Cladmir wrote:

odorofdeath wrote:Honestly the more I peek, the more overwhelmed I get. So many options, nearly all of them viable. It makes a Chaos and Tyranid player weep.

Are you talking about GK or SW or DE?

Or SM, or IG, or BA, or Necrons...

I don't know if this will change anyones mind but here's a small 750pts army list comparison. Decent SM list for small games.

HQ
Captain - Bolt Pistol, Chainsword, Power Armour

Elites
Dreadnought - 2x Twin-Linked Autocannon
Dreadnought - 2x Twin-Linked Autocannon

Troops
Tactical Squad - Plasma Gun, 4x Space Marine, Space Marine Sergeant - Bolt Pistol, Power Fist
-Razorback - Twin-Linked Assault Cannon
Tactical Squad - Plasma Gun, 4x Space Marine, Space Marine Sergeant - Bolt Pistol, Power Fist
-Razorback - Twin-Linked Assault Cannon

And common GK variant at this pts level:

HQ
Ordo Hereticus Inquisitor - Frag, Krak and Psyk-out Grenades, Power Armour, Incinirator

Troops
Grey Knight Strike Squad - Hammerhand, Psycannon, 3x Storm Bolter, Nemesis Force Halberd, 2x Nemesis Force Sword, Warp Quake
-Justicar - Nemesis Force Daemonhammer, Storm Bolter
-Razorback - Dozer Blade, Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, Twin Linked Assault Cannon
Grey Knight Strike Squad - Hammerhand, Psycannon, 3x Storm Bolter, Nemesis Force Halberd, 2x Nemesis Force Sword, Warp Quake
-Justicar - Nemesis Force Daemonhammer, Storm Bolter
-Razorback - Dozer Blade, Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, Twin Linked Assault Cannon

Heavy Support
Dreadnought - Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, 2x Twin Linked Autocannon
Dreadnought - Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, 2x Twin Linked Autocannon

Not sure if this is full 750pts, but I'm sure everyone can see my point. And that's all I have to say about this topic.

Thunder555 wrote:I don't know if this will change anyones mind but here's a small 750pts army list comparison. Decent SM list for small games.

HQ
Captain - Bolt Pistol, Chainsword, Power Armour

Elites
Dreadnought - 2x Twin-Linked Autocannon
Dreadnought - 2x Twin-Linked Autocannon

Troops
Tactical Squad - Plasma Gun, 4x Space Marine, Space Marine Sergeant - Bolt Pistol, Power Fist
-Razorback - Twin-Linked Assault Cannon
Tactical Squad - Plasma Gun, 4x Space Marine, Space Marine Sergeant - Bolt Pistol, Power Fist
-Razorback - Twin-Linked Assault Cannon

And common GK variant at this pts level:

HQ
Ordo Hereticus Inquisitor - Frag, Krak and Psyk-out Grenades, Power Armour, Incinirator

Troops
Grey Knight Strike Squad - Hammerhand, Psycannon, 3x Storm Bolter, Nemesis Force Halberd, 2x Nemesis Force Sword, Warp Quake
-Justicar - Nemesis Force Daemonhammer, Storm Bolter
-Razorback - Dozer Blade, Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, Twin Linked Assault Cannon
Grey Knight Strike Squad - Hammerhand, Psycannon, 3x Storm Bolter, Nemesis Force Halberd, 2x Nemesis Force Sword, Warp Quake
-Justicar - Nemesis Force Daemonhammer, Storm Bolter
-Razorback - Dozer Blade, Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, Twin Linked Assault Cannon

Heavy Support
Dreadnought - Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, 2x Twin Linked Autocannon
Dreadnought - Fortitude, Psybolt Ammunition, 2x Twin Linked Autocannon

Not sure if this is full 750pts, but I'm sure everyone can see my point. And that's all I have to say about this topic.

Is your point "Look, the Vanilla SM book can't build a GK-List as well as the GK book!"

1) 750 points isn't a format played in event, none that I can think of
2) You clearly built a GK's list, who's choices are based around the fact that GK's get certain things at a cheaper price/have access to different upgrades, and then just built a SM list the exact same way, even though it wouldn't have access to those upgrades.

Strawmans are bad, mkay?

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cladmir wrote:

odorofdeath wrote:Honestly the more I peek, the more overwhelmed I get. So many options, nearly all of them viable. It makes a Chaos and Tyranid player weep.

Are you talking about GK or SW or DE?

How did DE get in there?

Periodically there seems to be a new thread that goes like, "Tyranids need help against DE!!!".

Mass poison shot + mass lance ---> sad tyranids seems to be major point.

And the lack of sufficient AT to take down the sail boats

Why would you take a Captain instead of a Librarian at that points value?

And no melta guns?

Monster Rain wrote:Why would you take a Captain instead of a Librarian at that points value?

And no melta guns?

Indeed, he built a medicore GK's list at a specifically unusual points level, then mirrored it with a SM list as a "see, GK are op!"

The SM list is intentionally bad. If you were doing a real one, you'd not try and build around multiple options that are really only decent in the GK book due to psybolts (razorbacks with a-cannons, dakka dreads, looking at you), and you'd instead capitalize on the things the SM have and GK don't.

Cladmir wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cladmir wrote:

odorofdeath wrote:Honestly the more I peek, the more overwhelmed I get. So many options, nearly all of them viable. It makes a Chaos and Tyranid player weep.

Are you talking about GK or SW or DE?

How did DE get in there?

Periodically there seems to be a new thread that goes like, "Tyranids need help against DE!!!".

Mass poison shot + mass lance ---> sad tyranids seems to be major point.

And the lack of sufficient AT to take down the sail boats

Yes, but he was commenting about numerous viable options. Not inherent odds in matchups between armies.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cladmir wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Cladmir wrote:

odorofdeath wrote:Honestly the more I peek, the more overwhelmed I get. So many options, nearly all of them viable. It makes a Chaos and Tyranid player weep.

Are you talking about GK or SW or DE?

How did DE get in there?

Periodically there seems to be a new thread that goes like, "Tyranids need help against DE!!!".

Mass poison shot + mass lance ---> sad tyranids seems to be major point.

And the lack of sufficient AT to take down the sail boats

Yes, but he was commenting about numerous viable options. Not inherent odds in matchups between armies.

I thought the general consensus was that because Ward did not authored the DE codex, the DE army is a wonderfully balanced army with many viable builds and options and not filled with cheap power builds.

And yes, I did misunderstand his comment at first... my bad!

Cladmir wrote:I thought the general consensus was that because Ward did not authored the DE codex, the DE army is a wonderfully balanced army with many viable builds and options and not filled with cheap power builds.

There is so much 'awesome' in this sentence that it cannot go uncommented on.

The DE Codex is pretty solid though.

Thunder555 wrote:I don't know if this will change anyones mind but here's a small 750pts army list comparison. Decent SM list for small games.

-snip-

Not sure if this is full 750pts, but I'm sure everyone can see my point. And that's all I have to say about this topic.

Your SM list seemed terrible, and I'm underwhelmed by your GK list. Why did you pick 750 points? Many armies are under/over/whatever-powered at such a tiny point value. Come back with a serious Vulkan list and a solid GK list at, like, 1500 points. Even then, I'm not sure what this proves.

daedalus wrote:. Even then, I'm not sure what this proves.

That we all have far too much free time on our hands?

pretre wrote:

Cladmir wrote:I thought the general consensus was that because Ward did not authored the DE codex, the DE army is a wonderfully balanced army with many viable builds and options and not filled with cheap power builds.

There is so much 'awesome' in this sentence that it cannot go uncommented on.

The DE Codex is pretty solid though.

Which is why you see courts, those bird dues, mandrakes, incubi, talos', chronos', grotesques, and harlequins so very often.

Monster Rain wrote:

daedalus wrote:. Even then, I'm not sure what this proves.

That we all have far too much free time on our hands?

Oooh, yeah. That one. :(

Even with minor changes, and besides the fact that the SM list is illegal from C:SM, this SM list is a much better TAC. And would be exceptionally better against that GK list.

Librarian 100 w/powers to taste

Tac squad with combi-melta, melta, plasma cannon, Rhino 225
Tac squad with combi-melta Razorback w/Las/plas 175

2x rifleman Dread 250




Automatically Appended Next Post:
750 points is the most OP point range this thread has produced in a decade.

Dok wrote:Even with minor changes, and besides the fact that the SM list is illegal from C:SM, this SM list is a much better TAC. And would be exceptionally better against that GK list.

Librarian 100 w/powers to taste

Tac squad with combi-melta, melta, plasma cannon, Rhino 225
Tac squad with combi-melta Razorback w/Las/plas 175

2x rifleman Dread 250

Don't worry, that GK list was technically illegal as well (Ordo Herectus inquisitors can't take incinerators, it would have to be an Ordo Xenos)

Good call.

Dok wrote:750 points is the most OP point range this thread has produced in a decade.

What's worse is that at point level, SoB are super OP.
Celestine - 115
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
Dominion w/2 Flamer, 1 Combi, Rhino- 125
Exo - 135

Oh wait, that's just Celestine.

Celestine would be incredibly obnoxious in a game of 1k. lol 5-6 attacks, good movement, that always gets up, etc. :/

Mephiston can be quite a handful at these lower point values as well.

750 Points:

Mephiston
1 Sanguinary Priest
...

Whatever else you feel like. It doesn't really matter.

Yeah, below 1500 is just a crap shoot. We really shouldn't discuss it.

pretre wrote:

Dok wrote:750 points is the most OP point range this thread has produced in a decade.

What's worse is that at point level, SoB are super OP.
Celestine - 115
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
Dominion w/2 Flamer, 1 Combi, Rhino- 125
Exo - 135

Oh wait, that's just Celestine.

Orks are even worse, you can fit roughly mek + 3x30 shoots boyz with PK nobs in 750

Find me many 750 point armies that can deal with 90 models..

targetawg wrote:

pretre wrote:

Dok wrote:750 points is the most OP point range this thread has produced in a decade.

What's worse is that at point level, SoB are super OP.
Celestine - 115
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
Dominion w/2 Flamer, 1 Combi, Rhino- 125
Exo - 135

Oh wait, that's just Celestine.

Orks are even worse, you can fit roughly mek + 3x30 shoots boyz with PK nobs in 750

Find me many 750 point armies that can deal with 90 models..

Two purifier squads!

targetawg wrote:Find me many 750 point armies that can deal with 90 models..

I nearly tabled a Warboss and as many boyz as would fit in a 500 point game a couple of weeks ago.

Tesla Destructor is a hell of a gun.

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

pretre wrote:

Dok wrote:750 points is the most OP point range this thread has produced in a decade.

What's worse is that at point level, SoB are super OP.
Celestine - 115
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
Dominion w/2 Flamer, 1 Combi, Rhino- 125
Exo - 135

Oh wait, that's just Celestine.

Orks are even worse, you can fit roughly mek + 3x30 shoots boyz with PK nobs in 750

Find me many 750 point armies that can deal with 90 models..

Two purifier squads!

No in that case 1 Purifier squads dies to 180 shots, then 1 Ork boyz squad go down in assault. The other 2 Ork Boyz squad shot the other Purifer squad to hell with 120 shots. AV has a better chance at that point level.

Hey guys, can we get back to OP GK's. Take this to the whole 'this squad can beat that squad thread'.

Noir wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

pretre wrote:

Dok wrote:750 points is the most OP point range this thread has produced in a decade.

What's worse is that at point level, SoB are super OP.
Celestine - 115
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
BSS in Rhino, 2 Melta - 180
Dominion w/2 Flamer, 1 Combi, Rhino- 125
Exo - 135

Oh wait, that's just Celestine.

Orks are even worse, you can fit roughly mek + 3x30 shoots boyz with PK nobs in 750

Find me many 750 point armies that can deal with 90 models..

Two purifier squads!

No in that case 1 Purifier squads dies to 180 shots, then 1 Ork boyz squad go down in assault. The other 2 Ork Boyz squad shot the other Purifer squad to hell with 120 shots. AV has a better chance at that point level.

You're right, I had assumed slugga boyz for some reason.

ShumaGorath wrote:
Two purifier squads!

They're shoota boyz. If you're getting into assault with purifiers, than you've done something wrong.

10 purifiers shooting into 30 boyz

Assuming the boyz are out of cover, you have 4 storm bolter wounds, and 4.4 psycannon wounds (because the purifiers had to move).

21 boyz return fire. 2.4 unsaved wounds.

So, 26% of a boyz squad dies first turn of shooting, while 24% of the purifiers squad dies. Looks (slighly) bad for the orks, except for the fact that they SHOULD be in cover, and there are 3 squads of boyz as opposed to only two squads of purifiers, not to mention a nob who can absorb a wound and a warboss who can absorb a couple.

I think the orks would win a shooting war, or at least give a good stand.

pretre wrote:Hey guys, can we get back to OP GK's. Take this to the whole 'this squad can beat that squad thread'.

I loathe that thread. Don't send me there.

daedalus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
Two purifier squads!

They're shoota boyz. If you're getting into assault with purifiers, than you've done something wrong.

10 purifiers shooting into 30 boyz

Assuming the boyz are out of cover, you have 4 storm bolter wounds, and 4.4 psycannon wounds (because the purifiers had to move).

21 boyz return fire. 2.4 unsaved wounds.

So, 26% of a boyz squad dies first turn of shooting, while 24% of the purifiers squad dies. Looks (slighly) bad for the orks, except for the fact that they SHOULD be in cover, and there are 3 squads of boyz as opposed to only two squads of purifiers, not to mention a nob who can absorb a wound and a warboss who can absorb a couple.

I think the orks would win a shooting war, or at least give a good stand.

We already covered this.

targetawg wrote:

pretre wrote:Hey guys, can we get back to OP GK's. Take this to the whole 'this squad can beat that squad thread'.

I loathe that thread. Don't send me there.

So now you understand why I don't want it to happen here.

ShumaGorath wrote:

daedalus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:
Two purifier squads!

They're shoota boyz. If you're getting into assault with purifiers, than you've done something wrong.

10 purifiers shooting into 30 boyz

Assuming the boyz are out of cover, you have 4 storm bolter wounds, and 4.4 psycannon wounds (because the purifiers had to move).

21 boyz return fire. 2.4 unsaved wounds.

So, 26% of a boyz squad dies first turn of shooting, while 24% of the purifiers squad dies. Looks (slighly) bad for the orks, except for the fact that they SHOULD be in cover, and there are 3 squads of boyz as opposed to only two squads of purifiers, not to mention a nob who can absorb a wound and a warboss who can absorb a couple.

I think the orks would win a shooting war, or at least give a good stand.

We already covered this.

Oh, I saw after the fact. I was busy checking my math and got ninja'd.

pretre wrote:

targetawg wrote:

pretre wrote:Hey guys, can we get back to OP GK's. Take this to the whole 'this squad can beat that squad thread'.

I loathe that thread. Don't send me there.

So now you understand why I don't want it to happen here.

It's been happening here for 50 pages and you've contributed to that significantly.

Well they are the Inquisition's lap-dogs, what would you expect.

Khorne's Herald wrote:Well they are the Inquisition's lap-dogs, what would you expect.

So you're saying that the GK are OP because of their association with the Inquisition (fluff considerations) and nothing to do with their actual codex?

<next OT post or personal attack I have to delete gets the winner a vacation from Dakka; I'm tired of it.>

pretre wrote:

Khorne's Herald wrote:Well they are the Inquisition's lap-dogs, what would you expect.

So you're saying that the GK are OP because of their association with the Inquisition (fluff considerations) and nothing to do with their actual codex?

I don't think that they're that overpowered, but I do think they could have toned it down a little bit with the wargear options. I didn't try to sound mean or anything, I was just joking. But if you think about it, the Grey Knights main purpose is to wipe out deamons of various sorts. So it makes since that the Inquisition would give them stronger wargear.

Khorne's Herald wrote:But if you think about it, the Grey Knights main purpose is to wipe out deamons of various sorts. So it makes since that the Inquisition would give them stronger wargear.

See the problem with this particular line of reasoning is that is supposes that Daemons are the greatest threat to the Imperium (as seen by the Inquisition). It is also important to note that Daemons are not the only concern that the Inqusition has (and probably not even the greatest), just the one that GKs are the best at fighting.

Keeping in mind that the Inquisition is not made up of one opinion on the matter and that the Inquisition did not originally create the GKs, it gets a little hard to support that particular approach.

The GK are well equipped because of their history. It just so happens that that history intertwines with that of the Inquisition.

Thanks for clarifying!

pretre wrote:It is also important to note that Daemons are not the only concern that the Inqusition has (and probably not even the greatest), just the one that GKs are the best at fighting.

Random crazy fluff note-- the GKs actually aren't the Imperium's best forces against Dæmons! The best force against Dæmons is the Exorcists Chapter, who are all possessed by Dæmons and then freed as part of their training and become completely invisible to Dæmons as a result. Note that the Exorcists may or may not be a Successor Chapter of the Grey Knights.

That is actually not totally determined, the Excorcists achieved a kill ratio of 97 to 1 by being invisible to the daemons they were fighting, but Grey Knights might well have a kill ratio of even greater.

One thing I think is kinda funny is the gk before the new dex were fairly good at killing most other codexes stuff in assault. They just didnt have enough to quite be a stand alone. Using them before as allies they got a lt of raised eye brows because how good they were at shredding stuff.

I just think its one in a line of new generation dex's that people will just have to bare with until there codex in turn is updated. Necrons are strong, DE are strong, GK are strong. doesn't anyone seem to think its just following the trend of newly released dex's vs old ones?

Sure it will upset the meta more then perhaps previous edition dex releases but I think its just a matter of dealing with it (preferably quietly) until all are updated.

well here's a good way to determin, mathematically if they are OP or no. Take the percent of of players playing GK, and the percent of tournament wins. If the Percent of tournament wins is higher it can be called in part OP if it is WAY higher it is way OP. Does anyone have this data?

I don't think the percent of player using GK is a great stratergy, being able to field a 13man 2000pt army makes them a low-budget choice for people that want to compete. It might not be because they are good per-say but that they are affordable.

Just offering that in there.

gendoikari87 wrote:well here's a good way to determin, mathematically if they are OP or no. Take the percent of of players playing GK, and the percent of tournament wins. If the Percent of tournament wins is higher it can be called in part OP if it is WAY higher it is way OP. Does anyone have this data?

We've done the competitive data thing already. GK are number 2 in the US right now behind orks and number one in UK. Australia is just crazy.

http://rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=13
Click Army Rankings

Top 5 Armies by Country:
US: Orks, GK, SW, BA, IG
UK: GK, BA, IG, SW, DE
Aus: GK, DE, Eldar, CSM, DA

If the percentage of tournament wins is greater then the number of people playing GK, then I will accept that they are OP. No army should win more times then they have been played. That's ludicrous.

pretre wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:well here's a good way to determin, mathematically if they are OP or no. Take the percent of of players playing GK, and the percent of tournament wins. If the Percent of tournament wins is higher it can be called in part OP if it is WAY higher it is way OP. Does anyone have this data?

We've done the competitive data thing already. GK are number 2 in the US right now behind orks and number one in UK. Australia is just crazy.

http://rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=13
Click Army Rankings

Top 5 Armies by Country:
US: Orks, GK, SW, BA, IG
UK: GK, BA, IG, SW, DE
Aus: GK, DE, Eldar, CSM, DA

Thats pretty interesting consider newcrons have won quite a few 1st's but not in the top 5.

I thought Orks were terrible.

I read it on the internet.

Draigo wrote:

Thats pretty interesting consider newcrons have won quite a few 1st's but not in the top 5.

Really? I thought they had been kind of missing from the tournament scene. I know there haven't been any locally.

Dok wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Thats pretty interesting consider newcrons have won quite a few 1st's but not in the top 5.

Really? I thought they had been kind of missing from the tournament scene. I know there haven't been any locally.

It was on HQ rankings. I'll see if I can find a few real quick and I can pm them.
Here is ben who had a 2nd place.
http://www.rankingshq.com/public/playerprofile.aspx?PlayerId=7484


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heres another 2nd.. Hhhmm I shoulda copy paste those 1sts.http://www.rankingshq.com/public/playerprofile.aspx?PlayerId=927


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heres a first.
http://www.rankingshq.com/public/playerprofile.aspx?PlayerId=4378

having the ability to shoot 36' str 10 ap 1 large blasts form a chimera as a psychic power? Having the ability to have 3 of them or more in an army for a super low cost?

OP'ed codex!

I should had waited for GK instead of pushing all my money into SW.

Dok wrote:If the percentage of tournament wins is greater then the number of people playing GK, then I will accept that they are OP. No army should win more times then they have been played. That's ludicrous.

Percent of people playing, not number of people. Think of it like this.

If there are 75% of the players playing Grey knights and grey knights win 65% of the tournaments, then they are under powered respective to the field. If they win 85% of tournaments then they are over powered to the field.

GK are number 2 in the US right now

In what? wins or players.

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:

Cladmir wrote:I thought the general consensus was that because Ward did not authored the DE codex, the DE army is a wonderfully balanced army with many viable builds and options and not filled with cheap power builds.

There is so much 'awesome' in this sentence that it cannot go uncommented on.

The DE Codex is pretty solid though.

Which is why you see courts, those bird dues, mandrakes, incubi, talos', chronos', grotesques, and harlequins so very often.

It's a solid book with a lot of good units. The reasons why you mostly see the same units over and over have more to do with convenience, cost, and quick learning curve to use. The scariest players I've faced using DE in the last year are Ben Mohlie and Sean Nayden. Ben's list featued the court. Sean's tournament list includes Incubi, Talos, and Harlequins. There's a good player named Hans here in the Northeast who regularly runs Grotesques.

Mannahnin wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:

Cladmir wrote:I thought the general consensus was that because Ward did not authored the DE codex, the DE army is a wonderfully balanced army with many viable builds and options and not filled with cheap power builds.

There is so much 'awesome' in this sentence that it cannot go uncommented on.

The DE Codex is pretty solid though.

Which is why you see courts, those bird dues, mandrakes, incubi, talos', chronos', grotesques, and harlequins so very often.

It's a solid book with a lot of good units. The reasons why you mostly see the same units over and over have more to do with convenience, cost, and quick learning curve to use. The scariest players I've faced using DE in the last year are Ben Mohlie and Sean Nayden. Ben's list featued the court. Sean's tournament list includes Incubi, Talos, and Harlequins. There's a good player named Hans here in the Northeast who regularly runs Grotesques.

I'll trust you on it. Those units are very under represented in my local area and typically aren't topics of conversation online. I don't attend high end tournaments very often though, so the best players probably unlock the secret karate of those units.

Kinda funny in the last tourney I was at the 2 de players had very unorthodox lists and both placed well.

One had a Vect ds, beast masters and lances. The other ran a grot wall with Urien. I talked to one of the sw guys who ran razorback/longfang spam and the vect list really shocked him.

He didnt expect elves to come in and rock him. He was under the impression everyone played venom spam etc.

A guy deep struck Vect?

Dark Eldar can grot wall?


Forgive me if I am a bit confused.

Grotesque wall. Vect dais.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and a very successful DE player here uses incubi, court and scourges in different lists. All three in one list at 'AB semis.

ph34r wrote:A guy deep struck Vect?

Dark Eldar can grot wall?


Forgive me if I am a bit confused.

Vect deathstar sorry. It was him blood brides in Vect's speacial boat that spear headed forward. I can't remember if he had a sucubus in their too or not but I do remember Vect with blood brides. DE can field a wall of grotesques out of raiders or web way with urien and smash face if they get a charge. The aberration with scissor hands gets quite a few attacks at str 7 which works really well vs light armor stuff or squads after a lance pops it open. I think its similar to the beast master stuff people have been trying.

pretre wrote:Grotesque wall. Vect dais.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and a very successful DE player here uses incubi, court and scourges in different lists. All three in one list at 'AB semis.

I love running vect he is a great force multiplier. I only throw incubi in if I have the points and I am running an assault army. I love haywire scourges. I run them any and every chance I can spare the points. 24" range 2-5 glace 6 pen weapon on any armor value? Im in!

Monster Rain wrote:

daedalus wrote:. Even then, I'm not sure what this proves.

That we all have far too much free time on our hands?

This thread sort of proves that all on it's own right?

pretre wrote:Yeah, below 1500 is just a crap shoot. We really shouldn't discuss it.

We definitely should not discuss any points levels where GK are not the most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade. The internetz, or at a minimum Dakka, would explode.

Dok wrote:If the percentage of tournament wins is greater then the number of people playing GK, then I will accept that they are OP. No army should win more times then they have been played. That's ludicrous.

The tournament evidence that has been presented does not prove anything about GK being the most OP book GW has put out in a decade. There is not a substantial back log of data from the last decade to conclusively prove which book in the last decade is the most OP.

I would like to reiterate my original post from WAY before this thread exploded into the unknown. Fantasy Daemons broke an entire game system, GK have not. Therefore the title is false.

Sasa0mg wrote:I just think its one in a line of new generation dex's that people will just have to bare with until there codex in turn is updated. Necrons are strong, DE are strong, GK are strong. doesn't anyone seem to think its just following the trend of newly released dex's vs old ones?

Sure it will upset the meta more then perhaps previous edition dex releases but I think its just a matter of dealing with it (preferably quietly) until all are updated.

A couple of things...

If that is what the trend is, that is to say, codex creep, it's both unethical and it upsets the meta, neither of which are good, and neither of which should you sit for quietly. This is not an answer to the problem of whether the GK dex is overpowered relative to other dexes that should satisfy you. It's an indication that GW are willing to upset their game's balance in order to introduce progressively more awesome units. That means two things for us as consumers. One, we'd better be prepared to shell out in order to stay on the top end of that curve if we want to actually be competitive. The other side of that is that some people get frustrated when they purchase a codex that hasn't been 5th Editionfied. The second thing is that we're going to have to realize that this hobby might never stay imbalanced, it may perhaps even become intentionally imbalanced in the long, drawn out process of updating codexes.

And then there's the simple fact that GW didn't have to release any imbalanced codexes, nor did they have to introduce codex creep. They could, and they should, simply introduce codexes that are in line with the previous edition, with new and interesting elements that are nevertheless balanced, in the same way that RTS sequels are (ideally) released, and then progressively refining and tweaking balance issues until the game is fun and competitive for everyone regardless of the race they choose and no one has to feel left out for not getting their favorite race's edition on time.

This is all assuming that there is codex creep, which is a thing I don't think has been sufficiently established.

I would like to reiterate my original post from WAY before this thread exploded into the unknown. Fantasy Daemons broke an entire game system, GK have not. Therefore the title is false.

Welcome to page 52. This post probably belonged on page 20, back when people might have maybe disagreed with you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TedNugent wrote:

This is all assuming that there is codex creep, which is a thing I don't think has been sufficiently established.

The fog is gonna have to be pretty damn thick to be able to hide the mountain of evidence for codex creep. Its a pretty sunny day though, that stuffs easy to see.

The difference between fielding the best IG and fielding the best GK is that fielding optimal IG costs a lot of money compared to GK so you don't see it so much.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

Dok wrote:Speaking of Space Marines, one of the hardest games I've played was against a C:SM Vulkan army. The only reason I won was because he was scared of bringing his LRC full of terms into LoS of my vindicaire. But if he would've brought them in to party, I certainly would've lost.

That list still has plenty of life and will hold it's own against any of the flavors of GK presented in this thread.

QFT

I used my Salamanders against GK a number of times before selling them off. I won8 of 10 games against GK with my Salamanders. GK are not overpowered or unbalanced.

Chaos 3.5? Now that was the most overpowered 40k book GW has put out in a decade. Perhaps we need to reassess how long a decade is and what books were put out in that time frame.

Also, since you only said "book GW has put out..." and not 40k book GW has put out. I would like to state that Fantasy Daemons under 7th edition Fantasy would clearly take the prize as "most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade." It isn't even questionable.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I would like to reiterate my original post from WAY before this thread exploded into the unknown. Fantasy Daemons broke an entire game system, GK have not. Therefore the title is false.

Welcome to page 52. This post probably belonged on page 20, back when people might have maybe disagreed with you.

I made this point on page 8, see my quote of myself above. If I remember correctly the point was ignored much like it will be now. Even at that point the discussion was no longer a "discussion". I recently caught up with the thread because a friend of mine encouraged me to, I may need to end out friendship

I made this point on page 8, see my quote of myself above. If I remember correctly the point was ignored much like it will be now. Even at that point the discussion was no longer a "discussion". I recently caught up with the thread because a friend of mine encouraged me to, I may need to end out friendship

This is a place where only the damned can reside. The emperors light does not shine here.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:It's a solid book with a lot of good units. The reasons why you mostly see the same units over and over have more to do with convenience, cost, and quick learning curve to use. The scariest players I've faced using DE in the last year are Ben Mohlie and Sean Nayden. Ben's list featued the court. Sean's tournament list includes Incubi, Talos, and Harlequins. There's a good player named Hans here in the Northeast who regularly runs Grotesques.

I'll trust you on it. Those units are very under represented in my local area and typically aren't topics of conversation online. I don't attend high end tournaments very often though, so the best players probably unlock the secret karate of those units.

I'm sure there are local guys who use this stuff too; though if a player does attend the big events it can act as a spur to finding new combinations as opposed to just imitating other people. Hans' list is otherwise fairly traditional mech DA (although he uses the bomber as well); Ben's list was mech but with aethersails to allow him to deploy way the heck back if not going first, but still jet right into people's faces for assault even when going second and deploying back. Sean's list is webway-based, using no vehicles, big packs of beasts and 15-man squads of wyches for the core of the army, and talos/incubi/archon/drazhar for assault support. He's got some very good battle reports on his blog. He also runs drop pod/dreadnought-based Vanilla as his other main tournament army (and wacky ambush-based Tyranids for his newest), and surprises people frequently with good and unusual combinations.

http://sean-letitallburn.blogspot.com/

Anyway, this is all a bit of a divergence. IME you see fewer DE at events because it is more expensive to build an army, more challenging to paint, and most builds don't have the resiliency that an MEQ army does. GK are actually somewhat similar in terms of both codices having a range of nasty units, but they are cheaper to build, easy to paint, and (mostly) more durable on the table.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

OverwatchCNC wrote:

Dok wrote:Speaking of Space Marines, one of the hardest games I've played was against a C:SM Vulkan army. The only reason I won was because he was scared of bringing his LRC full of terms into LoS of my vindicaire. But if he would've brought them in to party, I certainly would've lost.

That list still has plenty of life and will hold it's own against any of the flavors of GK presented in this thread.

QFT

I used my Salamanders against GK a number of times before selling them off. I won8 of 10 games against GK with my Salamanders. GK are not overpowered or unbalanced.

Chaos 3.5? Now that was the most overpowered 40k book GW has put out in a decade. Perhaps we need to reassess how long a decade is and what books were put out in that time frame.

Also, since you only said "book GW has put out..." and not 40k book GW has put out. I would like to state that Fantasy Daemons under 7th edition Fantasy would clearly take the prize as "most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade." It isn't even questionable.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I would like to reiterate my original post from WAY before this thread exploded into the unknown. Fantasy Daemons broke an entire game system, GK have not. Therefore the title is false.

Welcome to page 52. This post probably belonged on page 20, back when people might have maybe disagreed with you.

I made this point on page 8, see my quote of myself above. If I remember correctly the point was ignored much like it will be now. Even at that point the discussion was no longer a "discussion". I recently caught up with the thread because a friend of mine encouraged me to, I may need to end out friendship

I also made the point about 7th edition chaos deamons back on page 29. The problem is many 40k players are so completely ignorant about warhammer fantasy battle, so when you tell them that literally 90% of the armies in a tournament were chaos deamons or vampire counts they think you are making gak up. Thus they have no idea about just how broken games workshop can make an army book.

On a side note as a CSM player I would say 4th edition CSM was far more broken when it came out than 3.5 ever was and should take the title of most broken 40k book to ever come out. At the time of it's release transport vehicles were still following 4th edition transport rules and 4th edition prices (Add about 15 points to every transport). For those that don't remember 4th ed vehicle rules I'll do a quick summary.

Glance had it's own table instead of a -2 and it went as following
1-2: shaken (no shooting)
3: stunned (no move or shoot)
4: weapon destroyed
5: immobilized
6: wrecked passengers are entangled (same as pinned but no pin and it affects fearless units), and take a wound on a 4+, if the vehicle moved >6 reroll all failed to wound rolls"

Penetrating hit
1: Stunned (no move or shoot), all passengers must disembark & take a pin test, if the vehicle moved 6" or more all passengers take a wound on a 4+
2: Weapon destroyed and stunned, all passengers must disembark & take a pin test, if the vehicle moved 6" or more all passengers take a wound on a 4+
3: Immobilized and stunned, all passengers must disembark & take a pin test, if the vehicle moved 6" or more all passengers take a wound on a 4+
4-5: wrecked all passengers are entangled (same as pinned but no pin and it affects fearless units), and take a wound on a 4+ if the vehicle moved >6" reroll all unsuccessful wound rolls on passengers.
6: Explodes all passengers are entangled (same as pinned but no pin and it affects fearless units), and take a wound on a 4+ if the vehicle moved >6" reroll all unsuccessful wound rolls on passengers.

Ordinance penetrating hit
1: Stunned (no move or shoot), all passengers must disembark & take a pin test, if the vehicle moved 6" or more all passengers take a wound on a 4+
2: Weapon destroyed and stunned, all passengers must disembark & take a pin test, if the vehicle moved 6" or more all passengers take a wound on a 4+
3: Immobilized and stunned, all passengers must disembark & take a pin test, if the vehicle moved 6" or more all passengers take a wound on a 4+
4: wrecked all passengers are entangled (same as pinned but no pin and it affects fearless units), and take a wound on a 4+ if the vehicle moved >6" reroll all unsuccessful wound rolls on passengers.
5: Explodes all passengers are entangled (same as pinned but no pin and it affects fearless units), and take a wound on a 4+ if the vehicle moved >6" reroll all unsuccessful wound rolls on passengers.
6: Vehicle annihilated: Vehicle goes poof along with the passengers all of whom are removed from play with no saves

Given the expensive 4th ed transport costs, brutal vehicle damage tables, passengers being forced to disembark on a penetrating hit, and my favorite passengers can only disembark from access hatches under all circumstances (if the hatch on a single access hatch vehicle is blocked passengers are removed from play) chaos 4.0 (Duel lash, 6 oblits, plague marines) was far more broken when it came out than GK is now.

DE are a good book thered probably be more players but their a pricy army and hard to play. Other top armies are good beacuse of their #s and durabality and firepower. De have only one of those and are top whats that say abut their firepower? On the note about necrons a few pages back winning alot its beause they are so unique with how they run with nightfight lists and global effects they will really change the meta game and make people take flamers to deal with scarbs. I think Gk are slighly op but if the rumors about the new editon are true about kp games then they wont be super good like they are now. I belive the Gk book was writen to be balanced in 6th editon like the necron book is probably ment for 6th editon.

Here's an interesting bit of stat's to nibble on, a very good breakdown provided by Kirby after their 3++ con

http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3con-initial-statistics-dig.html

Note where GK's place in the overall and amongst the top tables

Orks, DE, and BA are OP!!!!! They each have half again as many wins as losses! Ridiculous!!!!

In all seriousness I'm pretty sure the breakdown is similar (regarding GK's) here. It isn't that they are OP or winning all events. It's that generally 1/5-1/8 of the field is GK which makes it look like they are over the top.

targetawg wrote:Here's an interesting bit of stat's to nibble on, a very good breakdown provided by Kirby after their 3++ con

http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3con-initial-statistics-dig.html

Note where GK's place in the overall and amongst the top tables

well in terms of win/loss they place below orks, blood angels, dark angels, dark eldar and eldar. That's below two of the oldest codexes.

Hulksmash wrote:Orks, DE, and BA are OP!!!!! They each have half again as many wins as losses! Ridiculous!!!!

In all seriousness I'm pretty sure the breakdown is similar (regarding GK's) here. It isn't that they are OP or winning all events. It's that generally 1/5-1/8 of the field is GK which makes it look like they are over the top.

It's interesting that despite having one of the worst w/l ratios in the tourney (significantly worse than the GKs) they come in and defend the wolves codex as powerful but take special time to note that the GKs aren't. I sense someone having an axe to grind.

Wow, you either intentionally missed where they addressed it or maybe didn't understand it but he pointed out that the Space Wolves that did make it to day 2 in the higher bracket had the highest win percentage. Where as the GK's (approximately the same amount) that made day two were toward the bottom.

What he did was show that even among the better players at that tournament that the GK codex isn't over the top. That way people couldn't say it was just bad players bringing them down due to numbers. Granted it's a limited test sample but I'd be interested in a similar breakdown from Adepticon and Nova this year. Mostly because I don't think that GK's are OP, just that they slot in well in 5th edition.

Wow, you either intentionally missed where they addressed it or maybe didn't understand it but he pointed out that the Space Wolves that did make it to day 2 in the higher bracket had the highest win percentage.

Yes, because one person won all his games. That invalidates nothing since his contribution was still in the original total (implying that the other players lost a significant portion of theirs). They made an exception to skew the statistics.

Where as the GK's (approximately the same amount) that made day two were toward the bottom.

Just as the space wolves were overall. They specifically made mention that the sample size invalidated many of these comparisons.

What he did was show that even among the better players at that tournament that the GK codex isn't over the top. That way people couldn't say it was just bad players bringing them down due to numbers.

He specifically mentions that due to popularity that could well be what is occurring.

Granted it's a limited test sample but I'd be interested in a similar breakdown from Adepticon and Nova this year. Mostly because I don't think that GK's are OP, just that they slot in well in 5th edition.

I'd be interested in seeing matchups. My contention wasn't that GKs were OP in this tournament, it was that their reporting had clear bias (probably influenced by this awful tyrannical thread). The results of this tournament go against many commonly accepted tropes. Eldar slotted very high, space wolf win loss was abysmal, IG was perfectly average, dark angels had the best w/l in the field, etc. When observations are heavily skewed by single matchups (as they are here) the results become questionable. This tournament will be useful in aggregate with others, but anomalous on it's own.

Hulksmash wrote:Orks, DE, and BA are OP!!!!! They each have half again as many wins as losses! Ridiculous!!!!

In all seriousness I'm pretty sure the breakdown is similar (regarding GK's) here. It isn't that they are OP or winning all events. It's that generally 1/5-1/8 of the field is GK which makes it look like they are over the top.

That Hulksmash is OP!!!1 he should be nerfed for winning games.

He is right about that, I still hear people whine and complain about SW and Guard and those books came out years ago. What about SM stormshields? If Matt Ward did one good thing is that with every codex he does, he makes something that is broken but it balances itself out with other broken units from other armies. I feel that most of the recent imperial armies are far superior to their xenos counterparts but still it takes a degree of player skill to make it work. I used to think anime fans were real whiny then I ran into WoW players and thought differently, but I have to say that sometimes I feel like we are the whiniest bunch of people when it comes to stuff.

I would be interested in seeing data upon how many minds have been changed by this thread.

There are two ways to convince me that gk are the most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade.

1. An exceptional tournament player, Dash, Hulk, Blackmoor, Davefay etc . Gets beaten by a novice player using GK. That is highly unlikely, and as far as I know it hasn't occurred.

2. The GK book breaks 40k 5th as badly as Daemons broke Fantasy 7th. That isn't the case either.

thehod wrote:
He is right about that, I still hear people whine and complain about SW and Guard and those books came out years ago. What about SM stormshields? If Matt Ward did one good thing is that with every codex he does, he makes something that is broken but it balances itself out with other broken units from other armies. I feel that most of the recent imperial armies are far superior to their xenos counterparts but still it takes a degree of player skill to make it work. I used to think anime fans were real whiny then I ran into WoW players and thought differently, but I have to say that sometimes I feel like we are the whiniest bunch of people when it comes to stuff.

An ex-girlfirend of mine called it Whinehammer, because of how much we bitched about things during the game. After a while, it led to introspection, and analysis. At first, we were pissed at each other's armies. Then we thought about it, and realized that it was a matter of expectations, and that one of us was taking a lamer army than the other, so then we got pissed at each other. After more introspection, I then became a little obsessed with the statistics, and the fact that I couldn't evaluate what were valid tactics because dice rolls swung so wildly in any direction. I have a notebook with frightening amounts of situations where the game swung both, wildly in my favor, and wildly out of it.

Eventually, it's gotten to the point for me where I've stopped trying to evaluate the game or my list, and just take what I think feels like I'm the most comfortable with, and then I play the best game I can. Trying to take this game/thread seriously is just following down the route of madness.

Also, the historical guys are definitely the whiniest. Always push off the blame on those guys.

Also, the historical guys are definitely the whiniest. Always push off the blame on those guys.

You don't know whining until you've seen whinehammer played in Maine. We take that gak to the next level. It is an artform.

Btw yesterday Ghengiscon as won with a GK army for those keeping track with an attendance of 45+ players.

Tau won a 30 man tournament this last weekend. Tau are to OP. And it was 4 units of fire warriors, and 2 full units of kroot. only a couple suits. Sister's of Battle are winning and doing well at local tournaments too. Just wait till SoB's start winning the GTs.

Nids won the tourney last weekend. 35 people

thehod wrote:Btw yesterday Ghengiscon as won with a GK army for those keeping track with an attendance of 45+ players.

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:Tau won a 30 man tournament this last weekend. Tau are to OP. And it was 4 units of fire warriors, and 2 full units of kroot. only a couple suits. Sister's of Battle are winning and doing well at local tournaments too. Just wait till SoB's start winning the GTs.

Draigo wrote:Nids won the tourney last weekend. 35 people

Are these all 3 round tournaments or 5 to 6 round tournaments? If they are only 3 then they are kind of invalid data as the match-ups could skew the results tremendously.

Cygnar won in my local area two weeks ago.

ShumaGorath wrote:Cygnar won in my local area two weeks ago.

Who is cygnar?

Tomb King wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Cygnar won in my local area two weeks ago.

Who is cygnar?

Ultramarines successor chapter. They use a lot of variant dreadnoughts.

Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

well, i left for a while to get some real life things done (had a daughter, built a few new firearms, spending time at the range with dad, so on and so forth) and its nice to know that in a few months nothing has really changed.

pretre wrote:Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

Thank you, even more evidence that grey knights are not OP.

Sc077y wrote:well, i left for a while to get some real life things done (had a daughter, built a few new firearms, spending time at the range with dad, so on and so forth) and its nice to know that in a few months nothing has really changed.

Congrats on the birth of your daughter! Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

pretre wrote:Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

Interesting read, but I really wish he had more data to work with. A few dozen players and armies isn't going to prove anything overall.

Until he can put together some manner of database with hundreds if not thousands of tournament games, all run with the same style of mission, with similar terrain, this type of math hammering will be limited.

Carnage43 wrote:Interesting read, but I really wish he had more data to work with. A few dozen players and armies isn't going to prove anything overall.

Until he can put together some manner of database with hundreds if not thousands of tournament games, all run with the same style of mission, with similar terrain, this type of math hammering will be limited.

To be fair, Kirby himself has said that it isn't conclusive since it is a small dataset. What he did say is that because he ran it and collected the data he has an unprecedented dataset to play with and analyze. He looks to be a bit of an analysis/numbers geek, so that's what he's doing.

Unfortunately, the type of setup you're talking about is unlikely. The closest you will get is Nova, since they have pretty established terrain and missions.

pretre wrote:Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

Several variables hurt this data.
9 GK players will have a harder time keeping an average then 6 Dark Eldar players
Anyone taking Dark Eldar to a GT is usually a very experienced player as they are made of glass
GK's are cheap and easy to get and more friendly to players. Some players win with them effortlessly so when thrown against good opponents they are not used to having to use strategy. They are OP not auto-win
Point level for the tournament
Missions for the tournament
Table set up (ie terrain)
Match-ups (how many of each player got to beat up on nids or csm more then the other )
etc....

That's also the same tournament where IG had a 1-1 W/L and space wolves had like a 1-2 W/L. Taking examples from what is clearly a very aberrant set of data is at best misleading and at worst intentionally so.

This will give ammo to the "GKs are just fine camp" but it's the kind of ammo that's just going to misinform in a general sense. The evaluation of the results isn't really misleading, but the results themselves aren't a good representation of common tournament results which makes the entire endevour somewhat unhelpful.

Tomb King wrote:good opponents they are not used to having to use strategy. They are OP not auto-win

What definition are we using of OP then?

Tomb King wrote:

pretre wrote:Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

Several variables hurt this data.
9 GK players will have a harder time keeping an average then 6 Dark Eldar players
Anyone taking Dark Eldar to a GT is usually a very experienced player as they are made of glass
GK's are cheap and easy to get and more friendly to players. Some players win with them effortlessly so when thrown against good opponents they are not used to having to use strategy. They are OP not auto-win
Point level for the tournament
Missions for the tournament
Table set up (ie terrain)
Match-ups (how many of each player got to beat up on nids or csm more then the other )
etc....

The problem I see with most of the criticisms of the data that has been posted throughout the thread is this:

-When someone takes the time to parse out data from a large event where many games were played which demonstrates, albeit with a small sample size, that GK's are not outperforming similar books, the response is: the data set isnt big enough, this tournament wasn't a good example for xyz reason, there are too many variables, etc. etc. And some of these are valid concerns or 'grains of salt' to take in the data with.

Yet those same peoples evidence for the contrary, why GK's ARE OP is purely their own personal (and usually anecdotal) experience, which is a far, far, far smaller sample size.

To sum up:

Tournament with 50 players and analysis of data of all of the games played: sample size is too small, means nothing!
Handful of games I've personally observed, played in, or heard about: They're OP! It's irrefutable!

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

pretre wrote:Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

Several variables hurt this data.
9 GK players will have a harder time keeping an average then 6 Dark Eldar players
Anyone taking Dark Eldar to a GT is usually a very experienced player as they are made of glass
GK's are cheap and easy to get and more friendly to players. Some players win with them effortlessly so when thrown against good opponents they are not used to having to use strategy. They are OP not auto-win
Point level for the tournament
Missions for the tournament
Table set up (ie terrain)
Match-ups (how many of each player got to beat up on nids or csm more then the other )
etc....

The problem I see with most of the criticisms of the data that has been posted throughout the thread is this:

-When someone takes the time to parse out data from a large event where many games were played which demonstrates, albeit with a small sample size, that GK's are not outperforming similar books, the response is: the data set isnt big enough, this tournament wasn't a good example for xyz reason, there are too many variables, etc. etc. And some of these are valid concerns or 'grains of salt' to take in the data with.

Yet those same peoples evidence for the contrary, why GK's ARE OP is purely their own personal (and usually anecdotal) experience, which is a far, far, far smaller sample size.

To sum up:

Tournament with 50 players and analysis of data of all of the games played: sample size is too small, means nothing!
Handful of games I've personally observed, played in, or heard about: They're OP! It's irrefutable!

That same data said says that Space wolves are underpowered and that imperial guard are perfectly normal by that kind of broken logic.

Are they? Are you going to sit there in front of your typer and tell me that? Go ahead. Do it. See how it feels.

Sigh, I had hoped that with several days of no new posts this thread had finally died the death it deserved weeks ago.

The data is critically inconclusive at best.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

pretre wrote:Back on topic... Kirby did a bunch of analysis on 3++ Con's results for DE and GK vs different types of players (winning and losing players).

Interesting stuff to read through and relevant to what we were talking about:
http://www.3plusplus.net/2012/02/3-con-statistics-deeper-look-at-dark.html

Several variables hurt this data.
9 GK players will have a harder time keeping an average then 6 Dark Eldar players
Anyone taking Dark Eldar to a GT is usually a very experienced player as they are made of glass
GK's are cheap and easy to get and more friendly to players. Some players win with them effortlessly so when thrown against good opponents they are not used to having to use strategy. They are OP not auto-win
Point level for the tournament
Missions for the tournament
Table set up (ie terrain)
Match-ups (how many of each player got to beat up on nids or csm more then the other )
etc....

The problem I see with most of the criticisms of the data that has been posted throughout the thread is this:

-When someone takes the time to parse out data from a large event where many games were played which demonstrates, albeit with a small sample size, that GK's are not outperforming similar books, the response is: the data set isnt big enough, this tournament wasn't a good example for xyz reason, there are too many variables, etc. etc. And some of these are valid concerns or 'grains of salt' to take in the data with.

Yet those same peoples evidence for the contrary, why GK's ARE OP is purely their own personal (and usually anecdotal) experience, which is a far, far, far smaller sample size.

To sum up:

Tournament with 50 players and analysis of data of all of the games played: sample size is too small, means nothing!
Handful of games I've personally observed, played in, or heard about: They're OP! It's irrefutable!

That same data said says that Space wolves are underpowered and that imperial guard are perfectly normal by that kind of broken logic.

Are they? Are you going to sit there in front of your typer and tell me that? Go ahead. Do it. See how it feels.

Never theorize before you have data. Invariably, you end up twisting facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. -- Sherlock Holmes

SVDM Results: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/433040.page

1 GK, got 2nd. Wraithwing got 1st.

Dear TC: Please change the title of this thread to "Purifiers are the most overpowered unit GW has put out in a decade."

Thanks.

TedNugent wrote:Dear TC: Please change the title of this thread to "Purifiers are the most overpowered unit GW has put out in a decade."

Thanks.

Who's TC?
Also, No.

I have noticed that any information that says no gk are not op gets stamped with the label useless data but if they win it means theyre op. This thread is beyond ridiculous.

Draigo wrote:I have noticed that any information that says no gk are not op gets stamped with the label useless data but if they win it means theyre op. This thread is beyond ridiculous.

And yet, you keep posting in it, which keeps it at the top of the forum, where more people are reminded to post in it.

Draigo wrote:I have noticed that any information that says no gk are not op gets stamped with the label useless data but if they win it means theyre op. This thread is beyond ridiculous.

It would if you just skim the thread and don't bother to actually look at the data.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:

TedNugent wrote:Dear TC: Please change the title of this thread to "Purifiers are the most overpowered unit GW has put out in a decade."

Thanks.

Who's TC?
Also, No.

Change the name of the thread to "Space wolves are the most underpowered codex released in a decade" to accurately reflect this new and clearly relevant data please!

pretre wrote:SVDM Results: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/433040.page

1 GK, got 2nd. Wraithwing got 1st.

Lolz, and that GK, was me I'm afraid.

I used a super broken double raven and one redeemer list....with only 2 dreads, 3 psybacks, and no purifiers, warpquake, paladins, etc...

Ravens are broken! It's those damn frag blast missiles, BA only got str 8 ap 1 missiles. Codex creep!

Necrons won templecon and now SVDM, they're broken! (tongue in cheek on all of this of course)

(edit: and I think there were 2 GK's, Tim H. was playing a GK-GK build, ie, he used actual silver guys, while i went full-on inquisition)

target wrote:
The problem I see with most of the criticisms of the data that has been posted throughout the thread is this:

-When someone takes the time to parse out data from a large event where many games were played which demonstrates, albeit with a small sample size, that GK's are not outperforming similar books, the response is: the data set isnt big enough, this tournament wasn't a good example for xyz reason, there are too many variables, etc. etc. And some of these are valid concerns or 'grains of salt' to take in the data with.

Yet those same peoples evidence for the contrary, why GK's ARE OP is purely their own personal (and usually anecdotal) experience, which is a far, far, far smaller sample size.

To sum up:

Tournament with 50 players and analysis of data of all of the games played: sample size is too small, means nothing!
Handful of games I've personally observed, played in, or heard about: They're OP! It's irrefutable!

Looking at the data from another point of view....GKs had the most wins. Not the best win/loss percentage, but the most wins period. It's a combination of perceived strength of the codex (via threads like this), how cheap and easy they are to collect and paint, and the ACTUAL power of the book that make them insanely popular with players. Those 3 factors combined are making them the (pardon made up word) winning-est win ATM.

GKs look good not through being OP by itself, but by the fact the army is unbelievably popular and it's wracking up a huge quantity of wins.

Target wrote:Lolz, and that GK, was me I'm afraid.

Gratz on second! I think that Necrons are really underestimated by a lot of folks and are showing they can compete, which is nice.

@Carnage43: You misquoted. I didn't say that, I believe Target did.

pretre wrote:

Target wrote:Lolz, and that GK, was me I'm afraid.

Gratz on second! I think that Necrons are really underestimated by a lot of folks and are showing they can compete, which is nice.

@Carnage43: You misquoted. I didn't say that, I believe Target did.

Thanks! The guy who took first with 'crons is a good friend, we actually rode up to the tournament together, and the wraith list was a brainchild of our drive back from Conflict GT a month earlier. It's not a list i ever want my GK's to have to face. While not screwed, it's definitely pretty miserable. You know what makes DCA look like children in close combat? Wraiths. with lash coils reducing them to I1, tons of attacks, wound allocation, and 3+ invuls...oy vey!

My prediction is that within the next couple months, Necrons will continue their rise of domination, and pretty soon we'll have this thread, for Crons. They really are that good.

(And yup, that quote was me)

Carnage43 wrote:Looking at the data from another point of view....GKs had the most wins. Not the best win/loss percentage, but the most wins period. It's a combination of perceived strength of the codex (via threads like this), how cheap and easy they are to collect and paint, and the ACTUAL power of the book that make them insanely popular with players. Those 3 factors combined are making them the (pardon made up word) winning-est win ATM.

GKs look good not through being OP by itself, but by the fact the army is unbelievably popular and it's wracking up a huge quantity of wins.

Looking at it from yet another point of view, they also had the most losses. So from that, we can conjecture that people that are good at warhammer win more and people that are not as good win less. My conclusion therefore is that people that are good at warhammer are OP and need to be banned.

Dok wrote:

Carnage43 wrote:Looking at the data from another point of view....GKs had the most wins. Not the best win/loss percentage, but the most wins period. It's a combination of perceived strength of the codex (via threads like this), how cheap and easy they are to collect and paint, and the ACTUAL power of the book that make them insanely popular with players. Those 3 factors combined are making them the (pardon made up word) winning-est win ATM.

GKs look good not through being OP by itself, but by the fact the army is unbelievably popular and it's wracking up a huge quantity of wins.

Looking at it from yet another point of view, they also had the most losses. So from that, we can conjecture that people that are good at warhammer win more and people that are not as good win less. My conclusion therefore is that people that are good at warhammer are OP and need to be banned.

Sounds good. You're banned from GE, we'll ban Andy too, and I get to win all the tournaments for the next 2 months at which point I will be OP and banned too. Want to play in my garage in 3 months?

OverwatchCNC wrote:

Dok wrote:

Carnage43 wrote:Looking at the data from another point of view....GKs had the most wins. Not the best win/loss percentage, but the most wins period. It's a combination of perceived strength of the codex (via threads like this), how cheap and easy they are to collect and paint, and the ACTUAL power of the book that make them insanely popular with players. Those 3 factors combined are making them the (pardon made up word) winning-est win ATM.

GKs look good not through being OP by itself, but by the fact the army is unbelievably popular and it's wracking up a huge quantity of wins.

Looking at it from yet another point of view, they also had the most losses. So from that, we can conjecture that people that are good at warhammer win more and people that are not as good win less. My conclusion therefore is that people that are good at warhammer are OP and need to be banned.

Sounds good. You're banned from GE, we'll ban Andy too, and I get to win all the tournaments for the next 2 months at which point I will be OP and banned too. Want to play in my garage in 3 months?

Then we can start to have garage tournaments and ban whoever wins there too. I'm sure it will be grey knights.

Hmm, but then you will have home-field advantage! We'll have to ban you from the garage, sorry man. Maybe you can come watch sometime?

If anyone wants to provide the data from tournaments they run, I'd be more than happy to put them into pretty graphs.

The more information the better - round match-ups, number of players (including armies W/L record obviously), points, missions, etc. Obviously keeping in line with the NOVA format is going to produce the most robust results but I cannot get 15 tournaments worth of data unless it is given to me.

I'd done NOVA, 3++con and what data we have from 'Ard Boyz and will be doing Event Horizon, Centurion (2 more NOVA events from Australia) and NOVA this year - hopefully can grab the BFS data and perhaps wargamescon/adepticon but that's a different format.

Regardless, if you want to send some tourney info in with say 30+ players, we can get a better picture.

Edit: working on some more overall statistics for 3++con, i.e. win % of who went first, winning based upon parameters, etc.

Awesome to hear, Kirby! Keep it up.

To answer the top question.

Nope not overpowered in the least, their equipment is right where you'd think an Imperial Codex would be.

They do however suffer from IG syndrome, that being what they get they don't really pay all that many points for creating an illusion of overpower.

Overpowered, no. Undercosted, yes.


But it's Imperial, so you'd be fooling yourself if you expected it not get special treatment.

I would like to see the full results from the major tournaments. Anything to give hope to the lesser races.

Overpowered, no. Undercosted, yes.

I don't understand how people differentiate these. It's happened so many times in this blistering hellscape of a thread. They are intrinsically linked.

Kirby wrote:If anyone wants to provide the data from tournaments they run, I'd be more than happy to put them into pretty graphs.

The more information the better - round match-ups, number of players (including armies W/L record obviously), points, missions, etc. Obviously keeping in line with the NOVA format is going to produce the most robust results but I cannot get 15 tournaments worth of data unless it is given to me.

I'd done NOVA, 3++con and what data we have from 'Ard Boyz and will be doing Event Horizon, Centurion (2 more NOVA events from Australia) and NOVA this year - hopefully can grab the BFS data and perhaps wargamescon/adepticon but that's a different format.

Regardless, if you want to send some tourney info in with say 30+ players, we can get a better picture.

Edit: working on some more overall statistics for 3++con, i.e. win % of who went first, winning based upon parameters, etc.

I will see if I can get the results for this weekends INDY GT for you. I sincerely hope GK dont win though as I am not bringing them

The 56th Mechanized Company of the VIII regiment rides out once more.

IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

Tomb King wrote:

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

If you're playing mech guard (which by the look of your last comment you are) you're one of his worst matchups possible if he's doing the all-footsy grey knights again. Psybolt ammo is pointless versus chimeras, and psycannons are suddenly just autocannons.

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

If you're playing mech guard (which by the look of your last comment you are) you're one of his worst matchups possible if he's doing the all-footsy grey knights again. Psybolt ammo is pointless versus chimeras, and psycannons are suddenly just autocannons.

Autocanons that can kill land raiders.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

If you're playing mech guard (which by the look of your last comment you are) you're one of his worst matchups possible if he's doing the all-footsy grey knights again. Psybolt ammo is pointless versus chimeras, and psycannons are suddenly just autocannons.

Autocanons that can kill land raiders.

How many guard armies have access to land raiders, shuma?

That was all about mech guard versus GK's, and was clearly labeled as such.

Target wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

If you're playing mech guard (which by the look of your last comment you are) you're one of his worst matchups possible if he's doing the all-footsy grey knights again. Psybolt ammo is pointless versus chimeras, and psycannons are suddenly just autocannons.

Autocanons that can kill land raiders.

How many guard armies have access to land raiders, shuma?

That was all about mech guard versus GK's, and was clearly labeled as such.

Leman russes than. AV14 is AV14. The general that underestimates 30 rending shots is the one that loses his tanks.

It's all foot. And Mech IG are one of the nastier match-ups for me. We'll see how the weekend goes

Brad, are you going to BAO?

No, couldn't do another flight to Cali this early in the year so I'm headed to the Indy Open down in Indianapolis. It's a 6-round Nova-style event. Should be a good time. The BOA is on the list for next year if it's possible. Otherwise it's the Indy Open, Adepticon, The Bugeater, and the Nova guarenteed left for this year.

New thread suggestion: Nerf Hulksmash

thehod wrote:New thread suggestion: Nerf Hulksmash

How about 'Hulksmash is the most overpowered player GW has seen in the last decade.'?

pretre wrote:

thehod wrote:New thread suggestion: Nerf Hulksmash

How about 'Hulksmash is the most overpowered player GW has seen in the last decade.'?

I used to be a player like Hulksmash, but then I took a Manticore shot to the knee.....

Target, I am not sure where you fall on this debate currently... are you in the GK are overpowered camp? Or with the necron's latest success are you feeling that GK were just another good imperial book?

I feel like my Deathwing would be stronger if played as GK, at least from a shooting standpoint. Close combat is about a wash I feel. Morale suffers slightly, what with Paladins not being fearless, though there are ways to help Paladin morale.

DevianID wrote:Target, I am not sure where you fall on this debate currently... are you in the GK are overpowered camp? Or with the necron's latest success are you feeling that GK were just another good imperial book?

I feel like my Deathwing would be stronger if played as GK, at least from a shooting standpoint. Close combat is about a wash I feel. Morale suffers slightly, what with Paladins not being fearless, though there are ways to help Paladin morale.

I'm in the "GK are just another good 5th edition book" camp (and have been since they came out). I feel they're currently top tier, but by no means OP. They're just hanging out alongside SW, IG, BA, DE, and Crons

Not sure I think your DW would be stronger as GK

Paladins get:
Wound allocation
2 Wounds
More volume of fire
Force weapons (not a big deal since all DW have str 8 fists)

DW gets:
Controlled entry via deepstrike if desired
Much cheaper
Missiles (ill take em over psycannons any day)
Access to storm shields for free
Fearless

Target wrote:Force weapons (not a big deal since all DW have str 8 fists)

As a nid player, I have to disagree that Force weapons are not a big deal.
There's a huge difference between a STR 8 fist and a force weapon.

rigeld2 wrote:

Target wrote:Force weapons (not a big deal since all DW have str 8 fists)

As a nid player, I have to disagree that Force weapons are not a big deal.
There's a huge difference between a STR 8 fist and a force weapon.

I'll agree that for Nids players, it is a big deal. However, from the point of view of a tournament army thinking about str 8 weapons vs force weapons, in general I'd choose str 8. While force weapons may be better versus nids, str 8 allows you to punch vehicles (much more common than MC's), still instakill 90% of the characters/multiwound models you'll see, and not need a psychic check to do any of that.

Target wrote:I'll agree that for Nids players, it is a big deal. However, from the point of view of a tournament army thinking about str 8 weapons vs force weapons, in general I'd choose str 8. While force weapons may be better versus nids, str 8 allows you to punch vehicles (much more common than MC's), still instakill 90% of the characters/multiwound models you'll see, and not need a psychic check to do any of that.

Fair enough.

Target wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Target wrote:Force weapons (not a big deal since all DW have str 8 fists)

As a nid player, I have to disagree that Force weapons are not a big deal.
There's a huge difference between a STR 8 fist and a force weapon.

I'll agree that for Nids players, it is a big deal. However, from the point of view of a tournament army thinking about str 8 weapons vs force weapons, in general I'd choose str 8. While force weapons may be better versus nids, str 8 allows you to punch vehicles (much more common than MC's), still instakill 90% of the characters/multiwound models you'll see, and not need a psychic check to do any of that.

The initiative6 and prevalence of might of titan makes those points somewhat flawed. I'm happy to run ICs and dreadnaughts into 5 man blocks of DW knowing I'll take a few down with me, and I know that a land raider is perfectly safe. As long as a librarian is local I can do neither of those things against GKs. Even without MoT stacking hammerhand will give them the ability to kill nearly every vehicle in the game with relative ease.

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

If you're playing mech guard (which by the look of your last comment you are) you're one of his worst matchups possible if he's doing the all-footsy grey knights again. Psybolt ammo is pointless versus chimeras, and psycannons are suddenly just autocannons.

This is the equivalent of saying alpha strike guard armies are good against other alpha strike guard armies. I would be happy if I went the entire GT playing against alpha strike guard than playing against GK 6 times straight.

In the end the worst match-up for grey knights is.... grey knights. Wait you have all force weapons and 3+ cover saves too?

None the less I am hoping it will be a fun weekend regardless the outcome. Here's to hoping that I dont get an opponent with red paint syndrome

Tomb King wrote:

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:IDK, Hulk's list looks pretty mean.

Is he bringing grey knights? If so then I concede upon match-up. lol

If you're playing mech guard (which by the look of your last comment you are) you're one of his worst matchups possible if he's doing the all-footsy grey knights again. Psybolt ammo is pointless versus chimeras, and psycannons are suddenly just autocannons.

This is the equivalent of saying alpha strike guard armies are good against other alpha strike guard armies. I would be happy if I went the entire GT playing against alpha strike guard than playing against GK 6 times straight.

In the end the worst match-up for grey knights is.... grey knights. Wait you have all force weapons and 3+ cover saves too?

None the less I am hoping it will be a fun weekend regardless the outcome. Here's to hoping that I dont get an opponent with red paint syndrome

Except I was responding specifically to the things you even kept in your quote: you stating that if you had to play Hulk, you were screwed. I stated his particular brew of GK's, if he took it, was bad against your mech guard. Your mech guard (no clue if it's an alpha strike variant or not) is very different from Hulk's all foot GK, which is not an alpha strike build. 24 Inch guns, no scout, and nothing fast does not equal alpha strike. Which makes your "this is the equivalent" statement...make even less sense to me.

Also: GK's worst matchup = not grey knights. Grey knights have a wide variety of builds. Coteaz/hench spam builds hate seeing DOA Blood Angels, Tyranids, etc, Paladin builds hate seeing Dark Eldar, Template Spam guard, All foot PAGK hate seeing = super heavy mech msu spam, esp. av 12 fronts as it neutralizes the advantage of their psycannon.

...And for the love of god, would you guys stop quoting 3+ cover saves? It's fairly rare to see a tournament-worthy GK army featuring a libby...

...And for the love of god, would you guys stop quoting 3+ cover saves? It's fairly rare to see a tournament-worthy GK army featuring a libby...

Aren't librarians standard in every build except Coteaz henchspam..?

pretre wrote:SVDM Results: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/433040.page

1 GK, got 2nd. Wraithwing got 1st.

Go Wraithwing!

And congrats to GK for finishing 2nd without purifiers, henchmen or psyfleman-spam. Who knew double-raven would finish so high in a tourney?

Last but not least, can't believe Deathwing made it to 3rd but congrats as well.



Last, last but not leastest, can't believe I'm back in this thread.

jy2 wrote:

pretre wrote:SVDM Results: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/433040.page

1 GK, got 2nd. Wraithwing got 1st.

Go Wraithwing!

And congrats to GK for finishing 2nd without purifiers, henchmen or psyfleman-spam. Who knew double-raven would finish so high in a tourney?

Last but not least, can't believe Deathwing made it to 3rd but congrats as well.



Last, last but not leastest, can't believe I'm back in this thread.

As i mentioned, I played the GK's. I'd cooked up this list a few days prior to the tournament with the goal of "I've never played anything quite like this, it'll be fun! There's a few take away points:

-Redeemers are terrible
-Double ravens are fun, but not exactly powerful, as they go down in a hurry.
-Libby isn't worth it. It's not so much the points cost as it is the opportunity cost of eating up an HQ slot. The powers look awesome on paper, but any intelligent opponent can play around them pretty easily.
-REDEEMERS ARE TERRIBLE

I'm admittedly biased, because in 4/5 games my redeemer was immobilized on t1 to it's first terrain test (terrain was great at SVDM, but, without room to move a landraider in between pieces without a check on any board I was on). In the one game it didn't, it was because my opponent moved up with a MM attack bike on t1, and hit me with a full range MM, rolled a 6 to glance, (I failed my 3+ cover, yes, I took a libby, also a "never again") and a 5 to produce an immobilized. We both had a good laugh afterwards about that. Redeemers. NEVAR AGAIN.

Also, with only 2 heavy support Psyfle dreads, I felt fine. My long range AT was a bit slim, but with how people are switching away from light-mech-msu spam, 2-3 Psyfle dreads is all you really need IMO to have a solid long range AT response. You won't overwhelm or blow mech-msu off the board like the 5-6 dreads, but you'll be a much more well rounded tournament force.

And third place Deathwing, was Brad, he's on here as DevianID. Deathwing is still a great army, and esp. in the hands of someone really experienced like Brad. I may have taken 2nd, but that's due to painting. 2nd in BP's was Deathwing.

Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Tomb King wrote:
Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Ah, didn't realize you were joking, thought you thought it was a truly bad-news-bears situation.

And yea, that Necron tremor army is a very weird type of list. It doesn't engage in the traditional slugfest that most armies do, it just keeps you locked into one place and lolz until the end of the game. Playing as a more stationary mech IG (which I'm guessing is what you play) is super tough versus it, as you really have no way to deal with the scarab farm until it's charging you, and your strength (shooting) is nixed by night fight while lightning cracks on side AV 10. The only real way to beat it IS to bum rush it, and it makes you pay very dearly FOR bum rushing it.

The big Ace I can see for IG against it is Al'rahem (he's always been a cornerstone of my IG GT builds), you can control reserve rolls with the astropath and the side he comes in on, and now you're in his backfield on turn 2 or 3, missing out on the super fun "no movement turn 1". It's not a sure-win, but it's definitely an important role player in that match.

But, kudos to you for taking guard up the ladder so far! You seem to have played them quite well to go 5-1


And now....are necrons going to push GK out of this thread and replace them as the "most overpowered book?"

They've taken down 3 for 3 on the last GT's, Templecon, SVDM, and now Indy Open!

Tomb King wrote:
Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Didn't you roll on from reserve and lose a third of your army turn one? (I might be thinking of a different game.)

Step One: Don't go full reserve.
Step Two: Searchlight the C'Tan or Immo or Orik. Watch it evaporate. *
Step Three: Profit


Seriously, he can't hide them all unless there is VERY favorable terrain and if they are off the board they don't work. You have plenty of sacrificial searchlights in a guard army and then everything in your army is blowing him up. You just ignore the rest until you deal with the biggest threat.

Phazael wrote:

I used to be a player like Hulksmash, but then I took a Manticore shot to the knee.....and now play like mattyrm

Fixed that for you mate.

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:
Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Ah, didn't realize you were joking, thought you thought it was a truly bad-news-bears situation.

And yea, that Necron tremor army is a very weird type of list. It doesn't engage in the traditional slugfest that most armies do, it just keeps you locked into one place and lolz until the end of the game. Playing as a more stationary mech IG (which I'm guessing is what you play) is super tough versus it, as you really have no way to deal with the scarab farm until it's charging you, and your strength (shooting) is nixed by night fight while lightning cracks on side AV 10. The only real way to beat it IS to bum rush it, and it makes you pay very dearly FOR bum rushing it.

The big Ace I can see for IG against it is Al'rahem (he's always been a cornerstone of my IG GT builds), you can control reserve rolls with the astropath and the side he comes in on, and now you're in his backfield on turn 2 or 3, missing out on the super fun "no movement turn 1". It's not a sure-win, but it's definitely an important role player in that match.

But, kudos to you for taking guard up the ladder so far! You seem to have played them quite well to go 5-1


And now....are necrons going to push GK out of this thread and replace them as the "most overpowered book?"

They've taken down 3 for 3 on the last GT's, Templecon, SVDM, and now Indy Open!

Ya, I made it so far only to sit across the table for the duration of the final game and watch lightning strike. lol. Anyone that doesnt believe in codex creep should look at the last 3 codices released by games-workshop. Dark Eldar, Grey Knights, and now Necrons. I am seriously worried about the next army book coming out. I think eventually an army is gonna be put out that if you roll a 5+ on any given turn the battle ends. lol

The thing with necrons is they basically play there own game. They have the ability to make all 6 turns night fight with 2 solar pulse(for your enemies turn if you fail with immotep) and Immotep. While bringing scarab farm and just throwing them at your opponent there isnt much your opponent if he is shooty heavy or MSU spam can do about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:
Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Didn't you roll on from reserve and lose a third of your army turn one? (I might be thinking of a different game.)

Step One: Don't go full reserve.
Step Two: Searchlight the C'Tan or Immo or Orik. Watch it evaporate. *
Step Three: Profit


Seriously, he can't hide them all unless there is VERY favorable terrain and if they are off the board they don't work. You have plenty of sacrificial searchlights in a guard army and then everything in your army is blowing him up. You just ignore the rest until you deal with the biggest threat.

lol, no I had a DoW game I practiced against them and rolled on and lost half.

In this last occasion I won first turn and it was spearhead. So i kept the demolisher and a vet squad in a chimera in reserve and made sure I gave enough cushion when I scouted up as he can seize on a 4+, I search lighted his ctan and fired 3 TL las, 8 TL Auto Cannon, 6 Multi, laser and 3 HB shots at it and had more to shoot but stopped when none of the previous made it through to wound. He made his invul saves when I did wound him. Only works if he fails his save.

As for taking out Orik and Immotep it was spearhead and he placed his two hq's in the very back corner farthest from me as possible. Then he seized the initiative. I missed immotep's unit 3 out of 4 manticore shots. The last one hit 4 of them but only killed one in the unit. All my vendetta's were gone by my turn 2. Lightning plus a very angry ctan and immobilizing one that tried to move back some.

You can only do so much when your dice fail you.

Wait....am I in the right thread? What's all this talk about necrons?

Tremorcrons is an ok build, but it's got holes in it. People will figure it out eventually. Immo and Orikan are both hit-&-miss characters. Sometimes when they're on, they rock. But just as often as not, many times they will just not do much.

But no matter what, necrons have changed the current meta. Now you need to take into account Night-fight at tournaments to truly have a TAC list. For IG, they still have the perfect weapons against necrons - 3 manticores. These are great TAC heavy choices and isn't bothered all that much against NF.

Yeah, TK, get your own 'Necrons are the most overpowered book GW has put out in a decade' thread... Let's get back to ours.

pretre wrote:You can only do so much when your dice fail you.

QFT and lol at the make a necron thread.

jy2 wrote:Wait....am I in the right thread? What's all this talk about necrons?

Tremorcrons is an ok build, but it's got holes in it. People will figure it out eventually. Immo and Orikan are both hit-&-miss characters. Sometimes when they're on, they rock. But just as often as not, many times they will just not do much.

But no matter what, necrons have changed the current meta. Now you need to take into account Night-fight at tournaments to truly have a TAC list. For IG, they still have the perfect weapons against necrons - 3 manticores. These are great TAC heavy choices and isn't bothered all that much against NF.

Except 3d6 scatter and manticore's arent as great against other top builds.

Tomb King wrote:

jy2 wrote:Wait....am I in the right thread? What's all this talk about necrons?

Tremorcrons is an ok build, but it's got holes in it. People will figure it out eventually. Immo and Orikan are both hit-&-miss characters. Sometimes when they're on, they rock. But just as often as not, many times they will just not do much.

But no matter what, necrons have changed the current meta. Now you need to take into account Night-fight at tournaments to truly have a TAC list. For IG, they still have the perfect weapons against necrons - 3 manticores. These are great TAC heavy choices and isn't bothered all that much against NF.

Except 3d6 scatter and manticore's arent as great against other top builds.

3D6 is better than not being able to shoot at all. I'm also assuming you have scouting vendettas to searchlight the opponent if you had to. Against a scarab-farm, you have to consider sacrificing at least 1 bird to try to take out that threat....

As for manticores not being great against other top builds, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

There isn't much that D3 str10 large blasts isn't great against.

jy2 wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

jy2 wrote:Wait....am I in the right thread? What's all this talk about necrons?

Tremorcrons is an ok build, but it's got holes in it. People will figure it out eventually. Immo and Orikan are both hit-&-miss characters. Sometimes when they're on, they rock. But just as often as not, many times they will just not do much.

But no matter what, necrons have changed the current meta. Now you need to take into account Night-fight at tournaments to truly have a TAC list. For IG, they still have the perfect weapons against necrons - 3 manticores. These are great TAC heavy choices and isn't bothered all that much against NF.

Except 3d6 scatter and manticore's arent as great against other top builds.

3D6 is better than not being able to shoot at all. I'm also assuming you have scouting vendettas to searchlight the opponent if you had to. Against a scarab-farm, you have to consider sacrificing at least 1 bird to try to take out that threat....

As for manticores not being great against other top builds, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.

ShumaGorath wrote:There isn't much that D3 str10 large blasts isn't great against.

Mark my words now boys. I see (immotep) Necrons knocking IG from the top 3... maybe even the top 5. Hitting the side armor with d6 S 8 blast is crushing. You might say it averages 1 in 6 vehicles. How many vehicles do you have in your ig army?

Tomb King wrote:

Target wrote:

Tomb King wrote:
Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Ah, didn't realize you were joking, thought you thought it was a truly bad-news-bears situation.

And yea, that Necron tremor army is a very weird type of list. It doesn't engage in the traditional slugfest that most armies do, it just keeps you locked into one place and lolz until the end of the game. Playing as a more stationary mech IG (which I'm guessing is what you play) is super tough versus it, as you really have no way to deal with the scarab farm until it's charging you, and your strength (shooting) is nixed by night fight while lightning cracks on side AV 10. The only real way to beat it IS to bum rush it, and it makes you pay very dearly FOR bum rushing it.

The big Ace I can see for IG against it is Al'rahem (he's always been a cornerstone of my IG GT builds), you can control reserve rolls with the astropath and the side he comes in on, and now you're in his backfield on turn 2 or 3, missing out on the super fun "no movement turn 1". It's not a sure-win, but it's definitely an important role player in that match.

But, kudos to you for taking guard up the ladder so far! You seem to have played them quite well to go 5-1


And now....are necrons going to push GK out of this thread and replace them as the "most overpowered book?"

They've taken down 3 for 3 on the last GT's, Templecon, SVDM, and now Indy Open!

Ya, I made it so far only to sit across the table for the duration of the final game and watch lightning strike. lol. Anyone that doesnt believe in codex creep should look at the last 3 codices released by games-workshop. Dark Eldar, Grey Knights, and now Necrons. I am seriously worried about the next army book coming out. I think eventually an army is gonna be put out that if you roll a 5+ on any given turn the battle ends. lol

The thing with necrons is they basically play there own game. They have the ability to make all 6 turns night fight with 2 solar pulse(for your enemies turn if you fail with immotep) and Immotep. While bringing scarab farm and just throwing them at your opponent there isnt much your opponent if he is shooty heavy or MSU spam can do about it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:
Target I was obviously joking with the comment about conceding to grey knights. However, I am currently left puzzled on how I can possibly beat immotep + orikan + CTAN withering wolderscape + scarab farming assault army. The army has my number and I literally could do nothing to stop it. I felt quite powerless playing it in the final game at the INDY GT. Almost took with guard. Just cant play an entire game in night fight as I get blown up by lightning.

Didn't you roll on from reserve and lose a third of your army turn one? (I might be thinking of a different game.)

Step One: Don't go full reserve.
Step Two: Searchlight the C'Tan or Immo or Orik. Watch it evaporate. *
Step Three: Profit


Seriously, he can't hide them all unless there is VERY favorable terrain and if they are off the board they don't work. You have plenty of sacrificial searchlights in a guard army and then everything in your army is blowing him up. You just ignore the rest until you deal with the biggest threat.

lol, no I had a DoW game I practiced against them and rolled on and lost half.

In this last occasion I won first turn and it was spearhead. So i kept the demolisher and a vet squad in a chimera in reserve and made sure I gave enough cushion when I scouted up as he can seize on a 4+, I search lighted his ctan and fired 3 TL las, 8 TL Auto Cannon, 6 Multi, laser and 3 HB shots at it and had more to shoot but stopped when none of the previous made it through to wound. He made his invul saves when I did wound him. Only works if he fails his save.

As for taking out Orik and Immotep it was spearhead and he placed his two hq's in the very back corner farthest from me as possible. Then he seized the initiative. I missed immotep's unit 3 out of 4 manticore shots. The last one hit 4 of them but only killed one in the unit. All my vendetta's were gone by my turn 2. Lightning plus a very angry ctan and immobilizing one that tried to move back some.

I don't think IG should deploy against Imotep + Orikan. Full reserve, outflank the Vendettas, and employ a refused flank deployment against Necrons. With the short range of their weapons refused flank works very well. Necrons can't smoke or flat out before you roll on the table. With an astropath 2/3 of your army can roll on turn 3. Orikan's shenanigans are cancelled out by no IG being on the table turn 1. Imotep loses 2 turns of lightning strikes, and doesn't get to use it all until turn 3. By turn 3 he needs to roll a 4+ to continue night fighting (75% chance with the right cryptek, 50% without). By turn 4 he needs to roll a 5+ (55% with reroll, 33% without), and by turn 5 it's only on a 6 (16.6% or 33.3%). And while unlikely Imotep does have to make his rolls on turn 1 and 2 while IG are off the table to continue night fighting.

IG can also do a spotlight + Marbo + PBS combo on imotep on turn 2 causing him to run off the table.

Necrons are a solid book, but they are not over powered. Also IG isn't dead. Hydra spam went 6 wins and 1 tie to win first place out of 92 players at the bay area open yesterday.

Part of the reason I think necron's are doing so well at the moment is the meta hasn't adapted to their builds yet. Right now necron palyers got to build against the known meta with a decent book, their opponents are still building with past meta in mind and have less experience against the new crons.

Cron's definitely have a good book, but so far each competative build I've seen have success I think is counterable, so i expect the results to slow down.

They're better than a lot of people thought, but I agree that part of their advantage is unfamiliarity. There are counters to most of what they do, but most people haven't learned them yet, and even the folks who are getting used to them haven't made the counters second nature yet.

Well there is no other army that can change the battlefield like the crons and with the different tremor lists, wraith lists, night fight lists, etc its not as simple as well this army is long range, mc or whatever. lol

pretre wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:I find it entertaining. Granted I also don't believe GK's are broken. I find they slot in nicely to 5th edition.

Agreed. I have actually had little to no problem with GKs so far in 5th edition. Granted I only do one tournament a month, but I have lost to exactly one GK player and it was damn close (Amusingly enough, Celestine not getting back up lost me the game.) I think it was about 4 games with my SW at 2500 and 6-8 with Sisters and Orks at 1500-2000.

I agree here as and SOB player I have only lost to GKs 2 twice, The first time was when I played against them for the first time and the second was when a guy decided he wanted to stop playing in the forth turn of tourney. Long story and I don't feel like getting into it. But I beat them on a more regular basis then not.

I, along with a few others, said GK are overpowered. The naysayers have pointed to a lack of tourney success in 2011 as evidence they are not overpowered. I said 2012 would be the year everyone gets a chance to build GK and play them.

Adepticon 2012. The field is 25% Grey Knights. Grey Knits win the best overall and the top Imperial Army (which means they finished 1-2 among marines). Of the top 16 players record wise, 7 of them are Grey Knight players.

Anything can happen in a dice game and maybe GK will go undefeated at the end or maybe not, but out of 240 players in the final 16, 46% of the field remaining in Grey Knights and looking at the names present it appears some of the top players nationally have moved on to Grey Knights as expected. Something they had not done yet in 2011.

fantasy deamons end of it lol

Threadnomancy?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Welsh_Furey wrote:fantasy deamons end of it lol

I made this point ages ago when this all began. Then again somewhere in the middle. It was ignored, as the truth often is.

I wish the mods would lock this thread.

Adepticon is showing that when the good players play grey knights, they are indeed very dominant.

jy2 wrote:Adepticon is showing that when the good players play grey knights, they are indeed very dominant.

Or maybe they were 25% of the field and scenarios benefited them.

-666- wrote:I wish the mods would lock this thread.

This technically was a case of thread necromancy but I still doubt they will lock it.

the codex is broken.

anyone saying the codex isnt broken is a GK player who doesnt like the idea that their CODEX not their TACTICS are the reason they win games.

Smitty0305 wrote:the codex is broken.

anyone saying the codex isnt broken is a GK player who doesnt like the idea that their CODEX not their TACTICS are the reason they win games.

Cool story bro.

Anyone saying the codex is broken is just a non gk player tired of being beaten by them.

I am glad there is a resurrected thread where we can both discuss our views using 0 facts.

Great comments like Smitty's are one reason I'd love to see this thread bite the dust. There will always be top tier armies that are hard bit and that will never change.

The Simple fact is GK are OP I don't think you can deny that if you have played Vs it or read the book. The fact is GK have an answer to everything and that is why they are OP.

So how come I win just as handily with Dark Eldar as with GK then? Are they broken too? (I've beaten Purifier spam with the evil space faeries but in fairness I've not yet played other GK builds).

As regards the Adepticon results, consider that c40% of attendees had GK (I read in a Dakka thread). Now you may argue that they had 50% of the top 8 places but if nearly half the people attending are bringing them then that's to be expected.

Even were the percentage of attendees bringing GK lower (as I'd expect to be the case), you should consider that the net wisdom declaring them OP combined with the fact that they have several good builds would encourage people to take them, especially if they're looking for a new army to bring.

I agree that some codices restrict the possible competitive builds and that one or two codices are subpar while others allow several competitive builds and some have some very good builds indeed (Guard, GK, Dark Eldar, Space Wolves at least). But while snivelling about GK being OP may be amusing, I'd like to see some hard facts about number of attendees bringing GK armies to Adepticon (and how many GK players in the top 8 had previously placed in say the top 20 or so).

Blood and Slaughter wrote:So how come I win just as handily with Dark Eldar as with GK then? Are they broken too? (I've beaten Purifier spam with the evil space faeries but in fairness I've not yet played other GK builds).

As regards the Adepticon results, consider that c40% of attendees had GK (I read in a Dakka thread). Now you may argue that they had 50% of the top 8 places but if nearly half the people attending are bringing them then that's to be expected.

Even were the percentage of attendees bringing GK lower (as I'd expect to be the case), you should consider that the net wisdom declaring them OP combined with the fact that they have several good builds would encourage people to take them, especially if they're looking for a new army to bring.

I agree that some codices restrict the possible competitive builds and that one or two codices are subpar while others allow several competitive builds and some have some very good builds indeed (Guard, GK, Dark Eldar, Space Wolves at least). But while snivelling about GK being OP may be amusing, I'd like to see some hard facts about number of attendees bringing GK armies to Adepticon (and how many GK players in the top 8 had previously placed in say the top 20 or so).

Closer to 25% were GK. 8 of the top 16 were GK. As for your point about dark eldar their were 0 that survived day one so regardless of generals fielding them they did not survive. So conclusion DE are very balanced. I am just getting tired of seeing GK's. It gets boring. I beat GK's everytime I match up against them but it isnt usually fun to have back to back repeat match-ups. If the amount of players continue to grow they can have 2 seperate GT's. One for the 64 GK players and one for 64 players not using GK . This way maybe the over populated GK will see how boring it can get playing against the same thing over and over.

GK won the Adepticon Champs.

Some people felt the same way about IG two years ago.

-666- wrote:Some people felt the same way about IG two years ago.

Compared to the GK codex the IG was an easy beat. Meta is Meta. The GK codex gives so much flexibility that it is hard to beat. As I have stated in my previous postings about the GK (in 2011), the Cortez build is a brutal build and the person who won Adepticon used a Cortez Build.

Lets see what happens when 6th ed comes out and then see who and what codex gets nerfed. I got a sneaky suspicion that MSU units are going to go by the wayside.

-666- wrote:Some people felt the same way about IG two years ago.

I haven't seen competition get strangled by quite this level of entrant consolidation before. Top tables have looked similar to this, but even orks or IG weren't this popular in their heydays and this books been going for a year now. Having two brutally powerful ranged armies and an army that wins melee conflicts automatically comprising half a tournament is pretty terrible for any tyranid players or any army winning on the basis of mellee (grats to the ork and daemon players that got in). Hopefully sixth can help.

Closer to 25% were GK. 8 of the top 16 were GK.

To be exact 22% were GK and 7 of the top 16 were GK (the 8th was an alt when an Ork player declined to play in the finals). Probably of more interest is the numbers for undefeated (which I think is 7/14 but not sure).

Still, the point remains and its a strong one -- a much higher percent of GK ended up in the finals if all things were equal. If people recall Orks had a similar stat last year but nowhere near as strong. However we cannot just attribute this stat to the power of the codex itself. I can't quantify, but I think a big part of the results is the number of exceptional players playing the dex.

Interesting to know. So glad that this thread got necro'd. /facepalm.

I'll have to wait to see the results for Adepticon to see how things actually went out. Although it sounds like winterman has some good data there.

What were the others in the top?

I think a lot of it was that folks drank the kool-aid and a lot of top players brought GK. Sad thing is that I heard there were no SOB. :(

SW and IG are just as broken as GK. Its a fact.

-666- wrote:SW and IG are just as broken as GK. Its a fact.

Citation needed.

Adding 'Its (sic) a fact.' to your posts doesn't make it so.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh wait, it was a clever way of mocking the argument that any of them are broken. Well played.

pretre wrote:Interesting to know. So glad that this thread got necro'd. /facepalm.

I'll have to wait to see the results for Adepticon to see how things actually went out. Although it sounds like winterman has some good data there.

What were the others in the top?

I think a lot of it was that folks drank the kool-aid and a lot of top players brought GK. Sad thing is that I heard there were no SOB. :(

I don't have full stats and the 22% thing was the report from a few at the event. Could be inaccurate I guess. I dunno about SoB but it was mentioned many times that there were no Tyranids (which is kinda crazy for a 256 player event but that is a story for another post).

Below is the ranking after game 4 day 1. Notice Necrons were number 1. Also quite a few top rated or GT winning players in the mix and former Adepticon Finalists.

Alexander Fennell – Necrons
Tony Grippando – Grey Knights
Mike Mutscheller – Space Wolves
Justin Cook – Grey Knights
Bill Kim – Chaos Daemonsk
Jose Mendez – Dark Angels
Joakim Engstrom – Grey Knights
Ricky Johnson – Orks
Doug Johnson – Orks
Brett Perkins – Imperial Guard
Paul Murphy – Grey Knights
Tony Kopach – Space Wolves
Dave Ankarlo – Grey Knights
Brad Chester – Grey Knights
Nick Nanavati – Grey Knights
Reece Robbins – Eldar

Cool, thanks for the breakdown.

-666- wrote:SW and IG are just as broken as GK. Its a fact.

lol, that is why this is the second straight event that I was the solo IG player to survive the 1st day of gaming... and space wolves had only 2 make it to day 2 at this event and 0 made it to day 2 at the INDY Open. As for nids they have been removed from competitive play which is sad. Second event in a row that 0 were represented.

winterman wrote:

pretre wrote:Interesting to know. So glad that this thread got necro'd. /facepalm.

I'll have to wait to see the results for Adepticon to see how things actually went out. Although it sounds like winterman has some good data there.

What were the others in the top?

I think a lot of it was that folks drank the kool-aid and a lot of top players brought GK. Sad thing is that I heard there were no SOB. :(

I don't have full stats and the 22% thing was the report from a few at the event. Could be inaccurate I guess. I dunno about SoB but it was mentioned many times that there were no Tyranids (which is kinda crazy for a 256 player event but that is a story for another post).

Below is the ranking after game 4 day 1. Notice Necrons were number 1. Also quite a few top rated or GT winning players in the mix and former Adepticon Finalists.

Alexander Fennell – Necrons
Tony Grippando – Grey Knights
Mike Mutscheller – Space Wolves
Justin Cook – Grey Knights
Bill Kim – Chaos Daemonsk
Jose Mendez – Dark Angels
Joakim Engstrom – Grey Knights
Ricky Johnson – Orks
Doug Johnson – Orks
Brett Perkins – Imperial Guard
Paul Murphy – Grey Knights
Tony Kopach – Space Wolves
Dave Ankarlo – Grey Knights
Brad Chester – Grey Knights
Nick Nanavati – Grey Knights
Reece Robbins – Eldar

Yeah, notice the single Necron in a field of GK players. People bring them to tournaments because they're terribly broken and it's telling that 7 out of 16 players in the final field are GK players.

@Stoffer: Are you trying to say that Necrons are terribly broken? Your second sentence is a bit confusing.

Just gonna say that since the (arguably nearly as broken) space wolves veteran player got trashed by some newbie with a standard (broken) GK army of psy-dreads, deathcult and purifiers with halberds, GK are looking too good.

juraigamer wrote:Just gonna say that since the (arguably nearly as broken) space wolves veteran player got trashed by some newbie with a standard (broken) GK army of psy-dreads, deathcult and purifiers with halberds, GK are looking too good.

Remember that Tony was just 'some newbie' when he took Nova.

juraigamer wrote:Just gonna say that since the (arguably nearly as broken) space wolves veteran player got trashed by some newbie with a standard (broken) GK army of psy-dreads, deathcult and purifiers with halberds, GK are looking too good.

Single games can also be very matchup dependent. I wouldn't rush to call his opponent a newbie simply because he has no major tournaments under his belt. 40k isn't a particularly difficult game to play or win, you don't need to be some sort of separate breed to defeat the "best". There's a low skill ceiling, especially with armies like GKs and Space Wolves (SWs being arguably easier to play than the Inquisitorial GKs in that specific matchup).

I would have to say that the evidence is wrong, people are bringing GK because like alot of people here (while they are an easier skill level to use) think that they are drastically broken.

Notice that 7 out of 16 GK players aren't no.1

Just because more people brought them to the event doesn't mean anything if they're not winning. Yes it only increases the chance of having a GK army in the top 5, but if that many GK armies can't take top spot? I don't think it proves anything tbh.

@Sasa0mg: I think that you're absolutely right. The Adepticon seems to indicate that people have really psyched themselves up for what armies are 'good' and which are not.
No Tyranids, no Sisters in a 250 person tournament?
22% GK?

I think this falls in the realm of 'self-fulfilling prophecy'. edit: Misread a results thread earlier. My bad. Also, what is up with BoK's page load times. Geeze.

Sasa0mg wrote:I would have to say that the evidence is wrong, people are bringing GK because like alot of people here (while they are an easier skill level to use) think that they are drastically broken.

Notice that 7 out of 16 GK players aren't no.1

Just because more people brought them to the event doesn't mean anything if they're not winning. Yes it only increases the chance of having a GK army in the top 5, but if that many GK armies can't take top spot? I don't think it proves anything tbh.

But.. They won?

As an aside, I would have loved to take Sisters to a tournament with 1/4 GKs. Would have had a field day.

pretre wrote:@Sasa0mg: I think that you're absolutely right. The Adepticon seems to indicate that people have really psyched themselves up for what armies are 'good' and which are not.
No Tyranids, no Sisters in a 250 person tournament?
22% GK?

I think this falls in the realm of 'self-fulfilling prophecy'. In the end though, a Necron player still won.

I thought the final table was space wolves vs GKs.

Yeah, notice the single Necron in a field of GK players. People bring them to tournaments because they're terribly broken and it's telling that 7 out of 16 players in the final field are GK players.

There's two issues with this comment
1) You can't look at numbers in a vacuum. If 50% of the field is GKs and 1% is Necrons, then Necrons would have had a stronger showing per player (thats just an example, not actual numbers). We don't have all the stats yet but even when we do, there's very little we can do to isolate the actual reasons for the results, meaning we can't get a feel for how much was skill, dice luck, matchup and mission combination were a factor. So while I love looking at stats and talking about what they mean, you can't use it to make some definite statement like GKs are broken.

2) I think its the hyperbole like "they're terribly broken" that is really the sticking point and reason this thread even exists.

Strong? Strongest codex? Some undercosted, wtf things in the codex? Sure, all reasonable statements. Its the casual way people throw out 'broken' that is really just too much to stand. They are beatable. They have weaknesses. Their strengths come with some costs. Great players playing GKs were and are beaten by good players with other lists all the time. Look at it like a challenge, adjust your army and play and deal with them just like every other time a meta changing rule or dex comes out.

Or if you can't beat em, join them -- then lament the nerfs they get in 6ed :p

pretre wrote:I think this falls in the realm of 'self-fulfilling prophecy'. edit: Misread a results thread earlier. My bad. Also, what is up with BoK's page load times. Geeze.

That Necron army had the best score from Day 1, but they did not win. Grey Knights won the tournament.

Game 5 (Sunday Round 1)
Alexander Fennell (Necrons – Winner) vs. Tim Gorham (Grey Knights)
Tony Grippando (Grey Knights) vs. Reece Robbins (Eldar – Winner)
Mike Mutscheller (Space Wolves) vs. Nick Nanavati (Grey Knights – Winner)
Justin Cook (Grey Knights) vs. Brad Chester (Grey Knights – Winner)
Bill Kim (Chaos Daemons) vs. Dave Ankarlo (Grey Knights – Winner)
Jose Mendez (Dark Angels) vs. Tony Kopach (Space Wolves – Winner)
Joakim Engstrom (Grey Knights) vs. Paul Murphy (Grey Knights – Winner)
Doug Johnson (Orks – Winner) vs. Brett Perkins (Imperial Guard)

Game 6 Winner Brackets (Sunday Round 2)
Reece Robbins (Eldar) vs. Paul Murphy (Grey Knights – WINNER)
Alexander Fennell (Necrons – WINNER) vs. Doug Johnson (Orks)
Brad Chester (Grey Knights – WINNER) vs. Dave Ankarlo (Grey Knights)
Tony Kopach (Space Wolves – WINNER) vs. Nick Nanavati (Grey Knights)

Game 7 Winner Brackets – (Sunday Round 3)
Alexander Fennell (Necrons) vs. Brad Chester (Grey Knights) – LIVESTREAM
Tony Kopach (Space Wolves – WINNER) vs. Paul Murphy (Grey Knights)

Game 8 (Sunday Round 4)
Tony Kopach (Space Wolves) vs. Brad Chester (Grey Knights)

Final Results: Warhammer 40K Championships Warmaster – Brad Chester (Grey Knights)

kronk wrote:

pretre wrote:I think this falls in the realm of 'self-fulfilling prophecy'. edit: Misread a results thread earlier. My bad. Also, what is up with BoK's page load times. Geeze.

That Necron army had the best score from Day 1, but they did not win. Grey Knights won the tournament.

That probably explains my confusion. I blame lack of sleep. Also, still need an answer as to why BoK's page loads suck so bad.

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:@Sasa0mg: I think that you're absolutely right. The Adepticon seems to indicate that people have really psyched themselves up for what armies are 'good' and which are not.
No Tyranids, no Sisters in a 250 person tournament?
22% GK?

I think this falls in the realm of 'self-fulfilling prophecy'. In the end though, a Necron player still won.

I thought the final table was space wolves vs GKs.

That might be my fault. Necrons were at the top of the heap out of 16 on day 1 and I posted such (pretre then misinterpreted). In day 2 Necrons eventually lost in the semi-finals to the ultimate winner of the event.

Sasa0mg wrote:I would have to say that the evidence is wrong, people are bringing GK because like alot of people here (while they are an easier skill level to use) think that they are drastically broken.

Notice that 7 out of 16 GK players aren't no.1

Just because more people brought them to the event doesn't mean anything if they're not winning. Yes it only increases the chance of having a GK army in the top 5, but if that many GK armies can't take top spot? I don't think it proves anything tbh.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you said here, but if I am, this is just about the craziest thing I've ever heard.

So because 7 of the 8 GK players who were in the top 16 didn't win the evidence is wrong? If there were 16 GK armies in the top 16 would that further cement your position since all of those 15 other guys couldn't win with their GKs?

When looking at the results, GK had 50% of the field for all of the final rounds (8/16, 4/8, 2/4, 1/2). They were the only army that was meaningfully over-represented in the final rounds as well. When you have 8 of the final 16 from a single faction and the other 8 finalists are from 7 other factions, that should be a pretty big red flag. I don't think that GK are some magical win button, but it's pretty safe to say that they're currently the "best" of all the available factions.

@winterman: WHY HAVE YOU FAILED ME?!?!?!
@Amerikon: I think what he's trying to say is that all the competitive players are taking them because of the perception that they are OP. Then, because they are the top players, of course they filter to the top.

Not to call people out, but Nick N played GK at Adepticon and he's only a part-time GK player, IIRC. I'm sure he's not the only one in the top guys.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So, I just did a real quick Rankings HQ search to see what the GK players played last year or at other big events:

Brad Chester - SW last year, GK this year
Tim Gorham - SW last year, GK this year
Paul Murphy - IG and BA, swapped to GK for Atlanta and Adepticon
Nick Nanavati - Tyranids, Chaos Daemons, GK at Nova and Adepticon
Dave Ankarlo - Only GK results
Tony Grippando - Unclear, Orks at ToS
Joakim Engstrom - No good history, just a Adepticon TT from last year with no army listed
Justin Cook - DA last year.

Not to slander anyone, but the SW last year, GK this year ones are pretty amusing. I think this shows a little of the 'switch to GK for big events since they are the OP' mentality though. There is also a lot to be said for small, elite armies being easier on your brain when you need to play 10+ games in a weekend.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Darthdiggler wrote a good post re: my last line in the Adepticon thread:
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/90/444738.page#4192183

Not to slander anyone, but the SW last year, GK this year ones are pretty amusing. I think this shows a little of the 'switch to GK for big events since they are the OP' mentality though. There is also a lot to be said for small, elite armies being easier on your brain when you need to play 10+ games in a weekend.

You could just as easily say that the OP mentality brought them to space wolves or IG (who themselves were undoubtedly overpowered until the next big thing came along). I'd rather simply assume that skilled players are gravitating to the book that they perceive as more powerful. Since they're fairly skilled you could probably assume that they would actually be able to meaningfully review the codex's power level and determine its capabilities without external pressure. If they all did that then it should say something about the power-level of the book itself. That being that it's the most powerful book currently available against the widest variety of opponents. Which is likely is.

pretre wrote:@Stoffer: Are you trying to say that Necrons are terribly broken? Your second sentence is a bit confusing.

No, I think Necrons are a pretty good example of a strong release that doesn't steamroll the competitive community.

pretre wrote:@Amerikon: I think what he's trying to say is that all the competitive players are taking them because of the perception that they are OP. Then, because they are the top players, of course they filter to the top.

I think I did misunderstand what he was saying. I thought his point was that 7 of the GK players in the top 16 failed to win, which is completely insane because, of course, the 8th GK player actually won and, as they say, there can be only one. But it looks like there was some confusion about how many GK players were in the final rounds (7 or 8) and a mistaken post somewhere about Necrons winning it all. I'll settle down now.

Still, I think the results are a pretty strong indicator as to how good GK are. If you have the best players switching from Wolves to GK there has to be a reason.

1) It can be that they heard GK were OP and decided to bandwagon.
2) It can be that they actually analyzed the GK book and decided they were better than Wolves.
3) It can be that they thought they'd have an easier time playing/transporting a smaller army.
4) Something else entirely.

I'd think that 1 or 2 would be the most likely reason for a switch and since I like to give people the benefit of the doubt I'll assume that the top players aren't lemmings who just glom on to the latest FotM. That makes me think reason 2 is the most reasonable. And even if they were switching for some other reason, you'd still have a reality where the top players were (mostly) playing the same army. So on some level that would actually have to be considered the "best" army.

EDIT: I got ninja'd by ShumaGorath!

pretre wrote:

juraigamer wrote:Just gonna say that since the (arguably nearly as broken) space wolves veteran player got trashed by some newbie with a standard (broken) GK army of psy-dreads, deathcult and purifiers with halberds, GK are looking too good.

Remember that Tony was just 'some newbie' when he took Nova.

my thoughts exactly... Uknown name =/= Noob

For what its worth Nick plays me weekly at the LFGS... Nick almost brought bugs to Adepticon : )

Stoffer wrote:

pretre wrote:@Stoffer: Are you trying to say that Necrons are terribly broken? Your second sentence is a bit confusing.

No, I think Necrons are a pretty good example of a strong release that doesn't steamroll the competitive community.

Exactly, this is what the new codexes should do, not cause mass conversions. I don't mean that everyone needs to be on the level of play that the old tau codex is at, but a new codex shouldn't be leagues apart from recent codexes (see tyranids).

juraigamer wrote:

Stoffer wrote:

pretre wrote:@Stoffer: Are you trying to say that Necrons are terribly broken? Your second sentence is a bit confusing.

No, I think Necrons are a pretty good example of a strong release that doesn't steamroll the competitive community.

Exactly, this is what the new codexes should do, not cause mass conversions. I don't mean that everyone needs to be on the level of play that the old tau codex is at, but a new codex shouldn't be leagues apart from recent codexes (see tyranids).

I still maintain that the problem with tyranids is the problem with the edition more than the powerlevel of the book (though to what degree those are inseparable is YMMV). Remove 26" movement melta/ doubletap plasma drops from all basic transports, remove wound allocation bs and make it so that you can consolidate after combat with a vehicle (not being able to is nonsensical and a holdover from the bad old days) while changing the way that kill points work and removing True Line of Sight and the nids come back into being at a respectable tier. Those are all obvious and likely changes in sixth.

MDizzle wrote:The Simple fact is GK are OP I don't think you can deny that if you have played Vs it or read the book. The fact is GK have an answer to everything and that is why they are OP.

GKs are one of the top three army books without a doubt, but they are not OP compared to the other top books, and to many of the other armies out there near the top.

Smitty0305 wrote:the codex is broken.

anyone saying the codex isnt broken is a GK player who doesnt like the idea that their CODEX not their TACTICS are the reason they win games.

What an ignorant thing to say, and what a slap in the face to the eight GK players who played their way into the top sixteen. A codex or army list will not get you into the finals at Adepticon. It takes real skill, and guys like Reece proved that skill trumps lists with his footdar.

If the GK book was so broken, why didn't we see all GKs in the finals?

frgsinwntr wrote:

pretre wrote:

juraigamer wrote:Just gonna say that since the (arguably nearly as broken) space wolves veteran player got trashed by some newbie with a standard (broken) GK army of psy-dreads, deathcult and purifiers with halberds, GK are looking too good.

Remember that Tony was just 'some newbie' when he took Nova.

my thoughts exactly... Uknown name =/= Noob

For what its worth Nick plays me weekly at the LFGS... Nick almost brought bugs to Adepticon : )

Nick is a good player. He had Tyranids at the Colonial and did well in a field that had a lot of Grey Knight armies available. He ran into GK once? Orks 3x and something else from memory. Playing well and finishing 5th? Kudo's to him for playing well and doing well at a large event.

frgsinwntr wrote:

pretre wrote:

juraigamer wrote:Just gonna say that since the (arguably nearly as broken) space wolves veteran player got trashed by some newbie with a standard (broken) GK army of psy-dreads, deathcult and purifiers with halberds, GK are looking too good.

Remember that Tony was just 'some newbie' when he took Nova.

my thoughts exactly... Uknown name =/= Noob

Brad Chester is a well-known killer from the Toledo community; a peer of guys like Greg Sparks, so I am advised.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:@winterman: WHY HAVE YOU FAILED ME?!?!?!
@Amerikon: I think what he's trying to say is that all the competitive players are taking them because of the perception that they are OP. Then, because they are the top players, of course they filter to the top.

In my experience the opposite is true. Top players are largely divided into two groups: Those who have switched to GK because they are the strongest book, and they feel that is the best move, and those who refuse to use GK out of pride/stubbornness. Rather like many people refused to field Siren Princes or HarlieFalcon armies back in the day.

One of those GK players in the final sixteen was playing in literally his first big singles event.

Mannahnin wrote:

In my experience the opposite is true. Top players are largely divided into two groups: Those who have switched to GK because they are the strongest book, and they feel that is the best move, and those who refuse to use GK out of pride/stubbornness.

QFT!!! There is a third group that just hates seeing the same army over an over but relatively true statement.


It has not been said yet but a team of 4 GK players took the Team Tournament as well.

Mannahnin wrote:

pretre wrote:@Amerikon: I think what he's trying to say is that all the competitive players are taking them because of the perception that they are OP. Then, because they are the top players, of course they filter to the top.

In my experience the opposite is true. Top players are largely divided into two groups: Those who have switched to GK because they are the strongest book, and they feel that is the best move, and those who refuse to use GK out of pride/stubbornness. Rather like many people refused to field Siren Princes or HarlieFalcon armies back in the day.

One of those GK players in the final sixteen was playing in literally his first big singles event.

Interesting, not that he can't be a great player for his first event, but still interesting.

Tomb King wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:

In my experience the opposite is true. Top players are largely divided into two groups: Those who have switched to GK because they are the strongest book, and they feel that is the best move, and those who refuse to use GK out of pride/stubbornness.

QFT!!! There is a third group that just hates seeing the same army over an over but relatively true statement.


It has not been said yet but a team of 4 GK players took the Team Tournament as well.

several of my buddies again. Nick N and Andrew G. I believe hulk smash and Aaron Along also.

Tomb King wrote:

-666- wrote:SW and IG are just as broken as GK. Its a fact.

As for nids they have been removed from competitive play which is sad. Second event in a row that 0 were represented.

I think that is more that people don't have the gumption to play them in a large event such as Adepticon. That in and of itself doesn't mean they are not competitive.

-666- wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

-666- wrote:SW and IG are just as broken as GK. Its a fact.

As for nids they have been removed from competitive play which is sad. Second event in a row that 0 were represented.

I think that is more that people don't have the gumption to play them in a large event such as Adepticon. That in and of itself doesn't mean they are not competitive.

there are a few ways to think about lists...

1) you need a list that will have the best match ups most of the time. This limits your mistakes or limits the effects of mistakes
2) you need a list that will give your opponents a hard match

GKs are both of these... they are resilient... one small piece breaks and they don't fall apart... and they are STRONG... basically GK lists make the opponents game much harder... "psychotropic grenades do what? What?! rad grenades change my ID toughness?!?)

@frgsinwntr

Yeppers. You got the names right I built a team of ringers to carry me as far in the standing as possible. Turned out we managed to win.

@Thread

I stand by GK's not being broken. I think proliferation is making people cranky. I'll point out that personally the codex that is my bane is Chaos. I've lost more to Chaos in the last year than all other books combined. I think I've only lost to GK's twice since they came out....might be off by one

And with some of the stuff I picked up this weekend I'll either finish repainting my Nids or finish off my Necrons now that the new models are coming out.

Brad Chester was not at his first event, that was a joke over the mic by Chris.

Brad Chester is a great player with tons of experience in competitive play, and was the relative "veteran" in the final round with Tony. That's taking nothing from Tony - he's a great player and has a well-earned reputation, but Brad is quite a bit older and Tony wasn't winning tournaments in his diapers.

@ Hulksmash - Apparently I need to get my ringers on a heavier workout program; they couldn't quite carry me to the top 5. Guess that's what I get for being big-boned. Congrats to you guys again, you murderized 'em.

@jwolf:

Was your team the one that brought 40 paladins?

If so, then no wonder you guys didn't make top 5.

Jy2

No we brought Black Templar and Grey Knights. with Zero Paladins! I had to carry Wolf and Thomas but we only got 6th or 7th :(. 4 out of 4 Grey Knight teams though!

Hulksmash wrote:@frgsinwntr

Yeppers. You got the names right I built a team of ringers to carry me as far in the standing as possible. Turned out we managed to win.

@Thread

I stand by GK's not being broken. I think proliferation is making people cranky. I'll point out that personally the codex that is my bane is Chaos. I've lost more to Chaos in the last year than all other books combined. I think I've only lost to GK's twice since they came out....might be off by one

And with some of the stuff I picked up this weekend I'll either finish repainting my Nids or finish off my Necrons now that the new models are coming out.

Proliferation doesn't explain the fact that they had a representation in the top 16 of roughly twice what their actual entrant percentage was. On an even field they should of had an end table representation roughly equivalent to their entrance. The sheer size of the event makes the results a bit better than most major tournament examples for statistical review.

The otherr thing with GK is that many of the established competitive lists, especially MSU spam, struggle to cope with them whereas less fashionable and often older codices can do well against them (I find certain builds of orks, eldar and sometimes tyranids and demons much tougher than dark eldar, space wolves or - to an extent - guard). A lot of the 'problem' with GK is that people have not changed up to meet the new challenge they've thrown into the game. so instead they cry broken. I suspect this has a bearing on the large competitive events and what armies people bring. If you're smashing the current 'good' lists with GK in 'training' match-ups they're going to seem the smart choice and so they'll be very prevalent and also perform well given that many players from other codices seem reluctant to change their all-comers list to account for GK.

I know of Thousand Sons players that table Grey Knight armies in the first three turns of a game.

Really? Someone brought this thread back up because Grey Knights finally won a large event?

Dok wrote:Really? Someone brought this thread back up because Grey Knights finally won a large event?

lol, yes they did to cover more discussion on it. That one large event was 250 strong. In addition, grey knights won the team tournament which was 120 strong. Must be luck of the dice though or people failing to compensate for them.

Or simply weight of numbers. You throw enough Grey Knights at something and it's bound to fall!

The people who QQ about GKs will keep this thread going in perpetuity.

I'm surprised by how many people voted

Yes, GK are the most OP book in the last decade.

Do people not know about the Chaos Demons fantasy codex when it came out?

jgehunter wrote:I'm surprised by how many people voted

Yes, GK are the most OP book in the last decade.

Do people not know about the Chaos Demons fantasy codex when it came out?

I think most people are thinking 40k-exclusively.

People who know about GKs are not as likely to know about Fantasy Daemons, like myself.

AFAIK, GKs ARE the most OP book GW has put out in a decade, because I do not and probably never will play fantasy - I have the much-more-realistic FOG for that.

Gk are definitely powerful. I personally think some of their rules are game breaking and abusive, but most codexes have something game breaking. I definitely have an urge to go back to vanilla marines with no chapter tactics just to see how they square off, probably ending in being tabled....

helium42 wrote:The people who QQ about GKs will keep this thread going in perpetuity.

Yet your posting on it as well

I mainly play Eldar, and here is my problem with Grey Knights.

I cant assault them, because they negate my seer council, my psychic powers, and overall have better armor saves, initiatives, attacks, strength, toughness, and overall better attacks, supported by better HQ's

I cant out- maneuver them, because StormRavens are just as fast as I am, but they have an assault ramp.

I cant out Shoot them - One of their infantry models can out shoot my Main Battle Tank, with a higher Strength, a higher BS, and Rending Shots. 3 RifleDreds can out shoot my entire army, and they cost 400 points, ignore stuns, can easily attain cover, and require no support. If I put EML's on 3 Falcons, with guide support, they out shoot me by a ratio of OVER 60%. If I invest in 650 points of War Walkers, with double guide support, the RifleDreds STILL OUT SHOOT ME.

a GK player has a higher model account, more armor, and more units. There units are better IN EVERY ASPECT.

Do I care if people play grey knights? No.
Do I enjoy playing against grey knights? No.

The codex has no weaknesses. Ive Tried assault based eldar, footdar, Shooting Based Eldar, Autarch dar, and every combination, of every unit, and regardless of what I throw at each unit, GK has a counter that costs less and does more.

Psycannons and RileDreds are too effective. I challenge anyone to find a unit that comes to within a 50% effective margin of RifleDreds/psycannons, because one doesnt exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dok wrote:Or simply weight of numbers. You throw enough Grey Knights at something and it's bound to fall!

and you dont find it ironic the amount of players playing Grey Knights, compared to a year and a half ago when the codex wasnt out.

Smitty0305 wrote:

helium42 wrote:The people who QQ about GKs will keep this thread going in perpetuity.

Yet your posting on it as well

I mainly play Eldar, and here is my problem with Grey Knights.

I cant assault them, because they negate my seer council, my psychic powers, and overall have better armor saves, initiatives, attacks, strength, toughness, and overall better attacks, supported by better HQ's

I cant out- maneuver them, because StormRavens are just as fast as I am, but they have an assault ramp.

I cant out Shoot them - One of their infantry models can out shoot my Main Battle Tank, with a higher Strength, a higher BS, and Rending Shots. 3 RifleDreds can out shoot my entire army, and they cost 400 points, ignore stuns, can easily attain cover, and require no support. If I put EML's on 3 Falcons, with guide support, they out shoot me by a ratio of OVER 60%. If I invest in 650 points of War Walkers, with double guide support, the RifleDreds STILL OUT SHOOT ME.

a GK player has a higher model account, more armor, and more units. There units are better IN EVERY ASPECT.

Do I care if people play grey knights? No.
Do I enjoy playing against grey knights? No.

The codex has no weaknesses. Ive Tried assault based eldar, footdar, Shooting Based Eldar, Autarch dar, and every combination, of every unit, and regardless of what I throw at each unit, GK has a counter that costs less and does more.

Psycannons and RileDreds are too effective. I challenge anyone to find a unit that comes to within a 50% effective margin of RifleDreds/psycannons, because one doesnt exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dok wrote:Or simply weight of numbers. You throw enough Grey Knights at something and it's bound to fall!

and you dont find it ironic the amount of players playing Grey Knights, compared to a year and a half ago when the codex wasnt out.

I agree. In touniment terms they do nothing badly so leave no hole to exploit. Yes a bad player will always be a bad player and a good player will be good, but GK flatter everyone. Mistakes are not punished in the same way as other forces. Any other force you can think "well my basic plan is".

DE? Shooty them down befor they get to you and don't let them assault. Get um out in the open.
IG or Tau? Get in and carve them up in CC.
SM? Do what your force dose best and avoid what it dose worst.
Necron? Treat them like SM.
GK? What is the hole in what they can do?

The only place they are not that strong is long range against AV14, but they can do enough damage in CC that they roll up in there own AV14, or deep strike, or fly in, and do the job at close range, that this is not a problem.

Stand back and shoot? They can put out the fire power to take you down, and have the saves to shrug off your shots.
Want to Assault them? You'll get a load of psycic powers to effect you, help them and then they will get all the advantages of assaulting and you lose yours.
Wait and be assaulted? Same again, and cover meens nothing to them.
Got psycic powers? Well they have so many psycic powers that you can do nothing to stop most of them, but you'll never get one off at Gray Knights.

Every other force has a weekness and a strength, yet GK have no weekness and unlike Space Marines (who have no huge weekness, but no huge strenght) they are stong in many areas.

For non competative play they can be so easerly taylord. Playing Hordes? Purifier Spam. Playing MEQ? Draigowing with some dreds. CC force? Spam them psycannons and psyrifle dreds, oh and don't forget to use the Int 6 and hammerhand to make sure you kill anyone if you do get in CC. Shoty enamy? Deep strike and symitars on everything.

Just look at the price of basic gray knights. Then look at the price of a basic SM. 100 points with all the cool gear they get for the GK's (better guns, force weapons for all), 105 for the SM with one power weapon.

People keep saying that "the last codex is always seen as OP" but noone is complaining about Necron and the DE complaining went within about a month, once everyone worked out how they played.

The problem isnt Grey Knights.

The real problem is this mech domination in tournaments which has totally knocked out armys that can't do razorback or leafblower spam.

Lets see which are the top armys

grey knights
space wolves
blood angels
imperial guard

oh and they happen to just all do razorback/leafblower spam coincidence? no

Why have eldar, csm and orks gone from top to bottom in the past 4 years?

Eldar armys get shafted thanks to psychic power negation the new books have now.

Chaos Space Marines are exactly the same they cant reliably lash of submission anymore thanks to psychic power negation and the mech domination.

Orks attempt to deal with mech then next turn get shot to pieces.

Electro wrote:

Smitty0305 wrote:

helium42 wrote:The people who QQ about GKs will keep this thread going in perpetuity.

Yet your posting on it as well

I mainly play Eldar, and here is my problem with Grey Knights.

I cant assault them, because they negate my seer council, my psychic powers, and overall have better armor saves, initiatives, attacks, strength, toughness, and overall better attacks, supported by better HQ's

I cant out- maneuver them, because StormRavens are just as fast as I am, but they have an assault ramp.

I cant out Shoot them - One of their infantry models can out shoot my Main Battle Tank, with a higher Strength, a higher BS, and Rending Shots. 3 RifleDreds can out shoot my entire army, and they cost 400 points, ignore stuns, can easily attain cover, and require no support. If I put EML's on 3 Falcons, with guide support, they out shoot me by a ratio of OVER 60%. If I invest in 650 points of War Walkers, with double guide support, the RifleDreds STILL OUT SHOOT ME.

a GK player has a higher model account, more armor, and more units. There units are better IN EVERY ASPECT.

Do I care if people play grey knights? No.
Do I enjoy playing against grey knights? No.

The codex has no weaknesses. Ive Tried assault based eldar, footdar, Shooting Based Eldar, Autarch dar, and every combination, of every unit, and regardless of what I throw at each unit, GK has a counter that costs less and does more.

Psycannons and RileDreds are too effective. I challenge anyone to find a unit that comes to within a 50% effective margin of RifleDreds/psycannons, because one doesnt exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dok wrote:Or simply weight of numbers. You throw enough Grey Knights at something and it's bound to fall!

and you dont find it ironic the amount of players playing Grey Knights, compared to a year and a half ago when the codex wasnt out.

I agree. In touniment terms they do nothing badly so leave no hole to exploit. Yes a bad player will always be a bad player and a good player will be good, but GK flatter everyone. Mistakes are not punished in the same way as other forces. Any other force you can think "well my basic plan is".

DE? Shooty them down befor they get to you and don't let them assault. Get um out in the open.
IG or Tau? Get in and carve them up in CC.
SM? Do what your force dose best and avoid what it dose worst.
Necron? Treat them like SM.
GK? What is the hole in what they can do?

The only place they are not that strong is long range against AV14, but they can do enough damage in CC that they roll up in there own AV14, or deep strike, or fly in, and do the job at close range, that this is not a problem.

Stand back and shoot? They can put out the fire power to take you down, and have the saves to shrug off your shots.
Want to Assault them? You'll get a load of psycic powers to effect you, help them and then they will get all the advantages of assaulting and you lose yours.
Wait and be assaulted? Same again, and cover meens nothing to them.
Got psycic powers? Well they have so many psycic powers that you can do nothing to stop most of them, but you'll never get one off at Gray Knights.

Every other force has a weekness and a strength, yet GK have no weekness and unlike Space Marines (who have no huge weekness, but no huge strenght) they are stong in many areas.

For non competative play they can be so easerly taylord. Playing Hordes? Purifier Spam. Playing MEQ? Draigowing with some dreds. CC force? Spam them psycannons and psyrifle dreds, oh and don't forget to use the Int 6 and hammerhand to make sure you kill anyone if you do get in CC. Shoty enamy? Deep strike and symitars on everything.

Just look at the price of basic gray knights. Then look at the price of a basic SM. 100 points with all the cool gear they get for the GK's (better guns, force weapons for all), 105 for the SM with one power weapon.

People keep saying that "the last codex is always seen as OP" but noone is complaining about Necron and the DE complaining went within about a month, once everyone worked out how they played.

this is very well put and so true, when the special wolves came out i looked at the "tac" sqaud equiv and went "wtf" they are cheaper and better in everyway???
But then i looked at the LD and went "ok maybe i can make em run more" but with the LD rules in 40k that is unreliable at best, then looked at the DE "Tac" unit (warrior/trueborn) and thought, ok there good but not broken, then BA, red thirst is all they have over norm tacs, necrons... well they get back up and have a 4+ save so ok, immortals are good but not broken, then came GK and well.... yeah
for 100 pts we get 5 storm bolters, 5 force weapons and psy powers ... really? really?

lets see what we get here
Marines
10 man tac sqaud
meltagun, missile, PW, rhino 225
10 man strike sqaud
rhino 235