Knight-Phobia

[Frostglaive]

I love Imperial Knights. Fluff-wise they are so cool, their models look great, and they're a ton of fun (at least for me) to have on the table. Sure, they're not the most competitive thing out there, especially with 8th edition, but Rule of Cool trumps Play to Win for me any day.

 

The problem is whenever I try to actually FIELD a Knight in a game, I get looked at like I'm either some Warp-spawned monster, trying to be super competitive, or worse.... That Guy. And heaven forbid if I want to actually run a Super Heavy Detachment and bring THREE Knights. And I MUST be a horrible human being if I want to bring a FORGE WORLD Knight (gasp!).......... Bit of sarcasm in that text by the way.

 

I've shown some of these guys that Knights aren't as cracked up as they used to be like they were in 6th ed. I've told them how to beat them easily. And a few of those guys don't even need any kind of help with that (mostly because they tend to bring Maximum Cheese in the first place...). A couple players do bring Lords of War against me, which I am 100% okay with. Heck, I encourage it! They're fun! But as a whole, I'm considered That Guy if I bring one.

 

I just don't get the stigma and phobia towards bringing Knights. Does anyone else have this problem in their own local meta, or am I an isolated incident?

[Charlo]

It stems over from 7th where to kill a super heavy, you couldn't just wound it with a lucky bolter shot or decimate its wounds with a well-placed lascannon.

 

Get them to play against your knights and they'll soon see how balanced (or even "meh"!) they are.

[clanfield]

yes totally have this despite my regular opponents having them they still try to guilt trip me about having too many or using and all that

that said they are like this about certain army's as well as certain units 

 

I think people are not adjusting to 8th and its changes so well I do not mean the core rules I mean the changes in codex's are subtler than most people recognise 

[Vel'Cona]

There's a similar stigma on flyers that I've noticed lately too, as if they're somehow overpowered or not in the spirit of the game.  The rules have addressed these units well enough that I don't feel like it's out of place for an IG player to use a Baneblade, or a DE player to use a flight of Razorwing Jetfighters, or an AdMech player to take an IK.  That being said, the lists abusing these units via redundancy are pretty lame, and I feel like this sort of play is a meta-screw gimmick at best and try-hard WAAC at worst.  So that being said, I'd still be wary about bringing 3 IK to the table if you want to make friends at a local level (where it will be perceived as cheesy), and would also avoid it competitively because it's extremely easy to counter.

[Azekai]

There's a similar stigma on flyers that I've noticed lately too, as if they're somehow overpowered or not in the spirit of the game.  The rules have addressed these units well enough that I don't feel like it's out of place for an IG player to use a Baneblade, or a DE player to use a flight of Razorwing Jetfighters, or an AdMech player to take an IK.  That being said, the lists abusing these units via redundancy are pretty lame, and I feel like this sort of play is a meta-screw gimmick at best and try-hard WAAC at worst.  So that being said, I'd still be wary about bringing 3 IK to the table if you want to make friends at a local level (where it will be perceived as cheesy), and would also avoid it competitively because it's extremely easy to counter.

Precisely. I have a couple of renegade knights, but if I am gonna pull those bad boys out I am going to warn my regular opponents. That is more fun than springing the knights on my buddies and saying 'aha! You didn't bring enough lascannons- time to die.' Knight armies or superheavies can be very difficult to deal with for the unprepared player, and I feel like that is part of the 'strategy' that gets people bent out of shape- they don't want to get stuck in a 'gotcha' game that they will lose because they are up against something unexpected.

 

Although, depending on the mission, 2-3 knights might be an auto-lose, so that is something to consider.

[Lysere]

Knights are far more balanced than ever before and people who still react that way haven't really gotten over 7th where they were either unstoppable or died turn 1.

 

When in doubt just make sure you make it clear that the list is a bit more competitive because in any somewhat competitive setting your opponent should have enough to deal with 2-3 knights over the course of the game. Heck taking more than one in a detachment when running them with mechanicus actually prevents you from really using the only way to get re-rolls outside of the relic they can take, and three knights means you won't have much infantry support.

 

When in doubt just make sure your opponent knows you have a knight and if their list has the tools to stop it. In time people should chill out. Now if your opponent is using a cheesy list just call out the hypocrisy for giving you grief for using a knight when they're doing something like that. A buddy of mine in 7th got called cheesy for running a culexus assassin with his tau list to give him some counter to psychic nonsense at the LVO and the opponent who did was running the bark bark star, one of the most obnoxious lists ever made.

[Yoda79]

Take 2+ knight is vital for a list. And the single knight strat is not that good atm. It's an investment and as said in 8th all can kill all. Seen the video where an arc rifle kills a Titans last wound. That said I'd prefer 3 Onagers than a knight. But

 

If you make a knight list with 2+ and healing fixed around that strat then you suddenly increase lvl. Seems like making a plan works better nowdays ND try to include after those two three knight as much s possible options. Maybe deep strike or anti Psy or assassin's etc.

 

A single knight is meh. That's why it seems the meta swifted or the game has as you say. Still the game seems pretty solid atm ND mos today my games are nice good fun close games good ones vs various armies.

[DeStinyFiSh]

Take 2+ knight is vital for a list. And the single knight strat is not that good atm. It's an investment and as said in 8th all can kill all. Seen the video where an arc rifle kills a Titans last wound. That said I'd prefer 3 Onagers than a knight. But

 

If you make a knight list with 2+ and healing fixed around that strat then you suddenly increase lvl. Seems like making a plan works better nowdays ND try to include after those two three knight as much s possible options. Maybe deep strike or anti Psy or assassin's etc.

 

A single knight is meh. That's why it seems the meta swifted or the game has as you say. Still the game seems pretty solid atm ND mos today my games are nice good fun close games good ones vs various armies.

 

I dont want to be that guy, but sometimes it is hard (at least for me) to understand your posts...

 

I am the only one in my gaming group with Knights (3x GW and 1x FW Knight Lancer). The only other LOW we have is a Mortarion.

Normaly I let my opponent know before I bring a LOW choice in a game of 2000 points or below. But to be honest, this is more like a leftover from 7th, when a Super Heavy was a real pain to deal with if unprepared. From what I have seen and experienced so far there is no real need to tell you opponent about a Knight in a 2000 point list. If he struggles to get it down, it is his own fault.

 

That being said, I had a Knight related army list with a question. But there are not many people looking in the army list section, so here a little advertise for my own post

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/342243-first-knight-list-in-8th-warlord/

[Tyriks]

I actually was just thinking that this is an area that is getting better in this edition.  In 7th if you showed up with a surprise knight people around me got torches and pitchforks.  I brought a knight without warning my opponent to my last game (I had talked about wanting to use it and thought that during that conversation I had confirmed that I would, but that was evidently not the case) and while he was afraid for a moment he decided to give it a shot and was fine with it.  Honestly my Onagers did way more work except, ironically, when he had scions deep strike behind the knight to take it out, which didn't work and meant the knight got to stomp the crap out of them.

[WarriorFish]

I agree that it's a hold over from 7th, Knights are good but hardly something to cry beard over (especially compared to some other things?). I've used my Knight a bit and battled one a few times too and never felt they were too much. Quick and powerful yes, but my Guard could muster enough fire power to bring one down in a turn with good use of fire and stratagems (plus the dice gods, obviously ). I don't think any list should be struggling to deal with a Knight at normal points (more so if you're looking at 2,000+), unless you don't take a decent amount of AT in which case you get what you deserve

 

If someone turned up with a Knight army that would seem a handicap to me. Every gun I'd have could do something and you'd be struggling to achieve TOs, so while I've never faced a Knight army I think they're not insurmountable in 8th unlike what may have been in 7th. Besides, Rule of Cool trumps all and you can't get much cooler than putting a Knight on the table

[Prot]

A single Knight is nothing. Literally I think taking a single Knight is only going to help very mediocre armies, in a very uncompetitive environment.

 

Taking 3-5 Knights is a different ball game. 

 

If your meta is completely unaware, what will happen is you will catch them off guard for about 1 game. Then their lists will change, and the very same things that are putting down Magnus, and Mort in a turn will put your Knight down in a turn.

 

Scenarios count for a lot too. Assuming you're playing objective based scenarios that where I find AdMech is super lacking. Basically you feel like Astra on half a tank of gas. You have to take advantage of some form of aggressive movement. A Knight can help with objective based games.