Black Knights vs Grave Guard
- Thread starter Vampire Count
- Start date
-
The masquerade of murder returns! A new game of Vampires Amongst Us has begun. Unmask the killers, trust no one, and try to survive the night. Find out more and sign up now!
Yeah if you have to choose then GG will often be better though it depends on the other stuff you take of course. If I can I often take both though.
Hmm just a suggestion to help you figure this out.
Build you knight unit and Grave guard unit on paper using the same point allotment.
Then have the two units fight each other and at the end of combat use the results from one ION spell. For instance roll your d6 plus caster level for your grave guard while your knights only get the caster level in return wounds.
My bet is that the Grave Guard win all day long.
For instance 14 Black knights with full command and magic banner cost 886 skaven slaves. A Grave Guard unit will have 33 models with full command and magic banner for 886 skaven slaves.
However this alone would not make up my mind as i would probably bring the knights just for something different from most players lists. You will just need finesse and target selectivness to make them work well.
Build you knight unit and Grave guard unit on paper using the same point allotment.
Then have the two units fight each other and at the end of combat use the results from one ION spell. For instance roll your d6 plus caster level for your grave guard while your knights only get the caster level in return wounds.
My bet is that the Grave Guard win all day long.
For instance 14 Black knights with full command and magic banner cost 886 skaven slaves. A Grave Guard unit will have 33 models with full command and magic banner for 886 skaven slaves.
However this alone would not make up my mind as i would probably bring the knights just for something different from most players lists. You will just need finesse and target selectivness to make them work well.
Agreed on the Taget Selection. To having them fight eachother, who in the 9 Hells headlong charges their Knights into a unit of GW wielding Hordes? I suppose you could retort with "Dwarves all have them!" to this I say if you can't find a favorable position to charge the slowest moving army around then I suppose that's why you don't take cavalry.
I like cavalry becuase it offers a wide variety of movement and therefore tactical options in an army that suffers greatly from a lackluster movement phase.
Also with a few castings of Vanhel's you can make them into the fastest heavy cavalry in the WH world, break through a weak unit and use the book to turn about for turn 2-3 rear charges.
Ethereal movement is also nothing to sneer at, being able to pass through buildings and other impassable scenery can be invaluable as enemies tend to avoid positioning units behind such things meaning your opening is already available sans combat.
Agreed on raising that you get more GG but in theory the BK's give you more points on average back of a unit that takes more attacks per model to kill.
Also flank charging with a rank causes a unit to suffer from Diruption with a rank, negating rank bonus and like all disrupted units wether fighting in a forest or difficult terrain negates Steadfast.
I like cavalry becuase it offers a wide variety of movement and therefore tactical options in an army that suffers greatly from a lackluster movement phase.
Also with a few castings of Vanhel's you can make them into the fastest heavy cavalry in the WH world, break through a weak unit and use the book to turn about for turn 2-3 rear charges.
Ethereal movement is also nothing to sneer at, being able to pass through buildings and other impassable scenery can be invaluable as enemies tend to avoid positioning units behind such things meaning your opening is already available sans combat.
Agreed on raising that you get more GG but in theory the BK's give you more points on average back of a unit that takes more attacks per model to kill.
Also flank charging with a rank causes a unit to suffer from Diruption with a rank, negating rank bonus and like all disrupted units wether fighting in a forest or difficult terrain negates Steadfast.
in my first game with the new book the other night, i tried out the black knights, main reason i got them, was because my hybrid lord was mounted and needed a unit to go in, before ive always have chosen GG over BK, i was impressed with the BK, they are very resilient, the unit champ accepted a challenge from a chaos lord, and was able to roll well and save against all the wounds caused my the Chaos Lord for 3 rounds, at which point i was able to score a killing blow, and the whole time my VL was averaging 8 kills a turn on the horde of chaos worriers.
bonesaww666 said:
I was just attempting to demonstrate that the Grave Guard are an easy tactical choice vs the black knights because of the actual wound potential. I did state finesse would be required.
Just because you have a rank does not cause disruption. Having 10 or more models causes disruption. And disruption does not negate steadfast it just stops their rank bonus and gives you +1 combat resolution. It is being in a wood that deprives the use of steadfast. I just thought that might need clarified for other readers.
I made my first 2400 list without any GG.
Gonna try it out next week and am really excited bc there's a 10 BK death star with my combat lord and nightshroud-wearing WK BSB.
It's gonna feel odd without all those S6 hits, but I sure won't miss that 8 inch march and pitiful charges!!
Gonna try it out next week and am really excited bc there's a 10 BK death star with my combat lord and nightshroud-wearing WK BSB.
It's gonna feel odd without all those S6 hits, but I sure won't miss that 8 inch march and pitiful charges!!
Remind me why this is an either or proposition?
As observed, the grave guard are plenty hitty. On the other hand, vampire lords are super squishy unless they're mounted. My current idea is to use the black knights as ablative wounds for a red fury lvl 4.
Why? A lvl 4 vampire costs 105 points more than a regular one, which is cheaper than the 200 for a master necromancer. Aha! So, you get the master plus a ton of extra killy on the side. Keeping this guy alive is important. ~660 points worth of important. Now, as great as a 3+ save is, I'm more inclined to go with a 1+ (or 2+ rerollable) with a 4+ ward save tucked in the back pocket. The only way to do that is to stick him on a horse. From there, the need for black knights is clear.
So the question is not if you want grave guard or knights. The question is if you're going to take a vampire lord or not. That's a question for another thread, but that's pretty much what it comes down to. Without him, the knights do not have enough killy to make themselves useful. Without them, he doesn't have the staying power to be your only lvl 4 caster. If he's not your primary caster, there are problems.
As a parting remark, the power lists in this edition will gravitate toward 2 massive units of grave guard backed by double mortis engines. The vampire lord will take a back seat to the cheap casting power of the master necromancer. Are black knights going to rule the tabletop like they did in 6th? Nope. If, however, you take a blood dragon-type vampire, I guarantee that he'll be best riding into the fray with his loyal horsemen tagging along for the ride.
-Ether
As observed, the grave guard are plenty hitty. On the other hand, vampire lords are super squishy unless they're mounted. My current idea is to use the black knights as ablative wounds for a red fury lvl 4.
Why? A lvl 4 vampire costs 105 points more than a regular one, which is cheaper than the 200 for a master necromancer. Aha! So, you get the master plus a ton of extra killy on the side. Keeping this guy alive is important. ~660 points worth of important. Now, as great as a 3+ save is, I'm more inclined to go with a 1+ (or 2+ rerollable) with a 4+ ward save tucked in the back pocket. The only way to do that is to stick him on a horse. From there, the need for black knights is clear.
So the question is not if you want grave guard or knights. The question is if you're going to take a vampire lord or not. That's a question for another thread, but that's pretty much what it comes down to. Without him, the knights do not have enough killy to make themselves useful. Without them, he doesn't have the staying power to be your only lvl 4 caster. If he's not your primary caster, there are problems.
As a parting remark, the power lists in this edition will gravitate toward 2 massive units of grave guard backed by double mortis engines. The vampire lord will take a back seat to the cheap casting power of the master necromancer. Are black knights going to rule the tabletop like they did in 6th? Nope. If, however, you take a blood dragon-type vampire, I guarantee that he'll be best riding into the fray with his loyal horsemen tagging along for the ride.
-Ether
I dont have the book infront of me.
But do both Grave Guard and Black Knights get 1d6+wizard level off IoN or just Grave Guard?
But do both Grave Guard and Black Knights get 1d6+wizard level off IoN or just Grave Guard?
I think the power of T5 and a 4+ Ward is being somewhat underestimated, here. A Vampire Lord (given his ability to rip a rank off a Horde on demand) is plenty durable against rank-and-file troops, and we have plenty of options available to absorb any challenges that might come the unit's way. The fact of the matter is that Mortis Engines are not something I would trust implicitly when artillery is as good as it is (go ahead and trust the cannon to miss, see how that works out), and that means the Grave Guard lack a certain bit of muscle, which can be provided by the Vampire Lord. Black Knights are at their best as flankers, and the requisite killiness can easily be achieved with a much cheaper Vampire Hero who won't attract the attention of every piece of magic/ranged muscle the opponent has to offer (unlike an all-in Vampire Lord). Even with a Vamp Lord, that unit won't have enough ranks to break people on the charge, unless you bring a unit unwieldy enough to be fed chaff and taken out of the game (or worse, smashed in the flank where CR is going to wreck you). And then there's always the Stubborn units that will stop you cold regardless of your numbers.
Another thing to point out is while it's more points-efficient to make the Vampire a L4, it's also terribly risky. Miscasts happen, and nothing says "auto-lose" than that 500-point Vampire Lord plunging down the rabbit hole.
Another thing to point out is while it's more points-efficient to make the Vampire a L4, it's also terribly risky. Miscasts happen, and nothing says "auto-lose" than that 500-point Vampire Lord plunging down the rabbit hole.