Valiant or Castellan?

[Feral_80]

Counterpoints;

 

A Castelan has long range, but as with a Crusader, to get the most out of it it will have to stomp something as well as shoot something. If you play it as a static part of a gunline, you're not getting your moneys worth. Having long range is good, not a bad thing.

 

The relic flamer is connected to Questor Imperialis, which means no House Raven or Krast, no "spend 1 cp to fight like you are unharmed" - which is much better than the Hawkshroud bonus, and so on.

 

If you want it for the utility of having a flamer, why not go for the cheaper Acheron? Or play as House Mortan, for a single command point you get to ignore all modifiers against your shooting for an entire round. That'll make the Alaitoc eldar sweat.

 

I think that if you want a Dominus chassis, the strongest choice would be a Raven Castelan with the 4++ warlord trait and the relic plasmagun. It will need an army that can provide it with command points, and a player that is willing to play aggressively with it - but between the "reroll all 1s - including to hit, to wound, and when determining number of shots", and the "fight as if you're unharmed" stratagems you can get some value out of the thing. Still nothing I expect to see at top tables anytime soon - but I'm no seer. I hope to get pleasantly surprised

 

Hm, but why is the Machine spirit resurgent better than the Hawkshroud bonus? The former is limited to a single knight per turn AND costs 1 CP. The latter is army-wide, FREE, and does exactly the same for roughly 3/4 of the lifespan of a knight. I'd take the latter any day.

 

I don't know about the Acheron. Yes, against beefy targets its cannon is the same, but it cannot take a relic, nor does it mount many other weapons. It is only 90 pts cheaper, not 200...I'm not sure it is *that* better, considering all the extra dakka of a Valiant. And, until a fix by FW, it cannot use a huge part of the codex stratagems (including machine spirit resurgent).

[Heliomanes]

Sorry, I'll try to explain my thinking a bit.  -  The biggest difference I see between the two alternatives is that Hawkshroud has the negative effect that it locks you to questor imperialis and a specific house, which locks away a bunch of our strongest stratagems. Since it doesn't allow you to fight at max efficiency, it simply makes degradation take longer, I don't like that tradeoff. Which is still good, of course, but different than always allowing one knight to have at it at full tilt as long as you set aside the CP for it. It is also a price you can opt out of paying if you want to depending on how the matchup goes, unlike a chosen Household tradition which is fixed.

Why do you say that the Acheron can't take a relic? Do you mean the relic flamer?
You are right that the Acheron is just 100ish points cheaper, and that it isn't that great when compared to, say, an Errant. That's kind of the problem I have with the Valiant though. Most of the time it will act as a slightly worse and more expensive Acheron - which is itself a Knight chassis that hasn't been considered competitive.

And yes, I'm arguing on the basis that FW will fix up their ruleset to fit with the new codex as promised.

Hope I'm wrong about my analysis though - I really want to like the Valiant. :)

[Stray]

The 200 point thing I think was my fault. Dunno where my head was there :) - sorry folks.

 

It's academic really though as, like Helio says, neither are what I'd consider to be anything like a 'must take' unit. I have to say though out of the two, I believe the Acheron is better value.

 

Don't get too fixated on the Keyword problems with the FW Knights either. We're essentially had a guarantee they're the first thing to be fixed in the FAQ, and honestly you shouldn't have an issue in the meantime really - unless you're playing a seriously mean-spirited opponent :)

[Feral_80]

Ah, I see guys - thanks. I guess the only way is to try these bigger knights and see how they perform.

 

 

I guess the best way to field them is by making other, less expensive knights *more* dangerous, so that we can distribute threats - as much as that can be done in a 4-unit army... -

 

So, for example, I don't think I'd ever choose a Dominus as a Warlord, and not even a character. Nor give it any other boost, except possibly for the two juicy relic cannons that they alone can take.

 

I'll be very curious to read about reports on how Dominus perform. As said, I do agree that they are probably not *that* great, and their profile still has something disappointing to me. But anyway, let us see.

[PiñaColada]

The dominus knights are a bit strange to me, as much as I love them statwise I really dislike that we're locked into meltas and the expensive rotate ion shields. And the relatively poor CC capabilities coupled with lower speed. I haven't built mine yet so I haven't gotten a chance to try it but I suspect it'll be in the okay-good range.

I think it's a bit of a shame that they're simply worse in CC compared to a questoris. Worse at hitting I can buy, but maybe another point in AP or something could have been a decent tradeoff to signify that they're heavier? At the same time I don't hate the fact that we have fewer different CC profiles to keep track off.  I just hope we get some more options in the future, let me put siegebreakers on the chest instead of meltas please!

Same with the looks of it. I love the model but it does have some elements that are weird looking to my eyes. I don't really like how much of the shoulder mechanism is showing because of the way that the pauldrons are shaped, or the "pauldrons" over the chest guns either. I'll have to try and thing of some ways I can mod it a bit. I'm still super pumped to get started on it as soon as I've finished the last of the backlog I have, which was my own promise that I made before I can get started on the knights :P

[CaptainMarsh]

I'd pick the Castellan over the Valiant 8/10 times, regardless of House I play. The Valiant's flamer is very exciting, but the Harpoon is a big pile of overrated mediocrity. Both of the Castellan's guns are very useful and don' demand a specific playstyle. Both can fight okay in close combat so you shouldn't be afraid of it, but the Valiant will almost always require it in order to make the guns work. The Castellan can, and the ability to do as you wish with it shouldn't be discounted.

None of this is to say that the Valiant is bad. I just find that a Castellan will benefit most armies in some way rather well and more reliably than the Valiant.

[Stray]

 

I think it's a bit of a shame that they're simply worse in CC compared to a questoris. Worse at hitting I can buy, but maybe another point in AP or something could have been a decent tradeoff to signify that they're heavier? At the same time I don't hate the fact that we have fewer different CC profiles to keep track off.  I just hope we get some more options in the future, let me put siegebreakers on the chest instead of meltas please!

 

 

It may just be coincidence, but you see something similar with the Porphyrion too.

 

You don't lose the WS, but it does have one less attack over the other Chassis. Maybe it's a deliberate design philosophy with the bigger Knights?

 

'Tis odd though.

[CaptainMarsh]

I think it is fine. It has more wounds and better guns than other Knights, and cost *only* about 150 more (give or take, not exact). If it was also just as good in the same way/a different way in close combat, then all 'normal' knights not named the Gallant would vanish. 

[jeffersonian000]

Not sure why this thread is still going. The choice literally breaks down to which faction you want to start with. If you go Mechanicum, it’s the Castellan. If you go Imperial, it’s the Valiant. You can always pick up the other one later, and if you can’t decide, don’t get either.

 

SJ

[chapter master 454]

However the problem I just recently noticed: Valiant has the Mechanicus symbols proper (like the hip plate and carapace piece) while the castellan has the imperial versions...

 

I am just a little bit salty right now because I just finished painting up my Castellan trying to be as faithful towards DEvastation Unbridled and now I find I could of if GW actually gave us the kits the right way round!

 

So if you want accurate iconography, get both but no matter what you will always be one mechanicus or imperial short of being true to the house you paint!

 

...salt...heavy amounts of salt...I now need to wait until i get a Valiant kit so I can switch the plates around. It won't be pretty but by the omnissiah I WANT MY ACCURATE DEPICTION OF DEVASTATION UNBRIDLED! /rant

 

But yea, I mean if you min/maxing the choice then castellan for mechanicus and valiant for imperial. Outside of that however the choice comes down to what you want really. The Valiant offers some scary close range fire power that will make a lot of people think again about getting closer and fail at it because it will come to them regardless. However if you want to reach out and touch any and all targets, then the castellan will make sure you can remind all units that it didn't forget about them with a range that is greater than anything on a 6x4 table no matter where they are unless they get behind something solid.

 

Both have incredible firepower. Last week my castellan was able to completely core out a typhus siege tank with ease while also seeing off predators. On another table after I finished, I watched another player with a valiant take out 2 leviathan dreadnoughts (only minor wounding on them, 2-4 wounds) in one turn, one getting one shotted by the harpoon. The player was sad he wasted so many extra shots (he didn't think he'd clear them out with just the main guns!).

 

Both are excellent. Heck, just sell a kidney and get both...you have 2 so you can sell one. The Emperor's pocket money! (or omnissiah's depending on your house choice!).

[Marshal Reinhard]

Shouldn't be too hard to get people who've bought one or the other kit to possibly swap groin armor plates (and top icon too, though i'd argue those are both mechanicum?) which other in a similiar fashion as suggested in the missing transfers sheet?

 

As usualy there's also ebay if you fancy getting your wallet gouged.

[PiñaColada]

I had not noticed that the groin plates were different before, although even despite the fact that my Castellan is questor mechanicus I greatly prefer that plate. It meshes with the rest of the knight a lot better in my opinion.

[Guest MistaGav]

 

 

I'm still yet to be, (though open to be), convinced that either of the Dominus Chassis Knights are really very competitive in truth. Obviously that's not the be all, and end all - if you love them, run them! I certainly don't run Cerastus Knights because they're competitive for the points, I do so because I love the models

Indeed, I felt the same way after the initial release hype. At this point, I'd consider the Castellan powerful but rather overpriced compared to the efficiency/flexibility of a Crusader, while the Valiant (as has been said elsewhere) loses out by comparison to similar close-range Knights. They're certainly cool looking and I love concept, but I feel that GW not making these a multi-kit and allowing for more variations (and melee options) was a huge misstep.

Can't help but agree!

 

The more I think about it the more I'm less fussed about these knights.

 

Each one has maybe one great one and another average (Volcano + Conflagration Vs Plasma + Harpoon).

 

The shoulder weapons are okay but a little boring. The stratagem to fire ONE missile isn't really worth it unless you have something super clutch to do. It should be a 1/3CP deal where it's 1 for one CP or 2 for 3CP.

 

Then we have the Meltaguns, a massive missed opportunity. Why they aren't just multimeltas I don't know. The range would've been nice.

 

I really wish the Meltaguns could have been swapped for twin Stubbers as they would have been great for a small horde clearing option. Meltas are fine and all but it's a short ranged weapon on what is meant to be, a long ranged platform. Seems to go really against the design ethos.

[Marshal Reinhard]

Wwith the way the sprues are designed (two identical sprues making up the entirety of the bits there are two o for the kitf) space is pretty heavily limited. Hence no alternatives for the meltas, why the top carapace hard points either only take 2 twin siegebreakers or 2 sets dual shieldbreakers, etc.

 

Even if they make a new Dominus variant down the line, chances are it too will also only be able to take meltas, 2 each of each of the existing carapace weapon etc, with the new sprue having variants for the big guns, another face plate, another groin plate. etc.

 

A potential source for something trully different from this could actually come from forgeworl, if they make a Styrix or Magaera type alternative kit for the Dominus

[Karhedron]

The Castellan does offer a potential solution to really obnoxiously tough units like Daemon Primarchs. Combine with House Krast Warlord Trait and Relic for maximum overkill. The downside is that it can end up wasted if your opponent has not brought any large targets.

[Guest MistaGav]

That's totally understandable and I'm not surprised it's just a bit of a bummer is all. Fingers crossed Forgeworld do some kind of upgrade pack for the Dominus and even maybe the Armigers too.

[Lord Ragnarok]

 

Could anyone throw me a full Knights/Armagier list at 2k points?

You might be better off looking in the army list section for inspiration rather than asking in a specific thread.

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/forum/191-adeptus-mechanicus-army-lists/

 

Having said that, at 2000 points I would probably be looking at 3 Questoris plus 2 Warglaives and 2 Helverins. For the Questoris I would definitely field a Gallant and Crusader with the 3rd option being flexible (maybe a Preceptor to bolster the Armigers?).

 

If not running a pure Knight list, I would ditch a couple of the Armigers to bring a small Battalion of allied Imperial guard for extra CPs and ObjSec troop units. Knights really need CPs to operate at their best but you will struggle to get moer than 6 CPs in a 2000 point list without allies. Check out this thread for ideas.

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/348152-potential-allies-for-knights/

Yeah at 2000pts this is the list I pretty much came up with. Warden vs preceptor. I REALLY want to field a pure list with knights of each type but cannot build a list I like with my preferred dominus ... the valiant. I’d essentially have to give up one warglaive.

[jeffersonian000]

It’s probably best to magnetize the Meltas, on the off chance there are up grades in later kits or FW options. Make it forward compatible, so to speak.

 

SJ

[Prot]

Since release I’ve been a huge fan of the Valiant. I still think it’s a little underrated and can be a real deal maker in the right list composition.

 

I have a few armies that can benefit from a Frontline unit like this and that Spear is just something to behold in action.

[Lysere]

So I've had three games with my Knight Valiant at this point and will be aiming to test the Castellan soon enough but I've already found myself a huge fan of the Valiant. Part of this hinges on my household. I play House Hawkshroud for the most part as I like the combination of trait, relic, strat, and warlord trait. This plays very much to the Valiants strengths of course but even outside of those advantages I find it very handy to have around.

 

In terms of comparing the two the Meltas and carapace weapons are identical and the Castellan can do just fine getting closer to the enemy so neither set of weapons is better on the other, it really boils down to just the two main weapons.

 

While the Castellan can start firing from turn one regardless of your opponent the Valiant might have to spend a turn not firing everything so the Castellan has the edge there, but it's not enough for me to make me want to use it more than the Valiant. My issue with the Castellan is it's too much of a one trick unit. Neither weapon has enough consistent shots to handle hordes, and while the lance is great against multi wound models, the plasma is kind of meh, even with the relic version. So while it's a very good model it just doesn't have anything that makes me want to take one no matter what.

 

The Valiant on the other hand does. Not only is the flamer incredibly strong naturally, but the relic version is even stronger, making it a threat to anything it can be fired at. It also naturally suffers from damage and penalties less since it's primary weapon auto hits. Add to that the Harpoon which has a natural hit bonus against the targets it's meant to be used against and a high base damage and you have a very solid but short ranged platform. While many might view that short range as a disadvantage I feel it actually works to the Valiants favor.

 

This is where the Castellan falls short, since you want to get close to make use of the melta guns and stomp attacks, but a Castellan is at a huge disadvantage up close as it's overwatch potential is incredibly weak. Most knights have the issue of only being really good against one type of target with ranged attacks so are vulnerable to getting charged by something else and then charged by the unit meant to do the damage, the Castellan itself is even worse off in this regard. The Valiant however is a different beast. The only types of units I'd be willing to charge at a valiant except when absolutely necessary are those units which are somehow immune to overwatch. Everything else is going to suffer damage going in, and vehicles and monsters are at increased risk thanks to the re-roll of the harpoon. This isn't even factoring in a Hawkshroud Valiant providing cover fire for other knights around it.

 

This ties into something that's hard to calculate, fear. Yes the harpoon is unlikely to punch through a 3++ or 4++ save sometimes, but what if you fail that save? Are you willing to take the 11-13 wounds plus whatever other weapons are firing at you? The flamer alone can do a lot of damage to large targets, and if you charge it everything is in range. We can talk about averages all day but it always comes down to how lucky do you really think you'll be. The Valiant itself can more than carry it's weight even if the harpoon fails to do it's job most of the game, but the Castellan's Lance is just random enough that a couple of bad rounds could be hard to turn around.

 

I also feel like there are ways to make a strong valiant even without the relic flamer, while the Castellan is a bit more limited. This is a minor point and something I definitely want to experiment with more.

 

It'll be awhile until I'm able to say with any real certainty which one is better for a knight focused army, but for taking a single knight the Castellan is a solid choice.

[Heliomanes]

Good observations. I'm looking forward to seeing if you figure out some good Questor Mechanicus setups for a Valiant. I've been toying with ideas to make it work outside of the Hawkshroud + relic flamer niche. Not blown away yet, but I have been looking at testing out a House Krast Valiant with the "Blessed by the sacristans" warlord trait and the Headsman's mark relic.

Krast gives rerolls in combat, which makes the native 4+ easier to handle. The warlord trait allows the flamer to do additional mortal wounds on 6s, and the relic increases the damage of all weapons by 1 vs 10wound or more models, and 2 versus other titanic models. Could be interesting at least - it turns the flamer into a knight killer.

[MGL]

The Valiant is awesome with Raven. That +D6 move is very handy, and the stratagem. Oh boy. It makes the flamer much more consistent, and the arpoon will reroll hits and wounds, augmenting the fear factor. Really good.

[Mushkilla]

This ties into something that's hard to calculate, fear. Yes the harpoon is unlikely to punch through a 3++ or 4++ save sometimes, but what if you fail that save? Are you willing to take the 11-13 wounds plus whatever other weapons are firing at you?

 

This is such an important and overlooked concept in 40k. Potential threat, I like to call it. It's why weapons like melta guns/thermal cannons/harpoon are great psychological weapons that exert threat without needing to be fired. It's the same reason counter assault units can be valuable even if they never charge of kill anything in a game.

 

The ability for these sort of "potentially" devastating threats to control your opponents movement is really powerful. Yes they may be unreliable in terms of hitting and invulnerables. But if they do connect the outcome can turn a game around. Suddenly charging a crusader with a thermal cannon and melta gun is no longer a 10% chance of hurting you, it's a 10% chance of you loosing a key character, not destroying a knight in assault, and giving this all to your opponent without affecting any of his action economy, it's for free. That swings games, and that risk/fear is going to make your opponent play differently.

 

Same goes for moving into the threat range of the valiant's harpoon.

 

These binary outcomes are really hard for us to reason about. We don't think in terms of probability of an event occuring we think in terms of how devastating the outcome is when things go wrong (skydiving is a lot safer than boxing for example, but most of us find jumping out of a plane more intimidating). As a result the threat projection of these weapons is more powerful than their actual average damage across a game.

 

Edit: Interestingly this only comes into effect when your opponent has to make a choice. In that regard the volcano lance doesn't really give your opponent a choice as it's always going to be in range, and the targets it likes to shoot are hard to hide. So there is no dilemma.

 

A Thermal cannon on the other hand gives you a multiple choices, do you stay out of range? Do you stay out of melta range? The same can be said for the Mortan warlord trait that gives -1 to hit outside of 18". Do you stay outside of 18" and get the -1 to hit or move into 18" and be withing practically guaranteed charge/short weapon range of the knight?

 

Forcing choices on your opponent is really powerful.

[CaptainMarsh]

To a certain extent the debate is rather academic. Both of them will tend to do their jobs very well. I prefer the Castellan for range and I prefer its loadout a little more. The Valiant does have the single best gun in the Flamer, but I find the Harpoon not all that intriguing, while I like both of the Castellan's guns. Both Knights provoke fear of different types. Both are amazingly cool. 

[Lysere]

To a certain extent the debate is rather academic. Both of them will tend to do their jobs very well. I prefer the Castellan for range and I prefer its loadout a little more. The Valiant does have the single best gun in the Flamer, but I find the Harpoon not all that intriguing, while I like both of the Castellan's guns. Both Knights provoke fear of different types. Both are amazingly cool. 

 

This is part of the reason I'm going to be making a list using both when I can. See how that plays out. Only real issue will be durability since only one will have the 4++ warlord trait.