A little rant i need to get of my chest about a OP build or OP unit

[Xaric]

So since the arrival of the Knights I have seen people in forums say "I wont play anyone who brings 3-5 of these things to the game" has this game really started to become a game of "if I don't feel I can win I wont play" last I checked this game is a game of tactics for example the person I did play the other day relied on a helldrake spam fortunately for me he managed only to get 1 helldrake on per turn funny thing is each turn on lucky dice rolls I shot each one down with a icarus lascannon yay for intercept.

Funny thing is the people in the local game shop said why did I bring a bastion that thing is going to get ruined by turn 3 but to me it turned out to be the MVP of the game with the icarus lascannon and 2 missile launcher with 2 lascannons and a sgt no tank is ever out of its reach intercept acts like a split fire for the rest of the squad.

Now what bothers me is not because these guys are super heavy or people have dubbed them unstoppable because in a game of 40k there is always a unit in the codex that can make a easy meal out of these things for example my bastion a 14 armor all round with the weapons that can deal 5 wounds to it if you get lucky provide a nice cover save and that thing must get in range before it can even charge with its D weapon.

Flyers too take a stormtalon gunship with the Skyhammer missiles that's 3 shots each turn provide that 1 knight is = to the cost of 3 of these flyers can easily overpower a knight.

So my response to all players who just quit a game because they feel the game is unfair what's better quitting before you faced the thing or be the underdog and take the thing out and feeling like a total badass.

So what is everyone else's take on these sort of players who give up?

[Katharon]

Xaric, you have to understand that the majority problem that people see with the new Imperial Knights (at least from what I've encountered online and IRL) is that they are essentially an army of Lords of War. If the Knights had not come equipped with a Destroyer Close-Combat weapon, then practically no one would give a damn. In fact many people would even be thrilled and happy at the challenge of facing these things (even 3-5).

But the fact is that these things are capable of being in assault and massacring away on Turn One -- using those tactics that you said that this game is about. Their strength in undeniable. Now, that does not mean that I believe that they cannot be beaten. Quite the contrary.

However, the amount of effort, luck, and planning needed by a player to handle an army of five Imperial Knights is going to be -- in a word -- prohibitive.

[Xaric]

True its just sad because I want my 1500 pts space marine army to take on 5 IK's and from what I've seen at my local shop they look really nice painted :)

But people forget you can now bring a Superheavy to normal games of 40K without your enemy's permission as it states in Escalation if I had a thunderhawk that turbo-laser Destructor would lay waste to them but I have one question I hear if a IK dies there bang is way bigger then normal is that correct?

Unfortunately bringing a super heavy means the IK can roll on the Escalation chart that's the downside to bringing a super heavy :(

[Librarian Harker]

We've got a player at our club, he tries to dictate what you bring against him, and if things don't go his way he quits. There was one when he was using imperial guard, and his opponent was using space marines, and took out two chimeras with his devastator missile squad. He quit and packed up turn one.

I think it's more down to the change in dynamics within the game. It's a lot easier to refuse to play than to amend your tactics to accommodate the new meta. People have got used to using deathstar units, and don't want to have to work some dedicated anti armour units into their army, or risk losing their army buffing special character to a destroyer shot. Give it three months as with the heldrake and the taudar, people will have worked out how to handle them, and will be complaining instead about the new space wolf rune priest that shuts down all psychic powers on a 2+.

[Xaric]

This is why I don't take builds from other people because if a build is over used you can plan accordingly against it for example heldrake spam's when ever I go against a person who I know is going to field chaos I will almost always bring some form of Anti air with intercept.

For that instance the hunter/stalker is looking really tasty right now :D

Easy way to deal with that rune priest bring snipers how can someone shut down all psychic powers when they are dead :P

[Ben_S]

I think the problem is not simply that armies aren't balanced, but that they aren't balanced when supposedly they should be (equal points value).

I wouldn't mind playing a 'last stand' scenario where my army is vastly outnumbered and the point is simply to see how long they can hold out for. I know at the start that I'm going to get tabled, the only question is when, and the test is to either take as long as possible or to take as many of the enemy with me as possible. That can be fun.

But the problem is that if you turn up to play 1500 points against 1500 points (or whatever) that is supposed to be a fair fight or level playing field, and it's another thing entirely to get massacred in a game that was supposedly fair but where you didn't really stand a chance.

[Xaric]

Ben it can be balanced at point ratio but that would have to be for example I am playing Space Marine's and your playing Chaos Space Marines and we must bring the same types of units with the same weapon layouts to equal the same points cost.

You can't balance out a game if what you are going against is unknown after all for example I bring a tactical squad designed for killing other troop choice's but you bring anti tank troop and they are the same points cost the logical stance is the tactical squad will be Over powering the anti tank troop that is not so much about balance that is poor choice of tactics.

[Katharon]

True its just sad because I want my 1500 pts space marine army to take on 5 IK's and from what I've seen at my local shop they look really nice painted :)

But people forget you can now bring a Superheavy to normal games of 40K without your enemy's permission as it states in Escalation if I had a thunderhawk that turbo-laser Destructor would lay waste to them but I have one question I hear if a IK dies there bang is way bigger then normal is that correct?

Unfortunately bringing a super heavy means the IK can roll on the Escalation chart that's the downside to bringing a super heavy :(

Escalation is an optional expansion to regular games of 40K. If someone were to take a super heavy in a normal game against me without at least a prior heads up, I'd kick them. I'd still play the game, but they are served one swift kick to the balls.

[Xaric]

Its not a optional expansion as it is a choice unfortunately as stated on page 54 of the Escalation book but if a player takes a super heavy these rules on this page are also applied to your game so you can take super heavy's without permission but you must provide the escalation book as it has the datasheets for the models that can be used. Also unlike apocalypse super heavys must be used by the codex they have for exsample you cant take a baneblade if you olny ever play space marines.

[Katharon]

Page 41 of the Escalation book, the FoC chart for Escalation -- beneath the Lord of Wars slot -- what does it say in parenthesis?

[This Dave]

Since the game is being played for fun if someone's not having fun I can understand not wanting to play a game they won't have fun with. But I don't have a lot of sympathy with someone that quits or won't even start a game simply because they won't win it.

There's a tournament I've been going to for years called Astronomi-con. It's more of an excuse to get together and play games but there are prizes, including Best General for the person with the most battle points at the end. There was always one guy that brought the drive all before him army that everyone hated to play against because he HAD to win every game. He won the Best General award three years straight. Then a couple years ago in the second game of a six game two day tournament his crush everything army ran into one with three Flyers (this was back in 5th Edition but the tournament allowed them). After one turn when he decided he couldn't shoot down the Flyers with his three Vindicator army he packed up his stuff and left the tournament. And this is something you paid $85 Canadian to get into. And the army he was playing against didn't actually win any games because it had trouble holding objectives. But even though he would probably have won the game and probably still have own Best General because he couldn't max out the Battle Points he just gave up.

As anyone who's ever played me knows I'm rather easygoing but I will never ever play that guy.

[Dalleron]

To the original question.

40k may be a tactical game at heart, but I think its too easy to get away from it being so. The possibility that people can take 3 or 4 really good units and win by basically wiping out your effective units makes for an unfun game. I don't see how an average army these days could take on an army consisting of 3-5 Imp Knights as they stand now.

[Chris Copeland]

Xaric, of course it's an optional expansion. In every White Dwarf article they say things like, "When playing a game of Escalation..." when they are talking about Escalation. Since the creators themselves talk about it as a variant of the game it is clearly a variant of the game (like Planetstrike, Cities of Death, and Spearhead). The comments of GW provide the most telling evidence of all as to how they see the game. These comments have been made by GW in several places. Cheers. Cope

[Kelshin]

To the original question.

40k may be a tactical game at heart, but I think its too easy to get away from it being so. The possibility that people can take 3 or 4 really good units and win by basically wiping out your effective units makes for an unfun game. I don't see how an average army these days could take on an army consisting of 3-5 Imp Knights as they stand now.


This. The problem with an army consisting of 100% knights is it just takes 60-80% of the units for some armies out of the game. As in, the knights can ignore them because they can't be hurt by them, and pick apart your scoring units and such as they see fit. Hell, the jury is mostly still out as to whether or not you can even tar pit them with stuff that can't hurt them.

Is it even really a game anymore when you're only playing against someone's troop choices and heavy support?

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

it's called take an all comers army... if you take rock then guess what paper beats you it you take scissors then rock beats you... when you turn this game into rok paper scissors instead of chess then of course your going to loose 1/3
of the time. And i'm one of the people who cannot wit for 6.5 beause then everythign becomes legal and i wont have to listen to the whiners who wont play stronghold or who wont play escalation and forgeworld ect. so enjoy your time now boys cause this summer its all finally legal in a rule book even after GW has repeated said its all legal now but you still complain and whine that you wont play it. that's fine don't play it just means you'r not going to get in a game.

[Xaric]

well do people even try to find week points in thease new units? afterall cant rend/gauss or touch of rust glance it to death?

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

I build a list to be an all comers and honestly i have yet to take on an opponent where i did not have the right tools. Sure the math wasn't an auto win and it took alot of maneuvering and some luck but they were good matches. i really have yet to truly feel outclassed and looked across the table and gone damn i can't win.

[Chaoschrist]

I haven't played against someone with IK, but then again, I usually play against my friend, who doesn't even like the model. Though I wouldn't mind playing against one or more and see if I can actually defeat an army. I haven't been at my local store to see any in action yet (well, I have seem youtube vids) so I'm somewhere in the middle on how they work and how "impressive" they are against players/armies I played against.

Granted, if the only way to beat them would be by bringing knights of your own, I guess the entire "I'm not going to play against this list" is a valid argument. It would warp the meta too much. But so far that hasn't been the game.

However, for anyone who complains; bringing 5 knights of your own IS an option. Yes of course it's a financial investment, but I don't think 40k ever was about winning with the most financially appealing figures. That being said, I guess it might take away some of the fun for some players who prefer games that play in a different style (more combat oriented armies and such for example). If you are really inclined to play games and leave knights out, just play combat patrol or kill team (or however it's called right now). It's not really fixing the problem, but not moving forward with the inclusion of new units isn't a good thing for the state of the game either.


This. The problem with an army consisting of 100% knights is it just takes 60-80% of the units for some armies out of the game. As in, the knights can ignore them because they can't be hurt by them, and pick apart your scoring units and such as they see fit. Hell, the jury is mostly still out as to whether or not you can even tar pit them with stuff that can't hurt them.

But with that you might also start addressing game balance and if every unit should be equally good. Both things, I've repeatedly heard people complain about as not being the case for 40k.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

refusing to play against knights is about as valid as refusing to play against tau or eldar or taudar or eldar eldar... if your going to go down that route then you open yourself up to if its valid for you to not play againts my knights then i refuse to play against your xenos filth. So please feel free to refust to play against people for bringing knights and watch how quickly people give you the finger and refust to play against your cheesy units. because thats the road your headed down.

[Xaric]

Yep romulous that's how I have been seeing as of late just like this we have that friend when you was a kid where if you go around his house to play the N64 and he would always hand you the gamepad that is stiff or does not work properly then brag when he wins or when he is about to loose nudges you or switches off the computer or just pulls your controller out of the socket.

[SquigBrain]

Yep romulous that's how I have been seeing as of late just like this we have that friend when you was a kid where if you go around his house to play the N64 and he would always hand you the gamepad that is stiff or does not work properly then brag when he wins or when he is about to loose nudges you or switches off the computer or just pulls your controller out of the socket.

Seriously, if someone wants to not play against a Knight army because they don't think they can win, I'm with you.

*BUT* if someone doesn't want to play against a Knight army because they don't think it would be *fun*, more power to them. We play this game to have fun, and if you seriously think a game is going to be a chore, it's probably better off for both sides if you don't play.

I wouldn't want to play against a knight army with my orks, given a choice. I'd play if there was no other opponent, but five knights is not something I would enjoy a game against. It quite simply makes too much of my army pointless.

[Katharon]

here is an idea.. bring the aquilla strongpoint... bring a shadow swords... you know why... because all of these so called suppliments are meant to be a part of the game and after this summer you guys wont be able to stop it.

SoR, why should I have to participate in a game of one-up-manship?

[Wolfshade]

Knights are just the newest flavour of the week, soon the online meta will work out how to counter these beasts. But certainly most generic all comers lists will have difficulties against them.
But this is the issue with all comers list, it is neither one thing nor the other. These sorts of lists also have difficulties with other "extreme edge" armies, like hordes of melee orks or horders of small cc tyranids. This problem becomes even more exacerbated when you drop to 1,500 or less points as you don't have all the tools in your tool kit to deal with them.
Perhaps the threat of these will see other fortifications being added to generic all comers lists. In the way that the aegis defence line and quad gun/icarus cannon was before a better anti-flyer option was available?

I would argue it is not a game of one-up-manship, merely adapting your armies to face a new threat. Now this might just be GW trying to lull us into buying some of the big toys, which shock horror is their aim (to sell models). The other thing to consider is given the expense associated with an entire army of these blighters how often are you going to face one.

But then this could just be me being anti-all comers lists, I tend to run a different army depending whom I am facing or what mood I am in. Yes they may have the same building blocks within them, but they are variants on a common theme.

[Xaric]

Page 41 of the Escalation book, the FoC chart for Escalation -- beneath the Lord of Wars slot -- what does it say in parenthesis?

I am looking on page 41 and I see the datasheet for the banehammer... The foc is on 35 and there is no parenthesis under it or do you mean the part optional? Yes it said that for fortifications and alliance detachment and those two things you can bring without the permission of the person your playing against

[Katharon]

I am looking on page 41 and i see the datasheet for the banehammer... the foc is on 35 and there is no parenthesis under it...

iBook. And don't be an obtuse [-buzz word-]. It's the same for every FoC chart. FOC Picture (http://postimg.org/image/95esj7t5p/)

[Xaric]

Yes and look at fortifications and allied detachment they also say Optional and i've never had to ask permission to bring those that's what I am saying...

just a heads up first time i have heard the word parenthesis sorry about that normaly i just say brackets lol ill keep that in mind in future also what does obtuse mean sorry about this.

Wait a sec I've heard this debate before when allied detachments first came out and there was a huge debate on broken allied army's that win all the time then people found that it had a weakness. Are we going down that path again?

[Xaric]

Right as this forum post has gone on a bit long and turned into a negative feast lets think of the benefits of escalation stronghold and imperial knights. To me makes the battlefield look more epic provided that everyone paints and base there models but they don't have too. I do love seeing these battles where one side has a trenchline and the other side has a big *** khorne lord of skulls yes I used to hate the model but seeing it with loads of Khorne deamons and Khorne mark chaos space marines it looks epic as hell. The up coming IG book + trenchline + new nids = STAR SHIP TROOPER MUSIC !!!

[Learn2Eel]

Personally I don't mind playing against something like five Riptides or Wave Serpent spam in friendly games, I enjoy the challenge and always remind myself of this simple truth; people spend their hard earned money on these armies, so is it fair on them if I refuse to play against what they paid for? Our hobby is expensive and I am completely sympathetic to everyone that participates in it. However, I do understand why many wouldn't want to face those kinds of lists in friendly games.

[Dalleron]

I understand where you're coming from, but in a perfect world, it has to go the other way. It has to be fun for you and if you're army has little chance to counter your opponent, where is the fun for you? There should be a thought by your opponent and whether or not whoever they face will have fun. You've spent your time and money on this hobby just like most everyone else and should be entitled to enjoy it as well. If someone showed up with a spam of uber units, which we all know what they are, it's my choice if i want to play against it.

Sadly, the world isn't perfect and people spam helldrakes, riptides or whatever. In a tournament yea, go for it, you're they're to win, so do what you think gives you the best chance for accomplishing the task.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

@kath.. this entire game has always been an arms race. or did you miss how each edition they change what is good and what is bad? did you also miss each new book pimping out its new units as being the better options in the book.. odd wraith knights... riptides braodsides helldrake im sure the new storm troopers for guard will be awsome as well. this is how GW sells models. Gw has always been an arms race or did you miss codex creep? this whole concept of balance in 40k is like chasing after unicorns... they do not exist nor does balance so get over it already. you may get your way and be able to weasle out of forgeworld escalation and strong hold for a few more months but soon and very soon that will not be an option. so you can either adapt and overcome or you can sit there and pout. i know the guys i play with and the store i play in has already embraced them all and is letting it turn into a free for all because when the dust settles its just a game with minatures and we all play for fun my fun doesnt equal your fun. thats life deal with it.

[juliusb]

Xaric, of course it's an optional expansion. In every White Dwarf article they say things like, "When playing a game of Escalation..." when they are talking about Escalation. Since the creators themselves talk about it as a variant of the game it is clearly a variant of the game (like Planetstrike, Cities of Death, and Spearhead). The comments of GW provide the most telling evidence of all as to how they see the game. These comments have been made by GW in several places. Cheers. Cope

This is wrong. Escalation is a Suppliment just like a codex; says so right on the back, just like a codex. That said, the goal is to have a fun game so I would understand if my opponent asked me to remove a SuperHeavy because he was totally unprepared for it. But then I'd feel entitled to go through his codex list and remove anything I wasn't prepared for.

[Chris Copeland]

And yet GW folks keep saying things like "When playing a game of Escalation" when they are talking about Escalation...

[Katharon]

@kath.. this entire game has always been an arms race. or did you miss how each edition they change what is good and what is bad? did you also miss each new book pimping out its new units as being the better options in the book.. odd wraith knights... riptides braodsides helldrake im sure the new storm troopers for guard will be awsome as well. this is how GW sells models. Gw has always been an arms race or did you miss codex creep? this whole concept of balance in 40k is like chasing after unicorns... they do not exist nor does balance so get over it already. you may get your way and be able to weasle out of forgeworld escalation and strong hold for a few more months but soon and very soon that will not be an option. so you can either adapt and overcome or you can sit there and pout. i know the guys i play with and the store i play in has already embraced them all and is letting it turn into a free for all because when the dust settles its just a game with minatures and we all play for fun my fun doesnt equal your fun. thats life deal with it.

That is astoundingly obtuse. Codex creep, is naturally, something that has been in the game since its inception. I should know, having played 2nd to 3rd Edition and then returning for 5th and now 6th. Things change. But there are limits to which people will accept certain levels of power increase. With the change done to 6th edition Apoc and the manner in which Destroyer weapons are now handled, things changed irrevocably.

Destroyer weapons were originally designed with the intention of making the massed games of 10 thousand or more points move along faster. Then they came out with Apoc and the Destroyer weapon found its true home and calling.

To bring the Destroyer weapon into games of 2K and lower, however, is a mistake that we're still riding the eddies of - the water has not stilled yet. This is largely due to the massive influx of new Codicies, supplements, formations, and rule dataslates that we've received. Most people don't have the financial ability to buy the latest new item or unit with a special ability or otherwise.

If I am playing a 1.5K game and someone plops a D-weapon totting super heavy of one type or another that is soon to be just removing units en masse, then for me (and I think most people facing that situation) it is not fun. D-weapons have the incandescent stench of WAAC. That isn't the way I play and it certainly isn't the manner in which GW should be espousing their game. I think, on their part, it is not wholely intentional -- as they have been trying to increase interest in players developing narrative for their games -- but unfortunately the result of their efforts have gained them this controversy that we're now arguing over.

I'm not going to waste another post after this one, going back and forth SoR. I'm not going to change your mind and I don't want to. However, you will understand me when I say that this is not how I have fun. This is not how a large majority have fun.


This is wrong. Escalation is a Suppliment just like a codex; says so right on the back, just like a codex. That said, the goal is to have a fun game so I would understand if my opponent asked me to remove a SuperHeavy because he was totally unprepared for it. But then I'd feel entitled to go through his codex list and remove anything I wasn't prepared for.

That is horribly ridiculous. It's an optional supplement to the game that you can choose to include or not. As for your last sentence there...wow, that's just ridiculous.

[DarkLink]

Yeah, what Katharon said.

I've played a fair amount of escalation, I've seen quite a few escalation games, and I've heard the opinions of a lot of people who have also played a lot of escalation games, and from where I'm sitting, it's effectively unanimous that Str D is so overpowering that there's little point in actually playing with it. Even the very few people I've seen arguing for it have been forced to admit their games with it were unfair.

[daboarder]

Yeah, what Katharon said.

I've played a fair amount of escalation, I've seen quite a few escalation games, and I've heard the opinions of a lot of people who have also played a lot of escalation games, and from where I'm sitting, it's effectively unanimous that Str D is so overpowering that there's little point in actually playing with it. Even the very few people I've seen arguing for it have been forced to admit their games with it were unfair.

Only the range D though, the combat D isn't really all that.

subtle but important, and the major reason why I would happily fight a Knight but wouldn't play escalation.

[Nabterayl]

Inclined to agree with daboarder on that one.

Ranged Destroyer weaponry is, in my opinion, a victim of GW's love of over-the-top sensibilities: it's capable of killing the biggest AFVs in the universe, ergo it must create a big blast. But they aren't for making big blasts; they're titan-killers. I think that giving them a more literal interpretation of the Epic Titan Killer rules and eliminating or drastically reducing the blast sizes on Destroyer weapons, treating them like long-rod penetrators, would keep the core functionality and make them a lot less un-fun.

EDIT: I don't think it's a coincidence that of all the plastic superheavies, only two have a ranged Destroyer weapon, and one of those "ranged" Destroyer weapons is a Hellstorm weapon.

[Katharon]

Daboarder and Nabterayl, I think you're right to an extent. However, I would still begrudge the Knight it's D-weapon CCW. The reason being because it can move 12" in the movement phase. Anyone who has decided to buy, build, and use a Knight army should know that they best option is to get into combat ASAP with the strongest weapon they have: the D-weapon. Most of the deployment zones for our standard games are positioned in such a way that any half-decent Knight player will have a 60-75% chance of getting into a close-combat fight on Turn One. It's going to force players to turtle up in a corner with as many long-range and high strength weapons as they can muster -- and while some armies are made for that (IG, Tau, and even SM can do it), it certainly brings the dynamic of the game trundling down.


It's one of the reasons why I was hoping beyond hope that they would have simply made the Knight CCW a S10 AP1 weapon...but it is what it is, and as people have already said - strategies for dealing with Knights will be made.

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

@kath see that's the problem you say the majority of people don't like it and maybe thats the majority of the people in your area i can say here the majority of people are more then willing to give it a chance and enjoy it. it's all subjective but when people make broad statements like everyone hates it or no one wants to play it that's not really the whole truth. if your area is 50 people and someone else is 100 whos is more valid? perhaps another persons is 200 and they hate it while say in baltimore 500 people like it. this has always been my biggest complaints with boards people make broad statements that this is so broken or no one plays it when they are 1 person who has an albeit vocal response to it. But seriously there is no reason for anyone to make a claim that they speak for the bulk of the community when even bols only represents a fraction of the gaming community.

While i can say i am not a fan of ranged D weapons in a game i know i go into my games with a 50% chance to win if i play someone with a revanant titan i would take up the challenge i will win or i will loose if the game is super fast guess what i can get in another game that night instead of just playing the 1 game so for me its not a losing situation.

As for knights you begrudge them due to a str D close combat weapon how do you feel about beast stars? seer stars? riptide spam? wraith knight spam? vendetta spam? draigo wing. i could go on and on about some of the broken combos we have seem in this games history. it just surprises me that people will crucify one and give the other's a pass. sure Str D will kill you in close combat but its a walker granted AV13 with a 4+inv but seriouly it can be killed alot easier them all of the above listed spamable units. Which is the greater of evils? an army of 5 knights? or a unit that you can focus fire your entire army on and still not kill it in a single turn.

[Katharon]

3As for knights you begrudge them due to a str D close combat weapon how do you feel about beast stars? seer stars? riptide spam? wraith knight spam? vendetta spam? draigo wing. i could go on and on about some of the broken combos we have seem in this games history. it just surprises me that people will crucify one and give the other's a pass. sure Str D will kill you in close combat but its a walker granted AV13 with a 4+inv but seriouly it can be killed alot easier them all of the above listed spamable units. Which is the greater of evils? an army of 5 knights? or a unit that you can focus fire your entire army on and still not kill it in a single turn.

No worries, I equally condemn anyone that power games or uses WAAC-style in our gaming community; before you make the assumption that I "give the others a pass."

[SON OF ROMULOUS]

@kath i dunno i just play with a group thats very diverse we have waac players and we have fluff bunnies that hound those who play with things that shouldn't go together. So its a mixed bag for me. the way i look at it is as long as i know what you want to play then we can play that game. And in the end i will have fun. you wanna play a tournament styled mission (which i actually prefer their a bit more interesting especially with the escalting objectives and such) then we can swing it out and force each other to take a more balanced or rock/ paper army and see who wins. or we can do a massive narrative campaign. heck last campaign we played the orks took over an imperial world and i actually got to watch as wazdakka killed a titan in close combat too :) so for me it was epic. Heck we are getting a mini campaign on hopefully this weekend to welcome a new player to our group so im breaking out either world eaters or death guard to support a crimson slaughter army. I know my buddy (should be atleast) is assembling my lucius this week magnetizing it and everything so that it can be used this spring to fight along side my marines. i know i spent my holiday break painting up a shadow sword and touching up my bandblade so they will get some use and i have to repair the one stompa and make anew gun arm for the other one ( both were damaged in an auto accident) for use this summer as well.

[Charon]

While i can say i am not a fan of ranged D weapons in a game i know i go into my games with a 50% chance to win if i play someone with a revanant titan i would take up the challenge i will win or i will loose if the game is super fast guess what i can get in another game that night instead of just playing the 1 game so for me its not a losing situation.

As for knights you begrudge them due to a str D close combat weapon how do you feel about beast stars? seer stars? riptide spam? wraith knight spam? vendetta spam? draigo wing. i could go on and on about some of the broken combos we have seem in this games history. it just surprises me that people will crucify one and give the other's a pass. sure Str D will kill you in close combat but its a walker granted AV13 with a 4+inv but seriouly it can be killed alot easier them all of the above listed spamable units. Which is the greater of evils? an army of 5 knights? or a unit that you can focus fire your entire army on and still not kill it in a single turn.

If there is a 50% winchance I hapily play. This is the highest peak of balance. Two players of nearly the same skilllevel 50/50. PERFECT.
If my average DE have to face a knight army, the chances are more like 5%. He rolls dices, I remove models. Not exactly fun and not worth the time investment.
I rather fight jetseers, screamerstars,... than a knight army.
If I tailor a list to face knights, yes that could be ok. But I dont like to tailor lists. My average list contains around 13 Lances. More than enough to even deal with extremely tankheavy imperial guard. On the same time these 13 Lances will only do around 2 poinst of hull damage to a single knight per turn and the number of lances I can fire is dropping turn by turn.

[Xaric]

i have a idea for a house rule with ranged D weapon called Charge up rule for the first 2 turns you cant use a D weapon's i have play tested it and it seems pritty fair the person who played necron using that vault thing useing the big flame template but still need more play testing.