Is it just because the book is so damn strong? Is winning and beating the crap out of other armies so important that one chooses them?

I just do not see the appeal to knowing with ALMOST certainty that I will win the next game regardless of what army or style is fielded against me.


Why did you choose the GK's?

There's something called "bandwagoning" and it happens whenever a new codex comes out. People see the new hotness and jump on it. Also, GK is a very cheap army to build, since it's smaller and more elite than SM. On top of all this, GK are very powerful and have a lot of lists that do very well in tournaments, so there's this perceived power level with them that attracts a lot of people too. On top of all that, they generally have very cool models.

Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters. Some chose them to be the other side of the coin for chaos deamons. Some chose it for fluff. Some for playstyle. Some because they always lose to deamons. Some chose it for power. So many different reasons.

Main reason is it's a very powerful codex that lets you dominate opponents of equal skill and it's cheap to amass an army of them.

Because they took the WItch Hunter out of the Sisters of Battle Codex.

Great White wrote:Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters. Some chose them to be the other side of the coin for chaos deamons. Some chose it for fluff. Some for playstyle. Some because they always lose to deamons. Some chose it for power. So many different reasons.

Pffffffff, that's a funny joke

Milisim wrote:Is it just because the book is so damn strong? Is winning and beating the crap out of other armies so important that one chooses them?

Lets see.
First you ask a question. One would assume that you are interested in the various answers this might produce, but as we read your next question we realize that this isn't the case.
Then comes the second question. This question assumes that the answer to the first question was a "yes"....and then implies that the only reason for playing Grey Knights is because of its perceived power level.

With such an intro one can safely disregard the rest of the post as whining.

I just do not see the appeal to knowing with ALMOST certainty that I will win the next game regardless of what army or style is fielded against me.

Which of course isn't the case in the real world, but don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

Why did you choose the GK's?

I chose to make a Grey Knights army because I have always liked (since their first introduction anyway) the look of Grey Knights with halberds. I just think it looks really cool.
I get a certain kung fu vibe when thinking about a halberd armed Grey Knight swinging away while firing his wrist-mounted storm bolter.
Also I'm a hopelessly addicted completist. I just like to own all the armies for 40K.

Oh, I'm sorry....that wasn't the answer you expected, was it?

Erhm...."Naturally I play (unpainted) Grey Knights because then I can kick everybody's behind real easy like...This validates my existence and shines a light into the dark chasm that is my soul ."

Steelmage99 wrote:

Milisim wrote:Is it just because the book is so damn strong? Is winning and beating the crap out of other armies so important that one chooses them?

Lets see.
First you ask a question. One would assume that you are interested in the various answers this might produce, but as we read your next question we realize that this isn't the case.
Then comes the second question. This question assumes that the answer to the first question was a "yes"....and then implies that the only reason for playing Grey Knights is because of its perceived power level.

With such an intro one can safely disregard the rest of the post as whining.

I just do not see the appeal to knowing with ALMOST certainty that I will win the next game regardless of what army or style is fielded against me.

Which of course isn't the case in the real world, but don't let that get in the way of a good cry.

Why did you choose the GK's?

I chose to make a Grey Knights army because I have always liked (since their first introduction anyway) the look of Grey Knights with halberds. I just think it looks really cool.
I get a certain kung fu vibe when thinking about a halberd armed Grey Knight swinging away while firing his wrist-mounted storm bolter.
Also I'm a hopelessly addicted completist. I just like to own all the armies for 40K.

Oh, I'm sorry....that wasn't the answer you expected, was it?

Erhm...."Naturally I play (unpainted) Grey Knights because then I can kick everybody's behind real easy like...This validates my existence and shines a light into the dark chasm that is my soul ."

XD you sir, get a gold star for the day

On topic, I chose to pick up grey knights because I love the idea of small elite forces, which is why just about every list I play is made up of a big death star unit. I havnt lost a game in about 5 months (playing an average of 2-3 games a month) and I play many different armies. I switch it up between eldar and dark eldar, tau, and chaos space marines aswell. SO I am hardly a "band wagoner"

Also, for the first time GK actually have a strong codex, and being all plastic removes the barrier that kept a lot of people from collecting them before when they were all metal.

In terms of looks, I agree that Grey Knights are one of the best model lines in the game, just behind Chaos Space Marines IMO. The fluff is also interesting and enjoyable.

I don't enjoy playing against them. Generally, they don't present much of a tactical experience, especially Draigowing and other uber-elite lists. Players with little to no skill can perform very well with them, while players with even just a moderate amount of skill can really clean up. It's a little too forgiving and is such a difficult matchup for most other armies.

Draigowing doesn't scare me much at all. Drive circles around badguys and shoot them; not much to it. It's a slow list unless it's mounted, in which case it's a tinier list than it already was. I've thought of starting the $150 army of 10 paladins, Draigo and a codex, just because it's easy to build, paint, and play.

I think Grey Knights are one of the worst armies in the game. Their place in the story leaves no room for deviation and creativity. They are also such a small force with so little impact to the universe at large, getting an entire book to themselves is criminal. The Kroot have a bigger presence in the galaxy than the Grey Knights. The old book was closer to a good representation, though I'd join the Sisters and GK as auxiliaries to the Imperium's forces at large, because that's how they actually function.

I bought GK's because my decision between armies when i started 40k was daemonhunters, necrons, and tyranids... and i already had tyranids and necrons and my local area runs some marine only tournys.

I have quite a few GK's but i honeslty play them the least. It's not that I don't enjoy playing them... I just prefer my crons.

Brother SRM wrote:Draigowing doesn't scare me much at all. Drive circles around badguys and shoot them; not much to it. It's a slow list unless it's mounted, in which case it's a tinier list than it already was.

That's exactly my point. It's not very fun to play against. With my Ork list, all I can do is run away from the deathstar, as there are very few things I could send at it that have a chance to cause wounds. There are very few ranged AP2 weapons in the codex that are reliable enough to hurt them (SAG, zzap gun, KMB), none of which are generally taken in a competitive list. Ghazkull could put some hurt on them, but I've never run him before and generally don't list tailor.

I played all-GK daemonhunters, and loved them, but holy snickerdoodles were they expensive to collect. I'm all in favour of them being plastic'd.

The new fluff doesnt really do it for me, but i still have, and paint, the models.

I can see myself trying them out again sometime, though


Why do people play GK?

Some love the models. I have to say that the models are mostly very nice (DK is one of the few i dislike).

Some like the fluff. I find it a tad OTT, but if you like that kind of thing then cool.

Some like the power-level. They are obscenely powerful. They are also very low model count, which makes each death a major loss. Some of the rules/powers/gear are a bit OP in my opinion, but most are counterable. 'm happy to live and let live on that, as most codeci have SOMETHING that's a tad broken.

GK are beatable. If everyone is running GK you'll be able to learn to beat them all the quicker, and if your opponents only play against marine variants you can throw them some VERY nasty curves if you play an army they don't run against..

Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

wormark wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:Draigowing doesn't scare me much at all. Drive circles around badguys and shoot them; not much to it. It's a slow list unless it's mounted, in which case it's a tinier list than it already was.

That's exactly my point. It's not very fun to play against. With my Ork list, all I can do is run away from the deathstar, as there are very few things I could send at it that have a chance to cause wounds. There are very few ranged AP2 weapons in the codex that are reliable enough to hurt them (SAG, zzap gun, KMB), none of which are generally taken in a competitive list. Ghazkull could put some hurt on them, but I've never run him before and generally don't list tailor.

So instead of trying to find AP 2 solutions, pummel them with massed fire to make them fail saves.

Lootas work well vs 2+ saves, due to sheer weight of fire. Drive-by burnaboyz aren't too bad either.

Shoota mobs can just PILE fire onto a unit, and each 6 wounds will result in a death, on average.

If the guy isn't running Purifyerspam you can bury him in bodies.


'They're tough, but they aren't indestructable'

1. It's the bandwagon army right now
2. They sound super-strong, appealing to noobs fluff-wise
3. They actually are a strong book

Actually im not whining about GK as I have NEVER played against them.

I have seen so many people complaining about how OP they are that I wondered why so many people play what is considered an OP army.

People sayng they haven't lost in 5 months etc.. just make me wonder what the point is if its so easy to win.

Milisim wrote:Actually im not whining about GK as I have NEVER played against them.

I have seen so many people complaining about how OP they are that I wondered why so many people play what is considered an OP army.

People sayng they haven't lost in 5 months etc.. just make me wonder what the point is if its so easy to win.

This

I like to play underpowered or fragile armies to give myself a bit of a challenge.

I used to run oldcrons and Nids.

I still run BT, DE (not weak, but fragile as hell), Orks and Daemons.

I play Tau and Dark Eldar. So Im used to creative games for sure =]

Lootas aren't as good for killing paladins as I was hoping. Running the Mathhammer.

A boy only has a 1/48 chance of causing a wound for every attack. If I charge with a squad of 30, I'll be lucky to have 20 to attack back. This can expect to cause 1.58 unsaved wounds, plus 1.11 deaths from my PK. So I now take 7-8 fearless wounds and won't even get to attack back in the next round, but hopefully locked him so he can't charge something else.

I've got 5/216 or 2.3% chance of causing a wound for every Loota shot. If I get 3 shots each for a full squad of 15, I get an expected 1.04 unsaved wounds (double that if they don't have FNP).

Shoota boys can expect to cause 1 wound for every 72 shots fired, so less than 1 per round.

Burna boys seem to be a bit better, since the Ork BS2 won't come into play. Each hit under the template has a 5.5% chance of causing a wound. With a full burna wagon, and if I'm lucky enough to get 5 under the template, then I can expect to cause 4 wounds, which is much better, but I still haven't removed a model yet. They'll likely wreck me the next turn and I won't be able to replicate that. Maybe burna them, charge with a full squad, hope they lock them until the end of their turn, then try to burn them again.

My strategy is to blow everything else up and run away from the deathstar.

Purifiers I can handle just as you said, backup and let loose with my shootas and lootas.

Power levles and bandwagoning has something to do with it, for sure. But I think the biggest factor, in the current economic climate, is cost. Small elite army that just got released and is fairly strong (except vs. Mech IG or Dark Lance spam), makes for a economical choice of an army, especially for a newer player.

I've never played against GK so I can't comment....

Running Dark Eldar against paladins is always funny. "And I move 12" away again, still firing the dark lance."

That's basically all you have to do with DE to beat draigowing. Stay more than 24" away, and backtrack them around.

I wanted them since I saw them in the back of the BRB. I only started buying them when the new plastics came out.

My friend plays GK because he always played them. Now they're just more dangerous than they used to be.

Milisim wrote:Is it just because the book is so damn strong? Is winning and beating the crap out of other armies so important that one chooses them?

I just do not see the appeal to knowing with ALMOST certainty that I will win the next game regardless of what army or style is fielded against me.

At most tournaments there is money riding on the line.
Sure, in a small tournament at your FLGS with only 16 people playing, best general may only be $50, but that's $50 you can win. By playing an army with a better chance of winning, you increase the odds you getting more real world cash.

When you add in the cheapness of the models to build, it's really a no-brainer for people.

I don't play gk , I play guard, but the models look so appealing and I can get an awesome paint score because I have like 20 models at the max to paint and it;s easy to win against most opponets, the only reason I haven;t gone to gk;s is I don;t have the money and because they;re the powerhouse atm I can;t get them second hand at all from local sellers.

Great White wrote:Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters.

I played Daemonhunters. I didn't use GK's. How d'ya think I feel about the GK Codex?

Rather ecstatic due to all these new finely detailed kits you have to buy at such reasonable prices.

Finley detailed kits of what? GK's? Yes, my completely GK-free Inquisitorial Storm Trooper-based army is so much better thanks to the plastic GK kits.

I'm just going to go on and assume you didn't read my post...

I did read it, I thought the wink at the end of my post explained it was all in jest. Always sucks when they discontinue an army, but nothing stopping you from using the DH rules.

I started collecting GKs back with the Daemonhunters codex because I really liked that fluff. While the new GK codex has lost some of the feel, I still really like the army and therefore continue to collect.

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

Yes, Orks are an awful Codex and that's why they're one of the best performing armies in the US. Oh, wait a minute, that doesn't add up!

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

Yes, Orks are an awful Codex and that's why they're one of the best performing armies in the US. Oh, wait a minute, that doesn't add up!

One of the best performing currently? Really? I was under the impression that currently they are a strong contender for best of the mediocre.

Edit: Note I'm not defending the claim that the codex is awful. I'm just questioning the claim that it is one of the best performing armies in the US.

DarkHound wrote:I think Grey Knights are one of the worst armies in the game. Their place in the story leaves no room for deviation and creativity. They are also such a small force with so little impact to the universe at large, getting an entire book to themselves is criminal. The Kroot have a bigger presence in the galaxy than the Grey Knights. The old book was closer to a good representation, though I'd join the Sisters and GK as auxiliaries to the Imperium's forces at large, because that's how they actually function.

Massively agree with this. GK should have stayed as a special unit for imperial armies, to be used during games against chaos. 3-10 terminators with the option to take a proper character embedded. You could give the unit tons of options and make them proper elites, not just space marines with force weapons. It's really stupid to see so many grey knights running around in mechanised squads doing fire support, fighting orks and IG etc. I know I shouldn't conflate the background with games too much . . . but GK are an awesome idea which has totally split from its original principle.

I played DH before. When I saw the new sculpts, I saw it as an opportunity to push my painting techniques, and to have a really small army (draigowing) that I could use to go to tournaments on my motorcycle.

haendas wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

Yes, Orks are an awful Codex and that's why they're one of the best performing armies in the US. Oh, wait a minute, that doesn't add up!

One of the best performing currently? Really? I was under the impression that currently they are a strong contender for best of the mediocre.

Edit: Note I'm not defending the claim that the codex is awful. I'm just questioning the claim that it is one of the best performing armies in the US.

While it's far from perfect, RankingsHQ currently has Orks listed as the most successfull army in the US.

Orks make an interesting metagame consideration. Just when you think they're dead, people stop taking anti-horde stuff, and then they show up and walk all over people. The basic strength of a 6-point boy is hard to completely count out.

If the rest of the meta consists of a few men in AV10-12 boxes, then you see a whole lot of tools for opening boxes, and far fewer tools for killing men. So when someone drops 180 men on the table, you get caught flat-footed. Or they present a wall of AV14 boxes backed with a 4+ save, and the tools for opening AV12 boxes just aren't effective.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

Yes, Orks are an awful Codex and that's why they're one of the best performing armies in the US. Oh, wait a minute, that doesn't add up!

Orks are not "one of the best performing armies in the US" They're a decent army, definitely not an awful codex. They're mid-tier from how I look at it.

1. Bandwagoning

2. Strong codex - lots of quality options available.

3. Cheap to build - It takes a lot less money to build it so you can field an effective force for less.

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

Orks are a solid codex that can still perform very, very well. I won't argue that GK is a bit more powerful (and has some hard counters like Purifiers) but the Ork codex is far from bad.

Boggy79 wrote:I've never played against GK so I can't comment....

Thanks for sharing your wonderful opinion.

They are either army hopping or they are ex-Daemon Hunters players.

I've loved the GK/Daemonhunters since I started playing in 4th. I only stared with Space Marines because I hate metal. (Not to mention Strike Squads only had 5 poses...)

I got into GK when they released the new plastics, and didn't realize that the codex was "OP" until after I'd already invested in a sizable army.

Read my Sig,

I have played them since 4th and 90 percent of my 8k pts is metal AND fully painted.

Low model count, easy to paint, plug and play tactics, forgiving play style for new players.

bombboy1252 wrote:

Orks are not "one of the best performing armies in the US" They're a decent army, definitely not an awful codex. They're mid-tier from how I look at it.

Well, the link Almighty Walrus posted indicates (by comparing overall army rankings and tournament wins) that Orks aren't WINNING many big tournaments (3 out of the 48 listed), but they're PLACING quite consistently. They have the highest score total for the last year, while not being particularly numerous; a bit less than 8% of the total armies that participated in those tournaments, as opposed to ~10% each for Space Wolves (#2 total score) Imperial Guard (#3 total score) and Blood Angels (#5 total score).

All that means is that, on average, people who play Orks do better in tournaments than people who play Space Wolves, Imperial Guard, or Blood Angels; three codexes that are consistently rated among the upper-tier or even OP codexes of 5th Edition. So, there's two possibilities; either Codex: Orks is quite a strong codex, or Ork players are generally better than Space Wolves, Imperial Guard and Blood Angels players.

On-topic: They're new, they're shiny, they're cheap, and they're powerful. Any one or two of those things would make them attractive; all four together is like shining a lamp on a bunch of moths.

It doesn't help you can make create an army with them for very little cash comparably to other codexes, and that the GK are very, very (over)powerful in terms of melee and survivability.

juraigamer wrote:It doesn't help you can make create an army with them for very little cash comparably to other codexes, and that the GK are very, very (over)powerful in terms of melee and survivability.

Yeah, but Terminator and Paladin armies are, IMO, on the low end of the power scale for GKs. They are only difficult if you don't know how to counter them effectivly(Paladins really suffer from low model count)

rockerbikie wrote:They are either army hopping or they are ex-Daemon Hunters players.

Or they are new and chose GK, or they are a collector and wanted to build up a GK army alongside their other armies.

So far we've identified several valid points: typical new codex bandwagon, cool models, cheap to collect, very strong codex.

I'd actually like to hear from someone who admits that they started the game because they are a very powerful army. With some armies it takes a long time to come up with valid strategies and tactics in order to be able to win with them. A new Tau, Eldar, or Chaos player is going to get their butt handed to them until they actually learn to fully utilize their army. Understandably, it's no fun to get tabled and beat down over and over, but it is a learning experience, one that many people might forgo if they see a shortcut.

GK armies, just like any other army, will lose to significantly better generals. Not everyone can be a top general, such as myself. I'm just a middle of the pack guy. Even if I'm playing a rubbish GK player, I feel as though I have to play flawlessly and have the dice rolling fairly. If I mess up or the dice are on my opponents side I don't feel that I stand much of a chance.

The ceiling is just as high as other 5ed elite armies, but the floor is so much higher as well.

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Great White wrote:Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters.

I played Daemonhunters. I didn't use GK's. How d'ya think I feel about the GK Codex?

You do realize, with Inquistors, Assasins and Henchmen, you can keep playing your army with the new codex, right?

BobTheChainsaw wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Great White wrote:Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters.

I played Daemonhunters. I didn't use GK's. How d'ya think I feel about the GK Codex?

You do realize, with Inquistors, Assasins and Henchmen, you can keep playing your army with the new codex, right?

You just have to run Coteaz. This is the price for playing the least popular half of a dual codex when it gets updated. Consider yourself lucky they didn't get completely deleted from the codex(like they should have been)

Kinda funny on these type of threads people want to do a witch hunt for bandwagoners, power gamers etc but dont seem to care that not that long ago when the OLD daemonhunter players played the army it was considered stupid and no way competitive. Go from why did you bring that to the tourney to OMG you MUST be a bandwagoner, power gamer etc. As if no one owned the army prior. lol

bombboy1252 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

Yes, Orks are an awful Codex and that's why they're one of the best performing armies in the US. Oh, wait a minute, that doesn't add up!

Orks are not "one of the best performing armies in the US" They're a decent army, definitely not an awful codex. They're mid-tier from how I look at it.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

While it's far from perfect, RankingsHQ currently has Orks listed as the most successfull army in the US.

If you're gonna claim that someone's wrong, make sure that the statistics aren't on his side.

Also on these threads, people like to get defensive about why they bring a certain army. Obviously, there are people who have always played DH, but most aren't. Some like the army for valid reason, and some like it because it can be very easy to field a competitive army without needing to learn strategy or have any skill.

I had a nid and an Eldar army and I wanted another army. GK were both totally different to the others and also ultra-elite and therefore cheap to buy. I now use three pretty much equally, I like to do different play styles and troop types. I also do not have a spam army of GK. I have just about all the available units in my 3500pts somewhere. I field all kinds of units as I don't want Crowe 6 x purifiers in razorbacks. I don't like spam armies! The power level was not a major consideration. I bought all my armies on figures. The trygons and carnifexes got me back into the game and into nids, I used to be an Eldar player back in the day and I just liked the GK sculpts, plus the cheapness.

If so many people are playing GK's, then they'll wind up playing one another and knocking each other out of contention. I play daemons, and I'd rather see a GK player than a Ork horde.

I agree with the poster who said that GK's should have remained a smaller elite selection in another codex. GK's are primarily answers against chaos, yet most GK's I've seen don't even pay for the anti-chaos upgrades because so few people are playing Chaos at the moment.

My daemons are bloodthirsty. We particularly hate GK's. So everyone jump on the bandwagon...it just means more meals for Chaos!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One thing nice about the GK's is their cost...I bought some just to playtest my daemons against so I'd have good strategies when I face them at tournies.

I have to agree with the others here that the current GKs are missing the "elitist" feel with so
many of them running around like average Space Marines with fancy toys, but I like the new kinda like the new Codex.
I don't think it's too strong and I like the fact that there is a huge variety of effective builds rather than the super competitive one that everybody plays and other options that are plain bad.
And about all the ruckus that Draigowing is creating... Seriously? I haven't played against it yet, but 20 t4 terminators don't seem so threatening, even with two wounds. LRBT anyone?^^
(Yes this is over simplifying it but still....)

I currently don't play Grey Knights. BUT all the way back when I started I wanted the play Daemon Hunters (pure GK) because I simply loved the design
and their feeling of an elite Army, even if they weren't all that strong back in the day. What kept me from it was really only the high prices and metal models
(+ the only store I knew back then only had one box and I didn't think of asking them to order more...)

However I might start a Grey Knight army if I get the time and money together, though it will be a weird army... probably not very competitive... lots of weird henchmen... it's gonna be an Alpha
Legion army using the GK codex... COME AT ME BRETHREN

I can't say GK can be considered a bandwagon codex anymore, since not only is the thing nine months old but Necrons came out afterwards and would have pulled off most of the flavor of the month players.

Why do people keep bring up old GK players? I sure haven't seen those metal termies on the tables.

Theduke07 wrote:Why do people keep bring up old GK players? I sure haven't seen those metal termies on the tables.

Well come to florida and you can see an entire army of metal termies.

Currently it's all been about the new necrons where I am now. Like every 3rd guy has necrons. Gk are once again tied with IG / blood angels/wolves/tyranids. sisters, tau, and daemons all trailing far behind in popularity (which is wierdly the reason I want to start up a daemon army now lol)

Theduke07 wrote:Why do people keep bring up old GK players? I sure haven't seen those metal termies on the tables.

You should come to Cleveland for a game or two, I only have 2 models that are not from the old third ed sets.

Started GK's initially because I was so sick of having my Nids surgically crapped on by every other new codex since IG. The fact that they were a strong army with great rules was key. Started the army, didn't like the fluff, hated painting them and now they are on the back burner (though I fully intend to build a 2k Coteaz list...at some point).

Necrons are my latest army. Started because I thought the models looked cool. Loved the feel of the Codex. Overall it's well balanced, strong but not overpowered. And I'm loving the painting (yeah it's easy to paint, but having the choice to add detail or not is what is keeping me going...With GK's they may start out just plain silver, but with all the non-optional details that HAVE to be done it takes the fun out of it completely).

Milisim wrote:Is it just because the book is so damn strong? Is winning and beating the crap out of other armies so important that one chooses them?

I just do not see the appeal to knowing with ALMOST certainty that I will win the next game regardless of what army or style is fielded against me.


Why did you choose the GK's?

For me, I chose to switch to Grey Knights from Eldar. When I first started playing, I wanted to play Codex: Daemonhunters because of how they looked and the general fluff of the army. However, it was my first tabletop game, and I didn't want to choose an all metal army (I hated painting metal figures), so I picked Eldar because it was mostly plastic and I thought the models looked cool. After hearing they were re-releasing Daemonhunters as Grey Knights, I made plans to eventually switch to playing GK after they came out.

I don't care as much about the gaming aspect (I suck anyway lol) but I enjoy the painting and modelling aspect, hence why I chose an army I liked the aesthetics of.

Grey Templar wrote:

BobTheChainsaw wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Great White wrote:Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters.

I played Daemonhunters. I didn't use GK's. How d'ya think I feel about the GK Codex?

You do realize, with Inquistors, Assasins and Henchmen, you can keep playing your army with the new codex, right?

You just have to run Coteaz. This is the price for playing the least popular half of a dual codex when it gets updated. Consider yourself lucky they didn't get completely deleted from the codex(like they should have been)

I'm not sure if you are being serious. How would you like it if they deleted the Grey Knights and GW made the update Codex :Inquisition instead. Learn Empathy please.

Except a Codex: Inquisition would be far more interesting, varied, and fun than codex shiny marines

Easy is cheesy, I guess that is why. Luckily around here we don't have any GK players.

AzureDeath wrote:Easy is cheesy, I guess that is why. Luckily around here we don't have any GK players.

In an old British way, they would call it "Beardy".

Grey Templar wrote:You just have to run Coteaz. This is the price for playing the least popular half of a dual codex when it gets updated. Consider yourself lucky they didn't get completely deleted from the codex(like they should have been)

Yeah. Sure. I'll go right on ahead and consider myself 'lucky'.

I think it would be interesting for the new band of gk haters to play against 3rd edition csm. lol

@rockerbikle as far as empathy why? wargamers dont feel empathy. Just contempt when their book isn't the percieved strongest. lol It's lols a minute when you here IG and Ork players whine about BA and GK. There was no empathy playing DH gettin wiped out by those 2. lol

Ah let the hate commence. It binds wargamers.

Grey Templar wrote:You just have to run Coteaz. This is the price for playing the least popular half of a dual codex when it gets updated. Consider yourself lucky they didn't get completely deleted from the codex(like they should have been)

Yes, Daemonhunters players should consider themselves lucky their entire army didn't get 100% invalidated instead of just being restricted to a special character. Your logic is flawless.

Luke_Prowler wrote:Except a Codex: Inquisition would be far more interesting, varied, and fun than codex shiny marines

QFT. I don't even care about GK's powerlevel. I'm disappointing that the book was Codex: Shiny Marines. Just another mech army (that can kind of run a termie variety) that didn't really feel that different. SW gave up TW, BA made actual JP armies possible but GK just made playing Marines and IG in the same list.

Death Cult Assassin(15pts):
WS:5 BS:3 S:4 T:3 I:6 A:2 Ld:8 Sv:5++
and power weapons, so 4 Strength 4 Ws5 Power Weapon attacks on the charge, as well as an invulnerable.

Howling Banshee(16pts):
WS:4 BS:3 S:3 T:3 I:5 A:1 Ld:8 Sv 4+
16 points
with three attacks on the charge, a non-invulnerable save and a point lower weapon skill and strength. They also have lower initiative but their special ability means they'll be striking first anyway, so that evens out.

So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

the whole army has the exact same weapon choices just at different points cost. lame. no variety, nothing unique, just boring.

FOUR different grey knights squads come from the same plastic kit. grey knights, interceptors, purifiers and devestators (or whatever theyre called). lazy gw

plastic kits with lots of options are great but what is the difference between a regular grey knight and a purifier? you paint the helmet white? i never thought i'd say it but
that's getting a little too lazy for me GW. atleast make some purifier/paladin upgrade bits like unique helmets or robes or something.

shouldnt paladins and purifiers atleast have some unique weapons/equipment? no, i guess that would be too much work for gw to sculpt/make rules for.

borrrrrrrrrring.

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

What Joey said.

Joey wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

It's not so much that GK's have all these super cool toys. More like, they shouldn't have been allowed to so easily & cheaply spam the piss out of all these super-duper cool toys!

Coteaze is just silly for his paltry pts cost. Sure he's still 'just a basic human', but he allows a player to really abuse the henchmen by making them Troops choices, allowing for rediculously min/maxed melta squads (in cheap transports), and/or multiple super assault squads in the form of DCA's and crusaders, plus the ability to add on long-ranged cover with the monkies. (and more transports)
Then you can support this with all the juicy parts of the book as well...

Same with Draigo & Crowe - taking very powerful units that are normally quite limited AND prevent you from taking equally powerfull options that normally have to compete for those slots! Purifyers are likely the best genralist unit in the game. 150 odd point for a character 'tax' isn't that much to pay, especially when you can then add a pair of techmarines w/grenades + a venerable dread to the mix.

GK's get alot of hate because they're highly obnoxious and appeal to alot of people who are 'in it to win it'.


I know alot of players in my area picked up GK's after reading about how 'uber they were in the intertubes. They're easy to learn, super fogiving to mistakes, have very few 'bad match-ups' compared to other armies, are cheap to buy, super quick & easy to paint and have numerous 'power-builds' that don't require hours of list-crunching & game play to figure out for yourself.
Compared to say Eldar or Daemons or even Codex Marines, GK's are an army you can do very well with competitively even when you've never played a game with them yet! Once you add in the fact that almost every tournament offers cash prizes/store credit, it brings out the mercenary side in most players who look more at dollar signs than having fun.

I blame the local tourny scene for turning players into frothing mercenaries more than GW for releasing a powerful book... If tournies went back to the old GT formats of trophies, there'd be alot less hate and outright douche baggery going around.
But the terrible thing with monetary prizes? Win a prize, pick out something big and sell it yourself for profit or else trade it in later for the next big 'win-button' that come out.

I played GKs before the "new" release and haven't played them after.

Now, I don't play any Marines, and I don't really mean to start. I'm a Mekboy at heart.

But if I ever did choose to grab me a slice of that Power Armour, I'd probably go Grey Knights. Oddly enough? It's for their power- but not for tournies or for winning (I could care less if I win or lose). It's because, in my eyes, the Grey Knights codex is what Marines are supposed to be. 10 men fighting an army of hundreds of Orks or dozens of Daemons with a fair chance to win. Elite, over-ornamented soldiers who don't break, don't falter as bullets plink off their armour and beams of cohesive madness fizzle against their forcefields. Expert marksmen with superhuman reflexes that can fire a machine-gun and have each bullet strike a different skull.

They're as close as you're going to get to Movie Marines from an official GW product, with a beautiful model line that perfectly matches the fluff of their appearance.

They're still a pain to play agianst, though.

Joey wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

correct me if im wrong. psyfleman gets 4 strength 8 shots, rerolling failed to hit rolls AV12. 48 inch range.

that def beats a missle devestator squad.

BS that GK dont have any long range fire support. they have the best of that too.

the best of everything in one codex

Sigh. This is why we can't have nice things.

Good thing GK are still perceived as OP, leaves more room to have upsetting victories for the necrons to snatch the next grand tourny

Joey wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

Just for fun: Which of the two assault units you compared has the ability to assault into cover without becoming I1?

wormark wrote:Lootas aren't as good for killing paladins as I was hoping. Running the Mathhammer.

A boy only has a 1/48 chance of causing a wound for every attack. If I charge with a squad of 30, I'll be lucky to have 20 to attack back. This can expect to cause 1.58 unsaved wounds, plus 1.11 deaths from my PK. So I now take 7-8 fearless wounds and won't even get to attack back in the next round, but hopefully locked him so he can't charge something else.

I've got 5/216 or 2.3% chance of causing a wound for every Loota shot. If I get 3 shots each for a full squad of 15, I get an expected 1.04 unsaved wounds (double that if they don't have FNP).

Shoota boys can expect to cause 1 wound for every 72 shots fired, so less than 1 per round.

Burna boys seem to be a bit better, since the Ork BS2 won't come into play. Each hit under the template has a 5.5% chance of causing a wound. With a full burna wagon, and if I'm lucky enough to get 5 under the template, then I can expect to cause 4 wounds, which is much better, but I still haven't removed a model yet. They'll likely wreck me the next turn and I won't be able to replicate that. Maybe burna them, charge with a full squad, hope they lock them until the end of their turn, then try to burn them again.

My strategy is to blow everything else up and run away from the deathstar.

Purifiers I can handle just as you said, backup and let loose with my shootas and lootas.

Although not a perfect solution, rokkits. I realize they're not that great, but at least the Paladins die on every save roll of a 1. What in the Ork Codex is AP2? There's a plasma cannon equivalent on Dreadnoughts if I recall correctly.

Brother SRM wrote:Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Normally I fully agree. However, you can take nearly every situation of GK and other armies, and the GK can just flat out do it better.
Most armies have bad-matchups. In the case of GK -- these bad matchup's are Mech'dar or IG gunline. When other armies face a 'bad matchup', it means they have a poor chance of winning. GK has a 50/50 chance of winning on a bad matchup, and a greater chance of winning on a good matchup. (ie, any army not designed to kill GK)

GK is overpowered today. That will probably be fixed when 6th edition is released later this year. GW is thinking long term, and balancing for the upcoming 3 years and not just today.

Yeah - most people seem to do it because it's cheap, small elite army, that is basically better-marines.

I can see the appeal, and personally it's one of the 2 imperial armies I would ever consider, albeit not in the normal vein.
(The first being a Space Wolves Drop Pod army with 8-12 pods, the second being a Coteaz + 40 monkeys GK army.)

That said, I managed to beat a GK list full of psycannons and razorbacks at 2k with my tau... sooo make of that what you will.

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:

wormark wrote:.

Although not a perfect solution, rokkits. I realize they're not that great, but at least the Paladins die on every save roll of a 1. What in the Ork Codex is AP2? There's a plasma cannon equivalent on Dreadnoughts if I recall correctly.

Kustom Mega Blastas. They're Strength 8 AP2, but it's only Assault 1, no blast, and with an Ork's Ballistic's skill, well, you're hitting 1/3 of the time. That said, probably one of the best Termie hunters the Orks can get are squads of Burnas with 3 'free' KMB meks- you can try to get a lucky kill from range with the KMBs, template if you're close enough with a couple of the Burnas, and assault with Power Weapons for the rest of them, using the Meks and Burnas that Burned as the 'throw-away' wounds when the Knights inevitably attack first, even though you charged them.

Alternatively, if they don't have Powerfists or Thunderhammers (though they always do) KMB toting Killa Kanz- AV11 Walkers with a DCCW- they're cheap and they come in Squads.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

Just for fun: Which of the two assault units you compared has the ability to assault into cover without becoming I1?

Bahahahahahaha.
You seriously think the guardsmen's ability to assault through cover without getting I1 balances it?
People who play OP armies always say crap like that.

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

Just for fun: Which of the two assault units you compared has the ability to assault into cover without becoming I1?

Bahahahahahaha.
You seriously think the guardsmen's ability to assault through cover without getting I1 balances it?
People who play OP armies always say crap like that.

Firstly, I play Black Templars, so don't you come yelling with your "Oh you just play OP armies" BS. I didn't go for personal attacks, so I'd friggin' well expect you to not either.

Secondly, Howling Banshees have Banshee Masks, which works like grenades against terrain. Meanwhile, DCA don't. Oh look, I had a fair point, who would've thought?

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:

Joey wrote:
So, despite costing one point less than the howling banshee, the DCA has an invulnerable saving throw, an extra attack, at a higher strength and higher weapon skill.
Warrior acolytes with bolguns, same price as IG but with higher leadership and boltguns.
And that's just two of the henchmen. I could break down unit by unit how GK is more powerful than other books but I cba.
In short.
Grey Knights are over-powered

Eldar are an old codex. Their prices aren't in line with current pricing. Death Cult Assassins are also supposedly in one unit of the army, but of course Coteaz changes that.
Warrior acolytes with boltguns who can't get orders, which is the most important part of IG infantry squads.

Comparing things in a vacuum doesn't generally work well.

Yeah, and the GK warrior acolyte can have a storm sheild in the squad to soak up wounds.
Point for point GK offers more power than most codexes.

Just for fun: Which of the two assault units you compared has the ability to assault into cover without becoming I1?

Bahahahahahaha.
You seriously think the guardsmen's ability to assault through cover without getting I1 balances it?
People who play OP armies always say crap like that.

Firstly, I play Black Templars, so don't you come yelling with your "Oh you just play OP armies" BS. I didn't go for personal attacks, so I'd friggin' well expect you to not either.

Secondly, Howling Banshees have Banshee Masks, which works like grenades against terrain. Meanwhile, DCA don't. Oh look, I had a fair point, who would've thought?

I wonder how many eldar players would sacrifice offensive grenades for FNP and Furious Charge? Plus +1S, +1T and power armour on a model that's only 4 points more.
Yeah.
I don't see why some people are so reluctant to acknowledge that some armies are over-powered. Not unbeatable, since no one is claiming that. But point-for-point they deliver more damage than many older armies, and that's a fact.

I've had a foot Ork army full of Shoota boyz, Tankbustas and Flash Gits go up against Foot Grey Knights. The Knights put out more firepower, at a longer range, with higher average strength, with a better BS than my Orks, from fewer models that were harder to kill. I'd understand it if they had lower range, or if fewer of them had decent-range guns, or if they were lower AP than they were. I'm not expecting them to shoot worse, but the fact of the matter is, they had greater volume of fire, greater accuracy, pretty much better everything shooting than the Orks at equal points. They also had better armour, better assault (faster) and just as many attacks. At the same time.

That's what's not fair. If it was one or the other, then fine. But both?

Joey wrote:
I wonder how many eldar players would sacrifice offensive grenades for FNP and Furious Charge? Plus +1S, +1T and power armour on a model that's only 4 points more.
Yeah.
I don't see why some people are so reluctant to acknowledge that some armies are over-powered. Not unbeatable, since no one is claiming that. But point-for-point they deliver more damage than many older armies, and that's a fact.

...what does Power Armour, T4 and FNP have to do with DCAs? They can have FNP if they're in an SoB army, which isn't what we're discussing. Similarly, how many Blood Angels players do you think would swap any of their psychic powers for Fortune?

Also, of course 5th edition armies are more powerful than Eldar; they're a 4th edition Codex, not made for 5th. They also dominated the meta in 4th with their unkillable Falcons.

Offtopic: but how long did it take for people to complain about IG? I was still new but I didn't see any strong complaints until 'Leaf blower' won (which wasn't even the strongest IG build possible). It seems that PA is quick to be picked apart and whined about but everyone else slips under the radar until they win.

I wish gk had vendettas, lrbt, and such.. trade a vendetta for a psyfleman anyday..

Anvildude wrote:I've had a foot Ork army full of Shoota boyz, Tankbustas and Flash Gits go up against Foot Grey Knights. The Knights put out more firepower, at a longer range, with higher average strength, with a better BS than my Orks, from fewer models that were harder to kill. I'd understand it if they had lower range, or if fewer of them had decent-range guns, or if they were lower AP than they were. I'm not expecting them to shoot worse, but the fact of the matter is, they had greater volume of fire, greater accuracy, pretty much better everything shooting than the Orks at equal points. They also had better armour, better assault (faster) and just as many attacks. At the same time.

That's what's not fair. If it was one or the other, then fine. But both?

And how.is that different to any other marine army?

Marine armies are typically easier and more forgiving of mistakes than m ost armies. The rules tend to be decent to strong.

Grey knights are the epitome of this+1

They are better than marines with better equipment and not much of a cost increase.

The cost increase means fewer models, so less painting, so you can play sooner at tournament standards.

They are the second easiest army to paint, neurons being slightly easier.

Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

blaktoof wrote:
Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a liar." See how silly that looks?

2nd easiest to paint? Um their termies arent quite as easy as tau, ba, necrons, bt, some eldar, etc. Draigo is certainly more difficult then those mentioned hqs unless your rushing of course cause then the pain job is only as good as the time.

Better then marines? Thats kinda a blanket statement. Good to know I guess though not entirely true.

Hhhm easy to play? Not so much if i loose 1-2 paladins or 3 purifers in a squad I bet I notice more then a block of necrons or gaunts.

So if they dont use a psyfleman or play henchman whats your suggestion for shooting beyond 24in? I mean razorbacks are kinda a waste if I want to run 10 purifiers. lol SR? um no I dont think 1 twin link las is gonna prob cut it. Vinidcare? oh yes his one shot is much better. lol

With wound allocation nonsense losing 1 paladin doesn't happen until you have failed 6 saves in. A 5 man unit...

Draigo is easy to paint.

You are denying that a basic gk model is not as good as a basic marine?

And yes dreadknight and psyriflemanspam is not fluffy, I didn't say it wasn't effective. People play it because it's effective, not because it's fluffy.

Any other gk fanbois have their psychic panties in a bunch?

Deadshot wrote:

Anvildude wrote:I've had a foot Ork army full of Shoota boyz, Tankbustas and Flash Gits go up against Foot Grey Knights. The Knights put out more firepower, at a longer range, with higher average strength, with a better BS than my Orks, from fewer models that were harder to kill. I'd understand it if they had lower range, or if fewer of them had decent-range guns, or if they were lower AP than they were. I'm not expecting them to shoot worse, but the fact of the matter is, they had greater volume of fire, greater accuracy, pretty much better everything shooting than the Orks at equal points. They also had better armour, better assault (faster) and just as many attacks. At the same time.

That's what's not fair. If it was one or the other, then fine. But both?

And how.is that different to any other marine army?

Most other Marine armies don't have Assault weapons- they're stuck with Rapid Fire- and they don't get psycannons with their 4 shots on Relentless Terminators or 3 shots in small squads. If a basic Marine army wants that volume of fire, they need to take guns that aren't as effective against armour, and pay for larger units, or else get or allow the enemy to get within charge range. Knights can just sit back and shoot.

Brother SRM wrote:Draigowing doesn't scare me much at all. Drive circles around badguys and shoot them; not much to it. It's a slow list unless it's mounted, in which case it's a tinier list than it already was. I've thought of starting the $150 army of 10 paladins, Draigo and a codex, just because it's easy to build, paint, and play.

I have only played one game with my GKs and it was that exact setup... I got STOMPED by the new Necrons.

Now, admittedly, I am not the most skilled of players, but the guy had tremor staves and a C'tan... I lost three Paladins to dangerous terrain (argh!) and in the end only Draigo made it to CC... the doom ark or whatever it is killed everything else.

IMO you *need* some transport.

Running a 2000pt list with Draigo, a libby, 10 pallies, 13 purifiers and 2 stormravens atm... not played any games though as I have yet to build the vehicles

Henners91 wrote:

Brother SRM wrote:Draigowing doesn't scare me much at all. Drive circles around badguys and shoot them; not much to it. It's a slow list unless it's mounted, in which case it's a tinier list than it already was. I've thought of starting the $150 army of 10 paladins, Draigo and a codex, just because it's easy to build, paint, and play.

I have only played one game with my GKs and it was that exact setup... I got STOMPED by the new Necrons.

Now, admittedly, I am not the most skilled of players, but the guy had tremor staves and a C'tan... I lost three Paladins to dangerous terrain (argh!) and in the end only Draigo made it to CC... the doom ark or whatever it is killed everything else.

IMO you *need* some transport.

Running a 2000pt list with Draigo, a libby, 10 pallies, 13 purifiers and 2 stormravens atm... not played any games though as I have yet to build the vehicles

You failed 6 dangerous terrain tests in one turn? That's some pretty insane bad luck.

To be fair it was a combination of gauss and terrain, but the tests got the killing blow on all of them.

I don't know anything about the new Necron 'dex 'n' I am definitely a painter before a gamer, but eesh; difficult terrain if I hit you? Oh wait, I also took a C'tan: Looks like it's dangerous! Good luck getting to me, brah.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a liar." See how silly that looks?

Yep, it's blaktoof. reasoned argument isnt their strong suit.

rockerbikie wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:

BobTheChainsaw wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Great White wrote:Some people chose them because they played deamonhunters.

I played Daemonhunters. I didn't use GK's. How d'ya think I feel about the GK Codex?

You do realize, with Inquistors, Assasins and Henchmen, you can keep playing your army with the new codex, right?

You just have to run Coteaz. This is the price for playing the least popular half of a dual codex when it gets updated. Consider yourself lucky they didn't get completely deleted from the codex(like they should have been)

I'm not sure if you are being serious. How would you like it if they deleted the Grey Knights and GW made the update Codex :Inquisition instead. Learn Empathy please.

I really do mean that. Inquisition players really dodged a bullet here. There were rumors flying around that Inquisition was getting taken out of the GK codex and getting stuffed competely.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Joey wrote:
I wonder how many eldar players would sacrifice offensive grenades for FNP and Furious Charge? Plus +1S, +1T and power armour on a model that's only 4 points more.
Yeah.
I don't see why some people are so reluctant to acknowledge that some armies are over-powered. Not unbeatable, since no one is claiming that. But point-for-point they deliver more damage than many older armies, and that's a fact.

...what does Power Armour, T4 and FNP have to do with DCAs? They can have FNP if they're in an SoB army, which isn't what we're discussing. Similarly, how many Blood Angels players do you think would swap any of their psychic powers for Fortune?

Also, of course 5th edition armies are more powerful than Eldar; they're a 4th edition Codex, not made for 5th. They also dominated the meta in 4th with their unkillable Falcons.

I read what Joey wrote and was like "What!?!" I thought the discussion was about DCA, but then I saw you are probably referring to normal Grey Knights. But since when do average Grey Knights have FNP and Furious charge? Plus they don't have an as high initiative... You can't just push several units into one and them use them as an argument to say an army is over powered.
And yes as the almighty Walrus says (again and again referring to you feels like I have been taking bad amounts of LSD) the newer Codexes seem to be stronger on many points than older codexes and you can't just say that because one army would like tho exchange something for that unit, they should be able to. I'd like to exchange my heavy weapon squads for longfangs... and everybody else would give their souls to have vendettas but that's the thing about armies, you got yours, deal with em or get another one^^.

But on topic, yes GK are somewhat stronger than other armies. No they are not unbeatable. No playing them is not necessarily boring. Playing an up hill fight can make things more interesting from time to time. I don't see how Grey Knights are by nature easier to paint than other armies. Bad mouthing every new army that comes up isn't the way to go, the whole hobby is about fun. If your opponents make the nastiest of nasty GK lists and curb stomps you then look for other people to play or serious up and continue to hope for good luck. Grey Knights still die like Marines and there is nothing manlier than charging smug GK with regular guardsmen and beating them.
By the way, I love how there were people who said that GK players just wanted to jump the cheep bandwagon, but some of the stronger builds like Coatez henchmen actually require a rather large investment and effort to get (unless they just proxy everything). Or Psyflemen, where does everybody get the darn Autocannons to build those?!?

All I know is, at my local store, we used to have the following line up (Before GK release)
2 Necrons
1 Dark Eldar
2 Eldar
3 BA
1 SW (Me)
2 Marines
2 BT
2 Chaos
3 Guard
2 Tau
1 GK
3 Ork

Which, IMO, is probably the most balanced store I've ever seen. Nowadays it's (Post Necron release)
3 Necrons
1 DE
0 Eldar
1 BA
1 SW
1 Marine
1 Templar
1 Chaos
2 Guard
1 Tau
2 Ork
8 GK (The original player is not among these)

The two WAAC players at the store, which I freely admit I'm one of, refuse to play GK since it's easy mode. I've never seen another army be so popular before...not even the third edition chaos dex which had 5 players and was considered very op...
Also, one of the GK is a henchmen player, and the other is draigo wing. Other then that, it's pretty standard GK lists....and they do extremely well...

The holy trinity of cheap, easy to paint and really powerful.

Draigo wrote:2nd easiest to paint? Um their termies arent quite as easy as tau, ba, necrons, bt some eldar, etc.

Spoken like someone who hasn't tried to make black and white look good. Seriously, as someone who's painted both Grey Knights and Black Templars I can tell you that (IMO, of course) Boltgun Metal is an infinitely more forgiving colour than white, and possibly even black.

Grey Templar wrote:I really do mean that. Inquisition players really dodged a bullet here. There were rumors flying around that Inquisition was getting taken out of the GK codex and getting stuffed competely.

I'd rather my army die on its feet than live on its knees.

DarkHound wrote:I think Grey Knights are one of the worst armies in the game. Their place in the story leaves no room for deviation and creativity. They are also such a small force with so little impact to the universe at large, getting an entire book to themselves is criminal. The Kroot have a bigger presence in the galaxy than the Grey Knights. The old book was closer to a good representation, though I'd join the Sisters and GK as auxiliaries to the Imperium's forces at large, because that's how they actually function.

When you say "Because thats how they actually function" are you referring to the fact that Grey Knights like to kill Sisters of battle and smear their blood on their armour, or?

When you say "Because thats how they actually function" are you referring to the fact that Grey Knights like to kill Sisters of battle and smear their blood on their armour, or?

I'm actually painting a squad of my GK with half covered in blood with smears of it on their chests/helmets. dripping gore from the waist down essentially. If I had some spare sisters bits I'd toss them on the bases.

Well now...

1) They may have played Daemonhunters (like me) for years
2) They may like the background and new plastic kits
3) They're a cheap army to buy into due to the low model count
4) They're quite a competitive army, meaning players have a better chance of wining of having a closer battle
5) They're new, so they're getting lots of coverage in WD, on forums and in stores


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redbeard wrote:I played DH before. When I saw the new sculpts, I saw it as an opportunity to push my painting techniques, and to have a really small army (draigowing) that I could use to go to tournaments on my motorcycle.

This is so like me it's spooky.

DH player? Check
Small elite force? Check
Dig the new (not insanely expensive £37.50 metal Terminator squad)? Check
Travel mostly on a motorcycle? Check


......are you me?

Miraclefish wrote:Well now...

1) They may have played Daemonhunters (like me) for years
2) They may like the background and new plastic kits
3) They're a cheap army to buy into due to the low model count
4) They're quite a competitive army, meaning players have a better chance of wining of having a closer battle
5) They're new, so they're getting lots of coverage in WD, on forums and in stores


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redbeard wrote:I played DH before. When I saw the new sculpts, I saw it as an opportunity to push my painting techniques, and to have a really small army (draigowing) that I could use to go to tournaments on my motorcycle.

This is so like me it's spooky.

DH player? Check
Small elite force? Check
Dig the new (not insanely expensive £37.50 metal Terminator squad)? Check
Travel mostly on a motorcycle? Check


......are you me?

You are Alpharius....

And so's my wife

sudojoe wrote:

When you say "Because thats how they actually function" are you referring to the fact that Grey Knights like to kill Sisters of battle and smear their blood on their armour, or?

I'm actually painting a squad of my GK with half covered in blood with smears of it on their chests/helmets. dripping gore from the waist down essentially. If I had some spare sisters bits I'd toss them on the bases.

That's awesome. Post pics when you're done.

Milisim wrote:Is it just because the book is so damn strong? Is winning and beating the crap out of other armies so important that one chooses them?

I just do not see the appeal to knowing with ALMOST certainty that I will win the next game regardless of what army or style is fielded against me.


Why did you choose the GK's?

I have not picked up Grey knights, but was tempted because:

1. Awesome models. The Terminator and PA armor are just bad ass!
2. Fluff. What's not to like about the elite of the elite?
3. Small investment. As an elite army, you can keep the model count low, which means you can make a 2k point army for much cheaper with Grey Knights than with regular space marines.

I started a GK army *literally* as they came out (book night before, ordered entire army day of release) because I had always wanted the antithesis of my first love -chaos marines

I also wanted, as my chaos marines are mostly Bezerkers held in rhinos, an army that was the opposite of that - no vehicles.

I also liked the look of the Dreadknght, and have a love of large gribbly beasts, and liked the fuff and idea of mordrak

So i built it - 2x5man termies, mordrak and 5 ghost knights (made up to look....different to the normal termies), 2 jumpy dreadknights with flaming guns and a vindicare

Very fluffy, not very effective but quite a lot of fun as I am normally in your face turn 1 - and that stillt akes people aback.

Yes, you can hit the easy button with GKs - as much shooting as possible - biut thats a reaction to the dice game that is 40k. The more shots you have the more you will run to averages and the more predictable the results.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a liar." See how silly that looks?

Yep, it's blaktoof. reasoned argument isnt their strong suit.

Only the walrus and the vampire are being ignorant jerks. He's referring to the crypt beneath the Temple of the Emperor and the Grey Knights' unique perception of memory. You see, every Grey Knights' memory is erased during indoctrination. Probably the only thing a Grey Knight is afraid of is being forgotten; thus, every Grey Knights' name is written down on Titan when they die. If they live well enough, the name that is written down will be remembered. However, if they are entombed in a Dreadnought, their name is not recorded. They sleep for hundreds of years more, and all the while their name is absent from prayers and sagas.

Grey Knights hate becoming Dreadnoughts. The numbers they are fielded in now would terrify a Grandmaster.

Jaon wrote:

DarkHound wrote:The old book was closer to a good representation, though I'd join the Sisters and GK as auxiliaries to the Imperium's forces at large, because that's how they actually function.

When you say "Because thats how they actually function" are you referring to the fact that Grey Knights like to kill Sisters of battle and smear their blood on their armour, or?

That's awesome, I didn't think of that. I could make a whole different thread about the misogynistic fetish-pleasure that Ward probably derives from that story and its implications. No, I was merely referring to the fact that both Sisters of Battle and Grey Knights do not function as independent elements. They are always used in conjunction with the Planetary Defense Forces or directed by the Inquisition.

DarkHound wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a liar." See how silly that looks?

Yep, it's blaktoof. reasoned argument isnt their strong suit.

Only the walrus and the vampire are being ignorant jerks. He's referring to the crypt beneath the Temple of the Emperor and the Grey Knights' unique perception of memory. You see, every Grey Knights' memory is erased during indoctrination. Probably the only thing a Grey Knight is afraid of is being forgotten; thus, every Grey Knights' name is written down on Titan when they die. If they live well enough, the name that is written down will be remembered. However, if they are entombed in a Dreadnought, their name is not recorded. They sleep for hundreds of years more, and all the while their name is absent from prayers and sagas.

Apparently you havent learnt how to comprehend a sentence as yet. Try reading ALL of a sentence, not just fly off into a nerd rage.

DarkHound wrote:Grey Knights hate becoming Dreadnoughts. The numbers they are fielded in now would terrify a Grandmaster.

Jaon wrote:

DarkHound wrote:The old book was closer to a good representation, though I'd join the Sisters and GK as auxiliaries to the Imperium's forces at large, because that's how they actually function.

When you say "Because thats how they actually function" are you referring to the fact that Grey Knights [/u]like[/u] to kill Sisters of battle and smear their blood on their armour, or?

That's awesome, I didn't think of that. I could make a whole different thread about the misogynistic fetish-pleasure that Ward probably derives from that story and its implications. No, I was merely referring to the fact that both Sisters of Battle and Grey Knights do not function as independent elements. They are always used in conjunction with the Planetary Defense Forces or directed by the Inquisition.

Missed pointless crass hyperbole before. THat bolded bit? Crap, does not exist.

The reason i think most people are drawn to the GKs is because they like the idea of being bad-ass warriors who run around smiting daemons.

The fact they are op SEALS the deal

DarkHound wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a liar." See how silly that looks?

Yep, it's blaktoof. reasoned argument isnt their strong suit.

Only the walrus and the vampire are being ignorant jerks. He's referring to the crypt beneath the Temple of the Emperor and the Grey Knights' unique perception of memory. You see, every Grey Knights' memory is erased during indoctrination. Probably the only thing a Grey Knight is afraid of is being forgotten; thus, every Grey Knights' name is written down on Titan when they die. If they live well enough, the name that is written down will be remembered. However, if they are entombed in a Dreadnought, their name is not recorded. They sleep for hundreds of years more, and all the while their name is absent from prayers and sagas.

Grey Knights hate becoming Dreadnoughts. The numbers they are fielded in now would terrify a Grandmaster.

Suppose I made a Grey Knight army with two Dreadknights, a Techmarine and three Venerable Dreadnoughts and explained it as part of the Chapter arsenal being attacked by Daemons in disguise? Oh look, a fluff explanation!

I'm not being ignorant, I know perfectly well how much Grey Knights hate being Dreadnoughts. They still do it though, so the scenario above could still happen. The part I was focusing on was the part about lists including Dreadknights not being valid as fluff lists: THAT is ignorant, and the reason I made my posts to start with.

Couldn't have 3 dreads and a techy. All elites.

I'll concede to the walrus. The vampire, on the other hand, continues to lash out without a proper argument.

In my defense, Walrus, the Dreadknight is an abomination. The point of the Grey Knights, what made them different than Space Marines, is that their leaders could go toe-to-toe with Greater Daemons. Plus, what's the point of the Dreadnought if not to be an armored war beast? So the Dreadknight exists to fill the role that's already sufficiently covered. Then there's the matter of the model. Good Lord that thing is awful.

DarkHound wrote:I'll concede to the walrus. The vampire, on the other hand, continues to lash out without a proper argument.

In my defense, Walrus, the Dreadknight is an abomination. The point of the Grey Knights, what made them different than Space Marines, is that their leaders could go toe-to-toe with Greater Daemons. Plus, what's the point of the Dreadnought if not to be an armored war beast? So the Dreadknight exists to fill the role that's already sufficiently covered. Then there's the matter of the model. Good Lord that thing is awful.

DarkHound for President of the Moon!

Deadshot wrote:Couldn't have 3 dreads and a techy. All elites.

Normal dreads are heavy, ven dreads are elite

DarkHound wrote:I'll concede to the walrus. The vampire, on the other hand, continues to lash out without a proper argument.

Wrong. You nerd raged at AW and myself and you hadnt even read all the quote from blaktoof

DarkHound wrote:In my defense, Walrus, the Dreadknight is an abomination. The point of the Grey Knights, what made them different than Space Marines, is that their leaders could go toe-to-toe with Greater Daemons.

Um, guess you just answered your own question there. bolded

DarkHound wrote:Plus, what's the point of the Dreadnought if not to be an armored war beast?

The "point" is to house battle brothers that are almost dead, and allow them to carry on fighting. DK involves fuly functioning battle brothers. You're not good at this nerd rage stuff, are you?

DarkHound wrote:So the Dreadknight exists to fill the role that's already sufficiently covered. Then there's the matter of the model. Good Lord that thing is awful.

Nope i like the model. Your opinion on it is no more valid than anyone elses.

Which is all your post comes down to, validity wise - your opinion of the model.

DarkHound wrote:In my defense, Walrus, the Dreadknight is an abomination. The point of the Grey Knights, what made them different than Space Marines, is that their leaders could go toe-to-toe with Greater Daemons. Plus, what's the point of the Dreadnought if not to be an armored war beast? So the Dreadknight exists to fill the role that's already sufficiently covered. Then there's the matter of the model. Good Lord that thing is awful.

And this is why I made my "anything other than my opinion is wrong!" point to start with. While I agree that the "single warrior against the Evils" is more epic, the Dreadknight makes way more sense.

agreed on the dreadknight. when i first saw that POS i facepalmed.

they should have just left it as a robot, the exposed pilot ruins it for me.

and as someone already mentioned, the name "dreadknight" smells like poop too.

Nemesis Doom Fist.
Nemesis Dreadknight.
Blood Fist.
Blood Talon.
Bloodshard Rounds.
Blood Strike Missiles.

All of these came from one person.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Nemesis Doom Fist.
Nemesis Dreadknight.
Blood Fist.
Blood Talon.
Bloodshard Rounds.
Blood Strike Missiles.

All of these came from one person.

To be fair, there's at least as much Wolfy McWolferson in the SW codex.

H.B.M.C. wrote:Nemesis Doom Fist.
Nemesis Dreadknight.
Blood Fist.
Blood Talon.
Bloodshard Rounds.
Blood Strike Missiles.

All of these came from one person.

I agree that these are silly. However, they pale to the magesty that was bestowed upon us by Rick Priestley in Warhammer 40k Rogue Trader (1987):

Inquisitor Obiwan Sherlock Clousseau

But HE was joking.

Ward is deadly serious

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

DarkHound wrote:In my defense, Walrus, the Dreadknight is an abomination. The point of the Grey Knights, what made them different than Space Marines, is that their leaders could go toe-to-toe with Greater Daemons. Plus, what's the point of the Dreadnought if not to be an armored war beast? So the Dreadknight exists to fill the role that's already sufficiently covered. Then there's the matter of the model. Good Lord that thing is awful.

And this is why I made my "anything other than my opinion is wrong!" point to start with. While I agree that the "single warrior against the Evils" is more epic, the Dreadknight makes way more sense.

The Dreadknight never makes more sense because the pilot is always completely exposed. If it had been realized differently, I wouldn't have a problem with it. The pilot was exposed in the exo-suit from Aliens because it was a construction vehicle, not a combat mech.

I can make up some stuff about how a pair of Slaaneshi Daemon Princes tricked a cult of Obliterators and half the Deathguard into serving them, but regardless of how possible it is to justify, it doesn't make it correct. The Grey Knights have 6 Dreadnoughts to wake up, but they aren't going to do so for every Tom, Dick, and Harry that want to scrap. Nor are they going to bring "the most advanced machine in the Imperium" and show it off against the Tau. Lord knows they don't need anymore inspiration. There's nothing wrong with trying to break the game, but in this case doing so breaks the fluff.

At the very least, the Dreadknight should be put at a disadvantage fighting smaller enemies. I mean, it's one thing that it can move fast enough to block the giant weapons of the Greater Daemons, but a swarm of daemonettes would easily be able to get one to climb up while the others distract it and rip the pilot to pieces.

If they can get past the armour and forcefield, especially with their powets drained by the pilot.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Anyone that says they are playing for fluff reasons and uses dread knights or psyrifleman spam is a liar.

"Anyone who disagrees with me is a liar." See how silly that looks?

Yep, it's blaktoof. reasoned argument isnt their strong suit.

I'm going to set aside the fact your post is just a personal attack and lacks any other content.

The dreadknight fluff is that it was created to battle powerful daemons by being a giant robotic baby Bjorn of the emperors will. If you think about it there is no place for this model as conceptualy it is just the equivalent of dreadnaught with special rules. GKs already have dreads but do not like to become dreads for fluff reasons already stTes by DH.

I commented that dreadnaught and dreadknight spam was unfluffy. I stand by that it is. How many GK stories since Slaves to the Darkness where the first ordo malleus list appeares have talked about GK brothers sending their 6 dreadnaughts and 2 squads of five GKs to stop a demonic incursion have you read and thought "gee guys my nerdon is so hard for GKs must start an army!". Hmm. Zero?

Okay then. How many times have you read stories about some bad mofo GK brother captain fighting back chaos with their nemesis weaponry and psychic holy fortitude to stop a daemonic apocalypse when no man or machine could? Oh, every GK fluff story since RT era, ok then.

For 23/24 of the years that GKs have existed their fluff is just them as battle brothers, not 10 of them plus their baby Bjorn brothers and dreadnaught friends.

Yes I know they are competitive, but spamming them as I said, is not fluffy. People who are running 6 dreadnaughts or 3 dreadnaughts and 3 dreadknights are not playing GKs for the fluff, which is what I said. They are playing to win, which is valid way to play but to claim otherwise is kind of a lie to say they are doing it because they really lo e the back-story concept of the GKs.

Yes well another point of contention for the fluff part is that in most fluff they did not use rhinos, razorbacks, etc.

While in fun games at the shop I dont spam stuff but tend to have a little of everything from the book or all termies.. something I would not take to a tournament. While I like them for their fluff winning 500$ plus in prizes appeals to me too when that means I can expand my stuff. lol

Anvildude wrote:Most other Marine armies don't have Assault weapons- they're stuck with Rapid Fire- and they don't get psycannons with their 4 shots on Relentless Terminators or 3 shots in small squads. If a basic Marine army wants that volume of fire, they need to take guns that aren't as effective against armour, and pay for larger units, or else get or allow the enemy to get within charge range. Knights can just sit back and shoot.

No, they just get terminators with assault cannons, the psycannon just has +1 str added to it and I believe it also costs more than an assault cannon (don't quote me there, I don't have the codecies in front of me)

That +1 Strength can make a big difference, really. Thing is, though, regular Marines don't get assault cannons in their basic tac squads.

Now, I suppose I'm probably nowhere near the best to listen to on this. I'm mostly just airing my gripes- but I've played against Grey Knights, and I've played against regular Marines, and the Knights are much more powerful, point for point, than the 'nillas.

I would think that the main gripe is once within 24 in some of the mid range forces dont like trading shots cause purifiers, dreads etc can put out reasonably high volume of str 4-8 shots but then dont want to assault to take the shooting out because traditonal taac lists dont always have an answer for the nfw. Many of the players that say they dont have a particular issue with gk play them, have found a way around this, or play an army that can out range them.

Blaktoof - so its "unfluffy" due simply to your own opinion on what counts as fluffy?

Yawn

Also -you see people spam Dknights? Really? Theyre hideously uncompetitive.

I have a Dreadknight because I actually do like the model, but I don't run it in any of my lists because I can do so much more with it's points value. I do have a Dreadnaught, a Psyfleman Dread in fact, but this was done in response to playing against 2 seperate DE players in one tournament and not having the firepower to drop their Raiders before they could get into position.

blaktoof wrote:

The dreadknight fluff is that it was created to battle powerful daemons by being a giant robotic baby Bjorn of the emperors will. If you think about it there is no place for this model as conceptualy it is just the equivalent of dreadnaught with special rules. GKs already have dreads but do not like to become dreads for fluff reasons already stTes by DH.

They want the power of a Dreadnought but don't want to be Dreadnoughts, so they get Dreadknights. Not to be rude, but that didn't require much coherent thought to figure out.

Let's use another example: Someone plays with three Dreads and three Knights, runs an AdMech/henchman list and just calls them Skiitari vehicles and Knights. There, got you a not-far-fetched fluffy explanation. You could also have the army be part of the Grey Knight prescense around Cadia, which almost certainly includes Dreadnoughts and Dreadknights. There's another not-far-fetched explanation that also has the benefit of keeps the models counting as what they are.

I agree that it's unlikely to be the case, but flat out saying it is impossible seems a bit silly TBH.

Because it is one of the newest codexes. Wait until another round of books comes out, and see how many of your GK players switch to a newer book...

AlmightyWalrus wrote:They want the power of a Dreadnought but don't want to be Dreadnoughts, so they get Dreadknights.

What can a Dreadnought do that a Grandmaster cannot? A Grandmaster is perfectly capable of facing down literally the greatest of daemons. The Dreadnought can carry ordnance in addition to being a close combat machine, but in their line of work that's generally unnecessary.

DarkHound wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:They want the power of a Dreadnought but don't want to be Dreadnoughts, so they get Dreadknights.

What can a Dreadnought do that a Grandmaster cannot? A Grandmaster is perfectly capable of facing down literally the greatest of daemons. The Dreadnought can carry ordnance in addition to being a close combat machine, but in their line of work that's generally unnecessary.

Why does the US need Aircraft Carriers when they have Nukes? A Dreadnought or Dreadknight enables someone less powerful than a Grand Master to fight Greater Daemons.

Yet I'm almost certain there are more Grandmasters and Brother-captains than there are Dreadnoughts. If the Grey Knights are the size of three Chapters, they've probably got around 45 such ranked individuals.

DarkHound wrote:Yet I'm almost certain there are more Grandmasters and Brother-captains than there are Dreadnoughts. If the Grey Knights are the size of three Chapters, they've probably got around 45 such ranked individuals.

8 BroCaps, 8 GMs and Draigo as per Codex: Grey Knights, for a total of 17. Also, Dreadnoughts let's them preserve BroCaps and GMs when they fall in battle, keeping their wisdom and skill available for future missions.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Blaktoof - so its "unfluffy" due simply to your own opinion on what counts as fluffy?

Yawn

Also -you see people spam Dknights? Really? Theyre hideously uncompetitive.

I realize you ca not accept anyone who disGrees with you ever.

HOwever literally 93% of the fluff prior to the release of the current codex. Makes no mention of dreadnaughts in anyway in gk stories. Dreadnaughts have existed since RT times but have not been pivotal in the backstory, infact they are very rarely mentioned. However 100% of tourney viable or competitive lists include dreadnaught spam. Hence its pretty unfluffy. Honestly I don't know why you are arguing that point, you have no stance other than some troll rant that's pretty much a personal attack.

Can you put forth some background examples of how they GKs commonly deploy as many dreadnaughts as possible to perhaps back up your standpoint ?

blaktoof wrote:Can you put forth some background examples of how they GKs commonly deploy as many dreadnaughts as possible to perhaps back up your standpoint ?

I already did, but you're apparently too busy bashing people to notice.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:

The dreadknight fluff is that it was created to battle powerful daemons by being a giant robotic baby Bjorn of the emperors will. If you think about it there is no place for this model as conceptualy it is just the equivalent of dreadnaught with special rules. GKs already have dreads but do not like to become dreads for fluff reasons already stTes by DH.

They want the power of a Dreadnought but don't want to be Dreadnoughts, so they get Dreadknights. Not to be rude, but that didn't require much coherent thought to figure out.

Let's use another example: Someone plays with three Dreads and three Knights, runs an AdMech/henchman list and just calls them Skiitari vehicles and Knights. There, got you a not-far-fetched fluffy explanation. You could also have the army be part of the Grey Knight prescense around Cadia, which almost certainly includes Dreadnoughts and Dreadknights. There's another not-far-fetched explanation that also has the benefit of keeps the models counting as what they are.

I agree that it's unlikely to be the case, but flat out saying it is impossible seems a bit silly TBH.

That's a very fluffy example however the admech =/= GKs. At all. Even if you use the rules from the GK codex to represent them you have taken the rules to make a fluffy army from a codex that isn't yours to make your army, which is cool- just like saying you don't care about fluff and want a competitive army.

However your not playing a GK army so how fluffy it is for a GK army is a non factor.

right ?

blaktoof wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Blaktoof - so its "unfluffy" due simply to your own opinion on what counts as fluffy?

Yawn

Also -you see people spam Dknights? Really? Theyre hideously uncompetitive.

I realize you ca not accept anyone who disGrees with you ever.

HOwever literally 93% of the fluff prior to the release of the current codex. Makes no mention of dreadnaughts in anyway in gk stories. Dreadnaughts have existed since RT times but have not been pivotal in the backstory, infact they are very rarely mentioned. However 100% of tourney viable or competitive lists include dreadnaught spam. Hence its pretty unfluffy. Honestly I don't know why you are arguing that point, you have no stance other than some troll rant that's pretty much a personal attack.

Can you put forth some background examples of how they GKs commonly deploy as many dreadnaughts as possible to perhaps back up your standpoint ?

There were GK dreadnoughts in the DH codex.

And Nos is not saying "its my way or the highway", he is saying that you don't determine whats fluffy or not.

Dreadnoughts may not be a desirable fate but, like many other things the GKs do, they are a necessity. They don't like to end up in a dreadnought, but that individual will accept that it is required for the chapter's mission to be fulfilled. Thats what the GKs are, the ultimate in self-sacrifice for a greater purpose. They do it so that Mankind can live safe from the Daemonic threat.

You can't really use the lack of Dreadnoughts in GK stories as an example because GKs don't show up that often in BL literature and never in a situation where a GK dreadnought would be/could be deployed.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:8 BroCaps, 8 GMs and Draigo as per Codex: Grey Knights, for a total of 17. Also, Dreadnoughts let's them preserve BroCaps and GMs when they fall in battle, keeping their wisdom and skill available for future missions.

Nevermind, that's much fewer than I anticipated. I expected, with such high mortality rates, that heroes would emerge left and right.

My biggest issue isn't that Dreadknights exist, it's how they were realized. A new kind of power armor that turns them into a MC? Makes sense in moderation. A Terminator strapped to the front of a Dreadnought? wat.

blaktoof wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Let's use another example: Someone plays with three Dreads and three Knights, runs an AdMech/henchman list and just calls them Skiitari vehicles and Knights. There, got you a not-far-fetched fluffy explanation. You could also have the army be part of the Grey Knight prescense around Cadia, which almost certainly includes Dreadnoughts and Dreadknights. There's another not-far-fetched explanation that also has the benefit of keeps the models counting as what they are.

I agree that it's unlikely to be the case, but flat out saying it is impossible seems a bit silly TBH.

That's a very fluffy example however the admech =/= GKs. At all. Even if you use the rules from the GK codex to represent them you have taken the rules to make a fluffy army from a codex that isn't yours to make your army, which is cool- just like saying you don't care about fluff and want a competitive army.

However your not playing a GK army so how fluffy it is for a GK army is a non factor.
right ?

See the bolded part; I know it's shaky. You've done nothing to refute my second example though, and I'm not gonna let you cherry-pick your way ou of this one.

blaktoof wrote:
I realize you ca not accept anyone who disGrees with you ever.

Yeah, whatever. I'm pointing out that YOU, as in YOUR opinion, does not define what is fluffy and unfluffy.

blaktoof wrote:HOwever literally 93% of the fluff prior to the release of the current codex.

I must have imagined those GK Dreadnoughts in the prior codex. "Literally" you are wrong.

Oh, and "nought"

blaktoof wrote:Makes no mention of dreadnaughts in anyway in gk stories.

So, in the GK novels, how many times has a dreadnought made sense given what they are doing? In the ones I have read dreadnoughts wouldnt have really helped matters.

It still doesnt prove your contention that it is "unfluffy" to field 3 dreadnoughts. Not at all.

blaktoof wrote: Dreadnaughts have existed since RT times but have not been pivotal in the backstory, infact they are very rarely mentioned. However 100% of tourney viable or competitive lists include dreadnaught spam.

Gee, guess my top ten placed army in the last 50 player tournament (5 games) isnt competitive then. With no dreadnoughts. No purifiers. No paladins. Oh look! The plural of "anecdote" isnt "Evidence"

blaktoof wrote: Hence its pretty unfluffy. Honestly I don't know why you are arguing that point, you have no stance other than some troll rant that's pretty much a personal attack.

I am arguing that YOU cannot determine what is fluffy and unfluffy in terms of fielding units from a codex. GW have MADE IT FLUFFY to field 6 dreadnoughts, same as they did with 4th ed SM which could also field 6 dreads (and oh look, they're 1/3rd the size of GK and so are likely to have 1/3rd the dreadnoughts....shock!) *if you want to field them*

I'm arguing that, essentially, your argument is crap. Because it is, for all the reasons people have given here.

blaktoof wrote:Can you put forth some background examples of how they GKs commonly deploy as many dreadnaughts as possible to perhaps back up your standpoint ?

Can you find where it is unfluffy for them to do so? Anything? For exsample, a statement saying that they never field more than 1? Anywhere? No? Shock.

The viciousness in this thread.

*Insert comment regarding sexual activity of participants*

GK,SW and BA IMO are in the same boat. They are made and design to be beginner armies and that's it. I started with SW when you was allowed to bring termie armour into your scout squad. But now I play tau and orks because there is no challenge in playing DK,SW and BA.

thevirus wrote: I started with SW when you was allowed to bring termie armour into your scout squad.

Why would that be a big deal? Because they have the chance to outflank on any table edge? You can only bring one (via Wolf Guard), right?

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

blaktoof wrote:Can you put forth some background examples of how they GKs commonly deploy as many dreadnaughts as possible to perhaps back up your standpoint ?

I already did, but you're apparently too busy bashing people to notice.

considering I have made no personal attacks and only nosferatu has in my exchange I'm done replying to you as you lack reading comprehension skills on any level. You are more then welcome to take that as my first bash in this thread.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
I realize you ca not accept anyone who disGrees with you ever.

Yeah, whatever. I'm pointing out that YOU, as in YOUR opinion, does not define what is fluffy and unfluffy.

blaktoof wrote:HOwever literally 93% of the fluff prior to the release of the current codex.

I must have imagined those GK Dreadnoughts in the prior codex. "Literally" you are wrong.

Oh, and "nought"

blaktoof wrote:Makes no mention of dreadnaughts in anyway in gk stories.

So, in the GK novels, how many times has a dreadnought made sense given what they are doing? In the ones I have read dreadnoughts wouldnt have really helped matters.

It still doesnt prove your contention that it is "unfluffy" to field 3 dreadnoughts. Not at all.

blaktoof wrote: Dreadnaughts have existed since RT times but have not been pivotal in the backstory, infact they are very rarely mentioned. However 100% of tourney viable or competitive lists include dreadnaught spam.

Gee, guess my top ten placed army in the last 50 player tournament (5 games) isnt competitive then. With no dreadnoughts. No purifiers. No paladins. Oh look! The plural of "anecdote" isnt "Evidence"

blaktoof wrote: Hence its pretty unfluffy. Honestly I don't know why you are arguing that point, you have no stance other than some troll rant that's pretty much a personal attack.

I am arguing that YOU cannot determine what is fluffy and unfluffy in terms of fielding units from a codex. GW have MADE IT FLUFFY to field 6 dreadnoughts, same as they did with 4th ed SM which could also field 6 dreads (and oh look, they're 1/3rd the size of GK and so are likely to have 1/3rd the dreadnoughts....shock!) *if you want to field them*

I'm arguing that, essentially, your argument is crap. Because it is, for all the reasons people have given here.

blaktoof wrote:Can you put forth some background examples of how they GKs commonly deploy as many dreadnaughts as possible to perhaps back up your standpoint ?

Can you find where it is unfluffy for them to do so? Anything? For exsample, a statement saying that they never field more than 1? Anywhere? No? Shock.

Other than the dreadnaught entry in the current codex I can't seem to find any mention of the common deployment of large amount of dreadnaughts in GK OPERATIONS IN A SINGLE CODEX, OR BLACK library book. I think that's enough to say the background story of this game system does not consider it normal, or "fluffy" to field large amounts of dreadnaughts in a GK army. This isn't iron hands, and I'm beginning to think you believe being allowed to take so.ething by rules = background fluff. I'm sorry it doesn't. I also don't care about your army composition or win record and the fact you bring it up only proves you are a fanboi ranting about some facet of your beloved army that is a point of contention that you personally dislike for illogical reasons.

all I'm saying is people who have large amounts of dreadnUghtz in their army and are playing GK are not creTing an army list based on fluff or ba ground story of the GKs. Because it's not in their background story at all anywhere to deploy large amounts of dreadnaughts. Sorry, that's a fact the game developers created not me. I really don't care that your a canboi and anyone commenting logically and factually about something you dislike bothers you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rules =/= fluff and fluff =/= rules.

blaktoof wrote:
considering I have made no personal attacks and only nosferatu has in my exchange I'm done replying to you as you lack reading comprehension skills on any level. You are more then welcome to take that as my first bash in this thread.

blaktoof wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:Blaktoof - so its "unfluffy" due simply to your own opinion on what counts as fluffy?

Yawn

Also -you see people spam Dknights? Really? Theyre hideously uncompetitive.

I realize you ca not accept anyone who disGrees with you ever.

Nos posts a valid argument, you respond with "you're not respecting my opinion!". While he could be doing it in a more polite manner, bashing him back isn't the solution. I'd also consider calling everyone who claims to be playing a fluffy list while having Dreadknights in it liars "bashing". It doesn't have to be a personal attack to be bashing.

My challenge still stands: Why could it not be a part of the Grey Knights presence near the Eye of Terror? You can keep dodging the question all you want, but it isn't going to stop me from asking repeatedly.

DarkHound wrote:
My biggest issue isn't that Dreadknights exist, it's how they were realized. A new kind of power armor that turns them into a MC? Makes sense in moderation. A Terminator strapped to the front of a Dreadnought? wat.

The Dreadknight, much like the Tau Crisis Suit, is a 40k spin on an anime favorite. In the case of the Dreadknight, it's the Landmate, from the Appleseed series.

It kind of makes sense to have the arms free like that. The pilot's arms can't go inside the Dreadknight's arms, because they don't bend in the same places, but the arms have to be free to move, because that's how he controls the dreadknight. Personally, I prefer the Dreadknight model to the Dreadnought model.

Actually on the topic of the thread, I want to start a GKs army when I get bored with my Tyranids. Why? Well, my first inkling of desire to play GKs came from reading Inquisitor Valeria's fluff. I love the religious / chivalric imagery of the models, I love the connection to the inquisition, I like Terminators as Troops, I like the wackiness of the henchmen, I like not needing transports to be effective, I like the reasonable financial investment, and, yes, I love the idea of maybe, just maybe, being able to kill that stupid Rune Priest with his stupid Jaws of the World Wolf and all of the stupid Grey Hunters and all of their stupid Razorbacks and all of the stupid Venoms with their stupid Splinter Cannons and all of the stupid Trueborn with their stupid Blasters and dance on their graves. I want some payback, sue me. With GKs, I can get payback by buying a reasonable number of models that I love.

blaktoof wrote:

Other than the dreadnaught entry in the current codex I can't seem to find any mention of the common deployment of large amount of dreadnaughts in GK OPERATIONS IN A SINGLE CODEX, OR BLACK library book. I think that's enough to say the background story of this game system does not consider it normal, or "fluffy" to field large amounts of dreadnaughts in a GK army. This isn't iron hands, and I'm beginning to think you believe being allowed to take so.ething by rules = background fluff. I'm sorry it doesn't. I also don't care about your army composition or win record and the fact you bring it up only proves you are a fanboi ranting about some facet of your beloved army that is a point of contention that you personally dislike for illogical reasons.

You may want to inspect your keyboard. I don't think it's doing what you are trying to make it do. Personally, I'm not aware of anything outside of the 3rd edition Daemonhunters codex (which, like it or not, doesn't matter anymore) that implies Dreadnoughts are not commonly used. They mention that GK don't like being put in them, because they want to die and rest with their brothers. They're not commonly used in the fluff, true, but that doesn't mean that they wouldn't/couldn't be if the situation arose. Nothing I am aware of has ever said "We have less than X of these, and won't use them or put fallen knights in them."

You are arguing that the absence of evidence is the evidence of absence. By the same token, I could argue outrageous things, like that Grey Knights absorb oxygen directly through their skin, and have enchanted holy felafel where their lungs would normally be situated, since it's never mentioned in any of the books that they actively breathe. Or for that matter, that you are a bad person for naming any of your Crimson Fists with Slavic names, since all of the well-known ones are very clearly Latin in nature.

I think you'll find that the dreadknight is a dry run for changes to machines of that ilk for 6th ed, that's just my guess.

Isengard wrote:I think you'll find that the dreadknight is a dry run for changes to machines of that ilk for 6th ed, that's just my guess.

I don't know why people are so angry about it, still. I mean, in a lot of ways it has better rules than walkers, sure, but in plenty of other ways, it has worse rules as a result of it. It's supposed to represent that the DK is a more agile, "naturally" moving war machine. It's not a box on squatty little legs that exists primarily as a ranged weapons platform, it's an actual bipedal device with human-like movements.

blaktoof wrote:considering I have made no personal attacks and only nosferatu has in my exchange I'm done replying to you as you lack reading comprehension skills on any level. You are more then welcome to take that as my first bash in this thread.

I pointed out your argument didnt have any basis. You respond with saying people have no reading comprehension skills. Genius

blaktoof wrote:Other than the dreadnaught entry in the current codex I can't seem to find any mention of the common deployment of large amount of dreadnaughts in GK OPERATIONS IN A SINGLE CODEX, OR BLACK library book.

So, apart from the FLUFF in the CODEX you cannot find anything FLUFFY to ... wait, theres your issue. Staring you literally in the face.

What about in the 3rd ed book? They certainly talk about GK dreadnoughts being used. You could take 3 then as well. Was that unfluffy?

DreadnOUGHT. No "A" there. Given your complete nerd rage about them please try to use the correct spelling.

I thi

blaktoof wrote:nk that's enough to say the background story of this game system does not consider it normal, or "fluffy" to field large amounts of dreadnaughts in a GK army. This isn't iron hands, and I'm beginning to think you believe being allowed to take so.ething by rules = background fluff. I'm sorry it doesn't. I also don't care about your army composition or win record and the fact you bring it up only proves you are a fanboi ranting about some facet of your beloved army that is a point of contention that you personally dislike for illogical reasons.

God your argument gets worse. You were saying that ALL competitive lists involve scads of dreadnoughts. I pointed out my list, by your definition, was not competitive - yet it is. Thus I proved your fallacy (one of many) in pluralising "anecdote' into "evidence"

the fact you didnt recognise this, and your earlier comment about others reading comprehension, makes the juxtaposition highly amusing.

I am not a fanboi. I have an army that is hugely fun to play as it is challenging for me and my opponents. You, on the other hand, come across as a typical frothing mouthed fanboy who has their own, fixed idea on fluff that isnt based in reality nor grounded in the reality that *gasp* GW change their own fluff all the damn time. As they are allowed to - it's theirs, not yours remember?

blaktoof wrote:all I'm saying is people who have large amounts of dreadnUghtz in their army and are playing GK are not creTing an army list based on fluff or ba ground story of the GKs. Because it's not in their background story at all anywhere to deploy large amounts of dreadnaughts. Sorry, that's a fact the game developers created not me. I really don't care that your a canboi and anyone commenting logically and factually about something you dislike bothers you.

Logically? Nope, you havent done so as yet - you havent even answered AW's entirely logical scenario involving EoT
Factually? Nope, you havent managed that yet, either.

Your only "fact" (as in, something actually written down) is that GK dont like being put into Dreadnoughts. Thats true. However you have then LEAPED across from that into some wholly made up, fantasy world where this means they dont have many dreadnoughts, and never deploy large numbers (never mind 3 isnt a large number, unless you truly believe 1500 points is the whole battle - you wouldnt be that blinkered, would you?) in any battle ever, for any reason

THIS is WHOLLY a fantasy on your part, because there is nothing written to actually back it up. There are no pieces of fluff anywhere that indicates your assertion to be anything more than baseless, illogical misinterpretation of a piece of fluff. Not a sausage.

So, given you have stated it is a FACT that they NEVER EVER EVER for ANY REASON deploy large numbers of 'noughts - care to give a page ref for that? Even which book you found it in? Anything? Anything at all?

Oh my. This poor horse...

So many boot marks it's disfigured.

So tragic.

I never stated that they never ever for any reason reply xx. That you made up in your head.

I stated the gk backstory does not include a large amount of dreadnaughts, it doesn't. Sorry I didn't make it up.

I'm sorry, bit the background dictates what most people view as the general way different groups in the 40k universe deploy, and interact with each other. I view the background as fluff as written. If the majority of the background for a group has them deploying in termie armor with nemesis force weapons to battle insurmountable demonic odds then most people view the army composition to be deemed fluffy if it matches that.

I realize what the rules allow, but the rules don't always match the background story or fluff. Just like the fluff doesn't always match the rules.

For example as per the rules for apoc allow for you to say take an ork army, led by ghaz. Fill put the detachments and if you have points left you can start a new detachment of IG and take yarrixk. The rules allow me to put them in base to base not locked in combat. I can pivot my models by the rules and make them lock lips. So raw i can make ghaz and yarrick make out but as per the fluff this is mostly unlikely.

Fluffwise you shouldn't be able to use assault or defensive grenades versus dark eldar because they can kick of throw them back before detonation in quite a few of the black library books.

Most people will see no relation between the stories written by GW regarding GKs in the terms of force composition and the armies many people choose to field in the game. That is what i mean by GK lists with dread SPAM are unfluffy.

I'm sort you disagree but there is literally 23 years of gw hgw backstory to not support you. :(

The absense of Dreadnoughts from the current GK fluff(of which there isn't all that much) is not evidence that they arn't used.

I have seen Ironclad Dreadnoughts mentioned in 1 BL book up to this point(Salamanders) and have seen 0 references to Landspeeder storms in any books. By your logic, they must not be used very much and as such having them is unfluffy.

Whether or not it's fluffy does not excuess how annoying the list is.

nosferatu1001 wrote:I pointed out your argument didnt have any basis. You respond with saying people have no reading comprehension skills. Genius

And yet, not one page earlier...

nosferatu1001 wrote:

DarkHound wrote:He's referring to the crypt beneath the Temple of the Emperor...

Apparently you havent learnt how to comprehend a sentence as yet. Try reading ALL of a sentence, not just fly off into a nerd rage.

I would like to point out that in the GK dread entry it states along the lines of not deploying a dread for every Tom, Dick and Harry Daemon Prince that sticks his head up because it dishonours the gift of their service because they have already died once.


Don't know if that means anythimg but there it is.

blaktoof wrote: *text*

And you're STILL dodging my question: Why can't it be a detachment of Grey Knights near the Eye of Terror? We know that there's a big GK presence there (mentioned several times in the Grey Knights trilogy) so why wouldn't they bring some Dreadnoughts there? It's the Eye of Terror, the biggest source of Chaos incursions in the Galaxy, surely the Dreadnoughts would be useful?

BTW, "dreadnaught" is a completely valid way to spell it.

SoloFalcon1138 wrote:Because it is one of the newest codexes. Wait until another round of books comes out, and see how many of your GK players switch to a newer book...

It will have to be another OP book before they jump the bandwagon to a new one.

Why were people playing SW for so long, even after the BA, Nid and DE codex came out? Its because SW were tied with the top codex with IG.
As the GK codex continues to demonstrate that its more powerful than the other's people will switch to it. They will not hop off just because a new codex comes out. They will hop off when the next best thing comes around.

Take the example of Paul Murphy, currently #4 on rankings HQ. He recently switched from BA to GK. Why? Paul is an extremely competitive player. He likes to win. He knows that the GK codex is 10%-30% better than other codex', and when hes pushing to win he knows that can give him the edge he needs. Unlike Chess, there is random elements in 40k. You cannot mitigate those. However, you can alter your chances of winning vs. an equally skilled opponent by playing the better army.
Paul is not stupid. He knows to push every advantage. As such he switched from BA (which he played for years) to the winning codex.

Mainly because I love to have people whine about it. I subsist upon the tears of cry babies. I can think if nothing more enjoyable than to beat the hell out if a whiner. All the while asking....would you like some cheese with that whine?

Devil Dog wrote:Mainly because I love to have people whine about it. I subsist upon the tears of cry babies. I can think if nothing more enjoyable than to beat the hell out if a whiner. All the while asking....would you like some cheese with that whine?

Cool story bro

Dudes either need to engage in the #1 male activity or get laid.

Henners91 wrote:Dudes either need to engage in the #1 male activity or get laid.

Wait, I thought that was the #1 male activity...

For some of us, yes

He should have said #1 Solitary male activity

Watching MLP:FiM?

We shall fix this thread with Love and Tolerance!

Also, Derpy Grey Knight.

Henners91 wrote:Dudes either need to engage in the #1 male activity or get laid.

I imagined your avatar saying that, I lol'd

I hope you did so with Boreale's voice, sir.

Was kidding around. But seriously I should start a thread..why are there so many threads whinning about GK? Played the game as space marines long enough to have seen lots of harsh codex rules. I really don't think GK is too crazy considering other codex for 6th. For the price of a decked rhino DE can put out skimmers with better armament than a land raider. BA can have flying librarian drednaughts. So what's the big deal? I'm sure they'll balance armies decently, never perfectly, bit decently. And what good is ANOTHER whine post about GK going to serve? People play GK because they are a ass kicking army. Simple.

Listen, I think people just need to stop whining and get on with things. Don't like it don't play.

Well, this wasn't originally a Whine post, it was just a simple question post. But, as with many threads, it unraveled and degraded.

I realise that. But I am sick of people whining. It is a valid codex and a well written one, in my not-so-humble opinion.

If you don't go to competition and prefer Derp Knights in friendly games then hats off to you, but if you go to competition theb you WILL fight GK so the best thing to do is stop complaining and start planning your enevitable encounters. What unit will deal with what. Who will claim objectives. Possible enemy lists. Which lists will give the most hassel.

Deadshot...thank you

Deadshot wrote:I realise that. But I am sick of people whining. It is a valid codex and a well written one, in my not-so-humble opinion.

If you don't go to competition and prefer Derp Knights in friendly games then hats off to you, but if you go to competition theb you WILL fight GK so the best thing to do is stop complaining and start planning your enevitable encounters. What unit will deal with what. Who will claim objectives. Possible enemy lists. Which lists will give the most hassel.

Well, my main gripe is "how do I compete against an army when I can't even deploy a single model onto the freaking table?!!"
Okay, so the only local store that has open game nights is full of d-bags, but still, I should at least be able to plan a tactic beyond ''don't lose the roll-off for 1st turn"...

In my not-so-humble-opinion, GK's a well written internally balanced codex. It's external balance however is rather suspect.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Deadshot wrote:I realise that. But I am sick of people whining. It is a valid codex and a well written one, in my not-so-humble opinion.

If you don't go to competition and prefer Derp Knights in friendly games then hats off to you, but if you go to competition theb you WILL fight GK so the best thing to do is stop complaining and start planning your enevitable encounters. What unit will deal with what. Who will claim objectives. Possible enemy lists. Which lists will give the most hassel.

Well, my main gripe is "how do I compete against an army when I can't even deploy a single model onto the freaking table?!!"
Okay, so the only local store that has open game nights is full of d-bags, but still, I should at least be able to plan a tactic beyond ''don't lose the roll-off for 1st turn"...

In my not-so-humble-opinion, GK's a well written internally balanced codex. It's external balance however is rather suspect.

The thing is, every Codex becomes OP if it gets to tailor against you. Shuntquake lists are pretty much worthless against anything other than Daemons, so it isn't really OP, it's just stupid.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:

Deadshot wrote:I realise that. But I am sick of people whining. It is a valid codex and a well written one, in my not-so-humble opinion.

If you don't go to competition and prefer Derp Knights in friendly games then hats off to you, but if you go to competition theb you WILL fight GK so the best thing to do is stop complaining and start planning your enevitable encounters. What unit will deal with what. Who will claim objectives. Possible enemy lists. Which lists will give the most hassel.

Well, my main gripe is "how do I compete against an army when I can't even deploy a single model onto the freaking table?!!"
Okay, so the only local store that has open game nights is full of d-bags, but still, I should at least be able to plan a tactic beyond ''don't lose the roll-off for 1st turn"...

In my not-so-humble-opinion, GK's a well written internally balanced codex. It's external balance however is rather suspect.

The thing is, every Codex becomes OP if it gets to tailor against you. Shuntquake lists are pretty much worthless against anything other than Daemons, so it isn't really OP, it's just stupid.

It's not even fully tailored lists though - just 10 interceptors combat squaded + 20 strikes. Hardly a fully tailored anti-deamon list that also screws over DoA's lists and any kind of chaos marine termicide or deep striking oblit tactics.
Don't see dark ex anymore outside of dreadknights, people stopped taking truesilver armour and no one uses the likes of Stern who's murder on daemons.

Just 6'x4' tables with 30 models using the max 2" rules to auto-win against specific lists when they see them.

Devil Dog wrote:Mainly because I love to have people whine about it. I subsist upon the tears of cry babies. I can think if nothing more enjoyable than to beat the hell out if a whiner. All the while asking....would you like some cheese with that whine?

Personally, I think people are in the right to whine about this codex. It's proven to be very powerful, and and Daemons in partiular got screwed over (which is bad game design, anyway you slice it). But the sad truth is that Deadshot is right. All we can do is keep playing, and pray when your codex comes out, that you can let loose that frustration like the fist of an angry god

I agree that Daemons, all Daemon based army liKE Oblits, DP summoned.or possessed CSM, Mandrake DE, Avatars and others besides, are more pressed than most.



But there way to avoid screwing over Daemons.

We are super awesome Emperor birthed Daemon hunting Super Space Marines who can't hurt Daemons.

That wouldn't be too good.

Ascalam wrote:
I like to play underpowered or fragile armies to give myself a bit of a challenge.

I used to run oldcrons and Nids.

I still run BT, DE (not weak, but fragile as hell), Orks and Daemons.

Brother, this is grave news. Why have you allied yourself with xenos and heretics

As to the topic, I feel that GK appeal to players for several reasons:

1. New codex bandwagon

2. Less expensive monetarily

3. Heard they are competitive

4. Appeal of the fluff of them being crazy awesome

5. If you mean the GK book and not just armies with Grey Knights, since the new Sisters WD dex has no inquisition IIRC, people who want to play Inquisition decide to pick up the GK dex

Luke_Prowler wrote:Personally, I think people are in the right to whine about this codex. It's proven to be very powerful, and and Daemons in partiular got screwed over (which is bad game design, anyway you slice it). But the sad truth is that Deadshot is right. All we can do is keep playing, and pray when your codex comes out, that you can let loose that frustration like the fist of an angry god

Well, GW will listen to community-wide cries of OP silliness. Look at what happened with Fantasy - DoC led to the entire communty getting up in arms over how redonkulous that stupid book was, and GW has listened. They accepted that went way too far with that book, admited at various games days it was a mistake and promised us that they'd eventually balance things out.
And they have actually - 8th ed overall is a much better game than 7th, and best of all the new books have shown pretty much no 'power creep' at all! The only real complaints being how the army specific magic items were a farce in O&G's and have routinely been getting better with each new book. (TK's have 4-5 decent item, Ogres about the same, while they finally got it right with VC's and every item is usefull!)

Maybe if GW hears enough complaining from the masses about GK's being too OTT and being unfair/not fun to play against, it'll force their hand again and eventually we'll get a decent set of balanced books that don't cave into needless power-creep. (hey, a girl can hope, right?! )

While its true that Fantasy Daemons got nerfed from 8th edition, the rulebook was released in 2010. The daemon codex was released in 2008. That was at least a year of one army dominating everyone else. GW doesn't seemed to willing ti use their Errata to balance a codex, like video game companies do with patches, instead letting their fanbase suffer until they print another codex that suppose to be on the same level as them, but that only pisses the people who don't get an update yet even more.

blaktoof wrote:I never stated that they never ever for any reason reply xx. That you made up in your head.

You said it was unfluffy. As in, doesnt happen when the GK deploy. That is what fluff "means", surely? The in fiction representation of the army? Well your claim is they never (because it is unfluffy) deploy large numbers of noughts.

You may not realise youre saying something, but you are....

blaktoof wrote:I stated the gk backstory does not include a large amount of dreadnaughts, it doesn't. Sorry I didn't make it up.

Never said you did. We have repeatedly pointed out your continuing fallacy in this area, but apparently in vain.

blaktoof wrote:I'm sort you disagree but there is literally 23 years of gw hgw backstory to not support you. :(

So, you've found back story that ASSERTS your viewpoint, as opposed to being neutral? Yet? Anything? No? Then your hypothesis is wrong.

DarkHound quote cutting because theyre really clever! wrote: stuff

Yeah, dont quote crop. You failed to read the whole of a sentence and flew off on one. SLIGHTLY different. here

nosferatu1001 wrote:

DarkHound quote cutting because theyre really clever! wrote: stuff

Yeah, dont quote crop. You failed to read the whole of a sentence and flew off on one. SLIGHTLY different. here

The quote I responded to implied that spamming Dreadnoughts was against known cannon. Walrus' response was that cannon is subjective, and even he will admit he was cheeky about it. Your response to that was a personal attack on the Blaktoof. Since then you've done very little except attack other posters while shouting "you can't prove they don't!"

I'd personally leave fluff out of list construction.

The fluff for the crimson fists was that they took huge amounts of damage and there's just a handful left but hey, you can still field everything just fine and always claim that your army occurred before the big missle accident.

As long as the FOC allows for it and it's legal, then anyone can just generate anything to force it to make sense. Including the 11 dreadnaught BA list...

Can always claim that at one point very very early in the GK time line before they developed fear of being in dreadnaughts that they had more of them around. Can claim that your particular GK detachment was actually from just 1k years instead of 10k years after the horus heracy. The chapter didn't yet develop a fear of being made dreads as most of the recruits were still from the legions and respected the dreads. There you go. Problem solved.

Heck, I still see some very nice battle reports where people are using the SM codex to field a legal list of Death guard before they went traitor. I find that just fine and have no problems with them doing that. NM that they are fighting the lamenters which was a cursed founding 23k yrs later, just say it was a time warp and a ship went backwards in time or some such thing. happens similarly)

I think Daemon players really can't specifically complain about GKs too much.

Having your entire army deep strike in is just horrible against most opponents, a tailored GK list really just kicks you while your down.

Daemons just need a new codex thats all.

Spoof now I'm a troll. I think seeing 3 posts against GK in two weeks is kinda trolling. Getting everything from gambling crap, to all are just playing for the fluff. I'm sorry, but iits been said already. Just use the same post. Why the different ones? As well as the fact that people loose with GK. If its that op why have I seen three reports where necrons have handed them losses not to mention the reports where GK win but by the hair of their chinny chin chin.

It would be nice to not see every thread turn into ba, sw or gk hate threads for sure.

Brother SRM wrote:There's something called "bandwagoning" and it happens whenever a new codex comes out. People see the new hotness and jump on it. Also, GK is a very cheap army to build, since it's smaller and more elite than SM. On top of all this, GK are very powerful and have a lot of lists that do very well in tournaments, so there's this perceived power level with them that attracts a lot of people too. On top of all that, they generally have very cool models.

Thats a BIG part of it. Also the Dreadknight is bad ass looking alone, and people had alot of GK from the DH days.

DarkHound wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

DarkHound quote cutting because theyre really clever! wrote: stuff

Yeah, dont quote crop. You failed to read the whole of a sentence and flew off on one. SLIGHTLY different. here

The quote I responded to implied that spamming Dreadnoughts was against known cannon. Walrus' response was that cannon is subjective, and even he will admit he was cheeky about it. Your response to that was a personal attack on the Blaktoof. Since then you've done very little except attack other posters while shouting "you can't prove they don't!"

OR dreadknights. Hence "read the whole of the sentence" rather than just flying off in a rage. Hence why your "clever" quote cropping isnt.

The point I've been making is that it is NOT AGAINST KNOWN CANON. Known canon is silent on the matter of dreadnoughts. Blaktoof also went from "GKs dont like being put into Dreadnoghts" (valid) to "GKs therefore never field large numbers of them!!!!" - which is an invalid conclusion to make, because it is not supported by anything, and certainly not that GK dont like being put in dreadnoughts. It is an illogical conclusion to make

You cannot prove, one way or the other, exactly how many dreadnoughts or dreadknights is fluffy or unfluffy, because fluff is silent. Meaning all you can fall back on is what allowed in the game.

Most lists I've seen have 3 at max, exactly how many was allowed in the previous codex. So, is 3 unfluffy?

All this talk of canon is so much like a religious argument, some people seem to think that the published, official word is holy writ or something! I have visions of some posters sat in spartan monk's cells poring over codeces under the light of tallow candles and raging against blasphemers who either have not read or have misinterpreted the holy word of Matt Ward/Robin Crudace, etc. Do they have sainted pictures of the blessed GW staffers on their walls, perhaps with haloes...

Personally I could not give a stuff about the canon beyond the very basic level. I certainly would not take it into direct account when designing a list. However, I do dislike spam armies and I would much rather fight with a good variety of troops against a good variety of troops. Purely personal opinion. Each to their own!

Oh I agree - i'm not a fan of spam. My lists generally have no more than 2 of something in it beyond troops, and troops I rarely get beyond 3 units

However shouting and kicking up that somsone is "unfluffy" for taking 3 dreadnoughts, when you have no evidence as to what is "fluffy" for a GK dreadnought or not, is just a poor argument.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

DarkHound wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

DarkHound quote cutting because theyre really clever! wrote: stuff

Yeah, dont quote crop. You failed to read the whole of a sentence and flew off on one. SLIGHTLY different. here

The quote I responded to implied that spamming Dreadnoughts was against known cannon. Walrus' response was that cannon is subjective, and even he will admit he was cheeky about it. Your response to that was a personal attack on the Blaktoof. Since then you've done very little except attack other posters while shouting "you can't prove they don't!"

OR dreadknights. Hence "read the whole of the sentence" rather than just flying off in a rage. Hence why your "clever" quote cropping isnt.

I don't quote crop because it is clever. Look at how messy this is. Couldn't I easily remove the first 2 quotes without losing any meaning? Anyway, Dreadknights were a topic I talked about. They don't make sense as they've been realized. You're also avoiding the point that you attack posters as often as you attack their argument.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The point I've been making is that it is NOT AGAINST KNOWN CANON. Known canon is silent on the matter of dreadnoughts. Blaktoof also went from "GKs dont like being put into Dreadnoghts" (valid) to "GKs therefore never field large numbers of them!!!!" - which is an invalid conclusion to make, because it is not supported by anything, and certainly not that GK dont like being put in dreadnoughts. It is an illogical conclusion to make

If they don't like making Dreadnoughts, it is logical to assume they don't have as many Dreadnoughts. Now let me show you why that means they can't field them in large numbers.

You cannot prove, one way or the other, exactly how many dreadnoughts or dreadknights is fluffy or unfluffy, because fluff is silent. Meaning all you can fall back on is what allowed in the game.

Most lists I've seen have 3 at max, exactly how many was allowed in the previous codex. So, is 3 unfluffy?

When you look at the Codex Astartes, you'll see that a single active Company has 4 Dreadnoughts at most. Assuming that the Grey Knights have even half that, they would need to commit the resources of 200 Marines to bring 3 or 4 Dreadnoughts. You can field a full Space Marine company (100+ Marines) and 4 Dreadnoughts for 2500 points. The Grey Knights, on the other hand, would need twice as many points to equal that. You're looking at a 4-5000 point army to realistically have 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts.

So yes, an army consisting of 20 Purifiers and 3 Dreadnoughts is unfluffy.

Grey Templar wrote:I think Daemon players really can't specifically complain about GKs too much.

Having your entire army deep strike in is just horrible against most opponents, a tailored GK list really just kicks you while your down.

Daemons just need a new codex thats all.

As a Daemon player, I can tell you this idea that being forced to deep strike everything = daemons auto-suck theory is complete BS. We daemon players have learned how to make that into an advantage, and typically a big one at that!

Daemon players have every right to complain about GK's being so rediculously OTT against us specifically... It's not a case of GW just leaving it at 'sensible' rules like prefered enemy (daemons) and the daemonbane rule. But nope, they had to go and pretty much make it impossible for our entire codex to even reach the table by including non-sense like 12" warp quake zones/unit, dark ex able to nix everything under the sun and the like as well.
When you can take 30 models and block off pretty much an entire 6'x4' table with a silly psychic power, someone's really screwed up the system.

Devil Dog wrote:Spoof now I'm a troll. I think seeing 3 posts against GK in two weeks is kinda trolling. Getting everything from gambling crap, to all are just playing for the fluff. I'm sorry, but iits been said already. Just use the same post. Why the different ones? As well as the fact that people loose with GK. If its that op why have I seen three reports where necrons have handed them losses not to mention the reports where GK win but by the hair of their chinny chin chin.

7th ed Daemons would lose games as well, so would the 8th ed VC 'one list to rule them all' build. GK's getting beat doesn't prove the book is well balanced, just that the book isn't 100% 'idiot proof'.

GK's external balance sucks big time. They have rediculously OP counters that pretty much invalidate 3 entire codicies!
They get alot of what are essencially 'free' upgrades because they only work against a very small number of units in the game, but are utterly vicious against those targets.
They have wonky & easily spamed upgrades that can auto-win any assault.
They get what is effectively the 'Daemonic Possession' vehicle upgrade for only 1/4 of the 'normal' cost chaos vehicles pay, but only half the armies in the game can actually try to counter it.

And more besides. It's a powerful army that more 'point-and-click' than other books with fewer disadvantages than other books. I don't think they're on the same level as 7th ed Daemons, but they're easily comparable to 7th ed VC's & Dark Elves - a top tier army that is more obnoxious than fun and which leaves a bad taste in opponents' mouths.

That's a 'faildex' if ever there was one, just like the 3.5 Chaos or Craftworld books back in 3rd/4th.

When you look at the Codex Astartes, you'll see that a single active Company has 4 Dreadnoughts at most. Assuming that the Grey Knights have even half that, they would need to commit the resources of 200 Marines to bring 3 or 4 Dreadnoughts. You can field a full Space Marine company (100+ Marines) and 4 Dreadnoughts for 2500 points. The Grey Knights, on the other hand, would need twice as many points to equal that. You're looking at a 4-5000 point army to realistically have 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts.

So yes, an army consisting of 20 Purifiers and 3 Dreadnoughts is unfluffy.

but then again I can always claim that my army was from the 1st generation of GK when they still had alot of legion influence and had yet to develop this dislike for dreads. In fact, they still wanted to be dreads since it was honored from the legions where they came from but GK have plenty of money to buy all those injured brothers big dreadnaught bodies.

"Hey techpriest, all those dread chassies going to Ultramar?"

"Yes, Inquisitor Lord"

"Well they aren't anymore. Here, sign this or I'll have this storm trooper kill you. Good."

"So where are these now going my lord?"

"Titan. Opps, I said too much." *snaps fingers* *blam blam blam* *blam* "Well at least his signature is still legible"

DarkHound wrote:I don't quote crop because it is clever. Look at how messy this is. Couldn't I easily remove the first 2 quotes without losing any meaning?

You quoted part of the sentence, but not the important part. Removing context. Which is a fairly important failing.

DarkHound wrote:If they don't like making Dreadnoughts, it is logical to assume they don't have as many Dreadnoughts.

Bzzzt, first failure in logic.

They dont like being entombed in dreadnoughts. True enough
To then assume that they then dont have as MANY dreadnoughts - how? A does not imply B, here.

Are they less likely to entomb a battle brother who would die otherwise? If you say "yes" - wheres your proof? If you say no - then assuming that they are only equally likely to end up dreadnought-able the only way they could have less, would be if they have fewer chassis to put them in. Now, the former assumption could be wrong - however nothing I;ve seen or read indicates that, however the latter requisite is unlikely - they are the GK, they have the best of everything (apart from melta weapons)

So - in order to make your proposition "logical", please show one of three things:

1) They dont entomb an otherwise dreadnought-able battle brother, preferring instead for him to die
2) They are less likely, on average, than any other marine chapter to end up "producing" dreadnoughtable battle brothers due to battle damage
3) They are so lacking in dreadnought chassis that they dont have enough spare to keep up the "production" rate of battle ready dreadnoughts

There could well be a 4th or 5th i've missed, but these seem the most likely.

DarkHound wrote:When you look at the Codex Astartes, you'll see that a single active Company has 4 Dreadnoughts at most.

Are GK a codex chapter? I thought they were one of the many examples that didnt follow it....

DarkHound wrote:Assuming that the Grey Knights have even half that, they would need to commit the resources of 200 Marines to bring 3 or 4 Dreadnoughts.

Again, big assumptions you are making here, without any proof.

Given a codex army can commit 6 dreadnoughts to the field without 100 marines, you are placing requirements on the GK that SM do not fall under.

DarkHound wrote:You can field a full Space Marine company (100+ Marines) and 4 Dreadnoughts for 2500 points. The Grey Knights, on the other hand, would need twice as many points to equal that. You're looking at a 4-5000 point army to realistically have 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts.

So yes, an army consisting of 20 Purifiers and 3 Dreadnoughts is unfluffy.

Again, your conclusion is hideously illogical, even to the point of ignoring the designers statements about a 40k game

A 40k battle is not the battle entire. It really isnt. So those 20 purifiers and 3 dreads are a portion of the battle

So, again, to prove this configuration is "unfluffy" you are required to show that either:

1) This is the whole of the battle. Good luck proving that, given the games designers have contradicted this position
2) They never deploy 3 dreadnoughts to the same portion of the battle. Again, something other than a lack of canon would be useful here - you need to positively assert, as you are the one making the extraordinary statement.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Grey Templar wrote:I think Daemon players really can't specifically complain about GKs too much.

Having your entire army deep strike in is just horrible against most opponents, a tailored GK list really just kicks you while your down.

Daemons just need a new codex thats all.

As a Daemon player, I can tell you this idea that being forced to deep strike everything = daemons auto-suck theory is complete BS. We daemon players have learned how to make that into an advantage, and typically a big one at that!

Daemon players have every right to complain about GK's being so rediculously OTT against us specifically... It's not a case of GW just leaving it at 'sensible' rules like prefered enemy (daemons) and the daemonbane rule. But nope, they had to go and pretty much make it impossible for our entire codex to even reach the table by including non-sense like 12" warp quake zones/unit, dark ex able to nix everything under the sun and the like as well.
When you can take 30 models and block off pretty much an entire 6'x4' table with a silly psychic power, someone's really screwed up the system.

Don't get me wrong, Daemons can still do quite well. Its just difficult to do with a forced constraint.


I actually find daemons to be tough opponents with the new GKs, IF the GKs don't Warp Quake the hell out of the game(see what I did there )

I think covering the board with Warp Quake is both bad sportsmenship and ineffective from a competitive viewpoint. It really only screws 1 army, and 1 army that isn't too common at that.


Warp Quake is good for stopping suicide Deep Strikers trying to do some damage early on.

If Warp Quake was completely removed from the GK codex, Daemons would be a very difficult fight.

For the sake of my sanity, I'll just drop the quote cropping issue.

The reason they don't want to be entombed in Dreadnoughts is because it keeps their name from being written on the wall. If they die, their name goes on the wall. They would rather die than be in a Dreadnought, thus they have less candidates.

The Codex Astartes is designed with the Imperium's production capacity in mind. It shows what a Space Marine army is realistically capable fielding given their infrastructure. Guilliman already took into account how many Dreadnoughts a Space Marine company could effectively field, who am I to argue?

I related the force discrepancy to points to give perspective, not to imply a battle of 40k represented the entirety of conflict. My point was this: regular Space Marines would bring 2 Dreadnoughts to a conflict the size of 2500 points, where Grey Knights would likely be incapable until the lore equivalent to 4000 due to the dispersion of Grey Knight forces.

Whether a single game is a small portion of larger conflict is entirely up to the players. As part of an escalating campaign, there could easily be scenarios where the Grey Knights field a phalanx of Dreadnoughts. However, the point of a fluffy army is that it never needs justification. You don't need to ask why these Khorne Berserkers are following Kharne. You do need to make a story for why Plague Marines are taking orders from Slaaneshi Princes.

However, the point of a fluffy army is that it never needs justification. You don't need to ask why these Khorne Berserkers are following Kharne. You do need to make a story for why Plague Marines are taking orders from Slaaneshi Princes.

I'm actually 180 degrees from you on that one. I think fluffy lists should usually involve some sort of back story that the player came up with. Regular lists are just people playing along and just follow the FoC without any background story.

If I went fully fluff, maybe my kreig guardsmen shouldn't have any valks. They perfer seige right? so it'd be hard pressed to say why my kreig air cav exists. But hey, we're all entitled to our opinions. I feel as long as you can come up with a convincing story, then your list can be fluffy. Failure to make up a story = not fluffy. If you built the codex exactly,that in itself is probably fluffy, you just followed the cannon exactly instead of comming up with a fun story on your own.

Good example is the 9 something space wolf dreadnaught army that fought at the fang. There's definately precident. Who's to say the battle didn't happen out side of the centralized GK dreadnaught entombment factory? Or maybe it was a transport ship that was delivering several dreadnaughts from titan to various battle fronts and it just so happened to crash with 6 deads and their escort of bunch of knights?

Cuz the models are sick, except the dreadnight.

Here is justification. The Grey Knights do WHATEVER it takes to rid of Daemons. And I mean whatever. If that means teaming up with Eldar and Tau, so be it. If that means nuking an entire system, so be it. If that requires a phalanx of Dreadnoughts, SO BE IT. Those entombed within may dislike being entombed, and then awoken again, but personal discomfort holds no significance against the Mission. Even Daemonic pacts like using a Daemon's true name or having a Radical Inquisitor with Daemonhosts isn't out of the question.


No one gets in the way of the mission. Not an Ork Warlord. Not a chapter of space marines. Not a legion of Titans. Not Adeptus Custides Not even the Inquisition or the High Lords. If the High Lords told them to ignore Daemons and fight a Tyranid Hive Fleet instead, they would receive a Terminator sized middle finger. Grey Knights.answer to their Justicar, who answer to their Brother Captain, who anser to their Grand Master, who answers to the Chapter Lord AKA, Supreme Grand Master(Draigo). And he answers to.no one bar the God Emperor himself. The only thing that would distract them would be a direct assault on Terra or Titan, or the Emperor himself.

sudojoe wrote:

However, the point of a fluffy army is that it never needs justification. You don't need to ask why these Khorne Berserkers are following Kharne. You do need to make a story for why Plague Marines are taking orders from Slaaneshi Princes.

I'm actually 180 degrees from you on that one. I think fluffy lists should usually involve some sort of back story that the player came up with. Regular lists are just people playing along and just follow the FoC without any background story.

If I went fully fluff, maybe my kreig guardsmen shouldn't have any valks. They perfer seige right? so it'd be hard pressed to say why my kreig air cav exists. But hey, we're all entitled to our opinions. I feel as long as you can come up with a convincing story, then your list can be fluffy. Failure to make up a story = not fluffy. If you built the codex exactly,that in itself is probably fluffy, you just followed the cannon exactly instead of comming up with a fun story on your own.

You prove my point exactly. A DKoK Air Cav army isn't fluffy, so you'd need backstory to explain why it exists if you wanted to call it fluffy. My CSM army has (literally) scores of pages of fluff on why I field Noise Marines with Plague Marines and have a hard-on for Daemons. Neither of our armies are inherently fluffy; we have to bend the fluff or write our own.

A player who wanted to play the Grey Knights because he enjoys their fluff would not go about writing his own backstory. By definition, he plays because he wants the backstory that already exists.

"The reason they don't want to be entombed in Dreadnoughts is because it keeps their name from being written on the wall. If they die, their name goes on the wall. They would rather die than be in a Dreadnought, thus they have less candidates."

So your contention is they have less candidates? Prove it.

Book, page and paragraph. Oh wait - that's the point. There isnt. Canon is silent on this entirely

"The Codex Astartes is designed with the Imperium's production capacity in mind. It shows what a Space Marine army is realistically capable fielding given their infrastructure. Guilliman already took into account how many Dreadnoughts a Space Marine company could effectively field, who am I to argue?"

Yawn. GKs /= standard SM. They are a non codex chapter. They have the best of everything. Guilliman took into account the number of dreadnoughts an Orange could realistically field, so the Apples should have exactly the same number!

You're still failing on the fluff front.

"My point was this: regular Space Marines would bring 2 Dreadnoughts to a conflict the size of 2500 points, where Grey Knights would likely be incapable until the lore equivalent to 4000 due to the dispersion of Grey Knight forces. "

No, your point was that you a) made up an artificial restriction with no actual evidential basis to it and b) still dont get that *this* 1500 points is only part of a wider 15000+ point battle so placing restrictions on *this* part of the battle is laughably poor as an argument. It really is.

"Whether a single game is a small portion of larger conflict is entirely up to the players."

No, actually its up to the game designers. You know, those people who are >>>>>>> you when it comes to deciding what is fluffy and what isnt? Every 1500 battle you play isnt necessarily the battle entire. It's why you can field Abaddon at all, never mind in under 2k now. This 1500 point battle RIGHT HERE is part of a 3 company incursion, where the Grand Master has decided that he needs to place the hammer of his force here -hence he is leading with 3 dreadnoughts as heavy fire support.

Boom, fluffy as all hell with a couple lines.

So yes - a 6 dreadnought battle force can be entirely fluffy, regardless of your illogical arguments against

Makes me glad I played Daemonhunters and had tons of the metal models.

No bandwaggoning for me.

Mr. Bean, why are Grey Knights so popular?

"Psychic Powers. *Snort*Snort*."

nosferatu1001 wrote:So your contention is they have less candidates? Prove it.

Book, page and paragraph. Oh wait - that's the point. There isnt. Canon is silent on this entirely

Page 32 of Codex: Daemon Hunters wrote:It is a rare thing indeed for a Grey Knight to be consigned to the living tomb of a Dreadnought at the end of his services to the Emperor - they hope only to rest in the cool cark of Titan for all eternity. However, a few are sorely enough that to continue in the Emperor's path as a man is impossible and they accept the necessity of pursuing it as a man-machine instead.

So the basis for your entire argument is wrong, and mine is right. Do you want me to cover everything else you wrote?

You prove my point exactly. A DKoK Air Cav army isn't fluffy, so you'd need backstory to explain why it exists if you wanted to call it fluffy. My CSM army has (literally) scores of pages of fluff on why I field Noise Marines with Plague Marines and have a hard-on for Daemons. Neither of our armies are inherently fluffy; we have to bend the fluff or write our own.

A player who wanted to play the Grey Knights because he enjoys their fluff would not go about writing his own backstory. By definition, he plays because he wants the backstory that already exists.

I must respectfully still disagree with your overall premis. I enjoy the background but that in no way makes my list unfluffy in my head since I came up with background stories for them. In terms of krieg air force, they do have that blurb on IG codex page 40 which makes this entirely possible.

I have a feeling we are using the word "fluff" differently in this argument. I believe that you are using it to mean cannon only. Please feel free to correct me if I am mistaken as I am essentially guessing your intent here.

I am using fluff to mean "it's cool if you can come up with a scenario for it that fits" even better if there is some precident though not entirely mainstream.

Legality is not in debate here. You can technically make a fully fluff list that breaks the FOC like having 20 earthshakers for a krieg list but I'm sure that was not your intent during this thread.

I'm using fluff exclusively to refer to cannon. I get what you're saying and don't mean to call your army invalid. DKoK make Air Cav regiments like everyone else. However, a player who was really intent on playing DKoK for their fluff wouldn't run an air fleet. There are obviously other factors to building an army though (I thought about a DKoK air list at some point myself, because the hierarchy of the army was cool).

Theduke07 wrote:Orks are an awful codex. Has nothing to to with GK being good.

I agree. It is pretty balanced, but for an army with a high level of popularity like it has I would have thought that it would be a hair more competitive than it is. I almost think that the current fluff plays up their chaotic silliness a little too much and as a result people don't take them seriously. In fact, they are probably the most fun race to pick on in the game.

They are seriously out gunned and need some more low AP weapon options.

Well, more variety in our low AP weapons would certainly be nice. We have no Lance, no Melta, no Plasma. But we can put at least 1 Kustom Mega Blasta or Rokkit in every single unit we can take (except Grots. Dey'z too weedy.) and spam Powerfists like nobody's business.

Still, would be nice to have some low-AP Blasts or Templates, aside from Killkannons, Boomguns and SAGs.

I will say I just started GK army. Most of my ultra marines were stolen in a house break in. They were in a rifle case and I guess the guy thought they were a rifle. I had always liked the idea of playing a demon hunting army, with paldins. I'm a d and d geek and loved the paladin class the most in that game. I loved the models because I love the idea of power weapons. I'm the guy that made thirty honor guard to roll with Calgar. Had to model and look for ways to make ultramarines have power swords. But I like them. I like storm bolters more than anything. Wrist mounted storm bolters to me are just too kool for school. I don't have psifleman dreds. I don't use warp quake units. I don't play draigowing. I play purifiers and henchmen. I like jokearo. Many if the issues people have with the codex, I don't even use. Seems to me many of the gripes here and on the other GK hate threads are assuming that everyone that plays them are power gaming rule exploiters. And I find that kinda demeaning. Why do I play GK? Personal taste. And I'm sorry but you can't be the arbiter of who I am by pre judging me or others. I'm a grey knight. I hate demons. I don't like evil armies and would never play one. Do I harp on demon players? No, I'm glad they play what they want. I hope they have as much fun as I do modelling and painting, coming up with new lists and fantasizing about there next game. For that is what its supposed to be..fun. or I wouldn't put the hundreds of dollars into it, nor would I spend weeks on end modelling and painting. It's fun. I play GK because they are fun.

I'm sure there's good players out there who do well with GK. I just haven't seen it.

I've played against 4 different GK players, 1 of them is a very very strong CM player that rarely, if ever, loses with his Chaos forces.

Never lost against them, not even worried... just running stock UM against them.

Ways I've killed Dreadknights (some of these more than once)

Took apart with Cato
a BP/CS scout squad (with a PF sarg)
sniper scout squad target practice
tactical squad in CC (another PF sarg)
shot them to bits with Sternguard bolter rounds
Melta-guard DP in the back
Melta bike squad

Never had one take more than 200 points out of my force, most of them barely got 100.

Diverse Paladins to avoid wound allocation, well even Honour Guard (the overlooked, bypassed beauties of over costed) walk over them in CC at similar points

On GK as a whole

They cost more than marines, yet die just as easy. Heck, two of those Tau wins in my sig were against GK players.

Sorry guys, I just don't see it.

I agree lobukia. Just like any other codex . Depends on player and who he is playing. To be honest, I think sternguard are one of the best units in game. And I always win with melta attack bikes. I have 9 of them...six put together so far. I made a GK force and I'm still re making stuff to replace my ultra marine army. I think that is proof enough that GK are not op, especially if I a GK player, still feels more confident with my playing ability with ultramarines.

I guess I dont see the invalidating armies.. I mean GK struggle vs hordes if they build for tourneies in most cases. Issues now they will run into vs one army people say they invalidated, Nids. If the nid player spams SitW it is very difficult for GK to hurt monstrous stuff. You say they shoot well tervigon gives them fnp. you say kill tervigon. Well they have 2 so you need to try to do 12 wounds while the trygon is getting ever closer.

I mean most squads of even purifers are around 5-7 maybe 10(which onlly 2 can shoot if moved). So 2 trygons, 2 tervigon, swarmlord with 2 guard, and possibly something like Doom drop podding in covering the board with SotW. Its a tough go without your powers. At that pt your just over priced marines maybe doing A wound while his monsters eat you.

Lobukia wrote:
Diverse Paladins to avoid wound allocation, well even Honour Guard (the overlooked, bypassed beauties of over costed) walk over them in CC at similar points

The no-invul-strike-after-the-Paladins Honour Guard "walk over them in CC"?

Let's assume that it's 7 Honor Guard vs. 5 Paladins (slight cost advantage for the Honor Guards). Let's also assume that no one has been shot anywhere, and that no one's charging.


4 Paladins hit first with Halberds. Hammerhand goes off. 8 WS5 attacks, 5.333... hits, 3.555... wounds, rounded to 4. 3 remaining Honour Guard strike back, 9 attacks. 4.5 hits, 2.25 wounds, 1.5 rounded to 2 wounds after invulns. Daemonhammer strikes, 2 attacks, 1.333... hits, 1.111 wound, rounded to 1. 1 Honour Guard dies.

Final tally: 1 Dead Paladin versus 5 dead Honour Guard. Honour Guard gets walked over by Paladins.

I played Daemonhunters so when the new codex came out, I got that. And it will be the same with Dark Angels - I play Deathwing and when DA get a new codex, I'll buy it and play the new rules for them whether they are better or worse.

DarkHound wrote: When you look at the Codex Astartes, you'll see that a single active Company has 4 Dreadnoughts at most.

Interesting, but not at all relevant to the Grey Knights.

Assuming that the Grey Knights have even half that

That would be a baseless assumption.

they would need to commit the resources of 200 Marines to bring 3 or 4 Dreadnoughts.

Commit them where? Why can't the table-top battle simply be representative of the part of the engagement featuring the Dreadnoughts? Why must all forces imagined as part of the battle-group be present on the table? And who says a Marine commander could only take one dreadnought for every fifty tactical marines he takes? Surely tactical necessity and availability of specialist troops trumps any kind of traditional ratios? And how is ANY of that relevant to what the Grey Knights would do?

You're looking at a 4-5000 point army to realistically have 3 Venerable Dreadnoughts.

So yes, an army consisting of 20 Purifiers and 3 Dreadnoughts is unfluffy.

The conclusions youve drawn have no connection to the background. Sorry, son.

The quote you've posted only states that it's rare. And of course it is.

But is it MORE rare than ANY astartes becoming a Dreadnought? No. It certainly doesn't say that.

And no, it certainly doesn't imply that a Grey Kight would rather die than continue to fight as a Dreadnought.

DarkHound wrote: When you look at the Codex Astartes, you'll see that a single active Company has 4 Dreadnoughts at most.

Considering the Ultramarines 9th has 7 dreadnoughts, and are the priciple.upholders of the codex astartes, what you have said is false.

Draiowing doesnt scare me. I've been a necron player since the pewter warriors were around and have now done a full circle. Now they are more versatile and have potential to win tournaments. I'll play any other new dex even when necrons are back to lower tier again because I used to love driving opponents crazy with te wbb res orb mobs. Now I can drive them crazy and make gk players cry especially draigowing

DarkHound wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:So your contention is they have less candidates? Prove it.

Book, page and paragraph. Oh wait - that's the point. There isnt. Canon is silent on this entirely

Page 32 of Codex: Daemon Hunters wrote:It is a rare thing indeed for a Grey Knight to be consigned to the living tomb of a Dreadnought at the end of his services to the Emperor - they hope only to rest in the cool cark of Titan for all eternity. However, a few are sorely enough that to continue in the Emperor's path as a man is impossible and they accept the necessity of pursuing it as a man-machine instead.

So the basis for your entire argument is wrong, and mine is right. Do you want me to cover everything else you wrote?

The king of leaping to wrong conclusions strikes again!

I asked you to prove they were *more* rare, to support your pulled-out-of-thin-air contention that GK have half the dreadnoughts of a normal SM force.

Given the above quote doesnt prove what you think it does, I'd love for you to address the rest - it should be interesting, to say the least.

Also - it wasnt even "the" basis for my argument, but A basis. As in, even if you can prove (which you cant) that GK only have 2 per 100, this doesnt account for the situation where your 1500 arent the whole battle...as people have been saying all along.

GKs don't like being put in dreadnoughts 'cos they're dirty cowards who prefer to slumber in Titan's tombs. Apparently they have to give their consent before being interred in a Dread:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Grey_Knights_Dreadnought#.Ty68Blx7oWk

Henners91 wrote:GKs don't like being put in dreadnoughts 'cos they're dirty cowards who prefer to slumber in Titan's tombs. Apparently they have to give their consent before being interred in a Dread:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Grey_Knights_Dreadnought#.Ty68Blx7oWk

As does any other Space Marine. Your point is?

So let me get this straight. The Grey Knights have motive for having less Dreadnoughts. The Grey Knights say that their Dreadnoughts are very rare. You want it to say "they are more rare than other chapters." If you go look, no other codex refers to their Dreadnoughts as "rare." That older codex worked in conjunction with the other books, a Daemon Hunters player would be aware of precedent set by Codex: Space Marine. If the first book doesn't say Dreadnoughts are uncommon, and this one calls them rare, they must be more rare than the first one.

My logistics regarding the saturation of Dreadnoughts was an educated guess. We can know the maximum capacity of human supply by how well equipped the Space Marines are. Grey Knights are great and all, but why would the Imperium hold out on their front-line elites just to make their smallest body better in only comparison? The Grey Knights have access to better technology against daemons, but the ability to produce Dreadnoughts is not something exclusive to them.

Deadshot wrote:

DarkHound wrote: When you look at the Codex Astartes, you'll see that a single active Company has 4 Dreadnoughts at most.

Considering the Ultramarines 9th has 7 dreadnoughts, and are the priciple.upholders of the codex astartes, what you have said is false.

You'll notice the 9th company is a reserve company. not an active one. The 9th is the first graduation of the Scout company, and so they're called to smaller conflicts closer to home. They have access to more Dreadnoughts because they're closest to the armoury. And besides, you'll notice other companies have proportionally less Dreadnoughts.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Henners91 wrote:GKs don't like being put in dreadnoughts 'cos they're dirty cowards who prefer to slumber in Titan's tombs. Apparently they have to give their consent before being interred in a Dread:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Grey_Knights_Dreadnought#.Ty68Blx7oWk

As does any other Space Marine. Your point is?

'My point is', Rudey McRude, that generally Dreadnoughts are honoured heroes who continue to fight in the Emprah's name. I understand that they're not 'woken up' quite as much so that they might slumber... I read somewhere about them 'deserving' 'some' rest, but it's unique to the GKs to actually have Marines with the attitude 'I would rather die' than be a Dreadnought.

I apologise utterly that you did not understand my point in this heated debate about our precious 'plastic spayss mahns'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I've also never heard of consent being required in other chapters...

Henners91 wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Henners91 wrote:GKs don't like being put in dreadnoughts 'cos they're dirty cowards who prefer to slumber in Titan's tombs. Apparently they have to give their consent before being interred in a Dread:

http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Grey_Knights_Dreadnought#.Ty68Blx7oWk

As does any other Space Marine. Your point is?

'My point is', Rudey McRude, that generally Dreadnoughts are honoured heroes who continue to fight in the Emprah's name. I understand that they're not 'woken up' quite as much so that they might slumber... I read somewhere about them 'deserving' 'some' rest, but it's unique to the GKs to actually have Marines with the attitude 'I would rather die' than be a Dreadnought.

How about we tone down the hostility a notch? You can feel free to hit ThisShouldn'tBeHere for ten minutes or so, we'll still be waiting. Great way to expel the angst, that.

No, really, what's your point? Not wanting do be placed in a dreadnought doesn't equate to not accepting that it's your fate should you become severely wounded.

Besides, you might want to remove the reference to non-family friendly web pages. Or you might not. I'm not going to stop expressing my opinion anyway.

Henners91 wrote:I've also never heard of consent being required in other chapters...

Life is on a strict consensual-only basis. If the marine objected I doubt his brothers would Dreadnoughtify him.

Darkhound - would that be why every single one of the GK doesnt have a SB and power weapon then. Oh wait, they do. They get better equipment by default.

Apparently that extends to everything BUT getting more dreadnoughts, if they needed them, in your world.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Darkhound - would that be why every single one of the GK doesnt have a SB and power weapon then. Oh wait, they do. They get better equipment by default.

Apparently that extends to everything BUT getting more dreadnoughts, if they needed them, in your world.

They aren't equipped with a Power Weapon. They are equipped with Nemesis Force Weapons, designed specifically to kill daemons. The fact that they have Storm Bolters has more to do with how they are deployed than how advanced the equipment is. Storm Bolters provide mobility in close quarters over a standard Bolter. You'll notice that Space Marine chapters can also deploy shock troops equipped with Storm Bolters through Sternguard, Command Squads, and Honor Guard. However, Codex Space Marines are expected to face a larger variety of opponents so aren't restricted to the more expensive Storm Bolter by default. (Expense in this case justified by the logistics of bringing more ammunition; the Storm Bolter is only effective by sheer volume of fire.)

EDIT: Let me keep clarifying, since I have a feeling I'll need it. Storm Bolters would not be a good choice for an Imperial Fist force in a seige because they'd run through ammunition faster. The weapon is not automatically superior.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Life is on a strict consensual-only basis. If the marine objected I doubt his brothers would Dreadnoughtify him.

If a.marine is in a position to be interred he.isn't in a position to debate.it. If he ibjects later they may remove him dependent on things like current engagements and campaigns.

With the Grey Knights, there is no debate. They will let them slumber untill they are desperately need. They don't run crying for Brother Pius everytime Skarbramd raises his eyelids. If they have need of Dreadnoughts, they will have dreadnoughts. I have said it before and will say it again. No amount of personal discomfort gets in the way of the Mission.

They certainly DO NOT have a shortage of chassis. Not only do they have their own Forge World, but being next to Mars they can get gear directly from its source should the Steel Forge be insufficient.

Wow, GK are "dirty cowards" now? LOL. And I guess that's considered constructive criticism on here. Pretty hilarious actually. The fact that so many are upset about GK codex just doesn't seem justified to me. But hey to each there own.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Lobukia wrote:
Diverse Paladins to avoid wound allocation, well even Honour Guard (the overlooked, bypassed beauties of over costed) walk over them in CC at similar points

The no-invul-strike-after-the-Paladins Honour Guard "walk over them in CC"?

Let's assume that it's 7 Honor Guard vs. 5 Paladins (slight cost advantage for the Honor Guards). Let's also assume that no one has been shot anywhere, and that no one's charging.


4 Paladins hit first with Halberds. Hammerhand goes off. 8 WS5 attacks, 5.333... hits, 3.555... wounds, rounded to 4. 3 remaining Honour Guard strike back, 9 attacks. 4.5 hits, 2.25 wounds, 1.5 rounded to 2 wounds after invulns. Daemonhammer strikes, 2 attacks, 1.333... hits, 1.111 wound, rounded to 1. 1 Honour Guard dies.

Final tally: 1 Dead Paladin versus 5 dead Honour Guard. Honour Guard gets walked over by Paladins.

Around here, people mix up the weaponry on their Paladins, almost always use an Apothecary and a Banner, and usually 1 DHammer... if you see my post, I'm talking about diverse Paladins to play the wound allocation game.

Squad of 5, comes in at 430... while a fairly maxed out HG squad of 10 with a champion and a banner is at 430

Now I should have said "can walk all over", granted... but charging HG squad losses aren't so bad. I usually see on Apoth Banner and at least 1 Daemon Hammer or Warding Stave in a squad, so at worst/best that's 6 Halberd attacks... 3 of which hit, 2 of which wound (-2 HG). Then 5 HG with PS get 25 attacks, 2 with RB get 8 attacks, and the Champ gets 6 attacks... that's 12 PS hits, 4 RB hits, and the champ gets 4 PS hits... for 8 PS and 2 RB hits... 10 saves which yields 6 wounds (1 dead Paladin, probably Apoth in this scenario, and the rest hurting)... DH kills one HG in return, and we go to second round, 7 HG vs 4 Paladins. 3 Halberds kill 2 HG (say RBs this time), 5 HG +Champ, through out 25 attacks, with 12 hits, 6 saves, 4 wounds, game over...

Even giving the DH its kill, that's 4 Honour Guard and a Champ left standing (IF the HG charged)... with me rounding more often to Paladins' favor than not, and assuming that no shots on the charge had any affect and that DW for the champ always missed... so as I SHOULD have said, even HG can walk over Paladins

Darkhound - I guess you should refresh your memory on what a Nemesis Force Weapon is. Hint, the words "power weapon" appear in the rules.

Are you seriously trying to claim that GK, who have their own "FW" AND are sited pretty damn close to Mars, DONT have the best equipment? And can get pretty much anything they want, anytime?

Gosh you get funnier...

Lobuukla - erm, WS5 vs WS4, so 4 hit. Rarely see apoths, certainly not on 5 paladins - waste of points. You may see a bro-banner, at which point those are up to 6 hits. 4 dead HG

nosferatu1001 wrote:Darkhound - I guess you should refresh your memory on what a Nemesis Force Weapon is. Hint, the words "power weapon" appear in the rules.

Are you seriously trying to claim that GK, who have their own "FW" AND are sited pretty damn close to Mars, DONT have the best equipment? And can get pretty much anything they want, anytime?

Gosh you get funnier...

So the rules perfectly represent the fluff when you want them to now? Nemesis Force Weapons share few fluff similarities to a standard Power Sword. But I'll just borrow a page from your book: cite me a page that says that Grey Knights always have better equipment. I'll just put the burden of proof on you. Anything short of a real page and you're just misconstruing tangential evidence.

Oh gosh....

Right - I've not said that rules DONT perfectly represent fluff. Again you are making things up. Dont. It makes things a lot simpler.

I also dont need to prove they always have better equipment - i am proving that YOUR assertion, that they DONT have access to as much 'nought gear, is false because you have no supporting evidence.

You seem to have made a critical failure in your understanding here - you have made a number of claims, which I have disproven. Repeatedly. My claims are neutral (that it is no more or less fluffy to field 3 GK 'noughts at 1500 than it is to field 3 SM ones, etc) and so are the default position. H0, to borrow from the scientific method.

So by disproving your claims I have shown there is insufficient evidence to move away from H0.

So, if you want to continue with your rage, YOU are the one required to show proof. Actual proof would be useful, as opposed to something you simply made up / came up with based on an invalid logical leap.

or not. I dont really care what YOU think is fluffy - because the games designers, who rank SLIGHTLY higher in my opinion than you do, have already told us what is fluffy.

You've never refuted my claims. You've never provided evidence to the contrary. What you have done is ask for proof. Let's even ignore my projections of deployment. Let's talk exclusively about what the book says. You still haven't answered my point: "That older codex worked in conjunction with the other books, a Daemon Hunters player would be aware of precedent set by Codex: Space Marine. If the first book doesn't say Dreadnoughts are uncommon, and this one calls them rare, they must be more rare than the first one."

It has never been a question of having the chassis. It is a question of having willing candidates. Grey Knights would rather die, for reasons you cannot refute, than be entombed in a Dreadnought. The book itself calls the Dreadnoughts rare because of the same reason.

What more evidence do you want than the codex saying Grey Knights rarely field Dreadnoughts?