Is it possible to have a separate imperial knights forum?

[Time of madness]

With the release of the new book shortly is it worth having a separate section for just knight discussion?

[WarriorFish]

Knights usually feature as supplements to existing armies rather than fully fledged armies which has meant that such traffic is low. As such we normally need interest to be high enough to warrant a dedicated section. Should the new additions to the army change this it can be considered, as per normal :tu:

[Stray]

For what it's worth, I've been left with the impression of late that discussions around Knights tend to actually outweigh those around the Mechanicus - or are at least more active threads typically.

 

This might be an artifact of 'impending codex syndrome' of course.

 

The other point to consider is that the fluff doesn't support a Mechanicus-Knight link to the degree that many think. Certainly some Knight Houses owe a pledge of allegiance to the Mechanicum, but they still remain their own entities (with the exception of House Taranis). In the case of the Questor Imperialis Houses, there is no Mechanicus link whatsoever. Or at least no more of one than you'd find with any other Imperial faction.

 

On top of that, a good many of us who are active board participants, play as Renegade Knight Houses, which don't have any connection with the Imperium at all. Let alone the Mechanicus. Clearly though the same discussions are relevant to any flavour of Knight player.

 

As factions go, due to the above, Knights are actually quite a difficult bunch to place! :)

 

I'd personally like to see a separate area - whether a sub forum or similar - for clarities sake and to help not 'drown out' the other discussion on a board, but at the same time, we've managed so far and will continue to either way :)

 

Food for thought though folks. I hope the above points will be considered in any further discussion o7

[Brother Tyler]

Once we've had time to digest the scope of changes in the new codex, we'll consider whether or not they need a different location (and we already have some ideas on that).

[Mushkilla]

I was wondering if now that Chaos Knights have their own codex if it would be possible to create a Knights subform. There's enough similarity between Chaos/Imperial Knights in terms of: codex entries, modelling, list building, tactics and strategy. Also the player base seems to overlap with both factions (a lot of Imperial Knights players also play Chaos Knights). It feels like there would be enough traffic from both imperial/chaos knight players.

 

Currently all the Chaos Knight topics are getting sent to the Lost and The Damned to wither and die.

 

Thoughts?

[Stray]

I'd like to second this.

 

Right now, no other faction in 40K has as much impact on the meta as Knights do. This is likely to near double with the release of the Chaos Knights codex.

Their popularity is just as impactful, apart from possibly marines (it's hard to say right now, but figures are available for previous years), nothing is collected and sold in greater numbers.

 

They also have no current home on the internet for discussion

 

Chaos Knights and Imperial Knights can share a space. Many players due to the nature of Knights, use their collection to represent both sides. There i also significant rules overlap - the Chaos Codex in large part being designed to mirror the Imperial one.

 

I love B&C, but I think we're failing here to a degree. We have sub forums for forces such as Renegades and Heretics (an army which is very possibly the least played in 40K, and was covered fully by just one book in a single edition), and where, as Mushy mentions, it does feels like a place where 'topics go to die'. We also have dedicated sub forums for Space Marine Chapters that don't even possess codex support - let alone are meta defining and who are arguably now dealt with by two publications in a single edition.

 

It would mean a lot to many of us for you to really think about this seriously. If it's a matter of costs - hit us up! I'd be prepared to absorb some, if not all, of any additional financial burden.

 

Many thanks in advance

 

- Stray

[Panzer]

 

I love B&C, but I think we're failing here to a degree. We have sub forums for forces such as Renegades and Heretics (an army which is very possibly the least played in 40K, and was covered fully by just one book in a single edition), and where, as Mushy mentions, it does feels like a place where 'topics go to die'. We also have dedicated sub forums for Space Marine Chapters that don't even possess codex support - let alone are meta defining and who are arguably now dealt with by two publications in a single edition.

 

It would mean a lot to many of us for you to really think about this seriously. If it's a matter of costs - hit us up! I'd be prepared to absorb some, if not all, of any additional financial burden.

 

Many thanks in advance

 

- Stray

 

There's a thread in the News&Rumours section already addressing the issue of Chaos Knights not having a place currently: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/357012-lost-and-the-damned-forum-re-branding/

 

I recommend subscribing to the News&Rumours section so you get a notification when there's a new thread (it won't spam you with notifications for each new post, don't worry about that).

[Mushkilla]

 

There's a thread in the News&Rumours section already addressing the issue of Chaos Knights not having a place currently: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/357012-lost-and-the-damned-forum-re-branding/

Personally I see that as a solution to the wrong problem.

 

The problem isn't so much that Chaos Knights don't have a place. It's more the massive overlap in terms of modelling/fluff/tactics/codex/stratagems/players etc between the two books means that there would be much healthier traffic/discussion levels if both Imperial/Chaos Knights shared a subsection.

[Excessus]

I don't see how there would be much overlap in any of those categories you listed though...

 

 

Would be more logical to have the Chaos Knights take the lead in their subforum instead of the R&H, since neither them or the Dark mechanicum has a proper codex anyway. 

[Stray]

 

 

I love B&C, but I think we're failing here to a degree. We have sub forums for forces such as Renegades and Heretics (an army which is very possibly the least played in 40K, and was covered fully by just one book in a single edition), and where, as Mushy mentions, it does feels like a place where 'topics go to die'. We also have dedicated sub forums for Space Marine Chapters that don't even possess codex support - let alone are meta defining and who are arguably now dealt with by two publications in a single edition.

 

It would mean a lot to many of us for you to really think about this seriously. If it's a matter of costs - hit us up! I'd be prepared to absorb some, if not all, of any additional financial burden.

 

Many thanks in advance

 

- Stray

 

There's a thread in the News&Rumours section already addressing the issue of Chaos Knights not having a place currently: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/357012-lost-and-the-damned-forum-re-branding/

 

I recommend subscribing to the News&Rumours section so you get a notification when there's a new thread (it won't spam you with notifications for each new post, don't worry about that).

 

 

That's something, but does little to address the fact that discussion that largely affects all Knight players, is currently being spread across two locations - one of which is somewhat devoid of traffic :/

 

In order to discuss Knights as a whole with the Knight community, we're often having to 'hide' any mention of Renegades or Chaos within other topics. Failure to do so results in the topic being moved and the thread immediately dying.

 

If we can have sub forums for the likes of Black Templars, Salamanders, and the Iron Hands, surely we're justified in have a sub forum that covers Knights - which provably has a far bigger player base these days.

 

I do understand the difficulties. And it would mean (to a degree) deviating somewhat from the neat 'faction' structure on the boards. But forums are there to facilitate communication - in this instance I believe we're stifling it.

[Excessus]

I don't see it like that at all. 

 

Mixing imperial and chaos knights would be confusing for people. As it is now, people who play chaos knows where to go, instead of going to a knight subforum where the chaos knight topics would drown in the imperial knights topics. 

[Stray]

I don't see how there would be much overlap in any of those categories you listed though...

 

 

Understandable, but check out the Chaos Codex next week, or look at one of the many reviews.

 

80% of the same strats, traits, weapons and rules are shared between both Imperial and Chaos Knights - deliberately on GW's part. Even the model kits are largely precisely the same, with a single exception.

 

The fact is, Knight players can, and largely do, play as both Renegade, and Imperial Knights, depending on their whim. No other army can reasonably do this, so the situation is somewhat unique.

I don't see it like that at all. 

 

Mixing imperial and chaos knights would be confusing for people. As it is now, people who play chaos knows where to go, instead of going to a knight subforum where the chaos knight topics would drown in the imperial knights topics. 

 But that isn't what is happening.

 

One affects the other, and we ARE discussing both in the Imperial Knight section because both are relevant to the Knight community. However we see it, this is a fact that can be seen if you head over there. No one seems confused by this as yet.

[Excessus]

Oh, so you haven't seen people play R&H with AM rules as an example? 

 

 

Fluffwise, ally-wise, conversion-wise, player-wise (and so on) Chaos Knights have a more common theme with the other chaos factions than any imperial faction. An imperial knight player can ally with a dozen different factions, a chaos knight player can ally with less than half of that. It's more logical to keep them with their allies than to bunch them up with their mortal enemies imho. 

[Mushkilla]

I don't see how there would be much overlap in any of those categories you listed though...

 

There is though:

 

-Modeling: magnetising, transfer application technics, painting and conversions all overlap as they share 5 of the same kits.

 

-Tactics/Loadouts/codex: More than half the stratagems between both factions overlap, they have all their datasheets in common bar four (rampager/desecrator/preceptor/shrine). Even then the desecrator and preceptor are almost identical. The only other difference is chaos knights can double down on weapons. Weapon profiles are all identical apart from (the preceptor and desecrator weapons). Points costs are the same etc. Tactics are mostly the same as knights are knights, just a different flavour of allies.

 

-Fluff: chaos knights and imperial knights might share different core values, but the theme of feudal lords, vows, quests and courts are the same.

 

So as I said they do have considerable overlap in terms of discussion. Just my opinion as a player of both factions.

[Stray]

Oh, so you haven't seen people play R&H with AM rules as an example? 

 

 

Fluffwise, ally-wise, conversion-wise, player-wise (and so on) Chaos Knights have a more common theme with the other chaos factions than any imperial faction. An imperial knight player can ally with a dozen different factions, a chaos knight player can ally with less than half of that. It's more logical to keep them with their allies than to bunch them up with their mortal enemies imho. 

 

And yet, the primarily Chaos/Renegade Knight players are largely still discussing Knights with the other Knight players in the Knight area. That has come about out of necessity, and will continue for the same reasons - it's simply where the relevant discussion is. 

 

All Knight players can ally with Imperial forces (my Knights are using Hawkshroud rules today), and ALL Knight players can ally with Daemons (my Knights are using Infernal rules today).

 

Yes, it breaks the neat faction structure, but surely we should be more about servicing the community need? THIS is how the Knight community are already using the forum.

[Panzer]

I think there are arguments for both sides but in the end it makes more sense to keep the chaos and the loyalist separated. You don't see Chaos Marines and loyalist Marines in the same topics either despite having many similar units and problems.

[Stray]

 

I don't see how there would be much overlap in any of those categories you listed though...

There is though:

 

-Modeling: magnetising, transfer application technics, painting and conversions all overlap as they share 5 of the same kits.

 

-Tactics/Loadouts/codex: More than half the stratagems between both factions overlap, they have all their datasheets in common bar four (rampager/desecrator/preceptor/shrine). Even then the desecrator and preceptor are almost identical. The only other difference is chaos knights can double down on weapons. Weapon profiles are all identical apart from (the preceptor and desecrator weapons). Points costs are the same etc. Tactics are mostly the same as knights are knights, just a different flavour of allies.

 

-Fluff: chaos knights and imperial knights might share different core values, but the theme of feudal lords, vows, quests and courts are the same.

 

So as I said they do have considerable overlap in terms of discussion. Just my opinion as a player of both factions.

 

 

Indeed. Soup and ally considerations maybe make up 2-3% of discussion we're having? It's just not impactful enough to make sensible decisions using it as a basis. Though I fully accept that this may be different for other groups. And again, Knight players largely play both sides, and so largely also use allies on both sides anyway...

[Stray]

I think there are arguments for both sides but in the end it makes more sense to keep the chaos and the loyalist separated. You don't see Chaos Marines and loyalist Marines in the same topics either despite having many similar units and problems.

 

Chaos Marines and Loyalist marines though are vastly, vastly different from each other these days. They don't have largely the same equipment any more, let alone the same units - though this was once the case. They are utterly different armies, and you can't viably use your Chaos marines as Space marines in a game very often.

 

Knights though, remain virtually identical in equipment and rules (there is *one* weapon that differs between them), and can and do switch affiliations between games. It's not the same argument. We even literally share the same model line - by design.

[Excessus]

I don't see that the majority of imperial knight players are interested in chaos knight stuff or the other way around, though. Some are, yes, but the majority? 

[Stray]

I don't see that the majority of imperial knight players are interested in chaos knight stuff or the other way around, though. Some are, yes, but the majority? 

 

I'd hope we've proven that Chaos Knight stuff, is Imperial Knight stuff. With respect, I think you might be unaware of the overlap?

 

All I can tell you is that B&C's Knight community largely communicates and resides within the Ad Mech forum. I know and am incredibly fond of the players there within it, and very few do not have an interest in, discuss, and play as both.

 

Realistically, that is the way the Knight community on B&C uses the boards. Both subjects are discussed in that one area, because it's where we reside as peers. Now, that can be cracked down on, but I fear what that is likely to do is just stifle discussion, or drive people away from the boards entirely.

 

My question is, why not facilitate the discussion that's already happening, and assist that part of the community? So far I'm just seeing - again with respect - opinion based on faction neatness, from people who *aren't* involved with the Knight sub community discussions. I apologise genuinely and profusely if I'm wrong about that.

[Excessus]

I just don't see the overlap in people between the two forums though.

[Stray]

I just don't see the overlap in people between the two forums though

 

Many of us feel there isn't two forums in practice. That's part of our point. 

The weight of discussion for Knights as a whole - both Chaos and Imperial - occurs in the Ad Mech forum where we all engage. We actively avoid the R&H forum, because there's little to no discussion there much of the time.

 

When a mod decides a post that was designed to target the whole Knight community, is a little too 'Chaos' related, it's moved to the R&H sub forum and the thread dies. We then tend to continue the discussion within another thread for fear of it being moved again.

 

There's no overlap, because one area essentially has no population. Everyone is over in the Ad Mech area.

[Excessus]

Really? I didn't see the chaos folks over there when I looked earlier...

[Gederas]

Really? I didn't see the chaos folks over there when I looked earlier...

Look at Stray and NiftyVT's threads in the AdMech forum, which are currenyl two of the three most active Knight threads (outside of Hermanista's thread). Both are for the Traitor House Makabius (and Xana II)

[Excessus]

And they're not in the chaos part because...why exactly?