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.

Solar Shock wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
If you think this thread is talking about competitive/tourney lists then you are an idiot. Of course you'd spam your best units, but this is CLEARLY about casual play.

I'm not asking someone to take a "less optimal" list, where did I ask that? I was asking if the GK players on Dakka are like the guys I've played against, and it turns out that you are.

In my gaming group, during casual games GK players are the only ones to only take their best units, hence me asking if you do too. Like I said earlier, why shouldn't I just spam my best units in casual games? The answer is that it wouldn't be fun for anyone.

@astro_nomicon, MC are very much hated on, you barely go anywhere without people hating on the Wraithknight and/or Riptide (yet not the Dreadknight for some reason...) so I have no idea what you're talking about.

Can you even read your own poll?
38% the usual net list
31% net list with a spin
31% something original.....

... how you gathered from that that everyone on dakka plays only the best units I have no idea, im starting to think that your just an angry child who's lost to some Gk players. Starting with your points:
"If you think this thread is talking about competitive/tourney lists then you are an idiot. Of course you'd spam your best units, but this is CLEARLY about casual play." - Well you never actually stated which it was, so the idea that it is CLEARLY casual play goes right out the window, we dont read minds, we take what you gave us(not a lot) and give an opinion.

"In my gaming group, during casual games GK players are the only ones to only take their best units, hence me asking if you do too." - TADA! see, with one line you actually managed to inform us of what you really wanted to know, "during casual games", wasn't so difficult was it?
"The answer is that it wouldn't be fun for anyone." - well it would be if you were both playing your best units, as people who enjoy competitive play would enjoy this. Casual games can still be competitive, yes there is less of a focus on being WAAC, but doesn't mean you have to play easy.
"MC are very much hated on" - says who? you mean people hate MC's purely because they are MC's? im not even going to bother with that one.

Most people here have taken the time to give you decent responses, with reasons and their own personal experiences yet your conduct back has been rather aggressive and poor with no attempt to make reasonable discussion other than to tell GK players that its unacceptable to run their best units and that they should just accept the hate.
"The helldrake was their only awesome unit in an otherwise bland codex, yet they received hate for it, but because you're GKs we shouldn't hate, right?"
"I complain as I see that GK are like CSM in 6th: just complaining because you can."

I hope you have fun continuing to hate and I wish you luck (although part of me also hopes that these GK players you hate so much simply continue to smash your lists into the ground, because honestly your not making any reasonable steps towards accepting any views given to you)

Yes, I can read a poll but my comment is an observation of the comments. All of the comments (the people I am talking to) are saying that they can only really take the net list. How can I talk about the original lists if they don't post them?

The majority of people play casually... So if I was talking about tourneys I would've said so.

This is my 4th (I think) post on this thread, so that's hardly enough to stimulate discussion when I have to deal with people such as yourself.

I agree that casual play involves some competitiveness but you don't tend to spam cheesy units as that is not fun. People don't tend to enjoy it when someone spams units, just like people don't like wave serpent spam, and that's what GK players usually do.

MCs are generally considered broken due to their high survivability and due to them being FAR superior to vehicles like walkers, so yeah they are hated on.

If you read the introduction to this thread, you will see that I want people to prove me wrong about GKs only using net lists, but that hasn't happened as everyone just gets so worked up whenever GKs are mentioned.

Yes, GKs are like CSMs as in their community got very annoying.

The only views given are that the option used are the best, hence my example with Tau to make you guys realise that that isn't acceptable for other armies.

No, the difference is that if I'm playing tau, I can make a really fun list with just fire warriors, hammer heads, space pope, some stealth suits and kroot for infiltrate/outflank and pathfinders. Hell, throw in some crisis suits for melta. It's not that there aren't better options, there are, but these units still do the thing they were designed to do.

Purgation squads? Theyre awful. Just awful. I defy you to build a list around them and strike squads. You get to sit there in the back field with your psycannons at range 24. Oh wait, that's 12 inches if you move. And those psycannons on the strike squads? Don't fire them if you want to get into combat so you can use your expensive force weapons and CC psychic powers! Read those entries and tell me it doesn't feel like the GK codex fighting with itself.

Lets look at the rest of the Heavy Support section. And here I think you can make an argument for experimentation. Take Land Raiders. While they're not worse than regular SM Land Raiders, they don't really make sense in an army that is all about deepstriking. When both of our troop choices deep strike it's really hard to justify a 200+ point transport. That said, you could make a case for a purifier heavy, AV14 focused GK list. I'd play that list as it sounds like fun - except I don't currently have any land raiders.

I don't think it's fair to call every single GK list a netlist - I built my on my own volition taking the units I wanted to take. I'm not sure if this is a troll thread and I really don't understand how people can get mad at GK players for playing the more effective units in the codex.

I take a librarian because of that ML3 +1 extra psychic power. I take Purifiers to modify my Psychic Dice Pool and because Cleansing Flame is amazing. I take terminators because GKSS aren't all that great. I take two Dreadknights because I want to overload my threats and 4 wounds isn't impossible to deal with. I take a Brotherhood Captain because I was given the model in trade and he's a bit of a fluff choice.

Honestly other than a couple of psycannons and incinerators in my squads I'm bringing a lot of knives to mostly gun fights.

And why would I not sacrifice objective secured so that my deep-strikers can come in turn one. We already have a low model count as it is so we need to be sure that they actually get a chance to fight..

I honestly feel all this anger towards GK is unwarranted and a bit preposterous..

@Belac, you might find that fun, but not everyone will. Just like some people might find purgation squads fun.

Couldn't you put your purgation squads in a rhino? That would get them where they need to be to unload their salvo into the enemy. This could work with the purifiers in a land raider providing cover to the rhino as they move up.

Strike squads just hold objectives IME, but you could have more of them compared to terminators. Deepstrike them with incinerators as a distraction to occupy the enemy whilst your purgation rhino and purifier land raider move up.

One Dreadknight with interceptors to support it can work, you don't need another Dreadknight to support the first.


I'm not calling EVERY list a net list, just the one that is used by the majority of people (I'm talking about the GK's without allies). This thread isn't a troll thread, I wanted to know other non-net list ideas and only really Belac has suggested stuff.

digital, like I've said before, only using your best units is not usually welcome in casual games. Although your list has two dreadknights (that's just a personal hate of mine), it doesn't contain Draigo and contains a brotherhood captain, so I'd be okay with that.

I don't blame GKs for deepstriking turn 1, just like many other marines alpha strike with their drop pods, I think that was poor decision making by GW in my opinion. I think its a bit too strong for a command benefit, and I think it should've been a more specific formation bonus (like that Orky one with all those ork boyz and stuff), but I don't blame GK players.

You've got to admit that everyone taking the same list is kinda dull and boring, but hopefully you guys will get a new model wave to bring back some variety (hopefully something to rival the Dreadknight).

I think the problem here is a lot GK players came up with the 'net list' on their own, WITHOUT actually looking on the net. The options in the codex are so bland that it is easy to come up with:

Librarian ML3 (the cheapest and fluffiest HQ... GKs are psychers so why not take a psyker)
Terminators (Cause I'm playing GKs... and that's what they do)
2 DKs (cause they look awesome... oh they happen to be good too, whatcha know)

then add whatever. And boom you have a 'net list'.

I can fix the GK codex, it just runs counter to GW's current design philosophy. Give each unit their unique psychic powers back. Warp Quake on Strike Squads? That's a really cool power. Deep Strike denial is a really cool and unique mechanic.

Pugators could be fixed with some kind of power as well. Their old "shoot through walls" thing was kinda weird - they really need some ability to either get their 24 inch weapons into range, or maybe bring back the really old demonhunter shrouding rules - they don't have long ranged guns, but at least you can't shoot them at long range.

The real reason Purifiers and Interceptors are the only PAGK taken is because they're the only units that still get cool toys. The only difference between pugators and SSGK is the ability to deep strike. Interceptors tack jump packs onto that. Purifiers lose deep strike, but get fearless, extra attacks, and cool psychic powers. So the question confronting the GK player while listbuilding is between boring ineffective PAGK, or PAGK with cool toys.

Belac Ynnead wrote:



Lets look at the rest of the Heavy Support section. And here I think you can make an argument for experimentation. Take Land Raiders. While they're not worse than regular SM Land Raiders, they don't really make sense in an army that is all about deepstriking. When both of our troop choices deep strike it's really hard to justify a 200+ point transport. That said, you could make a case for a purifier heavy, AV14 focused GK list. I'd play that list as it sounds like fun - except I don't currently have any land raiders.

I have looked at running a twin purifier and landraider build, because my terminators ran around in LR's last edition. The real problem with that list is that there is no viable hq unit to stick with them, and if you take the token terminator squad with you gm or libby, and deep strike them, they will get destroyed turn 1. Taking draigo works but then you are basically adding purifiers in land raiders to a draigo star which is a form of the "net list"

Also OP, by net list do you mean librarian, with terminators, purifiers and dk's. Or do you mean an army with some of those elements. Because I run purifiers in rhinos and lasbacks sometimes... especially against horde armies. I played a game against some minotaurs that was primarily paladins and terminators. We have already talked to death the fact that the other hq units are pretty awful compared to the libby

Zimko wrote:
I think the problem here is a lot GK players came up with the 'net list' on their own, WITHOUT actually looking on the net. The options in the codex are so bland that it is easy to come up with:

Librarian ML3 (the cheapest and fluffiest HQ... GKs are psychers so why not take a psyker)
Terminators (Cause I'm playing GKs... and that's what they do)
2 DKs (cause they look awesome... oh they happen to be good too, whatcha know)

then add whatever. And boom you have a 'net list'.

100% this.
In about a week I figured out my 1850 list of:
ML3 libby
3x10 terminators, combat squads
2x dreadknights
Aegis line with Comms relay

The turn-1 deepstrike formation limits you to 2 dreadknights, but is worth it; so I take basically the same list I did with the old codex except no mordrak and 1 less dreadknight.
At the end of the last codex, a lot of GK players started realizing that they couldn't compete in a shooting war and went to shunt lists anyway. The loss of psybolts, henchmen, and the change to psycannons just pushed the holdouts into that camp.

The problem I have with you isn't your question, I initially liked your question: AKA, hey guys what other lists do you GK's run. Simple and interesting and had the potential to bring out some interesting info.

Then I start to read, I see a lot of people giving options, hell even Rihgu gave you a whole list he took that wasn't the netlist, he then carefully explained why he thought it had sucked and why the resultant was then a list that was very close to the netlist. Your answer...
"I'll do the same with Tau now. Everything sucks compared to HYMP broadsides and IA riptides, so I'll only use them and the FW riptides too."
So for the whole 10-15 minutes he spent writing and trying to make a point you felt a 3 second no brain idiotic answer was suitable?

I then made a point about the cost of units against the overall cost of armies, how that affects the ability to bring sub-optimal units and so forth, not trying to state that GK's should only bring the best and no one should complain, simply making a point about the overall dynamic of the game. (a point you completely didn't understand as your answer showed), to which you again felt that this:
"Just because they are elite they have to take the best units? So only horde armies can take uncompetitive units?... Okay :L "
Hmm? a 3 second no brainer answer?? oh look common theme appearing?

After having read all your responses and everyone else's:
your issues are draigo and 2x dreadknight.
EVERYONE here has made the point about how bad the other HQ's are, so thats fine, you can run a poor HQ if you like. However, it seems quite obvious that you'd want to run a nasty beatstick HQ right? who doesn't? I run MA warbosses with DLS, 2+ armour with unlimited re-rolls until i fail 3 (in one turn). Hes a monster for his points--- FOR HIS POINTS, against draigo he'd get splattered, but at about 150 pts who cares, he'll demolish anything that doesn't have an invun, he'll eat whole squads in a couple turns with large amounts of PK attacks. Draigo, for his points is a beast, but hes expensive. It would be awesome if draigo wasn't so powerful and the other HQs more inline, im sure you'd find different lists. But it seems in reality hes the best HQ by a mile.

2x dreads - yeh I dont like this either, 1 would be cool, but then what?
take a rhino? or a land raider? a common theme is to keep your units matching as it allows versatility. you bring a dreadknight and a landraider? well that landraider is gona take its time getting here, so dread goes out first. then landraider. Im not trying to say always go 2x dreadknights. But in reality most lists work by sticking to a theme. orks they say the golden rule is your force hits at the same time. so you dont mix walkers and trukks, as trukks die T1/T2, walkers next. by sticking to one type you negate their threat selection. So your Tau example, tau sit back and shoot with range, so you can mix anything in with range.

I just find your really dismissive of any points given to you, as im sure im about to find out. (waiting on the 2 second no brain responses that are sure to follow)
If you cant get what im saying--- Think and repsond with counter points that actually stimulate discussion rather than simply attempt to override and shutdown.
"when I have to deal with people such as yourself. "
I couldn't think of a better statement that sums up how I feel your responses are.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 GKTiberius wrote:

Spoiler:

Belac Ynnead wrote:



Lets look at the rest of the Heavy Support section. And here I think you can make an argument for experimentation. Take Land Raiders. While they're not worse than regular SM Land Raiders, they don't really make sense in an army that is all about deepstriking. When both of our troop choices deep strike it's really hard to justify a 200+ point transport. That said, you could make a case for a purifier heavy, AV14 focused GK list. I'd play that list as it sounds like fun - except I don't currently have any land raiders.

Spoiler:

I have looked at running a twin purifier and landraider build, because my terminators ran around in LR's last edition. The real problem with that list is that there is no viable hq unit to stick with them, and if you take the token terminator squad with you gm or libby, and deep strike them, they will get destroyed turn 1. Taking draigo works but then you are basically adding purifiers in land raiders to a draigo star which is a form of the "net list"

Also OP, by net list do you mean librarian, with terminators, purifiers and dk's. Or do you mean an army with some of those elements. Because I run purifiers in rhinos and lasbacks sometimes... especially against horde armies. I played a game against some minotaurs that was primarily paladins and terminators. We have already talked to death the fact that the other hq units are pretty awful compared to the libby

My current list (2500pts) is a tad underwhelming but atleast I usually get 1 squad into battle near the end...

-Crow
-Libby-ml3, relic bolter

-Terminators-10- 2 psycannon, 2 dh, 8 halberds.
dedicated LR given to purifiers... (god hammer) (m-m)

Purifier- 2 dh, 8 falcons
-purifieries- 2DH 8Falcons

LR-redeemer (m-m)
LR- God hammer (m-m)
Storm raven (las/m-m)
storm raven (las/m-m)

deepstrike terminators and librarian.
1 purifier group with crowe in redeemer. (no combat squad, come out flame dead stuff.)
second group combat squads in other god hamer, use dedicated hammer as cover/distraction.

Storm raven provides anti air/try to blow up threats.

(only hope that people are glancing and forgot to bring enough melta/anti-armour to combat this list.
But at 2500 bound list, they usually bring enough to deal with all my threats.

THe list is in effective and doesn't win alot but it atleast gives me some fun.
But still it gets called a net list because of terminators, librarian...
Kinda pisses me off a little considering this isn't even competitive.

SGTPozy wrote:
All GK players that I have seen all use the net list, or with some slight variation such as different allies (SW or SM).
I was wondering what your lists are like as it seems that GKs are building a bit of a bad reputation for themselves.
Prove me wrong GK players, tell me your original lists and lets avoid the cheesy DK spam and Draigo!

Depends what you want.

For fluffy and friendly play there are a lot of ok options.

For competitiv play GK-codex is really bad, and a pure GK-army is not possible. No need to look for lists IMO. Draigo, libby and dreadknights are only good options. They can't stand alone. The only competitive armies make you dependent on allies, normally involving centurions and/or drop pods

What's the netlist?

According to people at my local meta it is;
HQ
Draigo, librarian 2/7 hq's. 2/7 are mediocre at best , 3/7 are out right bad. (ps I don't count techmarine as an actual hq)

Troops
Terminators are cheesy 1/2 of out troops

elite
Purifiers, paladins. 2/3 of our elite

Fast attack
Stormraven, interceptors. 2/2

heavy
landraider, dreadknight. 2/4

dedicated transports are ambiguous.

This means I have to field an army of
5 hq's that are all kinda bad.
(strike squad, purgation,)
Only 2 units are not considered net listing...

(sorry forgot dreads. dread noguht and venerable... but some still feel they are cheesy/netlist from last edition so

I was literally thinking of looking up how much of the dex the 'netlist' contained. This is why its so sad. Im sure GK players dont actually want to bring the all powerful, hate bearing netlist, but the fact is its almost impossible not to as the majority of the dex is part of it.

Im sure if GK's could bring 'fun' lists they would. But with such small amount of choice any fun list will still contain about 50% of the netlist units and obviously the label netlist overrides funlist when you beat someone.

 Slayer222 wrote:
According to people at my local meta it is;

So people are getting snippy because you aren't using 1/2 of your codex? That seems like a jerk thing to do.

More voluminous codexes like Space Marines ignore an even larger percentage of theirs. Heck, many stupidly awesome Space Marine armies feature 4 or fewer total different units out of the hundred-plus they have available.

Start labeling Marine lists as netlists then.

7-9/11 units in our codex not including hq's are considered netlisting.
Yes they are snippy but have been that way since 5th edition...
If they added more units it would be fun, but everyone expects us to ally to make ourselves even stronger.
However what was the point of removing the inquisitor/assassins if you are just going to ally them back in.
I love playing pure grey Knights but with so little options it gets boring fast.
They have to add some sort of new unit eventually...

Also if this happened to any other codex people would be mad.
Next thing you'll know their will be;
codex tactical marine
codex gene-stealer
codex stormraven
codex boy
Codex striking scorpion
Codex imperial troops
...

Imagine If this happened to any other codex.
How much outcry their would have been.
They literally gutted the thing, and didn't add a single new unit or model.

Codex: Deathwatch will become a reality at this rate.

4 boxes for the entire 'Dex

1- SM Captain
2- Command Squad for that customization aspect
3- Techmarine w/ TFC
4- Droppod

It would seem that this thread already started with an anti-GK bias, where actual discussion was not really wanted, just confirmation.

The simple truth is, the GK codex lost a lot of options. Not just with the removal of Inquisition and Assassins, but with the removal of psybolt ammo, the unique psychic powers, the nemesis weapon rules, the change to psycannons, and other elements. Without all of these options, and if you also want to limit a GK player to the "not-best" units (no interceptors, no terminators, no dreadknights) then all you're really left with is overpriced marines that die exactly as easily as all other marines do. Other codices at least have different options to play with, as the units fall into multiple tiers (best, good, average, bad, for example) within their respective codices. For GK, and the already small number of units available, those multiple tiers are, unfortunately, reduced to two (best and average/bad, with nothing in between).

To be perfectly honest, my favorite GK codex was the Daemonhunters book, as GK were a bit more unique (WS5 and S6, for example) rather than just being plain old marines with extra gear and psychic powers.

Also for the record, Draigo is not an HQ choice anymore, he's a lord of war. Some people seem confused on this issue.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Its kind of a dumb poll. There are only a few combinations that work, with all of them posted, critiqued, flamed, and threaded in the internet, making any list a net list.

SJ

Was about to comment on the lack of GK veterans posting in this thread...

I started 40k in early 2013 with BA but switched to GK beause painting red is a huge pain in the ass and I really like the look of the models.
With 7th edition my playstyle switched from a shooty, mobile army with some assault assets to what is called the netlist nowerdays.

Why ? Because as stated before I just don't see any other options to run GK anymore. Everytime you take a look at the old Codex you will have new ideas, you see new ways of how to field your GK just because we had so much options back then. We were able to switch the flavour of our army from game to game because we had so much options and neat little tricks we could pull out of our pockets if we wanted to.

I figured out my "netlist" on my own beause in my gaming group we usually play the new missions and the ability to deepstrike 2+ armored units into the midfield from turn 1 on comes in handy in this kind of game. And as mentioned before we just don't have the options anymore to run something different.
If you want to play malestorm imho you want to have something beefy in the middle and mobile assets to jump arround and take objectives or to take out enemy troops which are holding objektives. This limits the usefullness of our choices to said "netlist" units. DK with teleporters as they are very mobile and have the ability to whipe out enemy troops aswell as tanks, interceptors to be very mobile and they are able to take objectives from non MEQ units due to their incinerators and terminators can DS in the mid and, depending on the terrain, can be very beefy and hard to take out.
Another mobile asset is GOI so why not try to get it ? Even our cards kinda force us to take it.
Librarians, well we do rely on psi and in my opinion to cast powers has become much harder then it was in 6th so we are dependand on a high amount of warpdice to buff our units. Why should we take something else ? We need the dice and the more expensive HQs do not offer anything to compensate the loss of warpdice.

So in my opinion the "netlist" is more or less the only logical choice to play the new missions in 7th edition. It is mobile, beefy and provides the warpdice needed to buff our units. And there is not much left to vary anyway.

If you play Orks for example you have tons of choices, tons of possibilitys to vary and of course you can field a whole new army every game if you want to. GK players choices vary between cheaper,less firepower and less armor and more expensive, more firepower and more durable. This is pretty much the only choice you have.

Well, I generally play my own lists.
If I'd publish it here, it would be a net list.

I play what I've always loved...Terminators backed by Stern...and some deepstriking strikes...maybe some melta "stormtroopers"

That's how I've always loved doing it...and how I'll keep doing it.

But yes, I also have 4 DreadKnights.

Guys, I cannot respond to all of you and comment on everything as too much is being posted. Since my last post there have been 19 (yeah, 19) other posts, so how could I possibly respond to them all?

I did start with anti-GK bias, I will not lie, but I want you guys to change my mind, just like that guy who talked about his personal gaming group with the land raider and single Dreadknight; that was good.

Most people are talking about HQs, I have no problem with the librarian as most people take essentially the same HQ in games, but its hard to explain my reasoning as when I give examples they get shot down as all other armies have more options.

I also hate the lucky stick warboss, but he's easy enough to kill with plasma due to lack of invulnerable save.

I also never said not to use any of the best units as that's idiotic, what I did say though was that in friendly games, you don't have to only use the best units (unless both people want to).

The difference between GKs losing half of their codex and another army losing it is that it the Inquisition and assassins didn't really belong there in the first place. Heck, I'd be fine if they removed Kroot and Vespid from Tau to make a Tau Auxiliaries codex (I know its not the same, but the options are still there).

Why would someone get annoyed for not using half of their codex? That makes no sense to me how you came to that conclusion, people would get annoyed if people only used 10% of units in casual games.

We still don't know what you classify as a 'net list' so it's hard to convince you of anything.

My preferred list involves Librarian, Terminators, DKs and Purifiers. Is that a net list?

Im actually liking the new codex more and more,

my terminators and libraians came off the shelf since they were totally bottom of the heap before,

sure I lost inq units and assasins, but its odd that they were shoe horned in there in the first place, most tournaments allow two detachments, and assisins are data slates so dont require a detachment so none of my previous lists were invalidated.


now I get to run GK as GK and im happy, libbies are the bees knees... sanctic is fething awesome... having guys with ranged D weapons that are not LOW can be very VERY nice (also very risky, but thats the trade off)

are the GK crazy op? no... why does every book have to be eldar OP to be a good codex? GW is doing codexes like orks and GK right... they just shat the bed on eldar big time.

SGTPozy wrote:

I also never said not to use any of the best units as that's idiotic, what I did say though was that in friendly games, you don't have to only use the best units (unless both people want to).

The difference between GKs losing half of their codex and another army losing it is that it the Inquisition and assassins didn't really belong there in the first place. Heck, I'd be fine if they removed Kroot and Vespid from Tau to make a Tau Auxiliaries codex (I know its not the same, but the options are still there).

Sure, but keep in mind, that GKs only have 3 elite, 2 troop, 2 fa (+rhino + razorback) and 3 heavy.

So the Gks are unable to adapt to a players playstyle like you can do with other, more mature codexes, like Orks for example.
The choices a player has to build his list are very limited.

The concept of a "netlist" fails regarding the GK codex because choices are extremely limited and do not allow much variation.

Purgation squads are more or less useless due to salvo and dreads are overpriced and lost psybolt ammo. To call the rest (excluding servo troops) a "netlist" is in my opinion just stupid.

SGTPozy wrote:

The difference between GKs losing half of their codex and another army losing it is that it the Inquisition and assassins didn't really belong there in the first place. Heck, I'd be fine if they removed Kroot and Vespid from Tau to make a Tau Auxiliaries codex (I know its not the same, but the options are still there).

I agree with you - Assassins and Inquisition shouldn't have been in the GK book. However, their removal and the handling if the remaining units was so ham-handed you'd think the designers had pigs for hands. Here are a few of the problems

1) The inquisition wasn't all that got dropped. They also removed multiple GK special characters, along with other elements like psybolt ammunition. If you're starting by hacking away half the content, it's generally not a good idea to then hack off even more.

2) Nothing was added. They didn't even furnish it with some crap units as a pretence. Perhaps more importantly, they got new new weapons (outside of artefacts). So, that's most of their weapon diversity down the toilet.

3) The changes invalidated yet more units, and removed any semblance of internal balance. Librarians got drastically cheaper, whilst Grand Masters kept their cost but lost Grand Strategy. Terminators were made markedly cheaper, and can also wield the new psycannons without penalty. Meanwhile, infantry got no point decrease, and don't even get a discount on psycannons. Know what might halp here? Having more than 3 weapons. Also, at the same time Purgation squads are looking at 24" range weapons (12" if they move), Dreadknights now pay a negligible cost for outstanding mobility - and their heavy psycannon was given an anti-vehicle mode (not to mention, unlike most MCs in this edition, they're S10 in combat without sacrificing attacks or ranged weapons). Dreadnoughts got more expensive and lost psybolt ammunition. So, the main reason for including them no longer exists... and they're more expensive now. It's just a mess of changes with no apparent logic behind them (save perhaps for selling the models GW is presumably overstocked with).

4) Despite losing half the content, the book still managed to double in cost. Nothing to do with balance, but I'm going to bring it up anyway because it just seems like such a massive middle-finger to GK players.

 easysauce wrote:

my terminators and libraians came off the shelf since they were totally bottom of the heap before,

It would be a lot nicer if GW were able to remove units from the shelf, without just putting other units back on it.

Zimko wrote:
We still don't know what you classify as a 'net list' so it's hard to convince you of anything.

My preferred list involves Librarian, Terminators, DKs and Purifiers. Is that a net list?

By my reading i think.its duel or more dk

 ductvader wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Its kind of a dumb poll. There are only a few combinations that work, with all of them posted, critiqued, flamed, and threaded in the internet, making any list a net list.

SJ

Was about to comment on the lack of GK veterans posting in this thread...

/bow

I'm just a little miffed at the obvious bias of the poll. When the new GK codex released, I and others posted several fluffy lists using the new NSF FoC because we thought they would be fun ways to play the exact same lists many of us have been using since 5th (Ghostwing, in my case). To have someone trash our efforts by lumping it all into the curse-word of "Netlist" is asinine at best, or being willfully ignorant at the very least. Hell, just read one of the many GK Tacticas, and you will find a limited set of decent builds at varying point level based on playability; Emperor Forbid you use one and risk being labelled a Netlister!

Bigoted polls are bigoted.

SJ