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.

Panzerboy26 wrote:Grey Knights aren't overpowered. They're an army with a fabulously low model count

Unless they forget they have access to Henchmen units.

If they want to fire beyond 24", they have Psyflmen Dreads and nothing else.

Razorbacks, Land Raiders, Stormravens, Jokaero, Chimeras, Vindicare's, conversion beamers, etc. There is in fact units that have greater than a 24" range in the book besides *just* Psyrifle dreads.

I promise that for every game they go firing every turn and fortituding any stunned or shakens away there's a game where they fail a cover save turn 1 and explode before firing a shot.

How is that different from any other army?

I disagree with that, the most overpowered book GW has released in the past Decade is Fantasy Daemons of Chaos 7th Edition book.

I'd say that the Grey Knights is the 40k equivalent of the Fantasy Demons.

That demons codex all but destroyed Fantasy's presence at my local club for a very long period of time, right up until 8th in fact. - Noone would touch the game with a barge pole, preferring instead WAB or even WOTR for a while.

And since GK has come out, 40k has been massively struggling as well... There's even questions posted up on the club forums about 'what can we use our 40k models for, that isn't 40k.'

Conversely, the question for fantasy right now is. "What models can I use for my games of Fantasy that arn't GW."

- Fortunately, the answer to that is easy... MANTIC!

Vaktathi wrote: Unless they forget they have access to Henchmen units.

Which require them to dilute their combat prowess, as well as take characters to unlock them for either Troops or Elites. You can bulk the numbers of the army out with these units, sure, but the list of gripes about Grey Knights generally don't apply to to them, i.e. most assault units are perfectly capable of curb-stomping henchmen units.

Vaktathi wrote: Razorbacks, Land Raiders, Stormravens, Jokaero, Chimeras, Vindicare's, conversion beamers, etc. There is in fact units that have greater than a 24" range in the book besides *just* Psyrifle dreads.

Godhammer pattern Land Raiders are the only model that has the ability to fire beyond 24", and I can't honestly say that I've ever seen an army list sporting one, much less people griping about it being in the list.

Stormravens are, from what I have seen, used as assault transports, being within 24" of the enemy from pretty much the first chance they get to move if they have anything to say about it. 200+ pts for one TL Lascannon to hang back with armor 12 isn't something I'd be concerned about in the long range firepower department.

Jokaero, as stated above, fall under henchmen, and for every unit of them you take your list becomes less and less able to not sweat assault units.

Razorbacks are hardly new, and they're not exactly cheap if you put lascannons on them. The psybolt Hvy. Bolter version is the only one that can actually be counted as reasonably cheap for what you get, and I still don't see what's so great about it. 3 Str 6 shots doesn't strike me as anything to get excited about unless you're fighting against DE.

Chimeras? I'd think it'd be more the things inside of them that are scary. Unless you're playing against DE, as a Guard player I can attest that generally a Chimera isn't all that threatening shooting wise unless taken in large numbers, things that I don't see in GK lists.

I'll bow out to the Vindicare, decent point, he's pretty good with all of his special shots no longer being one per game, specially the new and improved Turbo Penetrator. However, you'll at least never see more than one of them.

Vaktathi wrote: How is that different from any other army?

It's not. That's my point. They're vehicles, and like every other army with vehicles, the same remedies, counters, and weaknesses apply, making them not overpowered or broken.

The biggest issue with grey knights isnt that they are vastly over powered. Not saying they arent! It is that they can hard counter a majority of the armies out there more then any other codex. Adding onto to that most things that other codexs can do well, the grey knights can do just as well and in most cases better. Its hard to take an allcomers list that can fight every army as well as grey knights. I came pretty close to a build that could at the ard boyz finals but ran into Draigowing in a dawn of war annihilation mission. Needless to say he got 4 to 5 kill points and won the game lol. Perhaps the reason grey knights don't consistently take first is because they still have to roll well get doable missions against opponents (example: playing against nids on capture and hold compared to table quarters vs Tau). Once you reach a certain level between gamers it comes down to dice and matchups. If you make 80% of your flak armor saves with your guardsman your gonna go far. If you fail 60% of your marine saves go ahead and pack your stuff up because your going home early.

My issue isn't with grey knights being too good. Its that sometimes they can autowin against certain armies. Pending your dice pulling off a statistical miracle. Same reason DE wipe the floor with Nids. IG wipe the floor with DE. Grey Knights wipe the floor with everyone but SW and IG. Sure you can still win with those match-ups but statistically it aint gonna happen given the same skill level per side and a competitive build.

A lot of people seem to think that Fortitude is underpriced and compare it to Extra Armor. This strikes me as very silly, since they have the relationship the wrong way around. Fortitude isn't underpriced; Extra Armor is overpriced. If Extra Armor went back down to 5 points (as it should), we wouldn't see these complaints. Does anyone complain that Blood Angel Devastators are underpriced because they cost less than Space Marine Devastators? No, because-- as Long Fangs have demonstrated-- normal Marine Devastator heavy weapons are overpriced, and the BA Devs have been adjusted to cost the correct amount. The same goes for Fortitude and Extra Armor.

Panzerboy26 wrote:
Which require them to dilute their combat prowess, as well as take characters to unlock them for either Troops or Elites. You can bulk the numbers of the army out with these units, sure, but the list of gripes about Grey Knights generally don't apply to to them, i.e. most assault units are perfectly capable of curb-stomping henchmen units.

Taking a just 2 or 3 henchmen units with a transport costs only a few hundred points and hugely bulks out numbers and firepower, especially melta/long range firepower. You have far more than enough points left over for the assault units.

Godhammer pattern Land Raiders are the only model that has the ability to fire beyond 24" and I can't honestly say that I've ever seen an army list sporting one, much less people griping about it being in the list.

I'm not making a judgement call on Land Raiders, however it is a unit with three twin linked weapons available to the army with greater than 24" range.

Stormravens are, from what I have seen, used as assault transports, being within 24" of the enemy from pretty much the first chance they get to move if they have anything to say about it. 200+ pts for one TL Lascannon to hang back with armor 12 isn't something I'd be concerned about in the long range firepower department.

It's not something you sit back and have shoot from the back of the board, but it is a mobile gun platform with PotMS that can fire at a long range target if it needs to. It's another avenue that gives them >24" firepower on a fairly popular platform.

Jokaero, as stated above, fall under henchmen, and for every unit of them you take your list becomes less and less able to not sweat assault units.

And again, they're so cheap that you're really not.

Razorbacks are hardly new

Didn't say they were

and they're not exactly cheap if you put lascannons on them.

Cheap enough that they're the MSU spam transport of choice that's much maligned in GK, SW, and BA armies, and can't be shut down as a firing platform really without tearing off the gun or killing it. Also, it helps that you can take them as basically 92pt armored scoring units with a henchmen squad.

The psybolt Hvy. Bolter version is the only one that can actually be counted as reasonably cheap for what you get

This just isn't true. If you check out many of the GK army list threads and see what's popular at tournaments, you will see a great number of TLLC/LCTLPG/Psybolt Assault Cannon Razorbacks

Chimeras? I'd think it'd be more the things inside of them that are scary.

with two 36" range heavy weapons, they can put out enough firepower to make themselves useful.

Unless you're playing against DE, as a Guard player I can attest that generally a Chimera isn't all that threatening shooting wise unless taken in large numbers, things that I don't see in GK lists.

It's not difficult to bring 3 or 4 on top of the scary assault units, walkers, and whatnot for even cheaper than the IG can take them.

I'll bow out to the Vindicare, decent point, he's pretty good with all of his special shots no longer being one per game, specially the new and improved Turbo Penetrator. However, you'll at least never see more than one of them.

True.

It's not. That's my point. They're vehicles, and like every other army with vehicles, the same remedies, counters, and weaknesses apply, making them not overpowered or broken.

The fact that 5pts buys them immunity to 66% of glanced and 33% of penetrating hit results 92% of the time is a wee bit silly.

Fetterkey wrote:Fortitude isn't underpriced; Extra Armor is overpriced.

Extra Armor is overpriced yes. Fortitude however is underpriced, by no small amount. EA simply downgrades a Stunned result to shaken, it still means a vehicle cannot shoot. Fortitude flat out removes the result. If other armies had access to Fortitude for 5pts, 10pts, 15pts or even 20pts, you'd see it on a humongous number of units.

Chaos Space Marines have it but downgrade to BS3 and it costs 20pts.

I tied a coteaz henchman army. They are much stronger in assault than you'd believe with death cult sins being only 15 PTs per model now with furious charge and initiative 6

Fetterkey wrote:A lot of people seem to think that Fortitude is underpriced and compare it to Extra Armor. This strikes me as very silly, since they have the relationship the wrong way around. Fortitude isn't underpriced; Extra Armor is overpriced. If Extra Armor went back down to 5 points (as it should), we wouldn't see these complaints. Does anyone complain that Blood Angel Devastators are underpriced because they cost less than Space Marine Devastators? No, because-- as Long Fangs have demonstrated-- normal Marine Devastator heavy weapons are overpriced, and the BA Devs have been adjusted to cost the correct amount. The same goes for Fortitude and Extra Armor.

Your point about the devastators is interesting, in that you can tell when they get the price right by how many of a unit people tend to take. I very very rarely see space marine devastators (150 for 4 rockets), occasionally see blood angel devastators (130 for 4 rockets), and see long fangs spammed everywhere (115 for 4 rockets).

If something is spammed, that's a good indication that it is underpriced. Razorbacks in general, Long Fangs, Purifiers and Henchmen, Venoms for DE. All good examples. If something is taken in moderation, that's a good indication that it's reasonably priced. Space Wolf scouts, Space Marine Landspeeders, and Blood Angel Devastators all fit here. If something is only taken because it's required (as troops) or never taken, that's a good indication that it's overpriced. Like Mandrakes, or Skyclaw packs.

Extra Armour is probably priced appropriately. I see people take it, sometimes. I rarely see it spammed.

And Death Cultists have no frag grenades so unless assaulting out of an expensive landraider, it's rather unlikely they'll manage to avoid being I1.

Mainly it seems to me that people grumble about two things. GK having changed the 'metagame' by making some previously favoured lists an unattractive match up against some GK builds, coupled with of course the perceived 'overpowered' nature of the codex. These latter gripes, in my opinion, don't take into account the fact that it is impossible to field an efficient GK force that actually utilises all the advantages folk are moaning about. In general I find it is players of 'top tier' codices who moan loudest because their lists are often the most undermined by various GK builds.

It's also quite important to realise that the GK codex can make quite a few decent builds, including but not restricted to:

Coteaz/henchmen/mech MSU (with or without dreadnought support)
Crowe/purifier/mech msu/dreadnought support
Draigo/foot paladins
Draigo/stormraven paladins
Teleport lists (Strikes supporting Interceptors and Dreadknights)

and so on.

All these lists have different pros and cons and play very differently. This wide variety of possible builds may contribute to the erroneous notion that GK are overpowered.

Vaktathi wrote:The fact that 5pts buys them immunity to 66% of glanced and 33% of penetrating hit results 92% of the time is a wee bit silly.

Fetterkey wrote:Fortitude isn't underpriced; Extra Armor is overpriced.

Extra Armor is overpriced yes. Fortitude however is underpriced, by no small amount. EA simply downgrades a Stunned result to shaken, it still means a vehicle cannot shoot. Fortitude flat out removes the result. If other armies had access to Fortitude for 5pts, 10pts, 15pts or even 20pts, you'd see it on a humongous number of units.

Fortitude doesn't work all the time. It fails 1/9 of the time (double ones is essentially failure since it removes the existing result but inflicts another that could be worse), and is vulnerable to psychic defenses, which reduce its success rate to less than 50-50. Extra Armor, on the other hand, works completely reliably. If Extra Armor cost 5 points-- as it did in earlier editions-- it would be completely balanced with Fortitude, with Fortitude being a riskier option but allowing shooting (and thus being better for shooty transports) and Extra Armor being completely reliable but not allowing shooting (and thus being better for Rhinos and the like).

Redbeard wrote:Your point about the devastators is interesting, in that you can tell when they get the price right by how many of a unit people tend to take. I very very rarely see space marine devastators (150 for 4 rockets), occasionally see blood angel devastators (130 for 4 rockets), and see long fangs spammed everywhere (115 for 4 rockets).

The funny part about this is that Blood Angel Devastators are better than Long Fangs, but they haven't made as much of a splash as Long Fangs have-- probably thanks to very strong competition from Fast vehicles in the BA Heavy Support slot.

Fetterkey wrote:
The funny part about this is that Blood Angel Devastators are better than Long Fangs,

Care to back this up with some reasoning? I disagree. Nothing Blood Angel devastators have helps them in their primary role to the extent that long fangs being able to split fire helps them.

Consider the matchup against dark eldar. 3 units of long fangs, for a total of less than 400 points, can suppress six skimmers. Three units of blood angel devastators can only deal with three, and cost more to do so.

Artemo wrote:And Death Cultists have no frag grenades so unless assaulting out of an expensive landraider, it's rather unlikely they'll manage to avoid being I1.

Mainly it seems to me that people grumble about two things. GK having changed the 'metagame' by making some previously favoured lists an unattractive match up against some GK builds, coupled with of course the perceived 'overpowered' nature of the codex. These latter gripes, in my opinion, don't take into account the fact that it is impossible to field an efficient GK force that actually utilises all the advantages folk are moaning about. In general I find it is players of 'top tier' codices who moan loudest because their lists are often the most undermined by various GK builds.

It's also quite important to realise that the GK codex can make quite a few decent builds, including but not restricted to:

Coteaz/henchmen/mech MSU (with or without dreadnought support)
Crowe/purifier/mech msu/dreadnought support
Draigo/foot paladins
Draigo/stormraven paladins
Teleport lists (Strikes supporting Interceptors and Dreadknights)

and so on.

All these lists have different pros and cons and play very differently. This wide variety of possible builds may contribute to the erroneous notion that GK are overpowered.

Please explain to the Daemon players (such as myself) how GK's are balanced?!? You know, when you show up to your average game night and the quake-shunt lists come to play. God forbid 'prefered enemy' turns out in 6th as it's rumored...



As for Fortitude, it is OTT & game-breaking because;
a) It is better than extra armour for only a third of the cost. (if you fail more than 2 or 3 unmodified Ld10 tests at most over the corse of the game, that's bad dice talking there!)

b) Only a select few armies can actually counter it!
Orks, Chaos Marines, Daemons, Black Templars and Tau have no actual way of stopping it. So yes, against us it's completely broken!
Dark Eldar & Necrons have very limited ways to try and stop it, so it can be very obnoxious against them because it requires specific units/upgrades to be bought to have any chance at countering it.
GK's, Loyalist marines, Tyranids & IG have decent access to anti-psychic abilities, so against them it'll seem perhaps just a wee bit under costed, but fair enough.
Eldar will laugh!

But for roughly half the armies in the game, Fortitude is silly good and for cheaper than what any other similar ability is currently costed.
So sure, against say Space Wolves and their rune priests fortitude may turn out lackluster, but against those orks who already struggle to bring down vehicles, you get to laugh in their face as you easily ignore 2/3rd's of those glancing hits and a 1/3rd of the pens.

Fetterkey wrote:The funny part about this is that Blood Angel Devastators are better than Long Fangs, but they haven't made as much of a splash as Long Fangs have-- probably thanks to very strong competition from Fast vehicles in the BA Heavy Support slot.

Little off-topic, but in what way are they better? Price per missile launcher is better for long fangs (32.5 for 4 missile in BA, with a signum serg, 28 for 5 missile fangs + serg, or 28.75 for 4 missile fangs + serg), fangs can split fire and have the fringe bonuses of counter-attack and night-vision. Other then being able to take ablative wounds and maybe FnP in the BA devs, they are in every way inferior.

Things like giving great abilities to already great units, effectively forcing everyone to take those units and annoying everyone else is what makes the codex seem OP - like giving Cleansing Flame to Purifiers or making psybolts only cost 5 pts for Dreadnoughts.

I don't think it's the abilities or costs themselves that gives the impression of the codex being overpowered - it's more that all the best stuff is crammed into the best units for very little points that means most people will only ever see the same very powerful, relatively cheap units across the board from them.

Imagine if Strike Squads were the ones who could use Cleansing Flame and it cost 10 points to give it to the squad? You may see them used a lot more often, maybe even with falchions to boost their CC prowess but then you'd be looking at a marine that costs 21-31 points. It would be powerful but costly and therefore, fairly costed. It's when you see a 26 point Purifier with I6, 2 attacks base AND Cleansing Flame that you start to think the codex is OP.

I play GK and if I'm honest, I can't argue that it's not at least a very powerful codex. On the other hand, it's not an auto win army either as there are stark weaknesses to it - a general lack of range and low AP firepower across all the GK units. A general lack of good invulnerable saves across the GK units is another weakness. As is T4 and no Fearless on the Paladins as one or two well placed blasts can wipe an entire squad or at least force them to crap their iron undies and leg it off the board.

Fetterkey wrote:
Fortitude doesn't work all the time. It fails 1/9 of the time (double ones is essentially failure since it removes the existing result but inflicts another that could be worse), and is vulnerable to psychic defenses, which reduce its success rate to less than 50-50. Extra Armor, on the other hand, works completely reliably.

The failure rate is still very low, and is useful on all vehicles, whereas extra armor is often pointless on gun tanks. Also keep in mind, as has been earlier pointed out, psychic defenses are only available in a minority of the armies in the game and generally have a limited range aside from Eldar and Dark Angels (2 of the 4 oldest books also)

If Extra Armor cost 5 points-- as it did in earlier editions-- it would be completely balanced with Fortitude, with Fortitude being a riskier option but allowing shooting (and thus being better for shooty transports) and Extra Armor being completely reliable but not allowing shooting (and thus being better for Rhinos and the like).

If Extra Armor were 5pts we'd see it on every transport in every game all the time. If fortitude were available to everyone for 5pts, we'd see it on every vehicle all the time.

The funny part about this is that Blood Angel Devastators are better than Long Fangs, but they haven't made as much of a splash as Long Fangs have-- probably thanks to very strong competition from Fast vehicles in the BA Heavy Support slot.

BA devastators are 10pts cheaper but have fewer dudes and heavy weapons and can't split fire. For 130pts they get 5 dudes with 4 heavy weapons, Long Fangs for 140pts get 6 dudes with 5 heavy weapons. The Devastator squad is basically paying ~33pts per heavy weapon while the LF's are paying 28pts per heavy weapon. If BA dev's were better than long fangs, they'd be taken even with the other HS options, but they're not.

Redbeard wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:
The funny part about this is that Blood Angel Devastators are better than Long Fangs,

Care to back this up with some reasoning? I disagree. Nothing Blood Angel devastators have helps them in their primary role to the extent that long fangs being able to split fire helps them.

Consider the matchup against dark eldar. 3 units of long fangs, for a total of less than 400 points, can suppress six skimmers. Three units of blood angel devastators can only deal with three, and cost more to do so.

BA Devastators can take ablative wounds, can use Combat Squads to effectively split their fire if doing so, and can easily get FNP, making them far more resilient than Long Fangs. While Long Fangs can indeed target more units, you can't target any units if the enemy Venoms have flown in from outside your range and taken you out with Splinter Cannons. Overall, the radically increased resilience of Blood Angel Devastators with appropriate support elements makes them a stronger unit than Long Fangs, especially in the Dark Eldar matchup. However, they are still worse than Fast Predators, so they don't hit the tables that often.

Fetterkey wrote:

BA Devastators can take ablative wounds, can use Combat Squads to effectively split their fire if doing so

And in total cost significantly more for no appreciable gain in firepower. For the cost of two full sized Devastator units with 8 ML's, you can get three long fang squads able to engage half again as many targets with twice as many heavy weapons. One will notice that the "best" units in the MEQ metagame have been for many years MSU type units, not large squads with ablative wounds. Especially for a first turn alpha strike (where such heavy weapons units are at their peak in terms of performance), the Long Fangs have it by far.

and can easily get FNP, making them far more resilient than Long Fangs.

Which is another 50pt investment that's not going forward with the assault troops.

And if we're bringing in other units like sang priests, lets talk about Rune Priests with their ability to make every skimmer transport risk immobilization and who also can sport a multi-shot S7 weapon with unlimited range to further support the long fangs.

While Long Fangs can indeed target more units, you can't target any units if the enemy Venoms have flown in from outside your range and taken you out with Splinter Cannons.

Which usually isn't an issue given 48" range guns on most tables unless the DE are hiding in reserve. Splinter Cannons have a 36" range, they'll basically have to weather a turn of fire to get in there given that they can only move 12" and fire, so if the LF's were out of 48", the Venoms aren't going to be able to make 36" in one turn and still be able to shoot.

Overall, the radically increased resilience of Blood Angel Devastators with appropriate support elements makes them a stronger unit than Long Fangs

And yet, they are almost never fielded, whereas the Long Fangs are spammed something unmerciful

You don't see BA Devastators (except in neo-DoA lists) because Fast Predators, especially auto-las predators, are way way better. Auto-las predators are already on par with Long Fangs as a unit, albeit more vulnerable to outflankers, and letting them move and fire everything is crazy. Devastators just can't compete with that level of firepower, especially since the Predators adds to target saturation in a mechanized list. On the other hand, non-mechanized lists can use Devastators to great effect...

Fetterkey wrote:You don't see BA Devastators (except in neo-DoA lists) because Fast Predators, especially auto-las predators, are way way better. Auto-las predators are already on par with Long Fangs as a unit, albeit more vulnerable to outflankers, and letting them move and fire everything is crazy. Devastators just can't compete with that level of firepower, especially since the Predators adds to target saturation in a mechanized list. On the other hand, non-mechanized lists can use Devastators to great effect...

And often do, it's one of the key elements of the BA-Jump list, 15 devs + a sang priest to give them all FNP creates a tough backfield unit that puts out supporting fire/cracks open tanks. They're really quite good in actuality..

Yeah, that's the neo-DOA army I'm talking about. Even without ablative bodies, FNP can make Devastators extremely resilient to units that are normally their bane (Night Shield Venoms, various artillery, etc.)

Fetterkey wrote:You don't see BA Devastators (except in neo-DoA lists) because Fast Predators, especially auto-las predators, are way way better. Auto-las predators are already on par with Long Fangs as a unit, albeit more vulnerable to outflankers, and letting them move and fire everything is crazy. Devastators just can't compete with that level of firepower

Dev's actually put out increased AT firepower in terms of anti-medium/light tank capability than a Auto-Las predator does and are cheaper to boot, and especially compared with the tri-las. The issue isn't that the predator is so devastating, it's that it is mobile adds more armor to the list. That said, the BA devastators still aren't better than Long Fangs, they can't min/max as effectively, they lack the alpha strike capability, and cannot engage as many targets and pay more points per heavy weapon.

especially since the Predators adds to target saturation in a mechanized list.

Which is the other big thing.

On the other hand, non-mechanized lists can use Devastators to great effect...

And you still almost never see them.

Vaktathi wrote:

Fetterkey wrote:You don't see BA Devastators (except in neo-DoA lists) because Fast Predators, especially auto-las predators, are way way better. Auto-las predators are already on par with Long Fangs as a unit, albeit more vulnerable to outflankers, and letting them move and fire everything is crazy. Devastators just can't compete with that level of firepower

Dev's actually put out increased AT firepower in terms of anti-medium/light tank capability than a Auto-Las predator does and are cheaper to boot, and especially compared with the tri-las. The issue isn't that the predator is so devastating, it's that it is mobile adds more armor to the list. That said, the BA devastators still aren't better than Long Fangs, they can't min/max as effectively, they lack the alpha strike capability, and cannot engage as many targets and pay more points per heavy weapon.

especially since the Predators adds to target saturation in a mechanized list.

Which is the other big thing.

On the other hand, non-mechanized lists can use Devastators to great effect...

And you still almost never see them.

Please take this as a question, and not an attack, as that's the way it's intended: but how many GT's would you say you attend annually? Not an RTT or other event, but a GT.

This isn't to say the only thing that matters is a GT, but for the current discussion of "are GK's breaking the competitive scene omgzorz" we're talking about whether they're actually dominating the GT scene. They arent.

To bring this back to BA, I play at 4-5 GT's per year, and the majority of BA armies I see are (with very rough percentages of how I've observed them):
-DOA with Dev's on foot (50%)
-Foot spam with dev's/etc on foot and sang priests. It's actually a really obnoxious list due to the amount of 3+/FNP bodies and heavy weapons it fields. (5-10%)
-Razor/Pred spam msu BA (common at first, I havent seen it for the last couple GT's) (5-10%)
-Mephiston/Raider heavy builds that are low kp/rock style armies (not quite common, but (~30-40%)

Don't underestimate the importance of giving Dev's FNP in how you compare them versus long fangs. A couple ablative bodies and 1 sang priest means those 3 dev units are nigh-impossible to kill without actually engaging them in combat. Engaging them in combat is no easy feat since they're far away, and you're generally being rushed by a ton of jumper marines, so you have to deal with them first.

Against long fangs, I typically just torrent them with Psybacks/Psyfle Dreads/Storm bolters that have moved up. I won't kill them all, but I'll cause morale checks (painful when deployed near the edge) or kill off enough missiles/etc. to blunt their effectiveness. Against BA devs, this won't cut it.

Experiment 626 wrote:Please explain to the Daemon players (such as myself) how GK's are balanced?!? You know, when you show up to your average game night and the quake-shunt lists come to play. God forbid 'prefered enemy' turns out in 6th as it's rumored...

If guys are pulling out a quake-shunt list on you at game night just because you play daemons, then you probably play with a bag of dicks. List tailoring is a dick move normally, but in casual 'game night' games? Pure dickery.

Don't underestimate the importance of giving Dev's FNP in how you compare them versus long fangs. A couple ablative bodies and 1 sang priest means those 3 dev units are nigh-impossible to kill without actually engaging them in combat. Engaging them in combat is no easy feat since they're far away, and you're generally being rushed by a ton of jumper marines, so you have to deal with them first.

Against long fangs, I typically just torrent them with Psybacks/Psyfle Dreads/Storm bolters that have moved up. I won't kill them all, but I'll cause morale checks (painful when deployed near the edge) or kill off enough missiles/etc. to blunt their effectiveness. Against BA devs, this won't cut it.

As awful as comparative theoryhammer discussions are, I feel that I have to interject something. You are comparing the combined cost effectiveness of a full dev army backbone with FNP support to three min maxed long fang squads. There is a difference of several hundred points between these two formations in isolation. One is nearly twice the cost of the other. This negates such a comparison entirely since it is discounting any possible supporting/non elements within the space wolf army that would utilize those points.

You may now return to bickering.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

pretre wrote:

Experiment 626 wrote:Please explain to the Daemon players (such as myself) how GK's are balanced?!? You know, when you show up to your average game night and the quake-shunt lists come to play. God forbid 'prefered enemy' turns out in 6th as it's rumored...

If guys are pulling out a quake-shunt list on you at game night just because you play daemons, then you probably play with a bag of dicks. List tailoring is a dick move normally, but in casual 'game night' games? Pure dickery.

It effects space marine drop pod and BA DOA forces as well doesn't it? It's not really just a monobuild against demons. It's got good use against Dark Angels and a couple popular tyranid builds as well. Besides, the point was primarily that a power that cheaply negates the capacity of an army to function at a basic level is inherently unbalanced and stupid.

Augustus wrote:

mortetvie wrote: more complex armies like Dark Eldar/Eldar and so on.

Dark Eldar? Complex? That's laughable, take 6-9 venoms and 3 Ravagers and just start rolling to hit, that army plays itself. The only complex thing about playing Eldar is deciding what is the least of the terrible units to pair with Eldraad...

mortetvie wrote:Basically, it is easier to win with GK than other armies I think.

Yes, which is a pretty loose definition that essentially means OP.

GK and DE are both pretty similar armies bone headedly easy to play, set up, move up (maybe not even move up), and roll your buckets of egregious dice, the GK for psybolt amo and the DE for poison.

Between GK and DE 40k 5th isn't very diverse anymore, at least the space wolves had a variety of nasty builds. 2 armies that do it all, shoot a ton, have great vehicles, have great antitank, and have great melee as well. Why play anything else?

Um...DE balance otu by being a glass cannon, so you still have to position and play smart or anythign that survives the alpha-strike will SHRED your army. GKs, on the other hand, are nigh-invincible uber-marines whom are marines whom are better than the marines whom are better than those other marines". Though, in all fairness, I have yetto play them, so I'm holding my true judgement of them until I get that opportunity. I still think Space Wolves are the most broken (Loganwing w/ Ragnar attached, 3+ to hit ANYTHING in combat via wolfdick necklaces, VERY cheap Longdwarves, Eternal Warrior spam, and Thunderwolves whom are somehow Toughness 5 multi-wound models while bikers andTyphus are 4(5) and Nurgle Lords on bikes are 4(6)?)

Kepora wrote:
Um...

When addressing an audience, it is generally considered poor form to stammer or use filler words, such as "um" or "like", or any other words of the sort. The fact that this pervades into your writing, where temporal flow is not something measurable by your audience, is not encouraging.

DE balance otu by being a glass cannon, so you still have to position and play smart or anythign that survives the alpha-strike will SHRED your army. GKs, on the other hand, are nigh-invincible uber-marines

Dark lances insta-kill Paladins. Everything else dies like all other marines, except without storm shields. Where's the nigh-invincible uber-marines?

whom are marines whom are better than the marines whom are better than those other marines".

http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/whoVwhom.asp

Though, in all fairness, I have yetto play them, so I'm holding my true judgement of them until I get that opportunity.

Really? Cause, like, it sounds like you have yielded judgement unto those whom you've not yet played. (Irony, or is it?)

I still think Space Wolves are the most broken (Loganwing w/ Ragnar attached, 3+ to hit ANYTHING in combat via wolfdick necklaces, VERY cheap Longdwarves, Eternal Warrior spam, and Thunderwolves whom are somehow Toughness 5 multi-wound models while bikers andTyphus are 4(5) and Nurgle Lords on bikes are 4(6)?)

I had to read this a couple times, mostly to try to figure out what "Longdwarves" was a reference to. I guess cause they're beardy? Outside of the Eternal Warrior spam (what does that?), I think I agree with you. SW are nasty. ALL of the 5th edition 'dexes are nasty. Hell, you can even make outright vicious 'Nid builds, if you don't mind spamming a lot, and I don't mean Tervigons.

Kepora wrote:GKs, on the other hand, are nigh-invincible uber-marines whom are marines whom are better than the marines whom are better than those other marines". Though, in all fairness, I have yetto play them, so I'm holding my true judgement of them until I get that opportunity.

Somehow I have a feeling that a lot of the opposition to and Internet drama about GKs comes from people like this.

daedalus wrote:. ALL of the 5th edition 'dexes are nasty. Hell, you can even make outright vicious 'Nid builds, if you don't mind spamming a lot, and I don't mean Tervigons.

And you lost me... Here! Nids are fun but with GK, SW, IG, and of course Dark Eldar. They just have no say in a competitive environment. How many top 5 places with Nids have you seen since grey knights hit, or lets even back it up further, since their FAQ hit. Find a different angle for your feverish argument against the masses.

Fetterkey wrote:

Kepora wrote:GKs, on the other hand, are nigh-invincible uber-marines whom are marines whom are better than the marines whom are better than those other marines". Though, in all fairness, I have yetto play them, so I'm holding my true judgement of them until I get that opportunity.

Somehow I have a feeling that a lot of the opposition to and Internet drama about GKs comes from people like this.

+1

GKs are on the same level as SWs... Solid, tough, nasty, but completely beatable by other 5th Edition books. Yes... Older armies have a tougher time but that is just how GW seems to do things :/