Fixing Knights - What do they need?

[Faultie]

So, it seems that many comments I've viewed online have mainly bad things to say about basic human knights. Around here and elsewhere, it seems that Brettonians aren't viewed as a high-tier list, and they're supposed to be the best cavalry army (flying V and all that).

I admit that generic ones (S3 T3 for ~20-24pts) are not so hot, but otherwise I'm not quite sure exactly what's so bad about them. Ranks, attacks, Ld...?

So my question: Do you think human knights/heavy cavalry are crappy? If so, how would you improve them (least possible change) to make them worthwhile?

[Lord Azaghul]

Asked and Answered:

In my opinion that problem with human knights is the way the unit works in the game.

1)They often have a 1+ or 2+ AS, but much in the game either reduces it or negates it all together.

2)Most knights only have 1 attack, with any killing power, and that is only on the charge (horse attack not included)

3)Most knights are WS 4, this is current only average or below average - so your chances of the 1 attack hitting are already reduced to 50%

4) Price: knights are too expensive to overcome the lack of killing power with static combat rez. One static rank cost can easily cost you 100-140 pts, once that first models fails, no rank bonus = 140 wasted points so that can not fight.

5) no killing power once engaging in CC, 2nd rounds. The execption to this is great weapons, but striking last, at only +1 S isn't a great option with a 2+ AS (and its probably against something S4!)

Its the combination of all of these that make knights not worth it.

Fixes:
S4 Impact hits for barded horses. 1 Hit per model in the front rank.
Or Go with what we know works already:
Allow models with lances to fight in 2 ranks on the turn they charge - this would mean all the expensive knights you're paying for could actually be used!

[Faultie]

I like the 2-ranks on a charge with Lancers. I think it fixes the problem of wasted points, lack of power, and makes the charge itself (the whole purpose of cavalry, really) more effective.

It also encourages larger units of knights, meaning more models sold, which is good for GW!

[Lord Azaghul]

I like the 2-ranks on a charge with Lancers. I think it fixes the problem of wasted points, lack of power, and makes the charge itself (the whole purpose of cavalry, really) more effective.

It also encourages larger units of knights, meaning more models sold, which is good for GW!

I do really like the idea...and it seems more realistic as to how knights would work in game.

[Faultie]

Also with this idea, Brettonians still get to be better than everyone else, since their middle guy in a unit of 6 or 9 could attack. If they widened the unit, several guys in the middle could attack (it might take some tweaking of their rules to make it clearer). Regardless, they stand to gain an extra few attacks, just like everyone.

It might even make my Lancers good!

[Kjal]

Ive been thinking for quite a while now why are there two "persons" who attack (rider and horse) and why do they have only one wound together?

[Lord Azaghul]

Ive been thinking for quite a while now why are there two "persons" who attack (rider and horse) and why do they have only one wound together?

First theres the practical reason: You’d have to have both knights on foot, and horses with out knights and that would complicate the gaming process.


Then theres the astetic or game feel reason:
But the reason you’re getting at is ‘why not add an additional wound’ – If they did that then they would really have to increase the cost of mounted models – and that still doesn’t solve the problem of not being more effective in combat – yes they would be more durible against shooting and magic, but in cc, they don’t gain a whole lot, for the price increase – even nasty/expensive chaos knights only have 1 wound.
2 wounds is too much of a ‘hero’ thing for knights to have.

[wittdooley]

Call me crazy, call me nuts, but what about this:

How about Cav Heavy armies (hello Bretonnians!) get a trample/move through rule where the Cav (GASP) runs through a unit of infantry like the would in a real battle. They take their normal attacks as they're moving through, plus a impact hit is delivered.

Of course, you could throw in the obvious caveat that they's have to be able to move completely through the unit to complete the Through Charge, and you could even have a leadership skill roll off or something, where as long as the Knights won, they were allowed to pull of their through charge. This makes sense to me, as Knights SHOULD be able to move through packs of low leadership infantry like butter, but it should be harder against better trained, higher leadership infantry. If not leadership, you could even go with initiative as your determining number.

I know the High Elves chariots can do this, or something similar. Why can't Cav?

[Herald of Nurgle]

Ive been thinking for quite a while now why are there two "persons" who attack (rider and horse) and why do they have only one wound together?

If the Rider is killed, the Horse will flee. If the Horse is killed, the Rider will be trampled.

[brominated]

I'm curious about your usage of the knights. I used to play Bretonnians and still love the army dearly and personally I think the Brets work well-ish. I ran 2000 pts of entirely mounted troops to include mostly Knights of the Realm at 9 per unit supported by Mounted Yeomen and then the heavier Grail Knights. I would always double charge enemy block troops to ensure that I would break through. I think Empire knights major strength is that of a heavy flanker, not so much a line-buster unit. I would never run a unit of knights unsupported, even my Lizard Cold One Cav cant attack a block troop unit without some sort of support. Also knights are great for running off skirmishers and preventing enemy flanking attacks. Yes, they're expensive but their speed is wholly necessary. Also they are quite useful as an "oooh scary" unit. I've been playing for some time and Chaos knights scare the crap out of me still.