Re: [Epic] Knight units in E40K

From: Mark A Shieh <SHODAN+_at_...>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 1997 23:55:06 -0400 (EDT)

Paul Tobia <heresy_at_...> writes:
> Here's my take on Knights. All of this is IMO and YMMV. :)
>
> They shouldn't be War Engines for two reasons:
> 1) Slaneesh Knights (Daemon Engines) and Stompas aren't.

        Yes, but the Crusader and Castellan are significantly better
than the others.

> 2) Most people who have Knights have over 20 of them...

        Are they the larger kind? These things were 3 for 450 before.
20 of them would be 3000 points, about the right amount for a 2000
point war engine army in E40k.

> if you make them
> comaprable to a Warhound or Shadowsword then you're looking at about
> 100pts a piece x 20 Knights and there's your 2000 point army right away.

        I'm willing to agree to the non-war engine status for the
smaller Knights, but take a look at the stats on the larger ones.
(Previously, I was only talking about these two. These are more
heavily armored and armed than the Shadowsword, unlike the Stompa
which is a poor match for a Shadowsword. (Demon Engines vary so
widely it's hard to compare them.).
        The Shadowsword is a war engine, and has two weapon systems.
While the support weaponry may not be as good as I suggested (4FP as
an average of the SHV and Warhound), it is better than that of the
Shadowsword.
        Also, if you take the stats I suggest, it is much easier to
come to an agreeable points value.

> I'd like to see the Knight shield simplified. Considering their walker
> configuration they'd be tough to fully armor like the bricks that the
> Imerials call tanks, so you'd consider a 5+ armor. Now count in the
> shield and it gives them a 6+ armor. I don't like the idea of a Save as
> the shield in 2nd ed. didn't block shots so much as provide extra
> protection.

        They should have a 6+ armor without the shield. They had a 2+
save in Epic 2nd edition, just like a Land Raider. They secondary
weaponry was better than a Land Raider's, *and* they had a large Titan
weapon as well, the Quake Cannon.

> I'm against having any seperate rules for the lances. More time than I'd
> like to remember we had fights in 2nd ed. whether the lances could be used
> or not. Instead I reccomend a higher AV across the board.

        I agree, special rules seem to be against the feel of this
game. How about, if you're in base-to-base contact, you charged. if
you aren't, then you didn't charge and only add one to the combined
assault of your detachment?

> No normal vehicles or infantry have multiple weapon systems, so I am
> loathe to give the support Knights a SHW and some general FP.

        The Shadowsword has two weapon systems. They're just as
normal as any other SHV in the game.

> Let's take a look at what we have so far in E40k:
>
> Unit Speed Range FP AV Armor Notes Pts.
> Stompa 15cm 45cm 4 4 5+ 32
> Slaanesh Engine 25cm 45cm 3 2 5+ 29
>
> Now there were 6 types of Knights: Paladin, Errant, Lancer, Crusader,
> Castellan, and Baron. If you break it down you have Tac Knights
> (Paladin), Assault Knights (Errant, Lancer), Support Knights (Crusader,
> Castellan), and Command Knights (Baron).

        Err, the Paladin is better at CC than the Errant, which is
better than the Lancer. The Lancer doesn't deserve Assault status, IMHO.

> Looking at how the TL Knight stats measure up to the Imperial units that
> are present in E40k I submit the following:
>
> Unit Move Range FP AV Armor Notes Pts.
> Tac Knight 25cm 45cm 4 6 6+ 42?
> Assault Knight 30cm 30cm 3 8 6+ 47?


> Support Knight 15cm 60cm * 3 6+ MegaC 52?
> Baron 25cm 45cm 4 (12) 6+ +Hero 60?

> The detachment structure would be:
>
> Command:
> -------------------------
> You must Choose one Commander:
>
> Baron..............60?
> Det. HQ...........+25
>
> Main Force:
> -------------------------
> Choose up to 10 squads from the following:

        I think that 10 squads is overkill. Going from Epic 2nd
edition, you got 2 squads of 3 in the company, and then up to 5 squads
of 3 as support.
        I'd take the IG approach.
        up to 3 squads of main force
        up to 2 squads of support for each main force selected.

Main force: Assault, Tactical
Support: Tactical, Assault, Support

> What do you think sirs? :)

        As I said before, I cannot convince myself that a Crusader or
Castellan is weaker in any way to a Shadowsword except in CAF. When
replying to my post, keep in mind that I am only talking about the
larger Knights. What you have posted I consider to be an acceptable
first draft for Knight rules. Any complaints I have about them are
minor compared to those of the Support knights. (Y'know, stuff along
the lines of "They should have another FP/Assault" or "They should
move 5cm slower/faster"... )

Mark
Received on Sun Apr 20 1997 - 03:55:06 UTC