I don't want to get too hung up on comparative size of model being a major defining factor in design. The lack of consistency in the model ranges, let alone across the varying editions, makes for some frankly silly issues. Take the 4 versions of Thunderhawks, as an example.

The Slaanesh Knights look sleeker and faster. But their weaponry is effectively three times better than the Knight's KnightCannon, even though it's physically the same size. The Castellan's Gatling AutoCannon is twice as large, but the Castigator is at least 50% better.

I just sum up the differences in actual figures as maaaa-gic *wiggles fingers*, and don't see it as a defining factor.

Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion

Kind of hard to ignore if you ask me...

... then again, you wern't

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Everyone's entitled to their opinion.

So I can expect the stats on the Castigator Cannon on the Slaanesh Knights will be significantly cut back, when?

Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion

IF you come to the conclusion that it just absolutely cannot be done with the current rules, then I'd say stick with the movement version.

At the moment, I'm leaning towards Sem's suggestion with regards Errant 25+Inf, Lancer 20+Inf, or leaving the Lancer at 30 without Inf (it already Engages at it's best at 45cm). I'm wanting to see more reviews before I start changing things, hopefully with commentary from both the Knight players, and their opponents.

Only if that doesn't work, and another solution isn't made apparent, will I go back to considering a special rule. Though I do find the opposition to some fairly straightforward special rules ironic, given what Eldar, Necron, Tau and Tyranids are allowed to get away with. A small revision of the existing 2.1 Rules adding an X value (namely Invulnerable Save), and at least two of those racial abilities are made unnecessary (Lance would need a slight rewrite). Add in Infiltrate, and the Knightworld could lose both theirs. And Reinforced Armor, and a lot of other issues disappear. But that's not likely to happen.

The one significant issue is the Paladin problem, I'm not sure can be solved by minor tinkering. I've considered boosting it's shooting capacity, and I've also considered a reduction in effectiveness (and dropping the cost) and making it more a 'junior' model. It's just hard to fit it into the existing structure without some modification.

Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion

I remember seeing a thread somewhere which stated no more than five/seven (?) special rules?

We have the Eldar list to thank for laying the groundwork.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I like your initial idea/concept MV.

How about removing first strike from all the lance weapons stats and reducing the Errant/Paladin to 20cm and Baron/Lancer to 25cm move, then add something like your special rule:

Chargers?
All units with this rule gain:
* a +10cm move on an engage action;
* a 10cm counter charge move if the target of an enemy engage action; and
* gain the "First Strike" special rule to any Shock Lance and/or Power Lance weapons for the first round of any assault.

This allows a little extra distance on the charge, reduces the March move you're worried about and keeps the first strike for the first round of FF attacks. Should a combat go for longer due to a draw they loose the First strike as their charge momentum has gone and its all gone to poo..

It also allows you to get away from "infiltrator" which i don't think suits them. The double distance charge is potentially ok but how does a 8-12m tall battle suit slip past enemies and ignore their ZOC?

Thoughts
Geoff

You try standing in the way of a 8-12m tall battle suit and see who wins the game of chicken

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

As frogbear alluded to, in a case like this Infiltrator is not representing "sneak past" but "charge completely through enemy lines by sheer bloody-mindedness."

Oh I'm not worried about that I'm already running

Its ok whilst you can see them out on the plains, charging in at speed. Its when they use stealth to bypass my deamon engines, assault troops, cannon fodder, tanks, other war engines, etc and appear beside my commander that I'd start to worry....

Time to paint my paladins up as ninja!

I suggest having infiltrator and 20-25cm move for the fast racing Lancers and Barons but 20cm and no infiltrator for Palladins or Errants - both are slow hulking creations, not built for sneaking or mad dashes of speed. The Errant should be absolutely lethals at short range and CC but slow to make up for it.

If the max movement of the army becomes 20-25 then so be it, gives them a disadvantage and different character and Feral Ork armies sometimes play with max speeds of 15-25cm and do fine.

One of the reasons why I suggested infiltrate to begin with is that most cavalry already has infiltrate i.e rough riders. Lancers are essentially giant robots replicating the role of cavalry.

I'll hopefully get a chance to trial the Knights tomorrow night.

Would a trial of (25cm + Infiltrator) for Lancer & Baron and 20cm for Paladin & Errant be in line with the general concensus?

I wouldn't have bothered with the baron as you are putting your supreme commander in a lot of danger slicking him with the Lancers.

I'd prefer they were used 'as is', so I can get feedback from players as to current situations. While I appreciate people's opinions on things, there seems to be a significant lack of information from actual play experience, from both players and opponents.

If you're adamant about using alternate stats, here's what I'm currently leaning towards. Errant 25cm Infiltrate, Lancer 30cm, Paladin/Baron 20cm Infiltrate. Given their role as FF specialists, I don't see it as compulsory to give Lancers Infiltrate, and this still gives a formation with a good tactical move.

But as I said above, I don't really want to move forward, without some empirical evidence to go along with the theoretical. Besides just how they performed, I'd like to know form players why they selected specific formations, and whether they performed to standard. For me, Lancers are superior to Errants, and both outshine Paladins. Reports from before the handover seem to indicate Errants as superior. I want to know how they feel to the player, and from their opponent (if possible).

Morgan Vening
- Knightworld Sub-Champion