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.

I don't necessarily agree with the paladins being difficult to win with. But I think OP is also from your perspective.

I run hybrid IG and Paladins can walk all over my troops on the ground. With them being able to use the Stormraven to get in close or a LR to keep safe, they are tough to beat. But that is for me. I can take almost any other GK build rather easily or at least put up a good fight. But I struggle with Paladins.

If you say an army is over powered it is just because you have not really figured out how to beat them and incorporated that into you TAC list. It used to be Mech IG is OP, but now majority of all lists can take them because they are aware of the build out there. Whatever the next codex out, it will most likely be OP and people will complain. But with that change GK will take a blow and become that much easier to beat. It is a unique combination of your meta interacting with the meta of the game as a whole.

My beef with them is just cleansing flame and psyflemen dreads, extremely undercosted.

Every Codex has underpriced Units. Like I tell everyone else:
If you fell a unit is over-Powered or Under-Cost, build a 1,500-2,000 list with the OP units and look at the Model Count. You can’t judge a unit in a vacuum. Put 3 Psyflemen dreads into a Draigowing and see what you get.

Model count isn't everything either.

Run a 180 ork Greentide at a purifier spam list, and watch those mobs just vanish, doing relatively little in return.

I know i have 13 model 1,500 point Loganwing

i think of GK as the remedial kids army, its what people play that aren't good enough to win with a less forgiving army. Where your decisions are pretty cut and dry and you don't need to look for combo's or tactics. You just follow the formula and you will do well.

tgf wrote:i think of GK as the remedial kids army, its what people play that aren't good enough to win with a less forgiving army. Where your decisions are pretty cut and dry and you don't need to look for combo's or tactics. You just follow the formula and you will do well.

Alternatively you can come up with an army that you feel like playing, not following one of the set lists, and enjoy yourself and have people enjoy playing you, despite the fact you play GK?

Not everyone gravitates towards them hoping for it to be an auto-win, some enjoy the fluff, some enjoy the models, some enjoy the possibilities with the army to make things which they couldn't really do beforehand. Don't make a blanket claim that GK is for people who can't win otherwise, that may be the case in your area, and if so qualify it in that respect, steer clear of statements like that to avoid inaccuracies

Motyak is quite correct about not everyone plays them because they are the easy button. That isn't what gets on peoples nerves. Its playing against the power gamer type who is playing them just to wipe everyone he plays. That type of gamer exists in almost every gaming area too which is sad but a part of the gaming life.

The OP's train of thought was that they are the easiest army in 40k to win with because they have no weaknesses at all other than they die just as easily as Space Marines of other varities. Until you factor in that unholy Paladin blob...which cannot be equaled by anything in the other Marine Dexes. You would have to field a ludicrous amount of Death Company for Blood Angels or Thunderwolves for the Space Wolves to be able to get anywhere near the toughness of the Paladins and even then they really aren't as tough or deadly as the Draigowing.

There should be a stickied "GK ARE OP" thread. These seem to pop up every day.

But for OP, GKs are hard counter vs any marine list. Against a decent player with a competitive list, the only thing you can do to get an edge is to probably out shoot them with Orks or IG.

There isn't a single marine army that can dish out even remotely the same amount of firepower GKs can. 15 longfangs? Pfftt, child's play.
And ofc close combat vs S5 I6 is a no-no. You might as well charge into a squad of 20 genestealers wearing power armor.

I love the responses that are all "Well, durr you can just outshoot them" when the guy basically forgets that you don't have to pay points to make GK good at CC. Godly CC comes by default. You just pay points to make them slowed in shooting too.

bobamus87 wrote:
My ultimate question is: does anyone else feel the same way?

Yes for various reasons. Drastically undercosted wargear (5pts for upgrading two TL BS4 or BS5 autocannons to S8? 5pts to ignore Shaken/Stunned results 92% of the time, Purifiers that just need to get one dude into an ork mob to kill half of them off, min/maxable henchmen, etc.)

However...

I know I play Space Wolves, but there's only a few cheesey things you can do with them, most of which revolve around Thunderwolves,

You forgot the two most important units. Grey Hunters (the best parts of CSM's and SM's, with the very powerful Counterattack on top, with a cost discount!) and Long Fangs (by far the best heavy weapon infantry unit in the game). Counterattack in and of itself is extremely potent, especially when you're usually 15% cheaper than equivalents with more attacks.

SW's are not in a terrible position by any means. Yes, GK's can be brutal and really shouldn't have made it out as they are. Neither should SW's however, shoot them down, get stuck in only against depleted units, and you should do just fine.

My biggest problem with GK is that in my experience, you have to pretty much tailor your list to taking them out (at least for those of use that still want to play our 4th edition codices). People say "You just need to shoot them down" but how many all-comers lists have enough fire power to take down a reasonable amount of knights before they crash into your lines and obliterate you? Guard can maybe pull it off, and a long fang spam might also be in a good position, but any of my standard all comers lists for either my Eldar or Chaos is going to fighting a severe uphill battle in virtually any fight against GK.

So lets say you know you're playing GK, so you prepare ahead of time. Leave the far seer at home, or maybe bring one and keep him cheap with RoW, and just bring lots of firepower, with no melee elements. Now you're gonna get it for list tailoring and being TFG.

Obviously not all knights players are going to be playing the most hardcore lists, but even a list using basically just their base infantry is going to be very rough for an all-comers list.

Hearing a SW player complain that GKs are overpowered, priceless. Once observed a game where the GK player complained about the BA feel no pain saves. Just makes me laugh.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reivax26 wrote:Motyak is quite correct about not everyone plays them because they are the easy button. That isn't what gets on peoples nerves. Its playing against the power gamer type who is playing them just to wipe everyone he plays. That type of gamer exists in almost every gaming area too which is sad but a part of the gaming life..

Have one of these at the FLGS. When customers started getting into WM/H, his question, "what is the most powerful army?". When it was Dystopian wars/FSA, "What group is the most powerful?". When we started Malifaux, same thing. Then, his most over powered force got beat by somebody else, what does he do, walks out mad and annoyed that the over powered side lost. Came back later and bought what beat his group.

There is a guy at our local store who enraged so many people at our last one that a bunch of the guys from out of town said they weren't coming back. He was playing a 3 Rune Priest, 3 Longfang pack Space Wolf army and was walking around before the tournament commenting on how other peoples armies were cheesy and pointing out which ones were netlists. Then there was the blatant stalling he was doing when it was apparent that he might lose and the rules lawyering about everything. I've never wanted to hit someone so bad in my entire life.

martin74 wrote:Hearing a SW player complain that GKs are overpowered, priceless. Once observed a game where the GK player complained about the BA feel no pain saves. Just makes me laugh.

I was gonna say this, but you beat me to it.

martin74 wrote:

Reivax26 wrote:Motyak is quite correct about not everyone plays them because they are the easy button. That isn't what gets on peoples nerves. Its playing against the power gamer type who is playing them just to wipe everyone he plays. That type of gamer exists in almost every gaming area too which is sad but a part of the gaming life..

Have one of these at the FLGS. When customers started getting into WM/H, his question, "what is the most powerful army?". When it was Dystopian wars/FSA, "What group is the most powerful?". When we started Malifaux, same thing. Then, his most over powered force got beat by somebody else, what does he do, walks out mad and annoyed that the over powered side lost. Came back later and bought what beat his group.

I've known a few people like that. It's always funny to take them down.

But to answer the OP. I don't think Grey Knights are OP anymore than any of the other most recent codexes. On their own, BA, SW, DE, IG, and Newcrons can all go toe to toe without breaking a sweat. A good player can take any army and give tit for tat with GK. It's just a matter of knowing the game.

I personally don't think GK are any harder to beat than blood angels, space wolves or the IG.

BUT

At all my local stores, you see almost every player fielding a GK army when there are prizes and or league standings on the line. Also, almost all those players shelf their GK when there is a city fight, apoc or similar fun event. Then they bring out their tyranids, black templars, necrons, vanilla marines or daemons. People aren't just painting their armies in flavour-of-the-month marines, they are building a second tournament-only GK army. I also trust many of those people to actually know what they are doing, and not just following the interwebz rage.

So there has to be something about GK that eludes me as an ork player. I doubt that this amount of army-switching would be happening if GK were just as good as any other codex. Maybe GK are just best at beating other GK, and thus creating a vicious circle?

If a Daemon player goes up against the wrong Grey Knight list though its not going to matter about how good a player he is if he can't deploy on the board lol

All the complaining about 'dis is OP' and 'dat is OP' is horrible. God, the WHFB peeps are wavy more nice. They don't complain about armies with 2+ armor saves.. (WoC).

And, Ill say it once again, Grey Knights aren't Over Powered, OP.

Jidmah wrote:I personally don't think GK are any harder to beat than blood angels, space wolves or the IG.

Well that totally excuses it. If other codexes are internally imbalanced or 4e v 5e is imbalanced or there are only 4 OP dexes, then job well done, golf clap.

The highest aspiration of all gaming companies is to make it so there are roughly 25% of all their books that are superior to the rest of the armies at any given time.

Players who don't want to play those four armies should just go find something better to do until they pass the FOTM baton.

Jidmah wrote:
So there has to be something about GK that eludes me as an ork player.

Cleansing Flame? Instant death?

TedNugent wrote:

Jidmah wrote:I personally don't think GK are any harder to beat than blood angels, space wolves or the IG.

Well that totally excuses it. If other codexes are internally imbalanced or 4e v 5e is imbalanced or there are only 4 OP dexes, then job well done, golf clap.

Form an ork's view it does. I find black templars, vanilla marines and daemons quite easy to beat, while I have a hard time beating mech eldar and nidzilla lists. This has nothing at all to do with any of the codices you think are OP. Actually, a well played IG is a much harder opponent for me than GK could ever be.

Jidmah wrote:

So there has to be something about GK that eludes me as an ork player.

Cleansing Flame? Instant death?

Cleansing flame can be circumvented. Mostly by shooting purifiers dead, or simply assaulting them anyways. A player fielding a crowe list is no harder to beat than a player fielding any other army specifically tailored to kill orks.
Instant-death only changed my play style to picking Thrakka instead of a warboss. Nobz don't care about those few IDs from MEQ, GK terminators would walk all over them even without NFW.

Unless you argue that anything that doesn't die to "Moar boyz!" and "WAAAAAAGH! Charge!" is OP.

motyak wrote:

tgf wrote:i think of GK as the remedial kids army, its what people play that aren't good enough to win with a less forgiving army. Where your decisions are pretty cut and dry and you don't need to look for combo's or tactics. You just follow the formula and you will do well.

Alternatively you can come up with an army that you feel like playing, not following one of the set lists, and enjoy yourself and have people enjoy playing you, despite the fact you play GK?

Not everyone gravitates towards them hoping for it to be an auto-win, some enjoy the fluff, some enjoy the models, some enjoy the possibilities with the army to make things which they couldn't really do beforehand. Don't make a blanket claim that GK is for people who can't win otherwise, that may be the case in your area, and if so qualify it in that respect, steer clear of statements like that to avoid inaccuracies

The reason I say what I did is simple numbers. Last year at our local GT there was 1 GK player, this year 14, out of a field of 64. Now you could claim that its because it is a new dex. I think not. There were 2 necron players, last year there was 1, there was 1 nid player last year there were 3, there was 3 DE players last year there was 2. That indicates to me that the GK players that plays for fluff or like of the model is most often a WAAC, it seems the exception to the rule is the guy that has actually been playing before the integrated auto win buttons. I will say one nice thing, the guys that are WAAC are typically so used to having easy opponents that most skilled opponents can mop the floor with them. Again the data proves it out, only 3 GK players made the top 20, and only 1 in the top 10. (field of 64 with 14 total) With an ork player only a few of them this year taking first and two necron players in the top 10 one in top 5.

I guess I am trying to point out two things

1. Most GK players are the WAAC guys, not all but most.
2. WAAC guys aren't usually good enough to win even with the auto win buttons against long term skill players.

tgf wrote:Again the data proves it out, only 3 GK players made the top 20, and only 1 in the top 10. (field of 64 with 14 total)

Or that just proves that GK aren't as OP as people are saying they are. We don't know, because that's all the data we have.

tgf wrote:

motyak wrote:

tgf wrote:i think of GK as the remedial kids army, its what people play that aren't good enough to win with a less forgiving army. Where your decisions are pretty cut and dry and you don't need to look for combo's or tactics. You just follow the formula and you will do well.

Alternatively you can come up with an army that you feel like playing, not following one of the set lists, and enjoy yourself and have people enjoy playing you, despite the fact you play GK?

Not everyone gravitates towards them hoping for it to be an auto-win, some enjoy the fluff, some enjoy the models, some enjoy the possibilities with the army to make things which they couldn't really do beforehand. Don't make a blanket claim that GK is for people who can't win otherwise, that may be the case in your area, and if so qualify it in that respect, steer clear of statements like that to avoid inaccuracies

The reason I say what I did is simple numbers.

See, I don't think one GT counts as 'simple numbers' for such a blanket statement. If I was to look at the 'simple numbers' of my local GW, theres only a few GK players, none of whom have more than 1 unit of purifiers, none of whom have a draigo-paladin-libby-other gubbinz kind of list, only one of whom fields what I think is a competitive build (a SR, some terminators, some strike squads in rhinos and a dreadknight), and all of whom are reasonable players. They don't pick the GK because they need a crutch, they win some and lose some, but they don't play it because they can't win with a less forgiving army.

tgf wrote:
I guess I am trying to point out two things

1. Most GK players are the WAAC guys, not all but most.
2. WAAC guys aren't usually good enough to win even with the auto win buttons against long term skill players.

Your first point again...thats just based off your local area, the people that you see playing them.

Your second point doesn't make any sense. WAAC is, in and of itself, a poor term to use. Many of the players classified as WAAC are probably just competitive people, which is not a bad thing (some would say that you don't need to be competitive in a game of toy soldiers, and I agree to an extent, but competitiveness is also what can make games great fun, you just got to hope you are playing people within your comfort zone of competitiveness). The point where you call someone a WAAC player is when their own level of competitiveness is a certain degree (which differs from person to person) higher than the person judging them. Rules-Lawyering, Cheating, these terms can be measured (Rules lawyering to a lesser extent, it is also subjective in terms of how far they differ to you, perhaps they just really really want their games to be rules-accurate, and who is anyone to begrudge them that?), but WAAC is an angry, angry term which shouldn't be used as much as it is. It is simply a difference in how competitive players are.

Off topic: You know what would actually be interesting? A study conducted where those who call a lot of people WAAC players, and those who are often classified as WAAC players, have competitiveness measured, it'd be correlational data and so wouldn't be able to prove anything, but it'd be interesting to see if those who are often claimed to be WAAC are just very competitive, and if those who are slinging the phrase around are in fact really low in competitiveness...well, interesting to me.

Yet more naive cos based arguments. They pop up everytime.

No opp cost for those FW? What, apart from costin 25% more than a SW GH to begin with? By this same naive costing argument banshees, hardly an OP unit, would end up as 30ppm... lol

There are some bad combos that stack up well in the current meta - psybacks, dreads mainly - but you dont see crowe lists very often as theyre not that good except against bugs and *some* orks (and again, you can rework orks into TAC tht also work with purifiers. Not difficult) but dont put out enough against ig, necron and sw lists to do well

PAGK are expensive marines that die as easily as any other marine. Play on that, and you will realise that they are far from OP.

bobamus87 wrote:This isn't a flame thread, just a discussion. Just played a game last night, and got a hard fought tie, @ 2500 with my Space Wolves, vs. Grey knights, and some things really made me wonder what Matt Ward, and games Dev was thinking with Codex: Grey Knights.

Firstly, GK are currently the best codex. This may change in 2 weeks.

Secondly, on behalf of every C:SM, CSM, Ork, Tau, BA, Demon, DA, Eldar, SoB and Nid army out there.
Kettle, thou art black

martin74 wrote:Hearing a SW player complain that GKs are overpowered, priceless. Once observed a game where the GK player complained about the BA feel no pain saves. Just makes me laugh.

My local store has a GK player who readily complains that the only way to beat Daemons is to warp quake the entire board and auto-mishap the entire army.
His main gripes are that it's apparently impossible for GK's to kill an army that have army wide re-rollable invulnerable saves, and Daemons are utterly 'broken' because they totally nerf his force weapons!

Suffice it to say, I'm waiting with baited breath for a new Daemons book so I can show him what an actual OP Daemon army looks like! (and no, he's never played fantasy, so he's not a case of supreme butt-hurt due to that issue)

Jidmah wrote:Maybe GK are just best at beating other GK, and thus creating a vicious circle?

GK are vicious vs GK. Lots of anti psyker equipment vs an all psyker army? I6 vs I6 at the same time becoming redundant?

Also i wasnt aware IG were considered OP did i miss something???

As for my 2 pence, depends how you play them. With costing allowing, iv been trying to work mine to resemble the old Daemonhunters codex (1 GKSS, 1 GKTS and led by an inquisitor with acolyte stormtroopers and a storm raven to sub for the old valkyrie). Has it been an instant win button for me? lol hell no, iv won 1 fething game with em but i damn well have fun (also people forget another reason for buying gk, wallet will love you a little more when you can squeeze a massive amount of points out of a few boxes )

thenoobbomb wrote:All the complaining about 'dis is OP' and 'dat is OP' is horrible. God, the WHFB peeps are wavy more nice. They don't complain about armies with 2+ armor saves.. (WoC).

And, Ill say it once again, Grey Knights aren't Over Powered, OP.

Heheheh sorry man but you are way off, warriors of chaos dont have a 2+ save, they have a 4+ or 3+ with a shield, and in fantasy there are modifiers to help get rid off that.

GK are OP so are SW, both in diferent ways of course

Just so you know what i consider overpowered, if a unit is under costed for its abilites and has little to no weakness, so if wound alocation didnt exist i wouldnt consider paladins OP, as some of you said..shoot them.
Purifiers for there cost are broken, if i take a comparible unit of similer cost.. purifiers win most of the time, even against units mor expensive than themselves.
Psyfledread... 5pts...really????
But the biggest thing that breaks them is the massive amount of PW, i play DW and all my stuff have PW but at a premium cost.

DW do very well against PAGK based lists - SS are just *that* good.

It isnt the PW, its the cheap razorbacks, DCA and psyriflemen that are the biggest headaches. If you couldnt take cheap razorbacks - they shouldnt be int he list at all! - then thre would be far fewer complaints.

nosferatu1001 wrote:DW do very well against PAGK based lists - SS are just *that* good.

It isnt the PW, its the cheap razorbacks, DCA and psyriflemen that are the biggest headaches. If you couldnt take cheap razorbacks - they shouldnt be int he list at all! - then thre would be far fewer complaints.

tis true, but my point is i pay alot for those SS or PF or just PW, i dont get them for free (or a massive discount), i mean with how cheap psyfleman are its gross, these things can easily wipe a DW unit out a turn (to be fair that much shooting should) but i dont have an equiv to fight back with (by that i mean a supercheap anti vehicle platform that is very resiliant for the cost)

Formosa wrote:i mean with how cheap psyfleman are its gross, these things can easily wipe a DW unit out a turn (to be fair that much shooting should)

At least be honest...
I'm assuming you mean Deathwing when you say DW.

4 TL Psy-AC shots, we'll assume all 4 hit.
Wound on 2+, 3 wounds.
You save on a 2+, maybe one termie dead.

How is that easily wiping a DW unit out a turn?