Knight Acheron vs Paladin

[Frater Cornelius]

I am running a close ranged army. Mainly podding GH, TWC, Sicarans. At 1850 I sometimes use a Paladin, however now the Acheron caught my eyes.

My question is whether the 40pts increase is worth gaining what essentially amounts to +1A and a Hellstorm Template (which is more repiable at clearing roadblock for assault armies since it hits automatically) but potientially decreased flexibility (no long ranged pressure) and potentially lower odds of survival (since it needs to be in there to be effective).

 

You think it is worth invest 40 more points and 170 quid into a model that is only marginally better? Or does it blow the Paladin out of the water in an aggressive army?

[ShinyRhino]

The Hellstorm Template is just a huge version of a Torrent Flamer right? If so, that's a HUGE threat range. You can move your 12", place the small end of the template at 24", and cover a LOT of models under that teardrop shape. It ignores cover, which will be the enemy's biggest defense against the Paladin's battle cannon or melta cannon. If I had the money, I'd have the Acheron in a heartbeat.

[Frater Cornelius]

Hellstorm is not torrent. It is simply a 16.5 inch long template. So it is somewhat more restrictive. You have to consider the 45 degree firing arc of walkers. You will need to expose your side if you want to flame effectively.

[ShinyRhino]

Hellstorm is not torrent. It is simply a 16.5 inch long template. So it is somewhat more restrictive. You have to consider the 45 degree firing arc of walkers. You will need to expose your side if you want to flame effectively.

 

Ah. Well, I think a close support army like yours might do pretty well in defending the flanks of the Acheron. You have to compare the chances that the cannon on the Paladin might put your close-in units at risk of scatter, whereas the Acheron doesn't have that problem. It's also a monster in melee with anything that has an AV value.

[Frater Cornelius]

Well, it has D melee, so that hardly matters. The +1A is nice though.

 

The Template is also only S7, which is good to clean up chaff and roadblocks, but once the enemy rolls out his T6 wraith constructs or what else they have there, it might struggle.

I don't know, the more I think about it, the more useful it seems to be but also more underwhelming. Not sure why.

[ShinyRhino]

I guess you'd have to compare that against the shots that come out of a Paladin. I don't think any of the three options (melta cannon, battle cannon, or flamestorm) is really much of a threat to Wraithknights or Lords.

[Frater Cornelius]

Well, all those will get eaten in melee. I am more concerned about Wraith Guard, but I guess you are wounding on 3s instead on 2s but you hit more reliably.

Hm, I guess Acheron might just come out on top.

 

Last thing, do you think it is superior to a Typhon Heavy Siege Tank?

[Tyberos the Red Wake]

This isn't even a question. The Acheron is better hands down. The only reason to use the Paladin over the Acheron is army restrictions (such as in an all Knight army), price, and model size/aesthetics. For an aggressive army, the Acheron is a no-brainer.

 

Versus the Typhon, that I can't say, especially since I am biased towards the Spartan chassis. There isn't much data we can look at and it would require a lot of high level testing to really be sure, but I think an Acheron or even a regular Knight may outperform the Typhon even with Legacy of Glory, despite the latter's main gun, simply because of how Knights work vs. how tanks work.

[ShinyRhino]

Comparing the Typhon to a Knight is like apples to oranges, really. A superheavy walker can do so many different things, while a tank like the Typhon can move, shoot, or run things over. Of course, a Knight can be locked in melee with a mob of fearless mooks, while the tank cannot.