Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

The role of knights, etc.

 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 6:39 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
I wonder if giving knights the 'infiltrator' ability was ever considered. I ask because they always seemed to be more like cavalry than more traditional vehicles, and rough riders have the infiltrator ability to represent a cavalry charge. So, why not give the knights that ability, too?

I realise that doing so would require an overhaul of the stats, but I do think such an ability would help set them apart from the other vehicle squadron available in the list. Also, I realize that the ability might not make as much sense on the heavier knights, but I definitely think it would be a better fit to the errant and lancers than them having a higher move than the rest of the knights.

Maybe I'm off base, but the knights as they are now feel just like every other vehicle in the game. I think they should be designed around a different concept, and I think that the infiltrator ability is good place to start.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:16 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
I know we're not supposed to make decisions based on fluff from previous incarnations of epic, but giving knights "infiltrator" seems very unfluffy. I haven't played with knights in E:A yet, but in the past knights always seemed to me sufficiently different from regular vehicles.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
Quote (Dwarf Supreme @ 13 Feb. 2006 (18:16))
I know we're not supposed to make decisions based on fluff from previous incarnations of epic, but giving knights "infiltrator" seems very unfluffy. I haven't played with knights in E:A yet, but in the past knights always seemed to me sufficiently different from regular vehicles.

But other than appearance, what "sufficient differences" have you seen Dwarf Supreme?  

They just look like walking tanks to me at the moment.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
As I said, I haven't used them E:A, so I can't comment on how they play now. In the past the lance and the knight shield differentiated them from vehicles.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 7:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
I have to say, if the fluff says they aren't the type to have the abilities conferred by 'infiltrator,' then they probably shouldn't have the ability. However, if the fluff only vaguely hints at the knights not being all that fast on the charge, then I would say such an ability is still fair game.

At this point, I admit that there isn't a structural need to differentiate the knights from other vehicles. But, I am of the opinion that the list would be better (in a "gee, thats nice," kind of way) if the knights were more differentiated than they currently are. So, I mean, this isn't just change for change sake, more like charge for personal preference sake - which I understand isn't the best of intentions (but it isn't a terrible reason, either).

Also, I know I would worry more about the knight formation I face if I knew they could double move on a charge (not that the AMTL need any boosts - unless some of the GT objective ideas get out of hand).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 12:45 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
The current knights are quite different to normal armoured vehicles such as tanks.

Tanks will 9 times out of 10 want to shoot the enemy with ranged combat.  Yes some armoured formations are good at FF eg tank coys. But since they nearly all have multiple ranged weapons their ability to kill the enemy is higher with ranged shooting.

Knights on the other hand are armoured assault vehicles.  They excel far more in engagements than ranged shooting (barring the heavy knights that are fire support).  They generally have more CC or FF attacks than shooting attacks.

The knight shield also differentiates knights from tanks.  Making them harder to kill, though the smaller formations make them more susceptible to BMs.

As to infiltrate, it would definitely make the knights more potent.  The trouble is that they are already rather expensive and adding infiltrate could make them too costly to be worthwhile.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 8:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am
Posts: 876
Location: Brest - France
Quote (semajnollissor @ 13 Feb. 2006 (18:53))
I have to say, if the fluff says they aren't the type to have the abilities conferred by 'infiltrator,' then they probably shouldn't have the ability. However, if the fluff only vaguely hints at the knights not being all that fast on the charge, then I would say such an ability is still fair game.

At this point, I admit that there isn't a structural need to differentiate the knights from other vehicles. But, I am of the opinion that the list would be better (in a "gee, thats nice," kind of way) if the knights were more differentiated than they currently are. So, I mean, this isn't just change for change sake, more like charge for personal preference sake - which I understand isn't the best of intentions (but it isn't a terrible reason, either).

Also, I know I would worry more about the knight formation I face if I knew they could double move on a charge (not that the AMTL need any boosts - unless some of the GT objective ideas get out of hand).

Same here.

I don't really know whether this is supported by the fluff or not, but it does sound like a good idea. I can totally picture Knights leading a furious charge into the enemy lines. ?:cool:

I've only faced Knights one, and all they did was move 20cm a turn and shoot. Now that doesn't sound like an "armoured assault vehicle" (as clausewitz put it) to me, but rather like a Leman Russ. Giving them Infiltrator (well, to the Errants, Lancers, Barons and Paladins at least... not to the heavy Knights) would probably encourage players to use them more offensively, as should be.

Of course, doing that would make them even more expensive than they are now, but still, I really like that idea.






Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 3:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
Well, they would probably each have to loose a weapon system, and probably some range on the weapon systems they keep if the point cost were kept the same. Not something to be happy about, I suppose. However, the "light" knights could have their move reduced by 5 or 10cm without taking too much of a hit when assaulting. Also, if they are worth the point value they are assigned, there shouldn't be a problem.

It seems to me that the knights are a hard group to get "right." They should have good abilities, so they should be relatively expensive. But, being in a titan list means their expense competes with the big stuff, so a cheap unit is desired. But, this means small formations are required to keep the point cost down. But, small formations are very vulnerable to BM's, so cheap knight formations don't seem that attractive when compared to competing formation types.

It's almost as if there should be a 8-10 knight, 600-800pt legio choice, just so a player can go whole hog into this mess. But, then, once again, there is the fluff to content with. Oh well.

The whole issue frustrates me because I've always thought that the knights were a visually cool concept. Right now, the only difference I see between knights and Russes, is that the knights want to be in CC. However, their speed means theat they don't seem likely to ever get into CC without being charged by the enemy. The lighter knights obviously have a better chance, but they seem almost too fast when doubling or marching.

What if only the light knights were given infiltrator and at the same time give up some of their speed?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Tue Feb 14, 2006 6:03 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:52 am
Posts: 876
Location: Brest - France
Well, reducing their other stats could indeed be a solution to balance things out.

How about this (please bear with me if my propositions sound out of touch and contradict the fluff and/or the global balance of the army... I don't know much about the AMTL list, but the Knights are one of my favorite units):

Baron
Add Infiltrator
Baron Cannon >>> Range reduced to 30cm
(not much of a stat reduction, but considering the rarity of the Baron and its cost, I think it's OK)

Knight Errant
Add Infiltrator
Thermal Cannon >>> Range reduced to 15cm
Speed reduced to 25cm

Knight Lancer
Add Infiltrator
Knight Cannon >>> Range reduced to 30cm
Speed reduced to 25cm

(By the way, shouldn't the Lancer's CC and FF value be switched ? FF3+ and CC5+ seem strange for a vehicle that's supposedly designed to rush the enemy and whose weapons systems are made for close combat)

Knight Paladin
Add Infiltrator
Knight Cannon >>> Range reduced to 30cm
Speed reduced to 15cm

Knight Crusader
Unchanged

Knight Castellan
Unchanged

Well, here it is. Is that OK or not? I guess there's little chance of seeing the unit modified that way, but well, I like semajnollissor's idea, so...  :(8:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:14 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2006 4:55 pm
Posts: 9
The Knights need to be wrked on, as was stated in the To Do List for the next version.

A good change would be to drop their Save by 1 and give them DC 2, this would allow them to suffer a casualty whist remaining unbroken.

Infiltrate would make them a much more Titan friendly unit as they would fill the role they were designed for. As it is they cannot match a unit of 2 Warhounds.

Allowing Knights as a core unit (Around about 10 figs inc a Leader) would at least start to allow more varied lists.

The backgroundof the knghts, as I see it, shows them as being the interception forces of the Titan Legions who cannot survive in extended combat but are hit-and-run specialists.

With DC 2 and Armour Save 5+ with Infiltrate they play really well, try it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
Quote (Wailing_Doom @ 16 Feb. 2006 (10:14))
A good change would be to drop their Save by 1 and give them DC 2, this would allow them to suffer a casualty whist remaining unbroken.

Infiltrate would make them a much more Titan friendly unit as they would fill the role they were designed for. As it is they cannot match a unit of 2 Warhounds.

Allowing Knights as a core unit (Around about 10 figs inc a Leader) would at least start to allow more varied lists.

With DC 2 and Armour Save 5+ with Infiltrate they play really well, try it.

These stats wouild be great, except they'd make the knights more expensive than the target value. Certainly a group of 10 of these thing would be more expensive than a warlord.

I think that the knights should be about as vulnerable to fire as a Leman Russ is, but with shorter ranged and fewer guns and way better in CC (but not necessarily better in FF).

I think that the generalist knights would be ok with a couple of 30cm AT/AP shots a piece (like an eldar war walker gets) and a FF weapon with first strike, Extra attack(+1). My personal preferrence for their formation size would be 6 units. The light knights would have a single AT/AP shot, and two CC/FF weapons with first strike, Extra attack(+1). Meanwhile the heavy knights should get a powerful 60cm weapon (maybe a MW? - a AP3+/AT3+ weapon might be more balanced), plus one or two 30 or 45cm weaker weapons. They would have a better FF value than the other types of knight.

I know that the knights are all supposed to have shock lances, but what do they look like on the actual models? It looks to me like the model stats reflect the weapons on the models + the shock lance that isn't shown. Is the shock lance an actual lance, or is it some small device built into some other part of the knight? It might be better/easier to drop the shock lances in favor of just having the weapons shown on the model. The lights knights would be the most likely to keep the shock lances.

Also, I don't buy the stats given for the guns on the heavy knights. They have a battle-titan class weapon built into them? I don't buy it. Knock the range down a peg or two and maybe I'd believe it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
According to previous incarnations, not all of the knights had a lance, specifically the castellan and crusader didn't (there may be others that I'm not remembering.) Also, the lance was't necessarily a physical lance. The errant (I think) did have a physical lance, but the paladin didn't. The lance was an electric charge which built up while the knight was moving and was discharged as the knight entered CC.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:25 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:16 pm
Posts: 908
Dwarf Supreme is spot on with the Shock Lance - IIRC, it was discharged from the head (though I'd need to double-check this), so in a way it is represented on the model.

The shock lance is used by Knights to deliver high voltage electromagnetic socks in enemies they are close assaulting. The engines of the Knight suit are fitted with huge dynamos. As the Knight builds up speed and charges into combat, the dynamos revolve, storing an electric charge in capacitators mounted in the Knight suits visor. When the Knight enters combat the charge in the capacitators is so great it can do nothing but earth itself, usually via the enemy, delivering a devastating electric shock which can burn infantry to the bone and short out weapon and control systems.

Codex Titanicus, page 28

_________________
The forgotten Champion - AMTL, baby!

Dysartes.com - Resources for the Modern Wargamer - Last updated: December 2004 - Next Update: In Progress

Sentinels are just young titans that haven't grown up yet!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:27 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 8:45 pm
Posts: 11147
Location: Canton, CT, USA
Dysartes, I believe you're right that it was discharged through the head.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: The role of knights, etc.
PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 10:30 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1673
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
Well, dysartes, what do think of the original post topic - infiltrator for knights?

Since you're the army champion, I'm interested in you thoughts on the matter.






Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net