New Knight Castellan Revealed!

[CaptainMarsh]

I'm not a fan of ideas that in order to help one side of the equation (factions that can't fill out detachments as easily such as Knights or Custodes) it harms the other side (armies that can such as Guard). In this example, Guard gets more CP partially because each CP spent on a Guard Strategem is much less powerful than a CP spent on a Knight or Custode strategem. Fewer of their points are effected on average by every strategem both offensively and defensively. Custodes and Knights have fewer CP to spend, but each CP spent effects a greater sum of their point total and can have a much bigger impact. There are always caveats, but in general: 12 CP used on Custodes/Knights Strategems is much, much more powerful than 12 CP spent on Guard Strategems. It would be a massive force multiplier for smaller armies while hampering larger armies. If Horde armies with tons of CP were crushing the tournament scene (and not the usual suspects) I would think this wise, but they aren't and I don't.

The issue with Soup is the feeling of a requirement for it for certain armies. A good idea isn't one that goes out of its way to hurt Soup specifically but promotes mono-builds. This helps remove the requirement for certain armies while allowing people who like to play multiple detachments under the same umbrella but different styles within to enjoy their higher CPs. Knights, Custodes, Harlequins don't need the same number of or close to the number of CP Guard can generate. They just need enough to use a number of strategems to help them win the game. 

[Stray]

In theory I agree, but I don't think Stratagems are anything like that balanced in practice. No where even close in fact.

 

Soup lists erode even the little balance that does exist, because you can get all of the benefits of that AM lists access to CP, for less than a 200 point investment.

 

It should work exactly as you describe, it really should! And I think somewhere along the line, that legitimately was the intent. But we're unfortunately well past that now.

 

Let's also not forget, that AM in particular, have access to some of the most potent Super Heavy Vehicles in the game. Stuff that up until now, has been far more cost effective than any Knight, for a large amount more potential power.

It's a very basic, lazy example on my part really, but it does start to defuse the (very reasonable otherwise) argument regarding the value of CP for certain forces.

 

TL:DR. I really do agree with the spirit of your argument. I just think that were this the intent, it's since been lost as content has been piled upon content, and now we're in something of a mess :/

[CaptainMarsh]

In theory I agree, but I don't think Stratagems are anything like that balanced in practice. No where even close in fact.

 

Soup lists erode even the little balance that does exist, because you can get all of the benefits of that AM lists access to CP, for less than a 200 point investment.

 

It should work exactly as you describe, it really should! And I think somewhere along the line, that legitimately was the intent. But we're unfortunately well past that now.

 

Let's also not forget, that AM in particular, have access to some of the most potent Super Heavy Vehicles in the game. Stuff that up until now, has been far more cost effective than any Knight, for a large amount more potential power.

It's a very basic, lazy example on my part really, but it does start to defuse the (very reasonable otherwise) argument regarding the value of CP for certain forces.

 

TL:DR. I really do agree with the spirit of your argument. I just think that were this the intent, it's since been lost as content has been piled upon content, and now we're in something of a mess :/

 

I think it is far less dire than some believe it is. I play Guard armies by themselves as often as I play almost any of my other armies. My experience is generally as follows: I spend a metric ton of CP not just because I have them, but because the strategems do less on average. I've spent 20+ CP in games and felt much less overall impact than 8 or so I tend to have playing Custodes. My now two games of Knights- I've had 11 CP because of the near requirement for a Guard Battalion (which my idea on the previous page would have meant I wouldn't feel the need to take) and spent 10 and 8 respectively and won both games by turn 2 or 3.

 

Guard tend to spend a lot of CP so they need to be able to generate a lot of CP. The issue for Custodes and Knights is that their strategems are very powerful because they themselves are very powerful, but they don't generate much. If armies got CP based on the keywords shared(Imperium, Imperial Knights, Questor Mechanicus, House Raven, so +4 CP on top of everything else) it removes the near requirement for Knights/Custodes/Etc. to bring a battery, but it doesn't harm Guard specifically since they too would benefit(and at a certain point having a lot of CP becomes pointless, you run out of things you can honestly do with them in matched play). It allows people who want to have mixed Armies to still do so and doesn't actively hurt them either. It just doesn't give them an active benefit like it does others.

 

In the Knight example, I would have had 10 CP instead of 11. This is fine, I only needed 10. The points I spent on the Guard Battalion (which because of my personal dislike of the need of doing so I at least brought two tanks with) could have gone towards more Helverins or Warglaives. Would have had fewer drops, improved my chances of going first. That is the other somewhat bigger issue with Soup Guard- in a small drop game, they can sometimes ruin your chances of going first. And especially when you're relying on your Custodes/Knights to carry the weight, that can be an issue.

 

I got off topic there, apologies.

[Feral_80]

I think the original idea was that certain forces needed CPs and stratagem more than others to be competitive, and thus had wider access to them. In theory, the concept is fine and fluffy, and so I am totally against the idea to drop detachments and uniform all codexes to the same amount of CPs.

 

But then GW did what it has always done in the last 30 years: ruin a good idea through poor implementation and non-existent balance within and among codexes.

 

A simple fix, but at the cost of hugely impacting alliances, could be that you can only ever use stratagems from your warlord's faction codex. Not from any other allied faction (codex). This could limit the ridiculous amount of soups and the sad role of CP-batteries for all sorts of Imperium armies to which AM has been relegated (due to being basically too weak against recent codexes - yes, too weak: -1 hit spam has killed AM in competitive play). But it would also kill alliances, which is not necessarily good. It's the abuse that made allied forces bad, not the possibility to field them.

[Clingy]

When I said scrap detachments I was using poor wording. What I meant was the current system of CP generation through detachments needs an overhaul. Scrap the CP idea in its current state. Not necessarily scrapping detachments. They need to look at why people are throwing in 180 points of guard and if they don’t think this is working as intended, then try to change it up.

 

I’m not currently bringing the guard battery in my knights/Admech games but I’m gimping my chances in not doing so.

[Stray]

The more I think about it, honestly the more I like CaptainMarshes system of rewarding keyword matching with CP. It's really quite elegant in it's simplicity, and it does much to defuse the abuse/necessity of soup.

 

I seriously think you should suggest it to someone over in Nottingham. It could really work.

[Clingy]

Agree. There should be a reward for being monofaction. It also doesn’t seem like it’s over the top either.

 

Good suggestion

[SydonianDragoon404]

If it were up to me, I would just say every battle forged army gets 8 command points at 1500, 12 at 2000. No regeneration. Command points are so powerful that anything which allows you regen CP becomes an auto include. Just get rid of that mechanic altogether. 

[KhorneHunter57x]

If it were up to me, I would just say every battle forged army gets 8 command points at 1500, 12 at 2000. No regeneration. Command points are so powerful that anything which allows you regen CP becomes an auto include. Just get rid of that mechanic altogether.

Or make CP regen a universal mechanic that applies to everyone equally while your Warlord is alive and on the table.

[Charlo]

 

If it were up to me, I would just say every battle forged army gets 8 command points at 1500, 12 at 2000. No regeneration. Command points are so powerful that anything which allows you regen CP becomes an auto include. Just get rid of that mechanic altogether.

Or make CP regen a universal mechanic that applies to everyone equally while your Warlord is alive and on the table.

 

Problem is then you start to lose what makes certain armies unique and there is no advantage to bringing bigger detachments etc.

 

The current system is good, we just have a weird restriction on it.

[Marshal Reinhard]

 

The current system is good, we just have a weird restriction on it.

 

I would position that the current system is not good because our pretty harsh CP limitation can be mitigated by simply diverting less than a 10th of your points resource (in a 2000 point game) to virtually doubling them via some cheap bodies.

 

If our stratagems are so powerful (and not saying they are neccessarily) that they have to limit how many we can use by putting limiting our CP count... well, it doesn't work when it's so easily circumvented by a cheap supplementary force giving a comparable abundance in CP?

 

Is the goal just that, to encourage us to move to the soup solution (which, conceivably, allows for more model sales) because its so easy to do just that and is currently the only way to remain competetive?

 

Also, isn't this the system leading to pretty silly lists out there, where we have multiple bike captains going around to fill quotas and also being a fast response unit etc? Again, not an avid gamer here, so my knowledge of what people are fielding is rather limited. I do have an image of bare minimum detachments being filled out to get a bunch of CP, supplemented by having the killiest, most point efficient units possible besides them. Those do the real fighting.

 

Which essentially mirrors what the game encourages Knight players to do. Get your knights supplemented by cheap guard to allow your real fighting force additional uses of rotate ion shields etc...

[AstraWlad]

Which essentially mirrors what the game encourages Knight players to do. Get your knights supplemented by cheap guard to allow your real fighting force additional uses of rotate ion shields etc...

The only thing we can say in support to that system is that having infantry protecting and supporting Knights is fluffy. Of course, if you have Mechanicus Knights then Skitarii are a better option but anyways Knights should rarely fight alone. So current rules effectively push us to take a good, fluffy list, that is good from my POV.

[Stray]

 

The only thing we can say in support to that system is that having infantry protecting and supporting Knights is fluffy. Of course, if you have Mechanicus Knights then Skitarii are a better option but anyways Knights should rarely fight alone. So current rules effectively push us to take a good, fluffy list, that is good from my POV.

 

 

Is it? 

 

I've seen Knights brought in to support infantry in fluff (Taranis Crusader 'Red Might' is on semi-permanent assignment in support of a group of Skitarii), and I've seen Knights in the fluff supporting Titan Maniples, but though many of us create 'Household retainers' as infantry and the like for our Knight armies, it isn't particularly supported by fluff at all in fairness.

 

Knights seem to generally either be somewhat independent, or deployed to support other forces, rather than themselves being supported.

[Karhedron]

Also, isn't this the system leading to pretty silly lists out there, where we have multiple bike captains going around to fill quotas and also being a fast response unit etc? Again, not an avid gamer here, so my knowledge of what people are fielding is rather limited. I do have an image of bare minimum detachments being filled out to get a bunch of CP, supplemented by having the killiest, most point efficient units possible besides them. Those do the real fighting.

Yes, 3 Jetbike Captains (Supreme Command Detachment), Guard Battalion (Cheap ObjSec and shooting with some Russes or Manticores) and then a 3rd detachment of choice (Deathwatch being popular as the Fortis kill teams make Primaris Marines very good).

[Charlo]

So swerving the topic back to the Castellan (I know right, I forgot too!)

 

Who else is just baffled by the inclusion of the Twin-Meltas on the neck-mounts with no other options? At least the option for two twin-stubbers to keep parity would've been nice.

 

On the "sit back and shoot" Castellan these are just wasted, right? Unless something gets real close?

 

I can see their use on the Valiant as he is diving forward to get into Conflagration Cannon/ Harpoon range.

 

With the kits being separate this just feels like a big miss....

[chapter master 454]

Lists get silly when we talk competitive because in no world will Fluffy ever be competitive (and if it is then a rare day it is).

 

The problem however is that even in casual play knights need the Duracell Battalion just to have access to their stratagems. This often means in casual a knight player is left with little to do as the 6CP they can get normally is reserved for a few select stratagems and none for anything fun or interesting. No experimenting. It may look like "ah you need to be careful with your CP" and more "well I need to save 2CP for my Taranis Stratagem, 1CP for the Re-roll just in case. Down to 3CP. Hmmm. Need to hold onto those for command re-rolls and rotate Ion Shields" so it is less choice and more railroaded. Choice comes from having options and 6CP does not give options.

 

However any solution for pure knights just helps Knights with AM Duracell Battalion. I suppose the problem is a question of freedom of armies mixing vs. keeping each codex on their own. Allies has been a mechanic many players wanted because it would be awesome to have Space Marines fight along side Imperial Guard or see Custodes march along side the Mechanicus. Sadly however it is a case where ether we have these lists that allow mixing and thus get these wonky competitive lists or we just say no codex mixing.

 

I suppose however it could just be easier to apply one other way to get CP. CP generation is dependent on Codex not the Rulebook. Knights would gain certain benefits from some detachments, for example to them it could be a simple thing such as:

SHAD grants 0CP if 0-2 armigers are taken, grants 1 CP if 3 armigers are taken or 1 Questoris class knight, Grants 2 if a dominus class knight is taken.

SHD grants 3CP if at least one questoris is included. Grants 5 CP if at least 1 dominus is taken alongside a Questoris. 7 CP if a minimum of 1 dominus and 2 questoris are taken. (maybe grant 2CP for a including 3 armiger squads).

 

Not a fully realised idea but it could help push people towards list building pure. And you only get these command benefits if your warlord AND related army keyword (not Imperium) are from the chosen faction (so this would be imperial knights). That would mean allies cannot access their own stratagems nor give any CP benefit (as they shouldn't they add to logistical issues and command issues...how does a company commander order around custodes? he doesn't). Not sure...still sleepy so hopefully something in there makes sense

[KhorneHunter57x]

So swerving the topic back to the Castellan (I know right, I forgot too!)

 

Who else is just baffled by the inclusion of the Twin-Meltas on the neck-mounts with no other options? At least the option for two twin-stubbers to keep parity would've been nice.

 

On the "sit back and shoot" Castellan these are just wasted, right? Unless something gets real close?

 

I can see their use on the Valiant as he is diving forward to get into Conflagration Cannon/ Harpoon range.

 

With the kits being separate this just feels like a big miss....

It does bug me a little. I would've happily paid a bit more for another sprue, with the kit having one or two more neck-gun options, one or two more faceplates, a third option for carapace weapons, some different carapace iconography, and both sets of weapon arms (and the rules to mix variants).

 

That said, I've found that my Hawkshroud Castellan seems to pull his weight, even when I never use the meltas.

[Clingy]

I like your detachment idea rewarding those going for big knights and only knights

[Canadian_F_H]

Unpopular opinion time.

 

Hidden Content

CP and their uses were a mistake to begin with. As were all freebies from formations back in 7th.

 

Balance issues are seperate since we had balance issues before and after formations, and whether you used formations or not after they came about.

 

 

I think it should be a "you get what you pay for" system and they just need to do a better job of balancing rules and armies. (Tho I hear 8th is better balanced than 7th overall)

 

I think the new knights look pretty cool. As much as I like the mega flamer, I'm not digging the harpoon much. If I ever get one of these bigger knights I'd be going with the long range shooty fella.

[Charlo]

So the issue with 7th was 100000000 different formations across a load of publications in a massive arms race that got more and more ridiculous. The idea was to make fluffy forces but it soon got waylaid in free wargear/ transports/ OP rules etc.

 

Command points linked to flexible detachments is an amazing system, it just benefits others a little more as the points costs don't take "ease of building a battalion" into account. For guard this is <200 points and the force is pretty effective: Special weapon access, potential indirect fire, lots of bodies, orders, Psychic support, CP generation & recovery via relics. For Marines though that Battalion is reaching for double the cost and gives you 15 scouts (so some deployment options), a re-roll aura and some psychic support.

 

The main issue is that obviously 8th ed is evolving as time goes on, DEldar brought in their own unique detachments and CP generation and now Knights do the same. Really, to balance it Guard probably need to lose access to the Battallion or have some restrictions in place like Knights do.

 

I think Chapter Approved this year will probably go a long way to address this.

[Vel'Cona]

=][= This thread has gone into a realm it was never intended to tread, and will be closed.  Please take Detachment/CP/competitive meta discussions to the appropriate subforums =][=