Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
total0 wrote: Looks like the threads dead buddy, gk are fine
That's an interesting conclusion to draw from a 5-page thread where people have suggested changes to a bunch of things.
Yes, it has 6 pages but the discussion has died as before total0's coment, it was just the OP since he has ignored many contributors in this thread.
The posts are still there. People can see them if they want. I've done my best to heed good suggestions, but a few individuals keep presenting the same suggestion with the same reasoning. If I explain why I don't like a suggestion, it is only fair that the person gives a rebuttal. It becomes something else when a person keeps making the same suggestion over and over when I've made it clear that I think it is not suitable for the situation.
Examples:
Scout on Strike Squads: The fluff explanation for Strike Squads is that they lay down the teleport homers for the Terminators to arrive in locations otherwise inaccessible. Even with Scout, the Strike Squads' Teleport Homers cannot benefit the Terminators anywhere they couldn't have simply ran to in the same number of turns.
Adding a new anti-armor special weapon that's essentially a better melta: The Grey Knights have the Incinerator for anti-hoarde, the Psilencer for anti-Monstrous Creature, and the Psycannon for anti-armor. The Grey Knights don't need a new gun. They need the Psilencer and Psycannon to be a bit better at their roles. And the "better melta" suggestion would reduce both the number of shots and the range available, which would be detrimental to an already small and short ranged army.
Here is the current version of the suggestion.
Bill1138 wrote: 5th version:
Promethium Reserve Tanks: as a new option for vehicles with flamer-type weapons that grants the weapons a 6” Torrent. The price could vary by vehicle based on effectiveness or be a per-weapon upgrade. This upgrade would be available to other codexes.
Grey Knight Chapter Tactics: These are the rules that apply across the Grey Knight Codex in the same way the Space Marine Chapter Tactics affect the chosen Chapter. If you think this is too much, compare them to the Iron Hands’ Chapter Tactics.
The Aegis
Prefered Enemy (Daemons)
Psyker Mastery Level 1, with Purity of Spirit
Daemonology (Sanctic): Replace the #4 power (Purge Soul) with a Blessing that improves the AP of shooting weapons by 1. This would not apply to psychic shooting attacks.
4. Psychic Infusion …………………..Warp Charge 1
The Grey Knights focus their psychic might through their blessed ammunition to increase its deadly potential. Psychic Infusion is a blessing that targets the Psyker. Whilst the power is in effect, the AP of weapons fired by the unit are improved by 1.
HQs I’d leave their options the same, but a few of their base prices are too high for what they’re capable of.
125pts- Brother-Captain:
150pts- Brother-Captain Stern:
100pts- Brotherhood Champion:
125pts- Castellan Crowe:
Troops: Strike Squad:
Make Rites of Teleportation a special rule for Strike Squads instead of being a Detachment benefit for the Nemesis Strike force, but also have it reduce scatter to 1D6.
Elites 100pts – Dreadnought: Add a new piece of Wargear that grants the Dreadnought the option to use Skyfire each shooting phase.
Paladins: At their current price, give them Sanctuary.
Heavy: Purgation Squad: replace Hammerhand Psychic power with the Psychic Infusion power
Dreadknight: Add an Iron Halo as an optional upgrade.
*Special Weapons: new (and hopefully improved suggestion) The Grey Knights have 3 Special Weapons: the Incinerator, the Psilencer, and the Psycannon. As they currently stand the Psilencer and Psycannon are not good upgrades for PAGK. I would like to see that fixed.
Incinerator: Template, S6, AP4, Assault 1, Soulblaze (No change)
Psilencer: 24”, S4, Ap-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force (Being as other Codexes rely on template weapons for anti-hoarde, the Psilencer doesn't really have to be anti-hoarde. This profile makes it good at killing Monstrous Creatures, though not as good as my previous suggestion, yet removes most of the anti-infantry ability it had. It is also much closer to a traditional weapon profile than my previous suggestion.)
Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance (This doubles its effectiveness against Soulgrinders, and helps against AV 14, but doesn’t do anything at all to its effectiveness against lighter armor.
*For the sake of Fluff explanations, “Poisoned” and “Lance” would probably be given new overly flowery or pseudo-Latin names and descriptions to make them more in line with the Imperium’s lore, but would still be the exact same rules.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/08 18:13:23
Oh, can somebody quote this? Want to make sure that anybody and everybody can see it.
Bill1138 wrote: Psilencer: 24”, S4, Ap-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force (Being as other Codexes rely on template weapons for anti-hoarde, the Psilencer doesn't really have to be anti-hoarde. This profile makes it good at killing Monstrous Creatures, though not as good as my previous suggestion, yet removes most of the anti-infantry ability it had. It is also much closer to a traditional weapon profile than my previous suggestion.)
Well this is out of left field. Still, I dislike it quite a bit. It's not so horrendously broken as Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+, but it's not great either. I do admit that I like Assault 6, as it allows Psilencers to contribute to the midrange shooting that GKs generally excel at.
Poison 3+ is still over the top when combined with Force; if you want both then a better solution is to split the profile to either Force or Poison... it should also probably be Poison 4+, as otherwise this is 99% better Splinter Cannon and would overshadow the DE as the poison masters of the game.
As an example, a single Psilencer with 3+ Poison, and 6 shots, will inflict ~2.7 wounds on a MC. Against 3+ armor, this becomes ~0.89 unsaved wounds- so you've got really good chances to blap a MC. This is pretty over the top, especially when a moderately tooled up Strike Squad can kill any T6/3+ MCin one round of combat.
Here's the math:
Spoiler:
Strike Squad, 10 man, 10 Halberds, Charging:
against a WS4 MC: 21 attacks, 10.5 hits, ~3.5 unsaved wounds (Halberds provide +1S and AP3); a typical T6/3+ MC has only 4 Wounds- you don't even need Force to kill one given that in practice it'll round up to 4 wounds!
If you really want to go in for overkill, you could also activate Hammerhand, for 5 Unsaved Wounds- combined with Force, you can probably kill an entire brood of Carnifexes in a single round of combat!
WS4 MC, 10-man Strike Squad, w/ all Falchions, Charging, with Hammerhand:
31 attacks, ~16 hits, ~5.33 unsaved wounds (Falchions provide +1 Attack and AP3, Hammerhand provides +1 Str). Once again, you can just use Falchions+Hammerhand and kill any T6/3+ MC in the game in a single round; if they have a 5++, then you inflict ~3.55 unsaved wounds- still very good chances to kill a T6/3+/5++ MC in a single round.
And keep in mind that that's going to hold true against WS4-WS8 MCs; it takes an insane WS9 before the Strikes can only hit on 5+. Oh, and against WS3 (IE, many Tyranid T6/3+ MCs)? Halberds will inflict ~4.67 unsaved wounds (~7 w/ Hammerhand), while Falchions will get ~6.89 unsaved wounds when combined with Hammerhand. Season with Force, and you can literally kill any T6/3+ MC in a single round of combat- more likely, you'll kill multiple T6/3+ MCs in just one round of combat.
Also, for those who are curious as to how brokenly powerful Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+ is... take a look:
Spoiler:
I don't have my codex stuff with me right now, but let's just think about how much firepower you can get:
MSU Purifiers x3, w/ 2 Psilencers You'll get 72 S5 Poison 3+ shots at 36"; against T3 infantry you can pump out 40 (!) wounds per turn; against:
6+ Save: ~33.3 unsaved wounds
5+ Save: ~26.7 unsaved wounds (IE, you just mostly wiped out a typical IG Infantry blob of 30 dudes)
4+ Save: ~20 unsaved wounds (IE, you still mostly wipe out a typical IG Infantry blob, even if they're in 4+ cover)
3+ Save: ~13.3 unsaved wounds (there goes that Battle Sister blob)
Alternately, you can deal up to ~32 wounds against anything T5 or better; against a typical:
3+ Armor MC: ~10.7 unsaved wounds (nearly an entire Carnifex Brood gone!)
2+ Armor MC: ~5.34 unsaved wounds; if the MC has 5+ FNP then that becomes ~3.56 unsaved wounds- so you can nearly one-round a Riptide. Riptides are brokenly powerful too, but breaking Psilencers into this level of power is not the answer.
Oh, and for comparison, 30 Sternguard can only put out 30 2+ Poison shots at 12-24", and 60 at 0-12". They also cost around 3 times as much as MSU Purifiers, and can't use Rhinos as a pseudo-ablative armor. MSU Trueborn with Splinter Cannons and dual Splinter Cannon Venoms can dump 36 poison shots per squad- so 108 per turn for three squads- and of the total 108, 36 are twin-linked. Except that they're 4+ poison.
An approximate number of wounds inflicted before saves for MSU Splinterborn in Dual Splinter Venoms would be: 24 wounds from Splinterborn, 16 wounds from Venoms; total of 40 wounds. Which sounds comparable, until you realize that:
-Trueborn are T3/5+ infantry, in 4-man MSU squads, mounted in cardboard bawkse Venoms (10/10/10 2HPs, open-topped)
-It takes ~33% more shots for DE to equal the wound output of 6 Salvo 8/12 S5/Poison 3+ Psilencers
-Splinter weapons are S:X, which means they cannot harm AV at all
-For a moderate cost increase, the MSU Purifiers can mount in Rhinos and still fire their important weapons from the roof hatch, giving them an ablative AV11/11/10 3HP vehicle
-Purifiers are also ML2, so 3 MSU squads contributes 6 WC.
-Purifiers also know Cleansing Flame, probably the best Sanctic power.
So, yeah. Salvo 8/12, S5, Poison 3+ Psilencers? Brokenly powerful.
Bill1138 wrote: Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance (This doubles its effectiveness against Soulgrinders, and helps against AV 14, but doesn’t do anything at all to its effectiveness against lighter armor.
*For the sake of Fluff explanations, “Poisoned” and “Lance” would probably be given new overly flowery or pseudo-Latin names and descriptions to make them more in line with the Imperium’s lore, but would still be the exact same rules.
I don't really see the point of both Lance and Rending; it's got enough weight of fire that S7+Lance is perfectly functional for glancing things to death. Also, it doesn't need anything other than the "Lance" rule. There's no need for the weapon's rules to use something Imperial-ized for the rule. Make up whatever description you want, but leave it simple and clean as Lance rather than some other thing.
Bill1138 wrote: Psilencer: 24”, S4, Ap-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force (Being as other Codexes rely on template weapons for anti-hoarde, the Psilencer doesn't really have to be anti-hoarde. This profile makes it good at killing Monstrous Creatures, though not as good as my previous suggestion, yet removes most of the anti-infantry ability it had. It is also much closer to a traditional weapon profile than my previous suggestion.)
Well this is out of left field. Still, I dislike it quite a bit. It's not so horrendously broken as Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+, but it's not great either. I do admit that I like Assault 6, as it allows Psilencers to contribute to the midrange shooting that GKs generally excel at.
Poison 3+ is still over the top when combined with Force; if you want both then a better solution is to split the profile to either Force or Poison... it should also probably be Poison 4+, as otherwise this is 99% better Splinter Cannon and would overshadow the DE as the poison masters of the game.
As an example, a single Psilencer with 3+ Poison, and 6 shots, will inflict ~2.7 wounds on a MC. Against 3+ armor, this becomes ~0.89 unsaved wounds- so you've got really good chances to blap a MC. This is pretty over the top, especially when a moderately tooled up Strike Squad can kill any T6/3+ MCin one round of combat.
Here's the math:
Spoiler:
Strike Squad, 10 man, 10 Halberds, Charging:
against a WS4 MC: 21 attacks, 10.5 hits, ~3.5 unsaved wounds (Halberds provide +1S and AP3); a typical T6/3+ MC has only 4 Wounds- you don't even need Force to kill one given that in practice it'll round up to 4 wounds!
If you really want to go in for overkill, you could also activate Hammerhand, for 5 Unsaved Wounds- combined with Force, you can probably kill an entire brood of Carnifexes in a single round of combat!
WS4 MC, 10-man Strike Squad, w/ all Falchions, Charging, with Hammerhand:
31 attacks, ~16 hits, ~5.33 unsaved wounds (Falchions provide +1 Attack and AP3, Hammerhand provides +1 Str). Once again, you can just use Falchions+Hammerhand and kill any T6/3+ MC in the game in a single round; if they have a 5++, then you inflict ~3.55 unsaved wounds- still very good chances to kill a T6/3+/5++ MC in a single round.
And keep in mind that that's going to hold true against WS4-WS8 MCs; it takes an insane WS9 before the Strikes can only hit on 5+. Oh, and against WS3 (IE, many Tyranid T6/3+ MCs)? Halberds will inflict ~4.67 unsaved wounds (~7 w/ Hammerhand), while Falchions will get ~6.89 unsaved wounds when combined with Hammerhand. Season with Force, and you can literally kill any T6/3+ MC in a single round of combat- more likely, you'll kill multiple T6/3+ MCs in just one round of combat.
Also, for those who are curious as to how brokenly powerful Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+ is... take a look:
Spoiler:
I don't have my codex stuff with me right now, but let's just think about how much firepower you can get:
MSU Purifiers x3, w/ 2 Psilencers You'll get 72 S5 Poison 3+ shots at 36"; against T3 infantry you can pump out 40 (!) wounds per turn; against:
6+ Save: ~33.3 unsaved wounds
5+ Save: ~26.7 unsaved wounds (IE, you just mostly wiped out a typical IG Infantry blob of 30 dudes)
4+ Save: ~20 unsaved wounds (IE, you still mostly wipe out a typical IG Infantry blob, even if they're in 4+ cover)
3+ Save: ~13.3 unsaved wounds (there goes that Battle Sister blob)
Alternately, you can deal up to ~32 wounds against anything T5 or better; against a typical:
3+ Armor MC: ~10.7 unsaved wounds (nearly an entire Carnifex Brood gone!)
2+ Armor MC: ~5.34 unsaved wounds; if the MC has 5+ FNP then that becomes ~3.56 unsaved wounds- so you can nearly one-round a Riptide. Riptides are brokenly powerful too, but breaking Psilencers into this level of power is not the answer.
Oh, and for comparison, 30 Sternguard can only put out 30 2+ Poison shots at 12-24", and 60 at 0-12". They also cost around 3 times as much as MSU Purifiers, and can't use Rhinos as a pseudo-ablative armor. MSU Trueborn with Splinter Cannons and dual Splinter Cannon Venoms can dump 36 poison shots per squad- so 108 per turn for three squads- and of the total 108, 36 are twin-linked. Except that they're 4+ poison.
An approximate number of wounds inflicted before saves for MSU Splinterborn in Dual Splinter Venoms would be: 24 wounds from Splinterborn, 16 wounds from Venoms; total of 40 wounds. Which sounds comparable, until you realize that:
-Trueborn are T3/5+ infantry, in 4-man MSU squads, mounted in cardboard bawkse Venoms (10/10/10 2HPs, open-topped)
-It takes ~33% more shots for DE to equal the wound output of 6 Salvo 8/12 S5/Poison 3+ Psilencers
-Splinter weapons are S:X, which means they cannot harm AV at all
-For a moderate cost increase, the MSU Purifiers can mount in Rhinos and still fire their important weapons from the roof hatch, giving them an ablative AV11/11/10 3HP vehicle
-Purifiers are also ML2, so 3 MSU squads contributes 6 WC.
-Purifiers also know Cleansing Flame, probably the best Sanctic power.
So, yeah. Salvo 8/12, S5, Poison 3+ Psilencers? Brokenly powerful.
Bill1138 wrote: Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance (This doubles its effectiveness against Soulgrinders, and helps against AV 14, but doesn’t do anything at all to its effectiveness against lighter armor.
*For the sake of Fluff explanations, “Poisoned” and “Lance” would probably be given new overly flowery or pseudo-Latin names and descriptions to make them more in line with the Imperium’s lore, but would still be the exact same rules.
I don't really see the point of both Lance and Rending; it's got enough weight of fire that S7+Lance is perfectly functional for glancing things to death. Also, it doesn't need anything other than the "Lance" rule. There's no need for the weapon's rules to use something Imperial-ized for the rule. Make up whatever description you want, but leave it simple and clean as Lance rather than some other thing.
Bill1138 wrote: Psilencer: 24”, S4, Ap-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force (Being as other Codexes rely on template weapons for anti-hoarde, the Psilencer doesn't really have to be anti-hoarde. This profile makes it good at killing Monstrous Creatures, though not as good as my previous suggestion, yet removes most of the anti-infantry ability it had. It is also much closer to a traditional weapon profile than my previous suggestion.)
Well this is out of left field. Still, I dislike it quite a bit. It's not so horrendously broken as Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+, but it's not great either. I do admit that I like Assault 6, as it allows Psilencers to contribute to the midrange shooting that GKs generally excel at.
Poison 3+ is still over the top when combined with Force; if you want both then a better solution is to split the profile to either Force or Poison... it should also probably be Poison 4+, as otherwise this is 99% better Splinter Cannon and would overshadow the DE as the poison masters of the game.
As an example, a single Psilencer with 3+ Poison, and 6 shots, will inflict ~2.7 wounds on a MC. Against 3+ armor, this becomes ~0.89 unsaved wounds- so you've got really good chances to blap a MC. This is pretty over the top, especially when a moderately tooled up Strike Squad can kill any T6/3+ MCin one round of combat.
Here's the math:
Spoiler:
Strike Squad, 10 man, 10 Halberds, Charging:
against a WS4 MC: 21 attacks, 10.5 hits, ~3.5 unsaved wounds (Halberds provide +1S and AP3); a typical T6/3+ MC has only 4 Wounds- you don't even need Force to kill one given that in practice it'll round up to 4 wounds!
If you really want to go in for overkill, you could also activate Hammerhand, for 5 Unsaved Wounds- combined with Force, you can probably kill an entire brood of Carnifexes in a single round of combat!
WS4 MC, 10-man Strike Squad, w/ all Falchions, Charging, with Hammerhand:
31 attacks, ~16 hits, ~5.33 unsaved wounds (Falchions provide +1 Attack and AP3, Hammerhand provides +1 Str). Once again, you can just use Falchions+Hammerhand and kill any T6/3+ MC in the game in a single round; if they have a 5++, then you inflict ~3.55 unsaved wounds- still very good chances to kill a T6/3+/5++ MC in a single round.
And keep in mind that that's going to hold true against WS4-WS8 MCs; it takes an insane WS9 before the Strikes can only hit on 5+. Oh, and against WS3 (IE, many Tyranid T6/3+ MCs)? Halberds will inflict ~4.67 unsaved wounds (~7 w/ Hammerhand), while Falchions will get ~6.89 unsaved wounds when combined with Hammerhand. Season with Force, and you can literally kill any T6/3+ MC in a single round of combat- more likely, you'll kill multiple T6/3+ MCs in just one round of combat.
Also, for those who are curious as to how brokenly powerful Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+ is... take a look:
Spoiler:
I don't have my codex stuff with me right now, but let's just think about how much firepower you can get:
MSU Purifiers x3, w/ 2 Psilencers You'll get 72 S5 Poison 3+ shots at 36"; against T3 infantry you can pump out 40 (!) wounds per turn; against:
6+ Save: ~33.3 unsaved wounds
5+ Save: ~26.7 unsaved wounds (IE, you just mostly wiped out a typical IG Infantry blob of 30 dudes)
4+ Save: ~20 unsaved wounds (IE, you still mostly wipe out a typical IG Infantry blob, even if they're in 4+ cover)
3+ Save: ~13.3 unsaved wounds (there goes that Battle Sister blob)
Alternately, you can deal up to ~32 wounds against anything T5 or better; against a typical:
3+ Armor MC: ~10.7 unsaved wounds (nearly an entire Carnifex Brood gone!)
2+ Armor MC: ~5.34 unsaved wounds; if the MC has 5+ FNP then that becomes ~3.56 unsaved wounds- so you can nearly one-round a Riptide. Riptides are brokenly powerful too, but breaking Psilencers into this level of power is not the answer.
Oh, and for comparison, 30 Sternguard can only put out 30 2+ Poison shots at 12-24", and 60 at 0-12". They also cost around 3 times as much as MSU Purifiers, and can't use Rhinos as a pseudo-ablative armor. MSU Trueborn with Splinter Cannons and dual Splinter Cannon Venoms can dump 36 poison shots per squad- so 108 per turn for three squads- and of the total 108, 36 are twin-linked. Except that they're 4+ poison.
An approximate number of wounds inflicted before saves for MSU Splinterborn in Dual Splinter Venoms would be: 24 wounds from Splinterborn, 16 wounds from Venoms; total of 40 wounds. Which sounds comparable, until you realize that:
-Trueborn are T3/5+ infantry, in 4-man MSU squads, mounted in cardboard bawkse Venoms (10/10/10 2HPs, open-topped)
-It takes ~33% more shots for DE to equal the wound output of 6 Salvo 8/12 S5/Poison 3+ Psilencers
-Splinter weapons are S:X, which means they cannot harm AV at all
-For a moderate cost increase, the MSU Purifiers can mount in Rhinos and still fire their important weapons from the roof hatch, giving them an ablative AV11/11/10 3HP vehicle
-Purifiers are also ML2, so 3 MSU squads contributes 6 WC.
-Purifiers also know Cleansing Flame, probably the best Sanctic power.
So, yeah. Salvo 8/12, S5, Poison 3+ Psilencers? Brokenly powerful.
Bill1138 wrote: Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance (This doubles its effectiveness against Soulgrinders, and helps against AV 14, but doesn’t do anything at all to its effectiveness against lighter armor.
*For the sake of Fluff explanations, “Poisoned” and “Lance” would probably be given new overly flowery or pseudo-Latin names and descriptions to make them more in line with the Imperium’s lore, but would still be the exact same rules.
I don't really see the point of both Lance and Rending; it's got enough weight of fire that S7+Lance is perfectly functional for glancing things to death. Also, it doesn't need anything other than the "Lance" rule. There's no need for the weapon's rules to use something Imperial-ized for the rule. Make up whatever description you want, but leave it simple and clean as Lance rather than some other thing.
Quoted for truth!
+1
Also, would be interesting to see just how silly broken Poison 3+/Force Psilencers that can move & shoot at full range would be against your typical T4/5 4+ save unit... And for added lols, I'm sure these would obliterate Wraiths as well.
So, after even more thought, I think I've condensed some of my thoughts down a bit. Also, a "Quote For Truth" would be appreciated, to maximize idea exposure.
First off, let's consider GK Special Weapons, what they currently are intended to do, what they actually do, what they should do, and how we can make that transition. Before I begin, I will first note that Incinerators and Heavy Incinerators are mechanically fine; all that is necessary, IMO, is to do the following:
Incinerators, Heavy Incinerators
Spoiler:
Simply put, Heavy Incinerators should be an optional upgrade for Razorbacks, Dreadnoughts, and Land Raider Redeemers.
I would recommend that a single Heavy Incinerator be available to the Razorback/Dreadnought/DK for +20 points;
A Land Raider Redeemer, OTOH, can exchange it's Flamestorm Cannons for Heavy Incinerators for +5 points. Land Raiders are already overpriced, and you're losing the amazing AP3+Ignores Cover in favor of gaining greater flexibility via Torrent.
So, let's move on to Psilencers.
Psilencers right now have a design that is intended to make them good killers of multi-wound infantry. The problem is that they're only good against T4 multi-wound; against T3, the Psycannon is better. Against T5, again, the Psilencer is better. Against MCs? Psycannons again. So that makes Psilencers an ultimately flawed weapon. How do we fix that?
Well, I think it comes down to what we want Psilencers to do. I personally feel that they should retain the anti-multi-wound infantry aspect; the current profile is actually not bad at the job, it's just that Psycannon overshadows it in so many other roles against any other target type- and even some of the targets Psilencers are "supposed" to be good at killing- that the Psilencer really needs to get a pick-me-up of some kind. So, that leaves a decision to be made:
Should Psilencers be given an anti-GEQ mode?
-OR-
Should Psilencers be given an anti-MC mode?
My own opinion is that an anti-GEQ mode is a better choice. To that end, I'd like to recommend the following:
Psilencers, Gatling Psilencers
Spoiler:
Psilencers would have the following profile:
24" Assault 6 S4 AP- Force
Gatling Psilencers would retain their current profile, which is:
24" Heavy 12 S4 AP- Force
In addition, I think that one of the following options should be considered as the alternate profile; while I do not think that an anti-MC "mode" is the best option, I will include one anyways, for the purposes of discussion and comparison with other parts of this post:
Using the Psilencer as a base, the secondary profile would be:
24" Assault 6 S:X AP- Poison (4+) {an anti-MC option}
24" Assault 6 S5 AP- Shred {anti-GEQ/light infantry}
24" Assault 6 S5 AP- Pinning {alternate anti-GEQ profile}
[For the Gatling Psilencer, substitute Assault 6 for Heavy 12]
For those who are curious, Poison 3+ is a bit over the top, and also infringes on DE Poison weapons- the only Poison shooting that's better than the DE tends to be very expensive and also short ranged (as in, best weight of fire is at 12"). Poison 4+ strikes a better balance; on average a Psilencer with Poison 4+ will put 2 wounds onto a MC before saves are taken, so typically it'll be ~0.67 unsaved wounds. Which sounds unimpressive, but keep in mind that Psilencers are still relatively cheap- 10 points for PAGKs- and can be taken in numbers fairly easily. Four such weapons would produce ~2.7 unsaved wounds- that's very nearly 3 unsaved wounds, and a typical MC has 4 wounds; being able to take of 50-75% of those wounds in a single round of shooting with four Psilencers is pretty well balanced for the Psilencer's current price.
For the anti-GEQ option, S5+Shred means ultra-reliable wounding against T3 infantry. It also allows for surprisingly good results against T6 targets (IE, MCs); S5+Shred will have an ~55% wounding rate against T6, so you're looking at surprisingly comparable results to a Poison 4+ Psilencer, but with added capability against T3/T4/T5 infantry models.
The tradeoff is that Poison 4+ would be more desirable for facing T7+ targets- mostly Wraithknights, if we're honest. Alternately, Shred could be dropped from the S5 profile and exchanged for Pinning. It's got potential, I think, but it's not quite as nice as it could be due to only having 24" of range.
For the record, replacing Poison 4+ with Fleshbane isn't quite balanced, IMO. A squad of 4 can torrent down any 3+ MC, while still maintaining a blazing effectiveness against lighter targets. 4+ Poison sacrifices effectiveness against low-T enemies; as an example, Kabalite Warriors are quite inefficient when in a firefight with other T3 infantry- it's when they shoot at very high T targets that they really shine. Fleshbane, being functionally 2+ Poison, means that the degree of equal effectiveness remains "ultra-high"; there's no tradeoff and it's almost impossible to not put wounds onto anything. Basically, Fleshbane Psilencers have no functional weakness against Toughness-based targets.
So that's Psilencers. Let's tackle the enormous number of elephants in the room, with Psycannons. I'll start with my suggested profile first, and then explain the reasoning behind the design.
Heavy Psycannon 36" Heavy 6 S6 AP3 Psi-Shock
36" Heavy 1 S6 AP3 Psi-Shock, Large (5") Blast, Shred
24" Assault 2 SX AP- Haywire
I'm sure a lot of people will be surprised by this suggestion, especially coming from me. Ultimately, a lot of people seem to have the opinion that Psycannons are "AV". I disagree quite a bit with this idea... but Psycannons are bolt weapons, and one of the shining virtues of bolt weapons is that they have a lot of versatility due to their ammunition.
Enter the "Tempest Bolt". For those who do not know, one of the background ammo types for Bolters is the "Tempest" shell. While described as a proximity-burst frag round in the HH rules, the original incarnation (that I know of, at least) was a variation on Haywire weaponry. In terms of fluff, it can easily be explained as Psycannons having a dual munition feed, or even a GK hand-loading each Tempest Bolt for firing; in the case of a dual munition feed, lower RoF is fluffed as the Tempest "hopper" having a significantly lower capacity than the standard "Psybolt" hopper.
And now perhaps the greatest change: no more S7/AP4/Rending, instead S6/AP3 Psi-Shock. So, firstly, Psycannons have generally been written in the background as firing Heavy Bolter-size shells. Heavy Bolters only gain +1S for loading Psybolt ammo (according to the "old" rules for such). I wanted to represent the greater capability of the Psycannon when used with Psybolts, with each bolt being psychically activated by the GK firer. So, AP3 and Psi-Shock. This makes it good at killing Marines and passable at killing T6/3+ MCs; a Psycannon can reliably put 1 wound onto a T6 MC if the user sits still. Psi-Shock represents the psychic potential of each bolt, especially against psychic targets.
An alternative primary profile would be thusly:
Spoiler:
24" Assault 3 S6 AP3 Psi-Shock
The only real difference is that it changes from 36" Salvo 2/3 (and thus being 18" range and 2 shots when moving) for full RoF and range when moving... but also a lesser overall range.
The Heavy Psycannon gaining Shred on the Blast mode is to help make it a more attractive option.
These changes make Psycannons a good general purpose weapon- capable of hurting most infantry, and not a few MCs, and is also capable of really hampering the enemy's psykers (due to Psi-Shock being auto-Perils upon unsaved wound). It also helps GKs out with handling vehicles, but not so much so as to be ultra-spammy and make high-AV units a deadweight on the field. This is also why it's a single shot, with "only" 24" of range. Also, keep in mind that Haywire actually ignores the regular armor penetration mechanics- you roll on the Haywire Chart:
1: No Effect
2-5: Glancing Hit
6: Penetrating Hit
As such, a Strength value is unnecessary and redundant; the "regular" mode already has a Strength value (and a pretty good one too), while the AP is also of little use. I could be persuaded to put AP2 on the Haywire profile, allowing for a Penetrating hit via the Haywire table to also get a +1 on the damage table... but I'll need to see some convincing arguments first. If anybody thinks Haywire needs a Strength value... look at the multi-shot profile. Now look at the Haywire. Now look back and forth a few more times. Now realize that the Haywire profile does not need a Strength value, as it would have to be an unreasonably large value in order to compete with 2-3 S6 shots.
Nemesis Force Weapons
Pretty simple; Halberds, Daemonhammers, Warding Staves, and Greatswords are unchanged. The following weapons will have the annotated changes:
Spoiler:
Nemesis Force Swords:
S:User AP3 Force, Daemonbane, Parry
Parry: a model with a weapon with this trait gains a 5+ invulnerable save in close combat. If the user already has an invulnerable save, then he instead gains +1 to his save. A save gained or improved in this way may not be improved to be better than a 3+ save.
Nemesis Falchions:
Change cost from +4 ppm to +2 ppm; given that the default Swords are now more defensive in nature, the additional offense of the Falchions isn't worth a quite large 4 ppm. This also more cleanly lines up with Halberds, which offer +1S and are 2 ppm.
Nemesis Force Swords gaining Parry makes them a little more flavorful, and also more useful. The removal of the original disallowing of save re-rolling is to prevent the Brotherhood Champion's Blade Shield stance from being non-functional, and it's quite frankly easier to not say anything about save re-rolling than to have a specific exception. There is, however, a specific exception that you can't get a better than 3++ in combat only from the Parry rule.
Falchions going down in cost is to make them more viable, as they're quite overpriced IMO compared to Halberds.
Also, there's a new kid on the block insofar as Nemesis Force weapons:
Nemesis Doomglaive
Spoiler:
S:User x2 AP2 Force, Daemonbane, Articulated
Articulated: A model armed with a weapon that has this trait may choose to attack at S:User instead of S:x2, and may then attack in one of the following manners:
Sweep Attack: the owning model makes a single attack against every enemy model in base contact, at Initiative step 1.
Rapid Assault: the owning model attacks at its Initiative value as normal, and gains the Rampage rule
More-or-less, you get what is basically a Dread CCW with the Nemesis Force Weapon traits (IE, Daemonbane and Force), and the option to use the model's base Strength and either make a single S6/AP2 Force attack against all enemies in base contact, or gain Rampage and S6/AP2.
This particular weapon is intended for Dreadnoughts, though an alternative is to give them the Cleansing Flame power instead of Sanctuary.
Thoughts on Grey Knight Infantry and Special Weapon allowances
More-or-less, there's a very easy fix to the problem that Purifiers are just way better Purgation squads. It's thusly:
Purifiers may take up to two weapons from the Special Weapon list.
This allows Purifiers to do double special at 5-man, for MSU builds, but also allows them to be kitted up as assault infantry (which is what they are) by taking more mans. It also preserves the shooty intention of Purgation Squads, who can get more specials into the squad. I'm also tempted to allow Purgation Squads to take Conversion Beamers as well, for a "dedicated" long-range anti-tank option... but I'm not sure of whether or not that would work well with the army's design ethos.
Fixing Purifiers
Yeah, they're a bit too good for what they cost. IMO, they should have the above "nerf" in that they are limited to 2 specials in the squad total, but they can take both at min-size (which is nifty for MSU), but Purifiers should probably lose ML2 and instead become ML1. GKs don't really have issues with harnessing WC, given that they can generate a lot of it, so this change isn't that big a deal- Purifiers are already fantastic short-range shooting/assault units, and with the upgrades to the various weapons, as well as cheaper Falchions and defensively-minded Swords, they'll still be fantastic.
EDIT:
Experiment 626 wrote: Also, would be interesting to see just how silly broken Poison 3+/Force Psilencers that can move & shoot at full range would be against your typical T4/5 4+ save unit... And for added lols, I'm sure these would obliterate Wraiths as well.
It's not too bad actually- against Wraiths, for example, you'll probably kill one Wraith every turn if you activate Force. Where it really gets crazy is at it scales up against T6+ targets- a single Poison 3+ Psilencer can instagib pretty much any MC with a 3+ save (of any kind) or worse.
Realistically, then, Poison 3+ doesn't make much difference against infantry, it's when they scale up to T6+ models that they get insane.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/09 00:34:33
An explanation for my proposed Grey Knight Special Weapons.
The first thing that needs to be acknowledged is that the Grey Knights are the smallest non-super-heavy army in the game. In any typical game, the opponent will have more units than the Grey Knights because the Grey Knights units have higher base costs due to their starting equipment. But for all of this increased cost, they are no better at surviving their opponents’ attacks. So the only way to justify the extra expense if their equipment doesn’t help them survive is if it makes them better able to kill other units or grants them the mobility to snag objectives. Most Grey Knight units do not have increased mobility, and those that do have even higher base costs to account for it, so the best justification for their cost is their lethal abilities.
The Grey Knights are glass cannons, at least relative to their cost per model. They have greater ability to kill (per model), but they have fewer models and do not have increased survivability which means they will be slain in the sheer volume of fire other armies can produce. So the only way for the Grey Knights to be able to earn their points back are if they are able to do so within the first couple turns. If they haven’t made a significant dent in the enemy’s lines by turn two, there likely won’t be much of a Grey Knight army left (if any) by the end of turn 4.
Incinerator. One of the better Template weapons in the game. This weapon does not need any changes. Its limited range for anti-hoarde is a handicap shared by several other Codexes.
Psilencer: 24”, S4, AP-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force. Several other armies have good long-range anti-hoarde weapons, and I wanted to make the Psilencer a good mid-range anti-hoarde weapon. After considerable thought, I’ve decided to propose a different profile with much diminished anti-hoarde potential, but re-instituting Force to allow it anti Monstrous Creature potential.
6 shots with BS4, hitting on 3s will cause 4 Hits.
Against any enemy T3+ it will wound on 3s, causing 2.67 Wounds
5+ Save = 1.78 unsaved Wounds
4+ Save = 1.33 unsaved Wounds
3+ Save = 0.89 unsaved Wounds
2+ Save = 0.44 unsaved Wounds
*Note that these do not take into account casting Force, which is NOT a certainty, so these are the statistical chances of causing Wounds, while the statistical chance of inflicting Instant Death on a Monstrous Creature is lower. There are too many variables to show them all.
Reducing the Poisoned rule to a Poisoned (4+) would reduce the calculated number of unsaved Wounds against a 3+ save to 0.67 unsaved Wounds. I suspect that might be a better balance for the weapon’s current 10pt cost. I do find it interesting that those who argue that something is too good, they never suggest an appropriate price for the proposition, only demanding a nerf or exclusion.
Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance. The current version of the Psycannon is the Grey Knights only anti-vehicle Special Weapon option, though it isn’t particularly good with anything above AV12. The addition of Lance makes it able to handle higher armors as if they were AV12, but does not affect the lower AV vehicles.
The Psycannon needs the bonus to the damage table that Rending supplies. Rolls of 6 count as AP2, granting a +1 on the Damage Table. The +D3 of Rending doesn’t harm or help, being as 7+6 is already S13, when Lance means nothing counts as higher than AV12. The alternative would be to simply make the weapon AP2, and between the two options, I believe Rending would cause fewer freakouts.
2/4 shots with BS4, hitting on 3s will cause 1.33/2.67 Hits
Against AV12+ it will glance on a 5, taking off 0.44/0.89 Hull Points, with half being Penetrating Hits
Against AV11 it will glance on a 4, taking off 0.66/1.33 Hull Points, with 3/4 being Penetrating Hits
Against AV10 it will glance on a 3, taking off 0.89/1.78 Hull Points, with half being Penetrating Hits
The increased range compensates for Salvo, making the mobile range a useable 18”, while they can only make use of the maximum range of 36” by being stationary and sacrificing the shooting of the unit’s Storm Bolters.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/04/09 12:07:15
Whiskey144 wrote: So, after even more thought, I think I've condensed some of my thoughts down a bit. Also, a "Quote For Truth" would be appreciated, to maximize idea exposure.
First off, let's consider GK Special Weapons, what they currently are intended to do, what they actually do, what they should do, and how we can make that transition. Before I begin, I will first note that Incinerators and Heavy Incinerators are mechanically fine; all that is necessary, IMO, is to do the following:
Incinerators, Heavy Incinerators
Spoiler:
Simply put, Heavy Incinerators should be an optional upgrade for Razorbacks, Dreadnoughts, and Land Raider Redeemers.
I would recommend that a single Heavy Incinerator be available to the Razorback/Dreadnought/DK for +20 points;
A Land Raider Redeemer, OTOH, can exchange it's Flamestorm Cannons for Heavy Incinerators for +5 points. Land Raiders are already overpriced, and you're losing the amazing AP3+Ignores Cover in favor of gaining greater flexibility via Torrent.
So, let's move on to Psilencers.
Psilencers right now have a design that is intended to make them good killers of multi-wound infantry. The problem is that they're only good against T4 multi-wound; against T3, the Psycannon is better. Against T5, again, the Psilencer is better. Against MCs? Psycannons again. So that makes Psilencers an ultimately flawed weapon. How do we fix that?
Well, I think it comes down to what we want Psilencers to do. I personally feel that they should retain the anti-multi-wound infantry aspect; the current profile is actually not bad at the job, it's just that Psycannon overshadows it in so many other roles against any other target type- and even some of the targets Psilencers are "supposed" to be good at killing- that the Psilencer really needs to get a pick-me-up of some kind. So, that leaves a decision to be made:
Should Psilencers be given an anti-GEQ mode?
-OR-
Should Psilencers be given an anti-MC mode?
My own opinion is that an anti-GEQ mode is a better choice. To that end, I'd like to recommend the following:
Psilencers, Gatling Psilencers
Spoiler:
Psilencers would have the following profile:
24" Assault 6 S4 AP- Force
Gatling Psilencers would retain their current profile, which is:
24" Heavy 12 S4 AP- Force
In addition, I think that one of the following options should be considered as the alternate profile; while I do not think that an anti-MC "mode" is the best option, I will include one anyways, for the purposes of discussion and comparison with other parts of this post:
Using the Psilencer as a base, the secondary profile would be:
24" Assault 6 S:X AP- Poison (4+) {an anti-MC option}
24" Assault 6 S5 AP- Shred {anti-GEQ/light infantry}
24" Assault 6 S5 AP- Pinning {alternate anti-GEQ profile}
[For the Gatling Psilencer, substitute Assault 6 for Heavy 12]
For those who are curious, Poison 3+ is a bit over the top, and also infringes on DE Poison weapons- the only Poison shooting that's better than the DE tends to be very expensive and also short ranged (as in, best weight of fire is at 12"). Poison 4+ strikes a better balance; on average a Psilencer with Poison 4+ will put 2 wounds onto a MC before saves are taken, so typically it'll be ~0.67 unsaved wounds. Which sounds unimpressive, but keep in mind that Psilencers are still relatively cheap- 10 points for PAGKs- and can be taken in numbers fairly easily. Four such weapons would produce ~2.7 unsaved wounds- that's very nearly 3 unsaved wounds, and a typical MC has 4 wounds; being able to take of 50-75% of those wounds in a single round of shooting with four Psilencers is pretty well balanced for the Psilencer's current price.
For the anti-GEQ option, S5+Shred means ultra-reliable wounding against T3 infantry. It also allows for surprisingly good results against T6 targets (IE, MCs); S5+Shred will have an ~55% wounding rate against T6, so you're looking at surprisingly comparable results to a Poison 4+ Psilencer, but with added capability against T3/T4/T5 infantry models.
The tradeoff is that Poison 4+ would be more desirable for facing T7+ targets- mostly Wraithknights, if we're honest. Alternately, Shred could be dropped from the S5 profile and exchanged for Pinning. It's got potential, I think, but it's not quite as nice as it could be due to only having 24" of range.
For the record, replacing Poison 4+ with Fleshbane isn't quite balanced, IMO. A squad of 4 can torrent down any 3+ MC, while still maintaining a blazing effectiveness against lighter targets. 4+ Poison sacrifices effectiveness against low-T enemies; as an example, Kabalite Warriors are quite inefficient when in a firefight with other T3 infantry- it's when they shoot at very high T targets that they really shine. Fleshbane, being functionally 2+ Poison, means that the degree of equal effectiveness remains "ultra-high"; there's no tradeoff and it's almost impossible to not put wounds onto anything. Basically, Fleshbane Psilencers have no functional weakness against Toughness-based targets.
So that's Psilencers. Let's tackle the enormous number of elephants in the room, with Psycannons. I'll start with my suggested profile first, and then explain the reasoning behind the design.
Heavy Psycannon 36" Heavy 6 S6 AP3 Psi-Shock
36" Heavy 1 S6 AP3 Psi-Shock, Large (5") Blast, Shred
24" Assault 2 SX AP- Haywire
I'm sure a lot of people will be surprised by this suggestion, especially coming from me. Ultimately, a lot of people seem to have the opinion that Psycannons are "AV". I disagree quite a bit with this idea... but Psycannons are bolt weapons, and one of the shining virtues of bolt weapons is that they have a lot of versatility due to their ammunition.
Enter the "Tempest Bolt". For those who do not know, one of the background ammo types for Bolters is the "Tempest" shell. While described as a proximity-burst frag round in the HH rules, the original incarnation (that I know of, at least) was a variation on Haywire weaponry. In terms of fluff, it can easily be explained as Psycannons having a dual munition feed, or even a GK hand-loading each Tempest Bolt for firing; in the case of a dual munition feed, lower RoF is fluffed as the Tempest "hopper" having a significantly lower capacity than the standard "Psybolt" hopper.
And now perhaps the greatest change: no more S7/AP4/Rending, instead S6/AP3 Psi-Shock. So, firstly, Psycannons have generally been written in the background as firing Heavy Bolter-size shells. Heavy Bolters only gain +1S for loading Psybolt ammo (according to the "old" rules for such). I wanted to represent the greater capability of the Psycannon when used with Psybolts, with each bolt being psychically activated by the GK firer. So, AP3 and Psi-Shock. This makes it good at killing Marines and passable at killing T6/3+ MCs; a Psycannon can reliably put 1 wound onto a T6 MC if the user sits still. Psi-Shock represents the psychic potential of each bolt, especially against psychic targets.
An alternative primary profile would be thusly:
Spoiler:
24" Assault 3 S6 AP3 Psi-Shock
The only real difference is that it changes from 36" Salvo 2/3 (and thus being 18" range and 2 shots when moving) for full RoF and range when moving... but also a lesser overall range.
The Heavy Psycannon gaining Shred on the Blast mode is to help make it a more attractive option.
These changes make Psycannons a good general purpose weapon- capable of hurting most infantry, and not a few MCs, and is also capable of really hampering the enemy's psykers (due to Psi-Shock being auto-Perils upon unsaved wound). It also helps GKs out with handling vehicles, but not so much so as to be ultra-spammy and make high-AV units a deadweight on the field. This is also why it's a single shot, with "only" 24" of range. Also, keep in mind that Haywire actually ignores the regular armor penetration mechanics- you roll on the Haywire Chart:
1: No Effect
2-5: Glancing Hit
6: Penetrating Hit
As such, a Strength value is unnecessary and redundant; the "regular" mode already has a Strength value (and a pretty good one too), while the AP is also of little use. I could be persuaded to put AP2 on the Haywire profile, allowing for a Penetrating hit via the Haywire table to also get a +1 on the damage table... but I'll need to see some convincing arguments first. If anybody thinks Haywire needs a Strength value... look at the multi-shot profile. Now look at the Haywire. Now look back and forth a few more times. Now realize that the Haywire profile does not need a Strength value, as it would have to be an unreasonably large value in order to compete with 2-3 S6 shots.
Nemesis Force Weapons
Pretty simple; Halberds, Daemonhammers, Warding Staves, and Greatswords are unchanged. The following weapons will have the annotated changes:
Spoiler:
Nemesis Force Swords:
S:User AP3 Force, Daemonbane, Parry
Parry: a model with a weapon with this trait gains a 5+ invulnerable save in close combat. If the user already has an invulnerable save, then he instead gains +1 to his save. A save gained or improved in this way may not be improved to be better than a 3+ save.
Nemesis Falchions:
Change cost from +4 ppm to +2 ppm; given that the default Swords are now more defensive in nature, the additional offense of the Falchions isn't worth a quite large 4 ppm. This also more cleanly lines up with Halberds, which offer +1S and are 2 ppm.
Nemesis Force Swords gaining Parry makes them a little more flavorful, and also more useful. The removal of the original disallowing of save re-rolling is to prevent the Brotherhood Champion's Blade Shield stance from being non-functional, and it's quite frankly easier to not say anything about save re-rolling than to have a specific exception. There is, however, a specific exception that you can't get a better than 3++ in combat only from the Parry rule.
Falchions going down in cost is to make them more viable, as they're quite overpriced IMO compared to Halberds.
Also, there's a new kid on the block insofar as Nemesis Force weapons:
Nemesis Doomglaive
Spoiler:
S:User x2 AP2 Force, Daemonbane, Articulated
Articulated: A model armed with a weapon that has this trait may choose to attack at S:User instead of S:x2, and may then attack in one of the following manners:
Sweep Attack: the owning model makes a single attack against every enemy model in base contact, at Initiative step 1.
Rapid Assault: the owning model attacks at its Initiative value as normal, and gains the Rampage rule
More-or-less, you get what is basically a Dread CCW with the Nemesis Force Weapon traits (IE, Daemonbane and Force), and the option to use the model's base Strength and either make a single S6/AP2 Force attack against all enemies in base contact, or gain Rampage and S6/AP2.
This particular weapon is intended for Dreadnoughts, though an alternative is to give them the Cleansing Flame power instead of Sanctuary.
Thoughts on Grey Knight Infantry and Special Weapon allowances
More-or-less, there's a very easy fix to the problem that Purifiers are just way better Purgation squads. It's thusly:
Purifiers may take up to two weapons from the Special Weapon list.
This allows Purifiers to do double special at 5-man, for MSU builds, but also allows them to be kitted up as assault infantry (which is what they are) by taking more mans. It also preserves the shooty intention of Purgation Squads, who can get more specials into the squad. I'm also tempted to allow Purgation Squads to take Conversion Beamers as well, for a "dedicated" long-range anti-tank option... but I'm not sure of whether or not that would work well with the army's design ethos.
Fixing Purifiers
Yeah, they're a bit too good for what they cost. IMO, they should have the above "nerf" in that they are limited to 2 specials in the squad total, but they can take both at min-size (which is nifty for MSU), but Purifiers should probably lose ML2 and instead become ML1. GKs don't really have issues with harnessing WC, given that they can generate a lot of it, so this change isn't that big a deal- Purifiers are already fantastic short-range shooting/assault units, and with the upgrades to the various weapons, as well as cheaper Falchions and defensively-minded Swords, they'll still be fantastic.
EDIT:
Experiment 626 wrote: Also, would be interesting to see just how silly broken Poison 3+/Force Psilencers that can move & shoot at full range would be against your typical T4/5 4+ save unit... And for added lols, I'm sure these would obliterate Wraiths as well.
It's not too bad actually- against Wraiths, for example, you'll probably kill one Wraith every turn if you activate Force. Where it really gets crazy is at it scales up against T6+ targets- a single Poison 3+ Psilencer can instagib pretty much any MC with a 3+ save (of any kind) or worse.
Realistically, then, Poison 3+ doesn't make much difference against infantry, it's when they scale up to T6+ models that they get insane.
The basic Space Marine Troop Choice is the Tactical Marine. They are 70 points. The basic Grey Knight is the Strike Squad. They are 110 points they are 157% the cost of the Tactical Marines but don't have one iota of better survivability than the Tactical marines do.
Purifiers are 125pts base, 179% the cost of Tactical Marines, with no increased survivability. Some of this difference is paying for Cleansing Flame and the second Mastery Level to cast it.
Interceptors are 130pts base, 186% of the cost of Tactical Marines with no increased survivability. Though some of this difference is paying for the mobility of Personal Teleporters.
As I said, if the Grey Knights haven't made a sizable dent in the enemy's army by turn 2, the Grey Knights will be in danger of being tabled by turn 4. If an enemy has vehicles in their army, and they take out the couple Psycannons in our army, we're sunk, because that was the extent of our ranged anti-AV, and trying to take down Vehicles in melee will typically take multiple rounds, which the Grey Knights can't afford to be tied up for, due to 7th edition's emphesis on lots of cheaper units zooming around to ever-changing objectives.
"The basic Space Marine Troop Choice is the Tactical Marine. They are 70 points. The basic Grey Knight is the Strike Squad. They are 110 points they are 157% the cost of the Tactical Marines but don't have one iota of better survivability than the Tactical marines do.
Purifiers are 125pts base, 179% the cost of Tactical Marines, with no increased survivability. Some of this difference is paying for Cleansing Flame and the second Mastery Level to cast it.
Interceptors are 130pts base, 186% of the cost of Tactical Marines with no increased survivability. Though some of this difference is paying for the mobility of Personal Teleporters. "
That's actually outright bad, imo. The Eldar lol all over this. Even fewer Astartes to mercilessly gun down!
f course they are more expensive than a tactical marine, you get lvl 1 psycer, ap3 force weapons and a storm bolter! How can you complain about it being expensive when you combine the cost of gear you should cost over double what you do!
I find the problem with gks is that the dk is too much of a go to option because it is hugely op and needs a tone down or at least a large point increase.
The army as a whole isn't bad, just the dk is op in comparison to the other options (probably why you always see the civil partnership in the lists)
I'd say these edits to the dk would round the dex off
WS changed to 4
No access to become s10 the only way to increase s if using hammerhand. No access to shunt moves and remove the 5++ and make it have to be cast off to get it.
"f course they are more expensive than a tactical marine, you get lvl 1 psycer, ap3 force weapons and a storm bolter! How can you complain about it being expensive when you combine the cost of gear you should cost over double what you do! "
Because durability/pt matters. A lot. Go play the Necrons and get back to me. All the fancy dohickies you just listed don't mean a thing when the Eldar are pumping in 50+ S6/7 shots a turn and not giving a feth about your return fire. The bottom line is that combat gear shouldn't cost what it costs in the first place because good lists don't care about any of it. Just like good armies don't care about the gear on tac marines.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/09 13:30:55
Bill1138 wrote: The basic Space Marine Troop Choice is the Tactical Marine. They are 70 points. The basic Grey Knight is the Strike Squad. They are 110 points they are 157% the cost of the Tactical Marines but don't have one iota of better survivability than the Tactical marines do.
As I said, if the Grey Knights haven't made a sizable dent in the enemy's army by turn 2, the Grey Knights will be in danger of being tabled by turn 4. If an enemy has vehicles in their army, and they take out the couple Psycannons in our army, we're sunk, because that was the extent of our ranged anti-AV, and trying to take down Vehicles in melee will typically take multiple rounds, which the Grey Knights can't afford to be tied up for, due to 7th edition's emphesis on lots of cheaper units zooming around to ever-changing objectives.
The basic GK troop is the Terminator, the strike squad is more along the lines of SM Scouts since they're the vanguard for GKs (since GKs are SM+1).
They do not have increased survivability because they have increased offensive output in shooting (storm boters), 100% more output from psychic abilities and far superior combat (ap3 everywhere and the ability to be S7! {Which is higher than most MCs}).
If they had increased survivability on top of this, then they'd be broken like the Dreadknight, Wraithknight, Imperial Knight, TWC and Riptide.
Now onto the next part:
You do know that you have S6/7 on all of your guys in combat, don't you? Same as S10 (for some reason) on the Dreadknight that GK players always spam, so taking out vehicles is no problem, you just go at it from a different angle.
7th ed's empasisis is on fast units and the Dreadknight is definitely one of the fastest and most survivable in the game.
SGTPozy wrote: The basic GK troop is the Terminator, the strike squad is more along the lines of SM Scouts since they're the vanguard for GKs (since GKs are SM+1).
False analagy. The most average Power Armored Troop Choice in terms of their traits and gear for the vanilla Marines and Grey Knights are the Tactical Squad and the Strike Squad. That the vanilla Marines have a lighter Scout Armor option or that the Grey Knights have a Terminator option is inconsequential.
Strike Squads are not Scouts. They do not have any of the special rules that would allow them to field a Scout's role. The Tactical Squad is their closest comparison in the vanilla Marine Codex.
Similarly the Grey Knight Terminators would most accurately be compared to the vanilla Marines closest equivalent, which is their own Terminators.
They do not have increased survivability because they have increased offensive output in shooting (storm boters), 100% more output from psychic abilities and far superior combat (ap3 everywhere and the ability to be S7! {Which is higher than most MCs}).
Please repeat after me: "7th edition 40k is all about the Movement, and Shooting Phase, so Melee prowess isn't nearly as valuable." The Grey Knights are extremely small, and have few units capable of decent mobility. Grey Knights are nothing special in the Movement Phase. But because the army is so small, and are limited to Storm Bolters for most of their models in all of their units, they are effectively a non-factor in the shooting phase. 7th Edition is full of Monstrous Creatures and vehicles with AV11+, all of which the Storm Bolters have a negligible chance of damaging, if they have any at all. And even when they're up against infantry armies, there are such waves of firepower coming into them that they'll die due to sheer volume of fire. Most Grey Knight units don't survive to get into close combat, or if they do, they're so outnumbered that they get finished off by the other unit in spite of the fact that they have Nemesis Force Weapons (as often as not).
Also, S6+ (with Hammerhand) isn't nearly as powerful when most of your units have only one attack per model, as is the case with the Grey Knights, Our better units have two, but adding an extra attack with Falchions makes already over-priced units even more expensive.
One more point about your statement being objectively wrong, Monstrous Creatures have the Smash special rule, which means they have AP2 on their Close Combat attacks, and even if they don't have a weapon that hits at S10, they can make a Smash attack at S10. And, some of them attack at I5, which means they can typically kill off a unit (or a significant portion of it) before it has the chance to attack back. So the other Codexes Monstrous Creatures are better at killing than the Grey Knight units.
If they had increased survivability on top of this, then they'd be broken like the Dreadknight, Wraithknight, Imperial Knight, TWC and Riptide.
Do not equate the Dreadknight to those others. The Dreadknight is one of the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game. It most certainly is not "broken". If a Grey Knight army fielded nothing but Dreadknights, they'd still not win more than half of their games against other Codexes. Other armies can spam high-strength, AP2 which would wound the Dreadknight on 4s or better and ignore his armor save, meaning he'd have rely on his Invulnerable Save, which any Daemon player will tell you that a 5++ is not impressive odds for survival. And don't go on a rant about Sanctuary, because it isn't guaranteed to go off, and my opponents always save their dice to deny it, to ensure that the Dreadknight goes down easily.
Now onto the next part:
You do know that you have S6/7 on all of your guys in combat, don't you? Same as S10 (for some reason) on the Dreadknight that GK players always spam, so taking out vehicles is no problem, you just go at it from a different angle.
I already addressed this. Close Combat prowess is not particularly relevant in 7th Edition 40k. And even if it were, other armies have I5 models that have access to AP3, to remove my Grey Knights before they have a chance to attack back. If you want an example, the Death Cult Assassin from the Inquisition attacks at I5, and has two Power Weapons, which means she gets an extra attack at AP3, and she's only 15pts, AND she still gets a 5++ Invulnerable Save in close combat that my PAGK do not. That is a much cheaper unit that is much better at close combat. In fact Inquisition can use Henchmen to build a unit that is statistically better than the Strike Squad at virtually everything for the same price.
7th ed's empasisis is on fast units and the Dreadknight is definitely one of the fastest and most survivable in the game.
False. The Dreadknight has the standard 12" movement for Jump units, and 40k has other units that are more mobile, such as the Eldar that can turbo-boost and shoot. And the Dreadknight is among the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game, as I said above.
I'm not complaining about the Dreadknight's power or pricing. But it is objectively not over-powered in the scheme of 7th Edition 40k.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2015/04/09 16:02:39
SGTPozy wrote: The basic GK troop is the Terminator, the strike squad is more along the lines of SM Scouts since they're the vanguard for GKs (since GKs are SM+1).
False analagy. The most average Power Armored Troop Choice in terms of their traits and gear for the vanilla Marines and Grey Knights are the Tactical Squad and the Strike Squad. That the vanilla Marines have a lighter Scout Armor option or that the Grey Knights have a Terminator option is inconsequential.
Strike Squads are not Scouts. They do not have any of the special rules that would allow them to field a Scout's role. The Tactical Squad is their closest comparison in the vanilla Marine Codex.
Similarly the Grey Knight Terminators would most accurately be compared to the vanilla Marines closest equivalent, which is their own Terminators.
GKs are more about Terminator armour than Power armour, so their basic troop choice is the Terminator and Strike Squads are the vanguard. Read the codex's fluff and then this will become obvious.
I never said that Strike squads were scouts, I said that they were the equivalent as they do not make up the bulk of the army since they are either the vanguard or scouts
They do not have increased survivability because they have increased offensive output in shooting (storm boters), 100% more output from psychic abilities and far superior combat (ap3 everywhere and the ability to be S7! {Which is higher than most MCs}).
Please repeat after me: "7th edition 40k is all about the Movement, and Shooting Phase, so Melee prowess isn't nearly as valuable." The Grey Knights are extremely small, and have few units capable of decent mobility. Grey Knights are nothing special in the Movement Phase. But because the army is so small, and are limited to Storm Bolters for most of their models in all of their units, they are effectively a non-factor in the shooting phase. 7th Edition is full of Monstrous Creatures and vehicles with AV11+, all of which the Storm Bolters have a negligible chance of damaging, if they have any at all. And even when they're up against infantry armies, there are such waves of firepower coming into them that they'll die due to sheer volume of fire. Most Grey Knight units don't survive to get into close combat, or if they do, they're so outnumbered that they get finished off by the other unit in spite of the fact that they have Nemesis Force Weapons.
I cannot repeat that as that would be lying. Psychic shenanigans are very important, and you have the best access to warp charges. Whilst other armies have to make a decision about which powers to use, a GK can just steal the warp charges from their other units (like 4 from a combat squaded Purifier squad) to get off all of the Librarian's powers.
If you think that combat sucks then you clearly haven't played against Necrons, SW, Daemonkin etc.
GKs alpha strike, so you have the best movement since you can deploy your army wherever you want.
GKs are nowhere near as bad as you say, they do win 60% of their games (more than Eldar).
Also, S6+ (with Hammerhand) isn't nearly as powerful when most of your units have only one attack per model, as is the case with the Grey Knights, Our better units have two, but adding an extra attack with Falchions makes already over-priced units even more expensive.
GKs need a weakness somewhere, they can't only have strengths.
If they had increased survivability on top of this, then they'd be broken like the Dreadknight, Wraithknight, Imperial Knight, TWC and Riptide.
Do not equate the Dreadknight to those others. The Dreadknight is one of the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game. It most certainly is not "broken". If a Grey Knight army fielded nothing but Dreadknights, they'd still not win more than half of their games against other Codexes. Other armies can spam high-strength, AP2 which would wound the Dreadknight on 4s or better and ignore his armor save, meaning he'd have rely on his Invulnerable Save, which any Daemon player will tell you that a 5++ is not impressive odds for survival. And don't go on a rant about Sanctuary, because it isn't guaranteed to go off, and my opponents always save their dice to deny it, to ensure that the Dreadknight goes down easily.
You serious? The Dreadknight is the biggest offender there since it is the cheapest, best mobility, best psychic abilities, awesome shooting and durability and the best combat.
If they die easily then cover clearly isn't being used well.
How are the other two so survivable then?
Also, the Haruspex is the worst MC in the game...
Now onto the next part:
You do know that you have S6/7 on all of your guys in combat, don't you? Same as S10 (for some reason) on the Dreadknight that GK players always spam, so taking out vehicles is no problem, you just go at it from a different angle.
I already addressed this. Close Combat prowess is not particularly relevant in 7th Edition 40k. And even if it were, other armies have I5 models that have access to AP3, to remove my Grey Knights before they have a chance to attack back. If you want an example, the Death Cult Assassin from the Inquisition attacks at I5, and has two Power Weapons, which means she gets an extra attack at AP3, and she's only 15pts, AND she still gets a 5++ Invulnerable Save in close combat that my PAGK do not. That is a much cheaper unit that is much better at close combat. In fact Inquisition can use Henchmen to build a unit that is statistically better than the Strike Squad at virtually everything for the same price.
Why do you keep comparing things to Strike squads? Terminators are used far more often.
7th ed's empasisis is on fast units and the Dreadknight is definitely one of the fastest and most survivable in the game.
False. The Dreadknight has the standard 12" movement for Jump units, and 40k has other units that are more mobile, such as the Eldar that can turbo-boost and shoot. And the Dreadknight is among the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game, as I said above.
False analagy. The most average Power Armored Troop Choice in terms of their traits and gear for the vanilla Marines and Grey Knights are the Tactical Squad and the Strike Squad. That the vanilla Marines have a lighter Scout Armor option or that the Grey Knights have a Terminator option is inconsequential.
Strike Squads are not Scouts. They do not have any of the special rules that would allow them to field a Scout's role. The Tactical Squad is their closest comparison in the vanilla Marine Codex.
Similarly the Grey Knight Terminators would most accurately be compared to the vanilla Marines closest equivalent, which is their own Terminators.
Actually, GK Termies more closely compare to both Space Wolf and Chaos Termies due to the sheer level of flexibility they all have... Oh, and yours get grenades because... "reasons."
You really cannot complain in any way about your Termies, as they're easily the game's top Terminator option by a wide margin...
Strikes could definitely do with gaining the Scout USR to help them play more like their background says they do, which would also give additional flexibility and options when taking a Rhino/Razorback as a dedicated transport.
At most, Tac Marines could do with a drop to 13pts a pop to bring them in line with Chaos Marines (who only need their own similar Chapter Tactics & ATSKNF equivalents), and thus allow the basic PA Grey Knight to probably come down to 18pts a dude.
Bill1138 wrote: Please repeat after me: "7th edition 40k is all about the Movement, and Shooting Phase, so Melee prowess isn't nearly as valuable." The Grey Knights are extremely small, and have few units capable of decent mobility. Grey Knights are nothing special in the Movement Phase. But because the army is so small, and are limited to Storm Bolters for most of their models in all of their units, they are effectively a non-factor in the shooting phase. 7th Edition is full of Monstrous Creatures and vehicles with AV11+, all of which the Storm Bolters have a negligible chance of damaging, if they have any at all. And even when they're up against infantry armies, there are such waves of firepower coming into them that they'll die due to sheer volume of fire. Most Grey Knight units don't survive to get into close combat, or if they do, they're so outnumbered that they get finished off by the other unit in spite of the fact that they have Nemesis Force Weapons.
Also, S6+ (with Hammerhand) isn't nearly as powerful when most of your units have only one attack per model, as is the case with the Grey Knights, Our better units have two, but adding an extra attack with Falchions makes already over-priced units even more expensive.
A lot also depends on what type of 7th ed you're playing too... If you're only ever fielding 100% optimised "Competitive Tournament" type lists, and then playing games on planet Blowing Ball with just a few hills and the odd forest or three, then sure, Marines suck hardcore against the likes of Eldar, Tau, Gravbikers, Centstars, etc...
As for your supposed utter lack of mobility outside of 'Ceptors/Knights... Strikes, Purifiers & Purgators can all take a Rhino or Razorback. Strikes, Termies & 'Ceptors have Deep Strike. Draigo is guaranteed GoI, while Lv3 Libby's rolling on Santic run a roughly 60% shot at landing it as well. While expensive, there are still Stormravens & Land Raiders. And the Imperial BFF club can also lend Drop Pods to the mix as well.
You're plenty mobile if you want to be. Maybe not Eldar levels of speedy, but then, speed is supposed to be the Eldar's thing. (and the only problem with the Wave Serpent is the damn shield!)
I'd honestly be quite interest to know what kind of force you typically run, and what you typically come up against... I find it hard to believe that opposing armies are always throwing down masses of av11+ alongside multiple MC's, and/or "waves of infantry" that always outgun the poor defenseless Grey Knights.
Bill1138 wrote: Do not equate the Dreadknight to those others. The Dreadknight is one of the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game. It most certainly is not "broken". If a Grey Knight army fielded nothing but Dreadknights, they'd still not win more than half of their games against other Codexes. Other armies can spam high-strength, AP2 which would wound the Dreadknight on 4s or better and ignore his armor save, meaning he'd have rely on his Invulnerable Save, which any Daemon player will tell you that a 5++ is not impressive odds for survival. And don't go on a rant about Sanctuary, because it isn't guaranteed to go off, and my opponents always save their dice to deny it, to ensure that the Dreadknight goes down easily.
I have to chuckle at this. A T6/W4, 2+/5++ with Masterly lv1 & guaranteed access to Sanctuary is plenty survivable. I daresay, it's definitely far more survivable than the vast majority of Tyranid beasties, the non-Gargantuan Ork Squiggoths, Wraithlords, the Avatar, the Nightbringer/Deceiver, stock Greater Daemons, Daemon Princes...
Again, outside of the hyper optimised lists, what armies beyond Serpent Spam Eldar are putting out masses of high strength ap2 shooting that outrange the Dreadknight's threat zones?
And honestly, if you're not getting Sanctuary off against non-Daemon/Psyker spam Eldar/other GK's, then you simply need to learn how to better run your Psychic phase... If you 100% absolutely *need* Sanctuary for a turn, then you should easily be getting it against the vast majority of armies, as most struggle to get more than 6-8 WC's at best.
And if your opponent *IS* simply blowing their entire dispel pool on just your 1 casting of Sanctuary, they're giving you free reign to cast whatever the hell else you want! Run the proper psychic lores and you can really punish opponents for such foolishness.
As for a 5++ being trash... I'm a Daemon player, and that 5++ tends to be a lot more reliable than most give it credit for. (But then, the majority of Daemon players are also really, really, really good at passing 5++ saves for some reason. )
Bill1138 wrote: I already addressed this. Close Combat prowess is not particularly relevant in 7th Edition 40k. And even if it were, other armies have I5 models that have access to AP3, to remove my Grey Knights before they have a chance to attack back. If you want an example, the Death Cult Assassin from the Inquisition attacks at I5, and has two Power Weapons, which means she gets an extra attack at AP3, and she's only 15pts, AND she still gets a 5++ Invulnerable Save in close combat that my PAGK do not. That is a much cheaper unit that is much better at close combat. In fact Inquisition can use Henchmen to build a unit that is statistically better than the Strike Squad at virtually everything for the same price.
Deathcult Assassins also die to a stiff breeze when shot, and their only damage output comes in assaults. Your basic Grey Knight on the other hand competes decently in all phases, including the Psychic phase!
The vast majority of assault units that have high initiative ap3 or better attacks tend to be glass cannons that typically have little to no damage abilities outside of the Assault phase, or else they're even more expensive than your basic Grey Knight. (or even a combination of both!)
Bill1138 wrote: False. The Dreadknight has the standard 12" movement for Jump units, and 40k has other units that are more mobile, such as the Eldar that can turbo-boost and shoot. And the Dreadknight is among the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game, as I said above.
I'm not complaining about the Dreadknight's power or pricing. But it is objectively not over-powered in the scheme of 7th Edition 40k.
Eldar are supposed to be the super speedy army. Crying about how they can scoot and shoot better than any Imperial army is akin to Guard players crying about how their infantry die so much faster than Terminators...
While it's true the Dreadknight isn't outright over-powered, it's still definitely ahead of the curve in the Monstrous Creature category...
At it's basic stats, it's more survivable than a basic Greater Daemon. For a small upgrade cost, it can keep pace with 3 of the 4 Greaters, and leave the Fatman in its dust.
If I want my LoC for example to reach roughly the same levels of survivability, I need to spend for a pair of Greater Rewards.
If I want to gain an advantage over the Knight in the Psychic phase, then the Kipper & GUO need to spend for an additional Mastery Lv. (LoC is base Lv2)
If I want to be reliably certain of having an advantage over the Knight in assaults, then yet again, I need to spend pts on Rewards to boost the Greater's strength and/or number of attacks.
All told, a fully tooled out Dreadknight is actually the same cost or outright cheaper than a Greater Daemon at its base cost! Yet the Dreadknight is outright more survivable, is outright terrifying in the Shooting phase, and can beat-up the Greater in combat.
For a Greater Daemon to gain an advantage over the Dreadknight in combat, you're likely required to spend at least 250pts (basic un-upgraded Bloodthirster.) For my LoC on the other hand to have a decent chance of living through a Dreadknight encounter, it costs a whopping 305pts! (and he's still wary of Force being a likely counter...)
The Dreadknight is more than fine, and is far from being one of the game's crappiest MC's. (I'm sure Tyranids still hold that claim with about 50%+ of their beasties!)
False analagy. The most average Power Armored Troop Choice in terms of their traits and gear for the vanilla Marines and Grey Knights are the Tactical Squad and the Strike Squad. That the vanilla Marines have a lighter Scout Armor option or that the Grey Knights have a Terminator option is inconsequential.
Strike Squads are not Scouts. They do not have any of the special rules that would allow them to field a Scout's role. The Tactical Squad is their closest comparison in the vanilla Marine Codex.
Similarly the Grey Knight Terminators would most accurately be compared to the vanilla Marines closest equivalent, which is their own Terminators.
Actually, GK Termies more closely compare to both Space Wolf and Chaos Termies due to the sheer level of flexibility they all have... Oh, and yours get grenades because... "reasons."
You really cannot complain in any way about your Termies, as they're easily the game's top Terminator option by a wide margin...
Strikes could definitely do with gaining the Scout USR to help them play more like their background says they do, which would also give additional flexibility and options when taking a Rhino/Razorback as a dedicated transport.
At most, Tac Marines could do with a drop to 13pts a pop to bring them in line with Chaos Marines (who only need their own similar Chapter Tactics & ATSKNF equivalents), and thus allow the basic PA Grey Knight to probably come down to 18pts a dude.
Bill1138 wrote: Please repeat after me: "7th edition 40k is all about the Movement, and Shooting Phase, so Melee prowess isn't nearly as valuable." The Grey Knights are extremely small, and have few units capable of decent mobility. Grey Knights are nothing special in the Movement Phase. But because the army is so small, and are limited to Storm Bolters for most of their models in all of their units, they are effectively a non-factor in the shooting phase. 7th Edition is full of Monstrous Creatures and vehicles with AV11+, all of which the Storm Bolters have a negligible chance of damaging, if they have any at all. And even when they're up against infantry armies, there are such waves of firepower coming into them that they'll die due to sheer volume of fire. Most Grey Knight units don't survive to get into close combat, or if they do, they're so outnumbered that they get finished off by the other unit in spite of the fact that they have Nemesis Force Weapons.
Also, S6+ (with Hammerhand) isn't nearly as powerful when most of your units have only one attack per model, as is the case with the Grey Knights, Our better units have two, but adding an extra attack with Falchions makes already over-priced units even more expensive.
A lot also depends on what type of 7th ed you're playing too... If you're only ever fielding 100% optimised "Competitive Tournament" type lists, and then playing games on planet Blowing Ball with just a few hills and the odd forest or three, then sure, Marines suck hardcore against the likes of Eldar, Tau, Gravbikers, Centstars, etc...
As for your supposed utter lack of mobility outside of 'Ceptors/Knights... Strikes, Purifiers & Purgators can all take a Rhino or Razorback. Strikes, Termies & 'Ceptors have Deep Strike. Draigo is guaranteed GoI, while Lv3 Libby's rolling on Santic run a roughly 60% shot at landing it as well. While expensive, there are still Stormravens & Land Raiders. And the Imperial BFF club can also lend Drop Pods to the mix as well.
You're plenty mobile if you want to be. Maybe not Eldar levels of speedy, but then, speed is supposed to be the Eldar's thing. (and the only problem with the Wave Serpent is the damn shield!)
I'd honestly be quite interest to know what kind of force you typically run, and what you typically come up against... I find it hard to believe that opposing armies are always throwing down masses of av11+ alongside multiple MC's, and/or "waves of infantry" that always outgun the poor defenseless Grey Knights.
Bill1138 wrote: Do not equate the Dreadknight to those others. The Dreadknight is one of the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game. It most certainly is not "broken". If a Grey Knight army fielded nothing but Dreadknights, they'd still not win more than half of their games against other Codexes. Other armies can spam high-strength, AP2 which would wound the Dreadknight on 4s or better and ignore his armor save, meaning he'd have rely on his Invulnerable Save, which any Daemon player will tell you that a 5++ is not impressive odds for survival. And don't go on a rant about Sanctuary, because it isn't guaranteed to go off, and my opponents always save their dice to deny it, to ensure that the Dreadknight goes down easily.
I have to chuckle at this. A T6/W4, 2+/5++ with Masterly lv1 & guaranteed access to Sanctuary is plenty survivable. I daresay, it's definitely far more survivable than the vast majority of Tyranid beasties, the non-Gargantuan Ork Squiggoths, Wraithlords, the Avatar, the Nightbringer/Deceiver, stock Greater Daemons, Daemon Princes...
Again, outside of the hyper optimised lists, what armies beyond Serpent Spam Eldar are putting out masses of high strength ap2 shooting that outrange the Dreadknight's threat zones?
And honestly, if you're not getting Sanctuary off against non-Daemon/Psyker spam Eldar/other GK's, then you simply need to learn how to better run your Psychic phase... If you 100% absolutely *need* Sanctuary for a turn, then you should easily be getting it against the vast majority of armies, as most struggle to get more than 6-8 WC's at best.
And if your opponent *IS* simply blowing their entire dispel pool on just your 1 casting of Sanctuary, they're giving you free reign to cast whatever the hell else you want! Run the proper psychic lores and you can really punish opponents for such foolishness.
As for a 5++ being trash... I'm a Daemon player, and that 5++ tends to be a lot more reliable than most give it credit for. (But then, the majority of Daemon players are also really, really, really good at passing 5++ saves for some reason. )
Bill1138 wrote: I already addressed this. Close Combat prowess is not particularly relevant in 7th Edition 40k. And even if it were, other armies have I5 models that have access to AP3, to remove my Grey Knights before they have a chance to attack back. If you want an example, the Death Cult Assassin from the Inquisition attacks at I5, and has two Power Weapons, which means she gets an extra attack at AP3, and she's only 15pts, AND she still gets a 5++ Invulnerable Save in close combat that my PAGK do not. That is a much cheaper unit that is much better at close combat. In fact Inquisition can use Henchmen to build a unit that is statistically better than the Strike Squad at virtually everything for the same price.
Deathcult Assassins also die to a stiff breeze when shot, and their only damage output comes in assaults. Your basic Grey Knight on the other hand competes decently in all phases, including the Psychic phase!
The vast majority of assault units that have high initiative ap3 or better attacks tend to be glass cannons that typically have little to no damage abilities outside of the Assault phase, or else they're even more expensive than your basic Grey Knight. (or even a combination of both!)
Bill1138 wrote: False. The Dreadknight has the standard 12" movement for Jump units, and 40k has other units that are more mobile, such as the Eldar that can turbo-boost and shoot. And the Dreadknight is among the least survivable Monstrous Creatures in the game, as I said above.
I'm not complaining about the Dreadknight's power or pricing. But it is objectively not over-powered in the scheme of 7th Edition 40k.
Eldar are supposed to be the super speedy army. Crying about how they can scoot and shoot better than any Imperial army is akin to Guard players crying about how their infantry die so much faster than Terminators...
While it's true the Dreadknight isn't outright over-powered, it's still definitely ahead of the curve in the Monstrous Creature category...
At it's basic stats, it's more survivable than a basic Greater Daemon. For a small upgrade cost, it can keep pace with 3 of the 4 Greaters, and leave the Fatman in its dust.
If I want my LoC for example to reach roughly the same levels of survivability, I need to spend for a pair of Greater Rewards.
If I want to gain an advantage over the Knight in the Psychic phase, then the Kipper & GUO need to spend for an additional Mastery Lv. (LoC is base Lv2)
If I want to be reliably certain of having an advantage over the Knight in assaults, then yet again, I need to spend pts on Rewards to boost the Greater's strength and/or number of attacks.
All told, a fully tooled out Dreadknight is actually the same cost or outright cheaper than a Greater Daemon at its base cost! Yet the Dreadknight is outright more survivable, is outright terrifying in the Shooting phase, and can beat-up the Greater in combat.
For a Greater Daemon to gain an advantage over the Dreadknight in combat, you're likely required to spend at least 250pts (basic un-upgraded Bloodthirster.) For my LoC on the other hand to have a decent chance of living through a Dreadknight encounter, it costs a whopping 305pts! (and he's still wary of Force being a likely counter...)
The Dreadknight is more than fine, and is far from being one of the game's crappiest MC's. (I'm sure Tyranids still hold that claim with about 50%+ of their beasties!)
Martel, what do you think of the most recent version of my suggestion? I'm interested in yours and any new opinions I get. If you don't like something what would you do instead?
The Suggestion: Promethium Reserve Tanks: as a new option for vehicles with flamer-type weapons that grants the weapons a 6” Torrent. The price could vary by vehicle based on effectiveness or be a per-weapon upgrade. This upgrade would be available to other codexes.
Grey Knight Chapter Tactics: These are the rules that apply across the Grey Knight Codex in the same way the Space Marine Chapter Tactics affect the chosen Chapter. If you think this is too much, compare them to the Iron Hands’ Chapter Tactics.
The Aegis
Prefered Enemy (Daemons)
Psyker Mastery Level 1, with Purity of Spirit
Daemonology (Sanctic):
Replace the #4 power (Purge Soul) with a Blessing that improves the AP of shooting weapons by 1. This would not apply to psychic shooting attacks. Purgation Squads would have this power instead of Hammerhand)
4. Psychic Infusion …………………..Warp Charge 1
The Grey Knights focus their psychic might through their blessed ammunition to increase its deadly potential.
Psychic Infusion is a blessing that targets the Psyker. Whilst the power is in effect, the AP of weapons fired by the unit are improved by 1.
HQs I’d leave their options the same, but a few of their base prices are too high for what they’re capable of.
125pts- Brother-Captain:
150pts- Brother-Captain Stern:
100pts- Brotherhood Champion:
125pts- Castellan Crowe:
Troops:
Strike Squad:
Make Rites of Teleportation a special rule for Strike Squads instead of being a Detachment benefit for the Nemesis Strike force, but also have it reduce scatter to 1D6.
Elites
100pts – Dreadnought: Add a new piece of optional Wargear that grants the Dreadnought the option to use Skyfire each shooting phase. This new piece of Wargear could be available to other Codex's Dreadnoughts.
Paladins: At their current price, give them Sanctuary.
Heavy:
Purgation Squad: replace Hammerhand Psychic power with the Psychic Infusion power
Dreadknight: Add an Iron Halo as an optional upgrade. Such an expensive model should not have to hide in cover for a chance to survive, especially since it only has a 24" range on its weapons.
*Special Weapons: new (and hopefully improved suggestion)
The Grey Knights have 3 Special Weapons: the Incinerator, the Psilencer, and the Psycannon. As they currently stand the Psilencer and Psycannon are not good upgrades for PAGK. I would like to see that fixed.
Incinerator: Template, S6, AP4, Assault 1, Soulblaze
(No change)
Psilencer: 24”, S4, Ap-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force
(I still don't believe there was anything wrong with the effectiveness of the previous suggestion of Psilencer:24",S4,Ap-, Salvo8/12,Poisoned3+, beyond the unconventional profile. However this new suggestion is much more traditional, and retains a similar chance to kill Monstrous Creatures, but loses most of its anti-hoarde potential. The weapon needs to be able to statistically deal that Instant Death Wound in less than 2.0 Turns, because the chance of the weapon surviving within range to make more than two attempts are statistically almost null)
Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance
(This doubles its effectiveness against Soulgrinders, and helps against AV 14, but doesn’t do anything at all to its effectiveness against lighter armor. Rending needs to stay to give the weapon that fleeting chance of an Explodes. It also makes the weapon more viable against models with good armor saves.)
If the Grey Knights were to get a Suplement, I would like to see it be "Mordrak's Ghost Knights," which would include its own Formation.
The "Ghost Knight Formation" would include: Grandmaster Mordrak, and 2-5 units of Ghost Knights. The Formation would award the units within a 4+ Feel No Pain.
HQ: Grandmaster Mordrak: Pretty much the same, except he gets Eternal Warrior (A legion of the dead are his personal bodyguards, so it's justified, even as rare as it is meant to be). He still has the option to purchase a command unit of Ghost Knights as part of his unit.
Troop: Ghost Knights. If you use the Grey Knights Terminators as the base, add Aid Unlooked For, Fear, Fearless, and Unyielding Specters. Their appropriate price would be notably more expensive than the regular Terminators.
SGTPozy wrote: Bill, why do you think that the Psycannon should have lance? It doesn't really make sense other than to render all Daemon builds useless.
Grey Knights can't statistically handle Soulgrinders with any degree of effectiveness. Lance gives the Grey Knights a slightly better chance against them without changing the balance of the weapon in regards to other types of targets.
With Lance: 4 shots stationary
2/3 chance to hit
1/6 chance to glance, 1/6 chance to pen
~0.296 Glancing Hits, and 0.296 Penetrating hits (unsaved)
Without Lance: 4 shots stationary
2/3 chance to hit
1/6 chance to pen.
~0.296 Penetrating hits. (unsaved)
Half those values if the Psycannon was on a PAGK unit that moved.
Less than 30% chance of getting an unsaved Glance against a Soulgrinder is not going to make Chaos Daemons' lists obsolete. It's just a fair chance for the faction that is supposed to be the antithesis of Daemons to be able to hold their own against them.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/09 18:37:46
Whiskey144 wrote: Oh, can somebody quote this? Want to make sure that anybody and everybody can see it.
Bill1138 wrote: Psilencer: 24”, S4, Ap-, Assault 6, Poisoned 3+, Force (Being as other Codexes rely on template weapons for anti-hoarde, the Psilencer doesn't really have to be anti-hoarde. This profile makes it good at killing Monstrous Creatures, though not as good as my previous suggestion, yet removes most of the anti-infantry ability it had. It is also much closer to a traditional weapon profile than my previous suggestion.)
Well this is out of left field. Still, I dislike it quite a bit. It's not so horrendously broken as Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+, but it's not great either. I do admit that I like Assault 6, as it allows Psilencers to contribute to the midrange shooting that GKs generally excel at.
Poison 3+ is still over the top when combined with Force; if you want both then a better solution is to split the profile to either Force or Poison... it should also probably be Poison 4+, as otherwise this is 99% better Splinter Cannon and would overshadow the DE as the poison masters of the game.
As an example, a single Psilencer with 3+ Poison, and 6 shots, will inflict ~2.7 wounds on a MC. Against 3+ armor, this becomes ~0.89 unsaved wounds- so you've got really good chances to blap a MC. This is pretty over the top, especially when a moderately tooled up Strike Squad can kill any T6/3+ MCin one round of combat.
Here's the math:
Spoiler:
Strike Squad, 10 man, 10 Halberds, Charging:
against a WS4 MC: 21 attacks, 10.5 hits, ~3.5 unsaved wounds (Halberds provide +1S and AP3); a typical T6/3+ MC has only 4 Wounds- you don't even need Force to kill one given that in practice it'll round up to 4 wounds!
If you really want to go in for overkill, you could also activate Hammerhand, for 5 Unsaved Wounds- combined with Force, you can probably kill an entire brood of Carnifexes in a single round of combat!
WS4 MC, 10-man Strike Squad, w/ all Falchions, Charging, with Hammerhand:
31 attacks, ~16 hits, ~5.33 unsaved wounds (Falchions provide +1 Attack and AP3, Hammerhand provides +1 Str). Once again, you can just use Falchions+Hammerhand and kill any T6/3+ MC in the game in a single round; if they have a 5++, then you inflict ~3.55 unsaved wounds- still very good chances to kill a T6/3+/5++ MC in a single round.
And keep in mind that that's going to hold true against WS4-WS8 MCs; it takes an insane WS9 before the Strikes can only hit on 5+. Oh, and against WS3 (IE, many Tyranid T6/3+ MCs)? Halberds will inflict ~4.67 unsaved wounds (~7 w/ Hammerhand), while Falchions will get ~6.89 unsaved wounds when combined with Hammerhand. Season with Force, and you can literally kill any T6/3+ MC in a single round of combat- more likely, you'll kill multiple T6/3+ MCs in just one round of combat.
Also, for those who are curious as to how brokenly powerful Salvo 8/12 S5 Poison 3+ is... take a look:
Spoiler:
I don't have my codex stuff with me right now, but let's just think about how much firepower you can get:
MSU Purifiers x3, w/ 2 Psilencers You'll get 72 S5 Poison 3+ shots at 36"; against T3 infantry you can pump out 40 (!) wounds per turn; against:
6+ Save: ~33.3 unsaved wounds
5+ Save: ~26.7 unsaved wounds (IE, you just mostly wiped out a typical IG Infantry blob of 30 dudes)
4+ Save: ~20 unsaved wounds (IE, you still mostly wipe out a typical IG Infantry blob, even if they're in 4+ cover)
3+ Save: ~13.3 unsaved wounds (there goes that Battle Sister blob)
Alternately, you can deal up to ~32 wounds against anything T5 or better; against a typical:
3+ Armor MC: ~10.7 unsaved wounds (nearly an entire Carnifex Brood gone!)
2+ Armor MC: ~5.34 unsaved wounds; if the MC has 5+ FNP then that becomes ~3.56 unsaved wounds- so you can nearly one-round a Riptide. Riptides are brokenly powerful too, but breaking Psilencers into this level of power is not the answer.
Oh, and for comparison, 30 Sternguard can only put out 30 2+ Poison shots at 12-24", and 60 at 0-12". They also cost around 3 times as much as MSU Purifiers, and can't use Rhinos as a pseudo-ablative armor. MSU Trueborn with Splinter Cannons and dual Splinter Cannon Venoms can dump 36 poison shots per squad- so 108 per turn for three squads- and of the total 108, 36 are twin-linked. Except that they're 4+ poison.
An approximate number of wounds inflicted before saves for MSU Splinterborn in Dual Splinter Venoms would be: 24 wounds from Splinterborn, 16 wounds from Venoms; total of 40 wounds. Which sounds comparable, until you realize that:
-Trueborn are T3/5+ infantry, in 4-man MSU squads, mounted in cardboard bawkse Venoms (10/10/10 2HPs, open-topped)
-It takes ~33% more shots for DE to equal the wound output of 6 Salvo 8/12 S5/Poison 3+ Psilencers
-Splinter weapons are S:X, which means they cannot harm AV at all
-For a moderate cost increase, the MSU Purifiers can mount in Rhinos and still fire their important weapons from the roof hatch, giving them an ablative AV11/11/10 3HP vehicle
-Purifiers are also ML2, so 3 MSU squads contributes 6 WC.
-Purifiers also know Cleansing Flame, probably the best Sanctic power.
So, yeah. Salvo 8/12, S5, Poison 3+ Psilencers? Brokenly powerful.
Bill1138 wrote: Psycannon: 36”, S7, AP4, Salvo 2/4, Rending, Lance (This doubles its effectiveness against Soulgrinders, and helps against AV 14, but doesn’t do anything at all to its effectiveness against lighter armor.
*For the sake of Fluff explanations, “Poisoned” and “Lance” would probably be given new overly flowery or pseudo-Latin names and descriptions to make them more in line with the Imperium’s lore, but would still be the exact same rules.
I don't really see the point of both Lance and Rending; it's got enough weight of fire that S7+Lance is perfectly functional for glancing things to death. Also, it doesn't need anything other than the "Lance" rule. There's no need for the weapon's rules to use something Imperial-ized for the rule. Make up whatever description you want, but leave it simple and clean as Lance rather than some other thing.
It's not over the top...a reasonably tooled strike squad costs 300+ points dude...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/09 18:55:24
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
It's over the top for one weapon to have that kind of capability- it's very nearly a guaranteed kill if you activate Force.
Which means you can remove a lot of MCs in a single round of shooting. What armies have lots of MCs?
Mostly Tyranids and Daemons. And those results are against a T6/3+ armor MC- the average for 'Nids. Against T6/5++, the common standard for Daemons, it's a lot worse and flat-out broken.
Psilencers having Poison isn't actually broken, even if it doesn't make much sense fluffwise. Psilencers having both Poison and Force on the same profile is actually quite broken- there does not exist any weapon in the game that can one-shot without any risk of reprisal.
I'd also like to point out that the Strikes were used as a benchmark of "ultramurderlicious combat". Tooled up Strikes are rather expensive, yes. 300+ points, not so much; you're looking at something closer to 270-290, realistically.
Whiskey144 wrote: It's over the top for one weapon to have that kind of capability- it's very nearly a guaranteed kill if you activate Force.
Which means you can remove a lot of MCs in a single round of shooting. What armies have lots of MCs?
Mostly Tyranids and Daemons. And those results are against a T6/3+ armor MC- the average for 'Nids. Against T6/5++, the common standard for Daemons, it's a lot worse and flat-out broken.
Psilencers having Poison isn't actually broken, even if it doesn't make much sense fluffwise. Psilencers having both Poison and Force on the same profile is actually quite broken- there does not exist any weapon in the game that can one-shot without any risk of reprisal.
I'd also like to point out that the Strikes were used as a benchmark of "ultramurderlicious combat". Tooled up Strikes are rather expensive, yes. 300+ points, not so much; you're looking at something closer to 270-290, realistically.
In a rhino with a hammer and 2 psycannons its 315 points I think. With Psilencers I think it would be 305. I was including the rhino into the cost.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/09 19:14:11
If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder
I don't see anything wrong with that profile for the psycannon. S7 is not that amazing against AV 12, and the GK can't field the obscene number of shots of the Xeno lists.
The reworked silencer is not that broken, either. I'd like to see more force in the game actually as a hard counter to overpowered MCs. MCs are currently so much better than vehicles it's crazy.
I think the difference in my view and some other players is that I expect to take heavy casualties every game. Eldar and Tau players want to set up their units and win with only a few scratches on their paint. At least, that's the vibe I get from most Eldar/Tau players I have to play. Taking casualties is for meq lists. I don't bring anything to a match that I can't afford to lose, so the force/poison thing doesn't bother me at all. It's something that MCs have to pay attention to, though, unlike most of the weapon available to my BA.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/04/09 19:20:13
Whiskey, How long do you normally leave your daemonic Monstrous Creatures on the ground (not flying) within 24" of a Grey Knight unit that you know has a Psilencer, without either getting into close combat or moving out of there? If you know he has a Psilencer, are you really going to waste your Denial Warp Dice on other powers besides that Force? And if I pool enough Dice to get enough successes that you can't block it, Didn't I just sacrifice my ability to cast most of my other Psychic powers?
Force is useless if it the Weapon can't Wound when it needs to. And the Psilencer needs to inflict an unsaved Wound more than 50% of the time because there typically isn't a third try if if the other player's strategy is worth anything at all.
That is what Poison and Force do. They make the weapon capable of doing its job.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/04/09 19:29:00
If the devilfish gets reworked into something useful, the GK are going to struggle against Tau again. Just something to think about. I still think that Tau players could deploy in a more savvy manner against drop lists/shunt lists, but with a good transport, alpha strikes get neutered.
)