TedNugent wrote:Psycannons are simply better against AV14 per weapon than a multi-melta.

Psycannon is S7?

biccat wrote:

TedNugent wrote:Psycannons are simply better against AV14 per weapon than a multi-melta.

Psycannon is S7?

Yes, Psycannon is S7 (pg 58 of C: GK) with rending (pg 31 of 5.ed rulebook) and Heavy 4.

TedNugent wrote:

biccat wrote:

TedNugent wrote:Psycannons are simply better against AV14 per weapon than a multi-melta.

Psycannon is S7?

Yes, Psycannon is S7 (pg 58 of C: GK) with rending (pg 31 of 5.ed rulebook) and Heavy 4.

Psycannons are not mathematically as good as a multi-melta versus AV14. Are you forgetting the melta rule which gives 2d6 armor pen? You stated in your earlier post "Melta cannot pen av14" which makes me think you are. There isn't even an argument with this one, it's just math. The only time what you said is true is if it's at full 24 inch range, which begs the question...why are you firing a multi-melta at full range and not utilizing the melta rule?

Melta, in half range (for the melta rule), versus AV14:
1 shot, .667 hits, .28 penetrates, 14% chance to destroy the vehicle

Psycannon, lets even say you're stationary
4 shots, 2.667 hits, .445 rends, .296 penetrates, 9.8% to destroy the vehicle

targetawg wrote:
Psycannons are not mathematically as good as a multi-melta versus AV14. Are you forgetting the melta rule which gives 2d6 armor pen? You stated in your earlier post "Melta cannot pen av14" which makes me think you are. There isn't even an argument with this one, it's just math. The only time what you said is true is if it's at full 24 inch range, which begs the question...why are you firing a multi-melta at full range and not utilizing the melta rule?

Sorry, yeah, I didn't know about that rule to be honest. I'm literally brand new at this game.

TedNugent wrote:Yes, Psycannon is S7 (pg 58 of C: GK) with rending (pg 31 of 5.ed rulebook) and Heavy 4.

Interesting.

The multimelta is marginally better up to AV13, but drops off significantly at AV14.

The relative chances of destroying a vehicle (percentages):

Arm. Melta Psi 10 42.4 37.6 11 33.6 26.5 12 24.2 14.0 13 14.2 14.0 14 3.7 9.5

Interesting that a multi-melta is better, although not substantially so, except against AV12.

edit: Fixed code block, note that this doesn't account for the 2d6 AP meltas get at half range.

TedNugent wrote:

targetawg wrote:
Psycannons are not mathematically as good as a multi-melta versus AV14. Are you forgetting the melta rule which gives 2d6 armor pen? You stated in your earlier post "Melta cannot pen av14" which makes me think you are. There isn't even an argument with this one, it's just math. The only time what you said is true is if it's at full 24 inch range, which begs the question...why are you firing a multi-melta at full range and not utilizing the melta rule?

Sorry, yeah, I didn't know about that rule to be honest. I'm literally brand new at this game.

I suspected it was just an oversight!

Yea, that rule is the reason people take meltas, the AP1 is icing, the real meat of it is being able to get 2d6 armor pen at half range and reliably penetrate armor. The %'s on destroying vehicles in my example are actually higher for meltas, as I didnt include the ~2% chance of doing it with the glancing hit (-2 for glancing, +1 for AP1)

Just throwing in my 2 cents. The last 3 tournaments at black fyre games in Pleasant Grove, UT have been won by grey knights. 1 tied for first and 2 solid wins. So they are cleaning up in this area.

Igenstilch wrote:Just throwing in my 2 cents. The last 3 tournaments at black fyre games in Pleasant Grove, UT have been won by grey knights. 1 tied for first and 2 solid wins. So they are cleaning up in this area.

Not to mention the faq that came down on CSM recently if your a chaos player. Lash needs to roll to hit while jaws and blood lance dont and warptime is all or nothing now.

People should post recent experiences on here as it is on topic that they have had with grey knights. Both positive and negative maybe it could help mitigate the threat of them or clarify what they are capable of.

Everyone should think my buddy pretre for starting this thread it will never end.

Tomb King wrote:Everyone should think my buddy pretre for starting this thread it will never end.

People should let this thread die, because it is silly.

Ask a mod to lock it?

4oursword wrote:Ask a mod to lock it?

That's cheating.

pretre wrote:

4oursword wrote:Ask a mod to lock it?

That's cheating.

Thats what most of the people have been trying to express in this thread. haha

Tomb King wrote:

pretre wrote:That's cheating.

Thats what most of the people have been trying to express in this thread. haha

Ba-dum ching! Thank you folks, Tomb King will be here all week; try the veal!

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

pretre wrote:That's cheating.

Thats what most of the people have been trying to express in this thread. haha

Ba-dum ching! Thank you folks, Tomb King will be here all week; try the veal!

Thanks I do try, it looks like I will have to topple grey knights this weekend with my sisters. There has already been mention of dreadnoughts being used as a scoring troop . I wish they my sisters could take powerfist or eviscerators on champions!

Tomb King wrote:Thanks I do try, it looks like I will have to topple grey knights this weekend with my sisters. There has already been mention of dreadnoughts being used as a scoring troop . I wish they my sisters could take powerfist or eviscerators on champions!

I keep toying with the idea of a priest with Eviscerator. Especially for my celestian squad. If only they counted as upgrade characters instead of ICs. Although the nice thing abotu them being ICs is you can have them run off and charge something else.

So disembark, split squad. Shoot at something with celestians, charge something else with priest.

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:Everyone should think my buddy pretre for starting this thread it will never end.

People should let this thread die, because it is silly.

Then why did you start it

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:Everyone should think my buddy pretre for starting this thread it will never end.

People should let this thread die, because it is silly.

Then why did you start it

Because you made a provably false statement that we were able to disprove within the first couple of pages of the thread. Since then it has taken on a life of its own.

pretre wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:Everyone should think my buddy pretre for starting this thread it will never end.

People should let this thread die, because it is silly.

Then why did you start it

Because you made a provably false statement that we were able to disprove within the first couple of pages of the thread. Since then it has taken on a life of its own.

I made a hyperbolic statement about tournament tables and and you didn't disprove anything. Don't use "we". You directly showed a startling lack of understanding of the tournament results that you yourself posted. Other people came in and did a vastly better job, many of them actual tournament placers. It was then determined (over thousands of spam posts) that GKs do exceptionally well in format and their only realistic foil is mech guard which happens to be popular enough to tamp down their placement to consistent high tables but not consistent wins. That they place in the top three out of twelve codexes with regularity so soon after their debut implies a powerlevel well beyond average.

You didn't disprove crap. I said they were half of all top tables in a flippant hyperbolic point that was contrasting something else that you said that itself wasn't particularly realistic or well considered. It was more like 33%. Sue me.

ShumaGorath wrote:You didn't disprove crap. I said they were half of all top tables in a flippant hyperbolic point that was contrasting something else that you said that itself wasn't particularly realistic or well considered. It was more like 33%. Sue me.

Btw, the title of the thread was also a direct quote from you. We saw how that turned out as well.

Aww, it's okay pooky. You don't need to be sad. We understand that you write stuff and don't mean it.

That chart only shows the dominance of ap 1. Note that 1 strength 8 ap 1 shot is much better at kililng armor value 12 than 4 psycannon shots.

Add in 2d6 because of melta, and you can see pretty easily that melta has and still is the king of popping tanks.

It would have been in 4th edition, except that hull down and skimmer moving fast downgraded penetrating hits.

pretre wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:You didn't disprove crap. I said they were half of all top tables in a flippant hyperbolic point that was contrasting something else that you said that itself wasn't particularly realistic or well considered. It was more like 33%. Sue me.

Btw, the title of the thread was also a direct quote from you. We saw how that turned out as well.

Aww, it's okay pooky. You don't need to be sad. We understand that you write stuff and don't mean it.

If you understood that this thread wouldn't exist.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

scuddman wrote:That chart only shows the dominance of ap 1. Note that 1 strength 8 ap 1 shot is much better at kililng armor value 12 than 4 psycannon shots.

Add in 2d6 because of melta, and you can see pretty easily that melta has and still is the king of popping tanks.

It would have been in 4th edition, except that hull down and skimmer moving fast downgraded penetrating hits.

That and people weren't taking tanks that didn't directly exploit those rules so it didn't have much of a purpose. Also lascanons were like half the points cost they are now.

Sigh... why hasn't anyone ('specially Eldar players) mentioned that FARSEER turns GK into overpriced speesh mureens??

ShumaGorath wrote:If you understood that this thread wouldn't exist.

If you didn't say outlandish things you didn't really mean, this thread wouldn't exist.

pretre wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:If you understood that this thread wouldn't exist.

If you didn't say outlandish things you didn't really mean, this thread wouldn't exist.

But I'm admitting to it at least (besides, a 17% difference isn't that outlandish!).

whembly wrote:
Sigh... why hasn't anyone ('specially Eldar players) mentioned that FARSEER turns GK into overpriced speesh mureens??

Farseers remove the psychic spam element from the GK's game and nothing more. Psycannons are still the best weapon for taking down your pretty little skimmers due to having 2 or 4 S7 rending shots depending on the unit carrying them. (and multi-shot S7 is all you really need against av11/12 spam)
What really makes a farseer gold is being able to now counter GK mech like any other mech out there by stun/locking all the transports, something half the armies in the game have 0 chance at doing!

GK's however are still nails against eldar without needing their fancy mind tricks as their mobile 24" range and agressive playstyle are one of the better counters to a fast-moving T3/4+ save army, while also having better defenses against incoming psychic powers to boot.

scuddman wrote:That chart only shows the dominance of ap 1. Note that 1 strength 8 ap 1 shot is much better at kililng armor value 12 than 4 psycannon shots.

Add in 2d6 because of melta, and you can see pretty easily that melta has and still is the king of popping tanks.

It would have been in 4th edition, except that hull down and skimmer moving fast downgraded penetrating hits.

I assume you're talking about my post.

I ignored the 2d6 rule mainly because it would have tremendously complicated things. I agree that multimelta are substantially better for tankpopping at 24".

I'd still rather take 4 psicannons over a multi-melta, if only because the psicannons are better for popping terminators and MEQ.

biccat wrote:

scuddman wrote:That chart only shows the dominance of ap 1. Note that 1 strength 8 ap 1 shot is much better at kililng armor value 12 than 4 psycannon shots.

Add in 2d6 because of melta, and you can see pretty easily that melta has and still is the king of popping tanks.

It would have been in 4th edition, except that hull down and skimmer moving fast downgraded penetrating hits.

I assume you're talking about my post.

I ignored the 2d6 rule mainly because it would have tremendously complicated things. I agree that multimelta are substantially better for tankpopping at 24".

I'd still rather take 4 psicannons over a multi-melta, if only because the psicannons are better for popping terminators and MEQ.

The 2d6 is intensely important, skipping it makes comparisons relatively worthless. The 2d6 makes the meltagun effectively a strength 11.5 ap1 assault weapon that is relatively commonplace.

ShumaGorath wrote:

biccat wrote:

scuddman wrote:That chart only shows the dominance of ap 1. Note that 1 strength 8 ap 1 shot is much better at kililng armor value 12 than 4 psycannon shots.

Add in 2d6 because of melta, and you can see pretty easily that melta has and still is the king of popping tanks.

It would have been in 4th edition, except that hull down and skimmer moving fast downgraded penetrating hits.

I assume you're talking about my post.

I ignored the 2d6 rule mainly because it would have tremendously complicated things. I agree that multimelta are substantially better for tankpopping at 24".

I'd still rather take 4 psicannons over a multi-melta, if only because the psicannons are better for popping terminators and MEQ.

The 2d6 is intensely important, skipping it makes comparisons relatively worthless. The 2d6 makes the meltagun effectively a strength 11.5 ap1 assault weapon that is relatively commonplace.

Alright, adding the 2d6 means your up with 6" which lets be honest here if your that close to something that needs the 2d6 those guys are probably going to get charged or shot to hell in the next turn. For example guardsman. Whearas the Psycannon can do its damage at range and sting you from almost quadruple the effective 2d6 range of the melta. If I could take psycannons on my guard for double the points of the melta I would without hesitation.

The 2d6 is very important, hugely so, but yeah, the much greater range of the psycannon also matters. But ignoring the 2d6 is ignoring half of what makes the meltagun worth taking.

Tomb King wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

biccat wrote:

scuddman wrote:That chart only shows the dominance of ap 1. Note that 1 strength 8 ap 1 shot is much better at kililng armor value 12 than 4 psycannon shots.

Add in 2d6 because of melta, and you can see pretty easily that melta has and still is the king of popping tanks.

It would have been in 4th edition, except that hull down and skimmer moving fast downgraded penetrating hits.

I assume you're talking about my post.

I ignored the 2d6 rule mainly because it would have tremendously complicated things. I agree that multimelta are substantially better for tankpopping at 24".

I'd still rather take 4 psicannons over a multi-melta, if only because the psicannons are better for popping terminators and MEQ.

The 2d6 is intensely important, skipping it makes comparisons relatively worthless. The 2d6 makes the meltagun effectively a strength 11.5 ap1 assault weapon that is relatively commonplace.

Alright, adding the 2d6 means your up with 6" which lets be honest here if your that close to something that needs the 2d6 those guys are probably going to get charged or shot to hell in the next turn. For example guardsman. Whearas the Psycannon can do its damage at range and sting you from almost quadruple the effective 2d6 range of the melta. If I could take psycannons on my guard for double the points of the melta I would without hesitation.

Thats part of why the comparison is erroneous.

Did someone necro this thread or is is just still alive? Holy crap people, let it go, they're here, They're queer, get used to it.

There are 2 scenarios:
1- Your army isn't Chaos Daemons so they are just a good 5th ed. book.
2- Your army is Chaos Daemons and they are pretty damn overpowered.

Why is this in tournament discussion? It seems more appropriate for 40k general discussion.

The Grey Knights codex doesn't really have any dead entries other than a few henchmen choices. Basically this means you can't really make a terrible army if you wanted to compared to other codices which have TONS of dead entries.

Doesnt matter if there are "dead" entries. Most people spam the best stuff regardless. lol blood claws arent "dead." Doesnt mean they wont spam the better gh.

Everyday I'm derpelin.

Draigo wrote:Doesnt matter if there are "dead" entries. Most people spam the best stuff regardless. lol blood claws arent "dead." Doesnt mean they wont spam the better gh.

Perhaps you would like to explain yourself?

First off GOD I hate mathhammer people.

Second I'm in the Grey Knights are stupidly overpowered boat.

And third, I'm hoping the next Chaos Space Marines book is as broken, so I can have fun playing them again.

KingmanHighborn wrote:First off GOD I hate mathhammer people.

Care to explain?

RustyKnight wrote:

KingmanHighborn wrote:First off GOD I hate mathhammer people.

Care to explain?

He explains below

Second I'm in the Grey Knights are stupidly overpowered boat.

RustyKnight wrote:

biccat wrote:[The multimelta is marginally better up to AV13, but drops off significantly at AV14.

The relative chances of destroying a vehicle (percentages):
...
Interesting that a multi-melta is better, although not substantially so, except against AV12.

I'm not entirely sure what you did, but your math is off. Here's a list of destroyed results for the various armors against both the Melta weapons and the Psycannon. These assume that the target doesn't get cover, is neither open topped nor a Land Raider Achilles (or similar tank with result skewing special rules), and that the firer is BS4.

Psycannon (2 Shots/4 Shots)
Against AV10=.222/.444
Against AV11=.148/.296
Against AV12=.074/.148
Against AV13=.074/.148
Against AV14=.025/.049

Melta Weapons (1d6 Pen/2d6 Pen)
Against AV10=.241/.327
Against AV11=.185/.312
Against AV12=.130/.296
Against AV13=.074/..253
Against AV14=.019/.210

Time for some limited analysis of these results. As long as it has its 2d6 penetration, the melta weapon outperforms the Psycannon against everything except for AV10 vehicles. A four shot psycannon always beats a 1d6 melta weapon, but a two shot psycannon loses to the 1d6 melta against everything except for AV13 and 14 targets (where it ties and beats the melta respectively).

This is failmath.
Look up binomial theorem.
Doubling shots will not double your chance. Think about it logically. Even a gun with 1 million shots at best has an infinitely close chance of killing a tank 100% of the time.
That means at at best you'll have a 100% chance of killing a single vehicle. Even if I roll vehicle wrecked 4 times doesn't mean that I killed 4 vehicles.

That means for weapon comparisons invovling multishot guns you must use the binomial theorem.

1 shot * (2/3) * (.5) *(1/3) = 1/9 or .11 is the probability for one shot.
but 2 shots is not double that: Proof:

Assume that for any probability, doing the same thing twice should produce double the chance.

A coin has a 50% chance of rolling heads or tails.
If I flip the coin twice, my chance of rolling at least one head (very similar to at least 1 vehicle wrecked) is the following:
head head 1
head tails 2
tails head 3
tails tails 4

3/4 or 75%

You will note that 75% is NOT DOUBLE of 50%.

What if I flip the coin three times?

h h h
h h t
h t h
t h h
t t t
t t h
t h t
h t t

There are 2^3 results: 8 results. 7 of which have at least 1 head
7/8 = 87.5%

The limit of N coins flipped chance of rolling at least 1 head is 100% or 1.

QED

Edit: I guess i'll complete the limit

If n goes to infnite: The probability that N coins produces at least 1 head is the following:

(2^N)-1
/
(2^n)

If I substitute infinite:
2^infinite = infnite

-> Infinite -1
/
infinite

I think the simple fact that there are people that don't understand that Psycannons are worse than Melta weapons means that those same people will never believe that Grey Knights are anything but overpowered.

Just to save people in the know some future posting time.

touche

NO YOU! edit: Smiley here since this is a joke.

You said "Gray knights being half or more of the top tables in every major tourney since the book was released isn't good enough?"

I'm simply showing that they are not half or more of the top tables in most major tourneys.

But feel free to run off.

Seconded.
Give it a rest already shuma, you lost so what, is pride really worth 20+ pages? The GK hysterics is getting pretty tiresome by now.

Fearspect wrote:I think the simple fact that there are people that don't understand that Psycannons are worse than Melta weapons means that those same people will never believe that Grey Knights are anything but overpowered.

Just to save people in the know some future posting time.

Yes, clearly what makes a powerful codex is not the effectiveness of it's troops, the abillity to shut down other armies, or the skill of it's player, but how many meltaguns you can shove into each orifice.

Oooh ooh, I want in on this.

Shuma Gorath is like the weakest character in Ultimate Marvel Vs. capcom. Goddamn it, have you ever seen anyone pick shuma ever?

Ha! Take your blanket statement and insult at the same time and like it!

scuddman wrote:Oooh ooh, I want in on this.

Shuma Gorath is like the weakest character in Ultimate Marvel Vs. capcom. Goddamn it, have you ever seen anyone pick shuma ever?

Ha! Take your blanket statement and insult at the same time and like it!

I'm sure he'd struggle to even take on Squirrel Girl.

.. but let's not head off on this tangent eh. ta.

RustyKnight wrote:

biccat wrote:[The multimelta is marginally better up to AV13, but drops off significantly at AV14.

The relative chances of destroying a vehicle (percentages):
...
Interesting that a multi-melta is better, although not substantially so, except against AV12.

I'm not entirely sure what you did, but your math is off. Here's a list of destroyed results for the various armors against both the Melta weapons and the Psycannon. These assume that the target doesn't get cover, is neither open topped nor a Land Raider Achilles (or similar tank with result skewing special rules), and that the firer is BS4.

I took the chance of destroying a vehicle (hit, 'wound', table) and, using the binomial distribution, determined how likely or not it was that the vehicle would be destroyed. In excel the formula is:

1-binomdist(0, # shots, percent chance, 0)

The multi-melta has a higher percent chance of destroying a vehicle but the psycannon has more shots.

Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

ShumaGorath wrote:Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

@biccat and scuddman- Thanks for pointing this out to me. Prior to this, I've always just calculated number of vehicle destroyed results.

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

Are they given either?

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

Are they given either?

Psycannons? Constantly, it's one of the only ways you see them equipped.

Mind you, this isn't really because it's psycannon versus melta, it's that you get a psycannon inquisitor in termi armor for 80 points, which is a friggin steal, versus a one-use melta

Luckily, theres enough competition for the HQ slots that you dont see a ton of these

targetawg wrote:Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

Well played sir.

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

Are they given either?

Grey Knight Dreadnoughts can also have multi-meltas or assault cannons with psybolt ammunition, which is a psycannon in all but name.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

Are they given either?

Grey Knight Dreadnoughts can also have multi-meltas or assault cannons with psybolt ammunition, which is a psycannon in all but name.

They can have weapons other than autocanons?

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Directly comparing these weapons is almost worthless since there is no unit in the entire game that can chose one or the other. Most meltaguns come in multiples for redundancy on light suicide units or close range CC based troop squads. Most psycanons come on standoff high cost squads which are far from disposable

There is no equivalence between the chimera melta vet and purifier psycanon spam. Or between 10 melta pod sterns who combat squad to kill two land raiders or 10 palladins and a GM with 4 psycanons.

Directly comparing the weapons use against vehicles is useless in anything other than pure thought exercise.

Inquisitors in the GK codex can take a combi-melta or a psycannon.

Boom. Mind blown.

Are they given either?

Grey Knight Dreadnoughts can also have multi-meltas or assault cannons with psybolt ammunition, which is a psycannon in all but name.

They can have weapons other than autocanons?

No, taking those options are illegal.

Come to think of it, Land Raiders and Stormravens also get not-psycannons and multi-meltas, although they don't compete against eachother, at least not on the Land Raider variants.

RustyKnight wrote:

KingmanHighborn wrote:First off GOD I hate mathhammer people.

Care to explain?

gendoikari87 wrote:

RustyKnight wrote:

KingmanHighborn wrote:First off GOD I hate mathhammer people.

Care to explain?

He explains below

Second I'm in the Grey Knights are stupidly overpowered boat.

Oh no my hate of mathhammer has nothing to do with the GK. I have my own less angst ridden reasons for my beliefs on GKs.

scuddman wrote:

RustyKnight wrote:

biccat wrote:[The multimelta is marginally better up to AV13, but drops off significantly at AV14.

The relative chances of destroying a vehicle (percentages):
...
Interesting that a multi-melta is better, although not substantially so, except against AV12.

I'm not entirely sure what you did, but your math is off. Here's a list of destroyed results for the various armors against both the Melta weapons and the Psycannon. These assume that the target doesn't get cover, is neither open topped nor a Land Raider Achilles (or similar tank with result skewing special rules), and that the firer is BS4.

Psycannon (2 Shots/4 Shots)
Against AV10=.222/.444
Against AV11=.148/.296
Against AV12=.074/.148
Against AV13=.074/.148
Against AV14=.025/.049

Melta Weapons (1d6 Pen/2d6 Pen)
Against AV10=.241/.327
Against AV11=.185/.312
Against AV12=.130/.296
Against AV13=.074/..253
Against AV14=.019/.210

Time for some limited analysis of these results. As long as it has its 2d6 penetration, the melta weapon outperforms the Psycannon against everything except for AV10 vehicles. A four shot psycannon always beats a 1d6 melta weapon, but a two shot psycannon loses to the 1d6 melta against everything except for AV13 and 14 targets (where it ties and beats the melta respectively).

This is failmath.
Look up binomial theorem.
Doubling shots will not double your chance. Think about it logically. Even a gun with 1 million shots at best has an infinitely close chance of killing a tank 100% of the time.
That means at at best you'll have a 100% chance of killing a single vehicle. Even if I roll vehicle wrecked 4 times doesn't mean that I killed 4 vehicles.

That means for weapon comparisons invovling multishot guns you must use the binomial theorem.

1 shot * (2/3) * (.5) *(1/3) = 1/9 or .11 is the probability for one shot.
but 2 shots is not double that: Proof:

Assume that for any probability, doing the same thing twice should produce double the chance.

A coin has a 50% chance of rolling heads or tails.
If I flip the coin twice, my chance of rolling at least one head (very similar to at least 1 vehicle wrecked) is the following:
head head 1
head tails 2
tails head 3
tails tails 4

3/4 or 75%

You will note that 75% is NOT DOUBLE of 50%.

What if I flip the coin three times?

h h h
h h t
h t h
t h h
t t t
t t h
t h t
h t t

There are 2^3 results: 8 results. 7 of which have at least 1 head
7/8 = 87.5%

The limit of N coins flipped chance of rolling at least 1 head is 100% or 1.

QED

Edit: I guess i'll complete the limit

If n goes to infnite: The probability that N coins produces at least 1 head is the following:

(2^N)-1
/
(2^n)

If I substitute infinite:
2^infinite = infnite

-> Infinite -1
/
infinite

^ THIS IS WHY I HATE IT. You take a freaking game, that involves rolling dice and playing with toy soliders and boil it down to the most hated subject in mankind's history, math. Statistics in particular, but still. There is no need for a page load of a mathmatical formulas to explain which is better. I don't give a about binomial theorem, I want to pick what I like, build a competive, yet fun list to play, and let the dice gods take it from there. All this mathhammer BS does is suck the fun out of the game, reducing it to numbers instead of player cunning, tactics and chance.

Now me, I'm a History and Politics guy, the best evidence to me is to watch who wins the most, and HOW the games are won. If GKs win a lot it might not be there are 'completely' overpowered. But if they routinely table other armies regardless of opponent's army composition, for minimal model loss, there is something to the claim. And from the evidence I've seen, and from games I've watched GKs are at least top tier, if not overpowered. Character's like Draigo don't help either, and I maintain my 'special characters should not be allowed in tournaments and events' stance but it's not my decision so I can't stop anyone.

Now the reason I think they are overpowered is simply because GW wanted the Grey Knights to be a hit hard, hit fast army, but it could not afford to take casualitlies. Problem is by putting so much hitting power, and defensive power into the army, it's hard to get them killed even if you are trying. The number count just isn't enough of a con, to all the pros of the army, and so there is no 'game balance' to them. It's my opinion though. I won't begrudge someone for playing GKs, and if Chaos comes out and it's just as broken, I'm going to be a giddy kitty, especially if it brings my Daemon Prince is back to his 3.5 glory.

Not everyone hates math if you can't understand it STFU and ignore it, and let the big boys who can actually understand it discuss things.

DakkaDakka Rule Number One is "Be Polite." Please note that continued violation of that rule will result in temporary suspension of your account. Thanks! ~Manchu

gendoikari87 wrote:Not everyone hates math if you can't understand it STFU and ignore it, and let the big boys who can actually understand it discuss things.

I agree with the dude that math does ruin this game a bit. It basically boils down to people taking a codex, mathing it up, then telling the community how to play a game. Sadly its also not the math junkies fault, games workshop has trouble giving use to everything in a codex, and we as a community give into the 'this how you have to play army X by spamming A,B and C units' and if you dont quit playing and dont bother the 'big boys' as you put it.

Do people honestly have fun playing with the same units over and over, with the same lists and painting the same 3 things? I for one hate playing with and against 'spam' armies. its boring and takes away from the game IMO. Probably why I avoid playing people with them and tournaments all together.

PS. I know its a tournament thread, and probably almost everyone who will read this has their spam list, I mean...'competitive list'...but the title drew me to read a few pages of this discussion, and the mean quote poked me to respond lol

Not an acceptable post within the Dakka rules. -Mannahnin

KingmanHighborn wrote: *blahblahblahblah* I'm going to be a giddy kitty *blah*

That one phrase just put a smile on my face. I don't know why, but it did.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
^ THIS IS WHY I HATE IT. You take a freaking game, that involves rolling dice and playing with toy soliders and boil it down to the most hated subject in mankind's history, math. Statistics in particular, but still.

There is no need for a page load of a mathmatical formulas to explain which is better. I don't give a about binomial theorem, I want to pick what I like, build a competive, yet fun list to play, and let the dice gods take it from there. All this mathhammer BS does is suck the fun out of the game, reducing it to numbers instead of player cunning, tactics and chance.

Guess what tells what units are competitive? Guess what tells you which tactics are most effective? Guess what manipulating chance to your advantage is all about?

That's right, math.

Want to know how a Vanquisher will square up against a Hammerhead? Math will give you that answer.

Now me, I'm a History and Politics guy, the best evidence to me is to watch who wins the most, and HOW the games are won.

And if you've ever been through college as a History major there's a reason every good program makes you take both Statistics and some sort of Calculus now, because such analysis will help reveal the causes for events in the past and explain why certain things occurred. Statistics is *HUGE* in history field. Same thing with politics, math tells you a lot about demographics, importance of issues, how effective ad campaigns are, the best avenues of spending to get the best rewards out of a program or lobbying effort, etc.

If GKs win a lot it might not be there are 'completely' overpowered. But if they routinely table other armies regardless of opponent's army composition, for minimal model loss, there is something to the claim.

And guess what gives you the details of how to find that and to what extent that may or may not be true?

Math.

Riker210 wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:Not everyone hates math if you can't understand it STFU and ignore it, and let the big boys who can actually understand it discuss things.

I agree with the dude that math does ruin this game a bit. It basically boils down to people taking a codex, mathing it up, then telling the community how to play a game. Sadly its also not the math junkies fault, games workshop has trouble giving use to everything in a codex, and we as a community give into the 'this how you have to play army X by spamming A,B and C units' and if you dont quit playing and dont bother the 'big boys' as you put it.

Do people honestly have fun playing with the same units over and over, with the same lists and painting the same 3 things? I for one hate playing with and against 'spam' armies. its boring and takes away from the game IMO. Probably why I avoid playing people with them and tournaments all together.

PS. I know its a tournament thread, and probably almost everyone who will read this has their spam list, I mean...'competitive list'...but the title drew me to read a few pages of this discussion, and the mean quote poked me to respond lol

I had to exalt this for sheer truth of the statement.

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:

KingmanHighborn wrote:

So basically you are an idiot and hate it when people decide to use to build the most effective army possible.

Or maybe I'm actually very smart, but I want to play a game, have fun/enjoy the hobby, build a beautifuly painted, flavorful army, and I don't want my opponent to think I'm in this just win and beat on the competion, for sh*ts and giggles. Do I want to win? I try, but I'm not going to follow the cheese route. If I had a GK army for example (which I actually did at one time and sold it a long time ago) I wouldn't touch any of the special characters as it goes against my belief on using them. I'd use the units I like, and if I win great, if I lose and it was close I'll still probably have fun.

Mathhammer might make you 'win' more, but it just sucks the fun out of playing. It is supposed to be my hobby not my homework project.

Kepora wrote:

KingmanHighborn wrote: *blahblahblahblah* I'm going to be a giddy kitty *blah*

That one phrase just put a smile on my face. I don't know why, but it did.

I think I know why. I PMed you once but never got a response.

Vaktathi wrote:
Guess what tells what units are competitive? Guess what tells you which tactics are most effective? Guess what manipulating chance to your advantage is all about?

That's right, math.

Want to know how a Vanquisher will square up against a Hammerhead? Math will give you that answer.

And if you've ever been through college as a History major there's a reason every good program makes you take both Statistics and some sort of Calculus now, because such analysis will help reveal the causes for events in the past and explain why certain things occurred. Statistics is *HUGE* in history field. Same thing with politics, math tells you a lot about demographics, importance of issues, how effective ad campaigns are, the best avenues of spending to get the best rewards out of a program or lobbying effort, etc.

And the point is? I didn't say math DIDN'T help, didn't say math wasn't important. I said I hate the people that boil every unit down into a number, and then gloat about it, and force feed it down people's throats. And I've never been a math person, true. It doesn't come easy to me, as easily as writing 50 pages on the Battle of Midway, and examining everything from ship composition, numbers, gun cailbers, tactics, air power, philosophy and dogma, etc. And yes there is math in that too but it's VISIBLE math that had an applied purpose. I don't have to solve the problem, because I already SEE the answers, because they have been meticously recorded and I get to analyze it. That's fun TO ME. As far as politics go, your right math TELLS you, but the real IMPORTANCE is how the data is USED, your already given the answers and it's time to put them into a PRACTICAL use.

You want to know how you SHOULD find out how a Vanquisher squares up against a Hammerhead? It's very easy, pick up your dice and play Warhammer 40K! Oh wow! Shock! Roll the dice with your IG army/or Tau army or at bare minimum watch a game between them and ---->'[b]SEE'<---- IT. Gurantee you'll have more FUN that way then looking at an Excel spreadsheet.

And don't mistake my hate for the overcomplication of a game as an inability to use math. I'll bust my a** in class, and put in the work, doesn't mean I have to enjoy or appreciate it.

And I sure as hell don't need to cluttering up something that should be fun.

gendoikari87 wrote:Not everyone hates math if you can't understand it STFU and ignore it, and let the big boys who can actually understand it discuss things.

There's a discussion here? I only see character attacks and pathetic misdirection. Any half wit can assess the power level of this army, and if you expect serious discussion of this then I'd say you have less than that. (<½)

KingmanHighborn wrote:

^ THIS IS WHY I HATE IT. You take a freaking game, that involves rolling dice and playing with toy soliders and boil it down to the most hated subject in mankind's history, math. Statistics in particular, but still.

Ouch, that's a bad start.

Statistics describes the past.
Probability describes the future, or at least guesses at it.

If you don't like mathhammer...don't use it, but don't dismiss its usefulness in regards to war-gaming.

You guys are misrepresenting his statement. You see...everybody in this hobby has different objectives and goals for the word "fun".

Don't take what you assume to be fun and push it on someone else. His opinion is as valid as anybody else's.

I've discussed this before, but magic the gathering developer's divided players into 3 distinct types.

"Little TImmy" : goal was to cast get biggest creature on the board.

Weird al: goal was to try to win with unique and weird deck

Spike: Waac.

No one person's opinion is wrong. I use math as a tool. But I understand too, that my math ability gives me an advantage. Some people hate math, but it comes naturally to me. THat doesn't mean that I should push math to be a major part of 40k. It should be playable however you want to play.

That means, though, that you should play/hobby with your objective in mind and play/hobby with other like-minded people.

Don't assume, though, that your way is necessarily the ONLY way to have fun or is the right way to play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
[quote=Riker210

Do people honestly have fun playing with the same units over and over, with the same lists and painting the same 3 things?

Juicifer wrote: Any half wit can assess the power level of this army, and if you expect serious discussion of this then I'd say you have less than that. (<½)

Any half-wit could also claim that Codex: Tau Empire is the most broken book ever without backing it up with evidence. If you can't be polite and calm in contact with those who have opinions that differ from your own I suggest not posting at all.

You can't seriously expect people to compete in ANYTHING without trying to break the game down in some way? That's just an excuse to try to wallow in ignorance.

Yes this last page of the thread shows peoples claim to brilliance and shows their short comings for sure. Apparently if you arent a mathhammer fan your ignorant but you might want to double check that. There is many types of intelligences and methods. Everyone claims mathhammer is the way but if you look at what is considered competitive play. Find me a player who has used just math to win. I bet you most the "top" players are smart persons who also use real time exp. Bet they have played many games and used strategy. There is no need for hostility and "I iz so smartz." If you cant discuss why in a productive way your only showing you havent left school yard "tactics." This thread should end soon since there is no more actual productive discussion.

Draigo wrote:Yes this last page of the thread shows peoples claim to brilliance and shows their short comings for sure. Apparently if you arent a mathhammer fan your ignorant but you might want to double check that. There is many types of intelligences and methods. Everyone claims mathhammer is the way but if you look at what is considered competitive play. Find me a player who has used just math to win. I bet you most the "top" players are smart persons who also use real time exp. Bet they have played many games and used strategy. There is no need for hostility and "I iz so smartz." If you cant discuss why in a productive way your only showing you havent left school yard "tactics." This thread should end soon since there is no more actual productive discussion.

You very obviously didn't understand the posts about the importance of mathematics.

Math isn't going to play the game for you, simply sitting there with a calculator isn't going to do anything. Not a single person is saying that simply sitting there doing math will win you a game.

However, the game is all about manipulating the math to give the result most likely to be in your favor. Knowing how the math works and using it to determine the relative differences and effectiveness of units will inform your decisions as to what tactics and strategies to use.

Experience is basically learning how best to manipulate the odds in your favor on a consistent basis. Knowing what weapons and units are effective against which targets at what ranges and to what degree is all determined basically by math, and that will tell you how best to employ them, or how one unit will stack up against another on average.

If faced with a situation where you can either assault an enemy unit or rapid fire it, which do you choose? Likely the one with the greatest chance of destroying the enemy unit while leaving yours intact, and guess how you make that decision? Math. Consciously or unconsciously, math informs your decisions.

And yes, there have been games where I've waited a minute or two while I ran numbers in my head to try and figure out the optimal response to a situation, I'm not the only one either.


This entirely game is based off of probabilities and relative points values supposedly reflecting the value of units at manipulating those probabilities. Understanding that is important.

KingmanHighborn wrote:
And the point is? I didn't say math DIDN'T help, didn't say math wasn't important. I said I hate the people that boil every unit down into a number, and then gloat about it, and force feed it down people's throats.

This entire game is built on on it. Discussion of it in detail is entirely appropriate in such conversations.

And I've never been a math person, true. It doesn't come easy to me, as easily as writing 50 pages on the Battle of Midway, and examining everything from ship composition, numbers, gun cailbers, tactics, air power, philosophy and dogma, etc. And yes there is math in that too but it's VISIBLE math that had an applied purpose.

And somehow running the numbers on a D6 probability based game don't have an applied purpose? As someone with a background in econometrics dealing with exactly the sorts of things you're talking about, running 40k numbers will generally give you a much more concrete estimate than examining all that other stuff because of the relative lack of variables and small number range.

I don't have to solve the problem, because I already SEE the answers because they have been meticously recorded and I get to analyze it. That's fun TO ME. As far as politics go, your right math TELLS you, but the real IMPORTANCE is how the data is USED, your already given the answers and it's time to put them into a PRACTICAL use.

And all this math-hammer goes into that. I don't understand how you're missing how running the math in these situations is also informing your actions on the gaming table.

You want to know how you SHOULD find out how a Vanquisher squares up against a Hammerhead? It's very easy, pick up your dice and play Warhammer 40K!

Oh wow...I'd have to do that hundreds of times to get a reasonable estimation, because, as anyone with any sort of background in statistics can tell you, just looking at a couple of examples isn't going to give you any reliable information.

Or I could just run a quick calculation and get a meaningful average that informs my decision making process on how to approach that situation from the get-go and know that a Hammerhead with disruption pods is about 77% more effective at killing the Vanquisher beyond 12" than the Vanquisher is at killing the Hammerhead, and that at under 12" the Vanquisher is about 12.5% more effective at killing the hammerhead, telling me that I have a slight advantage at very close range and a very crippling disadvantage at long range and I then know that trying to trade shots with a Hammerhead at long ranges is generally a rather poor idea before I suffer for it.

Entire industries and fortunes are based upon this sort of stuff, knowing what to expect *before* you leap headfirst into it and acting intelligently on that information, as opposed to trying to figure it out as it happens in real time.

Oh wow! Shock! Roll the dice with your IG army/or Tau army or at bare minimum watch a game between them and ---->'SEE'<---- IT. Gurantee you'll have more FUN that way then looking at an Excel spreadsheet.

I have fun doing both, the latter excercises my mind just as much and informs my decision-making to a much better degree than just rolling dice a couple times and seeing what plays out once or twice.

lol I do understand the math but just because someone says well you dont get it stfu means you dont want to acknowledge other methods of learning.

Sure, and there are a lot of non-mathematical factors in the game too; movement and maneuvering around terrain are very difficult if not impossible to calculate mathematically, and thus (IMO) tend to get undervalued a bit in online discussions.

That said, given the ease of making basic calculations about likely shooting or assault results, it seems kind of silly to spurn that information when it's available.

Mathhammer is all well and fine for providing a guideline as to what to expect in a given senario, but consider;
a) Only the more competitive players give a damn about the actual math. It's fustrating as hell when you're just wanting to have some fun playing with toy soldiers and you get stuck with a small group of elitiests who boil everything down to the best mathamatical & optimised lists and refuse to budge. So now game nights turn into a torture fest for those who don't want to build full-on 'best optimised' lists because they find them boring/don't want to spend the money/don't want to ruin their theme etc... Or else you get those who join in to try and compete 'with the big boys'. Either way, feelings are hurt, people call eachother names and it just poisons the local communtiy against eachother.

Please, save that stuff for tournies where everyone goes in knowing full well that the gloves are off! Weekly gaming nights should generally be a break from the competitiveness of life in general, not yet another dick measuring contest.
And if that's really your thing and your enjoyment to be hyper competitive all the time, then don't be such a snot about it and give your opponent fair warning about your intentions! Most players I find on open gaming nights aren't looking for tournament style game. Would it honestly kill you that much to tonne it down every now and then?!

b) Do all the math you want! Cursed individuals like me exist and we'll ruin your super math skills without fail by beating the odds and rolling the worst dice you'll ever see! Hell, I got kicked out of probability class because I single-handedly wrecked the entire classes results with my 'epic fail' dice rolling. (out of 12 1D6 rolls I had three 2's and eight 1's!)



Take that mathhammer! Anything you can calculate I'll instantly break

Mathhammer will show you what is better statistically but throwing some less than effective unit at an opponent can be effective because either you use it efficiently or your opponent doesn't realize the actual effect. Also statistics will just show you the average. Have 10 terminators face off against a seer council. The termies should win every time but have the termies get "hot" on rolling 1s and they will lose.

You may get an idea of what will be more effective but your playstyle, your opponent's playstyle and luck of the dice will always make units more or less effective.

Now talking mathhammer. I was just owned by GK with orks -
I totally despise the cleansing flames (anti-hoard) and the pscho grenades (anti-quality) I am starting to think that GW wanted to make an idiot proof codex. Mind you you do pay for them but I am questioning whether they are paying enough. (esp. for the grenades. OMG)

KingmanHighborn wrote:That's fun TO ME.

Did you ever consider in your "I hate people who use math" tirade you start a page back and continued here, that mathhammer may be...fun...to someone else? The game and this forum isn't "satisfy KingmanHighborn". Plenty of people find the discussion of math hammer to be both relevant (in a game involving probabilities and tactical decisions) and enjoyable to discuss.

Try to tone down the hate, what you like plenty of people don't, and vice versa. There's plenty of room for all, and if the mathhammer bugs you, just ignore the post.

While the game isn't pure math, most decisions in life can be made better informed with just a pinch of mental math to run odds or other numbers. Same goes for wargaming, when I am considering which unit to fire at, I run the numbers in my head really fast, if i have a minuscule chance of doing damage, i rethink and pick a new target. While most of these decisions come as second nature due to experience, when you run into a new situation or matchup, it's useful to guide you in making the right choice, the first time.

Steelmage99 wrote:

KingmanHighborn wrote:

^ THIS IS WHY I HATE IT. You take a freaking game, that involves rolling dice and playing with toy soliders and boil it down to the most hated subject in mankind's history, math. Statistics in particular, but still.

Ouch, that's a bad start.

Statistics describes the past.
Probability describes the future, or at least guesses at it.

If you don't like mathhammer...don't use it, but don't dismiss its usefulness in regards to war-gaming.

that, but I would also add if you don't like doing the math, don't cry when you loose alot to people who do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

You want to know how you SHOULD find out how a Vanquisher squares up against a Hammerhead? It's very easy, pick up your dice and play Warhammer 40K! Oh wow! Shock!

Wrong, picking up your dice and playing one game will give you a single data point which may deviate several times from the standard value. Like Fire warriors beating a daemon prince. If you take your approach and you get that result you could infer that fire warriors are awesome CC units, only to be VERY VERY dissapointed when you face off against Imperial guard. the proper method of analyzing a unit is to first do the mathhammer, for basic abilities and then playtest several games for movement/tactics/combo strategies.

Experiment 626 wrote:Mathhammer is all well and fine for providing a guideline as to what to expect in a given senario, but consider;
a) Only the more competitive players give a damn about the actual math. It's fustrating as hell when you're just wanting to have some fun playing with toy soldiers and you get stuck with a small group of elitiests who boil everything down to the best mathamatical & optimised lists and refuse to budge. So now game nights turn into a torture fest for those who don't want to build full-on 'best optimised' lists because they find them boring/don't want to spend the money/don't want to ruin their theme etc... Or else you get those who join in to try and compete 'with the big boys'. Either way, feelings are hurt, people call eachother names and it just poisons the local communtiy against eachother.

Please, save that stuff for tournies where everyone goes in knowing full well that the gloves are off! Weekly gaming nights should generally be a break from the competitiveness of life in general, not yet another dick measuring contest.
And if that's really your thing and your enjoyment to be hyper competitive all the time, then don't be such a snot about it and give your opponent fair warning about your intentions! Most players I find on open gaming nights aren't looking for tournament style game. Would it honestly kill you that much to tonne it down every now and then?!

Your complaint here isn't with people doing math. It's with jerks. Jerks and people with poor social skills exist all over the place, and usually on both sides of any given issue. For every arrogant know it all incessantly nattering on about math and annoying everyone, you've got a know-nothing ignoramus telling everyone that math is meaningless and that the way other people like to play is WrongBadFun.

I don't entirely disagree with your sentiments about keeping it casual on casual game nights, but it sounds more to me like you've had some bad experiences with players in your local area being jerks, and are overgeneralizing your feelings about them, and being a bit short with strangers on the internet who've done you no harm. No offense intended, of course, but that's how it comes across.

Most of the best players I know are a) really experienced, b) capable of using math when appropriate, and c) very friendly and fun to play with, even when they're trying to smash your army to bits. It isn't a dichotomy with just overcompetive mathhammering jerks on one side and friendly pint-buying background-lovers on the other.

Mannahnin wrote:Sure, and there are a lot of non-mathematical factors in the game too; movement and maneuvering around terrain are very difficult if not impossible to calculate mathematically, and thus (IMO) tend to get undervalued a bit in online discussions.

That said, given the ease of making basic calculations about likely shooting or assault results, it seems kind of silly to spurn that information when it's available.

Mathammer boils down to assuming you're playing on a bare table, which is why I hate it. Clever use of terrain and movement can mask a fragile units (like, say, Genestealers) movement enough for them to get a charge without being shot by, say a Devastator squad with 4 Heavy Bolters that should, statistically, obliterate them as soon as they're in range.

Mathhammering things is a starting point, it's not the final result.

Math doesn't assume you're playing on a bare table. Bad players misusing math do.

Now that we've concluded that math is not the end-all-be-all of everything, can we agree that the psycannon's 24" range is what puts it over the edge versus the melta?

I only say this because I've seen people say that GK have a problem with AV14 and it's their crippling weakness, and then I watched a GK player remove three landraiders from a table in two shooting phases.

Most meltas are cheaper so not really. lol gh get 2 meltas for less then 1 psycanon. I will concede that gk are a strong army though as long as eldrad isnt around. lol they lose quite a bit espeacially non termies/pally lists. Not sayin non contending but a purifier without cf is just a a strike member.

Unit1126PLL wrote:Now that we've concluded that math is not the end-all-be-all of everything, can we agree that the psycannon's 24" range is what puts it over the edge versus the melta?

I only say this because I've seen people say that GK have a problem with AV14 and it's their crippling weakness, and then I watched a GK player remove three landraiders from a table in two shooting phases.

No?

Math isn't the end all be all, but it doesn't change that the melta is a better anti-tank gun. Observing one game and see psycannons remove raiders doesn't tell you anything about how likely that is to actually happen. Heck, I've killed a bloodthirster with a guardsman in combat, but it isn't a likely outcome.

A psycannon moving (which it probably is other than terminators) is:

2 shots = 1.334 hits = .222 rends = .148 pens = .049 destroyed results. This is if the land raiders don't have any cover, or smoke on. 4.9% to kill it.

Meaning on average, to remove one raider, you need ~40 psycannon shots

Not many GK armies put out that much firepower, let alone 2-3 times that to take out 3 raiders in 2 turns.

To compare, my 1750/1850 GK army put out a whopping 8 psycannon shots at most per turn, i have 2 on my purifiers, that's it.

You can set up Psycannons to fire to full effect, though. Through some stationary units and via having them on Relentless models. A psycannon is infinitely more likely to pop a LR from outside 12" than a meltagun is. They're certainly not as good as meltas are once you get a melta into short range, but they are quite good, and tend to get in multiple turns of firing without being immediately assaulted and killed.

GK are the most over powered book so far.

Just because we can make a list out of the weakest unit doesnt mean anything.

What makes something OP is what OP stuff can be spammed.

AND GK CAN SPAM OP STUFF

Not to mention that Psycannons are better against some units that the metlagun is rubish (like any kind of infantry)

EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

Also, there is nothing wrong with math in warhammer. It exists whether you turn your head away from it or not.
Because everything is measured with stats, and determined with dice, the fact that dice is related to probabilities is tied with math.

For example, if we play russian roulette, er if you put 1 bullet, you have 1 in 6 chances of getting shot.
If you put 2, the chance of you getting shot just doubled.

I dont have to be a math nerd to point that out.

Unit1126PLL wrote:EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

No theyre not. On a paladin theyre 25 pts. Cheapest they get is 10 and thats on stuff like strike squads.

LunaHound wrote:Also, there is nothing wrong with math in warhammer. It exists whether you turn your head away from it or not.
Because everything is measured with stats, and determined with dice, the fact that dice is related to probabilities is tied with math.

For example, if we play russian roulette, er if you put 1 bullet, you have 1 in 6 chances of getting shot.
If you put 2, the chance of you getting shot just doubled.

I dont have to be a math nerd to point that out.

Of course the real question is "why am I playing russian roulette?"
Can we at least agree that, while Math is a very important tool in this game, it's not a replacement for experence?

Luke_Prowler wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Also, there is nothing wrong with math in warhammer. It exists whether you turn your head away from it or not.
Because everything is measured with stats, and determined with dice, the fact that dice is related to probabilities is tied with math.

For example, if we play russian roulette, er if you put 1 bullet, you have 1 in 6 chances of getting shot.
If you put 2, the chance of you getting shot just doubled.

I dont have to be a math nerd to point that out.

Of course the real question is "why am I playing russian roulette?"
Can we at least agree that, while Math is a very important tool in this game, it's not a replacement for experence?

There is nothing to replace, it just exists like gravity whether you realize it or not.

LunaHound wrote:There is nothing to replace, it just exists like gravity whether you realize it or not.

Agreed 100% on this. Too many players choose to ignore math when they argue the usefulness of various units. Sure, your Leman Russ Punisher once killed an entire tactical squad in one turn.... but math still says it sucks.

Maybe "experence" isn't the right word.

Personally, my beef is more with "theoryhammer", where someone take two units, put them in a bubble and have them fight with unrealistic variables.

ph34r wrote:

LunaHound wrote:There is nothing to replace, it just exists like gravity whether you realize it or not.

Agreed 100% on this. Too many players choose to ignore math when they argue the usefulness of various units. Sure, your Leman Russ Punisher once killed an entire tactical squad in one turn.... but math still says it sucks.

Or they never looked at a calculator in their life and said hey after these 20 games these guys worked well and those didnt since im playin against this certain meta.

In theory a space marine should be able to kill a Grot.
But its possible to fail that 20 games.

But as they are priced accordingly to the theory, its reinforced because of laws of probability / math

LunaHound wrote:In theory a space marine should be able to kill a Grot.
But its possible to fail that 20 games.

But as they are priced accordingly to the theory, its reinforced because of laws of probability / math

So why play the game if your math is so absolute? Does it account for uneven terrain, dice bumping into things? Cocked die that need to be rerolled? The temperature in the air? The method in which the dice are dropped or tossed into a container? NO that is why math also uses variables and unknown values in algebra because it cannot predict every outcome. Even scientists who discovered the distance between planets realize they arent 100 percent accurate because they cannot account for everything. Yes it is an indicator but not absolute. Yes You can see how a weapon would affect AV 14 if it hits and you can get a general idea of how many times it could hit but not how many times it actually will till you can control reality.

What i said is absolute? I hardly call a grot beating space marine 20 times to be absolute ^-^

LunaHound wrote:In theory a space marine should be able to kill a Grot.
But its possible to fail that 20 games.

But as they are priced accordingly to the theory, its reinforced because of laws of probability / math

In theory, a unit of Blood Claw would kill a unit of Stormboyz. What do you think is more likely to happen?

Luke_Prowler wrote:

LunaHound wrote:In theory a space marine should be able to kill a Grot.
But its possible to fail that 20 games.

But as they are priced accordingly to the theory, its reinforced because of laws of probability / math

In theory, a unit of Blood Claw would kill a unit of Stormboyz. What do you think is more likely to happen?

In theory a unit of Stormboyz due to jump packs would be able to get the charge
however, due to the fact that bloodclaw have grenades would negate that.

Bloodclaw in theory would win, but like the Grot vs Marine i mentioned earlier, nothing is absolute like you think i claimed.

The probability is still there.

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

No theyre not. On a paladin theyre 25 pts. Cheapest they get is 10 and thats on stuff like strike squads.

The underlined part is directly contradicting your initial assertion of "no theyre not the same price as meltaguns on some units." Just sayin'.

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

No theyre not. On a paladin theyre 25 pts. Cheapest they get is 10 and thats on stuff like strike squads.

The underlined part is directly contradicting your initial assertion of "no theyre not." Just sayin'.

Not when I compared them to armies who get em cheaper or free.

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

No theyre not. On a paladin theyre 25 pts. Cheapest they get is 10 and thats on stuff like strike squads.

The underlined part is directly contradicting your initial assertion of "no theyre not." Just sayin'.

Not when I compared them to armies who get em cheaper or free.

Such as ... ? (I know Marines get MM for free, but I am comparing to regular Meltaguns because MM can't move and shoot like psycannons - whole nother worm box.)

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

No theyre not. On a paladin theyre 25 pts. Cheapest they get is 10 and thats on stuff like strike squads.

The underlined part is directly contradicting your initial assertion of "no theyre not." Just sayin'.

Not when I compared them to armies who get em cheaper or free.

Such as ... ? (I know Marines get MM for free, but I am comparing to regular Meltaguns because MM can't move and shoot like psycannons - whole nother worm box.)

Grey Hunters have 2 regular for 1 psycanon. Blood angels can get 1 reg and one mm for 5. Theres 2 quick examples without even lookin through my books.

Yet purifers can get 4 for 1 squad. And purifiers can be made as Troops

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

Draigo wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:EDIT: No specific points costs allowed, almost forgot.

Aren't psycannons the same price as meltaguns on some units? And those are the units you would spam them on? The game I saw had like four GKSS with max psycannons and paladins w/ GM with max psycannons, among other things.

It was certainly close to 40 psycannon shots, lol. That's only 10 of them and when it's your only real special AND only real heavy weapon...

No theyre not. On a paladin theyre 25 pts. Cheapest they get is 10 and thats on stuff like strike squads.

The underlined part is directly contradicting your initial assertion of "no theyre not." Just sayin'.

Not when I compared them to armies who get em cheaper or free.

Such as ... ? (I know Marines get MM for free, but I am comparing to regular Meltaguns because MM can't move and shoot like psycannons - whole nother worm box.)

Grey Hunters have 2 regular for 1 psycanon. Blood angels can get 1 reg and one mm for 5. Theres 2 quick examples without even lookin through my books.

Thanks! That has helped. So Grey Hunters, one of the other "spammable, possibly-overpowered, certainly overused" units gets a 2-fer-1, and Blood Angels get 1. Again, MMs really don't matter because they're totally worthless compared to psycannons.

But you're right. Psycannons are totally weak and useless and everyone should play the 2-fer-1 space wolves instead.

Never said they were weak and now it just sounds like you all just want to bitch and whine so carry on.

Draigo wrote:Never said they were weak and now it just sounds like you all just want to bitch and whine so carry on.

What on earth, that is just rude especially when you are doing the samething.

Reported

LunaHound wrote:

Draigo wrote:Never said they were weak and now it just sounds like you all just want to bitch and whine so carry on.

What on earth, that is just rude especially when you are doing the samething.

Reported

No I am saying many armies have strong stuff and all I hear back is well theyre OP too wah wah wah.. Good lord people on this site sometimes arent happy unless they have somethin to hate. Every army has stupid stuff spammed get over it. It isnt changing. This is why as a whole you get ignored. Nothing but complaining. Go make your own game where every is fair I mean in your favor.

LunaHound wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:

LunaHound wrote:In theory a space marine should be able to kill a Grot.
But its possible to fail that 20 games.

But as they are priced accordingly to the theory, its reinforced because of laws of probability / math

In theory, a unit of Blood Claw would kill a unit of Stormboyz. What do you think is more likely to happen?

In theory a unit of Stormboyz due to jump packs would be able to get the charge
however, due to the fact that bloodclaw have grenades would negate that.

Bloodclaw in theory would win, but like the Grot vs Marine i mentioned earlier, nothing is absolute like you think i claimed.

The probability is still there.

I never claimed that, my point was that people would use those probability without context

Luke_Prowler wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Luke_Prowler wrote:

LunaHound wrote:In theory a space marine should be able to kill a Grot.
But its possible to fail that 20 games.

But as they are priced accordingly to the theory, its reinforced because of laws of probability / math

In theory, a unit of Blood Claw would kill a unit of Stormboyz. What do you think is more likely to happen?

In theory a unit of Stormboyz due to jump packs would be able to get the charge
however, due to the fact that bloodclaw have grenades would negate that.

Bloodclaw in theory would win, but like the Grot vs Marine i mentioned earlier, nothing is absolute like you think i claimed.

The probability is still there.

I never claimed that, my point was that people would use those probability without context

Im sorry, it was Draigo not you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Draigo wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Draigo wrote:Never said they were weak and now it just sounds like you all just want to bitch and whine so carry on.

What on earth, that is just rude especially when you are doing the samething.

Reported

No I am saying many armies have strong stuff and all I hear back is well theyre OP too wah wah wah.. Good lord people on this site sometimes arent happy unless they have somethin to hate. Every army has stupid stuff spammed get over it. It isnt changing. This is why as a whole you get ignored. Nothing but complaining. Go make your own game where every is fair I mean in your favor.

Arent you also wah wah wahing about the wah wah wahers?

And Im pointing out and wah wah wahing about you wah wah wahing about wah wah wahers.

Well atleast im polite about it.

I find in most cases Luna you take things and make long debates out of them. I was planning to just leave this thread because I think it has become ridiculous and nothing good comes out of me continuing but You keep rehashing and threatening with reports. Grow up

Draigo wrote:I find in most cases Luna you take things and make long debates out of them. I was planning to just leave this thread because I think it has become ridiculous and nothing good comes out of me continuing but You keep rehashing and threatening with reports. Grow up

First off , the main debate is how OP GKs are. I have made solid points on GK being able to spam incredibly effective units that majority of other armies cannot match.
Then, we got into debate of how math and math hammer effects our games.

I was very much 100% on topic, 100% polite, and 100% contributing in every word i posted.


On the other hand, it sounds like you dont like to be proven wrong and dont like to be called out while being rude huh.

Dont be rude, and well get along fine. Its the #1 rule anyways?

LunaHound wrote:

Draigo wrote:I find in most cases Luna you take things and make long debates out of them. I was planning to just leave this thread because I think it has become ridiculous and nothing good comes out of me continuing but You keep rehashing and threatening with reports. Grow up

First off , the main debate is how OP GKs are. I have made solid points on GK being able to spam incredibly effective units that majority of other armies cannot match.
Then, we got into debate of how math and math hammer effects our games.

I was very much 100% on topic, 100% polite, and 100% contributing in every word i posted.


On the other hand, it sounds like you dont like to be proven wrong and dont like to be called out while being rude huh.

Dont be rude, and well get along fine. Its the #1 rule anyways?

You never proved me wrong luna you said gh were op. lol I never disputed psycanons being good I just said everyone does it so its not op. So get over yourself.

Draigo wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Draigo wrote:I find in most cases Luna you take things and make long debates out of them. I was planning to just leave this thread because I think it has become ridiculous and nothing good comes out of me continuing but You keep rehashing and threatening with reports. Grow up

First off , the main debate is how OP GKs are. I have made solid points on GK being able to spam incredibly effective units that majority of other armies cannot match.
Then, we got into debate of how math and math hammer effects our games.

I was very much 100% on topic, 100% polite, and 100% contributing in every word i posted.


On the other hand, it sounds like you dont like to be proven wrong and dont like to be called out while being rude huh.

Dont be rude, and well get along fine. Its the #1 rule anyways?

You never proved me wrong luna you said gh were op. lol I never disputed psycanons being good I just said everyone does it so its not op. So get over yourself.

Your sentence contradict yourself.

a) GK is the only army that can spam psycannons.

b) If everyone does it, it will have to imply the everyone you mentioned are all indeed GKs.

c) Then you said because all GKs are all spamming OP stuff, it wouldnt be considered OP...

Then it would mean.... your statement can only be correct, if GK are the only existing army. Too bad there are 13 other armies.

And telling people to get over themselves is also rude.

If im out of line why was your report ignored? Also if every army is op then no one is.

Draigo wrote:If im out of line why was your report ignored? Also if every army is op then no one is.

Every army have their distinct strength. GK have all the strength, which is why its OP.

And seeing your GK list, no wonder you don't think GK is OPd. You didn't even give the paladins FNP

Not in every list so its not. At 2k pts I cant have everything so I choose purifiers or pallys. Thats not good at everything but darn tough within 24 and add some decent shoting with the dreads. One bad round with purifiers for instance to an IG gunline or DE venom spam Im gone.

So then does that make the de or ig op? NO it means that it was a good matchup for that army type. There is no OP just bad matchups and outside of daemons vs GK there is not a dinstict advantage vs anyone else.

People always wanna say oh gk hurt nids.. well so did every other 5h codex. Vulkan rerolls melta, sw have tons of rules vs mc, de shoot them to death.. just an ugly affair.

Thats not op thats match up problems and a sub par nid codex. Orkz are technically a 4th edition codex and still are in almost every top 3 of every tournament since they arrived. Just cause they arent new and shiny people say oh well now theyve suddenly balanced out lol..

SW BA IG etc were all OMG they broke the game and now eh gk iz soooo busted. Same song and dance with no substance. EVERY army has outrageous stuff and it will always be so. These threads dont mean a thing to anyone and will not suddenly change the gaing world.

I am done wasting my time responding to you luna. If you feel you could do better then GW go apply!

how old are you?

how old are you?

Seconded!

But the troll bot is pretty fun actually.

Hello everyone,

I want to first start off by saying that I have only played 5th ed. (not counting when I played in 2nd ed. when I was 12) and I have been a tournament player off and on for about a year. I have been to Adepticon, WarGames Con, Alamo 40k GT, several smaller GT's ( roughly 32-48 players) as well as numerous 18-24 player tournaments at my FLGS. I have had the opportunity of playing big name competitiors at the tournament level (i.e. Goatboy, Darkwynn, JWolf, Dash, Hulksmash), and while I do not mean to go off on a wall of text, I just wanted to state that I had some level of understanding of tourneament play. I have placed very well at many and was ranked 8 on Rankings HQ (I think I am like 10 now)

Now on to my opinion of the Grey Knight Codex.

Is it currently/going to ruin the game at a tournament level for 5th ed. due to its OP'ness?

Nope.

Is it currently dominating the tournament scene?

Not really, but do you see alot of GK lists? Yes... but any good player can beat an optimized GK list if they have a solid all-comers list.

What do I mean by the above statement? Well, while the GK codex does have a ton of goodies and flat-out rude wargear and abilities, it still is essentially expensive 3+ armor saves (unless your facing Draigowing, which I consider to be one of the least terrifying builds). I hate to compare GK to other marine armies, but at some level this is still true. The key to consitently beating GK is simple, know the Codex cover to cover. Do not let yourself be surprised by what they can do, but instead anticipate. With terrain becoming more and more prevalent in the tournament scene, it actually hinders the GK codex with being able to hide from heavy fire lanes created by the 24" threat range (aside from the awesome dreads they have) and hugging cover as you make your way to them. I still think that the most OP codex out now is IG simply because of its first turn Alpha-Strike shooting potential. Once again, my opinion.

Do I think they should pull the GK codex and perma-ban Ward?

Absolutely not, I just think they should continue to make flexible codex's on par with the previous 4-5 that have come out.

I do believe that I have the answer to fix the GK Codex with what I consider it to be "pushing it just a little to far" and it can be done with 2 simple FAQ's.

1. Do not allow HH to be stacked even if one comes from the squad and the other from an IC. If you want that awesomeness so bad, take a Librarian with Might of Heroes or whatever its called and use it with HH.

2. Only allow one "special grenade" to be used per assault. Make people choose between using rad or psychotroke, because using both in 1 turn is just a bit much, don't ya think?

Doesn't that seem like a fair argument?


P.S. Another thing that could be FAQ'd but not necessary would be to lower the Psychic Pilots Ld. to 9 or make Psychic Pilots be an upgrade kind of like Daemonis Posession. Any thoughts?

2. Only allow one "special grenade" to be used per assault. Make people choose between using rad or psychotroke, because using both in 1 turn is just a bit much, don't ya think?

Why?
The grenades either come on a 1W fragile character that costs a ton for the poor stat line he has or on a super expensive HQ. You pay good points for those grenades so you should very well be allowed to use them too.

Pyriel- wrote:

2. Only allow one "special grenade" to be used per assault. Make people choose between using rad or psychotroke, because using both in 1 turn is just a bit much, don't ya think?

Why?
The grenades either come on a 1W fragile character that costs a ton for the poor stat line he has or on a super expensive HQ. You pay good points for those grenades so you should very well be allowed to use them too.

It is just my opinion, and keep in mind I am not talking about just the grenades being a problem. It is when they are used in conjuction with double stacked HH and Might of Heroes does it become a bit much..

Your talking having your toughness reduced by 1 with the possibility of attacking yourself or only having one attack and then being hit with s7 power weapons at I6 from DCA's that can wrap vehicles up in the assault and also do 2d6 armor pentrations. I have seen one stacked DCA squad with Librarian/Techmarine combo wipe a 20 man boy squad and a BW in combat massacring both units. It would of been worse had the BW not exploded and killed a few of their 3++ crusaders on some bad rolls. I have also seen that squad assault a LR and Stormraven blowing up both. Granted the player had only moved both vehicles less than 6 inches... which goes back to my statement about knowing what GK can do and anticipate them, not be surprised by them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pyriel- wrote:

2. Only allow one "special grenade" to be used per assault. Make people choose between using rad or psychotroke, because using both in 1 turn is just a bit much, don't ya think?

Why?
The grenades either come on a 1W fragile character that costs a ton for the poor stat line he has or on a super expensive HQ. You pay good points for those grenades so you should very well be allowed to use them too.

Any good player will know how to position his 1W fragile character in a way to keep him from getting in base to base combat. You and I both know this. Granted if the assault lasts more than one turn you can get to him or if you get the charge off, etc, but if the GK player is any good, he will be sure to get his bang for his buck with that model/grenade mongerer in the first assault before he is killed.

I have seen one stacked DCA squad with Librarian/Techmarine combo wipe a 20 man boy squad and a BW

So you need to take a libby at around 170p for the grenades on another 100p character to be good?
And this is to powerful according to you?

So a libby, tecchie, DCA squad at roughly 420 points massacred a 120p boy squad with a big mek and you are surprised?
Dude, should I complain about LC terminators being OP because my 10 man terminator squad and the chaplain attached to them for 500 points massacred a 100p grot squad too?

Those grenades together with stacked HH you are so afraid of arent as simple as you think, you need to fill 2 HQs to take them, that´s about 270 points right there.
These two characters need to be at the same place at the correct time, need to get the charge, need to buy a transport in order to get said charge, need to roll multiple Ld psychic tests that can kill your expensive characters/squad leaders if failed and afterwards might very well stand in the open to be shot to death etc etc.

I agree, the combo is good in melee so what, for what it costs and the coordination and luck it requires it better damn be.

Pyriel- wrote:

I have seen one stacked DCA squad with Librarian/Techmarine combo wipe a 20 man boy squad and a BW

So you need to take a libby at around 170p for the grenades on another 100p character to be good?
And this is to powerful according to you?

So a libby, tecchie, DCA squad at roughly 420 points massacred a 120p boy squad with a big mek and you are surprised?
Dude, should I complain about LC terminators being OP because my 10 man terminator squad and the chaplain attached to them for 500 points massacred a 100p grot squad too?

Those grenades together with stacked HH you are so afraid of arent as simple as you think, you need to fill 2 HQs to take them, that´s about 270 points right there.
These two characters need to be at the same place at the correct time, need to get the charge, need to buy a transport in order to get said charge, need to roll multiple Ld psychic tests that can kill your expensive characters/squad leaders if failed and afterwards might very well stand in the open to be shot to death etc etc.

I agree, the combo is good in melee so what, for what it costs and the coordination and luck it requires it better damn be.

Meh, I did not mean to come off as complaining. I merely was trying to offer other suggestions besides all the hate I have seen the GK Dex get. A lot of people seem to think the Codex is ruining the game. I was merely trying to state that it isn't, and that all you need to be is aware of their potential to beat them. My suggestions about the grenades were simply that. I am not advocating that they be changed or else I will rage quit. I have beaten lists with squads exactly as you detailed, and you're right, it can be done. And with psychic hoods and failures on psychic tests and rolls of 1's for psychotroke grenades they are not a for sure thing every time. Do not mistake me as a whiner please. I hate DE Venom spam more than any GK list I have ever seen, and I still don't hate on DE... publically atleast

Also, it wasn't just the boy squad they got, it was also a BW, and the ork squad and battlewagon was wiped without hardly any damage done to the DCA squad and friends. That squad can kill anything, literally. It could multi-assault a Blood talon and full 10 man Assault squad with attached Priest and Unleashed Rage Libby and come out the victor without taking a single wound if atleast 1 HH and Might of Heroes gets off. Thats pretty killy... And it can be delivered in a LR that has Fortitude

I mean, it doesn't take much luck/coordination to deliver an AV14 LR at your opponent while he is worrying about 2-3 Psyflemens and other cool stuff...?


Also, If you had a 10 man LC termie squad with attached chaplain for 500 points it would get raped by this squad. You couldn't fit in a vehicle meaning you were on foot and would probably be assaulted by libby/techmarine combo and 7 DCA's/3Crusaders putting out 28 Str5-7 PW attacks that are hitting on 3's and wounding on 2's. Now this is assuming atleast 1 of the 3 str buffs go off. Heaven forbid the crusdaers get to str 6 with all the str buffs and your now T3 IC due to Rad grenades can be insta-killed by crusaders. We aren't even going to factor in psychotroke grenades making you attack yourself with all those LC's. Of course I would choose to probably ignore the Chaplain by putting the crusaders additional 6 PW attacks on him for assault and focusing the 28 PW atacks on your 10 termies. So by me getting the charge since I would more than likely becoming out of a LR or Stormraven I negate your Chaplain Buff and hit you roughly 16-17 times..? Woundng you 13-14 times of which you would fail 8-9... before even swinging? Ouch.

On a side note, Crusaders are so cool that they get flak armor for wargear even though they will never use it. Due to their 3++ for 15 points. And because there other hand is jealous they get a PW. Both of those wargear upgrades cost 30-45 points for other codexs.

Meh, I did not mean to come off as complaining. I merely was trying to offer other suggestions besides all the hate I have seen the GK Dex get. A lot of people seem to think the Codex is ruining the game. I was merely trying to state that it isn't, and that all you need to be is aware of their potential to beat them.

Ok, sorry if I sounded harsh.
I agree.

I hate DE Venom spam more than any GK list I have ever seen

Same here, it´s the worst thing that has happened this game since 3:ed. With the 6:ed rules if they are true the DE boat spam crap will be ridiculously OP.

Also, it wasn't just the boy squad they got, it was also a BW, and the ork squad and battlewagon was wiped

Then again orks are so UP today that it´s sad.

I mean, it doesn't take much luck/coordination to deliver an AV14 LR at your opponent while he is worrying about 2-3 Psyflemens and other cool stuff...?

Wrong. LR´s arent that good with all the lance spam and meltaspam armies out there.

Also, If you had a 10 man LC termie squad with attached chaplain for 500 points it would get raped by this squad.

Flawed comparison as the termies would survive small arms fire whereas the DCA bomb would be annihilated the second anything shooty coughed at it.
Thus you cant simply compare different units meant to be good at different things in a vacuum.

On a side note, Crusaders are so cool that they get flak armor for wargear even though they will never use it.

Makes no sense to me either. For all I care they could be butt nekkid and still get that 3++ shield,

I played with my sisters of battle in a 1750 point tournament this weekend and ran Uriah with 5 death cult and 4 crusaders. Needless to say I probably wont run that combo ever again outside of a GT. Made me feel like I had a win button if I got them across the board. Sure its the one real hammer that sisters can get but the death cult are slowed good and I cant even buff up my strength for mine. They almost single handedly wiped out two chaos space marine armies. In my final game I had to play against grey knights and he fielded 8 assassins with the tech priest. I charged celestine into them after I managed to get them out of their storm raven and only 3 and the techpriest had survived my torrent of fire. Psychotrope grenades made me I1 and they instant killed me with rads and the such before I could swing once. They charged another squad and killed them off before I finally fired my entire army into them to kill them off.

Tomb King wrote:I played with my sisters of battle in a 1750 point tournament this weekend and ran Uriah with 5 death cult and 4 crusaders. Needless to say I probably wont run that combo ever again outside of a GT. Made me feel like I had a win button if I got them across the board.

Heh... That's the lite version too. I usually run 7 DCA / 2 Crusaders. That's just disgusting.

Luke_Prowler wrote:

LunaHound wrote:Also, there is nothing wrong with math in warhammer. It exists whether you turn your head away from it or not.
Because everything is measured with stats, and determined with dice, the fact that dice is related to probabilities is tied with math.

For example, if we play russian roulette, er if you put 1 bullet, you have 1 in 6 chances of getting shot.
If you put 2, the chance of you getting shot just doubled.

I dont have to be a math nerd to point that out.

Of course the real question is "why am I playing russian roulette?"
Can we at least agree that, while Math is a very important tool in this game, it's not a replacement for experence?

Experience is a reflection of mathhammer.


The counter arguments to mathhammer (as if there were such a thing) are often grouped the following way;

1. "Experience is "better"".

Once you have tried to assault Genestealers with Gretchins you learn that Gretchins often gets ROLFstomped.
Mathhammer could have told you how often beforehand....and then you could have made a decision whether you felt like trying to beat the odds or not.

2. "I might beat the odds and roll really high"

Or you might beat the odds and roll really low.
Mathhammer is about what is most likely to happen.
Any intelligent individual knows that probability is based on an infinite number of "attempts", and that a game of 40K does not contain an infinite number of dice rolls.
So, yes, you might indeed roll really high, but as the likelihood of you doing that is the same as the likelihood of you rolling low.....my calculations are still fine to work with.

3. "Mathhammer cannot calculate everything"

We all know that. There are plenty of things can cannot be easily defined, and that which cannot be defined cannot easily be calculated.
But is that reason enough to NOT calculate the things that are easily defined? Will those calculations not help us decide what to do about the "difficult" factors?

4. Hyperbole

"I don't want to have to wait 20 min. while my opponent whips out a calculator and starts mathhammering".
And you won't....so just leave the hyperbole at home, mkay?

5. Anecdotal "evidence"

"I once saw......"
People who tell such stories usually present them as some sort of argument. What they are really saying is that they expect that same thing to happen again.
It just might.....and mathhammer tells you how likely it is.


Mathhammer is simply a tool.
It can be used correctly...and then it helps, or it can be used incorrectly....and then it is worthless.

-Kinda like statistics.
Statistics are, in and of themselves, a reflection of utter truth. It is the humans reading them that screws up the analysis.
We say that statistics can be manipulated, but what we are really doing is manipulating the people reading it.

pretre wrote:

Tomb King wrote:I played with my sisters of battle in a 1750 point tournament this weekend and ran Uriah with 5 death cult and 4 crusaders. Needless to say I probably wont run that combo ever again outside of a GT. Made me feel like I had a win button if I got them across the board.

Heh... That's the lite version too. I usually run 7 DCA / 2 Crusaders. That's just disgusting.

The only way I finally lost them was in game three against grey knights and two dreds charged them after they killed anything they had a chance of killing. In game 2 I ran through a unit of CSM without letting them strike back. A unit of khorne berzerkers and a chaos lord. The whole time I lost 0 models as I made every FnP save anytime one failed the invulnerable. I sold my grey knights because I didnt want the crutch then I played my sisters and used what I felt like was a crutch. I can win on my own accord I dont need uber units to get me there

Tomb King wrote: I played my sisters and used what I felt like was a crutch. I can win on my own accord I dont need uber units to get me there

So not a crutch. It was our present for good behavior.

You should have seen what redemptionists did in 3rd. They were the uber unit back then for sisters.

Dok wrote:This is a silly thread. No army is an auto-win button unless you're playing against a robot. Time has passed and people have devised tactics to beat GK. Just as they devised tactics to beat SW, just as they devised tactics to beat IG, etc, etc.

Also, Complaining about purifiers when there are Grey hunters out there seems like a silly waste of time. You can take more than 2:1 grey hunters to purifiers when you factor in crowe. I'm sure all the SW players are like "woo hoo! I mean... uh... yeah, those purifiers are crazy OP!!!". And anyways what does complaining about them get done? Do you think GW is gonna come down from on high and ban something? When was the last time that happened... oh, right. Never.

TLR Work on beating lists, not bitching about them.

At core, I absolutely agree with you however it helps to vent and that is part of the purpose of Dakka.

I am still incredulous that some twit decided that Cleansing Flame is balanced or pscho grenades. One works against hoards and the other screws over quality counters. Where I am seeing that the GK hurt is the typical marine problem just on steroids... You have fewer wounds and 3+ saves, if you roll a lot of 1s and 2s, they will die. So if I have a firepower army, GK don't bother me so much but if I depend on hoards of CC attacks, I get screwed by a "flamer" template that hits everyone in the squad. Oh and it counts for CC resolution besides. So I need to kill 1 remaining GK and I charge him, he "flames" me and averages at least 12 kills on my 30 ork boy or 30 gaunt mob. Now hopefully I will kill him but Mr 20 to 24 pt GK walks away a winner killing 72 points of boys at least for his demise.

DAaddict wrote:So if I have a firepower army, GK don't bother me so much but if I depend on hoards of CC attacks, I get screwed by a "flamer" template that hits everyone in the squad. Oh and it counts for CC resolution besides. So I need to kill 1 remaining GK and I charge him, he "flames" me and averages at least 12 kills on my 30 ork boy or 30 gaunt mob. Now hopefully I will kill him but Mr 20 to 24 pt GK walks away a winner killing 72 points of boys at least for his demise.

Then finish him off in a way that he doesn't have a method of countering it. A squad of shoota boyz or lootaz maybe? Using a unit at what they're best at when you know they're going to get shredded is generally not the best use of that unit, especially when they have other options.

daedalus wrote:

DAaddict wrote:So if I have a firepower army, GK don't bother me so much but if I depend on hoards of CC attacks, I get screwed by a "flamer" template that hits everyone in the squad. Oh and it counts for CC resolution besides. So I need to kill 1 remaining GK and I charge him, he "flames" me and averages at least 12 kills on my 30 ork boy or 30 gaunt mob. Now hopefully I will kill him but Mr 20 to 24 pt GK walks away a winner killing 72 points of boys at least for his demise.

Then finish him off in a way that he doesn't have a method of countering it. A squad of shoota boyz or lootaz maybe? Using a unit at what they're best at when you know they're going to get shredded is generally not the best use of that unit, especially when they have other options.

Agreed but the issue is not only knowing what is best but affording what is best. So I have invested in 100+ boyz with slugga and choppa now to truly counter that I should buy 100+ boyz with shootas. 300$ is not really a good solution and that is my point. I have built a GK army for @ 300$ - the ENTIRE army. Now as an ork or nid player I have to buy that much to counter it. <sigh> It is good for GW sales but that is not an acceptable solution to a new codex. Let's say for example they redo the sisters and give them a faith point ability that reflects whatever an opponent targets them with - an anti-shooter ability that absolutely screws a firepower army. To then tell an eldar player that he should field bunches of howling banshees - that are not even troops- is not really a good answer.

Max the fire to whichever is less the number of GK or the targets and cleansing flame is acceptable. When 1 marine - with a successful Ld test - can slaughter 12+ figs it is OP. Then add to it the psycho grenades and you can't even look at countering them with a quality unit of say 10 nobz. That is my problem. But I suppose we will have to suffer through two years of GK and GK-counter armies dominating the tournaments before we get a solution. At least that is my hope and that GW doesn't respond by making a "screw the GK" codex.

Orks are very weak against pretty much everything now so use better examples other then my poor shootas cant counter purifyers...

Pyriel- wrote:Orks are very weak against pretty much everything now so use better examples other then my poor shootas cant counter purifyers...

Even if updated, that situation isn't likely to change, Boyz will be basically always be Boyz. Purifiers are just too capable against horde units, essentially being able to destroy half their numbers before any blows are struck and killing off half of what's left before the horde unit even gets to hit back.

True but then again they cost way more then regular marines and get down just as easy from shooting and need a 150p crutch to be able to take objectives.
Sure 1 model can kill a lot of low armour horde in melee but in order for that one model to reach melee you need to take a lot of them so that shooting leaves that one as a survivor to reach melee and/or buy a transport ro get into said melee.

How well do purifyer builds fare in competitive gaming anyway?

Pyriel- wrote:Orks are very weak against pretty much everything now so use better examples other then my poor shootas cant counter purifyers...

Shootas can though 20 orks = 6 wounds or 2 dead GK per turn. It is not world beating but it is okay. My point is that "counter" requires me to expend about 300$. That is what I find unacceptable.

DAaddict wrote:

Pyriel- wrote:Orks are very weak against pretty much everything now so use better examples other then my poor shootas cant counter purifyers...

Shootas can though 20 orks = 6 wounds or 2 dead GK per turn. It is not world beating but it is okay. My point is that "counter" requires me to expend about 300$. That is what I find unacceptable.

How exactly is this make sense? If someone doesnt field things to kill an army how is it the opponents fault? Thatd be like a player fielding no anti tank and then throwing a fit someone brought a landraider..

How exactly is this make sense? If someone doesnt field things to kill an army how is it the opponents fault? Thatd be like a player fielding no anti tank and then throwing a fit someone brought a landraider..

Simple, I can use the same logic to whine to no end about the OP of a landraider since it is so effective against tactical squads, I just cant find any counter for a LR in a tac squad since I need to take 9 marines for one lascannon and then get a lot of luck hitting and killing it while the LR can kill 3-4 marines in return per turn.
Plus I need to shell out a lot of $ for those 5 tactical squads so that I can down that one LR with ease.

Dont use examples taken out of context and using a crappy old codex against a new good one, the points made by taking to such biased examples are pretty lame.

How OP are the same purifyers against hammernators? DE venom spam? SW razor and longfang line? etc...

The constant whine in here is really about how weak orks are, not how OP purifyers are since comparing them and trying to make a point is pathetic.
The same boys are still worthless against most DE builds so does that mean you will start to whine about the OPness of DE all of a sudden?

But if you must insist:
30 shootaboys + 3 big shootas = 195p
8 purifyers = 192p
Thus even point cost.
Now try to calculate it again with the boys keeping range (backing and shooting) and the purifyers trying to move into melee.

The whole example, although balanced and not OP is still ridiculous since it is taken in vacuum, no transport for purifyers, no lootas for orks, no diff terrain saves, no shooting covers and most important of all, no failed Ld tests for cleansing flames.



...but yes I too find it ridiculous that you need to buy 30 models in order to have something in game that can take down the opponents 8 cheaper models.
One army is cheap while the other needs a bank robbery to build.

No that would be like having an army of tyranid warriors and then getting a codex update.....

<sigh> My complaint isn't that there is no solution but lo and behold GW releases a brand new codex and you are now left with spending $300 to rebuild your army to possibly keep its head above water OR spend the same $300 to build yourself a shiny new GK army that a blind man can run.

Playing Don Quixote is all well and good but very few are willing to tilt against the windmills of GWs codexes. Personally I have given in, I am building a GK army like a lot of other people. But I will grit my teeth with every new GW codex that "revolutionizes" the game world we play in.
Perhaps one day we will see a competitive Imperial codex that doesn't break new ground of cheezieness.

We had one. It's called Codex Space Marines.

Surtur wrote:We had one. It's called Codex Space Marines.

He said competitive... last I checked codex marines is definately not in the top 5 nor is it showing up in the top 5 of any tournaments that I have seen lately.

Tomb King wrote:

Surtur wrote:We had one. It's called Codex Space Marines.

He said competitive... last I checked codex marines is definately not in the top 5 nor is it showing up in the top 5 of any tournaments that I have seen lately.

Codex Marines is competitive, but not in every build, and not in the "point and click" way of a parking lot or razorspam.

Want to beat GK? Play a harder IG list.

Theduke07 wrote:Want to beat GK? Play a harder IG list.

I will agree IG are very competitive but they are not broken. IG struggle against Grey Knights just like everyone else does. I loathe draigowing because somehow I always face them when its Annihilation. IG have no solution for KP games. Same with dark eldar they can bring a lot of pain but if its a kill point game its an uphill battle vs elite armies.

Tomb King: IG do not need to struggle against Grey Knights, you can make it go the opposite way if you focus on putting transports on the table. It doesn't matter how many Psycannons they bring if you have 12+ AV12 vehicles for them to face that perform the same functions.

Your last Ard Boyz list, Tomb King, had a lot of lynchpin units (i.e. things that were important for your list to function, but can be taken out, heavily affecting your ability to retaliate). If you move away from that kind of list, you will find much more success not just against Grey Knights, but against all comers.

General discussion:
Grey Knights did something to the game that not a lot of people realize, I think. For the first time, to the more general audience, it became very clear that maxing out your mech capabilities makes for a very strong list. A lot of people talk about 'razorspam', but it didn't, and still doesn't really show up in numbers at competitive tournaments.

What you have with Grey Knights is an army showing up to tournaments with a pretty standard list of 9-12 vehicles. Opponents that are not playing on the same mech level simply cannot compete (of course, there are a few outlyers, such as DOA Angels, SM Bikes and Deathwing). It is the vehicle match-up, and Grey Knights generally embracing MSU where others are not, that is making this perceived difference.

The odd thing that I find though, is that quite a few armies do the mech game better than the Grey Knights, because they can bring the same numbers of vehicles but themselves posses much more reliable anti-tank. Things like Purifier's anti-horde spell don't even enter into the equation (check the forum we are discussing this in).

<broadcast mode active: stay on topic, and limit your discussions to other poster's ARGUMENTS, or you'll find yourselves with lots of Dakka-free time to fill>

Tomb King wrote:

Surtur wrote:We had one. It's called Codex Space Marines.

He said competitive... last I checked codex marines is definately not in the top 5 nor is it showing up in the top 5 of any tournaments that I have seen lately.

Might want to look up Ben Mohlie some time. Though he's having fun playing around with Necrons lately.

Vanilla SM are still quite solid and able to compete with anything.

Here is an example of a list I threw together in 10 minutes with just cheese in mind. This is an example of how crazy GK can get. Granted though, DE Venom/Blaster Spam will give this a headache, but then again what army wouldn't have a headache from Venom/Blaster Spam?


The idea is for Coteaz and Xenos Inquisitor to ride in LR with one henchmen squad while the other 3 ride with techmarines in Storm Ravens. I made the Xenos Inquisitor a psycher with Psychic Communion incase you wanted to reserve the Ravens, you could always give him hammer hand. I think this list would rape 80% of any of the tournament builds you put in fron of it. The biggest issues would obviously be with Alpha Strike IG shooting and DE venom/Blaster spam, but if you are better then the guy across the table you should do fine.


2000 Pts - Grey Knights Roster

Total Roster Cost: 2000


HQ: Inquisitor Coteaz (1#, 100 pts)
1 Inquisitor Coteaz,

HQ: Ordo Xenos Inquisitor (1#, 85 pts)
1 Ordo Xenos Inquisitor, = (Psychotroke Grenades + Rad Grenades + Upgrade to Psyker)

3 X Elite: Techmarine (1#, 115 pts)
1 Techmarine, (Psychotroke Grenades + Rad Grenades)

4 X Troops: Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband (10#, 150 pts)
1 Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband,
1 Crusader,
1 Crusader,
1 Crusader,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,

3 X Fast Attack: Stormraven Gunship (1#, 205 pts)
1 Stormraven Gunship,

Heavy Support: Land Raider Redeemer (1#, 255 pts)
1 Land Raider Redeemer, (Multi-melta)



Validation Report:
c-1. File Version: 1.34 For Bug Reports/www.ab40k.org; b-1. Roster Options: Special Characters; a-1. Scenario: Normal Mission
Roster satisfies all enforced validation rules

Composition Report:
HQ: 2 (1 - 2)
Elite: 3 (0 - 3)
Troops: 4 (2 - 6)
Fast: 3 (0 - 3)
Heavy: 1 (0 - 3)

Created with Army Builder® - Try it for free at http://www.wolflair.com

The default AB print out format is REALLY not easy on the eyes.

Try posting your army list in a condensed, standard manner. You might get more responses.

ph34r wrote:The default AB print out format is REALLY not easy on the eyes.

Try posting your army list in a condensed, standard manner. You might get more responses.

Your right, but TBH I am not looking for feedback. I would probably never play this list as it is just so cheesy.

I condensed it for you

How does that list destroy vehicles, stonychavez? It seems like it would have a hard time against 3x Vendetta, let alone an entire army.

Fearspect wrote:How does that list destroy vehicles, stonychavez? It seems like it would have a hard time against 3x Vendetta, let alone an entire army.

Well, it can go to 24" and PoTMS TL-MM's... ?


I really wasn't trying to build a list for myself, if I wanted to make it more difficult I would drop a techmarine, henchmen squad, 2 stormravens and add a LR and some other tweaking to add other stuff like psyfle dreads or something, I suppose I can mess with it a bit. I'll post something else shortly.

So, you are contending that with four total Multi-Meltas as all of your anti-mech, you can take down 80% of tournament builds out there?

Fearspect wrote:So, you are contending that with four total Multi-Meltas as all of your anti-mech, you can take down 80% of tournament builds out there?

You are definately right, there is alot of mech and it would be a problem.

Hmmm 3x Psy Ass 3x MM I guess, or Even Psyricane bolter in the rear.

But yes I agree if it fails, and the ravens are gone, its over

Here is a revised list to deal with mech a little better I suppose?


2000 Pts - Grey Knights Roster

Total Roster Cost: 2000

HQ: Inquisitor Coteaz (1#, 100 pts)
1 Inquisitor Coteaz, 100 pts

HQ: Librarian (1#, 220 pts)
1 Librarian, 220 pts = ( + Might of Titan + Quicksilver + Sanctuary + The Shrouding + Upgrade to Mastery Level 3)

2 X Elite: Techmarine (1#, 115 pts)
1 Techmarine, 115 pts = (+ Psychotroke Grenades + Rad Grenades)


3 X Troops: Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband (9#, 135 pts)
1 Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband,
1 Crusader
1 Crusader,
1 Crusader,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,
1 Death Cult Assassin,


Fast Attack: Stormraven Gunship (1#, 205 pts)
1 Stormraven Gunship, 205 pts

Heavy Support: Land Raider Redeemer (1#, 255 pts)
1 Land Raider Redeemer, = ( Multi-melta)

Heavy Support: Land Raider Redeemer (1#, 255 pts)
1 Land Raider Redeemer, = ( Multi-melta )

Heavy Support: Dreadnought (1#, 135 pts)
1 Dreadnought, 135 pts = ( + Psybolt Ammunition + Twin-Linked Autocannon + Twin-Linked Autocannon)

Elite: Venerable Dreadnought (1#, 195 pts)
1 Venerable Dreadnought, 195 pts = ( + Psybolt Ammunition + Twin-Linked Autocannon + Twin-Linked Autocannon )

Validation Report:
c-1. File Version: 1.34 For Bug Reports/www.ab40k.org; b-1. Roster Options: Special Characters; a-1. Scenario: Normal Mission
Roster satisfies all enforced validation rules

Composition Report:
HQ: 2 (1 - 2)
Elite: 3 (0 - 3)
Troops: 3 (2 - 6)
Fast: 1 (0 - 3)
Heavy: 3 (0 - 3)

Created with Army Builder® - Try it for free at http://www.wolflair.com


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here is an even tougher list I believe:


2000 Pts - Grey Knights Roster

Total Roster Cost: 2000

HQ: Inquisitor Coteaz (1#, 100 pts)

HQ: Ordo Xenos Inquisitor (1#, 95 pts)
Psychotroke Grenades + Rad Grenades + Ulumeathi Plasma Syphon + Upgrade to Psyker

2 X Elite: Techmarine (1#, 120 pts)
Blind Grenades + Psychotroke Grenades + Rad Grenades


Troops: Grey Knight Strike Squad (10#, 220 pts)
1 Justicar,
7 Grey Knight,
2 Grey Knight, + Psycannon

3 X Troops: Inquisitorial Henchmen Warband (9#, 135 pts)
3 Crusader,
6 Death Cult Assassin,

Fast Attack: Stormraven Gunship (1#, 205 pts)

Fast Attack: Stormraven Gunship (1#, 205 pts)

Heavy Support: Land Raider Redeemer (1#, 260 pts)
Multi-melta + Psybolt Ammunition

Heavy Support: Dreadnought (1#, 135 pts)
Psybolt Ammunition + Twin-Linked Autocannon + Twin-Linked Autocannon

Heavy Support: Dreadnought (1#, 135 pts)
Psybolt Ammunition + Twin-Linked Autocannon + Twin-Linked Autocannon

Mannahnin wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Surtur wrote:We had one. It's called Codex Space Marines.

He said competitive... last I checked codex marines is definately not in the top 5 nor is it showing up in the top 5 of any tournaments that I have seen lately.

Might want to look up Ben Mohlie some time. Though he's having fun playing around with Necrons lately.

Vanilla SM are still quite solid and able to compete with anything.

That's only one guy. You need far more sample than that. That's like saying old Crons were good because Dash of Pepper was winning with them

TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

Love how the other topics complaining about OP got closed but this junk is pushing 27 pages. Guess a mod got tabled by Daigo too many times

Love how the other topics complaining about OP got closed but this junk is pushing 27 pages. Guess a mod got tabled by Daigo too many times

Qft.
Although as the junk thread keeps on slogging we might just as well join the bandwagon while it lasts.


Interesting list above (with all those DCA) but what I find the most fun is that although it comes from the codex GK I see close to zero actual GKs in it.
Also, relying on one trick pony lists is not as good as one might think, having a few ultra fragile assault squads that rely on very expensive transports in order to win is not that effective as it might seem.

Theduke07 wrote:Love how the other topics complaining about OP got closed but this junk is pushing 27 pages. Guess a mod got tabled by Daigo too many times

Are you seriously trying to troll the moderators right now?

A) The other threads were clearly just offshoots of this one.
B) We have all kinds of threads go long. This isn't all that special.
C) Amidst (admittedly) some whining, there's been plenty of decent and reasonable discussion in this thread. There's certainly a general sentiment that GK are a bit over the top, but it's been repeatedly pointed out that other books/lists in the last ten years have been even worse, and there's been useful discussion about ways to beat GK and ways to contrast them with other armies which some folks may not have considered before.
D) I do find it amusing how when you lose a point of discussion you duck that point and instead complain that the thread isn't locked. Way to take the high road.

Mannahnin wrote:

Theduke07 wrote:Love how the other topics complaining about OP got closed but this junk is pushing 27 pages. Guess a mod got tabled by Daigo too many times

Are you seriously trying to troll the moderators right now?

A) The other threads were clearly just offshoots of this one.
B) We have all kinds of threads go long. This isn't all that special.
C) Amidst (admittedly) some whining, there's been plenty of decent and reasonable discussion in this thread. There's certainly a general sentiment that GK are a bit over the top, but it's been repeatedly pointed out that other books/lists in the last ten years have been even worse, and there's been useful discussion about ways to beat GK and ways to contrast them with other armies which some folks may not have considered before.
D) I do find it amusing how when you lose a point of discussion you duck that point and instead complain that the thread isn't locked. Way to take the high road.

QFT The Mods Strike Back in a galaxy far far away. Que star wars theme song!

I think the assassin spam with 4 crusaders is a little scarier then 3 as all you have to do is put mass wounds on them and you can get to the assassins easier. First Rank Fire, Second Rank Fire! I dont fear the above build as much as I do draigo and that dreaded DoW + Annihilation match-up

Quite the contrary. And what 'point of discussion' did I lose? The entire topic is pretty much going in circles and nothing said hasn't been covered before. I enjoy pointless complaining about codex power levels. 40k isn't some RTS where you can complain for a patch. GK are here to stay OP or not.

Theduke07 wrote:That's only one guy. You need far more sample than that.

Pretty sure he was talking about this...

Theduke07 wrote: The entire topic is pretty much going in circles and nothing said hasn't been covered before.

Welcome to the internet! Pretty much nothing that will be said hasn't been said before, but we're still going to talk about it.

@ stoneychavez: Those builds might be scary to someone who has never played against DCA before. But if that's all you have coming at me, then I'm just going to hide in terrain until I shoot the Stormravens down or you try and assault me. The grenades make it a little worse, but with only three troops, you're going to be taking significant casualties every combat. The reliance on the grenades and the lack of anything over str 5 in the units without the librarian would be a definite drawback as well against walkers or units with a high toughness and a decent save. T. wolf cav for example.
At the same time, the guy that has won the last two tourneys at my flgs has played a similar list. I don't know what he played against, but it will tear through people who don't play against it correctly.

Worst part about this is people aren't even playing against some of the crazier GK lists possible. <snip>

<snip>

Grey Knights are a strong book and they have a lot of builds. They are have their issues with having enough units around the table and once you clean out one or two squads it goes down hill for the really fast. What grey knights do is make even okay players good because of the resiliency within the list and design.

If they start to bring other books and incorporate those design ideas it should make for a better game.

<back on topic, folks, and refrain from discussing people who aren't allowed to post on Dakka>

Mannahnin wrote:TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

How many of those armies are using Vulkan? What were their lists? I've looked at the lists in the article concerning the last years tournament successes and two of the three SM contenders were using Vulkan lists while the third was using a weird variant mechspam list that looked like it could be better built in blood angels. If there's some sort of secret Karate in the C:SM codex that I don't understand I'd love to know it.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

How many of those armies are using Vulkan? What were their lists? I've looked at the lists in the article concerning the last years tournament successes and two of the three SM contenders were using Vulkan lists while the third was using a weird variant mechspam list that looked like it could be better built in blood angels. If there's some sort of secret Karate in the C:SM codex that I don't understand I'd love to know it.

The big SM players I know of:

Dameon Green, Khan biker build (won the last colonial gt)
Eric Hoerger, Pedro hybrid biker build (2nd or 3rd at BFS this past october)
Tim Hudak, Vulkan dual raider (2nd at last SVDM)

I'm not familiar with what type of builds the other folks mannahin listed play, but, in general, there's some variety

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

How many of those armies are using Vulkan? What were their lists? I've looked at the lists in the article concerning the last years tournament successes and two of the three SM contenders were using Vulkan lists while the third was using a weird variant mechspam list that looked like it could be better built in blood angels. If there's some sort of secret Karate in the C:SM codex that I don't understand I'd love to know it.

The big SM players I know of:

Dameon Green, Khan biker build (won the last colonial gt)
Eric Hoerger, Pedro hybrid biker build (2nd or 3rd at BFS this past october)
Tim Hudak, Vulkan dual raider (2nd at last SVDM)

I'm not familiar with what type of builds the other folks mannahin listed play, but, in general, there's some variety

Maybe the meta in my area is just unusually harsh to C:SM. In most tourneys I have to beat a guard heavy armor mechspam, draigowing, and tyranid or ork swarm in succession to place well in tourneys. I float around second or third with some regularity, but that's usually more due to tournament formatting than me contending well with those armies .I can usually beat one at the expense of the other two in most lists, but swiss pairings with KPs breaking ties creates a situation wherein the second place usually gets knocked into fourth or worse which pulls me up when I beat fifth or third.

I have such a hard time finding the cost effective parts of the C:SM book that can't be mirror made in one of the other marine books for cheaper/more effectively.

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

How many of those armies are using Vulkan? What were their lists? I've looked at the lists in the article concerning the last years tournament successes and two of the three SM contenders were using Vulkan lists while the third was using a weird variant mechspam list that looked like it could be better built in blood angels. If there's some sort of secret Karate in the C:SM codex that I don't understand I'd love to know it.

The big SM players I know of:

Dameon Green, Khan biker build (won the last colonial gt)
Eric Hoerger, Pedro hybrid biker build (2nd or 3rd at BFS this past october)
Tim Hudak, Vulkan dual raider (2nd at last SVDM)

I'm not familiar with what type of builds the other folks mannahin listed play, but, in general, there's some variety

it's funny because according to some people, it's codex Ultramarines...

But back to the topic. For those proclaiming the balance of Grey Knights look no further than a direct comparison between them and Codex Space Marines. Basic power armor grey knights vs tac marines. 4 points more for considerably better shooting and CC, cheap thunder hammer, ability to take options at 5 man, ability to double up on the special weapons, all weapons are assault and transports that don't need extra armor for a few points more.

For one less point than a tac marine you can get a death cult assassin. One is an "well rounded" (highly debatable) and the other is an atrocious min maxed model. One has an ok ranged weapon and will get 1 attack base and what is considered good stats. The other has an invuln save as good as a terminator's, 3 attacks base, ignore armor, same strength, higher initiative higher WS can be combined with ridiculously stupid grenades that will gimp the assaulted squad's ability to retaliate in addition to psychic powers to enhance their strength. Not to mention a player can prevent exposing their techmarine and librarian by abusing the assault rules so that neither sees combat but lends their support. Mean while genestealers are 1 point less, 1 attack less, no invul, no synergy on this level, rend instead of ignore armor, no transport.

Meanwhile their terminators get better cheaper assault cannons, potential for multi-wound, apothecary, banner for +1 attack, a 2++, +2 initiative or 4++, ect.

Let's not forget that all of their weapons become +1 S better for about 5-10 points or 20 if it's a squad. This means my base squad without special weapons can glance a rhino on the front or pen a chimera on the side or glance a predator on the side or a vindicator or pen venoms/raiders or wound tyranid MCs on 5s or pen ork trucks or DO I REALLY HAVE TO GO ON?

Then we have their transports. 5 points more for psychic power to ignore stunned or shaken. Also the 50 point razorback with the psyammo that can act as a cheap assault cannon in a pinch.

Oh but they have a weakness of psychic hoods and shadow in the warp and seer stones BUT OH WAIT LITERALLY EVERYTHING IN THIS ARMY IS DESIGNED TO DESTROY PSYCHERS AND THEY HAVE A HOOD TOO. Trying to deepstrike? Too bad, warp quake servoskull enjoy the mishap.

This is the problem. They have ridiculous options that they never pay full amount for, they cover their own weakness exceptionally well, their abilities get way out of control into limiting how an opponent can play, and their units and options are severely underpriced. I cannot see how you think this is fair and balanced. If you look away from the super competitive for a moment and compare to lower tier codexes or more casual play it's completely overpowering. Even in top tiers, why is a terminator list doing so well? Deathwing has always been considered a fun solid list, but it's not super competitive. Why is it that suddenly Draigowing is a serious threat to top tier armies?

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

How many of those armies are using Vulkan? What were their lists? I've looked at the lists in the article concerning the last years tournament successes and two of the three SM contenders were using Vulkan lists while the third was using a weird variant mechspam list that looked like it could be better built in blood angels. If there's some sort of secret Karate in the C:SM codex that I don't understand I'd love to know it.

The big SM players I know of:

Dameon Green, Khan biker build (won the last colonial gt)
Eric Hoerger, Pedro hybrid biker build (2nd or 3rd at BFS this past october)
Tim Hudak, Vulkan dual raider (2nd at last SVDM)

I'm not familiar with what type of builds the other folks mannahin listed play, but, in general, there's some variety

Maybe the meta in my area is just unusually harsh to C:SM. In most tourneys I have to beat a guard heavy armor mechspam, draigowing, and tyranid or ork swarm in succession to place well in tourneys. I float around second or third with some regularity, but that's usually more due to tournament formatting than me contending well with those armies (I can usually beat one at the expense of the other two in most lists, but swiss pairings with KPs breaking ties creates a situation wherein the second place usually gets knocked into fourth or worse).

Sounds fairly normal to me, if a bit soft. If by guard heavy armor mechspam you mean lots of russes, and draigowing and tyranid/ork swarm aren't the toughest lists out there. One thing I know a lot of the SM players favor now a days is the forgotten thunderfire cannon, which if you haven't looked into it, you should. Against draigowing it puts wounds on, stays at range, and with the difficult terrain ammo slows them down even more. Against hordes like tyranid/ork swarm, it shoots 4 str 5 ignoring cover templates. The things are grossly underrated.

And no offense intended but: it might be the player skill. Having played with/against the three I mentioned, and played on the GT scene a while myself, most players are focused on turning every game into some sort of old school meat-grinder mission "Whats the mission? Objectives? Okay, PROCEED TO ENGAGE AND TRY TO KILL OPPONENTS ARMY". In many situations, you have to focus on playing to the mission, rather than straight up "killing" the other player. I know Dameon and Eric play cagier bike builds focused on banging the opponent up a bit, and only engaging in big costly scrums if absolutely necessary.

Also, regularly finishing 2nd or 3rd isn't bad, I wouldn't get down on your 'dex when your placing regularly in the top spots

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

targetawg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Mannahnin wrote:TK said the codex was not showing in the top 5 of any tournaments. You just need one example to disprove an "any", and Ben was doing it in pretty much every event he entered. Boston Brawl last year and WargamesCon the year before for two examples. Dameon Green also won The Colonial last year with vanilla. The poster may have hedged his bets with "that I have seen lately", but that just points out that he hasn't been paying particularly close attention to the US GT scene.

I am opining that C:SM is good overall from my personal experience playing with and against it, including when piloted by good generals like Ben, Eric Hoerger, Dameon Green, or lesser-known but still very good players like Jamie Hatcher or Tom McLaughlin. Your mileage may vary, but I'm not speaking from ignorance here.

How many of those armies are using Vulkan? What were their lists? I've looked at the lists in the article concerning the last years tournament successes and two of the three SM contenders were using Vulkan lists while the third was using a weird variant mechspam list that looked like it could be better built in blood angels. If there's some sort of secret Karate in the C:SM codex that I don't understand I'd love to know it.

The big SM players I know of:

Dameon Green, Khan biker build (won the last colonial gt)
Eric Hoerger, Pedro hybrid biker build (2nd or 3rd at BFS this past october)
Tim Hudak, Vulkan dual raider (2nd at last SVDM)

I'm not familiar with what type of builds the other folks mannahin listed play, but, in general, there's some variety

Maybe the meta in my area is just unusually harsh to C:SM. In most tourneys I have to beat a guard heavy armor mechspam, draigowing, and tyranid or ork swarm in succession to place well in tourneys. I float around second or third with some regularity, but that's usually more due to tournament formatting than me contending well with those armies (I can usually beat one at the expense of the other two in most lists, but swiss pairings with KPs breaking ties creates a situation wherein the second place usually gets knocked into fourth or worse).

Sounds fairly normal to me, if a bit soft. If by guard heavy armor mechspam you mean lots of russes, and draigowing and tyranid/ork swarm aren't the toughest lists out there. One thing I know a lot of the SM players favor now a days is the forgotten thunderfire cannon, which if you haven't looked into it, you should. Against draigowing it puts wounds on, stays at range, and with the difficult terrain ammo slows them down even more. Against hordes like tyranid/ork swarm, it shoots 4 str 5 ignoring cover templates. The things are grossly underrated.

And no offense intended but: it might be the player skill. Having played with/against the three I mentioned, and played on the GT scene a while myself, most players are focused on turning every game into some sort of old school meat-grinder mission "Whats the mission? Objectives? Okay, PROCEED TO ENGAGE AND TRY TO KILL OPPONENTS ARMY". In many situations, you have to focus on playing to the mission, rather than straight up "killing" the other player. I know Dameon and Eric play cagier bike builds focused on banging the opponent up a bit, and only engaging in big costly scrums if absolutely necessary.

Also, regularly finishing 2nd or 3rd isn't bad, I wouldn't get down on your 'dex when your placing regularly in the top spots

But I don't win, and I consistently can't take two out of those three lists. I've never been able to beat the mechspam list that my friend brings. Two demolishers, an executioner, and three hydras at 1500 makes it exceedingly tough to avoid being tabled. It's hard to play to objectives when I have no models. I can't bring sufficient firepower of the right kinds to down the draigowing and still meaningfully threaten the light infantry spam (200+ models) and vice versa. A thunderfire isn't pulling that off by itself. The draigowing I can tech to beat, but in the end it still requires luck. A shrouded and turbo boosted Stormraven full of palladins only gives you one shot to do meaningful damage. After that you're in trouble.

Also, regularly finishing 2nd or 3rd isn't bad, I wouldn't get down on your 'dex when your placing regularly in the top spots

It's hard not to when I outplay and out list-build people and still get overpowered due to costing issues in C:SM. Not outmaneuvered, overpowered. Draigowing walking forward and casting the shrouding isn't much for a maneuver but it works. Stuffing heavy support as much as possible for guard doesn't require much thought but it's damn effective (though he also plays well). It's discouraging.

@Shuma (to avoid long chain reposting)

But calling an entire book OP because you're discouraged/frustrated that you personally can't beat a couple of guys at your shop? I think you need to take a step back and realize that maybe, you aren't thinking of how to outplay them. Rather than saying "I outplay them and out list build them and still lose".

Sounds like excuses to me. The first step to improving is to acknowledge that maybe you aren't outplaying them, and aren't out list building them.

As for that specific draigo-wing scenario.

Don't clump.

Let him smash a 200 point skimmer + 500 point cargo straight into you. Blow up the raven (it's AV12, it ain't hard) and eat the charge from the paladins. They will kill your unit, yes. Now move everything else away and let them waddle around the rest of the game all sadfaced for being slow.

I'd be curious to see what list you're using, though we are venturing slightly off topic I suppose...

But calling an entire book OP because you're discouraged/frustrated that you personally can't beat a couple of guys at your shop? I think you need to take a step back and realize that maybe, you aren't thinking of how to outplay them. Rather than saying "I outplay them and out list build them and still lose".

I didn't start this thread.

Sounds like excuses to me. The first step to improving is to acknowledge that maybe you aren't outplaying them, and aren't out list building them.

Except in many cases I am. I'm pretty good at this game. I can recognize massive errors in the play of my opponents and I can also recognize when they don't matter in the slightest because (as many celebrity bloggers are starting to point out) the actual input from across the table doesn't matter to the gray knight book as much as making a few crucial saves.

As for that specific draigo-wing scenario.

Don't clump.

Let him smash a 200 point skimmer + 500 point cargo straight into you. Blow up the raven (it's AV12, it ain't hard) and eat the charge from the paladins.

With missiles
1 in 2 to destroy on pen.
1 in 3 to pen.
1 in 3 to get past turbo boosted shrouded cover.

With hit rolling it requires about 21 missiles to down it 50% of the time. What about that "ain't hard"?

They will kill your unit, yes. Now move everything else away and let them waddle around the rest of the game all sadfaced for being slow.

And then I lose two of the games three scenarios.

I'd be curious to see what list you're using, though we are venturing slightly off topic I suppose...

Yes.

To completely derail the thread OP.

SM vanilla power at 1850pts

HQ - Libby, Terminator, SS, (null zone + vortex)

EL - 5 TH/SS terminators in Land Raider (or Redeemer with MM)
EL - Dreadnought with MM
EL - Dreadnought with MM

TR - 10 SM, Lascannon, flamer, Lazorback
TR - 10 SM, Lascannon, flamer, Lazorback
TR - 10 SM, Missile, meltagun, combi-melta, fist, rhino, HK

FA - 2 Attack Bikes with MM

HV - Thunderfire Cannon
HV - Predator with heavy bolters


Build it, play it and win.

Surtur wrote:
But back to the topic. For those proclaiming the balance of Grey Knights look no further than a direct comparison between them and Codex Space Marines. Basic power armor grey knights vs tac marines. 4 points more for considerably better shooting and CC, cheap thunder hammer, ability to take options at 5 man, ability to double up on the special weapons, all weapons are assault and transports that don't need extra armor for a few points more.

For one less point than a tac marine you can get a death cult assassin. One is an "well rounded" (highly debatable) and the other is an atrocious min maxed model. One has an ok ranged weapon and will get 1 attack base and what is considered good stats. The other has an invuln save as good as a terminator's, 3 attacks base, ignore armor, same strength, higher initiative higher WS can be combined with ridiculously stupid grenades that will gimp the assaulted squad's ability to retaliate in addition to psychic powers to enhance their strength. Not to mention a player can prevent exposing their techmarine and librarian by abusing the assault rules so that neither sees combat but lends their support. Mean while genestealers are 1 point less, 1 attack less, no invul, no synergy on this level, rend instead of ignore armor, no transport.

That's an interesting way of spelling "I didn't read page 2 and on before replying."

Meanwhile their terminators get better cheaper assault cannons, potential for multi-wound, apothecary, banner for +1 attack, a 2++, +2 initiative or 4++, ect.

It's "etc.", and those terminators get the 2++ or 4++ in close combat only, cost potentially more than your regular terminator, with an apothecary that is crazy expensive, require an expensive special character to be troops (which is a big deal because you can't field many of them without making them your only option). I still do not believe you have read any page of this discussion beyond the first, and I'm being generous there.

Let's not forget that all of their weapons become +1 S better for about 5-10 points or 20 if it's a squad. This means my base squad without special weapons can glance a rhino on the front or pen a chimera on the side or glance a predator on the side or a vindicator or pen venoms/raiders or wound tyranid MCs on 5s or pen ork trucks or DO I REALLY HAVE TO GO ON?

I don't know. Do you need to go on? If you have no melta, then you're relying on subpar weapons to crack open vehicles. If you have no plasma, then you're relying on subpar weapons to kill MCs. The average case for two shots of plasma wounding a TMC is 1.11 wounds. The average case for 20 S5 storm bolter shots is 20 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/3 = 1.48 wounds. This is assuming 3+ armor on the TMC. You spent less points on the plasmagun than you did on the psybolt ammo, more points on the GK than you did the Tacs who carried the plasmagunner, and that doesn't include the fact that the GK required a full squad of marines to pull off, while the Tacs only needed a single guy remaining, or the bolter fire from the tacs which would wound on 6+ still.

Then we have their transports. 5 points more for psychic power to ignore stunned or shaken. Also the 50 point razorback with the psyammo that can act as a cheap assault cannon in a pinch.

S6 does not an assault cannon make. Fortitude is pretty useful, yes. I will not argue against that. It is still affected by hoods though, and it's still requires a leadership roll.

Oh but they have a weakness of psychic hoods and shadow in the warp and seer stones BUT OH WAIT LITERALLY EVERYTHING IN THIS ARMY IS DESIGNED TO DESTROY PSYCHERS AND THEY HAVE A HOOD TOO. Trying to deepstrike? Too bad, warp quake servoskull enjoy the mishap.

Uh, what? Warp quake is broken, and can autowin a game against daemons if you tailor your list for it, but what do servoskulls have to do with the time of day? What bearing does their anti-psyker stuff have on their vulnerability to anti-psyker stuff? You just seem angry.

This is the problem. They have ridiculous options that they never pay full amount for, they cover their own weakness exceptionally well, their abilities get way out of control into limiting how an opponent can play, and their units and options are severely underpriced. I cannot see how you think this is fair and balanced. If you look away from the super competitive for a moment and compare to lower tier codexes or more casual play it's completely overpowering. Even in top tiers, why is a terminator list doing so well? Deathwing has always been considered a fun solid list, but it's not super competitive. Why is it that suddenly Draigowing is a serious threat to top tier armies?

There is a concept referred to as "opportunity cost" at work here. You can't remove the force weapons from the GK, no matter how hard you try. They're bolted on. Same thing with Aegis, same thing with all of the other "ridiculous" options. For that, you're paying C:SM cost + 25%. In return, you get no access to the conventional weapons that marines get, including any of the standard heavy weapons as well as melta and plasma. You DO get a badass generalist weapon in the psycannon, but it's a poor replacement for either of those guns, and it's only a medium range weapon. So far, the only ability you've listed as limited to an opponent is warp quake, and yes, I do agree, it has the penchant for being abusive, just like options in other codexes. Remember the fit thrown about CSM's Lash of Submission when it came out?

And actually, post-DA FAQ, Deathwing actually seems pretty competitive nowadays. There was a chart indicating that they were making a comeback in the tournament scene as well.

ShumaGorath wrote:

But calling an entire book OP because you're discouraged/frustrated that you personally can't beat a couple of guys at your shop? I think you need to take a step back and realize that maybe, you aren't thinking of how to outplay them. Rather than saying "I outplay them and out list build them and still lose".

I didn't start this thread.

No, but it was started based on your position in another thread, and you've continued the opinion of GK are overpowered. You'll see above I stated you think the book is OP, not that you made this thread.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Sounds like excuses to me. The first step to improving is to acknowledge that maybe you aren't outplaying them, and aren't out list building them.

Except in many cases I am. I'm pretty good at this game. I can recognize massive errors in the play of my opponents and I can also recognize when they don't matter in the slightest because (as many celebrity bloggers are starting to point out) the actual input from across the table doesn't matter to the gray knight book as much as making a few crucial saves.

1) "Celebrity" bloggers? Really? That's your source?
2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

ShumaGorath wrote:

As for that specific draigo-wing scenario.

Don't clump.

Let him smash a 200 point skimmer + 500 point cargo straight into you. Blow up the raven (it's AV12, it ain't hard) and eat the charge from the paladins.

With missiles
1 in 2 to destroy on pen.
1 in 3 to pen.
1 in 3 to get past turbo boosted shrouded cover.

With hit rolling it requires about 21 missiles to down it 50% of the time. What about that "ain't hard"?

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game. If he turboboosted forward, he isnt disembarking that turn. Also, now he has draigo, 5 paladins, and a libby in there? (Which wouldn't fit). With libby + pallies + raven thats a 700 point brick, that's half his army at 1500! Also, shrouding is a psychic check, and is susceptible to a hood since it's right in your face (if you brought one).

ShumaGorath wrote:

They will kill your unit, yes. Now move everything else away and let them waddle around the rest of the game all sadfaced for being slow.

And then I lose two of the games three scenarios.

How? You've gotten 1 KP, and lost 1-2 to the paladins. They're in one spot, so maybe, maybe, they're denying you an objective. That hardly loses two of the games three scenarios.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I'd be curious to see what list you're using, though we are venturing slightly off topic I suppose...

Yes.

No, but it was started based on your position in another thread, and you've continued the opinion of GK are overpowered. You'll see above I stated you think the book is OP, not that you made this thread.

I haven't been an active part of the GK bashing in the thread for like 15 pages. When I was I was the closest thing to a moderate opinion in this thread.

1) "Celebrity" bloggers? Really? That's your source?

The feth do you want for a source beyond personal experience and blogs? You think Reuters is polling people for their opinions on GKs?

2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

I've been playing it for 13 years and I get complimented on my play. There is no absolute observer here and we don't know eachother so you're going to have to believe me.

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him. Either way, going from 21 to 15 in the transition between melta and missile is still utterly insane for that kind of a threat delivery system, and you casually stated that it was easy. Requiring more heavy weapons than I can bring in a 1750 list is not easy by any definition.

How? You've gotten 1 KP, and lost 1-2 to the paladins. They're in one spot, so maybe, maybe, they're denying you an objective. That hardly loses two of the games three scenarios.

One scenario is kill points and the other has two objectives. I might be able to zoom some tacs onto his, but they have to survive over there and I'm at a distinct disadvantage.

Yup, that pretty much confirmed it, it's you, not the book.

How the feth does agreeing that we're off topic mean that its me and not the book? Do you have stock in space marine codexes or something? Why did you suddenly turn into an ass?

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

ShumaGorath wrote:

No, but it was started based on your position in another thread, and you've continued the opinion of GK are overpowered. You'll see above I stated you think the book is OP, not that you made this thread.

I haven't been an active part of the GK bashing in the thread for like 15 pages. When I was I was the closest thing to a moderate opinion in this thread.

1) "Celebrity" bloggers? Really? That's your source?

The feth do you want for a source beyond personal experience and blogs? You think Reuters is polling people for their opinions on GKs?

2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

I've been playing it for 13 years and I get complimented on my play. There is no absolute observer here and we don't know eachother so you're going to have to believe me.

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

How? You've gotten 1 KP, and lost 1-2 to the paladins. They're in one spot, so maybe, maybe, they're denying you an objective. That hardly loses two of the games three scenarios.

One scenario is kill points and the other has two objectives. I might be able to zoom some tacs onto his, but they have to survive over there and I'm at a distinct disadvantage.

Yup, that pretty much confirmed it, it's you, not the book.

How the feth does agreeing that we're off topic mean that its me and not the book? Do you have stock in space marine codexes or something? Why did you suddenly turn into an ass?

1) You responded rudely, I responded curtly, you responded nastily in your most recent. Name calling, dropping the f bomb, etc. is typically frowned upon on these boards

2)The "it's you not the book" was more to your entire post, which came off as a page of denial as to why it couldn't possibly be your fault for losing the games.

3) In the kp scenario you're dead even, you've lost a unit to what he charged, and you've killed the raven, in this hypothetical. In the 2 objective mission, yes, you may have to go get his and not just hold your own. But he isn't going to be walking back to his with that unit any time soon.

4) I don't need to believe you, as I believe, and apologies if I'm wrong, you stated in previous pages, proof is in tournament finishings. How about letting us know what large-scale events you've performed well in (anything bigger than an RTT or the silliness that is ard boyz)?

5) Nice quip about reuters, minus the language. My point was more that internet bloggers hold no water, they're aren't sources, they're just other random guys spouting off, typically unfounded, opinions. When you use them to back up your point, expect for it to be questioned in a reasonable discussion. When you state "im pretty good at this game" and "nameless bloggers agree with me", don't be too surprised when people don't just go "oh, okay then".

1) You responded rudely, I responded curtly, you responded nastily in your most recent. Name calling, dropping the f bomb, etc. is typically frowned upon on these boards

I did after you started flaming me. Not before. Note that my post comes after yours.

2)The "it's you not the book" was more to your entire post, which came off as a page of denial as to why it couldn't possibly be your fault for losing the games.

Yes, because pointing out the numerical requirements for the things you said were "easy" and pointing out the deficiencies in your glorious battle plan paint me as a someone in denial of their own poor skills. That's it.

In the kp scenario you're dead even, you've lost a unit to what he charged, and you've killed the raven, in this hypothetical. In the 2 objective mission, yes, you may have to go get his and not just hold your own. But he isn't going to be walking back to his with that unit any time soon.

In the KP scenario He hasn't charged one squad in isolation. I'm going to lose others. I can't stuff my entire army in one land raider and then fly it into the sky out of their range. A 30 inch threat bubble in the center of the board covers a large percentage of the table. He can start picking off transports at his leisure. As for taking his objective, did you know that draigowing armies have other units in them? Shocking I know. Those ones typically stand on his objective. Many of them exist for the pure purpose of killing transports, making the long haul to his objective kinda hard.

I don't need to believe you, as I believe, and apologies if I'm wrong, you stated in previous pages, proof is in tournament finishings. How about letting us know what large-scale events you've performed well in (anything bigger than an RTT or the silliness that is ard boyz)?

I live in Maine. Bring an RTT here and I'll have something beyond ARD boyz and the local scene.

Nice quip about reuters, minus the language. My point was more that internet bloggers hold no water, they're aren't sources, they're just other random guys spouting off, typically unfounded, opinions.

you sound pretty high up in that ivory tower right now.

When you use them to back up your point, expect for it to be questioned in a reasonable discussion. When you state "im pretty good at this game" and "nameless bloggers agree with me", don't be too surprised when people don't just go "oh, okay then".

This is the nature of subjective experiential discussion. You're going to have to get used to it since you clearly don't want to do the mathammer side.

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

Damn, I fail math. On the other hand, looks like someone's had a critical failure on his politeness roll...

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

Damn, I fail math. On the other hand, looks like someone's had a critical failure on his politeness roll...

I apologize, you just said the exact same thing as targetwag in reply to me. He was flaming me in other areas, so I was started to get the feeling I was being ganged up on and I was getting aggravated.

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

Damn, I fail math. On the other hand, looks like someone's had a critical failure on his politeness roll...

I apologize, you just said the exact same thing as targetwag in reply to me. He was flaming me in other areas, so I was started to get the feeling I was being ganged up on and I was getting aggravated.

Flaming you? I was disagreeing with you. Flaming is when someone just rips someone else a new one and rails on them, or as good ole urban dictionary defines it:

1. To engage in an online argument usually involving unfounded personal attacks by one or more parties.

So in actuality, since I didn't stoop to personal attacks, but you started swearing and namecalling...you're flaming me. It's still a polite fail, as the almighty walrus spoke of.

Flaming you? I was disagreeing with you. Flaming is when someone just rips someone else a new one and rails on them, or as good ole urban dictionary defines it:

1. To engage in an online argument usually involving unfounded personal attacks by one or more parties.

2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

I consider this to be a flame. The direct implication that I am poor at this game and that my play is directly at fault for my feelings of codex inadequacy is something you derived from nothing but the need to find a fault other than those that I've listed. That fault happens to involve me as a person and carries negative connotations.

So in actuality, since I didn't stoop to personal attacks, but you started swearing and namecalling...you're flaming me. It's still a polite fail, as the almighty walrus spoke of.

Yup, that pretty much confirmed it, it's you, not the book.

There is no way to take this other than as a personal attack since that's precisely what it is. I responded with sarcasm and a harsher tone. I have yet to flame you and the closest that I've come to it come after you started up the bad discussion engines.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I consider this to be a flame. The direct implication that I am poor at this game and that my play is directly at fault for my feelings of codex inadequacy is something you derived from nothing but the need to find a fault other than those that I've listed. That fault happens to involve me as a person and carries negative connotations.

He might have worded it stiffer than you'd like, but it's a valid consideration. If I play a game with people, and I lose, and ESPECIALLY if I get on a losing streak, I don't assume that the armies that I'm playing against are just better, or imbalanced in their favor. I say, "guys, seriously, what am I doing wrong?"

I've taken it to extremes. I have notepads that have recorded die roll I make that happens within the fringe of the probability curve. I keep notation of how each of my armies does against other particular opponents. I change things up, I try to figure out what I've done wrong.

He might have worded it stiffer than you'd like, but it's a valid consideration. If I play a game with people, and I lose, and ESPECIALLY if I get on a losing streak, I don't assume that the armies that I'm playing against are just better, or imbalanced in their favor. I say, "guys, seriously, what am I doing wrong?"

The general consensus in my group after such discussions is "Play blood angels or wolves they're better". It's a hard argument to ignore given the costing of a lot of key units. As for his verbage, it would of been better if he didn't end his post with "Yep, its you not the codex". That was just trolling.

I've taken it to extremes. I have notepads that have recorded die roll I make that happens within the fringe of the probability curve. I keep notation of how each of my armies does against other particular opponents. I change things up, I try to figure out what I've done wrong.

That's not a bad idea, though I've been through the ringer on this issue enough to know that without dramatic remodeling and rebuying of my army I'm going to be stuck in the third tier. I know the inadequacies of my army and what needs to be improved to improve performance, but the fixes are untenable or unavailable to me. I don't want to play a vulkan semi MSU or mechspam list and I dont have the hundreds of dollars (or the willpower) to purchase 50 bikes. After placing second last week I tried to pick up a thunderfire and didn't because I'm not King Midas and that things 50 dollars. The kinds of lists I like to run work perfectly well in Blood angels and space wolves because the costing on units like devastators and the inadequacies of tactical marines don't exist. Long and short range AT is built into cheaper or more mobile platforms and their fringe units are significantly more capable (wolf lords v captains, rune priests v librarians, furioso v regular dreads, BA mech v C:SM mech etc).

Just because the marine codex has gotten up in a few tournaments (which is impressive and kudos to those players) doesn't make it a good or adequate book. When most forms of tournament placing feature the same couple of units redundantly placed in every list there are issues. No one would argue that paladin spam or the leafblower are the only realistically viable builds for IG or GKs, but there is some pretty strong teeth to the contention that outside of some outliers like good bike performance (which is heavily dependent on the opponants list), space marines have only one repetitiously well performing list variation (vulkan). I find it sad that so many units that are the heart and soul of the marine army, the games flagship army, are poor. Terminators are poor, predators are fairly poor, devastators are significantly overcosted, assault squads are almost useless, dreadnaughts are cheap multimeltas and little else, etc.

<lay off each other, folks, before I have to get firm>

Hello clueless people. Check out the army rankings in the
US:
http://www.rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=13
Orks. Whowuddathought? GK's #4

UK:
http://www.rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=9
Yup, GK #1

Australia:
http://www.rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=1
Yup GK #1

So I guess GKs ARE the current top dogs. Easy to play in tournaments.

N.I.B. wrote:Hello clueless people. Check out the army rankings in the

So I guess GKs ARE the current top dogs. Easy to play in tournaments.

Interesting data. According to your theory, the top 5 armies are:

AUS:
GK
CSM
Eldar
DE
Chaos Daemons

US:
Orks
SW
IG
GK
BA

UK:
GK
BA
IG
DE
SW

GK are on all three lists, which make them pretty decent. Interesting that AUS (the largest data set) has three armies considered to be the worst in this edition in the top 5 (CSM, Eldar, Chaos Daemons). Still interesting to look at.

pretre wrote:

N.I.B. wrote:Hello clueless people. Check out the army rankings in the

So I guess GKs ARE the current top dogs. Easy to play in tournaments.

Interesting data. According to your theory, the top 5 armies are:

AUS:
GK
CSM
Eldar
DE
Chaos Daemons

US:
Orks
SW
IG
GK
BA

UK:
GK
BA
IG
DE
SW

GK are on all three lists, which make them pretty decent. Interesting that AUS (the largest data set) has three armies considered to be the worst in this edition in the top 5 (CSM, Eldar, Chaos Daemons). Still interesting to look at.

I wouldn't consider either eldar nor Daemons to be the worst armies for tournament play currently. They've had consistent showing and without an edition change mech eldar will always be able to place well as long as it doesn't get really bad matchups. Reserve turbo boosting onto objectives just works.

ShumaGorath wrote:I wouldn't consider either eldar nor Daemons to be the worst armies for tournament play currently. They've had consistent showing and without an edition change mech eldar will always be able to place well as long as it doesn't get really bad matchups. Reserve turbo boosting onto objectives just works.

I probably should have been clearer in saying that they were the worst books, but not necessarily the worst at tournament play.

daedalus wrote:
That's an interesting way of spelling "I didn't read page 2 and on before replying."

So can I just pick over parts I don't want to debate too?

It's "etc.", and those terminators get the 2++ or 4++ in close combat only, cost potentially more than your regular terminator, with an apothecary that is crazy expensive, require an expensive special character to be troops (which is a big deal because you can't field many of them without making them your only option). I still do not believe you have read any page of this discussion beyond the first, and I'm being generous there.

4++ is still better than a normal termie and if you didn't want that you could go with +2 initiative. Even if you went with basic terminators, special weapons only and didn't chase the big options you still have a rather nasty advantage with S7 rending shooting, tougher in CC with a slight sacrifice to your to wound roll and don't lose initiative. And you make out for 5 points less than assault cannon marines.

I don't know. Do you need to go on? If you have no melta, then you're relying on subpar weapons to crack open vehicles. If you have no plasma, then you're relying on subpar weapons to kill MCs. The average case for two shots of plasma wounding a TMC is 1.11 wounds. The average case for 20 S5 storm bolter shots is 20 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/3 = 1.48 wounds. This is assuming 3+ armor on the TMC. You spent less points on the plasmagun than you did on the psybolt ammo, more points on the GK than you did the Tacs who carried the plasmagunner, and that doesn't include the fact that the GK required a full squad of marines to pull off, while the Tacs only needed a single guy remaining, or the bolter fire from the tacs which would wound on 6+ still.

Plasma only does .88 wounds rapid fire. Bolter rapid fire would do .74 wounds. So about one and a half. Now you're at 12 inches with an entire squad and one pissed off trygon. If you were at 24 inches for safety, well you're now doing about .75 wounds. So the storm bolter did slightly less at 12 inches and it's doing the exact same at 24 which is now double what that entire tac squad just did. They never needed to close the gap to 12. If either squad got into combat with it, one squad would be down a few guys but have a nice trophy, the others would probably be getting mulched with nothing to show for it. A 25% premium really isn't translating well here and you didn't even let the grey knights take a special weapon to boot.

S6 does not an assault cannon make. Fortitude is pretty useful, yes. I will not argue against that. It is still affected by hoods though, and it's still requires a leadership roll.

LD 10. S6 can still go a long way if you're short on points. Granted it's not getting rid of armor every so often nor penetrating land raiders, but it can go a long way towards glancing or penetrating their transports on a budget.

Uh, what? Warp quake is broken, and can autowin a game against daemons if you tailor your list for it, but what do servoskulls have to do with the time of day? What bearing does their anti-psyker stuff have on their vulnerability to anti-psyker stuff? You just seem angry.

I thought I recalled servo skulls increasing scatter distance. I apologize and retract that. AS for the anti psyker run around, it's them covering their ass in a number of ways. Mindstrike missiles, psyk-out grenades, culexus assassin and the other little goodies they have in their arsenal to take out their weakness. Not many armies get that luxury.

There is a concept referred to as "opportunity cost" at work here. You can't remove the force weapons from the GK, no matter how hard you try. They're bolted on. Same thing with Aegis, same thing with all of the other "ridiculous" options. For that, you're paying C:SM cost + 25%. In return, you get no access to the conventional weapons that marines get, including any of the standard heavy weapons as well as melta and plasma. You DO get a badass generalist weapon in the psycannon, but it's a poor replacement for either of those guns, and it's only a medium range weapon. So far, the only ability you've listed as limited to an opponent is warp quake, and yes, I do agree, it has the penchant for being abusive, just like options in other codexes. Remember the fit thrown about CSM's Lash of Submission when it came out?

And actually, post-DA FAQ, Deathwing actually seems pretty competitive nowadays. There was a chart indicating that they were making a comeback in the tournament scene as well.

I understand opportunity cost from economics. They still have those options else where in the codex. What happened in trade is they got the psycannon which you see as inferior, but I disagree. I get 4-8 shots with them per squad, more than I would out of special and/or heavy weapons, and I can remain highly mobile and retain my effectiveness at maximum weapon range of a respectable 24." If I sit still with them I have quite good odds of penetrating a land raider. I can accept they have force weapons, but they need to pay for it. As is, their combat effectiveness with storm bolters and force weapons is exceeding 25% of a tac marine. A wound from a grey knight can be up to three times the effectiveness of a tac marine's in close combat and they're putting more shots down range before hand. I'm sorry, I don't see the tac marine making up the 4 point difference any time soon.

Mindstrike only comes int play IF they take a sr which can be a limiting factor due to a lone sr is a bullet magnet and causes you to find ways to make it more survivbale which again forces choices. Never in my life seen a culexus assassin in any list so thats not really a method of defeating psykers. Most Draigo lists have a libby but seldom do you see hoods in a purifiers list so they have at best improved aegis on models that never move forward there by limiting its usefulness..

So we come to the ONLY methd that consistant Pyskout grenades. Those do nothing against the new faq sotw, eldar farseer/eldrad, hoods etc unless trying to kill them in cc. So that would mean by and large every army can overcome the "weakness" by killing it.

Also as far as cc, those nfw everyone is so scared of may not even ensure a victory vs gaunts etc in cc. Squad of 10 purifers go into cc even with cf are unlikely to kill an entire squad of gaunts that cost a little less then half. Plus being str 4 may not even wound something like trygon before they are killed due to being fearless.

Just because you don't use something, doesn't mean it's not there. Grey Knights are still fresh and draigo/purifiers/henchies are the quick and easy lists.

10 purifiers will do about 15 wounds to a full squad of guants before combat begins from cleansing flame meaning 12.5 dead. Not to mention shooting putting out 20 shots to do 8.89 wounds (saves vary). So how can they not kill the remaining 8 or 9?

As for the odds of killing a trygon, 11 attacks will result in .91 wounds. That's if you get charged. If you charge on the other hand 1.75 wounds. You strike at the same time either way. He'll do about 3-4 wounds, but he will die.

Surtur wrote:
So can I just pick over parts I don't want to debate too?

Depends. If it's because they've been beaten into the ground a million times, yeah, I guess you can. If not, you can explain to me why Fire Dragons are so much better a bargain than IG vets. Or why Long Fangs are a better deal than C:SM Devs. It's because they don't balance similar units in a vacuum. They balance armies. Either that, or the game is ENTIRELY unbalanced at ALL levels, and we're just spinning our wheels fruitlessly.

4++ is still better than a normal termie and if you didn't want that you could go with +2 initiative. Even if you went with basic terminators, special weapons only and didn't chase the big options you still have a rather nasty advantage with S7 rending shooting, tougher in CC with a slight sacrifice to your to wound roll and don't lose initiative. And you make out for 5 points less than assault cannon marines.

Storm shields? For 'free'? I'd rather have a constant 3++ than have I6, any day. Or are you talking about Tac Termies, specifically? They were considered lackluster by most before the GK codex dropped. Also, with the psycannon, the S7 rending shooting is all you have. You can't choose to get a CML. You can get S10 hammers, but you can't get a chainfist. Those are the breaks.

Plasma only does .88 wounds rapid fire. Bolter rapid fire would do .74 wounds. So about one and a half. Now you're at 12 inches with an entire squad and one pissed off trygon. If you were at 24 inches for safety, well you're now doing about .75 wounds. So the storm bolter did slightly less at 12 inches and it's doing the exact same at 24 which is now double what that entire tac squad just did. They never needed to close the gap to 12. If either squad got into combat with it, one squad would be down a few guys but have a nice trophy, the others would probably be getting mulched with nothing to show for it. A 25% premium really isn't translating well here and you didn't even let the grey knights take a special weapon to boot.

I was assuming a 2+ for some reason on my 'to wound' for the plasmaguns. Not sure why. The reason why I didn't give the GK a special weapon is because we were talking about how effective the psybolt ammo was, and we're already 40 points more expensive on the GK squad than the SM squad. For the 40 points, you could buy a rhino to sit the Tac squad in to better protect the Tacs at close range.

We could include psycannons if you wanted, but then I'd want to include a plasma cannon or multimelta shot, and maybe also a combi-plasma firing. At any rate, we are also assuming that you're working with a 3+ armor save TMC, which is also not always the case. So it's not a perfect comparison, but what is?

LD 10. S6 can still go a long way if you're short on points. Granted it's not getting rid of armor every so often nor penetrating land raiders, but it can go a long way towards glancing or penetrating their transports on a budget.

It's an option, but it's not the most durable one. Razorspam is universally considered a 'power build' though.

I thought I recalled servo skulls increasing scatter distance. I apologize and retract that. AS for the anti psyker run around, it's them covering their ass in a number of ways. Mindstrike missiles, psyk-out grenades, culexus assassin and the other little goodies they have in their arsenal to take out their weakness. Not many armies get that luxury.

Yeah, they have a lot of stuff to put psykers in their place, however, it's not like that's an issue in every game. You're probably not willfully running your Farseer/Libby into melee combat. The mindstrike missiles are nasty, but they're useless if your opponent can keep his psyker in a transport.

I understand opportunity cost from economics. They still have those options else where in the codex. What happened in trade is they got the psycannon which you see as inferior, but I disagree. I get 4-8 shots with them per squad, more than I would out of special and/or heavy weapons, and I can remain highly mobile and retain my effectiveness at maximum weapon range of a respectable 24." If I sit still with them I have quite good odds of penetrating a land raider. I can accept they have force weapons, but they need to pay for it. As is, their combat effectiveness with storm bolters and force weapons is exceeding 25% of a tac marine. A wound from a grey knight can be up to three times the effectiveness of a tac marine's in close combat and they're putting more shots down range before hand. I'm sorry, I don't see the tac marine making up the 4 point difference any time soon.

To say that the psycannon is 'inferior' was not really what I was trying to get at. Don't get me wrong, it's a good gun. But it's not a melta, and it's not a MC/Terminator killer like plasma. It's decent anti-horde, but it lacks the range of a heavy bolter. It's essentially the supergun of the generalist mindset. It's good at taking down anything, but it's not specialized to do it. As far as having all of the other options available elsewhere in the codex, they do, but how do you afford to put it all in one list? Most of the counter-arguments I've read seem to fail to realize that you only have a limited amount of points and FOC to operate within. It all comes down to figuring out how on earth the 'detractors' of the codex expect you to take that nasty henchman army, two stormravens, three venerable dreadnoughts, paladins, purifiers, warp quake spam, dreadknights and whatever happens to be their personal goat, all at the same time.

They have a lot of options and a lot of them are really good; so, in knowing you're facing GK, there's no way to anticipate what you'll be fighting until you see it on the other end of the table. I think that's what's really pissing people off.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Surtur wrote:
10 purifiers will do about 15 wounds to a full squad of guants before combat begins from cleansing flame meaning 12.5 dead. Not to mention shooting putting out 20 shots to do 8.89 wounds (saves vary). So how can they not kill the remaining 8 or 9?

EDIT: I found a better one, see below. The mean implies that odds are you're going to fail that LD test, with decent odds of your Knight of the Flame's head popping. That's quite a risk to take.

As for the odds of killing a trygon, 11 attacks will result in .91 wounds. That's if you get charged. If you charge on the other hand 1.75 wounds. You strike at the same time either way. He'll do about 3-4 wounds, but he will die.

How do you get the 11 attacks? In your math, did you take into consideration SitW? Odds are that you're not getting that LD test again.

Stop whining, every knew book that comes out is "OP?" so stop QQing and get over it. What I would like to happen and hopefully you guys would to, is that GW comes out with all the new codexs for each army in bulk when a new rule set comes out. But they dont, because they can make more money by selling a codex one at a time and make it "OP", so everyone will want to buy it, then on to the next codex lol.

ParatrooperSimon wrote:QQing

This is not the first time I have seen this written. What does this mean?

daedalus wrote:

ParatrooperSimon wrote:QQing

This is not the first time I have seen this written. What does this mean?

<take it elsewhere; you're off-topic. ParatrooperSimon, if you can't participate in the thread without being derogatory towards posters with a different view point, I can remove you from the thread.>

daedalus wrote:

ParatrooperSimon wrote:QQing

This is not the first time I have seen this written. What does this mean?

QQ looks like two eyes crying. So 'QQ more n00b' would mean 'cry more new player'.

In a tournament I don't see GK as being all that superior. Sure they can have an answer for everything but it does come at a cost and in some matchups the answer is going to mean wasted points. The advantage is in having all the answers means you don't have any auto-lose matchups.

Where they do get broken is when they can build for a specific opponent.

It still comes down to a properly built and PLAYED army can beat a properly build and half-a$$ed played army.

Admittedly, some codexes have some auto-lose situations and some will find the GK nigh unto unbeatable but the thing to remember is a GK is going to be a small force whether purifiers, paladins, terminators or even standard strike marines. They have T4 and 3+ armor saves but they are not going to survive forever.

Ah, thanks. I feel old now.

I don't remember anyone calling 5th ed Tyranids OP. Either way, you can't just poison the well like that, claiming that anyone that complains is a bad. Despite what some say, there are legitimate reasons why this codex is more powerful that other codexes and why people hate going up against it.

Edit: And QQ refers to how in Warcraft 2 one could quickly end a match by pressing alt+Q+Q, so it basicly saying "rage quit"

ShumaGorath wrote:It's generally used by trolls and people with nothing to add to a conversation.

That's not very nice, now is it...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I don't remember anyone calling 5th ed Tyranids OP.

There was quite a bit of OMG TYRANIDS right before the book came out and how they were going to be the most OP book ever. Technically before they came out and not after, but it was certainly present.

That's not very nice, now is it...

It's also not particularly inncacurate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:It's generally used by trolls and people with nothing to add to a conversation.

That's not very nice, now is it...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Luke_Prowler wrote:I don't remember anyone calling 5th ed Tyranids OP.

There was quite a bit of OMG TYRANIDS right before the book came out and how they were going to be the most OP book ever. Technically before they came out and not after, but it was certainly present.

Without a mech meta the book is excessively powerful and many units in it are very capable for their cost. The nid book was sort of the tipping into metalbox hammer (which directly created missilehammer), so observations weren't entirely out of line. Nids have a hard time dealing with missile spam which instakill many of their more powerful units and ignore most of their armor saves on MCs and the codex has a hard time bringing down numerous mobile vehicles. The mech meta and the anti mech submeta (which itself exists in the mech meta) is an anti tyranid meta through and through, but when you stop bringing boxes to the field they start winning games a lot.

Do they speak English in Meta?

Say meta again!