| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| 'Forge Knight' thoughts. http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=12285 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
The vote came out in favour of having a single type of Knight in our AMTL army list. So, should it be a 'generic' Knight, or a specific Knight (Most likely a 'Paladin'). My thought is that a generic 'Forge Knight' would look something like: Type : AV Speed : 25cm Armour : 4+ Close Combat : 4+ Firefight : 5+ Weapons: Lascutter - 30cm AT4+ Forge Manipulators - Extra Attacks (+1), Assault Weapon Notes: Reinforced Armour, Walker, Invulnerable Save. 3 Forge Knights for 200 pts? 6 Forge Knights for... 400 pts? Background for it would be that it is a medium sized walker machine normally used in the forges, but on occasion called to war in an auxilliary role. Statwise, it is close enough to the Paladin to provide a good proxy, but avoids the need for a special rule ('Knight Shield') which would only be used by a single unit type. Thoughts? |
|
| Author: | Dwarf Supreme [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
I would go with the Paladin. |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
I would be looking at whatever the stats to be able to field it in a 6 strong formation. And try and not have it as a firepower/firefight beast as titans do that and its an overlap. CC leaning would be nice. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
(The_Real_Chris @ Apr. 10 2008,17:49) QUOTE I would be looking at whatever the stats to be able to field it in a 6 strong formation. And try and not have it as a firepower/firefight beast as titans do that and its an overlap. CC leaning would be nice. Modded the above stats to be cc-orientated, and added some thoughtful points costs... |
|
| Author: | The_Real_Chris [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 6:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
With FF 4+ they are still a bit FF. I would have gone for 25cm speed, CC/FF5+, +1EA CC MW, some gun(s). 3 strong formation would be pointless (thats a support not attack). And gods - no fearless!!! Cut RA if it meant an affordable 6 strong unit. This isn't intended to be a dedicated battlefield unit? |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
Oops Fearless shouldn't be there, typo.  This isn't intended to be a dedicated battlefield unit? I'm still mulling over the gryphonne-specific fluff, and what form their particular knights would take, fluffwise. Nabbed your 25cm speed, but left CC at 4+. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 7:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
Can't you call them Forge Guards or something? I don't see why not! |
|
| Author: | ragnarok [ Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
Forge guard are armed with a baneblade battle cannon with concussion shell (disrupt) and a chain blade (+1 attacks CC MW). They have a lousy FF, since their gun is a long range surpression gun, not something for a fire fight, but their CC isn't that bad, due to the large chain blade. Yes I have already nabbed Forge guard name for my own (now retired) list, though you can use the name if they arn't civvies pressed into seervice. 
|
|
| Author: | PlushWombat [ Fri Apr 11, 2008 1:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
(Evil and Chaos @ Apr. 10 2008,17:12) QUOTE Weapons: Lascutter - 30cm AT4+ Forge Manipulators - Extra Attacks (+1), Assault Weapon Notes: Reinforced Armour, Walker, Invulnerable Save. 3 Forge Knights for 200 pts? 6 Forge Knights for... 400 pts? Background for it would be that it is a medium sized walker machine normally used in the forges, but on occasion called to war in an auxilliary role. Statwise, it is close enough to the Paladin to provide a good proxy, but avoids the need for a special rule ('Knight Shield') which would only be used by a single unit type. Thoughts? How about calling the Forge Manipulators....The Iron Hand...or Forge Combat Fist? Why the Invulnerable Save? |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Fri Apr 11, 2008 1:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
Why the Invulnerable Save? To avoid having a special rule for this non knight-focused army list for the 'Knight Shield' (Essentially a 4+ invulnerable save that only works against TK). |
|
| Author: | J0k3r [ Mon Apr 14, 2008 1:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
I really like this angle, fits very well with my image of titans defending a forgeworld. And I dont see any problem with the lascutter having a range of hundreds of meters- A lascutter would need to be incredibly powerful to cut through thick adamantium and the likes. You could easily imagine it having a setting that refocusses the beam trading power for range. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | 'Forge Knight' thoughts. |
You know with 3.9 Im not seeing as much of Knight shaped hole in the list ..... if you know what I mean. I know, and I think the list would work fine without Knights... but we're going to have one anyway. Unless there are strong objections, it will be: - Forge Knight / Forge Guard - Armoured Vehicle - Speed 20cm - Armour 4+ - CC 4+ - FF 4+ - Lascutter (30cm AT4+) - Manipulators (+1 EA, MW, Assault Wpn) Reinforced Armour, Walker, Invun Save. The closest proxy will be the Paladin, but these stats / the name ensure that the prospect of fielding Knights is very approachable. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|