Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 16:55:12


Post by: MasteroftheBloodAngels


 greyknight12 wrote:
We had a couple players with GK as primary do well at NOVA (Tyler Devries and Brad Townsend), anyone know what they were running?


They were majority AM with some GK. Here was Tyler's list:
Tyler Devries

Patrol detachment

170 grand master- terminator psylencer, soul glave (warlord) (first to the fray)
214 x10 strikes, x8 storm bolters, x8 falchions, x2 psilencers
214 x10 strikes, x8 storm bolters, x8 falchions, x2 psilencers
113 x5 purgation squad, x1 falchion, x4 psilencers

Brigade detachment

45 elysian commander, plasma pistol
40 elysian commander, krak gernads
40 elysian commander, krak gernads
58 elysian command squad, x4 plasma guns
58 elysian command squad, x4 plasma guns
58 elysian command squad, x4 plasma guns
21 x3 elysian sniper teams, x1 sniper rifle
21 x3 elysian sniper teams, x1 sniper rifle
21 x3 elysian sniper teams, x1 sniper rifle
21 x3 elysian sniper teams, x1 sniper rifle
21 x3 elysian sniper teams, x1 sniper rifle
50 x10 elysian guard, krak gernads
50 x10 elysian guard, krak gernads
50 x10 elysian guard, krak gernads
107 x5 strikes, x4 storm bolters, x4 falchions, x1 psilencer
107 x5 strikes, x4 storm bolters, x4 falchions, x1 psilencer
107 x5 strikes, x4 storm bolters, x4 falchions, x1 psilencer
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
15 cyber wolf
15 cyber wolf
15 cyber wolf

Spearhead detachment

150 celestine
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
27 x3 heavy weapon team, x3 mortars
15 x1 astropath
15 x1 astropath


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 17:27:12


Post by: TheMostWize


Are mortars that strong this edition?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 17:37:13


Post by: Xenomancers


 TheMostWize wrote:
Are mortars that strong this edition?

27 points for 3d6 str 4 shots at 48" range with no LOS required? pretty strong.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 19:09:30


Post by: TheMostWize


 Xenomancers wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
Are mortars that strong this edition?

27 points for 3d6 str 4 shots at 48" range with no LOS required? pretty strong.



Didn't realize that was the profile. Thats definitely pretty good.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 19:29:03


Post by: MasteroftheBloodAngels


The other GK list towards the top (Brad Townsend) can be found here (https://mismatchedplay.com/2017/09/06/nova-gt-lists/). Fairly similar to the other one.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 21:14:04


Post by: Spartacus


 TheMostWize wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
Are mortars that strong this edition?

27 points for 3d6 str 4 shots at 48" range with no LOS required? pretty strong.



Didn't realize that was the profile. Thats definitely pretty good.


For 9 points per mortar?!?! Holy hell, why bother with storm bolter spam when you can do it for cheaper, from behind a wall 48 inches away. The ludicrousness of IG balance never ceases to astound me.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 21:34:39


Post by: Xenomancers


Spartacus wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
Are mortars that strong this edition?

27 points for 3d6 str 4 shots at 48" range with no LOS required? pretty strong.



Didn't realize that was the profile. Thats definitely pretty good.


For 9 points per mortar?!?! Holy hell, why bother with storm bolter spam when you can do it for cheaper, from behind a wall 48 inches away. The ludicrousness of IG balance never ceases to astound me.
No kidding - for the cost of a strike squad you can have 12 d6 str4 no LOS shots with 48 inch range. Almost twice the firepower for 0 risk 24 wounds compared to 5 too. The guard index is a joke of balance - if the codex comes out and they don't address this stuff - I'm just going to quit and sell my armies.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/06 23:30:25


Post by: Audustum


So my buddy played against Devries and his list. His remark to me was that the biggest problem when facing it was that there were no great targets to shoot. Everything was cheap and a bit of a waste for the firepower. Basically, nothing could be killed efficiently.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/07 04:22:31


Post by: IVIOOSE


well The list preformed well at nova and i liked it for what it did. Im Tyler DeVries the one that was running GK and the guard. my only true loss was to alan pajamapants but we only played 3 turns and if there was more time i would have one. my game vs brad chester came to a draw but he had more points left on the field so got the tie breaker.

Fought some good players. Nick Nanivati twice, once in the invite and then in the open, alan, brad chester, alex fennel and reece robbins. it is a mix of cheep units to maximize effectiveness and have plenty of board control. i have already made changes for the iron Halo GT if i run the list out there.

One of my regular gaming friends is Brad Townsend which also lives by me which we worked on tweeking out lists together and adding in our own play style. the list originated from ETC this year.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/07 04:39:27


Post by: Audustum


IVIOOSE wrote:
well The list preformed well at nova and i liked it for what it did. Im Tyler DeVries the one that was running GK and the guard. my only true loss was to alan pajamapants but we only played 3 turns and if there was more time i would have one. my game vs brad chester came to a draw but he had more points left on the field so got the tie breaker.

Fought some good players. Nick Nanivati twice, once in the invite and then in the open, alan, brad chester, alex fennel and reece robbins. it is a mix of cheep units to maximize effectiveness and have plenty of board control. i have already made changes for the iron Halo GT if i run the list out there.

One of my regular gaming friends is Brad Townsend which also lives by me which we worked on tweeking out lists together and adding in our own play style. the list originated from ETC this year.


What'd you think of your Round 1 match? The guy with the AM and the Relic Falchion, if you don't mind my asking?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/07 05:20:41


Post by: IVIOOSE


he did not have the best target priority, brought down his plasma squads too early so they did not have good targets as none of the grey knights were on the board. personally i dont like big expensive units and that tank he took was like 800 points which is a lot and against my army does not do much as i dont have vehicles for it to kill to make its points back. he should have blocked the big tank and the two taurox more behind guard. if he did that i would not have been able to drop in and just nuke them with plasma. just needs work on placing models and target priority and he will do much better.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/07 11:41:58


Post by: Audustum


Ha! I'll have to let him know. It was his first GT. He was saying in his own post mortem your list was hard to Target prioritize.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/08 11:04:38


Post by: Fantome


I am right in thinking that I don't need to roll to see if my reserves come in? I just choose and turn when the shown up, and then they so automatically right?

In a recent game only my 2nd of 8th my opponent insisted I had to roll to see if they showed up or not a la deep strike reserves form 7th is this correct?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/08 11:24:03


Post by: Godeskian


Your opponent was wrong, that random mechanic went out with 7th edition. You just pick the turn and things come in at the end of the movement phase


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/08 12:28:35


Post by: L0adedDice


Hey so, what's people's thoughts on Demon hammers on units.
Is it worth putting them in some? Pt's V effectiveness


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/08 12:32:26


Post by: Godeskian


L0adedDice wrote:
Hey so, what's people's thoughts on Demon hammers on units.
Is it worth putting them in some? Pt's V effectiveness


Other people have done the math, but to sum up,

Yesterday on paragons, apothecaries and librarians (anything with ws+2) and falchions on everything else


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/08 13:50:31


Post by: Fantome


Godeskian wrote:
Your opponent was wrong, that random mechanic went out with 7th edition. You just pick the turn and things come in at the end of the movement phase


I thought this most be the case, thanks for the clarification.

My alpha strike felt a bit hamstrung when it didn't show up until the top of turn 3 lol.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/08 17:26:20


Post by: Godeskian


Fantome wrote:
Godeskian wrote:
Your opponent was wrong, that random mechanic went out with 7th edition. You just pick the turn and things come in at the end of the movement phase


I thought this most be the case, thanks for the clarification.

My alpha strike felt a bit hamstrung when it didn't show up until the top of turn 3 lol.


Been there


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/10 23:17:31


Post by: macexor


Are there any good/semi good range anti-tank models apart from Stormraven/Ven Dread?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/12 17:24:06


Post by: Spartan117xyz


so I see all your optimized lists and everything and that's great and al....

but what do you all think of an all paladin list? I have 2k list of paladins, apothecaries (because I hate when my special silver boys die) draigo, voldus, storm ravens and a dreadknight.

what do you think? basically its an alpha strike tear the throat out type army. prolly just get tabled but dang it will be fun.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/12 17:41:45


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


I'm just not sold on the Apothecary. Focus fire would make his ability too useless.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/12 18:02:59


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm just not sold on the Apothecary. Focus fire would make his ability too useless.


so I have yet to use him (or even play 8th ed) but from what I understand I can give one the cuirass for frizzle if I make him my warlord. which if nothing else makes him one tough SOB.

waddya think?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/12 18:33:29


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Nah I'd rather just use that on a regular Grandmaster or Librarian.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/12 18:57:49


Post by: Spartan117xyz


well so the thing is you can have voldus or dragio or whoever. give the cuirass to the apothecary and give him first to the fray. so he can heal himself and is a super support character.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/12 19:58:49


Post by: Godeskian


I love my apothecary. Won't build a list without them as it forces people to put huge amounts of firepower into Paladins, and with a hammer and the ability to fix himself he's a beast in close combat. Ws2+ for the win


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/14 10:44:15


Post by: L0adedDice


As it's usually the squeaky wheel that gets the grease...
Can we talk more about how Terminators are literally pointed so high they are unplayable?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/14 11:09:44


Post by: Spartan117xyz


L0adedDice wrote:
As it's usually the squeaky wheel that gets the grease...
Can we talk more about how Terminators are literally pointed so high they are unplayable?


terminators not including paladins? from what I here paladins are worth it. but yes from what I understand regulare termies are overcosted.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/14 11:15:47


Post by: mario88826


 Xenomancers wrote:
Spartacus wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
Are mortars that strong this edition?

27 points for 3d6 str 4 shots at 48" range with no LOS required? pretty strong.



Didn't realize that was the profile. Thats definitely pretty good.


For 9 points per mortar?!?! Holy hell, why bother with storm bolter spam when you can do it for cheaper, from behind a wall 48 inches away. The ludicrousness of IG balance never ceases to astound me.
No kidding - for the cost of a strike squad you can have 12 d6 str4 no LOS shots with 48 inch range. Almost twice the firepower for 0 risk 24 wounds compared to 5 too. The guard index is a joke of balance - if the codex comes out and they don't address this stuff - I'm just going to quit and sell my armies.


Hold on dude, don't sell your stuff - codex may even buff them further.

It's pretty accurate that all codexes were finished long time ago. And have been printed in fact already.

But don't lose your hope - I think what is really going to decide what is strong and what is not in 8th 40k will be Chapters Approved in December. Until then well nothing in this edition can be said to be balanced or not. Chapters Approved are supposed to be balancing factor that for first time takes into account actual performance of armies and playtesting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
L0adedDice wrote:
As it's usually the squeaky wheel that gets the grease...
Can we talk more about how Terminators are literally pointed so high they are unplayable?


You talking about GK terminators there ? As I wouldn't extend this statement to all terminators around.

Problem with Terminators now is that it's so easy to remove them with plasma etc. Or just sheer amount of attacks . And deepstriking is denied by wraps of cannon fodder that even if they kill is still bad - since they will kill some conscripts and you lose 300 points of terminators back.

Now imagine terminators with 18" rapid fire range who are mathematically proved to be around 150% more durable against OH plasma and at same time thanks to 18" rapid fire can melt with plasma themselves something far away even protected by bubblewrap.

Pro tip if you are into terminators - time to turn heretic .


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/14 19:14:31


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


The problem with Terminators is they went up 2 points instead of being decreased by 2 points. Paladins are only 7 points more for the extra attack and wound and heavy weapon saturation.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/18 10:32:27


Post by: L0adedDice


Does anyone here take an Imperial Knight with their Grey knight forces?
If so, what kind and what kind of load out?

I'm considering picking one up, purely for the rule of cool factor as they look killer.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/18 15:30:34


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


L0adedDice wrote:
Does anyone here take an Imperial Knight with their Grey knight forces?
If so, what kind and what kind of load out?

I'm considering picking one up, purely for the rule of cool factor as they look killer.

Honestly it's a fantastic kit and you should pick it up for that alone.

I haven't ran one as an ally since 8th started though, but the performance is basically the same: it dies in 1-2 turns or it's an unstoppable monster.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/18 16:03:29


Post by: greyknight12


I've considered a knight as well, but the problem of knights as has been said is there is ALOT of stuff in the game that can one-shot them, and they don't pack nearly enough firepower for their cost. For example: for 390 pts you can get the cheapest knight, the CC only version; and for the same cost you can get 2 dreadknights with teleportors, gatling psilencers, and greatswords. In CC and durability-wise they are about equal, but the dreadknights have 24 shots, can deepstrike, and boost their invul to a 4++. And they fill slots in an army that struggles to get multiple detachments. A stormraven puts out very similar damage for 326 points, and has much more mobility.
Knights are my second army and I love them, but without enough firepower to level important units and no ability to hold objectives they're in a rough spot (especially playing them pure).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/18 19:57:03


Post by: jeffersonian000


L0adedDice wrote:
Does anyone here take an Imperial Knight with their Grey knight forces?
If so, what kind and what kind of load out?

I'm considering picking one up, purely for the rule of cool factor as they look killer.

I preferred an Errant previous to 8th, but would not recommend one for GK in 8th. Probably would go with a Paladin with the Battle Cannon, if I didn't need to points for GK, but since I need points for GK ...

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/18 20:57:44


Post by: Audustum


A Knight is always a great ally if you want to emphasize the elite advantage of GK. If you're going that route, the hands down best option is the Crusader with a Stormspear Rocket pod. GK are already brutal in melee. Their big weakness is guns. Crusaders are the best bang for your buck Knight Gun platforms out there.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/19 06:16:58


Post by: Godeskian


I may or may not have painted up my knights to look like grey knights too, but the truth is that I also haven't played them as allies since 7th. I honestly think GK at HD well enough alone these days


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/19 12:09:00


Post by: commander dante


Gonna ask

How is Crowe faring for you guys?

Ive used him several times, and he seems good at mulching anything that isnt a Tank/2+ Save

Because his 2+ Rerollable hits and S4/S6 (hammerhand) that is also rerollable is a nice bonus, despite his Sword having no special properties (as it should)


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/19 16:23:28


Post by: Audustum


It's more that anything Crowe can do a Brotherhood Champion can do better.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/19 17:58:33


Post by: Quickjager


And cheaper.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/25 13:22:23


Post by: FrozenDwarf


dudes, i need your oppinions.

i recently dug up my old GK models from the basment. i have no idea whatt the stuff is in todays new setting so im just going to add a pic of them
Spoiler:

at that time i was a collector not a gamer. still am, but eventualy i want to bring them to the table for the very first time. (havent even bought the codex yet.)
they are prolly 15 years old so they are all metal and that means no wep alternatives as i see current gk has on the box art, but i dont want to throw them away just cuz i love the old metal cast over the current plastic cast.

so, what can i do whit that small army in a NON competative setting?
(is it even playable??)


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/25 15:27:13


Post by: Godeskian


Not actually that bad.

You've got a lascannon / missile dread (make him venerable and give him astral aim for lulz)

8 strike knights with swords and halberds,
2 strike knights with flamers,
One terminator / Paladin, an Inquisitor and a vindicare.

You could run the terminator as an hq choice, the two five man strike squads as troops, the dread as an elite and you'd have the beginning of a decent little patrol detachment.

The Inquisitor and vindicare don't really suit the rest anymore as they're in different codexes these days, but due to keywords you can legally field them as part of the same detachment.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/25 18:20:42


Post by: Spartacus


^^

Right out of Codex: Daemonhunters from 10 years ago, awesome. Don't sell them, I use plenty of metal terminators still and even a few of the power armour guys.

If you wanna run the Inquisitor and Assassin I would recommend getting 2 models to use as acolytes. They can be anything basically, you can buy a small pack of 4 Guardsmen for very cheap and use those. A single acolyte counts as an elite choice. This will give you 1 HQ (Inquisitor) and 3 Elites (Assasssin and 2 acolytes) to use as a seperate vanguard detachment to your GK's. You want to keep them seperate: you can include the Inqusitional models with them but your Knights get a bonus for being in a detachment on their own.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/25 20:07:25


Post by: FrozenDwarf


whaaat, inquisitors are no longer part of GK?
what are gw thinking..........

But that aside for now, so if i go the rute Spartacus suggests, by finding 2 acolytes and place the assasin and inq in 1 group alone, and the path Godeskian suggested for my GK(is it even legal to say my bog standard dread is a venrable dread?) this small army becomes "legal"?

Finaly, seeing as i wont enter any competitions whit this army, is there any unit selections that i should avoid before the collector in me takes controll yet again?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/25 21:46:45


Post by: Fantome


Godeskian wrote:
Your opponent was wrong, that random mechanic went out with 7th edition. You just pick the turn and things come in at the end of the movement phase


Hi, is this true of matched play? I've not yet got the brb, but do you have a page ref to back this up. Got a game planned tomorrow and want to get it right, we will have a brb at the game. Thanks in advance.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/26 03:52:46


Post by: Spartacus


Fantome wrote:
Godeskian wrote:
Your opponent was wrong, that random mechanic went out with 7th edition. You just pick the turn and things come in at the end of the movement phase


Hi, is this true of matched play? I've not yet got the brb, but do you have a page ref to back this up. Got a game planned tomorrow and want to get it right, we will have a brb at the game. Thanks in advance.


There is no page reference because the rule doesn't exist. It's just peoples hangovers from last edition.

The onus is on the other player to prove that you HAVE to roll for reserves, otherwise just follow the instructions for teleporting on the units datasheet. And yes, the matched play rules makes no changes to this.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/26 11:30:30


Post by: Godeskian


 FrozenDwarf wrote:


But that aside for now, so if i go the rute Spartacus suggests, by finding 2 acolytes and place the assasin and inq in 1 group alone, and the path Godeskian suggested for my GK(is it even legal to say my bog standard dread is a venrable dread?) this small army becomes "legal"?


Yeah, pretty much a legal army in all respects. And sure, it can be a venerable dread. What, physically at lead, distinguishes a venerable dread from a regular dread? Its all points and opinions after all.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spartacus wrote:
Fantome wrote:
Godeskian wrote:
Your opponent was wrong, that random mechanic went out with 7th edition. You just pick the turn and things come in at the end of the movement phase


Hi, is this true of matched play? I've not yet got the brb, but do you have a page ref to back this up. Got a game planned tomorrow and want to get it right, we will have a brb at the game. Thanks in advance.


There is no page reference because the rule doesn't exist. It's just peoples hangovers from last edition.

The onus is on the other player to prove that you HAVE to roll for reserves, otherwise just follow the instructions for teleporting on the units datasheet. And yes, the matched play rules makes no changes to this.


This, the teleportation rules just say they come on when you choose. No random arrival, no scatter, just end of movement phase and more than 9" from the enemy


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/29 02:04:42


Post by: greyknight12


Anyone else notice we lost twin autocannons on our dreadnoughts with the codex?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/29 02:22:40


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 greyknight12 wrote:
Anyone else notice we lost twin autocannons on our dreadnoughts with the codex?

You can use the index entry if you want.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/30 21:15:24


Post by: RobHampster


I don't think you can use an index entry if there is an entry which supercedes it in a codex.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/09/30 22:17:30


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


RobHampster wrote:
I don't think you can use an index entry if there is an entry which supercedes it in a codex.

They did an FAQ that covers index options and models they don't sell. You're fine.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/01 16:34:45


Post by: greyknight12


Another question for the group: how do people feel about warding staves? Aside from the potentially hilarious option of giving every model a 5++ in CC (and basically taking us back to a Daemonhunters-era nemesis weapon) is it worth adding one to power armor squads to try and stop rouge power fists and such? On terminator types it seems to be a decent idea with the caveat that wound allocation will get him shot to death if the stave guy makes it out of combat alive. S6 AP-1 seems to be a decent trade for losing an extra S4 AP-2 attack, didn't know if anyone else had an opinion.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/01 17:20:57


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 greyknight12 wrote:
Another question for the group: how do people feel about warding staves? Aside from the potentially hilarious option of giving every model a 5++ in CC (and basically taking us back to a Daemonhunters-era nemesis weapon) is it worth adding one to power armor squads to try and stop rouge power fists and such? On terminator types it seems to be a decent idea with the caveat that wound allocation will get him shot to death if the stave guy makes it out of combat alive. S6 AP-1 seems to be a decent trade for losing an extra S4 AP-2 attack, didn't know if anyone else had an opinion.

Anything with Power Fists is likely going to go through a Strike Squad anyway. Maybe one in a Paladin squad, because the real hitters in melee with doing D3-6 or D D3-D6 damage are gonna have a higher AP value.

Same logic for Terminators too, but...ya know, our Terminators are bad.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 01:38:21


Post by: Derek4real


Curious to know what are your answers to Mortarion or Magnus as a grey knights player?

Thinking about taking some Grey Knights for Daemon support.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 02:38:40


Post by: macexor


Initially I wanted to create a separate thread, but changed my mind.

I'm slowly getting my girlfriend into wh40k. She has chosen Grey Knights as her army, in a nutshell, because every single one of them is a psyker and they are an elite force that walks in shiny armours.
She's mostly interested in Paladins, some Strike Squads, Voldus, Brother-Captain and maybe a GMNDK. So far I've only bought her a single Paladin squad. That aaand Saint Celestine cause she's "pretty" and an "angel".

I'm fine with that. I'm also trying to make good lists with units she likes, so she doesn't get stomped every game playing with some veterans. Simply speaking, I want to make up her rather low skills (for now at least), with a stronger list, so the games are fun for her. Here comes the question. I know I can simply take the Celestine via the "Auxiliary Support Detachment", but loosing that 1CP seems like a waste. She also doesn't want to include her just like that in the main detachment, so she doesn't loose the psyking bonus (wchich seems reasonable). How would you bring Celestine other than the auxiliary detachment? Possibly using some units that would fill some GK needs?

a) buying Sororitas units doesn't count simply because they are expensive and I hate dealing with metal models
b) no Astra Militarum models simply because they look ugly (we both agree on that)


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 03:20:14


Post by: greyknight12


I had a game against mortarion yesterday, he charged at me and I surrounded him with interceptors and dreadknights. Took him down to 5 wounds with smite and psilencers, then assaulted him with dreadknights. He died.
If you're doing allies, I'd recommend interceptors over strikes simply for the mobility: for 4 more points per model you get a 12" move and a once per game shunt move.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 03:36:33


Post by: Derek4real


 greyknight12 wrote:
I had a game against mortarion yesterday, he charged at me and I surrounded him with interceptors and dreadknights. Took him down to 5 wounds with smite and psilencers, then assaulted him with dreadknights. He died.
If you're doing allies, I'd recommend interceptors over strikes simply for the mobility: for 4 more points per model you get a 12" move and a once per game shunt move.


Can you give me numbers of units? I was thinking 2 dreadknights would be enough.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 03:51:17


Post by: Audustum


macexor wrote:
Initially I wanted to create a separate thread, but changed my mind.

I'm slowly getting my girlfriend into wh40k. She has chosen Grey Knights as her army, in a nutshell, because every single one of them is a psyker and they are an elite force that walks in shiny armours.
She's mostly interested in Paladins, some Strike Squads, Voldus, Brother-Captain and maybe a GMNDK. So far I've only bought her a single Paladin squad. That aaand Saint Celestine cause she's "pretty" and an "angel".

I'm fine with that. I'm also trying to make good lists with units she likes, so she doesn't get stomped every game playing with some veterans. Simply speaking, I want to make up her rather low skills (for now at least), with a stronger list, so the games are fun for her. Here comes the question. I know I can simply take the Celestine via the "Auxiliary Support Detachment", but loosing that 1CP seems like a waste. She also doesn't want to include her just like that in the main detachment, so she doesn't loose the psyking bonus (wchich seems reasonable). How would you bring Celestine other than the auxiliary detachment? Possibly using some units that would fill some GK needs?

a) buying Sororitas units doesn't count simply because they are expensive and I hate dealing with metal models
b) no Astra Militarum models simply because they look ugly (we both agree on that)


You just put your GK in two detachments. The ones you don't want casting too often go with Celestine to make a barebones skeletal force while the ones you want to cast most your psychic powers go into the main detachment.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 03:58:28


Post by: Godeskian


macexor wrote:
Initially I wanted to create a separate thread, but changed my mind.

I'm slowly getting my girlfriend into wh40k. She has chosen Grey Knights as her army, in a nutshell, because every single one of them is a psyker and they are an elite force that walks in shiny armours.
She's mostly interested in Paladins, some Strike Squads, Voldus, Brother-Captain and maybe a GMNDK. So far I've only bought her a single Paladin squad. That aaand Saint Celestine cause she's "pretty" and an "angel".

I'm fine with that. I'm also trying to make good lists with units she likes, so she doesn't get stomped every game playing with some veterans. Simply speaking, I want to make up her rather low skills (for now at least), with a stronger list, so the games are fun for her. Here comes the question. I know I can simply take the Celestine via the "Auxiliary Support Detachment", but loosing that 1CP seems like a waste. She also doesn't want to include her just like that in the main detachment, so she doesn't loose the psyking bonus (wchich seems reasonable). How would you bring Celestine other than the auxiliary detachment? Possibly using some units that would fill some GK needs?

a) buying Sororitas units doesn't count simply because they are expensive and I hate dealing with metal models
b) no Astra Militarum models simply because they look ugly (we both agree on that)


If I owned the Celestine model and wanted to use her as a bolt on attachment to Grey Knights, I'd run her with a trio of Assassins as A Vanguard detachment. Culexus, Callidus and Eversor being my preference. None of the assassins are expensive, each is really good in their own niche, and whatever plan you opponent has, the assassins allow you to disrupt it.

The other option imo is to go for a supreme command detachment and add two astra telepathica psykers for 55 points each. Cheap, cheerful and a pair of extra smites us never amiss, especially as these are full powered smites, since the psykers were an element she was interested in.

Mind you, if it were me, I'd probably be willing to sacrifice one CP for Celestine by herself. She's such a beatstick, she's worth it.

As for good lists, while the details vary depending on play style, the overall agreed 'good' units are strikes, GMNDK, Paladins, and for my money an apothecary with a hammer (preferably as the warlord with a Cuirass of sacrifice).

My 1500 is two GMNDK, 3 sets of five falchion strikes ( which gives you a battalion and extra cp), a five man Paladin squad, an apothecary, a Doomglaive (forgeworld GK exclusive dreadnought) and a Culexus. So far I've lost two games with some variation of this list since the codex came out.

Of course your meta might mean it needs some adjustment as mine is a vehicle light meta. As always YMMV


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And for the record 'elite force in shiny armour' was about 90% of my motivation back in fifth. I've never looked back


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Derek4real wrote:
Curious to know what are your answers to Mortarion or Magnus as a grey knights player?

Thinking about taking some Grey Knights for Daemon support.


I've yet to go up against him myself, but the more I think about it, the more I become convinced that mass smiting is probably the way to go.

With my current build, I'd deploy everything on board except maybe a Paladin squad and force him to come to me, hammering him with all my firepower and smites I could, before engaging him with sanctuary or Heed the Prognosticators GMNDK.

But I think he's a tough challenge, especially if it's an allied detachment and not a full grey knights army. My advice would be a GMNDK and strike squads to get more smites on the board


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 06:21:44


Post by: Spartacus


Derek4real wrote:
Curious to know what are your answers to Mortarion or Magnus as a grey knights player?

Thinking about taking some Grey Knights for Daemon support.


The question isn't what are our answers, it should be what are their answers to us?

Smite and psilencer spam beats the hell out of a Daemon primarch, and what is left of them you'll have little trouble in dispatching in close combat. They will be forced to play super conservatively with their shiny beatstick to make sure you don't obliterate him turn 1.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 10:33:00


Post by: Derek4real


I saw a batrep where they took away the invuln save and he started taking wounds much easier. (libby casting Null Zone)


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 13:27:36


Post by: GangstaMuffin24


Derek4real wrote:
I saw a batrep where they took away the invuln save and he started taking wounds much easier. (libby casting Null Zone)

Don't have my codex in front of me, but I don't think Grey Knights have access to Null Zone.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 14:02:05


Post by: Audustum


 GangstaMuffin24 wrote:
Derek4real wrote:
I saw a batrep where they took away the invuln save and he started taking wounds much easier. (libby casting Null Zone)

Don't have my codex in front of me, but I don't think Grey Knights have access to Null Zone.


We don't, but you could always take a Supreme Command Detachment of other factions' librarians and get it (say SM, BA and SW).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 17:02:34


Post by: Grey Templar


I've actually used Crowe a bit. He's a nice Smite-bot and a cheap HQ to fill out a supreme command detachment. Once he's stuck in melee he can reliably put out D6 wounds each psychic phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Audustum wrote:
 GangstaMuffin24 wrote:
Derek4real wrote:
I saw a batrep where they took away the invuln save and he started taking wounds much easier. (libby casting Null Zone)

Don't have my codex in front of me, but I don't think Grey Knights have access to Null Zone.


We don't, but you could always take a Supreme Command Detachment of other factions' librarians and get it (say SM, BA and SW).


They should just errata us to have access to Librarius with our Librarians and other HQs, because only Sanctic is not enough powers for what we're paying.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 19:48:26


Post by: Audustum


 Grey Templar wrote:
I've actually used Crowe a bit. He's a nice Smite-bot and a cheap HQ to fill out a supreme command detachment. Once he's stuck in melee he can reliably put out D6 wounds each psychic phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Audustum wrote:
 GangstaMuffin24 wrote:
Derek4real wrote:
I saw a batrep where they took away the invuln save and he started taking wounds much easier. (libby casting Null Zone)

Don't have my codex in front of me, but I don't think Grey Knights have access to Null Zone.


We don't, but you could always take a Supreme Command Detachment of other factions' librarians and get it (say SM, BA and SW).


They should just errata us to have access to Librarius with our Librarians and other HQs, because only Sanctic is not enough powers for what we're paying.


It'd be a nice way to reflect we're super psykers.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 20:14:46


Post by: GangstaMuffin24


Audustum wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
I've actually used Crowe a bit. He's a nice Smite-bot and a cheap HQ to fill out a supreme command detachment. Once he's stuck in melee he can reliably put out D6 wounds each psychic phase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Audustum wrote:
 GangstaMuffin24 wrote:
Derek4real wrote:
I saw a batrep where they took away the invuln save and he started taking wounds much easier. (libby casting Null Zone)

Don't have my codex in front of me, but I don't think Grey Knights have access to Null Zone.


We don't, but you could always take a Supreme Command Detachment of other factions' librarians and get it (say SM, BA and SW).


They should just errata us to have access to Librarius with our Librarians and other HQs, because only Sanctic is not enough powers for what we're paying.


It'd be a nice way to reflect we're super psykers.

Agreed. I actually like some of the vanilla SM powers better.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 22:32:13


Post by: Grey Templar


Or we should just get the following added to our bonuses for being Battle Forged.

Psychic Mastery: In a battle forged army, Grey Knight psykers may ignore the Psychic focus rule.

They've already ensured that Sanctuary can't bring your invuln to better than 3+, so it's not like we'd have insane benefits to spamming it.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 23:43:54


Post by: Audustum


 Grey Templar wrote:
Or we should just get the following added to our bonuses for being Battle Forged.

Psychic Mastery: In a battle forged army, Grey Knight psykers may ignore the Psychic focus rule.

They've already ensured that Sanctuary can't bring your invuln to better than 3+, so it's not like we'd have insane benefits to spamming it.


I can already hear the screaming if we could basically cast Psychic Shriek Redux off of every single unit. Our whole internal meta would switch to bringing as much MSU as possible to spam Purge Soul and Vortex of Doom.

I haven't actually crunched numbers to see if that'd make us overpowered, but it'd definitely cause a huge backlash.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/02 23:47:06


Post by: Grey Templar


I doubt it. Best case we need 7s to cast Vortex, so it's basically a coin flip each time it was cast. 50/50 chance of doing d3 mortal wounds isnt anything amazing.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 02:04:20


Post by: Audustum


 Grey Templar wrote:
I doubt it. Best case we need 7s to cast Vortex, so it's basically a coin flip each time it was cast. 50/50 chance of doing d3 mortal wounds isnt anything amazing.


It does d3 Mortal Wounds to the target unit and all units within 3". You hit a conscript blob with that (which should be in the front) and the size of the blob, particularly a snaking blob, means you're hitting lots of units with it. Doing that multiple times hurts artillery and vehicles pretty bad. Purge Soul was what I meant with pseudo-psychic shriek though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 04:53:25


Post by: Godeskian


Audustum wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
I doubt it. Best case we need 7s to cast Vortex, so it's basically a coin flip each time it was cast. 50/50 chance of doing d3 mortal wounds isnt anything amazing.


It does d3 Mortal Wounds to the target unit and all units within 3". You hit a conscript blob with that (which should be in the front) and the size of the blob, particularly a snaking blob, means you're hitting lots of units with it. Doing that multiple times hurts artillery and vehicles pretty bad. Purge Soul was what I meant with pseudo-psychic shriek though.


I'm afraid you are misreading the power. It says, and I quote 'that models unit and every other unit within 3" of THAT MODEL suffers a D3 mortal wounds'

Yeah, clever positioning might help, but it's units within 3" of one model, not the entire conscript blob that get hit


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 06:50:30


Post by: Spartacus


Godeskian wrote:
Audustum wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
I doubt it. Best case we need 7s to cast Vortex, so it's basically a coin flip each time it was cast. 50/50 chance of doing d3 mortal wounds isnt anything amazing.


It does d3 Mortal Wounds to the target unit and all units within 3". You hit a conscript blob with that (which should be in the front) and the size of the blob, particularly a snaking blob, means you're hitting lots of units with it. Doing that multiple times hurts artillery and vehicles pretty bad. Purge Soul was what I meant with pseudo-psychic shriek though.


I'm afraid you are misreading the power. It says, and I quote 'that models unit and every other unit within 3" of THAT MODEL suffers a D3 mortal wounds'

Yeah, clever positioning might help, but it's units within 3" of one model, not the entire conscript blob that get hit


Correct. This means that you have to think ahead about your positioning for VoD to do max damage.

I think the power should be FAQ'd to be 'select a model within the closest enemy unit that is within 12 inches' and resolve the power from there. Would avoid a lot of hassle and contention over exactly which model is closest, which sometimes happens in my experience.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
All Grey knights having access to Librarius is too much IMO. Not that it would make GK overpowered, but GW will never do it anyway judging by their track record this edition with GK.

Perhaps a happy compromise might be allowing Librarians only to access it? Makes sense if only from a naming standpoint. That would give my poor Libby a chance at making it back into my lists :(


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 12:05:39


Post by: Audustum


Godeskian wrote:
Audustum wrote:
 Grey Templar wrote:
I doubt it. Best case we need 7s to cast Vortex, so it's basically a coin flip each time it was cast. 50/50 chance of doing d3 mortal wounds isnt anything amazing.


It does d3 Mortal Wounds to the target unit and all units within 3". You hit a conscript blob with that (which should be in the front) and the size of the blob, particularly a snaking blob, means you're hitting lots of units with it. Doing that multiple times hurts artillery and vehicles pretty bad. Purge Soul was what I meant with pseudo-psychic shriek though.


I'm afraid you are misreading the power. It says, and I quote 'that models unit and every other unit within 3" of THAT MODEL suffers a D3 mortal wounds'

Yeah, clever positioning might help, but it's units within 3" of one model, not the entire conscript blob that get hit


Maybe it's because my e-reader screws with the font a bit, but it definitely says 3" of that unit when I look at my epub copy. I even checked it before posting.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 12:51:05


Post by: Godeskian


Audustum wrote:

Maybe it's because my e-reader screws with the font a bit, but it definitely says 3" of that unit when I look at my epub copy. I even checked it before posting.


Well.... Damn.... In that case yeah, I'd probably rock Vortex everywhere I could. You might want to raise that with the fine folks at GW, because that's no small difference.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 16:25:09


Post by: Audustum


Godeskian wrote:
Audustum wrote:

Maybe it's because my e-reader screws with the font a bit, but it definitely says 3" of that unit when I look at my epub copy. I even checked it before posting.


Well.... Damn.... In that case yeah, I'd probably rock Vortex everywhere I could. You might want to raise that with the fine folks at GW, because that's no small difference.


I think it's an ereader issue. It's probably ramming things together improperly. Calibre shows 3" of that model, epub showed unit from what I remember and experimenting this morning.

Lesson of the day: Pick your software wisely!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/03 16:40:25


Post by: Grey Templar


Yeah. The hardcopy says "within 3" of that model". I'm inclined to go with that over a digital version.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 05:00:28


Post by: Quickjager




Just to clear up. Epub version. Yea its a pretty weak power, just like everything else in the codex.

Suffers from...

-D3 damage on a unit basis, which is what everyone gets from ordinary smite already
-Same nerfed GK smite range
-No aiming



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 06:18:28


Post by: Spartacus


While we are on the subject, how do you guys interpret the 'D3 Mortal wounds' part of the rule?

Do you roll once, or once for each unit hit?



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 09:20:02


Post by: buddha


Vortex seems good for parking lot lists at least.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 10:40:27


Post by: Neophyte2012


Don't know if it has been discussed in 8th edition. Which melee weapon is better for Dread Knight especially the Grand Master one? I am thinking about the Great Hammer or Great Sword, at first glance for a Dread Knight Grand Master the hammer is more promising for "minimum 3 Damage", but after doing some math the hammer is actually only average 4D, only slightly better than sword 3.5D, while it costs -1 to hit and 5 more points. Is the hammer overcosted?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 15:37:06


Post by: Audustum


 Quickjager wrote:


Just to clear up. Epub version. Yea its a pretty weak power, just like everything else in the codex.

Suffers from...

-D3 damage on a unit basis, which is what everyone gets from ordinary smite already
-Same nerfed GK smite range
-No aiming



Just to be clear, I wasn't saying the Epub version itself is messed up. I was saying that certain readers cause an issue. Looking at the power as it's supposed to be, I think it's worth grabbing if you're running grey Knights just because most of our powers are lackluster and it's at least some more damage. It's not the original Power to write home about though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Neophyte2012 wrote:
Don't know if it has been discussed in 8th edition. Which melee weapon is better for Dread Knight especially the Grand Master one? I am thinking about the Great Hammer or Great Sword, at first glance for a Dread Knight Grand Master the hammer is more promising for "minimum 3 Damage", but after doing some math the hammer is actually only average 4D, only slightly better than sword 3.5D, while it costs -1 to hit and 5 more points. Is the hammer overcosted?


I personally think the hammer is over costed. The higher damage roughly balances out with the -1 to hit as you're seeing. How expensive most of our list is I would rather just try and save the points wherever I can.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 16:26:10


Post by: Grey Templar


Neophyte2012 wrote:
Don't know if it has been discussed in 8th edition. Which melee weapon is better for Dread Knight especially the Grand Master one? I am thinking about the Great Hammer or Great Sword, at first glance for a Dread Knight Grand Master the hammer is more promising for "minimum 3 Damage", but after doing some math the hammer is actually only average 4D, only slightly better than sword 3.5D, while it costs -1 to hit and 5 more points. Is the hammer overcosted?


Lets see.

Assuming no modifiers to his WS,

2 Dreadfists: 6 attacks hitting on 2s rerolling 1s. 5.8333 hits: 2s to wound vs anything T6 and below. 3s vs anything T11 and below. Vs X=<T6: 4.86 wounds. Vs a vehicle with a 3+ armor save which turns into a 6+. 4.06 wounds get though armor. Average of 2 wounds per fist is 8.12 expected wounds. Vs X=<T11: 3.88 wounds. 3+ armor=3.24 wounds get though armor. D3 wounds gives an average of 6.48 wounds.

Greatsword: 5 attacks hitting on 2s rerolling 1s. 4.86 hits. 2s to wound anything T5 or below. 3s vs anything T9 and below. Vs X=<T5: 4.05 expected wounds. 3+ save. 3.37 expected wounds. D6 wound multiplier gives an expected 11.81 wounds. Vs X=<T9: 3.24 expected wounds. 3+ save. 2.7 expected wounds. D6 wound multiplier gives expected 9.45 wounds.

Daemon Hammer: 5 attacks hitting on 2s rerolling 1s. 4.86 hits: 2s to wound vs anything T6 and below. 3s vs anything T11 and below. Vs X=<T6: 4.05 wounds. 3+ save=no save. D6 wounds = 14.17 expected wounds. Vs X=<T11: 3.24 wounds. 3+ save= no save. D6 wounds = 11.34 expected wounds.


TLR

So vs a single model with a 3+ armor save.

Dreadfists vs T6 or less: 8.12 wounds

Dreadfist vs T7-T11: 9.45 wounds

Greatsword vs T5 or less: 11.81 wounds

Greatsword vs T6-T9: 9.45 wounds

Daemon Hammer vs T6 or less: 14.17 wounds

Daemon Hammer vs T7-T11: 11.34 wounds


The Hammer is clearly superior at killing single multi-wound models that have a lot of wounds. As for cost. The Greatsword loadout has the same point cost as 2 Dreadfists(35 for a pair of dreadfists. 25 for a single dreadfist+10 for sword) as both come out to 35 points. The Hammer+Dreadfist comes out to 40 points(25 for single dreadfist+15 for Hammer).

The hidden benefit of the fists however is more attacks. So you'll kill more single wound models with the fists, and it's probably also better vs 2 wound models as well since you aren't "wasting" D6 rolls of 3 or higher with the hammer or sword.

So I guess it depends what you want your grandmaster to be hunting. Is he killing vehicles or MCs? Take the sword or pay the extra 5 points for the hammer. Is he a more allrounder? Just leave the fists.

For any invuln saves, just multiply the expected wounds by the chance of failing the invuln save. Technically the order that you apply these probabilities doesn't matter.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 17:24:16


Post by: Audustum


 Grey Templar wrote:
Neophyte2012 wrote:
Don't know if it has been discussed in 8th edition. Which melee weapon is better for Dread Knight especially the Grand Master one? I am thinking about the Great Hammer or Great Sword, at first glance for a Dread Knight Grand Master the hammer is more promising for "minimum 3 Damage", but after doing some math the hammer is actually only average 4D, only slightly better than sword 3.5D, while it costs -1 to hit and 5 more points. Is the hammer overcosted?


Lets see.

Assuming no modifiers to his WS,

2 Dreadfists: 6 attacks hitting on 2s rerolling 1s. 5.8333 hits: 2s to wound vs anything T6 and below. 3s vs anything T11 and below. Vs X=<T6: 4.86 wounds. Vs a vehicle with a 3+ armor save which turns into a 6+. 4.06 wounds get though armor. Average of 2 wounds per fist is 8.12 expected wounds. Vs X=<T11: 3.88 wounds. 3+ armor=3.24 wounds get though armor. D3 wounds gives an average of 6.48 wounds.

Greatsword: 5 attacks hitting on 2s rerolling 1s. 4.86 hits. 2s to wound anything T5 or below. 3s vs anything T9 and below. Vs X=<T5: 4.05 expected wounds. 3+ save. 3.37 expected wounds. D6 wound multiplier gives an expected 11.81 wounds. Vs X=<T9: 3.24 expected wounds. 3+ save. 2.7 expected wounds. D6 wound multiplier gives expected 9.45 wounds.

Daemon Hammer: 5 attacks hitting on 2s rerolling 1s. 4.86 hits: 2s to wound vs anything T6 and below. 3s vs anything T11 and below. Vs X=<T6: 4.05 wounds. 3+ save=no save. D6 wounds = 14.17 expected wounds. Vs X=<T11: 3.24 wounds. 3+ save= no save. D6 wounds = 11.34 expected wounds.


TLR

So vs a single model with a 3+ armor save.

Dreadfists vs T6 or less: 8.12 wounds

Dreadfist vs T7-T11: 9.45 wounds

Greatsword vs T5 or less: 11.81 wounds

Greatsword vs T6-T9: 9.45 wounds

Daemon Hammer vs T6 or less: 14.17 wounds

Daemon Hammer vs T7-T11: 11.34 wounds


The Hammer is clearly superior at killing single multi-wound models that have a lot of wounds. As for cost. The Greatsword loadout has the same point cost as 2 Dreadfists(35 for a pair of dreadfists. 25 for a single dreadfist+10 for sword) as both come out to 35 points. The Hammer+Dreadfist comes out to 40 points(25 for single dreadfist+15 for Hammer).

The hidden benefit of the fists however is more attacks. So you'll kill more single wound models with the fists, and it's probably also better vs 2 wound models as well since you aren't "wasting" D6 rolls of 3 or higher with the hammer or sword.

So I guess it depends what you want your grandmaster to be hunting. Is he killing vehicles or MCs? Take the sword or pay the extra 5 points for the hammer. Is he a more allrounder? Just leave the fists.

For any invuln saves, just multiply the expected wounds by the chance of failing the invuln save. Technically the order that you apply these probabilities doesn't matter.


Doesn't the Hammer give -1 to Hit though? I don't see that in the math.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/04 17:43:05


Post by: Grey Templar


Yes it does. Forgot that. Also didn't take into account that rolls of less than 3 for the D6 wounds count as 3. That skews the wound causing a bit.

Lets see, 6 results. 3+3+3+4+5+6=average of 4 wounds on the D6 roll.

Daemon Hammer: 5 attacks hitting on 3s rerolling 1s. 3.88 hits: 2s to wound vs anything T6 and below. 3s vs anything T11 and below. Vs X=<T6: 3.24 wounds. 3+ save=no save. D6 wounds = 12.96 expected wounds. Vs X=<T11: 2.59 wounds. 3+ save= no save. D6 wounds = 10.37 expected wounds.


Dreadfists vs T6 or less: 8.12 wounds
Dreadfist vs T7-T11: 9.45 wounds
Greatsword vs T5 or less: 11.81 wounds
Greatsword vs T6-T9: 9.45 wounds
Daemon Hammer vs T6 or less: 12.96 wounds
Daemon Hammer vs T7-T11: 10.37 wounds

So it's still better than the sword, but not by much, on average. Though it has a far narrower spread of possible damage. The minimum damage of 3 is a pretty rock solid thing.

It's interesting to note that the Greatsword and Dreadfist have identical expected damage vs T7-9. Which covers the most common vehicle toughness values.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/05 04:48:18


Post by: Audustum


 Grey Templar wrote:
Yes it does. Forgot that. Also didn't take into account that rolls of less than 3 for the D6 wounds count as 3. That skews the wound causing a bit.

Lets see, 6 results. 3+3+3+4+5+6=average of 4 wounds on the D6 roll.

Daemon Hammer: 5 attacks hitting on 3s rerolling 1s. 3.88 hits: 2s to wound vs anything T6 and below. 3s vs anything T11 and below. Vs X=<T6: 3.24 wounds. 3+ save=no save. D6 wounds = 12.96 expected wounds. Vs X=<T11: 2.59 wounds. 3+ save= no save. D6 wounds = 10.37 expected wounds.


Dreadfists vs T6 or less: 8.12 wounds
Dreadfist vs T7-T11: 9.45 wounds
Greatsword vs T5 or less: 11.81 wounds
Greatsword vs T6-T9: 9.45 wounds
Daemon Hammer vs T6 or less: 12.96 wounds
Daemon Hammer vs T7-T11: 10.37 wounds

So it's still better than the sword, but not by much, on average. Though it has a far narrower spread of possible damage. The minimum damage of 3 is a pretty rock solid thing.

It's interesting to note that the Greatsword and Dreadfist have identical expected damage vs T7-9. Which covers the most common vehicle toughness values.


That is an interesting note! I don't think GW intended it though the sword and the fists are the same price.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/06 01:26:36


Post by: Chippen


Hey folks. Got an interesting question that isn't strictly a GK question, but it kind of is. You'll see in a minute.

So basically I was tossing around a list idea of Grey Knights plus some other faction. The second faction ally acts as a gunline while GKs play aggressive.

The GK side of the list is:
2x GMNDK w/ Greathammer and Gatling Psilencers.
3x Strike Squad, Falchions and 1 Psilencer in each
2x Purgation Squad, 4x Psilencers, Justicar w/ Falchions

That's 1067 points of Battalion. For the non-deep strike, gunline, backfield portion of the list, what factions would work?

Or, should I just keep it "in house" and spam Razorbacks and Dreads?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/06 03:17:58


Post by: Audustum


 Chippen wrote:
Hey folks. Got an interesting question that isn't strictly a GK question, but it kind of is. You'll see in a minute.

So basically I was tossing around a list idea of Grey Knights plus some other faction. The second faction ally acts as a gunline while GKs play aggressive.

The GK side of the list is:
2x GMNDK w/ Greathammer and Gatling Psilencers.
3x Strike Squad, Falchions and 1 Psilencer in each
2x Purgation Squad, 4x Psilencers, Justicar w/ Falchions

That's 1067 points of Battalion. For the non-deep strike, gunline, backfield portion of the list, what factions would work?

Or, should I just keep it "in house" and spam Razorbacks and Dreads?


If you really want a backfield gunline look to Astra Militarum. You want Mortars, Manticores, Earthshakers and Basilisks.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/06 23:51:19


Post by: Vortenger


I've had good luck with a Mars Spearhead using Cawl, a pair of Dakkabots with Datasmith, and two Onagers as the artillery for my GK. It has worked very well.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/07 00:39:25


Post by: Fueli


I'm having a similar problem as Chippen, but I want to know what would be the most cheesy GK detachment to take alongside my fledgling Vostroyan army.

I'm thinking one or two GM NDK, 10 man Strike squad, and maybe Draigo or Voldus. This would allow me to use both GK shooting stratagems, the psyweapon one for GM NDK and psybolt one for the Strikes. I'd love to run some Paladins but I feel they are too expensive for competitive play.

I want to run them together until I have enough of AM to run them independently.

EDIT: Note that this is for competitive play as my group runs pretty tough lists.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/07 02:10:19


Post by: Audustum


 Fueli wrote:
I'm having a similar problem as Chippen, but I want to know what would be the most cheesy GK detachment to take alongside my fledgling Vostroyan army.

I'm thinking one or two GM NDK, 10 man Strike squad, and maybe Draigo or Voldus. This would allow me to use both GK shooting stratagems, the psyweapon one for GM NDK and psybolt one for the Strikes. I'd love to run some Paladins but I feel they are too expensive for competitive play.

I want to run them together until I have enough of AM to run them independently.

EDIT: Note that this is for competitive play as my group runs pretty tough lists.


Honestly? A Supreme Command Detachment of 3-5 Grandmaster Nemesis Dreadknights. That's your best option. AM has plenty of its own cheap bubble-wrap which you'll want anyway to maximize command points. The GM-DK's give you the "in your face" factor and personal melee power you need.

Michael Lee recently used that setup to ride to a fair success in some tournament, don't remember which one though (he also used Assassins instead of AM).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/07 02:27:26


Post by: Chippen


 Fueli wrote:
I'm having a similar problem as Chippen, but I want to know what would be the most cheesy GK detachment to take alongside my fledgling Vostroyan army.

I'm thinking one or two GM NDK, 10 man Strike squad, and maybe Draigo or Voldus. This would allow me to use both GK shooting stratagems, the psyweapon one for GM NDK and psybolt one for the Strikes. I'd love to run some Paladins but I feel they are too expensive for competitive play.

I want to run them together until I have enough of AM to run them independently.

EDIT: Note that this is for competitive play as my group runs pretty tough lists.



What Audustum said, or go with 1 or 2 GMNDK, Draigo, and a 10 man Paladin squad.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/08 09:26:42


Post by: Fantome


Has anyone had any success with GK land raiders and if so which variant? The potential to gate one around the board seems like it could be strong, but obviously it's a huge point sink.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/08 17:51:16


Post by: Grey Templar


Gating a Crusader into range to unload those hurricane bolters sounds fun.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/09 09:31:49


Post by: Fantome


It does doesn't it, it's not like our army particularly needs more bolter shots but it does sound like a good plan. Especially if you've also got it loaded with purifiers for d6 mortal wounds the following turn.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/09 16:35:23


Post by: greyknight12


Fantome wrote:
It does doesn't it, it's not like our army particularly needs more bolter shots but it does sound like a good plan. Especially if you've also got it loaded with purifiers for d6 mortal wounds the following turn.

If you're going to do that, then load 2-3 purifier squads in it for 2-3D6 mortal wounds..the tank holds 16. Deepstrike a brother-captain in for extended range and you'll put Morty to shame. Of course, it'll also cost 3 times more than the daemon primarch but hey it's a full vanguard detachment on its own.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/10 07:30:16


Post by: Godeskian


3 squads and Crowe for 16 models and 4d6 smite damage. You know, if you want to max it out


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/12 18:37:33


Post by: Marmatag


Trying to make a good 50 PL list for GK.

Thinking:

Grand Master Nemesis Dreadknight
3x Strike Squads, Falchions on everything except Justicars
3x Razorbacks, 3x twin assault cannons



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/18 12:09:24


Post by: Nithaniel


recently had some fun using a GK battalion and a vanguard consisting of an SM libby in terminator armour and 3 assassins.

I took the vindicare, eversor and culexus

Was a lot of fun and I used the SM libby to might of heroes on a strike squad because it keywords off astartes which GK are. Opens up a world of possibilities going forward for assasins with a buffing SM librarian.

Vindicare was lacklustre but was able to start on the board in a high vantage point allowing me to deepstrike one additional strike squad which was gravy.

Eversors 3d6 charge meant he was able to blend charge into some marines and the culexus is mean being able to shut down pykers and he's old school invisible so he only worries about flamers.

I really like the crazy support that the assasins bring to GK but they can add to the deepstrike tally for matched play


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/19 03:19:35


Post by: greyknight12


I played a local RTT to test out a "silver tide" list:

Battalion
2 GMDK - Psilencer, teleporter, sword/hammer (one had hammer, other had sword)
5 5-man strike squads - psilencer, falchions
Outrider
Voldus
3 10-man interceptor squads - psilencer, falchions (combat-squaded, I just didn't have enough justicar models at the time)

Used NOVA missions. I went 2-1, first game was against a mix of TLAC dreadnoughts, basilisks, and stormtalons (win), second game was against bikers, guilliman, and stormtalons (loss), and third game was against harlequins (win). Game 1 was a lesson in what smite and 280ish S4 shots can do, especially with d3 damage. I lost the second game becasue I was dumb and dropped everyone inside 12" of his castle; I underestimated how tough bikers would be (especially with cover) and how deadly the stormtalons would be with guilliman support in addition to failing all but one charge turn 1. Game 3 I was able to kite and shoot down the transports, and either shred the troupes with bolters or countercharge them.
Big takeaways are to treat the list like a school of pirahna, each unit is individually deadly and the mobility of interceptors combined with gate on the heavy hitters and strikes gives alot of mobility. It's still taken me awhile to get used to how good my shooting is, but it means you can shoot the choppier stuff and still out-chop the shooty stuff. The GMDK are more than enough punch to take down knights and the like. I think a variant of this list has alot of potential, especially with the new ITC missions.
I'm working on another variant that drops a GMDK and some interceptors for a pair of stormravens; we'll see if dropping from 11 to 8 squads works with the added firepower and if multimeltas and stormstrike missiles make up for the loss of a GMDK. I'll also lose a command point cause everything will be in a battalion detachment, but that's not huge.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/19 03:51:32


Post by: Spartacus


^^Very interesting^^

I had often wondered how such a list might fare, but I only have 20 PAGK (that I care to use, just can't bare to bring those horrific metal models again)

I for one would be keen to hear more results when you have them.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/19 20:50:13


Post by: Vortenger


 Nithaniel wrote:
recently had some fun using a GK battalion and a vanguard consisting of an SM libby in terminator armour and 3 assassins.

Was a lot of fun and I used the SM libby to might of heroes on a strike squad because it keywords off astartes which GK are. Opens up a world of possibilities going forward for assasins with a buffing SM librarian.



Pretty sure Might of Heroes only works on one model.

I was looking into a buffing SM Libby also, but was truly underwhelmed by the options.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/19 21:09:44


Post by: Quickjager


That is correct.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/22 21:22:50


Post by: Fueli


There's a Grey Knight player in SoCal Open doing really well. He's in top 8 on round 5. Anyone have any idea of his list? I can't find it in Best Coast Pairings.

EDIT: Also, cheering for this dude. Great job!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/22 22:15:04


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Fueli wrote:
There's a Grey Knight player in SoCal Open doing really well. He's in top 8 on round 5. Anyone have any idea of his list? I can't find it in Best Coast Pairings.

EDIT: Also, cheering for this dude. Great job!

I didn't hear about this, but that's pretty good news.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/23 10:11:59


Post by: MasteroftheBloodAngels


 Fueli wrote:
There's a Grey Knight player in SoCal Open doing really well. He's in top 8 on round 5. Anyone have any idea of his list? I can't find it in Best Coast Pairings.

EDIT: Also, cheering for this dude. Great job!


From the Best Coast Pairings player app, the list that finished undefeated in the top 5 was a 985 pts Cadian Regiment AM Brigade (usual stuff, Yarrick, Tempestor PRime, 6 infantry squads, Tempestus command with plasma, Scout Sentinels, and mortar teams) with a Supreme Command Grey Knights detachment for 1014 pts (3 GMDKs and 1 Librarian as Warlord with FttF and Fury of Deimos).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/23 13:16:55


Post by: Quickjager


Looks like he took the IG for drops, obj holding and efficent shooting. Oh and that is a brigade, so lots of Command points. Wonder what he wanted command points for.l specifically.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/23 13:37:32


Post by: Fueli


 Quickjager wrote:
Looks like he took the IG for drops, obj holding and efficent shooting. Oh and that is a brigade, so lots of Command points. Wonder what he wanted command points for.l specifically.


Psychic onslaught, Only in death, and other stratagems of course.

That's actually very similar to a list I've been tinkering with. I just don't have enough models for brigade yet.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/31 11:21:41


Post by: TheMostWize


Currently running the following force.

- Draigo
- Voldus
- Doomglaive
- Doomglaive
- Apothecary
- Paladin x13 (5, 5, and 3) Standard Loadouts

Own Celestine but I'm thinking about adding a Knight instead for some firepower. If i do then Voldus and the Apoth have to go because of points.

Think adding a Knight to this would bring enough firebase support to be worth it? I'm not a power game but still want an effective list.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/31 16:29:25


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Honestly Imperial Knights suffer a bit. Find extra firepower elsewhere.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/10/31 16:51:43


Post by: jeffersonian000


You don’t add a Knight to add firepower, you add a Knight to add a distraction to pull enemy firepower from your more vulnerable units. Regardless of efficiency, Knights have to be dealt with or they will roll a flank all on their own. And when you focus down a Knight, you ignore the rest of the army for a couple of turns. A cagey GK player with a Knight Errant, for example, will use the Knight as a terror unit, while dropping Strikes onto soft targets. GMDKs kind of fulfill this role, though, so running a Knight needs to be something you want to do rather than something you need to do.

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/01 00:01:46


Post by: greyknight12


With their 4++ (3++ with sanctuary or strategems), GMDK are probably a better bet than an Imperial knight. I’ve had good results with them shrugging off lascannons, plus their re-roll ones bubble and FTTF are a good force multiplier. With your paladins, I would drop them all down to 3 man units, that way you maximize the number of models with a 2+ WS. It will also give you more board control and 9 2+/5++ wounds is difficult enough to shift, especially with your bigger stuff bearing down on your opponent’s high value units.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 10:30:30


Post by: grimz


Do you think we are likely to get anything in chapter approved?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 11:26:29


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 grimz wrote:
Do you think we are likely to get anything in chapter approved?

Hopefully Terminators cheaper by 4-5 points and Purifiers that have 2 attacks. I know I'm wishlisting but I want those items now.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 13:12:44


Post by: Gest


I would love to see a rework of our heavy weapons. Either point reduction or making them assault.

I'm scared of the rumored smite nerf (only 3 smites per round allowed), because this would hit GK very hard.

And maybe give Swords the +1 to invul for Terminators/Pallys back? I really liked that one and it would make swords relevant again.
Right now the melee weapon choices are basically non-existent.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 15:57:20


Post by: Grey Templar


Gest wrote:

I'm scared of the rumored smite nerf (only 3 smites per round allowed), because this would hit GK very hard.
.


Meh, unlimited crappy smites each turn was hardly amazing anyway.

If its accompanied by us gaining the following rule if we are battle forged I would be ok with it,

Arcane Rites: If your army is battle forged, all Grey Knights psykers may ignore the Psychic Focus special rule.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 16:52:45


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Gest wrote:
I would love to see a rework of our heavy weapons. Either point reduction or making them assault.

I'm scared of the rumored smite nerf (only 3 smites per round allowed), because this would hit GK very hard.

And maybe give Swords the +1 to invul for Terminators/Pallys back? I really liked that one and it would make swords relevant again.
Right now the melee weapon choices are basically non-existent.

That's because the Falcions have excellent AP on top of countering a weakness the army has.

If you made them AP-1 instead maybe it would be more balanced.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Psycannons definitely need a rework though. I'm fine on Psilencers and Incinerators.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 19:31:13


Post by: grimz


Oh yeah so sad about Psycannons especially since I didn't magnetize mine


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 19:35:50


Post by: daedalus


I posted this elsewhere, but I just watched a GMDK deep strike and immediately get taken down to one wound remaining on the GK player's turn from a squad of Dark Reapers using the Forwarned stratagem.

Just something else to look forward to with your "Deep Strike is Our Primary Gimmick" army.

Frankly, I wasn't sure how to play GK at this point beyond load up on dreadknights and shove down throat. I don't honestly know what you do against eldar at this point.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 19:53:13


Post by: Grey Templar


Spam Stormbolters I guess. Eldar are still quite squishy and don't appreciate high volume attacks. Psilincers are good too vs vehicles.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/06 23:10:13


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 daedalus wrote:
I posted this elsewhere, but I just watched a GMDK deep strike and immediately get taken down to one wound remaining on the GK player's turn from a squad of Dark Reapers using the Forwarned stratagem.

Just something else to look forward to with your "Deep Strike is Our Primary Gimmick" army.

Frankly, I wasn't sure how to play GK at this point beyond load up on dreadknights and shove down throat. I don't honestly know what you do against eldar at this point.

Strategems are once per turn. You can't simply spam the Grandmaster Dreadknight like that and not expect something bad to happen.

The basic Grey Knight troop is where it's at for me in that situation.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/08 17:05:53


Post by: Vortenger


Gest wrote:

That's because the Falcions have excellent AP on top of countering a weakness the army has.

If you made them AP-1 instead maybe it would be more balanced.



Right now falchions are force lightning claws that give up the re-roll ability. Vary too much from that profile and things get weird in an edition that is all about streamlining. More likely they just give falchions a cost of 2-4 points per model


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/08 17:09:19


Post by: Xenomancers


 Marmatag wrote:
Trying to make a good 50 PL list for GK.

Thinking:

Grand Master Nemesis Dreadknight
3x Strike Squads, Falchions on everything except Justicars
3x Razorbacks, 3x twin assault cannons


Thats about as good as it gets.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 daedalus wrote:
I posted this elsewhere, but I just watched a GMDK deep strike and immediately get taken down to one wound remaining on the GK player's turn from a squad of Dark Reapers using the Forwarned stratagem.

Just something else to look forward to with your "Deep Strike is Our Primary Gimmick" army.

Frankly, I wasn't sure how to play GK at this point beyond load up on dreadknights and shove down throat. I don't honestly know what you do against eldar at this point.

Drop your grand masters and use the +1 invo save strategem - and reroll a failed 3++. That's all you can do. It could go really bad for him if you can be a boss with those 3++ saves.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/09 08:53:05


Post by: Godeskian


I believe the +1 strategem has to be used at the start of the turn, the unit is not on the board yet and can't be affected by it (AFAIK)


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 01:37:34


Post by: Spartacus


Godeskian wrote:
I believe the +1 strategem has to be used at the start of the turn, the unit is not on the board yet and can't be affected by it (AFAIK)


There's nothing in the rule that says the chosen character must be on the board.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 02:02:25


Post by: Godeskian


Spartacus wrote:
Godeskian wrote:
I believe the +1 strategem has to be used at the start of the turn, the unit is not on the board yet and can't be affected by it (AFAIK)


There's nothing in the rule that says the chosen character must be on the board.


No, but I'm pretty sure there's something in the main rules that says that units 'off the board' such as in transports or deep strike cannot effect, nor can be effected by anything on the board. I'll dig up my rulebook when I get home and report back.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 02:08:31


Post by: Spartacus


^^

I wouldn't consider a stratagem to be an 'on the board' effect by default for starters, but yeah if there's something in the big rules I'd be keen to see.

I know there are several stratagems/power/abilities/wargear pieces which do specify the targeted/chosen model must be 'on the battlefield'. In the absence of that condition I would consider units which are off the battlefield to be fair game.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 06:02:21


Post by: greyknight12


Just cast sanctuary instead.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 15:56:58


Post by: TheMostWize


 greyknight12 wrote:
With their 4++ (3++ with sanctuary or strategems), GMDK are probably a better bet than an Imperial knight. I’ve had good results with them shrugging off lascannons, plus their re-roll ones bubble and FTTF are a good force multiplier. With your paladins, I would drop them all down to 3 man units, that way you maximize the number of models with a 2+ WS. It will also give you more board control and 9 2+/5++ wounds is difficult enough to shift, especially with your bigger stuff bearing down on your opponent’s high value units.


I had thought about 3 man squads but was afraid to lose the psilencers. The only reason I don't use GMDK is because I think the model is bad looking. I'm more of a rule of cool player than a practicality player lol.

I will consider that though!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 16:24:23


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Yeah it isn't that 3 man squads are bad (they're actually great), but you sometimes need Psilencers.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 18:46:40


Post by: Lanlaorn


When do you "need" psilencers? Psilencers are better than Psycannons or Incinerators, but that doesn't actually make them good.

Within 12 inches, with the -1 penalty for moving they're only slightly better than the free Stormbolter for TDA units, and for PA units I actually would prefer to keep the melee weapon than get that minor shooting upgrade.

If your choice is two 3 man groups of Paladins or one 5 man group of Paladins with 2 Psilencers, then the Mortal Wound from an extra Smite is going to completely eclipse the marginal Psilencer shooting "upgrade".

With the numbers as they are our heavy weapons just aren't worth bringing outside a Dreadknight.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 19:26:29


Post by: Toppan


So I've been having a doozy of a time getting a good list together using what units I want. I want to win, obviously, but I want to use what I think is cool, too. This is what I have so far. Fyi, I really don't want to run any Dreadknights.

Grey Knights - Vanguard Detachment
Grandmaster Voldus
-- Sanctuary, Gate of Infinity, Purge Soul
Apothecary
-- Daemonhammer, Sanctuary
Brotherhood Ancient
-- Banner of Refining Flame, Falchion, Gate of Infinity
Paladin Squad
-- Paragon with Daemonhammer
-- 3x with Falchions, Hammerhand
Paladin Squad
-- Paragon with Daemonhammer
-- 3x with Falchions, Hammerhand

Grey Knights - Vanguard Detachment
Brother-Captain -WARLORD-
-- Daemonhammer, Purge Soul, First to the Fray
Doomglaive Dreadnought
-- Stormbolter, Heavy Psycannon, Gate of Infinity
Doomglaive Dreadnought
-- Stormbolter, Heavy Psycannon, Gate of Infinity
Purifier Squad
-- 4x with Falchions, Knight of the Flame with Halberd
Purifier Squad
-- 4x with Falchions, Knight of the Flame with Halberd
Stormraven
-- Hurricane Bolters, Twin-Lascannon, Twin-Multimelta

Now, I'm aware that Purifiers aren't the best, but I don't really mind. I like em too much. The problem I'm running into is that the deployment is:
--Stormraven carrying
----Both Purifiers
----Brotherhood Captain
----Doomglaive #1

While doomglaive 2 sits off to the side? Seems rather crazy if I don't get first turn.

What should I change? The top Vanguard is nearly non-malleable, I already have all those dudes built and ready to go, and I have a doomglaive on order as well.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 21:42:55


Post by: TheMostWize


It's not that psilencers are needed. It was more since the points cost was so low the upgrade was worth it. I am going to give the 3 man squads a shot and see how it goes.

Doomglaives really do some heavy lifting they have been my superstars so far. Them and Draigo that is.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/10 22:00:42


Post by: daedalus


Maybe it's a latent tumor or recent head injury or something I haven't noticed, but I'm starting to come around to the notion of ML/2xLC dreadnoughts.

At this point, it pretty consistently gives a higher anti-tank damage yield than the 4xAC build we lost does.

And, if you're going for pure anti-tank alone, you get slightly more firepower with two of those compared to a stormraven for about the same price.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/11 03:27:59


Post by: greyknight12


 TheMostWize wrote:
It's not that psilencers are needed. It was more since the points cost was so low the upgrade was worth it. I am going to give the 3 man squads a shot and see how it goes.
Just remember that paladins pay the "terminator" cost for weapons, so it's 10 pts vs. 4 pts for the power armored guys.

I've personally been wondering about spamming paladins myself and going for pure survivability in my list; for 2.5X the points a paladin has 6X the survivability of a PAGK against small arms (with no AP) and an invulnerable save. We can't hit as hard force on force as anyone anyway, so MSU and holding objectives seems to be a reasonable strategy; our units individually hit hard enough not to get bullied off an objective by anything insignificant. Just thinking out loud here:
Comparison (Paladins vs Strike squads)
-165 pts Paladin squad
9 T4 2+/5++ wounds
6/12 bolter shots
9 CC/12 falchion attacks
1 smite/santic power

-168 pts Strike squad
8 T4 3+ wounds
16/32 bolter shots
8 CC/16 falchion attacks
1.5 smite/santic power (assuming 5-man squads)

The strike squad has the advantage of being OBSEC as well. It has slightly more melee power when you equip falchions, and twice the ranged attacks. The paladins are over twice as durable against AP0 weapons; however despite the invulnerable saves they can lose more capability to high damage weapons than their power armored counterparts (though D3 and less weapons end up being the same, and you have a 1/3 chance of a paladin surviving a lascannon that makes it through their 5++ due to a low damage roll). So far I've been sticking with a mix of strikes and interceptors for the flexibility and damage output, but a paladin list could definitely do well against something that doesn't have a lot of high-end firepower.




8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/11 13:24:19


Post by: TheMostWize


Yea my 2 games have been against Chaos and Chaos and Orks in a 2v2 game. The first game I basically tabled my Chaos opponent.

Second game it was me and some Imperial guard who admittedly ended not really doing much which was surprising. The alpha strike with terminators and doomglaives can be devastating. Ended up killing a whole squad of 10 flashgitz with 9 ammo runts and Draigo charged and killed a Predator.

That was a 10 Paladins, Draigo and a Doomglaive. They then survived an entire opponents round of shooting which was 10 chaos terminators a land raider and a forgefiend.

Admittedly none of the people in my group are power gamers so take my experience with a grain of salt. All the being said I think 3 man squads would likely be entirely resilient enough to survive small arms shooting. You also create some target saturation requiring firepower to be split more which helps survivability as well in a round about way.

Just came up with this idea for 2k.

Vanguard
- Draigo
- 3x Paladin (Hammer/Falchions)
- 3x Paladin (Hammer/Falchions)
- Doomglaive
- Stormraven

Vanguard
- Voldus
- 3x Paladin (Hammer/Falchions)
- 3x Paladin (Relic Halberd/Falchions)
- Doomglaive
- Stormraven

Or no ravens and a Knight since I own the kit already.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/11 16:52:52


Post by: Vortenger


 daedalus wrote:
At this point, it pretty consistently gives a higher anti-tank damage yield than the 4xAC build we lost does.


Um, we haven't lost anything? We can still take Rifleman Dreads. You just use the index for loadout and the codex for point cost.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

Glad you're getting good results from the LC/ML though. I've been considering grabbing a couple Missile Launchers to add to my Venerable blokes for variety. The loadout seems to pair quite nicely with Astral Aim.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/11 20:09:57


Post by: daedalus


Vortenger wrote:
 daedalus wrote:
At this point, it pretty consistently gives a higher anti-tank damage yield than the 4xAC build we lost does.


Um, we haven't lost anything? We can still take Rifleman Dreads. You just use the index for loadout and the codex for point cost.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/07/05/codexes-your-questions-answered-july-5gw-homepage-post-2/

Yeah, yeah, I know. I don't think most tournaments abide by that though, and I ripped the bandaid off for my personal games. The mathhammer actually works out better for the LC/ML dread anyway than for a bunch of regular AC in this edition for anti-tank. Haven't run it against anything else.



Glad you're getting good results from the LC/ML though. I've been considering grabbing a couple Missile Launchers to add to my Venerable blokes for variety. The loadout seems to pair quite nicely with Astral Aim.


It's more expensive than it should be for the number of wounds you get, but that could be said for anything in the codex.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/11 20:16:50


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 greyknight12 wrote:
 TheMostWize wrote:
It's not that psilencers are needed. It was more since the points cost was so low the upgrade was worth it. I am going to give the 3 man squads a shot and see how it goes.
Just remember that paladins pay the "terminator" cost for weapons, so it's 10 pts vs. 4 pts for the power armored guys.

I've personally been wondering about spamming paladins myself and going for pure survivability in my list; for 2.5X the points a paladin has 6X the survivability of a PAGK against small arms (with no AP) and an invulnerable save. We can't hit as hard force on force as anyone anyway, so MSU and holding objectives seems to be a reasonable strategy; our units individually hit hard enough not to get bullied off an objective by anything insignificant. Just thinking out loud here:
Comparison (Paladins vs Strike squads)
-165 pts Paladin squad
9 T4 2+/5++ wounds
6/12 bolter shots
9 CC/12 falchion attacks
1 smite/santic power

-168 pts Strike squad
8 T4 3+ wounds
16/32 bolter shots
8 CC/16 falchion attacks
1.5 smite/santic power (assuming 5-man squads)

The strike squad has the advantage of being OBSEC as well. It has slightly more melee power when you equip falchions, and twice the ranged attacks. The paladins are over twice as durable against AP0 weapons; however despite the invulnerable saves they can lose more capability to high damage weapons than their power armored counterparts (though D3 and less weapons end up being the same, and you have a 1/3 chance of a paladin surviving a lascannon that makes it through their 5++ due to a low damage roll). So far I've been sticking with a mix of strikes and interceptors for the flexibility and damage output, but a paladin list could definitely do well against something that doesn't have a lot of high-end firepower.



I like the direct comparison.

One thing to keep in mind is that something like Objective Secured for a unit like the Strike Squad only matters near the last turn if they can't be killed. The unit is very much a glass cannon. If the opponent thought it would claim an objective, it would be dead the moment they glanced at it.

I also experimented with spamming the Psilencer with Paladin squads because of their capability to do so compared to the rest of the army outside Purgator squads. If you do the typical striking your Grandmaster Dread with the reroll charges, it can go fantastically assuming the opponents screening hasn't worked out or has been partly destroyed.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 15:13:20


Post by: Orock


With smite being limited to 3 casts in chapter approved, do you think grwy knigjts will be bumped up to d3 vs non demon and just keep 3 against demon or will they just be forgotten.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 16:07:31


Post by: Fueli


Point me to a source your rumor originates from.

And I bet GK will be forgotten.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 17:18:09


Post by: Grey Templar


If it's accompanied by another rule saying that Grey Knights can cast the same power up to 3 times then I'd say its a fair trade off.

But if not, then the last pathetic excuse of Grey Knights being a psyker army goes away. People always say "Stop complaining, you can cast smite with everybody". Completely forgetting that our Smite sucks, and now we might be losing even that.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 17:45:40


Post by: Audustum


Yeah this isn't even in the leaks from Faeit.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 21:46:02


Post by: greyknight12


Something like relentless would be nice to have on terminators, otherwise I’m just hoping for some points cuts. I think the big problem right now is that we don’t have anyone at GW or any of their TO consultants who are enthusiastic enough about GK to give us the death guard treatment and really flesh out the fluff and army mechanics.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 21:51:34


Post by: Spartacus


While we are wishlisting for stuff - I saw someone a while back propose a ressurection of the 'True Grit' rule for GK Storm Bolters, from the old Daemonhunters codex.

It could be applied to 8th Edition by perhaps making Storm Bolters 'Pistol' type weapons while in the fight phase. This would help to deal with mass infantry, particularly if Falchions go up in pts. It also keeps the same vibe as the original rule by improving the output of GK's in prolonged combats.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/12 22:28:10


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Honestly would two attacks on Purifiers be too much to ask for? I miss that a lot.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/15 02:25:50


Post by: greyknight12


Since other codices are getting 4th ed rules, I definitely wouldn’t mind some Daemonhunters throwbacks:
True grit for our storm bolters (+1 attack)
Psycannons/psybolt ammo ignores invul saves
Shrouding (3D6x3=range of your weapons when shooting at GK)

Other old school options:
Orbital bombardments as heavy support choices
Inquisition in our codex
Dreadknights can shunt again
Everyone can start in reserve

There’s a lot of fluffy options for us, someone just needs to take the time and effort to port them into 8th.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/15 02:45:14


Post by: Audustum


 greyknight12 wrote:
Something like relentless would be nice to have on terminators, otherwise I’m just hoping for some points cuts. I think the big problem right now is that we don’t have anyone at GW or any of their TO consultants who are enthusiastic enough about GK to give us the death guard treatment and really flesh out the fluff and army mechanics.


Ding ding ding ding, I believe this is actually one of two critical issues. Notice AM got an amazing (and I don't mean just powerful but fluffy and cohesive) Codex and their big champ is Reecius.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/15 02:47:26


Post by: Rihgu


True Grit would probably be modeled as treating Storm Bolters as pistols
Ignoring invuln saves again would be GREAT, and there's definitely a precedent for it in this edition so it wouldn't have been that hard to give it to us... maybe it's because we have such a high rate of fire? Make it a 2 CP strategem to let our special weapons ignore invulns for a turn...
Shrouding would just be -1 outside of 12", like every other version of that rule has become.

Too bad we've already got our codex, so we're unlikely to see any of this...


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/15 17:29:05


Post by: Grey Templar


It is exceptionally strange that Relentless or some equivalent didn't make it into this edition. Terminators, Vehicles, etc... have always ignored the penalty for moving and shooting heavy weapons. Yet suddenly they suffer the same penalties as a couple guardsmen lugging around a tripod mounted autocannon...


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/15 18:22:12


Post by: Spartacus


Agreed. One ray of hope is that all Termie units share the 'TERMINATOR' keyword. They could pass a universal rule in a chapter approved to enact something like this, much like the 'FLY' keyword has universal implications. I'm not holding my breath but who knows...


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/19 06:30:32


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Is chapter approved going to do anything for us? I only play grey knights and us falling behind this fast is making this grown man wanna cry.

I want them to do tons of little changes to make my knights fluffy and actually hold those own against other higher teir armies. But I won't be surprised at all if we get nothing more than a foot note in chapter approved for some rule we don't care about and that's it. We just get forgotten and pushed aside for the bigger more popular armies


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/19 06:35:08


Post by: Spartacus


Spartan117xyz wrote:
Is chapter approved going to do anything for us? I only play grey knights and us falling behind this fast is making this grown man wanna cry.

I want them to do tons of little changes to make my knights fluffy and actually hold those own against other higher teir armies. But I won't be surprised at all if we get nothing more than a foot note in chapter approved for some rule we don't care about and that's it. We just get forgotten and pushed aside for the bigger more popular armies


Smite will be nerfed and GMDK will go up in points

Seriously though, who knows what will happen. I hoping for a few points drop/rule changes, but we may see little to no change at all judging how GK are often brushed under the rug.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/19 09:43:10


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Is there any way to make our voices be heard? It sounds so simple but I mean really. Why don't we on this thread all really discuss what we would really like to see change. All agree on something. And then email gw or some crap. Maybe we all sign it. We can complain and wish and hope our knights of Titan will be what we want but if they don't hear us asking for change they probably won't pay any mind to it.

Is that a doable thing? Do they have an email or some way to suggest what we would like to see?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/19 15:12:44


Post by: MasteroftheBloodAngels


Spartan117xyz wrote:
Is there any way to make our voices be heard? It sounds so simple but I mean really. Why don't we on this thread all really discuss what we would really like to see change. All agree on something. And then email gw or some crap. Maybe we all sign it. We can complain and wish and hope our knights of Titan will be what we want but if they don't hear us asking for change they probably won't pay any mind to it.

Is that a doable thing? Do they have an email or some way to suggest what we would like to see?


Since Chapter Approved will already be up for preorder next week there is nothing we can do to influence whatever changes they have made to GK. We can only hope that they have been paying attention to the competitive scene to notice that mono-GKs are a non-entity and that the only way they really see competitive play is allied with tons of guard. I kind of doubt there will be rules changes for codex factions so the best we might be able to hope for is points reductions across the board.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/20 11:34:22


Post by: Gest


After having some more games done with my GK, I came to the conclusion that their problems are just too complicated to get resolved with a simple Chapter Approved.

I personally think that you can't play GK in friendly games as your main army, because they have just one strategy that works and its not a fun one to play against.

And at the same time they are not good enough to be competitive.

GK just need more options.
I personally love Interceptors.
But GK seem to be the most CP dependent army right now and at the same time they generate the lowest amount of CP (next to Custodes?).

When I build a list my thoughts are(2000p):
Ok, I want some interceptors.
My option is an Outrider Detachement, because I don't have the space to take (lets say) a battalion detachment and just add one squad of Interceptors.
Doing that would waste the space to squeeze out more CP.

But lets look at our huge selection of fast attack.
1.
Ok cool. I take Voldus and 3 minimum squads of interceptors then. Thats 565 points for 1 CP.
And it already feels super spammy to build a list like this.
(btw Voldus is a must in my meta, because we have a lot of Eldar here and their psychic phase gets out of hand so quick).

Next thought is: I have to have a battalion for the 3 CP.
So 1 GMNDK + 3 Strikes it is. 600 points for 3 CP.

Now more than half my points are gone for the obligatory battalion and another detachement that basically does the same, just a bit more flexible.
This leaves me with 835 points to play around, getting 2 more CP, another NMDK (feels like a must), the much needed anti tank and some transports for the poor squads starting on the table.

Which just ends in cutting the Outrider again, just because they are too same-ish to the Strike Squads.

All this brought me to the conclusion that the best way to play GK is to take an Inquisition Vanguard detachement.
79 Points for an Inquisitor and 3 acolytes(you can add more acolytes if you want more stuff in reserve).
This gives me 1 CP AND 4 drops on the table.

Additionally I use an Astra Militarum Battalion to fill that much needed slot.

And suddenly I'm just playing Imperium Soup. (in a worse set up than everyone else).
But I feel like I have to rely on those super cheap CP generators to actually be able to take the cool toys of the GK and use the Stratagems that makes them strong.

Honestly with the upcoming Land Raider All you can eat system I would love to field Land Raider again, but one Land Raider means -3 smites and -1 CP most of the time, and Gk can't afford this.

Man, this went tl;dr pretty quick, sorry for that.

In short: I love a lot of GK stuff, but I always feel inefficient when I try to use it.
In my opinion GK need a CP generator/recycle system. Every other army has that.

And a few more options so you can fill out detachements without being that guy who just spams the same unit.

This way GK would still have the worst codex so far, but at least it would make list building and playing them more enjoyable.
It still feels like forcing out the GK codex so early and barely changing anything from the index was totally pointless.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/20 14:36:24


Post by: Fueli


I'd like GK to get some rule that let's you add one die to deny rolls for each unit within 6" of the original denier. That would give us a really good psychic defense and unique rule that works against all psykers, not just demons. In fact, I'd ditch the anti-demon rules completely in matched play. Leave the fluff to books and narrative play. Then it would be easier to balance and GK wouldn't have to pay for super situational rules.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/20 17:14:00


Post by: Grey Templar


The whole CP system itself is flawed. It needs to be army dependent, not just "how many FoCs can you fit into your list".

Each faction should generate it's own unique amount of CPs, with some units giving/using up CPs. Then FoCs can add CPs.

So IG for example should only get 2 CPs to start with. While an army like Grey Knights or Space Marines should get 5-6. Since IG can easily fill FoCs to generate new CPs, they start with the fewest.

Space Marine factions wouldn't be able to generate many CPs from FoCs, but their HQs or other specialized units would add CPs. Like say a Chapter Master/Grand Master would give you 2 CPs.

I would also add a rule that says that if you have allied detachments, each additional faction of allies that you bring costs 2CPs.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 18:36:07


Post by: Audustum


So GW Community put up some info on Chapter Approved and it looks like Faeit's leaks on the book are accurate so far. Faeit doesn't have anything on Grey Knights though. Literally not mentioned in the point changes or new rules at all.

It could just be the leaker didn't look us up or remember, but it could also be that Chapter Approved simply ignores us.

Wanna take any bets? Stake out any reactions if we're ignored in advance?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 18:42:18


Post by: daedalus


Audustum wrote:
Wanna take any bets? Stake out any reactions if we're ignored in advance?


Depends, what's the odds given on a point increase?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 18:47:17


Post by: Spartacus


Hey we were right! The True Grit rule is back as a stratagem!

Spoiler:
...for Space Wolves


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 19:17:00


Post by: Audustum


 daedalus wrote:
Audustum wrote:
Wanna take any bets? Stake out any reactions if we're ignored in advance?


Depends, what's the odds given on a point increase?


Paladins now +10 PPM, to make them more fair with Terminators.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Spartacus wrote:
Hey we were right! The True Grit rule is back as a stratagem!

Spoiler:
...for Space Wolves


Hey, least we know it was a good idea!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 20:29:59


Post by: Lanlaorn


All the wish list stuff is great, but there's one thing Grey Knights most desperately need and it's something that Chapter Approved explicitly says it is meant to address.

Lower point costs.

It'd be nice to have better units, but I'll settle for being able to compete by fielding more units.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 20:33:03


Post by: Audustum


Lanlaorn wrote:
All the wish list stuff is great, but there's one thing Grey Knights most desperately need and it's something that Chapter Approved explicitly says it is meant to address.

Lower point costs.

It'd be nice to have better units, but I'll settle for being able to compete by fielding more units.


Honestly, you're right and points are the big sticker. We could use a bit of a Smite revamp (at least let HQ's cast full), but points are our main problem. Terminators would actually be solid if they were a bit cheaper. Paladins are borderline but could probably use a haircut (5 Paladins without special guns costing more than 5 Custodes all with Stormshields, really?). More units means more detachments and CP which helps the non-Grandmaster Dreadknights out (we can actually afford that stratagem to buff their invulnerable). Lowering the cost on Incinerators is needed too since they're basically inferior to psycannons with re-roll auras.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 21:55:06


Post by: GangstaMuffin24


I think a lot of the issues point cost wise stems from GW's designers overvaluing force weapons and psychic powers.

That's the only explanation I can think of for why a basic Strike Squad member is 6 more points than a Tactical Marine (not even including the storm bolter).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 22:48:49


Post by: Grey Templar


Indeed. We are costed as if we can cast all our psychic powers all the time, yet most of the time we won't even be touching psychic powers with most units.

Its like they either forgot Psychic Focus exists OR we were written up before that was a rule.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/21 23:00:44


Post by: Audustum


 Grey Templar wrote:
Indeed. We are costed as if we can cast all our psychic powers all the time, yet most of the time we won't even be touching psychic powers with most units.

Its like they either forgot Psychic Focus exists OR we were written up before that was a rule.


Overpricing psykers isn't unique to just us, unfortunately. Thousand Sons gets that treatment too (but not original Horrors, no sir).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/24 20:03:51


Post by: greyknight12


Spartacus wrote:
Hey we were right! The True Grit rule is back as a stratagem!

Spoiler:
...for Space Wolves

That infuriated me so much. I feel like GW needs a staffer/consultant for each army; a veteran with the game’s best interest in mind who will take the time to help flesh out their codex. I’m not jealous of power level as much as flavor when I compare my codex to others.

On the tactics side, something I’ve toyed around with is the idea of allying in a patrol detachment of AM, then spending an AM CP to give the AM HQ a relic: specifically Kurav’s Aquilla. Then I have a chance to get CPs whenever my opponent spends one, which is far more often than my GK do.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/24 22:07:50


Post by: Audustum


 greyknight12 wrote:
Spartacus wrote:
Hey we were right! The True Grit rule is back as a stratagem!

Spoiler:
...for Space Wolves

That infuriated me so much. I feel like GW needs a staffer/consultant for each army; a veteran with the game’s best interest in mind who will take the time to help flesh out their codex. I’m not jealous of power level as much as flavor when I compare my codex to others.

On the tactics side, something I’ve toyed around with is the idea of allying in a patrol detachment of AM, then spending an AM CP to give the AM HQ a relic: specifically Kurav’s Aquilla. Then I have a chance to get CPs whenever my opponent spends one, which is far more often than my GK do.


If you just want CP's and you don't mind losing "First to the Fray", just take Guilliman in a Super-Heavy Auxiliary detachment and make him your warlord. +3 CP's and you get to roll every time you spend one to get it back. Plus he's a solid melee beater and lets you charge and advance a smidgen farther.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pics posted in News forum. Only unique change to us was Terminators down to 41PPM.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 01:21:14


Post by: MasteroftheBloodAngels


So it looks like CA will bring GKs a whole lot of nothing. It's as if the faction doesn't even deserve another look. Incredibly disappointing.

Units

Razorbacks 70

Storm Raven 192

Terminators 41

Wargear

Assault Cannon 22

Hurricane Bolters 16

Twin Assault Cannon 44


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 01:23:45


Post by: Audustum


I am really close to boycotting GW for that neglect and GK are only 1 of my 3 armies.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 01:37:22


Post by: daedalus


Man. I don't think I've ever waited so long for so little.

GK changes were worthless.

IG changes are nonsensical. I know there's a lot of spite going on, and I know I'm a bit of a IG cheerleader in those threads, but I really can't even reconcile those changes. The stuff I would admit to being too good didn't get touched and the stuff I haven't used got hammered.

I didn't even see Tau in there. Or inquisition. Guess those 8 points per acolyte was actually intentional.

I don't even.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 02:16:08


Post by: Audustum


 daedalus wrote:
Man. I don't think I've ever waited so long for so little.

GK changes were worthless.

IG changes are nonsensical. I know there's a lot of spite going on, and I know I'm a bit of a IG cheerleader in those threads, but I really can't even reconcile those changes. The stuff I would admit to being too good didn't get touched and the stuff I haven't used got hammered.

I didn't even see Tau in there. Or inquisition. Guess those 8 points per acolyte was actually intentional.

I don't even.



Honestly, I don't play Guard, but I thought they needed to wait longer to let the meta develop.

I can't wait to see what Quickjager thinks of Chapter Approved though...


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 06:27:33


Post by: Quickjager


This is our codex now
Spoiler:




Automatically Appended Next Post:
An absolute nightmare of balancing with no clear vision of what the army is supposed to be.

But hey, we aren't fething Rubric Marines and their Exalted Sorcerers


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 15:34:00


Post by: Emulgator


Its kinda ironic that the only model i usually bothered bringing that didnt just carry another stormbolter just went up by 41 points (+20 raven +12 hurricane +9 twin ass cannon)

I can't rly cant believe that they didnt bother changing the cost of our special weapons (especially on servos...)


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 15:59:41


Post by: Audustum


Emulgator wrote:
Its kinda ironic that the only model i usually bothered bringing that didnt just carry another stormbolter just went up by 41 points (+20 raven +12 hurricane +9 twin ass cannon)

I can't rly cant believe that they didnt bother changing the cost of our special weapons (especially on servos...)


Working as intended, obviously.

Also, great picture Quickjager!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 16:44:17


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


I mean, I like that Terminators went down 5 points. Not that I would ever use them over Paladins but still.

No fixes to Purfiers either, which is sad.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 18:49:18


Post by: Emulgator


another think i realized "just now" (since i nevere even bothered to look at the terminator page in my codex before)
why THE feth are our terminators only morale 7/8 when normal SM terminators are 8/9 ???


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 18:56:28


Post by: Audustum


Emulgator wrote:
another think i realized "just now" (since i nevere even bothered to look at the terminator page in my codex before)
why THE feth are our terminators only morale 7/8 when normal SM terminators are 8/9 ???


GW actually said it was because our Terminators aren't as seasoned veterans as normal Terminators. This was a community Facebook reply though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 18:58:37


Post by: Emulgator


so our terminators are rookies and our psykers dont know how to properly smite

why exactly do they send us to fight creatures from the warp created by actual chaos gods again.... ?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/25 20:34:07


Post by: Smotejob


So, looking at the points leaks (at least across the imperium) the Grey knights were relatively untouched in most areas.

Terminators went down in price a little bit. Not a lot but just a little.

Our Assault razorbacks are a little bit nerfed now (which is in line with the space marine dex, which hurts the Robby G lists). Also, our twin psycannon was nerfed, but I don't see many of those around.

However, I would say that with point increases on a lot of the competitive units in the imperium (I haven't looked at xenos yet) I think this is, overall, a step in the right direction with the Grey Knights. Are we going to rise to the top of the food chain off of these changes? likely no. but it helps us out.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/26 00:32:08


Post by: Red Comet


I'm pretty happy that Terminators got a points decrease, but overall I feel like they needed to drop at least another 5 points to actually become worth taking. What do you all think? What do you think would be the appropriate cost for a GK terminator?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/26 00:45:06


Post by: daedalus


Nowadays? I'd say 30 points for a space marine statline, 2W, and 2+ armor is fair. Maybe add an extra point or two on top for a psychic power you're seldom ever going to use and nerfed smite.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/26 01:02:13


Post by: Audustum


I'd say they'd be O.K. around 36-38 PPM base. Part of the problem is FOC's want 3 troops instead of 2 so problems of over cost get felt extra. They need to be cheap enough you can get the minimum on a battalion without blowing almost half your points.

OR they need to be more like Custodes who get S5, T5, 2+/3++, 3A and 3W for 51PPM.

Terminator special weapons need to be reduced too. We don't have relentless now and just keeping your melee weapon isn't worth the difference between PA versions and Terminator versions.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/26 01:09:57


Post by: greyknight12


I still haven’t figured out why custodes are cheaper than paladins.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/26 03:06:14


Post by: Audustum


 greyknight12 wrote:
I still haven’t figured out why custodes are cheaper than paladins.


The only guess I have is that GW really overpriced being a psyker or access to the Sanctic discipline.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/27 09:19:58


Post by: Godeskian


Anyone else feeling a little depressed about the future of Grey Knights as a semi - competitive army? Because between the index cut and paste, and being completely ignored in Chapter Approved I'm feeling a bit like the red headed stepchild


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/27 18:36:45


Post by: Audustum


Godeskian wrote:
Anyone else feeling a little depressed about the future of Grey Knights as a semi - competitive army? Because between the index cut and paste, and being completely ignored in Chapter Approved I'm feeling a bit like the red headed stepchild


Oh trust me, you aren't the only one. It's widespread.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/27 18:50:15


Post by: Fantome


I know it's not going to be amazing but has anybody thought of running Grey Knights coupled with a patrol detachment of Space Marines consisting of a libby and three camo cloak sniper scout squads?

I think it could have it's uses, making your opponents deployment very difficult and allowing you to stick more of your Grey Knights in deep strike reserve.

Plus the potential for more mortal wounds.

I'm thinking all of your grey knights in reserve apart from some interceptors which can then essentially just redeploy at the start of your first turn anyway by using there personal teleporters.

Again I know it's not going to be game breakingly effective but I think it might still have some mileage, thoughts?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/27 19:18:54


Post by: Spartacus


Fantome wrote:
I know it's not going to be amazing but has anybody thought of running Grey Knights coupled with a patrol detachment of Space Marines consisting of a libby and three camo cloak sniper scout squads?

I think it could have it's uses, making your opponents deployment very difficult and allowing you to stick more of your Grey Knights in deep strike reserve.

Plus the potential for more mortal wounds.

I'm thinking all of your grey knights in reserve apart from some interceptors which can then essentially just redeploy at the start of your first turn anyway by using there personal teleporters.

Again I know it's not going to be game breakingly effective but I think it might still have some mileage, thoughts?


Would be worth a go I think.

I would also add a cheap Lieutenant to babysit the scouts. Gives them the wound re roll which is fine but also puts you up to a min size battalion. GK need all the easy command points they can get I find.

With a reroll of 1 to wound the scouts will stack up those mortal wounds a little faster on big targets. It also makes them pretty threatening to any of the cheap fragile characters which are often spammed, such as Primaris psykers.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/27 19:32:49


Post by: Audustum


Spartacus wrote:
Fantome wrote:
I know it's not going to be amazing but has anybody thought of running Grey Knights coupled with a patrol detachment of Space Marines consisting of a libby and three camo cloak sniper scout squads?

I think it could have it's uses, making your opponents deployment very difficult and allowing you to stick more of your Grey Knights in deep strike reserve.

Plus the potential for more mortal wounds.

I'm thinking all of your grey knights in reserve apart from some interceptors which can then essentially just redeploy at the start of your first turn anyway by using there personal teleporters.

Again I know it's not going to be game breakingly effective but I think it might still have some mileage, thoughts?


Would be worth a go I think.

I would also add a cheap Lieutenant to babysit the scouts. Gives them the wound re roll which is fine but also puts you up to a min size battalion. GK need all the easy command points they can get I find.

With a reroll of 1 to wound the scouts will stack up those mortal wounds a little faster on big targets. It also makes them pretty threatening to any of the cheap fragile characters which are often spammed, such as Primaris psykers.


Yeah but you're gonna want your scouts spread out probably beyond the Lieutenant's ability to get more than 1 of them in range. Those are your objective campers.

You should definitely throw in a second HQ for a battalion though. Make them Raven Guard to boot for the -1 to Hit. Good ideas all around.

I'll admit after all this I just slap 3 Grandmaster Dreadknights into a Supreme Command detachment and then ally them with something for my GK lists.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/28 00:20:56


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Hey warhammer 40,000 page! Super happy about the new edition and love so much that has come out. But unfortunately I'm here to give a complaint that's hopefully constructive.

I am a huge grey knight fan. I love the story. I love the models. I love pretty much everything about them. However, this edition we have been given easily the worst codex and rules so far. I started with such high hopes. And since other codecs have come out it is extremely apparent that the grey knight codex was given very little thought. There aren't any of the cool sub factions that every other codex has. Most of the units are basically unusable. And we are beaten at our own game very easily (custodes are better and cheaper than Paladins, pretty much anyone can smite better than we can).
Now I have played a few games. And even my most competitive builds are mediocre to other armies. And with this last chapter approved, we are getting an increase in points. And no bonus. None of our units can really do what they are designed to do. And we can't even really play in a cool "fluffy" way, even though you guys have done a tremendous job on other codecs.
I am part of several grey knight forums. And all of them agree and are really quite sad at the current state of the sons of Titan. And we all want our voices to be heard, that we want a change to make them fun to play.
If you can see this, and in any way pass it up the chain. Since we really have no way of directly contacting anyone and asking for a change on the army we love so much. It would be greatly appreciated by the whole community of grey knight players.
Also, if there is already some kind of update for our shiny boys. Maybe some primaris grey Knights or something that is already happening to fix the problem. Just a hint of that would give us all so much hope for our army.
Thank you in advance for any help you can give.

I just posted this on the comments on the warhammer page. I would recommend you gents doing something similar. Constructive and to the point.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/28 15:29:02


Post by: MasteroftheBloodAngels


Spartan117xyz wrote:

I just posted this on the comments on the warhammer page. I would recommend you gents doing something similar. Constructive and to the point.


Great post, I commented on it and hopefully the feedback will be acknowledged. Since other Grey Knight players on BolterandChainsword are also going to post messages, I've written out a personalized one about my own experiences.

"To the wonderful Warhammer Community staff,

I am hoping that you might pass along this message to the 40k game designers and balance testers. I recently started playing 40k again after a long hiatus having first played the game in 3rd edition until 5th edition. Grey Knights had always been my favorite faction in the lore and aesthetic and I had a sizable force of metal Grey Knight strike squads and terminators from when I played with the old Daemonhunters Codex. To my delight, Grey Knights were now entirely in plastic! Throughout the summer I purchased, built and painted an entirely new force of these beautiful plastic Grey Knights that stands at well over 4000 points at the moment with an entire airwing of Stormhawks, Stormtalons, and Stormravens (awesome models!).

While the experience of building and painting has been a true joy, the Grey Knights have increasingly fared less well on the tabletop against both index armies and the other codexes in semi-competitive matched play pickup games, local tournaments, and league matches. When I first heard about Chapter Approved I was excited for the prospect of the designers having a second look at the Grey Knights codex, which suffers from poor internal balance in stark contrast to the Astra Militarum, Tyranids, and Aeldari codexes and some bizarre points costs for certain units like Techmarines (which are 100% more expensive than their codex Space Marine counterparts). However, having now seen the points adjustments for our faction—a single minor points decrease for terminators alongside increases for our most efficient aerial options and weapons—I feel that we have been almost entirely neglected. While I am not a competitive tournament player (fortunately since Grey Knights have struggled to place well even with a Codex without allying in an IG brigade), I would love to be able to put Land Raiders, Purifiers, Techmarines, Terminators, Paladin Ancients, and other options into my lists without being completely run over by my opponents because I had too many points tied up in ineffective units that can never earn back their cost. In addition, all of our special weapons—the unique options that Grey Knights players should want to take—are entirely lackluster and do not seem to have clear roles and are absurdly overcosted for what they do in-game. And lastly, our command point situation is unenviable. At most a 2,000 point Grey Knight army will have 5-7 command points, which is hardly enough to ever use our best stratagems, which are 2 and 3 CPs while saving a few for command point re-rolls. This issue is compounded by the fact that we do not have a way to recycle command points like other imperial armies. Perhaps the Domina Liber Daemonica could return used CPs on a 5+ as well since it is widely regarded as the worst relic in the game or Kaldor Draigo could grant battleforged Grey Knight armies an additional 2 CPs.

These are simply a few ideas, but there are threads on every major 40k forum in which disappointed Grey Knight players are offering feedback on the army and we would be grateful if some of it could be passed along to the balance team. They have a difficult task looking at so many factions and moving pieces, but the Grey Knights are a clear example of a faction, which received few changes from the Index to the Codex and now Chapter Approved even though the army has been struggling to produce results.
Thank you in advance"


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/28 17:26:02


Post by: Emulgator


I`m gonna try to bring this thread a little bit back on topic since my salt levels from initially reading the leaks hast settled a bit by now...

Over the last few weeks i was trying to find a way to use my 3 riflemen dreads that i still have back from the psy-ammo glory days
So far im really struggling to make them worth their points (since you basically pay for 3 astral aims but you are only ever using 1...)

my final conclusion is a little bit sad but IMHO I feel that if i want to use them i probably should not use them as GKs...

3 Venerable Space Marine Dreadnought including a primaris lieutenant with a MC Stalker bolt rifle is just 15pts more expensive than just 3 GK Ven Dreads (or 32 when upgrading to a captain)
I lose out on 1/3 Astral Aim casts attempts per turn but i gain reroll wound in 12" range (BT relic Crusader Helm) 1shot str4 ap-2 d2 in 36" and 1CP for a full vanguard detachment (cheapest option GKs have to fill that HQ slot would be a barebone Brotherhood Champ who has 0 synergy with anything and cant even deepstrike for 115pts minimum.

Would this be a worthwile thing to do for people like me who want to get some mileage out of their already bought models or does anyone see a better way ?

Thoughts ?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/28 17:46:43


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


If you guys wanna talk fixes for the codex there's a thread in the Porposed Rules Subforum so we can keep this area nice and clean.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Emulgator wrote:
I`m gonna try to bring this thread a little bit back on topic since my salt levels from initially reading the leaks hast settled a bit by now...

Over the last few weeks i was trying to find a way to use my 3 riflemen dreads that i still have back from the psy-ammo glory days
So far im really struggling to make them worth their points (since you basically pay for 3 astral aims but you are only ever using 1...)

my final conclusion is a little bit sad but IMHO I feel that if i want to use them i probably should not use them as GKs...

3 Venerable Space Marine Dreadnought including a primaris lieutenant with a MC Stalker bolt rifle is just 15pts more expensive than just 3 GK Ven Dreads (or 32 when upgrading to a captain)
I lose out on 1/3 Astral Aim casts attempts per turn but i gain reroll wound in 12" range (BT relic Crusader Helm) 1shot str4 ap-2 d2 in 36" and 1CP for a full vanguard detachment (cheapest option GKs have to fill that HQ slot would be a barebone Brotherhood Champ who has 0 synergy with anything and cant even deepstrike for 115pts minimum.

Would this be a worthwile thing to do for people like me who want to get some mileage out of their already bought models or does anyone see a better way ?

Thoughts ?

Rifleman Dreads are gone for now. Honestly I actually like throwing them in Stormravens now as it's less dangerous than it used to be. I recommend trying it once to see if you like it.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/28 18:17:57


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Hey everyone! They gave me an email and said we as a community should come up with what we would like to see and email it to them! I'm gonna post it in the proposed rules thread. So please let's put something constructive together so we can email them.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/28 19:34:55


Post by: Gest


While I'm not the biggest fan of social justice, I know that it is a powerful tool and we already saw that GW bends to it.

Seeing that they are open for dialogue gives me hope that GW is really trying.

I'm waiting for your proposed rules thread and I hope we can work out a nice constructive list together!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/11/30 05:38:50


Post by: Coyote81


So I saw some of the screenshots for the Land Raider Vehicle Design. It mention to add <Chapter> to the Land Raiders. I hope this includes Grey Knights as a chapter option in the CA book. Otherwise I'll be rather sad that we got left out.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 01:34:56


Post by: greyknight12


Grey Knights is a chapter option


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 19:43:05


Post by: RobHampster


We just got a minor faq change if anyone if interested.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 20:50:20


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


What was the change exactly?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 21:55:52


Post by: Lanlaorn


It says to roll 3d6 and discard the lowest rather than roll 3d6 and pick the two highest.

I don't see in what instance that matter..?.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 21:59:39


Post by: Strat_N8


They changed it so it can work with the Kronos Deepest Shadow stratagem.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 22:03:59


Post by: Xenomancers


Originally I figured that they were fixing the interaction with the tyranid kronos stratagem that makes you roll on 1 dice for a psychic power. However - nope - GW is just bad at everything.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Strat_N8 wrote:
They changed it so it can work with the Kronos Deepest Shadow stratagem.
How does it fix that though...it says to roll an additional dice and discard the lowest. Where the Nid strategam says to roll with 1 dice. Sorry - but picking the best of 2 dice leaving you with 1 dice....that's not fixing it.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/04 22:08:57


Post by: Strat_N8


 Xenomancers wrote:
Originally I figured that they were fixing the interaction with the tyranid kronos stratagem that makes you roll on 1 dice for a psychic power. However - nope - GW is just bad at everything.


How does this not fix the interaction? The problem before as far as I can tell is that you had two effects that both said to roll xd6. With the new version you still get some benefit if affected by Kronos rather than having the stratagem completely canceled out.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/05 02:55:32


Post by: Mr. Shine


The argument went that you would call in Sequencing to resolve it, but as it was written it didn't matter in which order you tried to apply the Stratagems.

Applying The Deepest Shadow first meant that you roll only a single dice, resulting in not being able to apply Psychic Channeling because for that you roll three dice instead of two.

And applying Psychic Channeling first you end up having your three dice knocked down to only one dice anyway.

Personally I didn't think Sequencing was appropriate because applying either Stratagem I think would involve actually taking the test and leaving no test for the second to be applied to, but at least now we have a clear way for them to interact.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/07 14:39:37


Post by: Nairul


After experiencing loss after loss lately, I've changed my perspective on the optimal pure-GK list. Drop the Paladins, the GM NDKs, the vehicles, the dreadnoughts. Drop all the expensive multi-wound models. They melt too darn fast to any semi-competitive opponent.

Instead, flood the board with 1-wound marines and characters under 10 wounds to buff them. Your opponent has no choice but to waste his high-dmg weapons on 1-wound marines. Interceptors are the best option, though I like including 3 strike squads for the Battalion CPs.

With this strategy I almost (keyword: almost) beat an Eldar player who ran too many Dark Reapers. It was fun watching him squirm.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/07 16:10:31


Post by: daedalus


Nairul wrote:
After experiencing loss after loss lately, I've changed my perspective on the optimal pure-GK list. Drop the Paladins, the GM NDKs, the vehicles, the dreadnoughts. Drop all the expensive multi-wound models. They melt too darn fast to any semi-competitive opponent.

Instead, flood the board with 1-wound marines and characters under 10 wounds to buff them. Your opponent has no choice but to waste his high-dmg weapons on 1-wound marines. Interceptors are the best option, though I like including 3 strike squads for the Battalion CPs.

With this strategy I almost (keyword: almost) beat an Eldar player who ran too many Dark Reapers. It was fun watching him squirm.


That's consistently been the single most winning strategy for any army in 8th that I've heard of so far. Step 1. Pack more bullets. Step 2: Make those bullets better. Step 3: Drop expensive toys to make more room to repeat step 1.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/08 13:58:52


Post by: greyknight12


 daedalus wrote:
Nairul wrote:
After experiencing loss after loss lately, I've changed my perspective on the optimal pure-GK list. Drop the Paladins, the GM NDKs, the vehicles, the dreadnoughts. Drop all the expensive multi-wound models. They melt too darn fast to any semi-competitive opponent.

Instead, flood the board with 1-wound marines and characters under 10 wounds to buff them. Your opponent has no choice but to waste his high-dmg weapons on 1-wound marines. Interceptors are the best option, though I like including 3 strike squads for the Battalion CPs.

With this strategy I almost (keyword: almost) beat an Eldar player who ran too many Dark Reapers. It was fun watching him squirm.


That's consistently been the single most winning strategy for any army in 8th that I've heard of so far. Step 1. Pack more bullets. Step 2: Make those bullets better. Step 3: Drop expensive toys to make more room to repeat step 1.

I'll echo this as well, my most successful iteration of a grey knights list has been spamming power armor. My current list is 55 marines (30 interceptors, 25 strikes), Voldus, and 2 GMDK. I actually like the GMDK since they can take down Knights and other big stuff, I just keep sanctuary/stratagems on them for a 3++ and/or keep them in reserve until they can help kill things or the threats to them are dead.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/10 19:02:26


Post by: Smotejob


So the list I just ran and it did well was
2x GMDK, 2x terminator squads, 1x strike squad, min paladin squad, 2x min interceptos, 2x purgation squad (psilencers), and 2 rhinos for dudes to hide inside from the get go.

It just did really really well (tabled by turn 3) a semi competitive nids list. Psilencers are perfect against nids who tend to run a mix of gribbly bugs and a few big ones.

The 2x Grandmasters do a lot of heavy lifting, but the purgation squads were the stars of the game. I lost 2x terminators, 2x paladins (wrong units to pit against a choppy nid HQ) and 2x other power armor. I had turn 1, which was a major part of the game. Going to keep trying this list out.

But the more and more I play the grey Knights, the more and more I want to just buy more power armor to support my 2x Dreadknights.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/11 01:33:40


Post by: Fenris-77


Yeah, denying the bulk of the efficiency to big guns is an effective way to play 8th. It doesn't cost CPs and and can't be countered, plus it also (probably) maximizes the value of your unit buffs. Some lists will struggle to get AT on the board, but there are creative ways to fix that, and the built-in value you get from nerfing every Lascannon and melta weapon you face leaves you with a significant efficiency buffer.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/14 01:46:20


Post by: TheMostWize


Anyone run a Sicaran? What Loadouts do you prefer? I run strictly paladins with an Imperial Knight because I like aesthetics if the force.

Just trying to figure out which variant I should add.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/14 20:12:34


Post by: Quickjager


A Sicaran? You man the tank that destroyed Wave Serpents? I thought it was priced out of the game by the FW update.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/15 01:03:00


Post by: Spartacus


Not so good at wave serpent killing now, you want a few big shots rather than lots of smaller ones.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/15 01:09:30


Post by: TheMostWize


So the standard is more efficient than the punisher? Or the Venator?

GK do a decent job at shooting weak infantry with storm bolters at least in my experience playing my buddies orks. He also doesn't spam a million boyz.

The standard is probably the best for the fact it can also hit flyers without pentalty. Even though the Venator has PoMS.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/16 17:28:26


Post by: Vortenger


Proposed changes for the March FAQ. Well, this bodes ill for the full Psyker chapter of the Imperium. Perhaps we should request GW not tighten the screws all the way to the floor?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/12/15/the-future-of-faqs-and-chapter-approved-dec-15gw-homepage-post-2/


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/16 19:01:56


Post by: Audustum


Vortenger wrote:
Proposed changes for the March FAQ. Well, this bodes ill for the full Psyker chapter of the Imperium. Perhaps we should request GW not tighten the screws all the way to the floor?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/12/15/the-future-of-faqs-and-chapter-approved-dec-15gw-homepage-post-2/


It's cool, the 3 Dreadknights half us run as our only GK are busy casting other spells anyway.

Sarcasm aside, might as well spam GW's inbox about this one. Thousand Sons will probably join us.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/17 01:50:14


Post by: TheMostWize


Yea this definitely would be a bad. A weaker version of smite that would now be handcuffed further by making it harder to cast.

I will definitely be sending an email to them.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/17 19:43:32


Post by: RobHampster


I sent an email suggesting some changes. Specifically an additional special rule for the aegis and reflecting Grey Knights psychic mastery. I don't know if it will fly though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/18 01:46:44


Post by: jeffersonian000


RobHampster wrote:
I sent an email suggesting some changes. Specifically an additional special rule for the aegis and reflecting Grey Knights psychic mastery. I don't know if it will fly though.

Post what you sent, so we can better anticipate their response... if any.

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/18 23:07:07


Post by: RobHampster


The below is what I sent:

I'm a Grey Knights player with a pure Grey Knights list. You have priced Grey Knights units based partly on their psychic abilities. The proposed FAQ changes are likely to make these abilities considerably less valuable and versatile especially when I take more than 6 Grey Knights units (which already struggle against other pure codex armies).

I think there are likely to be two ways to adjust for the proposed changes for Grey Knights: points reductions or Grey Knights special psychic rules.

It doesn't really make any sense that an army of master psykers has weaker smite than everyone else though I understand the need to limit Grey Knights capacity for smite spam especially in Imperial soup like armies.

The Aegis could be used to create a more fluffy balanced special rule. Put normal smite in the list of psychic powers for Grey Knights (and take away naff smite). Allow Grey Knights detachments to cast individual powers multiple times in any psychic phase by pooling their psychic powers using the Aegis and reflecting their psychic mastery. However, any multicasting should reduce aegis charge thereby reducing cast rolls by 1, 2 or 3 (I haven't done any maths so I don't know what would be balanced but this could change based on numbers of Aegis units maybe). It is also difficult to believe Grey Knights would be victims of perils. A 'The Aegis' special rule could protect from perils but terminate the psychic phase as all the Knights concentrate on fighting the warp peril through the aegis.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/19 03:32:36


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Just out of curiosity what email do you send that to? I want to send a few of my own but don’t know the best to send it to


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/19 06:05:27


Post by: Spartan117xyz


Spoiler:
Hello games-workshop team!!

I am a long time warhammer 40,000 player (since 3rd edition) and I can say that 8th edition is by far my favorite one so far! The changes have made the game so much more fun and easy to play. And has fixed a lot of problems from other editions.

But, unfortunately in this new edition my most beloved army, grey knights, are very far behind in the rules. They are considered by everyone to be dead last in codex ability. And the transition from index to codex gave us very little. While other armies got a great overhaul. The other armies, such as Nurgle and Astra militarum, have both good and “fluffy” rules. All the armies so far have had great rules that really go with the back story of the army. Except unfortunately grey knights. Which is a huge disappointment to me. I absolutely love grey knights. With the announcement of this new edition I spent a ton of time painting and customizing my army. Only to be let down on the table top when I’m constantly losing. Even index armies with much less rules seem to be much better than the grey knights.

That all being said, I’m not here just to complain and expect something to happen. I have been reading and talking with fellow grey knight players ,who agree we need a chance, on all sorts of online forums. Seeing what they would change to bring us on par with other armies.

So, I realize we can only ask for so much. A codex re write is to much. But some simple point and rule changes that I have tested and talked about would make us not only able to put up a fight and be a middle rank army (instead of dead last) but also would be much much more fun to play.

Rule changes:

So to start I’ll start with special rules for the grey knights. Most are fine, however with the other armies coming out it is very apparent our rules actually limit us a great deal. And the few things we are supposed to be good at we are out classed by other armies.

Rights of banishment.
So this rule seems like it was put in place with the fear that we would be casting smite so much that it would be over powered. However, I have played against a few players. And if they bring two or three Psykers they can put smite my entire grey knight force, getting D3 wounds most of the time and the occasional D6. A usual grey knight force can cast about 5-6 smites a turn, and that means we haven’t cast any other powers. And that means we have done 5-6 mortal wounds. Another army with two or three psychers can match us, and if they get a 10+ on the cast. Out smite us very easily. Making us as a psycher heavy army actually very week. There is the other part of the rule that we do a straight 3 mortal wounds against demons. While that is close to the lore of grey knights. It really comes into play very very rarely. Of both my local gaming stores and of the 20 people I there are that play. There are two people that occasionally play chaos. So that rule is almost never used.
What I and many other players have agreed is this for a rule change: our librarians should be able to cast the full regular smite. As it stands we don’t have a full smite at all and that would make taking librarians in our armies useful.
Also, grandmasters and captains should get the D3 wounds. But not get the bonus for casting on a 10+. Giving them a bit more of a useful smite.
But other than them. All other squads and units would cast the lower one wound smite.



Purifying flame:
Not a major change here, just needs a small increase in range to 6 inches. The 3 inch range is really hard to use and with the other changes to purifies would make them more viable.

Psychic lotus:
So our captains get this. And it really isn’t anything useful, we are a close range army and so we are trying to get close anyway. Plus since it targets the closest enemy so the extra range usually just gets wasted. What we really need, that our army lacks and that other armies have is a re roll of ones to wound. Space marines for example, have lieutenants. Giving captains that rule makes our small elite army that much more useable as an elite army, and makes the captain useful.


Another rule change that is a rather big one, but would drastically help our limited army is one that once again, most armies have some access to and we don’t. The -1 to hit while being shot at. Now, it would be an added rule and would work as such:

The shrouding:
When GREY KNIGHT INFANTRY are targeted in the shooting phase by an enemy model beyond 18 inches subtract 1 from the roll to hit.

This whole being in line with the lore, would also help our infantry. One of the problems we have is we are coated and treated like we are a very tough army. But one round of shooting can cripples us and wipe out whole squads very easily. The range means it isn’t as good as other armies. But it means that long range armies would have a little more trouble simply shooting us off the table. Plus, it would Allow us to “foot slog” instead of doing the one real tactic we have that is to teleport everything in and hope to get turn one charges. I have play tested it a bit and it seems to work just fine. Without being to strong.

Psychic powers:

So the major problem is the rule of one. We get very few powers. And some of those powers are situational. Plus, the larger the game gets, the worse we get because so many units are left with nothing to cast. Other armies such as Eldar have so many powers that they don’t really have to worry about it. However we depend on them so much and have so few it really hurts us in any competitive games. Now what I have tested, that has been both balanced and fun, is the ability to cast each power three times.
It is just enough to give us a lot more utility, but also few enough that I have to really think and plan for who gets what power. Instead of the current way the rules are. That one grandmaster dreadknight gets sanctuary, and everyone else casts smite.

Purge soul:
Probably no changes needed. It isn’t great, but it can target and kind of “snipe” enemy characters. So it is probably fine.


Gate of Infinity:
Fine just the way it is. Casting three times also allows us to move not only a squad. But the supporting character with it. A large problem we have right now is we teleport a squad or unit. And the character that was moving with them gets left in the open.


Sanctuary:
Great power that really helps us from getting shot off the table. Casting it three times would help so much with our terminator models


Vortex of doom: so this power is ok, how ever the wording need to be cleared up. The problem is it says model and not unit. With model it is just a worse smite. That very rarely gets a few mortal wounds. But with the wording of unit it makes it the deadly thing we need it to be.

Stratagems:
So a lot of a stratagems are super useful to us. And really helps with all the problems we have like weak short range shooting. The major problem is how expensive in command points they are. And how strapped for command points we are. With a normal force we only can get about 5 points maybe 6 if we try. And with how expensive our stratagems are we can barely use them.
The simple and proposed change is that honor the chapter, psybolt ammunition, psychic onslaught, and heed the prognosticators, all be reduced by 1 cp.
the two shooting ones which really are the most useful are too expensive to use regularly. Bringing them down in cost let’s us use them more often. Which really addresses the problem of our generally weak shooting.



Relics:
They are ok, mostly weak and just sort of fun to take rather than really useful. But not so bad as to cripple us.


Warlord traits:
Most are ok, but not very useful. First to the fray stands so far and above the others that it is a really simple choice. So here is the supposed change. We once again unlike other armies have no way to get cp back. That in conjunction with our very low cp means we are always strapped for command points. So all we want is a relic or warlord trait for a 5+ to get command points back. Other armies that have no trouble getting 10+ cp have a way to get them back. And even in some cases steal them from the enemy. Our high cost to stratagems, low cp count, and no ability to get them back means we are at a pretty severe disadvantage. So either one of the excising traits get changed, or simply add another. That way once again it’s more of a choice instead of just take “first to the fray” and be done.

Wargear:
Most of our gear is just fine the way it is. However our special weapons simply put is a joke. They are over coated and weaker than their fellow space marine options. I didn’t realize how much till a fellow grey knight player made the comparison between the plasma gun and the psycannon:
The psycannon is 24inch range strength 7, ap-1, heavy 4. Damage 1. While a plasma gun is the same range and strength, but -3 and doesn’t get the -1 to hit. And it’s cheaper! Why in the world does the grey knights use such a weak weapon? Why don’t we just use plasma?
So, the change would be this, just make it D2. That, with the addition of cheaper psychic onslaught makes it a much more viable option. Giving it the utility of a weapon used against bigger armored targets. It also needs a point reduction. Which I’ll talk about later. Maybe give it a mortal wound on a roll of a 6? Not sure about that, but would also make it much more useful.

Units:
I’m just going to go over the units that need rule changes. And will give point changes to them later.

Brother captain:
Like I talked about earlier the current rule of psychic lotus needs to be changed to re roll wounds of 1. We have no way to get it. And this would give players a reason to take a captain over the much better grandmaster.

Librarian:
Same as said earlier in my email. Needs full smite. There is no reason at all to take on right now.

Lord Kaldor Draigo:
So another way to get cp would be to give him a special rule that if you include him in your army you get an additional 2 cp. most other large super high cost space marine characters have a similar rule. And once again helps us with one of our biggest problems of cp

Grand master Voldus:
Give him full smite as well. As he is a librarian as well as a grandmaster.

Castellan Crowe:
Honestly pretty bad. He doesn’t have the same stances as brother champions. And has a terrible sword. I think with just the addition of the stances like the other champions he would become viable.

Paladin squad:
The problem with paladins are that they are trying to be a very very tough elite squad. But aren’t tough enough to stay in the open for even one turn. Just a few shots from a damage three weapon and poof they are gone. Which is such a disappointment from a squad that is supposed to be the very best we have. So the change is this, give them all iron halos. What that would mean is they get a 4+ invulnerable save. And with sanctuary would be a 3+. Now believe me I know when I first tried that I felt there was no way it would work. It would be to powerful and feel cheap. But, without it they have been shot to pieces every game I played. Even the other players I have had games with were disappointed. They die so fast and are so expensive that I lost very quickly. Now what is also very silly, is that Adeptus Custodes get better weapon skill, better strength and toughness, they have a 3+ inv save, all while costing LESS then a squad of paladins! after quite a few games using them with iron halos. And casting sanctuary on them they have fit right into the roll they have needed to. That of a tough expensive squad that can take a huge beating. The players I have played against who were still able to kill of paladins with my proposed rules, firmly agree with the changes. Without it they are so easy to kill, most other players found it very silly they didn’t have it to begin with.


Purifiers:
Need a point decrease and just one extra base attack. Right now there is so reason to take them over the cheaper strike squad.
But with a slightly longer range purifying flame, and one extra attack they would be a viable option.




Point costs:
So this is another thing that needs to be looked at. Some of our units are so over coated for what they deliver that they never make it to the table top. These point costs will be in line with my proposed changes. I’ll only go over the units that need a change. If I don’t mention them they are fine for what they cost.

(Before wargear)


Grand master: 140

Brother captain: 130

Paladin ancient: 120
Such a useful unit but way over costed.

Librarians: 137
In line with space marine librarians who have full smite and cost 40 points cheaper

Terminator squad: 38 ppm

Inceptor squad:20 ppm

Purgator squad: 17 ppm

Psycannon: 5 for power armor 10 for terminator

Psilencer: 5 for power armor 10 for terminator

Incinerator: 2 for power armor 5 for terminator

Heavy psycannon: 20

Gatling Psilencer:20

Heavy incinerator: 20
Also make it 2d6 hits.

That should be everything. And like I said I have play tested these changes a few times and they work really well. Plus without them we are at such a disadvantage that not only are we not fun to play. But we are not fun to play against. A friend of mine who plays Orks
Wasn’t having any fun shooting me off the table in two turns. He could also out-smite me. I would barely make a dent is his army.
With these proposed changes the games I have played I have had a much more solid chance of winning. And both me and my opponent have had much more fun.

If you have any questions or would like to talk to me feel free to ask. I would so dearly love my favorite army to play better and closer to the story of grey knights.

- a huge fan of your work
Heath.







This is the email I sent. What do you guys think?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/19 07:23:35


Post by: Grey Templar


I would recommend against posting exact rules suggestions in your emails to GW. Largely because they will not use them for fear of getting sued for "stealing someone's idea without crediting them".

Not that that is likely, its just a possibility so they will want to avoid that to avoid legal trouble.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/19 07:45:30


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Pfft, I don't care if I don't get paid to be honest. Just a quick recognition is all that's necessary to me.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/21 00:18:31


Post by: RobHampster


They previously have been doing similar things with Age of Sigmar and have happily used rules suggested by players. There are no legal repercussions because they have specifically asked for feedback to use in developing the game. It is part of the understanding when you bother to email them that they can use it without anything but an anonymous credit to 'player suggestions'.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/23 19:58:42


Post by: Niiai


Hi. I see a lott of doon and gloonnon these pages.

Could an army of stormbolters with other weapons work? I was designing a cool SW wolf guards unit when I thought it was just a worse GK model. Heck, you come with your own delivery system.

Strikes and interseptors seem good. Could purefiers or purgatora have a place in such a list? You can fitt 2 squads in a rhino, no? That's 3 deployments in one. A rhino is not exspensive, even if it eats every lascannon. (The landraider seems like a point sink.)

What do you think, could it work? Would it be boring? Is the psycannon worth it as only heavy weapon in the list, hitting on 4+?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/23 20:15:20


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Purifiers require too much effort to make work. Purgators have potential for spamming Psilencers though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/23 20:34:48


Post by: TheMostWize


Purgation squads with psilencers definitely can do damage. Massed stormbolter fire really isn't even bad especially against guard and orks. Unless your playing against massed infantry.

That being said there are some things that could really hurt GK of implemented and some simple ways to fix it that have been mentioned here already. I love my knights and I'll fight through whatever nonsense I have to deal with.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2017/12/26 17:10:06


Post by: greyknight12


Massed stormbolter is great; so are dirt cheap psilencers. The problem is that we have no cheap units, and not enough high-yield firepower. S4 is fine, but without a high strength/low AP weapon there’s not a way to get to enemy heavy armor outside of CC. And since our basic unit costs 105 pts minimum (though actually it’s our HQs that make filling out battalions hard) we don’t really have the points to play around with land raiders of our own. The reason why smite nerfs are a big deal is that outside of CC it’s the only reliable way for us to put wounds on knights and their ilk outside of CC


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/08 19:51:08


Post by: RobHampster


 greyknight12 wrote:
Massed stormbolter is great; so are dirt cheap psilencers. The problem is that we have no cheap units, and not enough high-yield firepower. S4 is fine, but without a high strength/low AP weapon there’s not a way to get to enemy heavy armor outside of CC. And since our basic unit costs 105 pts minimum (though actually it’s our HQs that make filling out battalions hard) we don’t really have the points to play around with land raiders of our own. The reason why smite nerfs are a big deal is that outside of CC it’s the only reliable way for us to put wounds on knights and their ilk outside of CC


I think GKs are challenging for a couple of reasons. In the old first turn system, you could pretty much guarantee an alpha strike with GK. Under these circumstances, you could drop in half your units and transport/shunt/GOI the rest up the field. Keep them inside Auras and using FTTF reliably charge. The glass cannon nature of strike squads and dreadnoughts didn't matter so much as you could reliably do damage first. GK with this tactic are incredibly powerful.

However, the changes to first turn mechanics hit elite armies really hard. The only durable units we have (land raiders, NDKs, Storm ravens, Paladins) are really vulnerable on the first turn and are really expensive if they can be reduced to lower effectiveness levels or destroyed.

Our limited threat range is also challenging. New strategies and special units can screw up our reliable first turn damage. Really cheap units like scout sentinels, ratlings, etc. can prevent a decent alpha strike by area denial and board coverage leaving any deepstriking units really exposed while trying to open up gaps in board coverage. Also some other armies just spread out across the board using their own strategies which we cannot deny (no board coverage with the low model count). Because our really damaging fire is really range limited, after the alpha strike, it is really difficult to remain a united fighting force while trying to inflict damage (which many of our elite units must do to earn their Points). These two things make it really hard to fight ranged armies like guard and tau without our elite units being snuffed by simple rate of fire.

Against true close combat armies like orcs and Tyranids, it is also difficult because our really damaging shooting range is just inside 12" (which is easily within charge range). If you hang back and avoid cc, storm bolters struggle to deal with the numbers, if you go on the offensive, you are generally exposed to some serious counter charging due to our low model count. We simply cannot take out enough models using rapid fire plus psychic plus charging.

Finally, against high toughness opponents, we don't have reliable guns that do damage. We have to rely on psychic powers (which often hit the bubble wrap due to targeting rules) or close combat (where again bubble wrap is a problem).

Ironically, none of these are actually a problem in reality. It is to do with how units are costed. If you play power levels, GKs are much more competitive. This simply demonstrates that GKs are overcosted. For example, I have a 30pl list of GKs for mini games. In points, it would cost very nearly 600pts. My 500pt list of Astra Militarum only totals 30pls. This is carried through when we compare custodes and Paladins, or any of our units vs. vanilla marine equivalents. They are generally better value for the points. The psychic and first turn mechanic changes will only exacerbate this problem which is why is is an issue for us.

Basically, I think GKs can destroy opponents who make strategic or tactical mistakes or who don't know the army very well. Unfortunately, they just don't cut it against seasoned players. I think I'm going to have to take a guard detachment to really have enough tactical and strategic options to compete.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/08 20:23:54


Post by: Spartacus


It all comes down to points cost at the end of the day. Theres nothing fundamentally broken with a GK list, just pros and cons as with any other army.

If GK suddenly received a points cut of 15 to 20% across the board, you would suddenly see a lot more of them in competition.

If you want to bring your GK's to win tourneys, Its just gonna be a matter of waiting until all codex's are released, the competitive environment to settle into a well defined 'meta' (hate using that term), and GW reacting with the next Chapter approved book.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 04:20:00


Post by: greyknight12


So guys, apparently we've been doing it all wrong:
From me, in the LVO tournament discussion (https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/733325.page)

"Apologies if this isn’t the place for this, but will there be any FAQs in place for Tsons, GK, etc who have a reduced version of smite but still got shafted by the beta rules?"

Reply from Reece himself:
"@GreyKnight

Obviously if I did know of an inbound FAQ I couldn't say anything about it, sorry.

But, it may feel like a nerf but in our experience it isn't, particularly for GK. If you were relying on their baby smite to win games you were probably doing something wrong (not to be rude). We use GK loads here and rarely even cast their smite unless playing Daemons, of course.

And, in reverse, it means you are getting hit with less Smites which for an army like GK is actually a big deal as you are so low model count. It helps you more than hurts you in that scenario."

[Thumb - reece.PNG]


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 04:52:44


Post by: Spartacus


I always knew that guy had smoked too much of something when he was younger.

What absolutely flawed logic, and still completely ignorant of the exponential scaling problem of this stupid 'balancing mechanic' (affects larger point value games immensely, and small games barely at all).

Thanks for sharing.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 18:23:52


Post by: Vortenger


I do not understand his reply. We only have six powers in our arsenal and more than six units on the board. Two HQ's usually have five of the powers between them. So, if they play 'loads of GK over there', just what are they casting if not smite?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 19:17:23


Post by: Xenomancers


So here is the final nail in the coffin for the GK.

I thought that maybe if deamons were a strong army (and they are going to be - ive seen the codex) that at least GK would be able to hurt them. Turns out that GK are once again just as in 7th INEPT at killing daemons. 2 point stratagem - if a GK unit kills an unnammed daemon unit - in your next movement phase it deep-strikes in at FULL STRENGTH. I'm not even making this up!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 19:27:06


Post by: daedalus


I assume nothing.

I think what he's trying to say is that "baby smite is a waste of time". I kind of agree with that--It's certainly getting there. His comment about "doing it wrong" suggests that there's a way to do it right though. That's the part I'm interested in.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 19:59:37


Post by: Lanlaorn


It's only a waste of time if you have something better to do. if I could cast the other Santic powers are unlimited number of times, yes I agree I would never cast Smite.

If I only had three GK units I probably would never cast smite, either. But if you have a few an entire army of them you quickly reach a point where it's cast smite or do nothing, and even baby smite is clearly superior to nothing at all.

I'm not sure how this could in any way be done better or worse, it just is what it is


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 21:59:32


Post by: greyknight12


I have a strong feeling that “doing it right” involves playing your GK as allies to AM. Otherwise tournament results don’t support there being any good way to play the army.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 22:14:26


Post by: Spartacus


Lanlaorn wrote:
It's only a waste of time if you have something better to do. if I could cast the other Santic powers are unlimited number of times, yes I agree I would never cast Smite.

If I only had three GK units I probably would never cast smite, either. But if you have a few an entire army of them you quickly reach a point where it's cast smite or do nothing, and even baby smite is clearly superior to nothing at all.

I'm not sure how this could in any way be done better or worse, it just is what it is


It could certainly be done better.

At the moment we pay full price points-wise for each unit to have the capability to cast either smite or a Santic power. With the matched play rules stating that each non-smite power can only be cast once, at least all of our units have baby smite to fall back on.

Now that only 4-5 smites will be usable before it becomes inefficient (and then impossible) to cast, any further units you buy for your army are essentially paying for psychic ability which they cannot use. It was designed to stop armies from spamming normal smite, but when you have no choice but to take psykers in armies like Grey Knights or T Sons, many units in larger armies will simply be overcosted. GK aren't super competitive points wise as it stands, so we can't afford to sink much lower.

The rule itself is not a terrible idea, its just its application to armies like GK which is flawed, as we have no choice but to be punished by it. A simple fix would be to exempt units with the GREY KNIGHTS keyword (plus a similar measure for T Sons).

However I'm of the opinion that GW should just do a better job of balancing their existing rules with appropriate points costs. The only thing broken about a Primaris psyker casting full smite is that it only costs 46 points, so is easily spammable. If GW put a proper points cost on them they would not be spammable - its that simple. I was hoping this would be solved by chapter approved but their good intentions have been spoiled by either inattention or incompetence, so now we get this...


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/09 22:21:55


Post by: daedalus


 greyknight12 wrote:
I have a strong feeling that “doing it right” involves playing your GK as allies to AM. Otherwise tournament results don’t support there being any good way to play the army.


I've been suspecting that for a while. I think that they wanted to make GK a "not just marines" codex again like it was back in the DH days, but they didn't want to reprint scions and inquisition a bunch of times, so they just made it GK units. That still doesn't handwave away why they made PAGK practically identical units that take up different FOC slots.

I want to hear someone admit it though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 14:57:53


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


As a new GK player I tried using a Draigo bubble with my troops and it turned out pretty well. It might be that we misplayed the rules but when my opponent charged my strike force (4 stormbolters + 1 psilencer) he pretty much disintegrated due to the reroll almost doubling the amount of hits I got. According to my math (please correct me if I'm wrong) but I get about 80% more 6's with Draigo's reroll ability.

I think for my next game I'm going to make sure that I make Draigo's aura 12" for 3 turns (and burn all of my CPs) just because all of those rerolls can mean so much.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 18:41:58


Post by: SkrawnyNob


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
almost doubling the amount of hits I got. According to my math (please correct me if I'm wrong) but I get about 80% more 6's with Draigo's reroll ability.

I think for my next game I'm going to make sure that I make Draigo's aura 12" for 3 turns (and burn all of my CPs) just because all of those rerolls can mean so much.


1/6 Chance of hitting in overwatch = 16.667%

With reroll: 1/6 + ((1 - 1/6)/6) = 30.556%

30.556/16.667= 1.8333; so you actually hit 83.333% more. On average. Yeah, rerolls are just The Best, which is why it's probably pretty good that we don't get as many of them in this edition for power balancing reasons. Rerolling only 1s is a little more restrained.

As for expanding Draigo's aura, how many more units will that cover for you? Pure GK don't have so many units that you can afford to cluster on one side of the board for most of the game. I like to save some CPs for the psilenser buffs or rerolling an important psychic power or something.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 19:05:21


Post by: Marmatag


What a joke. What an absolute joke.

Please teach me the right way to play Grey Knights that includes not actually playing Grey Knights.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 19:11:07


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


Would you care to elucidate your "joke"? If you don't have anything to add to the discussion then why are you posting?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 19:15:47


Post by: Spartacus


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Would you care to elucidate your "joke"? If you don't have anything to add to the discussion then why are you posting?


He's not talking about you. On the last page a response from Reecius of Frontline Gaming was posted essentially saying that relying on Smite for GK was 'doing it wrong', so we shouldn't be worried about the upcoming nerf.

It is a joke, just not the Ha Ha kind.

Further to the discussion I'm not sure why people consider baby smite to be a non-issue. On average, regular D3 smite does 2 mortal wounds to a target (ignoring the D6 result). Our smite does one. Range is not an issue as GK want to be in rapid fire/charge range all the time anyway.

That's still pretty much 50% of the effectiveness of regular smite by my reckoning. On every unit in the army it is not something to be scoffed at, and certainly not 'doing it wrong'.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 19:23:32


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


Thanks for the explanation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So how does Reecius play GK? Or at least, what is he proposing regarding GK and smiting?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 20:01:46


Post by: Spartacus


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Thanks for the explanation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So how does Reecius play GK? Or at least, what is he proposing regarding GK and smiting?


FLG are part of the playtesting group which GW use for new rules. There is currently a beta test rule put out by GW as an attempt to control the smite spam in other armies, whereby each attempted cast of smite beyond the first incurs a further -1 modifier to the psychic test, and the effect is cumulative. It will probably have the intended effect on smite spam (kinda), but for armies like GK where we have no choice but to take a whole heap of psykers, its just a straight up nerf.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 20:21:54


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


I know about the Beta rule. I'm asking what does Reecius suggest that we do about the nerf? I know he said that it doesn't hurt GK players because GK players shouldn't be dependent on smite. What was the basis for his opinion and what does he suggest that we do to overcome this nerf (if anything)?

BTW where did his statement originally come from? Maybe I should look at that thread for answers to my question.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 20:37:49


Post by: daedalus


It was from the LVO thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/733325.page#9779219

Looks like he responded to my question from the other day:

 Reecius wrote:

Most successful, competitive GK players use lots of Strikes, sometimes Dreadknight Grand Masters and Interceptors but not always, moderate character support, and deep strike in using things like Astra Aim and Psilencers to lay down a boatload of multi-damage firepower. Same goes with their Devastator squad (the name of which escapes me).

If you play them with a detachment of say, Astra Militarum to compliment them, they work very well together. Playing pure GK is very challenging but that is not because they aren't good, just because they (like most elite armies) lack some of the essential tools you need to succeed in the hyper-aggressive 8th ed competitive meta. You have to be able to screen effectively, and elite armies by their nature aren;t good at that unless they have a hyper-durable unit like Bullgryn, or some Nurgle units that can take a vicious punch.

Lacking that, you are just waiting to get alpha struck out of a tournament. That is why GK struggle and why they can be tough to play pure in a competitive setting.

They have amazing units and elements to them, but their 1 damage smite is certainly not a cornerstone of their competitive strategy. Their other powers are better by a mile. The baby smite is something you do when you don't have anything else to do, not something you rely on to win games.


It's the answer I figured it would be. I don't imagine that makes a whole lot of other people happy though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 21:09:01


Post by: Spartacus


Hahaha...

Literally: 'play them with Astra Militarum' was his answer to doing it right.

That's so insulting.

How about not nerfing them and fixing the bloated points costs?

Edit: Also, if by his own admission baby smite is such a non-issue, there should be no harm in omitting Grey Knights from the beta rule? Again I fail to rationalise his thought process: one one hand he is saying that GK are weak, while his other hand is justifying a nerf that will apply to them across the board. He's delusional...


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 21:10:33


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


So he basically avoided the question.

Can't trust him further than I can throw him.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 21:11:48


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


He is right on 1 aspect- GKs do need a cheap chaff unit of some sort or some other way to soak up an alpha strike at a reasonable cost.

I agree with you. I'm a mono codex player and want to be able to have a viable competitive army.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 21:16:04


Post by: Marmatag


 daedalus wrote:
It was from the LVO thread: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/733325.page#9779219

Looks like he responded to my question from the other day:

 Reecius wrote:

Most successful, competitive GK players use lots of Strikes, sometimes Dreadknight Grand Masters and Interceptors but not always, moderate character support, and deep strike in using things like Astra Aim and Psilencers to lay down a boatload of multi-damage firepower. Same goes with their Devastator squad (the name of which escapes me).

If you play them with a detachment of say, Astra Militarum to compliment them, they work very well together. Playing pure GK is very challenging but that is not because they aren't good, just because they (like most elite armies) lack some of the essential tools you need to succeed in the hyper-aggressive 8th ed competitive meta. You have to be able to screen effectively, and elite armies by their nature aren;t good at that unless they have a hyper-durable unit like Bullgryn, or some Nurgle units that can take a vicious punch.

Lacking that, you are just waiting to get alpha struck out of a tournament. That is why GK struggle and why they can be tough to play pure in a competitive setting.

They have amazing units and elements to them, but their 1 damage smite is certainly not a cornerstone of their competitive strategy. Their other powers are better by a mile. The baby smite is something you do when you don't have anything else to do, not something you rely on to win games.


It's the answer I figured it would be. I don't imagine that makes a whole lot of other people happy though.


Because it's a bs answer.

(a) If you're making it harder to cast smite, the restriction of GK smite is wholly unfair. GK smite was set to 1 wound in a time when you could easily cast as many smites as you wanted. Now that there is a mechanism to prevent this, there is no logical reason for GK to have a restricted smite.

(b) GK are complimented well by AM, but it's EQUALLY ACCURATE to say that GK have no place in an AM list, and pure AM lists are better than GK + AM. They are not adding value, when you start doing analysis and putting together a competitive list. So to say that GK competitive mechanism is to be a drag on a tuned AM list, so therefore GK are viable, is wholly disingenuous.

(c) Reecius seems to take the stance that GK should not be able to function as a standalone army. This is always a tacitly inserted in any GK balance discussion by people who don't seem to understand that an army should be able to stand on its own in some degree. What will we do when the ITC format, or 40k format, evolves to restrict souping, as it should? On this note, the best Tyranid lists pre-codex were heavily including Imperial Guard. That is absolutely bs. And the same thing is happening here with GK, it's just more acceptable because GK are human, too? It's not good balance for every bad army to use AM as a crutch, because AM is wholly overpowered.

Of course this is nothing new, and also probably represents GW's feeling on the topic as well.

Anyone want to buy some Grey Knights?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 21:56:32


Post by: daedalus


 Marmatag wrote:
Because it's a bs answer.


I mean, it is and it isn't. From a practical point of view, it's the best answer you're going to get in an unofficial / short term, and it would probably take fewer IG assets to make work than you'd think. I keep saying that a 3rd ed Daemonhunters style list would probably actually be pretty competitive now, or at least, viable. I might actually have time for a game this weekend. Maybe I'll give it a shot.

The problem is that this kind of attitude isn't coming from me or any other nobody. It's coming from someone who actually has a line of communication with GW. I won't say that he or any other individual has the chance to change this kind of stuff, but I'm willing to guess there's some level of influence there that could do something.

So I guess I'll agree that it's a total bs answer from a "how it should be" point of view, but it's quickly working out to be the "how it is" answer.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 22:07:18


Post by: Spartacus


 daedalus wrote:


So I guess I'll agree that it's a total bs answer from a "how it should be" point of view, but it's quickly working out to be the "how it is" answer.


GW put these Beta rules out so we could take a look at "how it could be". If one of the organisations which does rule testing for GW is resigned to 'how it is', what hope is there for change?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 22:14:20


Post by: Lanlaorn


But that's silly, first it's something everyone obviously knows - "if your army sucks right now play another one" isn't exactly groundbreaking and second, that's only "how it is" right now because the math just doesn't work out.

Any number of numerical changes, from lowering point costs to increasing unit durability, could balance things. If they want to get fancier maybe allow Santic powers to be cast twice per turn or something.

Anyway I wouldn't worry about what Reecius or any other playtester says, they don't seem to actually have any real influence, just wait to see if the constant rules update process GW promised actually delivers on balance improvements.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/10 22:18:07


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


He does have influence. He runs the LVO, one of the biggest gaming conventions in the US. The results from the LVO also could be an influence on GWs rule makers.

The biggest favor they could do GK is to revamp how they determine what faction is represented. Rather than just looking at the Warlord they should look at the narrowest level word that all of the models in an army have in common


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 06:09:32


Post by: Nairul


I'm going to play devil's advocate for a second. There's some validity to Reece's side of the debate:

It might be counter-intuitive, but smite is actually the lowest portion of a GK army damage output (unless you're weird and run Purifiers or Crowe... then you have reason to be mad!). So think of Smite as a cherry-on-top of the damage output of your Shooting & Fight phases. I ran the numbers, estimated against various toughness levels and weighted towards what a GK marine is inclined to shoot/fight.

Before beta-smite, Smite on a 4+ (+1 for pure-GK detachment) is a reliable 1 Mortal Wound x 92% chance to roll a 4+ = 0.92 Damage per unit.
Averages show the damage breakdown of a GK Marine (w/ rapid-fire SB & Falchions) is about 0.39 (Shooting) & 0.56 (Fight) per turn. So multiply those values by five for a 5-man strike/interceptor squad. That's roughly 1.95 (Shooting) & 2.8 (Fight) per turn.

So the total breakdown is 0.92(Psychic) -->1.95 (Shooting) -->2.8 (Fight).
These estimates ignore force multiplier auras (Draigo, GM, Chaplain, Ancient), which would increase Shooting & Fight output even further.

Here you see Smite is about 16% of our total damage output in a single turn. The beta-smite rules would hurt that portion, but luckily it's the smallest chunk of our damage.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 08:01:34


Post by: Lanlaorn


No one misunderstands that, the point is that a) because the minor smite is pre-nerfed it clearly doesn't need to be affected by the real smite "fix" and b) an army which is struggling to be competitive really shouldn't be burdened with any kind of reduction in ability.

Also, you'll find that the smite damage percentage grows dramatically based on the durability of the target. For example attacking something like a humble Rhino equivalent T7, 3+ save then Smite does more damage than the stormbolters.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 20:40:15


Post by: Commissar_Rex


Nairul wrote:
I'm going to play devil's advocate for a second. There's some validity to Reece's side of the debate:

It might be counter-intuitive, but smite is actually the lowest portion of a GK army damage output (unless you're weird and run Purifiers or Crowe... then you have reason to be mad!). So think of Smite as a cherry-on-top of the damage output of your Shooting & Fight phases. I ran the numbers, estimated against various toughness levels and weighted towards what a GK marine is inclined to shoot/fight.

Before beta-smite, Smite on a 4+ (+1 for pure-GK detachment) is a reliable 1 Mortal Wound x 92% chance to roll a 4+ = 0.92 Damage per unit.
Averages show the damage breakdown of a GK Marine (w/ rapid-fire SB & Falchions) is about 0.39 (Shooting) & 0.56 (Fight) per turn. So multiply those values by five for a 5-man strike/interceptor squad. That's roughly 1.95 (Shooting) & 2.8 (Fight) per turn.

So the total breakdown is 0.92(Psychic) -->1.95 (Shooting) -->2.8 (Fight).
These estimates ignore force multiplier auras (Draigo, GM, Chaplain, Ancient), which would increase Shooting & Fight output even further.

Here you see Smite is about 16% of our total damage output in a single turn. The beta-smite rules would hurt that portion, but luckily it's the smallest chunk of our damage.



The following was incorrect, I thought rites of banishment were rolled on 1d6 like some other mini-smites, please ignore
Spoiler:
I'm not sure I see where that math is coming from. Before beta smite rules we have a 50% chance/squad to hit that smite... not sure where 92% is coming from? The problem is that Grey Knights pay a huge premium for their shiny abilities, but aren't any tougher to kill than tacticals- which are already pretty bad pts efficiency for troops. Weight of fire is deadly to them.

Beta smite rules mean that rites of banishment can be used 3 times, tops, by your knights (excluding real psykers). Grey knights couldn't hold their own competitively when every unit could try their smite every turn.


It's too bad that GKs are so bloated. Even against chaos they don't really get much done. re-rolling wounds on daemons is fine, but I wouldn't want to tie up GKs in CC with almost any daemon unit due to the low attack #s, and the fact that the AP on the force weapons (weapons presumably taken for their effectiveness vs daemons...) is useless against the invul save that daemons predominantly use. The boys in Grey could really use some love...


P.S. if anyone has any good uses for GK in an AM army, I'd love to hear them! I want a reason to bring them for some more serious games, but right now they're just for super casual. Unfortunately, hate the GMNDK model and don't have the skills to do a conversion I'd be proud of. Any compelling units better than what my vanilla AM could take?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 21:05:40


Post by: ryzouken


 Commissar_Rex wrote:
I'm not sure I see where that math is coming from. Before beta smite rules we have a 50% chance/squad to hit that smite... not sure where 92% is coming from?

Smite, as a psyker power, is cast on 2d6 with a target number (abbreviated TN) of 5. Grey Knights have a bonus to their roll of +1, setting our TN at 4.
There are three total results on a 2d6 roll that fail to generate a 4 (1,1; 2,1; 1,2) and thirty-three results that generate a 4 or higher of the 36 possible results 2d6 can generate. 33/36 = 11/12 = 91.6(repeating)% or roughly 92%

I'm more curious how you ended up at 50%


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 21:26:08


Post by: Commissar_Rex


ryzouken wrote:
 Commissar_Rex wrote:
I'm not sure I see where that math is coming from. Before beta smite rules we have a 50% chance/squad to hit that smite... not sure where 92% is coming from?

Smite, as a psyker power, is cast on 2d6 with a target number (abbreviated TN) of 5. Grey Knights have a bonus to their roll of +1, setting our TN at 4.
There are three total results on a 2d6 roll that fail to generate a 4 (1,1; 2,1; 1,2) and thirty-three results that generate a 4 or higher of the 36 possible results 2d6 can generate. 33/36 = 11/12 = 91.6(repeating)% or roughly 92%

I'm more curious how you ended up at 50%


I guess I don't read so good. I thought the rites of banishment was cast on 1d6 like some other mini-smite units (astropaths, brimstones, etc). Sorry!


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 22:00:03


Post by: the cosmic serpent


Is there a distinction between Smite and named spells like Purifying Flame (or the Eldar warlock spell?) for the beta rule or would the smite restriction still apply to those spells even though they are different names? Seems it would be easy enough for GW to say Smite as in non-modified specifically the Smite named spell versus the other versions which are typically lower damage?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 22:24:56


Post by: ryzouken


the cosmic serpent wrote:
Is there a distinction between Smite and named spells like Purifying Flame (or the Eldar warlock spell?) for the beta rule or would the smite restriction still apply to those spells even though they are different names?

There is not. Destructor and similar abilities refer to the act of casting smite when delineating what modifications are made. Thus, when a warlock casts destructor, they're casting smite.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 22:43:01


Post by: DarknessEternal


Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So he basically avoided the question.

Can't trust him further than I can throw him.

Well, look at the source. This is the same guy that said some armies were intentionally designed to be bad in 8th because he didn't like them in 7th.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/11 22:49:48


Post by: Audustum


Reecius absolutely has influence. Do you think it's a coincidence that he loves Astra Militarum and they got a phenomenal codex?

It's pretty obvious we didn't have a fan like that among the play testers.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/12 09:39:08


Post by: Fueli


 DarknessEternal wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So he basically avoided the question.

Can't trust him further than I can throw him.

Well, look at the source. This is the same guy that said some armies were intentionally designed to be bad in 8th because he didn't like them in 7th.


You spout crap like that around without even a source.

This has been going on all 8th edition goddammit, I want a source. Or better yet, stop bashing Reece and FLG in general.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/12 18:33:41


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


 Fueli wrote:
 DarknessEternal wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So he basically avoided the question.

Can't trust him further than I can throw him.

Well, look at the source. This is the same guy that said some armies were intentionally designed to be bad in 8th because he didn't like them in 7th.


You spout crap like that around without even a source.

This has been going on all 8th edition goddammit, I want a source. Or better yet, stop bashing Reece and FLG in general.

He did say something to that effect though. I'll have to find the source on my next break (or hopefully someone else does it) but this did happen.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/12 19:45:04


Post by: jeffersonian000


Yes, the FLG crew has been quite open and vocal about their dislike of Grey Knight and Tau armies. There is no question on that regard. Their recent statement on how GK players aren’t playing right if they use Smite really does need to be backed up by them on what they think the right way to play GK is, other than play AM. Telling GK players to play AM instead just causes the FLG crew to lose all credibility on their being even remotely unbiased. That was not only a useless statement, it was an insult to their fan base.

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/12 20:41:40


Post by: DarknessEternal


 Fueli wrote:
 DarknessEternal wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So he basically avoided the question.

Can't trust him further than I can throw him.

Well, look at the source. This is the same guy that said some armies were intentionally designed to be bad in 8th because he didn't like them in 7th.


You spout crap like that around without even a source.

This has been going on all 8th edition goddammit, I want a source. Or better yet, stop bashing Reece and FLG in general.


The sources are many and verified. Go examine all the post 8th edition threads. At this point, it's thoroughly covered.

The guy inserts his own bias into his playtesting feedback, and he does so proudly and blatantly.

He's bad for the game.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/14 17:38:09


Post by: Vortenger


I second Jeffersonians sentiments.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/15 16:54:08


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


OK so now that we know who to blame for making GKs a challenge what are we going to do about it? Considering that anyone who actually wants to play a real GK army should be considered a masochist how do we inflict pain on others? Or, do we just tuck our tails in and wait for 9th?

Let's put out some thought s and build something interesting. There can't be anything too out there considering we aren't even allowed to be out there.

I've been thinking of basing an army around Draigo and his aura. My thought is either put him and most of the fire power in the center of a line and then just try to punch a whole in the opponent's line or place him on a flank and roll with him.
I'm thinking:
Draigo
Voldus
Brother Captain with first to the fray
3 Strikes
1 Interceptor
1 Stormraven
1 Stormtalon

The Raven, Talon, interceptors, Voldus and 1 Strike squad start on the board everything else DS in. Using the double the aura card on Draigo I can pretty much choose where to focus firepower and with DS and the speed of the other units I should be able to pick my targets.

Is this a perfect strategy? Hardly but it's what I'm going to use as my base of play.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/16 07:53:13


Post by: jeffersonian000


We can legitimately do Apothecary spam with Storm Shield index Librarians, and just play like GK are Movie Marines. Add Draigo and Voldus, some GMDKs, even some GKT to sit objectives. Don’t play their game, play our game!

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/16 19:17:52


Post by: Gest


 jeffersonian000 wrote:
We can legitimately do Apothecary spam with Storm Shield index Librarians, and just play like GK are Movie Marines. Add Draigo and Voldus, some GMDKs, even some GKT to sit objectives. Don’t play their game, play our game!

SJ


I actually did something similar in a game a few weeks back.
1 Vanguard Detachement with 3 Apothecaries with Hammers (1 Relic Hammer)+GMDK
2 Vanguard Detachements with 1 Inquisitor Psyker + 3 Acolytes each(thanks for the CP and unit 8 units on the field)
1 Batallion with Voldus, GMNDK, 3 Strikes, 2 Rhinos(one for the Inquisitors and one for two strike squads to gate) and a Lazorback.


I had a lot of fun with the list. The major drawback is that the meatshields take some time to be in place. I thought about replacing the strikes with interceptors for maximum Alphastrike.
I really love the apothecaries. Sure, no Stormbolters, but I play in a Marine-heavy environment, so petty smite does more than one Stormbolter anyway. And they're basically mini Grandmasters. While your enemy can't waste firepower to shoot them.

I always ran into space problems when I spammed deepstrike paladins. Only having 6 Models deepstriking was way more relaxing, especially for smite targeting and everyone except Voldus made it into cc.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 12:11:50


Post by: Foxen


What about librarians using index option for storm shield and Warding Stave giving them constant 2++. For 172pts.

A few of those and maybe an Apothecary to give some wounds back if they take damage?



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 20:57:25


Post by: jeffersonian000


Foxen wrote:
What about librarians using index option for storm shield and Warding Stave giving them constant 2++. For 172pts.

A few of those and maybe an Apothecary to give some wounds back if they take damage?


Still legal, since it’s got a different name from any unit in the codex as well as a different stat line. They have full Smite, access to Librarius powers, access to Storm Shields, yet also start off with a Nemesis Force Staff, Grey Knights keyword, and all 3 grenades. They are still a good option for a 3++/2+++ character.

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 21:01:36


Post by: Xenomancers


When the army that is supposed to counter daemons - is countered by daemons. What is the point? Why do grey-knights actually exist?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 21:05:13


Post by: jeffersonian000


 Xenomancers wrote:
When the army that is supposed to counter daemons - is countered by daemons. What is the point? Why do grey-knights actually exist?

At the moment, they are a line of very pretty models.

SJ


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 21:28:17


Post by: Grey Templar


 jeffersonian000 wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
When the army that is supposed to counter daemons - is countered by daemons. What is the point? Why do grey-knights actually exist?

At the moment, they are a line of very pretty models.

SJ


We're basically back to 3rd edition. Just with more model choices and without the cool "gotcha" of Force weapons which ignore Eternal Warrior.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 22:43:13


Post by: daedalus


Next time I play, I'm thinking about doing this:

Spoiler:

Battalion Detachment:

GMNDK
- Warlord: FttF
- Teleporter
- Gatling Psilencer

Draigo

5x Strike Squad
- Psilencer
- Hammer
- 3 Falchions

5x Strike Squad
- Psilencer
- Hammer
- 3 Falchions

5x Strike Squad
- Psilencer
- Hammer
- 3 Falchions

Apothecary
- Hammer

Apothecary
- Hammer

5x Paladin Squad
- 2x Psilencer
- 4x Falchions
- Hammer

5x Paladin Squad
- 2x Psilencer
- 4x Falchions
- Hammer

Razorback
- Asscans

Razorback
- Asscans

Vanguard Detachment

Inquisitor (psyker)
- Boltgun
- Chainsword

1x Acolyte
- Boltgun

1x Acolyte
- Boltgun

1x Acolyte
- Boltgun

1x Acolyte
- Boltgun

1x Acolyte
- Boltgun

1x Acolyte
- Boltgun


Okay, so none of that is exactly revolutionary, but I don't think I've seen anyone mix the Paladin / Apothecaries with the Strikes with the cheap inquisition drops to deep strike the GK half exactly so. The plan is simple: Almost always deep strike all the GK bodies and force feed them to the enemy. The acolytes space out around the razorbacks to be slightly annoying things that have to get shot up before the enemy can deep strike right next to them, or go hide on objectives when possible. I might drop the hammers in the strike squads to reclaim a few points, but I don't know where else I'd spend them.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 22:49:25


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


Good luck with the list. I'm going to try my list tomorrow (weather permitting).


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/17 23:04:09


Post by: Elric Greywolf


Here's my LVO list:

Spoiler:

GK Battalion:
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107

AM Battalion, Vostroyans:
Commander, Kurov's Aquila, WARLORD (Grand Strategist) - 30
Psyker, Armor of Graf (Visions, Maelstrom) - 46
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Mortar - 45

DA Spearhead:
Lieutenant, Foe-Smiter - 62
Devastators, 5x, 4 Plascan, Cherub - 154
Devastators, 5x, 2 hbolts - 85
Hellblasters, 8x, Heavy Plasinerators - 280


Stratagems:
Psychic Onslaught and Precog for GMDKs, Communion for Vortex, Dark Age Weapons for Hellblasters, Hellfire Round for Heavy Bolter


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/19 03:40:26


Post by: macexor


Thought I might ask GK players about this thing.

If a GK unit uses Gate of Infinity, do stratagems like Auspex Scan or Eldar's Forewarned enable enemy units to shoot at units coming via Gate?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/19 04:02:16


Post by: Spartacus


macexor wrote:
Thought I might ask GK players about this thing.

If a GK unit uses Gate of Infinity, do stratagems like Auspex Scan or Eldar's Forewarned enable enemy units to shoot at units coming via Gate?


The 'reinforcements' blurb in the main rules is very broad and covers anything which looks like deepstrike no matter what it is called and what phase its in. Gate of infinity therefore = deploying via reinforcements The only requirement for the stratagems is for the target to be arriving via reinforcements.

So yes, the stratagems can be used vs GOI (twice in one turn if you are also deepstriking, due to the different phase)

^^ I think thats right based on a cursory read through of the related rules, any other takes?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/19 12:32:55


Post by: GuardStrider


Been wondering since I haven't see anyone mentioning it. How does the Doomglaive Dreadnought fare in this edition?
I have been tempted to get it just because I like how it looks and don't own any FW stuff


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/19 13:54:40


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


Spartacus wrote:
macexor wrote:
Thought I might ask GK players about this thing.

If a GK unit uses Gate of Infinity, do stratagems like Auspex Scan or Eldar's Forewarned enable enemy units to shoot at units coming via Gate?


The 'reinforcements' blurb in the main rules is very broad and covers anything which looks like deepstrike no matter what it is called and what phase its in. Gate of infinity therefore = deploying via reinforcements The only requirement for the stratagems is for the target to be arriving via reinforcements.

So yes, the stratagems can be used vs GOI (twice in one turn if you are also deepstriking, due to the different phase)

^^ I think thats right based on a cursory read through of the related rules, any other takes?


The stratagem only works vs reinforcements.Gates =/= reinforcements. You already have to be on the table to be gated you're not going off board and then coming back via reinforcements. Otherwise it would work on models disembarking from vehicles.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/19 15:22:31


Post by: Vortenger


Doomglaive is great! The Heavy Psycannon is honestly a pretty good weapon, putting it on a cheaper platform than the NDK helps it shine. I drop mine out the back of a Stormraven and he's as killy as a venerable, S9 is plenty of hitting power. He does go down like a dread to high AP weaponry so being in combat is safest Landing close enough to use an incinerator is fun. Also, you may look into Furioso bits; the Force Spear and the Frag Cannon look decent enough with just a few minor tweaks and come cheaper online. If you know a BA player they may have these lying around.



8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/19 17:06:18


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


I'm not sure how to work with my Storm Raven. I love the dakka but I hate the lack of maneuverability. I mean move 20" or so. Next turn make a 90 to the left or right and repeat. I don't like going into hover as you lose a lot of your defense when you do so.

I wish they put back the old rule that allowed embarked troops to disembark at the end of the transport's movement. As it is now I feel like if I attack with my Raven I risk all of the units that are embarked on my opponent's next turn. And I certainly don't want to risk a dread considering that it has a 1/6 chance of being outright destroyed in an explosion.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/20 14:53:34


Post by: Quickjager


...So Reecius says we are playing wrong when the first thing any of us did was look at the units in the codex competitively, said DKGM and Strikes were the best things. They are OBVIOUSLY the best things in the codex.

If playing GK is taking those two, and adding AM Reecius is as dumb as the 7th ed. Psychic phase writers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
GK could easily be fixed by simply adding a few things. As in....


Null Deployment, which would fix their weak durability.

Increase the number of attacks each model gets by 1.

Normal Smite.

Hell maybe we could balance this by getting rid of their anti-daemon properties?!?! Which are worth crap because they have next to no attacks that actually connect.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/20 17:09:20


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


I'm still awed that GW explained that GK termies have a lower Ld score than normal SM termies due to the fact that the SM ones have more combat experience than the GK ones.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/20 17:21:04


Post by: Slayer-Fan123


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I'm still awed that GW explained that GK termies have a lower Ld score than normal SM termies due to the fact that the SM ones have more combat experience than the GK ones.

That's the way it's been since 5th I'm pretty sure though.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/20 20:37:58


Post by: Fueli


Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I'm not sure how to work with my Storm Raven. I love the dakka but I hate the lack of maneuverability. I mean move 20" or so. Next turn make a 90 to the left or right and repeat. I don't like going into hover as you lose a lot of your defense when you do so.

I wish they put back the old rule that allowed embarked troops to disembark at the end of the transport's movement. As it is now I feel like if I attack with my Raven I risk all of the units that are embarked on my opponent's next turn. And I certainly don't want to risk a dread considering that it has a 1/6 chance of being outright destroyed in an explosion.


Don't use it as transport. Way too many eggs in one basket. It's good as just a gunship.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/20 22:00:37


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


I'm going to drop both of my flyers and try a Land Raider with 5 paladins and a paladin ancient in it.
So it will be:
Draigo, Voldus and, a brother (warlord)
Ven Dread, the above paladins
3 5 man strike squads
Land Raider.

I start with the raider loaded with paladins as 1 drop, the Ven dread on the board everything else deep striking. If I have to Draigo and Voldus will also start on the board (I'm not sure if embarking is putting the models on the table or into tactical reserves).[ https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/60/747769.page ]


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/21 15:54:59


Post by: greyknight12


Since Custodes are basically our army but better now, what do people think of using the vexilla defensor (on the praetor) to give our PAGK a 5++ against shooting? Might be worth it as an alpha strike defense, I don't think they can deepstrik though.
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/01/18/adeptus-custodes-preview-part-3-elitesgw-homepage-post-2/


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/21 16:02:21


Post by: Leo_the_Rat


And I'm playing GK why?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/21 21:06:15


Post by: Nairul


 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Here's my LVO list:

Spoiler:

GK Battalion:
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107

AM Battalion, Vostroyans:
Commander, Kurov's Aquila, WARLORD (Grand Strategist) - 30
Psyker, Armor of Graf (Visions, Maelstrom) - 46
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Mortar - 45

DA Spearhead:
Lieutenant, Foe-Smiter - 62
Devastators, 5x, 4 Plascan, Cherub - 154
Devastators, 5x, 2 hbolts - 85
Hellblasters, 8x, Heavy Plasinerators - 280


Stratagems:
Psychic Onslaught and Precog for GMDKs, Communion for Vortex, Dark Age Weapons for Hellblasters, Hellfire Round for Heavy Bolter


Thanks for posting. Good luck in LVO!

One question: What is "Precog" for GMDKs?


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/22 18:24:07


Post by: Elric Greywolf


Nairul wrote:
 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Here's my LVO list:

Spoiler:

GK Battalion:
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107

AM Battalion, Vostroyans:
Commander, Kurov's Aquila, WARLORD (Grand Strategist) - 30
Psyker, Armor of Graf (Visions, Maelstrom) - 46
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Mortar - 45

DA Spearhead:
Lieutenant, Foe-Smiter - 62
Devastators, 5x, 4 Plascan, Cherub - 154
Devastators, 5x, 2 hbolts - 85
Hellblasters, 8x, Heavy Plasinerators - 280


Stratagems:
Psychic Onslaught and Precog for GMDKs, Communion for Vortex, Dark Age Weapons for Hellblasters, Hellfire Round for Heavy Bolter


Thanks for posting. Good luck in LVO!

One question: What is "Precog" for GMDKs?


Oh whoops, I meant Prognosticators, the +1 invuln strat. Somehow I was thinking of last edition's psychic power Precognition.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/22 18:41:50


Post by: Marmatag


Elric you should absolutely run a banner with that many overchargers in one place.


8th Ed. Grey Knight Tactica Discussion - Mathhammer (Data To be Revised) @ 2018/01/24 21:41:56


Post by: Nairul


 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Nairul wrote:
 Elric Greywolf wrote:
Here's my LVO list:

Spoiler:

GK Battalion:
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GMDK, psilencer, psycannon, teleport, hammer - 290
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107
GKSS, 5x, psilencer - 107

AM Battalion, Vostroyans:
Commander, Kurov's Aquila, WARLORD (Grand Strategist) - 30
Psyker, Armor of Graf (Visions, Maelstrom) - 46
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Flamer, Mortar - 53
Infantry, 9x, Mortar - 45

DA Spearhead:
Lieutenant, Foe-Smiter - 62
Devastators, 5x, 4 Plascan, Cherub - 154
Devastators, 5x, 2 hbolts - 85
Hellblasters, 8x, Heavy Plasinerators - 280


Stratagems:
Psychic Onslaught and Precog for GMDKs, Communion for Vortex, Dark Age Weapons for Hellblasters, Hellfire Round for Heavy Bolter


Thanks for posting. Good luck in LVO!

One question: What is "Precog" for GMDKs?


Oh whoops, I meant Prognosticators, the +1 invuln strat. Somehow I was thinking of last edition's psychic power Precognition.


Thanks for clarifying. But why not give him Sanctuary instead of using the 2CP strategem??