Dear Forum Posters,

I would like to hear your opinions on the following:

First up, we have Codex Space Marines. Our basic troop choice is 90 points, it contains a sergeant, 4 marines armed with bolt pistols, bolters, frag & krak grenades.

Next up, we have Codex Grey Knights. Our basic troop choice is 100 points, it contains a justicar (sergeant) and 4 Grey Knights armed with: Storm Bolters, Nemesis Force Swords, Frag Grenades, Krak Grenades, Psyk-out grenades... not one but two psychic powers and the ability to deep strike in their point cost of 100.

Can anyone explain the logic behind this, aside from Codex Creep? For 10 points extra, that is a lot of extras. TO be nice, we'll say the Bolter/Bolt Pistol is cancelled out by the Storm Bolter (Even though it is superior with the ability to fire 2 shots within 24" and still assault, unlike the Bolter.)

So for 10 points extra:

5 Force Weapons (not just power weapons, but Nemesis Force weapons).
Psyk-out Grenades.
2 Psychic Powers
Deep Strike
Preferred Enemy
The Aegis

Also worth pointing out, at 5 models they can take a heavy weapon and for 5 points, the force halberd.


So, here's the challenge:

Can anyone try to provide some logical justification? This looks like to me, about 50-100 points extra of wargear for 10 points. Does any army have a basic troop choice that good??? The average Grey Knight costs 4pts more then a Tactical marine and is given a force weapon to along with everything else.

Yes, PAGK, objectively are a lot better value than tac marines. But look at everything else in the codex. The prices are hiked massively. Like Librarians. GK libbys are a full 50 points more than vanilla.

Cerebrium wrote:Yes, PAGK, objectively are a lot better value than tac marines. But look at everything else in the codex. The prices are hiked massively. Like Librarians. GK libbys are a full 50 points more than vanilla.

Of course that's over looking the fact that they come with terminator armor AND the 50 point upgrade to a level 2 psyker....that was a bad example on your part since it's actually 20 points CHEAPER then a vanilla librarian with similar rules.

As for explanation? Tacticals suck compared to everything. It's called a "Tactical Tax" for a reason.

It's just driving me nuts to look at the difference. The majority of local tournaments run at 1000 points and while I've had a great winning streak, I had a crapload of trouble against an army roughly my equal in composition but horribly unequal in terms of wargear.

I run 4 troops space marines with Sicarius and pods (3 tac squads, 1 scout squad) and I almost win every match due to the versatility allowed by really if I want, being able to have a total of 8 scoring units which is key in so many of the missions that come up (and they are randomly chosen each round).

I came up against a GK player who ran a similar setup but instead, he had 30+ guys running around with storm bolters, force weapons etc.. Lucky for me we had an ahnilihation mission and I setup a drop pod firebase and ate him up piecemeal as he came in from reserves. The only nasty part, was him charging me with a unit of 6 GK that survived bolter-storm & hitting me at initiative 6 with power weapons after firing off 12 shots. It got him his one and only KP, one of my tactical squads.

I noticed that some of the other units in the dex are priced higher, but when you consider the extra that are included, this becomes apparent why. Even the Terminatorss cost the same as troop choice....

Anyone out there play GKs much? How competitive are they? I'm considering them for my next army.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Carnage43 wrote:

Cerebrium wrote:Yes, PAGK, objectively are a lot better value than tac marines. But look at everything else in the codex. The prices are hiked massively. Like Librarians. GK libbys are a full 50 points more than vanilla.

Of course that's over looking the fact that they come with terminator armor AND the 50 point upgrade to a level 2 psyker....that was a bad example on your part since it's actually 20 points CHEAPER then a vanilla librarian with similar rules.

As for explanation? Tacticals suck compared to everything. It's called a "Tactical Tax" for a reason.

LOL... so yet another unit that is superior to the Codex: Space Marines version for less points.

Also, was that sarcasm saying that Tacticals suck compared to everything?

Yes, one on one, or even squad on squad, power armour Grey Knights are superior to tactical marines.

However they are more expensive.

A typical 10 man squad, two psycannon, hammer and a Rhino is 270 points. A tactical squad with multi-melta, flamer and Rhino is 205. That 65 points adds up fast over a few squads.

They can't cost Grey Knights against Space Marines, because if they did they wouldn't have enough models to compete in any level of the game. As it is, many competitive builds will revolve around Coteaz and his ability to allow henchmen as troops choices freeing up more points for really dangerous units (as well as providing the ever essential melta threat). 6 acolytes, 3 meltaguns, las-plas razorback is 134 points, and far more useful than the aforementioned Grey Knight squad.

I play GK, and with a good list and a lot of discipline, you can win. Always use your psychic powers, and never assault something you havent shot to bits first. They are neither an assault or shooty army, they do both equally well, so you have to have a healthy mix.

IdentifyZero wrote:Also, was that sarcasm saying that Tacticals suck compared to everything?

Sadly no. Other then Tau and Necrons I can't really think of a book with worse troops.

As a long time Ultramarine player, I'm running out of ideas to stay ahead of all the new armies.

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:Yes, one on one, or even squad on squad, power armour Grey Knights are superior to tactical marines.

However they are more expensive.

A typical 10 man squad, two psycannon, hammer and a Rhino is 270 points. A tactical squad with multi-melta, flamer and Rhino is 205. That 65 points adds up fast over a few squads.

They can't cost Grey Knights against Space Marines, because if they did they wouldn't have enough models to compete in any level of the game. As it is, many competitive builds will revolve around Coteaz and his ability to allow henchmen as troops choices freeing up more points for really dangerous units (as well as providing the ever essential melta threat). 6 acolytes, 3 meltaguns, las-plas razorback is 134 points, and far more useful than the aforementioned Grey Knight squad.

I kind of like how you didn't give them comparable upgrades. to make one seem like it costs a lot more. Power Fist on Sergeant - 25 points right there, which is comparable to the hammer which costs you guys 10 and the points difference only seems to be 45 and then you're probably going to want upgrades; likely a meltagun & a combi-melta which is another 15.

Either way, you're looking at roughly 30 points more on a 10 man with transport for 10 power weapons, 10 24" assault 2 bolters, 2 psychic powers etc...

Yep TWO psychic powers is overpowered.

Except they are Mastery level 1. Which means it's ONE of them (and no force weapon ability) at a time.

You can't Hammerhand with them AND use the forceweapon ID ability with them.
If you want to ID them, you do it at S4. Many of the multiwound units are tougher than T4. Which means you need 5's to wound (or 6s). These are not guaranteed kills.

Now if they were ALL ML2, then yes, it might be a problem. They aren't. Most of the units aren't ML2. So it's a trade off. One or the other.

chromedog wrote:Yep TWO psychic powers is overpowered.

Except they are Mastery level 1. Which means it's ONE of them (and no force weapon ability) at a time.

You can't Hammerhand with them AND use the forceweapon ID ability with them.
If you want to ID them, you do it at S4. Many of the multiwound units are tougher than T4. Which means you need 5's to wound (or 6s). These are not guaranteed kills.

Now if they were ALL ML2, then yes, it might be a problem. They aren't. Most of the units aren't ML2. So it's a trade off. One or the other.

I chuckled. They also have Warp Quake...so in essence they have 3 psychic powers. 1 for screwing over deepstriking lists (Demons, DoA, Drop-pod assault just to name a few), 1 for butchering basic infantry or helping them crack vehicles in melee, and the good old force weapon to insta' splat monstrous creatures. Flexibility is never a downside. Considering the tactical squad they are compared to can do none of the above....yeah.

I haven't seen any logical justifications.

Just that it's not overpowered they get so much for so little points.

I should clarify, just the fact that they can use 1 psychic power a turn, let alone choose between 3 (counting the NFW) is pretty powerful without including all of the other stuff. I was even hoping, someone could have pointed out a downside to this... all I see is:

Nemesis Force Weapons = Win.
Choice of Psychic Powers in Normal Unit = Win.
Deep Strike = Useful and a positive.
Fairly cheap upgrades = Win.
Extremely Flexible, some might say 'Tactical' = Win.

My point is and it's something a lot of Marine players are pointing out (The FLGS I play at, marines are a small minority at all 3) we are being rapidly hit with Codex Creep. I understand every army list is different, that's obvious and I enjoy that aspect of the game, but points values are supposed to keep armies at relatively the same 'power' level for the same points value. I never had a big issue with unit points values through 2nd-4th edition but in 5th Edition, I am seeing more and more of this 'oddity'.

Aside from selling more models for various reasons (New Kits + New Armies + Good Rules = Lots of Sales.) There is also (Lesser points cost = people buy more models to field their force). I'm sure if they kept GKs closer to the old points costs, it wouldn't be so bad. As it stands, you're paying 10 points extra over their closest equivalent comparison, for an amazing slew of upgrades & wargear.

So much insanity, my brain hurts.

I think the "balance" you will see most people spout is that they aren't any tougher to kill then normal tactical marines, but cost 25% more per model. Of course that's on a model by model basis, and as you calculated it's only ~11% more per squad basis.

Which is low in my opinion.

Of course, this is comparing them to Tactical marines. Try comparing them to Ork Boyz, Grey Hunters or Genestealers or something and they look a lot closer to balanced.

Every new Marine troop that comes out makes me rage

Grey hunters with 3 attacks whether they charge or not and the exact same price as tacticals

Assault Marine squads with double melta, fist, jump packs deep striking with 1+ reserve and 1D6 scatter

Grey knight basic troops with storm bolters and fething force weapons on every single guy, only slightly more expensive then tacticals


Vanilla marines, with a 5th edition codex, get a choice between garbage, or lower BS/WS/armor garbage. We literally have the worst troops in 5th ed. Doesn't make us bad though, I am not saying we are underpowered. Just have to take min troops and max out fast/elite/heavy and hope for the best.

Carnage43 wrote:I think the "balance" you will see most people spout is that they aren't any tougher to kill then normal tactical marines, but cost 25% more per model. Of course that's on a model by model basis, and as you calculated it's only ~11% more per squad basis.

Which is low in my opinion.

Of course, this is comparing them to Tactical marines. Try comparing them to Ork Boyz, Grey Hunters or Genestealers or something and they look a lot closer to balanced.

One squad costs 90 and the other costs 100.

That is 18 points per Tactical marine. 20 Points per Grey Knight. 2 Point difference. It's actually closer to a 10% difference in cost. You literally pay 2 points more a model for a power weapon, a storm bolter (which is an upgrade to a bolter) & a psychic power.

Good point on comparing them to other Codexes though. After reading through a few, I'm wondering WTF is up with Codex: Space Marines 5th...



Automatically Appended Next Post:

scubasteve04 wrote:Vanilla marines, with a 5th edition codex, get a choice between garbage, or lower BS/WS/armor garbage. We literally have the worst troops in 5th ed. Doesn't make us bad though, I am not saying we are underpowered. Just have to take min troops and max out fast/elite/heavy and hope for the best.

Yeah, I just came back in 5th and I do realize the Blood Angels, Space Wolves and now Grey Knights have far superior troops to us vanilla Codex players. The thing is....

Unless you play all out war scenarios with kill points only or you allow other units aside from troops to score, how are you going to manage with just 2 troops? In the local tournies, ONLY Troops can Hold OR Contest which obviously increases the value some here; as in many cases, units other then troops can contest.

In many cases, if you are smart and eliminate your opponents troops in the objective based game... you are almost guaranteed victory. Granted, these are only 1000 point tournaments. In a bigger game, it becomes easier to min/max with such things.

I just feel like the hobby has become like MMOs, the new thing to come out is always the best and shiniest.

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:Yes, one on one, or even squad on squad, power armour Grey Knights are superior to tactical marines.

However they are more expensive.

A typical 10 man squad, two psycannon, hammer and a Rhino is 270 points. A tactical squad with multi-melta, flamer and Rhino is 205. That 65 points adds up fast over a few squads.

They can't cost Grey Knights against Space Marines, because if they did they wouldn't have enough models to compete in any level of the game. As it is, many competitive builds will revolve around Coteaz and his ability to allow henchmen as troops choices freeing up more points for really dangerous units (as well as providing the ever essential melta threat). 6 acolytes, 3 meltaguns, las-plas razorback is 134 points, and far more useful than the aforementioned Grey Knight squad.

I completely agree with the OP. This example just further proves the attempt to justify the cost difference as flawed. 10 man squad with psykic power, drastically better weapons in every instance of what you depict a "typical squad" as having (psycannon > flamer, psycannon > multimelta, storm bolter > boltgun, NFW > bolt pistol, hammer > chainsword), and yes, the same transport. If anything, GK players should be happy it only costs 65 more points. Try a SM sarge with a powerfist as the closest thing to a hammer, and a plasma gun instead of flamer and now its only 25 more points. Considering the cost of a storm bolter upgrade is between 3 and 5 points depending on the model (for SM that can actually take it), you are already getting quite a deal, and this is without the force weapons or psykers. Don't even try to justify it, it is just creep plain and simple. Heavan forbid they should have to use something as un-useful as the aforementioned Grey Knight squad... And then there's the nerve of asserting that the Nemesis falchions should give +2A because otherwise they aren't points cost efficient compared to the other nemesis weapons... and don't get started on vindicare assassins.

It is following the same pattern of attracting the bandwagoners with its sheer weight of creep awesomeness.

yeenoghu wrote:

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:Yes, one on one, or even squad on squad, power armour Grey Knights are superior to tactical marines.

However they are more expensive.

A typical 10 man squad, two psycannon, hammer and a Rhino is 270 points. A tactical squad with multi-melta, flamer and Rhino is 205. That 65 points adds up fast over a few squads.

They can't cost Grey Knights against Space Marines, because if they did they wouldn't have enough models to compete in any level of the game. As it is, many competitive builds will revolve around Coteaz and his ability to allow henchmen as troops choices freeing up more points for really dangerous units (as well as providing the ever essential melta threat). 6 acolytes, 3 meltaguns, las-plas razorback is 134 points, and far more useful than the aforementioned Grey Knight squad.

I completely agree with the OP. This example just further proves the attempt to justify the cost difference as flawed. 10 man squad with psykic power, drastically better weapons in every instance of what you depict a "typical squad" as having (psycannon > flamer, psycannon > multimelta, storm bolter > boltgun, NFW > bolt pistol, hammer > chainsword), and yes, the same transport. If anything, GK players should be happy it only costs 65 more points. Try a SM sarge with a powerfist as the closest thing to a hammer, and a plasma gun instead of flamer and now its only 25 more points. Considering the cost of a storm bolter upgrade is between 3 and 5 points depending on the model (for SM that can actually take it), you are already getting quite a deal, and this is without the force weapons or psykers. Don't even try to justify it, it is just creep plain and simple. Heavan forbid they should have to use something as un-useful as the aforementioned Grey Knight squad!

Well said friend. I love Warhammer 40,000, I just wish things weren't going in this direction. Grey Knights have always been a very powerful and ELITE army, but they cost a lot of points for it.

Now they've become the new Marines from what I see......

10 Tactical Marines = 170
10 Grey Knights = 200

Yes, PAGK can Deep Strike, but I think Drop Pods are better for that...

And the only special weapons PAGK can take are Psilencer, Incinerator, and Psycannon.

They really shouldn't be compared...

Tactical Marines do suck, they are one of the worst troop choices in the game and I have no idea why people like them or insist on play Smurfs.
The fact that they can only take one special weapon annoys me to no end.

CSM get two special weapons.
BT don't but they only require 5 Crusaders to unlock a heavy weapon option.
BA Tactical Marines can't, but Assault Marines can and who takes Tac Marines as BA?
DA can't but, that's 3rd edition...
Grey Hunters can.
Hell, even SoB can go duel meltaguns if they want.

WHY NOT TACTICAL MARINES?!

yeenoghu wrote:

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:Yes, one on one, or even squad on squad, power armour Grey Knights are superior to tactical marines.

However they are more expensive.

A typical 10 man squad, two psycannon, hammer and a Rhino is 270 points. A tactical squad with multi-melta, flamer and Rhino is 205. That 65 points adds up fast over a few squads.

They can't cost Grey Knights against Space Marines, because if they did they wouldn't have enough models to compete in any level of the game. As it is, many competitive builds will revolve around Coteaz and his ability to allow henchmen as troops choices freeing up more points for really dangerous units (as well as providing the ever essential melta threat). 6 acolytes, 3 meltaguns, las-plas razorback is 134 points, and far more useful than the aforementioned Grey Knight squad.

I completely agree with the OP. This example just further proves the attempt to justify the cost difference as flawed. 10 man squad with psychic power, drastically better weapons in every instance of what you depict a "typical squad" as having (psycannon > flamer, psycannon > multimelta, storm bolter > boltgun, NFW > bolt pistol, hammer > chainsword), and yes, the same transport.

Of course you do.

If anything, GK players should be happy it only costs 65 more points.
Try a SM sarge with a powerfist as the closest thing to a hammer, and a plasma gun instead of flamer and now its only 25 more points. Considering the cost of a storm bolter upgrade is between 3 and 5 points depending on the model (for SM that can actually take it), you are already getting quite a deal, and this is without the force weapons or psykers.

And what else do you get on that Tactical Squad? You're purposefully ignoring that many Codex: Space Marines characters replace "Combat Tactics" with something else.
Please.

Don't even try to justify it, it is just creep plain and simple. Heaven forbid they should have to use something as un-useful as the aforementioned Grey Knight squad!

Heaven forbid Marine players don't get what they want!

So where's my Dark Angels Tactical Marines being worth taking? Where's my Deathwing being top dog of the Terminator game? I mean, Grey Knights are better than my army--I should be better too!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IdentifyZero wrote:
Well said friend. I love Warhammer 40,000, I just wish things weren't going in this direction. Grey Knights have always been a very powerful and ELITE army, but they cost a lot of points for it.

Now they've become the new Marines from what I see......

Oh please. Take a look at some of the builds that can be done with Grey Knights.

You can effectively field 8 models as an army. That's "powerful and ELITE".

The only difference is that now there's also the ability to field a more 'standard Marine' army as well.

This doesn't mean your precious Marines are somehow nerfed. It just means you need to buck up, quit whining that you've "got it soooo bad", and adapt.

Adapt? Like all the "counts as" marines? I have no problem that some other army is "better", as in, has superior stuff. That's all fine as long as the points costs reflect it. They don't reflect it at all.

Yes yes, and Grey Hunters and BA Assault squads are also way better than SM tacticals. When will people realize 40K (or fantasy) can never be a balanced game for tournament play? The design methodology simply doesn't allow for it. When they actually have a team of writers all working together on each book, so that each book is put out with the same level of oversight and no single individual's biases colors the whole product, then maybe we can start contemplating GW games as tournament-worthy.

Until then, it's all bogus. Just enjoy the mayhem and try not to think about it too hard. Or play Warmachine. *shrug*

Kanluwen wrote:

yeenoghu wrote:

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:Yes, one on one, or even squad on squad, power armour Grey Knights are superior to tactical marines.

However they are more expensive.

A typical 10 man squad, two psycannon, hammer and a Rhino is 270 points. A tactical squad with multi-melta, flamer and Rhino is 205. That 65 points adds up fast over a few squads.

They can't cost Grey Knights against Space Marines, because if they did they wouldn't have enough models to compete in any level of the game. As it is, many competitive builds will revolve around Coteaz and his ability to allow henchmen as troops choices freeing up more points for really dangerous units (as well as providing the ever essential melta threat). 6 acolytes, 3 meltaguns, las-plas razorback is 134 points, and far more useful than the aforementioned Grey Knight squad.

I completely agree with the OP. This example just further proves the attempt to justify the cost difference as flawed. 10 man squad with psychic power, drastically better weapons in every instance of what you depict a "typical squad" as having (psycannon > flamer, psycannon > multimelta, storm bolter > boltgun, NFW > bolt pistol, hammer > chainsword), and yes, the same transport.

Of course you do.

If anything, GK players should be happy it only costs 65 more points.
Try a SM sarge with a powerfist as the closest thing to a hammer, and a plasma gun instead of flamer and now its only 25 more points. Considering the cost of a storm bolter upgrade is between 3 and 5 points depending on the model (for SM that can actually take it), you are already getting quite a deal, and this is without the force weapons or psykers.

And what else do you get on that Tactical Squad? You're purposefully ignoring that many Codex: Space Marines characters replace "Combat Tactics" with something else.
Please.

Don't even try to justify it, it is just creep plain and simple. Heaven forbid they should have to use something as un-useful as the aforementioned Grey Knight squad!

Heaven forbid Marine players don't get what they want!

So where's my Dark Angels Tactical Marines being worth taking? Where's my Deathwing being top dog of the Terminator game? I mean, Grey Knights are better than my army--I should be better too!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

IdentifyZero wrote:
Well said friend. I love Warhammer 40,000, I just wish things weren't going in this direction. Grey Knights have always been a very powerful and ELITE army, but they cost a lot of points for it.

Now they've become the new Marines from what I see......

Oh please. Take a look at some of the builds that can be done with Grey Knights.

You can effectively field 8 models as an army. That's "powerful and ELITE".

The only difference is that now there's also the ability to field a more 'standard Marine' army as well.

This doesn't mean your precious Marines are somehow nerfed. It just means you need to buck up, quit whining that you've "got it soooo bad", and adapt.

You need to chill out. I found your post to be filled with barely concealed passive-aggressive rage that was just ready to burst through.

We were having a calm discussion. Would you like to join it, or would you like to try and vent your real life issues via forum raging?

IdentifyZero wrote:
You need to chill out. I found your post to be filled with barely concealed passive-aggressive rage that was just ready to burst through.

We were having a calm discussion. Would you like to join it, or would you like to try and vent your real life issues via forum raging?

"Calm discussion"?

I love how people always play the "calm discussion" card when their post was a great big whine and someone calls them on it. Or the ever popular "you're raging".

You're not interested in people "logically justifying" the Grey Knights. That's already been done, you've brushed it off.

Maybe, just maybe, one day you'll come to realize that armies aren't meant to be built around a single unit that is effectively "spammed".
Maybe you'll realize that while to you, Grey Knights look overpowered--to many other armies they're one great big bullseye.

In this particular case it's not that GK are overpowered (okay, Grey Hunters might be), but that regular Space Marines really suck.

Oh, and they don't have the same transport. GK transports can ignore shaken/stunned results.

I am going to go into the disagree camp for C:SM versus Grey Knights on the Tactical Marines versus PAGKs.

The comparative of C:SM versus Grey Knights is unfair in some respects.

C:SM forces its marines to go for the full ten man squad because it then opens up the gate of upgrades to make the unit better.

At ten models, you get this:

a free flamer or 5pt melta gun,
a free HB, MM, or ML.

Considering the Troop option PAGKs have to pay for most of their useful weapons aside from the Psilencer (which is debatable as to usefulness), PAGKs tend to get far more expensive than your typical Tac squad of SMs.

In addition, PAGKs unlock their upgrades at 5 models, meaning the codex designers know that these armies will tend to have a lower model count and therefore give them access to their options at a lower count of models (this assumes a GK army will stick with PAGKs and no Inquisitors, or Purifier troopers, ect.).

One thing to keep in mind with GKs as well is that even with all their fancy new weapons, they are also psykers and subject to weaknesses and weapons that target or hose pyskers specifically. A hammerhand or Force Weapon activation could potentially backfire or fail, leaving them as regular SMs with power weapons.

withershadow wrote:In this particular case it's not that GK are overpowered (okay, Grey Hunters might be), but that regular Space Marines really suck.

Really suck compared to what? Their specialized cousins?
Grey Hunters are seemingly OP when you simply compare them 1:1 for each trooper.

But when you actually sit back and look: Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon, and at best can take a power weapon/power fist. There's no Sergeant either.

Oh, and they don't have the same transport. GK transports can ignore shaken/stunned results.

They can only nullify Shaken/Stunned results from a successful Psychic test taken during the Movement phase.

Oh no, I need to not roll an 11 or 12 as opposed to ... not being able to do anything at all.

And not being able to take a heavy weapon is hardly a disadvantage. If regular tacticals could take two special weapons instead of a special and heavy, no one would take the heavy. Grey Hunters get a second special weapon for free, can take a power fist, and MotW and banner, which also makes them quite deadly in melee. If you want to give up the second special weapon, you can attach a wolfguard for more melee beatdown and a combi-weapon.

Regular Space Marines suck compared to any other 5th edition troop choice.

Kanluwen wrote:

IdentifyZero wrote:
You need to chill out. I found your post to be filled with barely concealed passive-aggressive rage that was just ready to burst through.

We were having a calm discussion. Would you like to join it, or would you like to try and vent your real life issues via forum raging?

"Calm discussion"?

I love how people always play the "calm discussion" card when their post was a great big whine and someone calls them on it. Or the ever popular "you're raging".

You're not interested in people "logically justifying" the Grey Knights. That's already been done, you've brushed it off.

Maybe, just maybe, one day you'll come to realize that armies aren't meant to be built around a single unit that is effectively "spammed".
Maybe you'll realize that while to you, Grey Knights look overpowered--to many other armies they're one great big bullseye.

Never called them overpowered, jumping to conclusions is a great sign of intelligent life.

I compared the points cost of normal GK Troops to Normal SM Troops and noted, there was a large disparity. I don't think a single post in this topic has been about GKs stomping anyone or people complaining they are incredibly OP.

The points costs are skewed. Did you read the topic or just rage and jump into a whine-fest?

withershadow wrote:Oh no, I need to not roll an 11 or 12 as opposed to ... not being able to do anything at all.

And not being able to take a heavy weapon is hardly a disadvantage. If regular tacticals could take two special weapons instead of a special and heavy, no one would take the heavy. Grey Hunters get a second special weapon for free, can take a power fist, and MotW and banner, which also makes them quite deadly in melee. If you want to give up the second special weapon, you can attach a wolfguard for more melee beatdown and a combi-weapon.

Regular Space Marines suck compared to any other 5th edition troop choice.

And some 3rd and 4th edition choices as well.

Grey Hunters get a second special weapon if the unit numbers 10 models.

Mark of the Wulfen can only be taken by one model.

Let's also not forget the "Leaders of the Pack" special rule.

No two Space Wolves characters may take the same wargear combination, Sagas, or even Psychic Powers.

WarOne wrote:I am going to go into the disagree camp for C:SM versus Grey Knights on the Tactical Marines versus PAGKs.

The comparative of C:SM versus Grey Knights is unfair in some respects.

C:SM forces its marines to go for the full ten man squad because it then opens up the gate of upgrades to make the unit better.

At ten models, you get this:

a free flamer or 5pt melta gun,
a free HB, MM, or ML.

Considering the Troop option PAGKs have to pay for most of their useful weapons aside from the Psilencer (which is debatable as to usefulness), PAGKs tend to get far more expensive than your typical Tac squad of SMs.

In addition, PAGKs unlock their upgrades at 5 models, meaning the codex designers know that these armies will tend to have a lower model count and therefore give them access to their options at a lower count of models (this assumes a GK army will stick with PAGKs and no Inquisitors, or Purifier troopers, ect.).

One thing to keep in mind with GKs as well is that even with all their fancy new weapons, they are also psykers and subject to weaknesses and weapons that target or hose pyskers specifically. A hammerhand or Force Weapon activation could potentially backfire or fail, leaving them as regular SMs with power weapons.

None of the GK upgrades cost more then regular Tactical Marine upgrades. In fact, they get cheaper upgrades on the whole which tend to be better versions of what normal marines get. Take a look at both codex entries. I think if you ignore everything else in difference, just consider this: GKs get Nemesis Force Weapons for 2 points each.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:

withershadow wrote:Oh no, I need to not roll an 11 or 12 as opposed to ... not being able to do anything at all.

And not being able to take a heavy weapon is hardly a disadvantage. If regular tacticals could take two special weapons instead of a special and heavy, no one would take the heavy. Grey Hunters get a second special weapon for free, can take a power fist, and MotW and banner, which also makes them quite deadly in melee. If you want to give up the second special weapon, you can attach a wolfguard for more melee beatdown and a combi-weapon.

Regular Space Marines suck compared to any other 5th edition troop choice.

And some 3rd and 4th edition choices as well.

Yep.... which is why it is funny Captain Rage jumped in the topic and got upset. xD

I just like how when the space marine codex first came out, everyone said:

"DUDE! Space marines RULE now! How can you possibly lose with this army?"

2 years later:

"DUDE! Space marines SUCK now! How can you possibly win with this army?"

Gk's have some strong abilities, but they have weaknesses too. What little long range firepower than can bring (though good), really cuts into the rest of their army. They really do play more like a shoot first, assault if you have to force, despite what they look like; and the majority of that shooting is at midfield.

Treat them like you would any other cc style army, with a few changes:

1. Fight them at long range for as long as you possibly can
2. While you're doing that, concentrate on getting their troops out on foot before going after psydreads etc, it's actually more beneficial
3. Bring a hood; most times you'll have a 50% chance or better of stopping their abilities. They don't like that
4. TH/SS termies are still your friends, and all gk troops are actually scared of them in cc; even paladins. Only with the addition of powerful HQ units can they beat th/ss in combat, and it's not cost effective for them at all

The Moderators suggest that if you feel the need to attack another user personally, you pause, reflect on how seriously you are taking the toy soldier discussion, and remember that you agreed to abide by the Forum Rules when you made an account here. If a particular poster is rude or otherwise breaking the forum rules, be sure to hit the Alert Moderator button on their post. Being rude yourself never helps. It only makes you look as bad or worse. On the other hand, if you are able to remain scrupulously polite when another poster seems rude, you... A) Win the respect of other posters. B) Add to the strength of your argument. C) Avoid Moderator action to your detriment. D) Avoid the risk of attacking someone who did not mean offense, which occasionally happens.

Kanluwen wrote:

IdentifyZero wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

IdentifyZero wrote:
You need to chill out. I found your post to be filled with barely concealed passive-aggressive rage that was just ready to burst through.

We were having a calm discussion. Would you like to join it, or would you like to try and vent your real life issues via forum raging?

"Calm discussion"?

I love how people always play the "calm discussion" card when their post was a great big whine and someone calls them on it. Or the ever popular "you're raging".

You're not interested in people "logically justifying" the Grey Knights. That's already been done, you've brushed it off.

Maybe, just maybe, one day you'll come to realize that armies aren't meant to be built around a single unit that is effectively "spammed".
Maybe you'll realize that while to you, Grey Knights look overpowered--to many other armies they're one great big bullseye.

Never called them overpowered, jumping to conclusions is a great sign of intelligent life.

A sarcasm is the last refuge of a shallow mind.

I compared the points cost of normal GK Troops to Normal SM Troops and noted, there was a large disparity. I don't think a single post in this topic has been about GKs stomping anyone or people complaining they are incredibly OP.

And you failed to notice that while "normal" Grey Knights troops come out superior to "normal" SM troops--"normal" SM troops come out superior to Guard and Eldar troops.

You seem to have this idea that Space Marines are the end all, be all. They are in fact not.

I really hope that Robin Cruddace gets his hands on writing the next book and incorporates some fluff requirements. A full Scout Squad for every 5 Tactical marines and every 2 Terminators sounds about right to me.

The points costs are skewed. Did you read the topic or just rage and jump into a whine-fest?

Of course the points costs are skewed. The points costs are always going to be skewed when you go from book to book.

Your stuff is cheaper than my Dark Angels stuff. You get Scouts as Troops, while I get them as Elites.
Your Veterans get specialized bolter ammunition, mine do not.
Your Terminators can get 10 model units and Dedicated Land Raider transports. Mine do not.
Your Dreadnoughts even get the signature Dark Angels "Mortis" pattern--my Dark Angels do not.
Your Chapter Masters get Orbital Bombardments--mine do not.

So can I cry about your book being 'skewed' compared to mine?

Not without any real reason. Know why?
Because different books have different advantages and disadvantages.

You also failed to mention the advantages Dark Angels have for using an older Codex in the current setting. Unless you're dead-set on a Ravenwing or Deathwing army, you may as well use CSM 5th Edition or wait till you get a new Codex this edition that will have some insanely powerful rules for you to play with.

IdentifyZero wrote:
You also failed to mention the advantages Dark Angels have for using an older Codex in the current setting. Unless you're dead-set on a Ravenwing or Deathwing army, you may as well use CSM 5th Edition or wait till you get a new Codex this edition that will have some insanely powerful rules for you to play with.

And what advantages would those be?

Go on, name some.

And why would I field Deathwing if I could just use Loganwing? Or Draicowing?

omerakk wrote:I just like how when the space marine codex first came out, everyone said:

"DUDE! Space marines RULE now! How can you possibly lose with this army?"

2 years later:

"DUDE! Space marines SUCK now! How can you possibly win with this army?"

Gk's have some strong abilities, but they have weaknesses too. What little long range firepower than can bring (though good), really cuts into the rest of their army. They really do play more like a shoot first, assault if you have to force, despite what they look like; and the majority of that shooting is at midfield.

Treat them like you would any other cc style army, with a few changes:

1. Fight them at long range for as long as you possibly can
2. While you're doing that, concentrate on getting their troops out on foot before going after psydreads etc, it's actually more beneficial
3. Bring a hood; most times you'll have a 50% chance or better of stopping their abilities. They don't like that
4. TH/SS termies are still your friends, and all gk troops are actually scared of them in cc; even paladins. Only with the addition of powerful HQ units can they beat th/ss in combat, and it's not cost effective for them at all

I see a few people have said Space Marine Tactical Squads are the worst troop choices, I haven't seen a single SM Suck post...

I'm not sure why several of you are jumping on to the topic and taking it as a SM Suck. The majority of us talking about this, seem to play Codex Chapters or use CSM. The only people I've seen say SM Suck are the people who have jumped in to attack the discussion.

For the record, giving a defense like, different writers wrote the books: It's not as if they didn't have the other book to reference.

OR

LOOK AT IMPERIAL GUARD OR TAU! Look at the points cost difference there to, Guardsmen and Tau do not cost the same as Space Marines or 2 points less with a slew less equipment.

The point of this entire post, is *drumroll*:

CODEX CREEP.

Do none of you have any issue what-so-ever with a series of more powerful Codices being released one after the other in order to sell models? I suspect some of you have not been playing Warhammer long enough, to remember when GW was actually very much about the Hobby aspect. Now it's come down purely, to a marketting aspect.

Go look at a White Dwarf from the 90s... Compare it to the crap they release now as a Hobby Magazine.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kanluwen wrote:

IdentifyZero wrote:
You also failed to mention the advantages Dark Angels have for using an older Codex in the current setting. Unless you're dead-set on a Ravenwing or Deathwing army, you may as well use CSM 5th Edition or wait till you get a new Codex this edition that will have some insanely powerful rules for you to play with.

And what advantages would those be?

Go on, name some.

And why would I field Deathwing if I could just use Loganwing? Or Draicowing?

The Moderators suggest that if you feel the need to attack another user personally, you pause, reflect on how seriously you are taking the toy soldier discussion, and remember that you agreed to abide by the Forum Rules when you made an account here. If a particular poster is rude or otherwise breaking the forum rules, be sure to hit the Alert Moderator button on their post. Being rude yourself never helps. It only makes you look as bad or worse. On the other hand, if you are able to remain scrupulously polite when another poster seems rude, you... A) Win the respect of other posters. B) Add to the strength of your argument. C) Avoid Moderator action to your detriment. D) Avoid the risk of attacking someone who did not mean offense, which occasionally happens.


I should also point out, we're once more, not comparing Xenos or Guard with Space Marines. We're comparing Space Marines with *gasp* Space Marines.

All Space Marine Codices should maintain some semblance of coherency in the costs of wargear and units. As for organization? Advantages? Disadvantages? Of course, these are individual aspects to each army, whether or not they are the same race or points value. I think enough points have been brought up by the posters, to show how horribly skewed the points costs are, that I'm done arguing with you.

IdentifyZero wrote:
I see a few people have said Space Marine Tactical Squads are the worst troop choices, I haven't seen a single SM Suck post...

I'm not sure why several of you are jumping on to the topic and taking it as a SM Suck. The majority of us talking about this, seem to play Codex Chapters or use CSM. The only people I've seen say SM Suck are the people who have jumped in to attack the discussion.

For the record, giving a defense like, different writers wrote the books: It's not as if they didn't have the other book to reference.

Why would they reference the other book? Their goal isn't to recreate the other book. It's to do something different.

OR

LOOK AT IMPERIAL GUARD OR TAU! Look at the points cost difference there to, Guardsmen and Tau do not cost the same as Space Marines or 2 points less with a slew less equipment.

This concept of "comparison" seems to be foreign to you.

Right now, as it stands, if you just pen and paper it--sure. Grey Knights are better.
But when you actually take the time, sit back and play--you'll notice that they die just as easy as your normal Space Marines do. You'll notice they have weaknesses and counters, just like your Space Marines do.

The point of this entire post, is *drumroll*:

CODEX CREEP.

Do none of you have any issue what-so-ever with a series of more powerful Codices being released one after the other in order to sell models? I suspect some of you have not been playing Warhammer long enough, to remember when GW was actually very much about the Hobby aspect. Now it's come down purely, to a marketing aspect.

Oh god, I love this one.

You mean when deodorant bottles were to be standard for tanks?

GW is still just as much "about the Hobby aspect".
For that matter, Codex Creep has been around as long as 40k has been around. Maybe you just haven't played Warhammer long enough to notice it.

Go look at a White Dwarf from the 90s... Compare it to the crap they release now as a Hobby Magazine.

It's about the same, once you get rid of the "nostalgia makes everything better!" attitude. I've got issues from 1998 that are complete crap and I've got issues from last year that are full of fantastic stuff.

Magazines are a dead medium anyways.

Do you know why I love forums and the human race in general?

The Moderators suggest that if you feel the need to attack another user personally, you pause, reflect on how seriously you are taking the toy soldier discussion, and remember that you agreed to abide by the Forum Rules when you made an account here. If a particular poster is rude or otherwise breaking the forum rules, be sure to hit the Alert Moderator button on their post. Being rude yourself never helps. It only makes you look as bad or worse. On the other hand, if you are able to remain scrupulously polite when another poster seems rude, you... A) Win the respect of other posters. B) Add to the strength of your argument. C) Avoid Moderator action to your detriment. D) Avoid the risk of attacking someone who did not mean offense, which occasionally happens.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

IdentifyZero wrote:Dear Forum Posters,

I would like to hear your opinions on the following:

First up, we have Codex Space Marines. Our basic troop choice is 90 points, it contains a sergeant, 4 marines armed with bolt pistols, bolters, frag & krak grenades.

Next up, we have Codex Grey Knights. Our basic troop choice is 100 points, it contains a justicar (sergeant) and 4 Grey Knights armed with: Storm Bolters, Nemesis Force Swords, Frag Grenades, Krak Grenades, Psyk-out grenades... not one but two psychic powers and the ability to deep strike in their point cost of 100.

Can anyone explain the logic behind this, aside from Codex Creep? For 10 points extra, that is a lot of extras. TO be nice, we'll say the Bolter/Bolt Pistol is cancelled out by the Storm Bolter (Even though it is superior with the ability to fire 2 shots within 24" and still assault, unlike the Bolter.)

So for 10 points extra:

5 Force Weapons (not just power weapons, but Nemesis Force weapons).
Psyk-out Grenades.
2 Psychic Powers
Deep Strike
Preferred Enemy
The Aegis

Also worth pointing out, at 5 models they can take a heavy weapon and for 5 points, the force halberd.


So, here's the challenge:

Can anyone try to provide some logical justification? This looks like to me, about 50-100 points extra of wargear for 10 points. Does any army have a basic troop choice that good??? The average Grey Knight costs 4pts more then a Tactical marine and is given a force weapon to along with everything else.

Looking at the OPs post (oh that's me)..... this seems to be a comparison and points discussion of these two units.

IdentifyZero wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:

IdentifyZero wrote:
You also failed to mention the advantages Dark Angels have for using an older Codex in the current setting. Unless you're dead-set on a Ravenwing or Deathwing army, you may as well use CSM 5th Edition or wait till you get a new Codex this edition that will have some insanely powerful rules for you to play with.

And what advantages would those be?

Go on, name some.

And why would I field Deathwing if I could just use Loganwing? Or Draicowing?

You're a munchkin. Why don't you share your omniprescient gaming knowledge with us?

I should also point out, we're once more, not comparing Xenos or Guard with Space Marines. We're comparing Space Marines with *gasp* Space Marines.

No, we're really not. We're comparing Space Marines that are intended for one thing to Space Marines that aren't.

It's like comparing Dreadnoughts to Sentinels. The roles they're intended to play are not the same.

All Space Marine Codices should maintain some semblance of coherency in the costs of wargear and units.

Aw, and here's the crux of the matter. The little Space Marine is sad he doesn't have the toys that the Grey Knights do.

Tough. They're lacking things, same as you are. While they can take a Thunderhammer equivalent--they forego a Storm Shield and survivability to do so.

As for organization? Advantages? Disadvantages? Of course, these are individual aspects to each army, whether or not they are the same race or points value.

So you'll recognize that there are advantages and disadvantages...but think that they don't apply to the Space Marines codex when compared to other power armoured units?

I think enough points have been brought up by the posters, to show how horribly skewed the points costs are, that I'm done arguing with you.

All I've seen is posters with a case of the "Me too!" disease. The points costs are far from "skewed". Things change, life goes on--you'll get over it.
And if you don't, well...that's kinda sad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Putting it frankly: you were never interested in opinions. You just wanted people to agree with you.

Good luck with that. You'll have a great time here.

The Moderators suggest that if you feel the need to attack another user personally, you pause, reflect on how seriously you are taking the toy soldier discussion, and remember that you agreed to abide by the Forum Rules when you made an account here. If a particular poster is rude or otherwise breaking the forum rules, be sure to hit the Alert Moderator button on their post. Being rude yourself never helps. It only makes you look as bad or worse. On the other hand, if you are able to remain scrupulously polite when another poster seems rude, you... A) Win the respect of other posters. B) Add to the strength of your argument. C) Avoid Moderator action to your detriment. D) Avoid the risk of attacking someone who did not mean offense, which occasionally happens.

omerakk wrote:I just like how when the space marine codex first came out, everyone said:

"DUDE! Space marines RULE now! How can you possibly lose with this army?"

2 years later:

"DUDE! Space marines SUCK now! How can you possibly win with this army?"

Gk's have some strong abilities, but they have weaknesses too. What little long range firepower than can bring (though good), really cuts into the rest of their army. They really do play more like a shoot first, assault if you have to force, despite what they look like; and the majority of that shooting is at midfield.

Treat them like you would any other cc style army, with a few changes:

1. Fight them at long range for as long as you possibly can
2. While you're doing that, concentrate on getting their troops out on foot before going after psydreads etc, it's actually more beneficial
3. Bring a hood; most times you'll have a 50% chance or better of stopping their abilities. They don't like that
4. TH/SS termies are still your friends, and all gk troops are actually scared of them in cc; even paladins. Only with the addition of powerful HQ units can they beat th/ss in combat, and it's not cost effective for them at all

Swing and a miss. Did you read a single post in this thread? No one at any point said Grey Knights are overpowered.

I'm not seeing much codex creep here...just that Tactical Marines REALLY suck.

Let's just compare these two for example:

10 Sisters of Battle /w Veteran Sister Superior /w Combi Flamer and BoSL, H. Flamer, and Flamer - 157 points

10 Tactical Marines /w Flamer - 170 points

SoB are better than Stubborn, they will use LD9 for all tests until their VSS dies. They provide a Faith Point allowing them AP1 weapons on a roll of 10 or less on 2d6 (assuming full strength squad). They put 2 down 2 templates per turn and 3 templates once per game.

Marines get +1 WS, +1S, +1T, +1I, ATSKNF, and a Flamer

Not only are the Sisters better at close range shooting, they're arguably the best anti-infantry troop choice in the game, thanks to Faith and flamer spam they can literally kill any infantry unit (with the exception of multiwound models) in a single turn of shooting. I've seen Sister squads wipe out Plague Marines, Terminators, and all other sorts of fun stuff with their fun firepower.

Tactical Marines provide decent close range shooting and are more durable in CC. But compared to shooty units, they aren't good. Compared to choppy units they aren't good. Tactical Marines look like developers where trying to avoid making them too powerful, realized that they made them underpowered, and fixed those mistakes with the newer Marine codices.

IdentifyZero wrote:For the record, giving a defense like, different writers wrote the books: It's not as if they didn't have the other book to reference.

Codex Space Marines, Codex Blood Angels, and Codex Grey Knights were all written by Matt Ward.

CODEX CREEP.

On this, I disagree. Creep implies that the new book is more powerful than the last. I wouldn't say GK are better than Wolves, Angels, Guard or Dark Eldar. There may be creep in the sense of making each codex more and more off-the-wall to draw sales, but in this case GK have always had equipment up to the gills. C:SM simply has the unfortunate distinction of being released along with 5th edition, so it is most deeply seeped in its mistakes. Newer books have learned from its failures and its successes, such as the penchant for gimmicks spurred by the success of Vulkan.


@omerakk: I am not the OP, I required no such justification. I know why the vanilla-Marine troops are so, well, vanilla by comparison. See above.

Swing and a miss. Did you read a single post in this thread? No one at any point said Grey Knights are overpowered.

No, you're just saying they have better weapons for a cheaper price.... big difference....

You wanted justification for why their basic troops are better for cheaper, and I gave an opinion on why: because the rest of their army suffers for it. The basic troops are given extensive powers to make up for what they lack elsewhere.

Honestly, from what I've been seeing since the gk codex came out, normal space marines have roughly a 50/50 chance of beating them, which is actually much better than their odds against certain other races. It just requires you to change your usual old faithful builds... something the few remaining competitive vanilla marine players have been doing for about 5 months now

Amaya wrote:I'm not seeing much codex creep here...just that Tactical Marines REALLY suck.

Let's just compare these two for example:

10 Sisters of Battle /w Veteran Sister Superior /w Combi Flamer and BoSL, H. Flamer, and Flamer - 157 points

10 Tactical Marines /w Flamer - 170 points

SoB are better than Stubborn, they will use LD9 for all tests until their VSS dies. They provide a Faith Point allowing them AP1 weapons on a roll of 10 or less on 2d6 (assuming full strength squad). They put 2 down 2 templates per turn and 3 templates once per game.

Marines get +1 WS, +1S, +1T, +1I, ATSKNF, and a Flamer

Not only are the Sisters better at close range shooting, they're arguably the best anti-infantry troop choice in the game, thanks to Faith and flamer spam they can literally kill any infantry unit (with the exception of multiwound models) in a single turn of shooting. I've seen Sister squads wipe out Plague Marines, Terminators, and all other sorts of fun stuff with their fun firepower.

Tactical Marines provide decent close range shooting and are more durable in CC. But compared to shooty units, they aren't good. Compared to choppy units they aren't good. Tactical Marines look like developers where trying to avoid making them too powerful, realized that they made them underpowered, and fixed those mistakes with the newer Marine codices.

That's a pretty crappy generalization. Tactical marines also have combat tactics (or whatever replaces it) and can take free heavy weapons. Add in a (mandatory) transport and you'll notice that point differential drop. This unit to unit comparison is getting ridiculous.

As for the OP - Space Marines are no less/more competitive than Grey Knights as far as I can tell. Although PAGK may trump tactical marines, it is more than compensated by other space marine advantages (TH/SS termies, land speeders, predators, special characters, bikes...)

Well its not really reflected in squad points value and such, but if GKs want to minimize points sunk into scoring troop choices, they have the Hq ability to make other non-troops scoring
and balance out the lack of typical scoring versatility.

But thats neither here nor there.

IdentifyZero wrote:Do you know why I love forums and the human race in general?

You can post one thing, dealing with the math behind a single and individual unit in comparison to another similar unit.

Then, it just takes a single idiot to blow it out of proportion as he goes on a crusade of ignorance to try and enlighten the masses about things they didn't care about.

Until the above poster came into this topic, there was no mention of SMs sucking or no overall comparison of CSM to CGK, but just comparing the two most basic squads points costs and loadouts.

You know why I love forums and the human race in general? Because people can come in and choose to completely ignore the fact that there was a mention of the SM sucking compared to the Grey Knights and there was little to no mentioning of the CSM. In fact there seems to be a whole lot of ignorance from the OP because I seem to believe Kan came in here and told people that they have no reason to complain or needlessly compare their units to the units of a newer Codex. Congratulations, OP you are a shinning example of one of the reasons I generally choose not to spend much time on this website and thats a shame. Frankly, you've been just as hostile as you perceive him to have been.

Just to let you know, Kan was saying at first that you really have no room to compare and whine about what the PAGK get compared to your Tactical Squads when the Dark Angels variants of the Tactical Squads get even less or have to pay for equipment you get for free. They also only have one troops choice compared to your two, though they do get BS4 WS4 Scouts, though they are Elites.

Basic Tac Marines are slightly overcosted at this point. If they were 15pts/model rather than 90 + 16/model they'd be fine. It's not a gamebreaking difference though, and it's worth remembering that single-unit comparisons in a vacuum are a poor way of assessing how good a unit is for its points.

While we're at it, OP, you may have found that you were struggling against GKs because you're playing a list which is not only bad (paying 200pts for Sicarius might be some of the reason you feel like you're paying more and getting less...) but is also pretty close to ideal for GKs to fight against (MEQ on foot).

GK aren't hard to beat, I just dislike the fact that Tactical Marines are one of the worst troop choices and in my local tournaments, I pretty much have to rely on tactical marines @ 1000 points. For the versatility at 1k points, I have been considering making a new list with PAGK which can at that point range, take on any unit with a very good chance of success.

I've won the past 3 Friday Night/Saturday ntournaments with $300 store credit accumulated.

Despite what anyone says about Sicarius, he is the most balanced and best HQ in small points tournaments:

#1. Rites of Battle (Ld 10 across the board)
#2. Veteran skill chosen each game for 1 tactical squad, this has in many cases, actually been able to swing a game for me. Such as infiltrating a lascannon squad in a bunker to hold an entire game while sniping armor or even counter-charge on my first line drop unit or tank hunters on a unit with 2 meltas (1 normal, 1 combi) and a multi-melta which unless I manage 1s is always a guaranteed tank kill a turn.
#3. Seize the initiative? Not AMAZING but the fact is, it's won me a few turn 1s.
#4. His wargear? Point it out, it's cheap as hell on Sic and that FNP.
#5. Coup de'grace has finished off more ICs in an enemy force then I can count.
#6. While no beast in close combat, he can easilly tie up an entire enemy squad and an IC without issue and stand a very good chance of winning unless they are specialist assault troops with power weapons; then it gets tough. My last match Saturday, Sicarius survived 4 rounds against 2 Wych Squads and a Succubus after his tactical squad fell. He emerged the victor of the combat in the end and accounted for almost twice his points in kills.

My list:

Sicarius
3x Tactical Squads (2 Melta, 1 flamer, 3 combi-melta sergeants, multi-melta, missile, lascannon)
1x Scout Squad (Either 10 strong as a CC Unit with Power Fist SGT who has usually accumulated an average of 10-15 kills a game by himself in CC)
or 1x Normal strength Scout squad with sniper rifles, missile launcher & telion.

I change the list depending on how the armies present for that week look. If you check out the thread on this topic, it is also discussing games at 1000 points.

I've always felt them to be much more challenging and reliant upon a player's skill, rather then spamming game winning units.

I love Space Marines, I enjoy the Codex and I will continue to play them even if GW somehow was to remove them from WH40k. All I wanted, was a logical, non-fluff justification as to why GK Tacs are godly in comparison to my staunch defenders of humanity.

The bottom line is . . . Yes SM have been hit by codex creep, but not as hard as you may think.

compare the chapter codecies to one another, and you get pretty reasonable point costs compared to one another. SM's were just behind that wave.

Spacewolves = Bloodangels = Greyknights (roughly)

SM's were really left in the dust thematically. Their Tac squas, and special options just seem so basic when compared to most other troops. the only real flavor they have comes from the HQ choices (some more viable than others).

Codex Marines have a lot better ranged shooting than GKs and TH/SS Terminators.

Not to mention the fact that they can field an all bike army, which is nasty.

Ward simply realised that there no reason why anyone would want to take Tacticals in Vanilla, apart from having units that score, and that no one will ever take the Tacticals in BA, because they are horrible to the 1000 other choices.
So he made the GK Tacs worth something.

Having the choice to get 2 specials would help the Tacs ALOT. The heavy weapons are bad, because Tacs want to be on the move to get the most from their bolters. Heavies should remain an option, but not the only one.

yeenoghu wrote:Adapt? Like all the "counts as" marines? I have no problem that some other army is "better", as in, has superior stuff. That's all fine as long as the points costs reflect it. They don't reflect it at all.

Considering that GK lack land speeders, vindicators, storm shields on their termies, sternguard, and melta without giving up their T4 3+ save goodness, I would say it balances out. Just saying.

I play Necrons. I regularly beat up on GK. Stop whining.

Two special weapons would be an improvement for vanilla tacticals.
Being able to choose heavy OR special weapons for both weapon upgrades would be an improvement for vanilla tacticals.
An additional CCW would be an improvement for tacticals (Though it might make grey hunters cry.)
Not having to take 10 <CENSORED> models to get squad upgrades would be an improvement.

But none of these is the case. SM players have to make due.

Another poster said that one should go troop-min and then make it up in all those outside-troop-slot goodies. This is about the best advice i've heard on the subject so far. We do have goodies that make even GKs jealous. (Hi MM/HF speeders, TH/SS terminators!)

And as a freshly started GK player, yes. Even strike squads are a landslide better than tacticals point for point, or man for man. Army wide, the advantages over SM -may- go away, depending on how happy one gets with upgrades. But between BS3 mechvets, the rifleman dreads, stormravens (And the S10 close combat thing, perhaps also armed with meltabombs or MM..) you are not really lacking anti tank, and if you are wanting to put more space marine bodies on the field rather than upgrading EVERYTHING, you can make the vanilla codex` advantages largely academic.

Only piece of wargear that really hurts to lose going from one army to the other is the stormshield, that's about it. And with a librarian to provide quicksilver for the I10, I can use all swords and have a 4++ on my paladins or terminators(and/or might of titan..) it's something I am quite willing to trade for.

EDIT: What dash said. While I am of the opinion that a smart player will take GKs further, GKs will not turn a bad player into a good one, and Vanilla is not a helpless codex.

I am going to once more point out, as several other players in this thread have:

Nobody has said SM suck, are unplayable or any of the above that some others have done.

Many of us have tried to have a constructive discussion about the points cost difference and some very interesting points have come out. Unfortunately, a lot of this is being overtaken by the random guy who jumps in, claims people are whining or SM don't suck.. when this isn't the discussion.

IdentifyZero wrote:I am going to once more point out, as several other players in this thread have:

Nobody has said SM suck, are unplayable or any of the above that some others have done.

Many of us have tried to have a constructive discussion about the points cost difference and some very interesting points have come out. Unfortunately, a lot of this is being overtaken by the random guy who jumps in, claims people are whining or SM don't suck.. when this isn't the discussion.

I suggest ignoring people like Kanluwen, it helps a lot with keeping a cool head.

To get on topic: I also think that compared to the newer choices Tactical Marines seem bland. They have their moments and can sometimes positively surprise me, but that's because, apart from scoring and surviving thanks to power armour, I don't expect anything else from them.

We gotta remember, however, that SM is the codex for begginers and as such will not have the many options avialable in other Codici.

Amaya wrote:

Tactical Marines do suck, they are one of the worst troop choices in the game and I have no idea why people like them or insist on play Smurfs.

Because not everyone wants to say that his Chapter Marines are becoming a differently coloured SW, BA or GK after a new codex hits the shelves. Some people stick to one book.

Dashofpepper wrote:I play Necrons. I regularly beat up on GK. Stop whining.

Have you beat them with SM?

omerakk wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:I play Necrons. I regularly beat up on GK. Stop whining.

Have you beat them with SM?

SM can beat GK, that was never the discussion of this topic, except for people who came in and posted off-topic.

It has never been about WHO CAN BEAT WHO! It was just the points cost/wargear difference.....

@Omerakk: I do appreciate you asking the guy telling people to stop whining mind you, just, nobody is whining about GK vs SM in a fight. xD

I had a great game, DW vs GK, I run a nasty DW list to be fair, I lost due to making some silly mistakes. I did kill a 10 man Paladin(?) sqaud with atached librarian, but I hit it with 2 TH/SS units and 1 LC unit (with interogator chap) and Belial.

So in my humble(HA!) opinion, DA are not so naff vs the flavour of the week.

Amaya wrote:Tactical Marines do suck, they are one of the worst troop choices in the game

*Splutter* Wait WHAT?! Im sorry, but my friends Necrons would love to have a word about that or my damn Daemonettes...All the squishy-ness of a guardsmen with a HIDEOUS price hike and the fact seekers beat them at EVERYTHING.

Tacticals are fine, its just everyone measure everything against them. Sure they arn't as good as they used to be with the codex creep but at least they can handle most things you throw at them. Or be tailored too, hence tacticals.

IdentifyZero wrote:

omerakk wrote:

Dashofpepper wrote:I play Necrons. I regularly beat up on GK. Stop whining.

Have you beat them with SM?

SM can beat GK, that was never the discussion of this topic, except for people who came in and posted off-topic.

It has never been about WHO CAN BEAT WHO! It was just the points cost/wargear difference.....

@Omerakk: I do appreciate you asking the guy telling people to stop whining mind you, just, nobody is whining about GK vs SM in a fight. xD

So in other words, this is a pointless discussion. In a theoretical world where only Tac squads and GKSS squads existed, then yes, it would be a problem. No one, as far as I know, is disagreeing with that very limited premise. However, what I think most people are saying is that the amount of complaining about Tac squads that is going on misses the basic point that Tac marines aren't where the C:SM makes their money.

I think that what Kanluwen and others have said is not deflecting the subject, but instead saying, "Yeah, GKSS are undercosted compared to Tac Marines, BUT that doesn't matter." It's kind of like saying that Vespid suck in comparison to Grey Hunters. It's true, but it doesn't really mean anything.

Kanluwen wrote:

But when you actually sit back and look: Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon, and at best can take a power weapon/power fist. There's no Sergeant either.

This comes up like every time GH's are discussed. Nobody would take Heavy Weapons even if GH's could. How often do you see Chaos Marines with heavy weapons? Almost never. They can still get a sergeant, who is in fact significantly cheaper with significantly cheaper options than other sergeant equivalents and all it means is that they can't take triple special weapons and they have to use an Elites slot. Given that they can still get a Special weapon and a Combi, and still be noticeably cheaper after everything is said and done while being just as good at short range shooting and better at CC, coupled with the fact that very few SW lists use all 3 Elites slots on something other than Wolf Guard, where's the downside? I don't see it. I've yet to see a SW list that really felt the pinch of that Elite slot, and was much happier with the overequipped Counterattack troops that cost fewer points.

They can only nullify Shaken/Stunned results from a successful Psychic test taken during the Movement phase.

Which for the most part 99% of the time is functionally the same thing. They have an 11 out of 12 chance to ignore any stunned/shaken results an enemy inflicted on them in the previous turn. So, for Extra Armor which simply downgrades Stunned to Shaken, armies pay 15pts. GK's pay 5pts to flat out ignore both results 11 of 12 times.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:

IdentifyZero wrote:SM can beat GK, that was never the discussion of this topic, except for people who came in and posted off-topic.

It has never been about WHO CAN BEAT WHO! It was just the points cost/wargear difference.....

@Omerakk: I do appreciate you asking the guy telling people to stop whining mind you, just, nobody is whining about GK vs SM in a fight. xD

So in other words, this is a pointless discussion. In a theoretical world where only Tac squads and GKSS squads existed, then yes, it would be a problem. No one, as far as I know, is disagreeing with that very limited premise. However, what I think most people are saying is that the amount of complaining about Tac squads that is going on misses the basic point that Tac marines aren't where the C:SM makes their money.

I think that what Kanluwen and others have said is not deflecting the subject, but instead saying, "Yeah, GKSS are undercosted compared to Tac Marines, BUT that doesn't matter." It's kind of like saying that Vespid suck in comparison to Grey Hunters. It's true, but it doesn't really mean anything.

This.

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
So in other words, this is a pointless discussion. In a theoretical world where only Tac squads and GKSS squads existed, then yes, it would be a problem. No one, as far as I know, is disagreeing with that very limited premise. However, what I think most people are saying is that the amount of complaining about Tac squads that is going on misses the basic point that Tac marines aren't where the C:SM makes their money.

I think that what Kanluwen and others have said is not deflecting the subject, but instead saying, "Yeah, GKSS are undercosted compared to Tac Marines, BUT that doesn't matter." It's kind of like saying that Vespid suck in comparison to Grey Hunters. It's true, but it doesn't really mean anything.

Regardless of where Space Marines "make their money" (Vulkan, Vanguard, TH/SS terminators, LSS), it's pretty damn sad that the basic troop choice is so horrendous. It's not creep in the sense that the newer books are more powerful overall, but the individual units do show that they are learning from their mistakes.

On a completely unrelated note, I do hope the new Chaos Space Marines will be as badass as they deserve to be.

withershadow wrote:

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
So in other words, this is a pointless discussion. In a theoretical world where only Tac squads and GKSS squads existed, then yes, it would be a problem. No one, as far as I know, is disagreeing with that very limited premise. However, what I think most people are saying is that the amount of complaining about Tac squads that is going on misses the basic point that Tac marines aren't where the C:SM makes their money.

I think that what Kanluwen and others have said is not deflecting the subject, but instead saying, "Yeah, GKSS are undercosted compared to Tac Marines, BUT that doesn't matter." It's kind of like saying that Vespid suck in comparison to Grey Hunters. It's true, but it doesn't really mean anything.

Regardless of where Space Marines "make their money" (Vulkan, Vanguard, TH/SS terminators, LSS), it's pretty damn sad that the basic troop choice is so horrendous. It's not creep in the sense that the newer books are more powerful overall, but the individual units do show that they are learning from their mistakes.

On a completely unrelated note, I do hope the new Chaos Space Marines will be as badass as they deserve to be.

I am sure it will be. Chaos Space Marines book will probably be amazing.

IdentifyZero wrote:

withershadow wrote:

Sgt_Scruffy wrote:
So in other words, this is a pointless discussion. In a theoretical world where only Tac squads and GKSS squads existed, then yes, it would be a problem. No one, as far as I know, is disagreeing with that very limited premise. However, what I think most people are saying is that the amount of complaining about Tac squads that is going on misses the basic point that Tac marines aren't where the C:SM makes their money.

I think that what Kanluwen and others have said is not deflecting the subject, but instead saying, "Yeah, GKSS are undercosted compared to Tac Marines, BUT that doesn't matter." It's kind of like saying that Vespid suck in comparison to Grey Hunters. It's true, but it doesn't really mean anything.

Regardless of where Space Marines "make their money" (Vulkan, Vanguard, TH/SS terminators, LSS), it's pretty damn sad that the basic troop choice is so horrendous. It's not creep in the sense that the newer books are more powerful overall, but the individual units do show that they are learning from their mistakes.

On a completely unrelated note, I do hope the new Chaos Space Marines will be as badass as they deserve to be.

I am sure it will be. Chaos Space Marines book will probably be amazing.

Im waiting for it to happen, so I can start Iron Warriors. Not doin it with their current dex.

I also wish they would give Tacticals a close combat weapon in their profile. They carry combat blades, I don't understand how Guardsmen get a CCW in their profile for having a bayonet, but a Space Marine with a combat blade does not?

Grey Hunter= CCW, Chaos Space Marine= CCW Tactical marine= No CCW

WTF?!

it's about role. Chaos Marines got the BP/CCW combo to represent their greater focus on CC and veteran status in an easy and simple way over basic CSM's. Then SW's came along and became "SM+CSM+1 at the same cost" and through the whole thing out of whack.

This may be off topic from your standard troop versus standard troop thing. In my case i tend to have the edge against GKs as blood angels, i use the Lucifer engines well to my advantage on my pred and baal preds. Run, shoot, run shoot, run shoot.

withershadow wrote:Regardless of where Space Marines "make their money" (Vulkan, Vanguard, TH/SS terminators, LSS), it's pretty damn sad that the basic troop choice is so horrendous. It's not creep in the sense that the newer books are more powerful overall, but the individual units do show that they are learning from their mistakes.

They're not actually horrendous; that's hyperbole. They're not as efficient as other units in particular roles, so use them at what they do well. Combat Squads works very well to give you a heavy weapon which can camp an objective in the backfield while still contributing fire support, while still leaving you another scoring unit to move more aggressively. Combi-weapons give the squad a turn of having two special weapons, which (as SW players with Wolf Guard know) is often all you need. Larger squads are good at moving up to midfield to abuse light enemy units with bolterfire & special weapons, then Combat Tactics-running away from disadvantageous fights. Alternately, instead of big units, you can take squads of 5 with Razorbacks. Again, the sgt can have a combi-weapon. A friend of mine has great results using las/plas razors with combi-flamers on the sgts. The flamer boosts their hitting power to clear a light (scouts, grots, pathfinders) or damaged enemy unit off an objective with an end-of-game assault.

Sure, when you compare with GH they're inferior at HtH, but HtH's not their role. If you want/need to kill GH in combat, use Hammernators, Ironclads, or characters (Vulkan's a beast) for that.

IdentifyZero wrote:Chaos Space Marines book will probably be amazing. [/quote

scubasteve04 wrote: Im waiting for it to happen, so I can start Iron Warriors. Not doin it with their current dex.

I'd say go for it. The current kits (aside from the Dread) are fine or great. The current codex is perfectly viable. I beat SW and IG with it more than I lose to them. It's got some flavor issues and isn't overall as good as a couple of the newer books, but can certainly be used to make thematic and competitive armies. If you have a fully-painted IW army before the next book comes out, you also avoid looking like a bandwagon-jumper.