Re: [Epic] Knight units in E40K

From: Mark A Shieh <SHODAN+_at_...>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 1997 18:06:23 -0400 (EDT)

Paul Tobia <heresy_at_...> writes:
> On Sun, 20 Apr 1997, Mark A Shieh wrote:
> I don't want the differences between the Knights to be skills used for
> infantry. I think we should make different profiles for each type of
> Knight.

        I guess that does leave us with more flexibility.

> > get shot at with large guns with large save modifier in Epic 2nd
> > edition can turn into a War Engine with 6+ armor and 4DC, a unit with
> > a 2+ save, unmodifiable from the front, put in a similar role, should
> > be more durable?
>
> A valid point, but I still think Knights should be kept on the level of
> MBTs and not WEs. Perhaps add a Save to the Heavy Knights in addition to
> the 6+ armor of the other Knights.

        The two together give it the sort of durability I'm looking
for (on the two). Clearly more than an MBT, though less than a scout
titan.

> I don't think all Knights deserve a Save... Yes the power field was pretty
> functional, but it only covered the front 90, and Knights 3+ armor in 2nd
> ed.

        Well, it could go either way. They definitely don't deserve a
6+ armor and a save. But I'm still trying to figure out which one is
more convenient... No save so you don't have to roll as many dice, or
a save so that all Knights have saves and you don't have to
remember...

> > Also, if the Knights are to have any hope of standing alone
> > with out allies, they deserve a War Engine, IMHO. I think the
> > background let them take straight Guardsmen and Rough Riders, but not
> > much else.

> But Knights are not an army unto themselves (according to the fluff from
> TL), they're part of the Titan Legion. They have War Engines... the
> Titans. From my interpretation of the fluff the only time you'd run into
> a Knight army without Titans and Tech Guard would be if you invaded a
> Knight world. On the crusades they were a support group for the Titans.

        Ah! I'm remembering incorrectly here. They didn't get Titan
BGs, but they did get Titans. I had remembered that they didn't get
either. Also, with the muddling of IG, TG, and SM into one army now,
allied armies are going to be much more common (We considered it
unfair to field an IG/SM army when the rest of the players were
fielding Eldar, Ork, or Squat armies. 'course, this didn't stop the
Chaos player from fielding Titan BGs)

["What is your image of Knights" snipped]

> I think the Knights in general should represent the fast, mobile heavy
> strike force they did in 2nd ed. By throwing WEs in to the mix you add
> confusion and dissimilar tactics across the Knight force.

        While true, I felt that the Heavy Knights weren't fast,
mobile, or really even a strike force.

> Now this might mean that Heavy Knights are not as powerful as they are in
> 2nd ed., but I think the point values we decide on should reflect this
> making the Heavy Knights more accessable.

        I guess. The closest thing to support I've received is
someone suggesting a 2DC Heavy Knight War Engine, and I'm sure he'll
be mollified if they get a 6+ armor and a save.

Mark
Received on Mon Apr 21 1997 - 22:06:23 UTC