This is another feeler thread before I release my first incarnation of the Knightworld list.

Just curious where the Knight constituency feels regarding a change to Core Formation Composition. It's been the one thing that I've had more than a passing issue with, and I'm curious as to what other people feel.

The problem (for me and a few others I've spoken with), stems from a 3 unit formation having it's integrity too much in the hands of fate. A single shot, a botched save, and a broken formation as a result. Coupled with expensive attrition (Each BM kills a ~75pt Knight) and difficulty rallying (4+ under best circumstance), it just made playing with 3-man formations way too risky, and the next costing was almost double the points.

Firstly, there's the issue of pack size. That's where the current creation guidelines seem to come from. Are people comfortable with shifting this, or would they retain the mutiples of 3?

The way I see it, there are several ways that can be kept, without losing the integrity of what I want to change, if people would rather stick there.

Option 1 - Knights purchased as upgrades are purchased individually (up to 3 per Upgrade Option).
Option 2 - Seneschals are purchased with a Knight (approx 125pts)
Option 3 - Seneschals have the option of being an upgrade (50pts) or with a Knight (~125pts).

Then there's also dropping the 3 multiple, allowing..

Option 4 - Basic Knight formation is 4 strong (325pts). Upgrades are 2 strong (125pts), keeping the integrity of the 450pt extended formation, making an 8 man slightly cheaper (per capita to the existent 9 man ones).

Option 3 is probably the least controversial, as it doesn't change the existing makeup in any way, but it's really only a fix if you take a Seneschal. Which for me isn't an issue, but others might prefer not to use Seneschals and still want a fix.

There might also be another option I haven't thought of, and I'd be glad to hear it. I'm not real interested in making the Knights resistant to the consequences of breaking (Fearless is absolutely out of the question), just making them SLIGHTLY harder to get into that position. I'm interested in what ideas people like, would consider, and hate. If your existing armies are a factor in that (Painted in triplets, making it hard to accommodate Option 4) , I want to hear about it as well. Like the Knightshield thread, I've got an idea in mind of what I would like, but don't want to run directly into a wall of opposition, and heck, someone may have a more elegant solution.

Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion

I think option 1 is probably the best. Not in favour of changing to a 4-Knight formation base - knights have been in 'basic' formations of 3 at least since Titan Legions and the release of the plastic Paladins, and making the base formation as 4 would almost certainly impact on people's collections/painting, and seeing as the models are all OOP it would be problematical to 'top up' to the new formation sizes.

Another advantage of having variable size formations is that as it stands, with the 1:1 core/support ratio and lack of upgrades worth under 200 points (barring senechals) choosing a list is quite restrictive. Having Knight upgrades as 1-3 would mean it would be easier to avoid having unspent points without diluting the knight-focussed character of the list.

I think the 4+2 is a good idea game wise. I tend to have collected knights in multiple lots of 6's so can field whatev.

The problem here is that metal knights are in 3's and obtaining a 4th would be tricky. I'd go for option 3 for now to make it easy for people who can do it either way. Best to have an army that fits in with what people currently have.

It's probably barely worth adding (but I'm adding it anyway), that certain shield options (as covered in the other thread) leave 3 man formations doing very nicely thank you.

Assuming there's to be no ablative shields, then options 1 & 3 both sound good.

I think the number of knights in the original packaging from years ago is probably not critical at this point. It's nice to keep it in mind as a "wish list" item but it should probably be low priority.

The reason I suggested 'non 3' is because I see a lot of Knights being sold individually, in pairs or quadruples almost as often as the standard triples. I'll probably keep to the triple as a base, because as long as there's an option to go to 4, all my issues fall by the wayside.

And I don't annoy the packaging purists.

Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion

Basic size 3 with 1-3 as upgrades seems the best solution to me.

Yep me too.

_________________
http://hordesofthings.blogspot.co.nz/

+1

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Sounds good, yes.

Agreed. However, if you do keep formations at three, I really like the idea of being able to upgrade 1-3 Knights instead of in groups of three.

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