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.

 Marmatag wrote:
Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

LOL at the appeal to authority.

If it matters at all I had local toppings in the Bay area during early 4th using Necrons. Never #1 but I did for a young dude at the time.

You definitely can't be it as you think your changes are balanced in any way. At minimum I would encourage you to read the thread once done.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

LOL at the appeal to authority.

If it matters at all I had local toppings in the Bay area during early 4th using Necrons. Never #1 but I did for a young dude at the time.

You definitely can't be it as you think your changes are balanced in any way. At minimum I would encourage you to read the thread once done.

It's not an appeal to authority. I would suggest you take a quick sojourn over to Google.

You haven't actually made a single argument, you've just said, "these are bad suggestions. Trust me."

Okay. Since your argument requires we trust you, maybe you could do something to show us why.

-No math hammer
-No meaningful comparison to other codexes
-No explanation of what GK role is
-Casually throws out 2+ WS which shows no understanding of current GK problems

There is no reason to trust you. Cheers.

Further you say the suggestions are obviously bad. If it's so incredibly obvious, you should have no difficulty proving it. Let's rewind to my original statement of what (I feel) the problem of Grey Knights is.

Once we have debated and agree on the problem of GK and their primary use cases, a more meaningful balance discussion can follow. I would suggest (as i did earlier) you frame the use case for Grey Knights and also detail their balance issues at a high level. For instance, I would say mobility is a huge problem for Grey Knights. If you can't figure it out, let me know, i'll create a template for you.

 Marmatag wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

LOL at the appeal to authority.

If it matters at all I had local toppings in the Bay area during early 4th using Necrons. Never #1 but I did for a young dude at the time.

You definitely can't be it as you think your changes are balanced in any way. At minimum I would encourage you to read the thread once done.

It's not an appeal to authority. I would suggest you take a quick sojourn over to Google.

You haven't actually made a single argument, you've just said, "these are bad suggestions. Trust me."

Okay. Since your argument requires we trust you, maybe you could do something to show us why.

-No math hammer
-No meaningful comparison to other codexes
-No explanation of what GK role is
-Casually throws out 2+ WS which shows no understanding of current GK problems

There is no reason to trust you. Cheers.

Further you say the suggestions are obviously bad. If it's so incredibly obvious, you should have no difficulty proving it. Let's rewind to my original statement of what (I feel) the problem of Grey Knights is.

Once we have debated and agree on the problem of GK and their primary use cases, a more meaningful balance discussion can follow. I would suggest (as i did earlier) you frame the use case for Grey Knights and also detail their balance issues at a high level. For instance, I would say mobility is a huge problem for Grey Knights. If you can't figure it out, let me know, i'll create a template for you.

I already told you why they were bad suggestions. You. Want. To. Give. A. 20. Point. Model. A. Custodes. Halberd. And. Fire. Warrior. Shooting.

It's like a 10 year old wanted to make a list for improvements.

We already know that mobility is an issue with the army. That's not a unit issue though, that's an army issue. That's something that's worked on outside the unit profiles. Giving Terminators 10" movement (I'm surprised you didn't suggest it) wouldn't fix the Land Raider as a delivery platform nor does it fix the fact you don't even really want a Rhino, and that you're essentially stuck with the same Warlord trait if you want dudes to be in melee. And when the army even gets to melee it isn't even really good at it. Yet at the same time you see outrageous suggestions for Terminator based units like giving them the same number of attacks as a Custodes and making them as tough as a Custodes and making them an actual Custodes in general, on top of some suggestions not scaling appropriately (Blightlord Terminators do not need 3 wounds and treating all 2 damage weapons as 1 damage, so what else can you do for Terminator units?)

I have many proposed fixes but of course that's not gonna be done on this phone.

Ok, so if GK stats shouldn't be changed, and they weapons are fine. Then what should be changed to make GK valid.

They are too slow and not resilient enough to do melee the way they are now. I don't think they can outshot any army in the game right now.

So what is their gimmik, what is suppose to make GK something else then bad jetbikeless custodes?

Psychic powers? GW is nerfing all game wining psychic powers, so it can't be that.

To be honest the way all armies that are fun to play are made, they all have some OP stuff, or stuff other armies can only dream about.

Gentlemen calm down, why are people even bringing up ITC pedigree. There is no reason for there to be gatekeeping on how to IMPROVE Grey Knights, because there is no real way to mess them up more; just disagreement on how much to move them up.

There are easy to identify key issues with the Grey Knights. We have been over this, since there is no way in hell any of the playtesters will ever listen to the community and most of them seem to be completely out of touch on how Grey Knights should play (you know who I am talking about, a certain "you're playing GK wrong playtester) we should do the easiest thing and simply keep up the pressure vocally through emails, facebook, or even talking to store managers. Just bring up how GK are no present in any tourney scene, how Custodes are just better for less points etc.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I already told you why they were bad suggestions. You. Want. To. Give. A. 20. Point. Model. A. Custodes. Halberd. And. Fire. Warrior. Shooting.

It's like a 10 year old wanted to make a list for improvements.

We already know that mobility is an issue with the army. That's not a unit issue though, that's an army issue. That's something that's worked on outside the unit profiles. Giving Terminators 10" movement (I'm surprised you didn't suggest it) wouldn't fix the Land Raider as a delivery platform nor does it fix the fact you don't even really want a Rhino, and that you're essentially stuck with the same Warlord trait if you want dudes to be in melee. And when the army even gets to melee it isn't even really good at it. Yet at the same time you see outrageous suggestions for Terminator based units like giving them the same number of attacks as a Custodes and making them as tough as a Custodes and making them an actual Custodes in general, on top of some suggestions not scaling appropriately (Blightlord Terminators do not need 3 wounds and treating all 2 damage weapons as 1 damage, so what else can you do for Terminator units?)

I have many proposed fixes but of course that's not gonna be done on this phone.

So the fix is land raiders? Aren't GK land raiders even worse then the normal marines ones, and normal marines don't seem to be using them at all.

The only unit comperable to terminators stats, that seem to be played are jetbike custodes, and they have better weapons, both shoting and melee, and movment that isn't even comparable to a footslogging terminator. Not to mention the cost, a unit of 5 termintors in a land raider costs a lot more then a unit of custodes jetbikes, but is a lot less efficient.

 Quickjager wrote:
Gentlemen calm down, why are people even bringing up ITC pedigree. There is no reason for there to be gatekeeping on how to IMPROVE Grey Knights, because there is no real way to mess them up more; just disagreement on how much to move them up.

There are easy to identify key issues with the Grey Knights. We have been over this, since there is no way in hell any of the playtesters will ever listen to the community and most of them seem to be completely out of touch on how Grey Knights should play (you know who I am talking about, a certain "you're playing GK wrong playtester) we should do the easiest thing and simply keep up the pressure vocally through emails, facebook, or even talking to store managers. Just bring up how GK are no present in any tourney scene, how Custodes are just better for less points etc.

You can say Reece's name. That statement was a slap in the face to GK players that's for sure.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Karol wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

I already told you why they were bad suggestions. You. Want. To. Give. A. 20. Point. Model. A. Custodes. Halberd. And. Fire. Warrior. Shooting.

It's like a 10 year old wanted to make a list for improvements.

We already know that mobility is an issue with the army. That's not a unit issue though, that's an army issue. That's something that's worked on outside the unit profiles. Giving Terminators 10" movement (I'm surprised you didn't suggest it) wouldn't fix the Land Raider as a delivery platform nor does it fix the fact you don't even really want a Rhino, and that you're essentially stuck with the same Warlord trait if you want dudes to be in melee. And when the army even gets to melee it isn't even really good at it. Yet at the same time you see outrageous suggestions for Terminator based units like giving them the same number of attacks as a Custodes and making them as tough as a Custodes and making them an actual Custodes in general, on top of some suggestions not scaling appropriately (Blightlord Terminators do not need 3 wounds and treating all 2 damage weapons as 1 damage, so what else can you do for Terminator units?)

I have many proposed fixes but of course that's not gonna be done on this phone.

So the fix is land raiders? Aren't GK land raiders even worse then the normal marines ones, and normal marines don't seem to be using them at all.

The only unit comperable to terminators stats, that seem to be played are jetbike custodes, and they have better weapons, both shoting and melee, and movment that isn't even comparable to a footslogging terminator. Not to mention the cost, a unit of 5 termintors in a land raider costs a lot more then a unit of custodes jetbikes, but is a lot less efficient.

I'm saying Land Raiders are part of the problem as all units need to be viable.

Also I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that Custodes Jetbikes are underpriced so...

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Marmatag wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

LOL at the appeal to authority.

If it matters at all I had local toppings in the Bay area during early 4th using Necrons. Never #1 but I did for a young dude at the time.

You definitely can't be it as you think your changes are balanced in any way. At minimum I would encourage you to read the thread once done.

It's not an appeal to authority. I would suggest you take a quick sojourn over to Google.

You haven't actually made a single argument, you've just said, "these are bad suggestions. Trust me."

Okay. Since your argument requires we trust you, maybe you could do something to show us why.

-No math hammer
-No meaningful comparison to other codexes
-No explanation of what GK role is
-Casually throws out 2+ WS which shows no understanding of current GK problems

There is no reason to trust you. Cheers.

Further you say the suggestions are obviously bad. If it's so incredibly obvious, you should have no difficulty proving it. Let's rewind to my original statement of what (I feel) the problem of Grey Knights is.

Once we have debated and agree on the problem of GK and their primary use cases, a more meaningful balance discussion can follow. I would suggest (as i did earlier) you frame the use case for Grey Knights and also detail their balance issues at a high level. For instance, I would say mobility is a huge problem for Grey Knights. If you can't figure it out, let me know, i'll create a template for you.

I already told you why they were bad suggestions. You. Want. To. Give. A. 20. Point. Model. A. Custodes. Halberd. And. Fire. Warrior. Shooting.

It's like a 10 year old wanted to make a list for improvements.

We already know that mobility is an issue with the army. That's not a unit issue though, that's an army issue. That's something that's worked on outside the unit profiles. Giving Terminators 10" movement (I'm surprised you didn't suggest it) wouldn't fix the Land Raider as a delivery platform nor does it fix the fact you don't even really want a Rhino, and that you're essentially stuck with the same Warlord trait if you want dudes to be in melee. And when the army even gets to melee it isn't even really good at it. Yet at the same time you see outrageous suggestions for Terminator based units like giving them the same number of attacks as a Custodes and making them as tough as a Custodes and making them an actual Custodes in general, on top of some suggestions not scaling appropriately (Blightlord Terminators do not need 3 wounds and treating all 2 damage weapons as 1 damage, so what else can you do for Terminator units?)

I have many proposed fixes but of course that's not gonna be done on this phone.

I don't see the problem in giving them Custodes level halberds and strength 5 shooting. They don't have the durability and flexibility of Custodes, and they don't have the range or synergy of Firewarriors.

You need to do better than this, frankly, if you're going to criticize. And calling me a 10 year old doesn't change the fact that you haven't said anything with substance. Fire warriors have strength 5 guns. Yes, this is true. So what? Custodes and Fire Warriors would still both be superior to Grey Knights infantry with just this change for a host of reasons.

I did not suggest making them as tough as Custodes. You seem to be fixated on the idea that if Grey Knights improve they're somehow stepping on Custodes toes. Can't get better weapons. Can't get better mobility. Can't get more toughness. Can't get better invulns. Can't get more attacks. Why would I propose giving terminators a 10" move? That makes no sense. You would be keen to notice that almost all the fixes i proposed would be Grey Knights specific, and would not overall destabilize the game. Grey Knights could easily achieve mobility through psychic powers, there are massive precedents set here.

You are seriously looking at a unit like its entirety is boiled down into one specific stat, in a vacuum.

You seem to be able to type out long rage paragraphs just fine. I guess your phone just can't handle a meaningful discussion.

Marmatag wrote:Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

I don't necessarily agree with slayerfan, but this is the most embarrassing way to try win an argument. I hope I don't have to spell out why.

 Marmatag wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Marmatag wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

LOL at the appeal to authority.

If it matters at all I had local toppings in the Bay area during early 4th using Necrons. Never #1 but I did for a young dude at the time.

You definitely can't be it as you think your changes are balanced in any way. At minimum I would encourage you to read the thread once done.

It's not an appeal to authority. I would suggest you take a quick sojourn over to Google.

You haven't actually made a single argument, you've just said, "these are bad suggestions. Trust me."

Okay. Since your argument requires we trust you, maybe you could do something to show us why.

-No math hammer
-No meaningful comparison to other codexes
-No explanation of what GK role is
-Casually throws out 2+ WS which shows no understanding of current GK problems

There is no reason to trust you. Cheers.

Further you say the suggestions are obviously bad. If it's so incredibly obvious, you should have no difficulty proving it. Let's rewind to my original statement of what (I feel) the problem of Grey Knights is.

Once we have debated and agree on the problem of GK and their primary use cases, a more meaningful balance discussion can follow. I would suggest (as i did earlier) you frame the use case for Grey Knights and also detail their balance issues at a high level. For instance, I would say mobility is a huge problem for Grey Knights. If you can't figure it out, let me know, i'll create a template for you.

I already told you why they were bad suggestions. You. Want. To. Give. A. 20. Point. Model. A. Custodes. Halberd. And. Fire. Warrior. Shooting.

It's like a 10 year old wanted to make a list for improvements.

We already know that mobility is an issue with the army. That's not a unit issue though, that's an army issue. That's something that's worked on outside the unit profiles. Giving Terminators 10" movement (I'm surprised you didn't suggest it) wouldn't fix the Land Raider as a delivery platform nor does it fix the fact you don't even really want a Rhino, and that you're essentially stuck with the same Warlord trait if you want dudes to be in melee. And when the army even gets to melee it isn't even really good at it. Yet at the same time you see outrageous suggestions for Terminator based units like giving them the same number of attacks as a Custodes and making them as tough as a Custodes and making them an actual Custodes in general, on top of some suggestions not scaling appropriately (Blightlord Terminators do not need 3 wounds and treating all 2 damage weapons as 1 damage, so what else can you do for Terminator units?)

I have many proposed fixes but of course that's not gonna be done on this phone.

I don't see the problem in giving them Custodes level halberds and strength 5 shooting. They don't have the durability and flexibility of Custodes, and they don't have the range or synergy of Firewarriors.

Rapid Fire 2 at 24" is better than Rapid Fire 1 at 30", especially when you have Deep Strike. Full Stop. Those 3 wounds are also more durable to Multi-Damage shooting as well.

You aren't thinking.

Even ignore the fact that you are okay with Custodes Halberds for whatever reason. You then want Falcions to do 3 attacks total instead. So for 100 points, we get a squad with:
1. 10-20 S5 shots that ignore Invul Saves
2. 16 attacks at AP-2 doing D3 damage, or we can go with those 6 S6 AP-3 DD3 damage

You aren't scaling well. At all.

And for the record those paragraphs take a pretty darn long time to type out. I AM having meaningful discussion, but you're more fixated on making Grey Knights broken you can't take a singular ounce of criticism for ideas that are at the maturity of, yes, a 10 year old writing them out. My brother hasn't played a single game of 40k and I bet he could figure out better balancing techniques than you.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Marmatag wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

LOL at the appeal to authority.

If it matters at all I had local toppings in the Bay area during early 4th using Necrons. Never #1 but I did for a young dude at the time.

You definitely can't be it as you think your changes are balanced in any way. At minimum I would encourage you to read the thread once done.

It's not an appeal to authority. I would suggest you take a quick sojourn over to Google.

You haven't actually made a single argument, you've just said, "these are bad suggestions. Trust me."

Okay. Since your argument requires we trust you, maybe you could do something to show us why.

-No math hammer
-No meaningful comparison to other codexes
-No explanation of what GK role is
-Casually throws out 2+ WS which shows no understanding of current GK problems

There is no reason to trust you. Cheers.

Further you say the suggestions are obviously bad. If it's so incredibly obvious, you should have no difficulty proving it. Let's rewind to my original statement of what (I feel) the problem of Grey Knights is.

Once we have debated and agree on the problem of GK and their primary use cases, a more meaningful balance discussion can follow. I would suggest (as i did earlier) you frame the use case for Grey Knights and also detail their balance issues at a high level. For instance, I would say mobility is a huge problem for Grey Knights. If you can't figure it out, let me know, i'll create a template for you.

I already told you why they were bad suggestions. You. Want. To. Give. A. 20. Point. Model. A. Custodes. Halberd. And. Fire. Warrior. Shooting.

It's like a 10 year old wanted to make a list for improvements.

We already know that mobility is an issue with the army. That's not a unit issue though, that's an army issue. That's something that's worked on outside the unit profiles. Giving Terminators 10" movement (I'm surprised you didn't suggest it) wouldn't fix the Land Raider as a delivery platform nor does it fix the fact you don't even really want a Rhino, and that you're essentially stuck with the same Warlord trait if you want dudes to be in melee. And when the army even gets to melee it isn't even really good at it. Yet at the same time you see outrageous suggestions for Terminator based units like giving them the same number of attacks as a Custodes and making them as tough as a Custodes and making them an actual Custodes in general, on top of some suggestions not scaling appropriately (Blightlord Terminators do not need 3 wounds and treating all 2 damage weapons as 1 damage, so what else can you do for Terminator units?)

I have many proposed fixes but of course that's not gonna be done on this phone.

I don't see the problem in giving them Custodes level halberds and strength 5 shooting. They don't have the durability and flexibility of Custodes, and they don't have the range or synergy of Firewarriors.

Rapid Fire 2 at 24" is better than Rapid Fire 1 at 30", especially when you have Deep Strike. Full Stop. Those 3 wounds are also more durable to Multi-Damage shooting as well.

You aren't thinking.

Even ignore the fact that you are okay with Custodes Halberds for whatever reason. You then want Falcions to do 3 attacks total instead. So for 100 points, we get a squad with:
1. 10-20 S5 shots that ignore Invul Saves
2. 16 attacks at AP-2 doing D3 damage, or we can go with those 6 S6 AP-3 DD3 damage

You aren't scaling well. At all.

And for the record those paragraphs take a pretty darn long time to type out. I AM having meaningful discussion, but you're more fixated on making Grey Knights broken you can't take a singular ounce of criticism for ideas that are at the maturity of, yes, a 10 year old writing them out. My brother hasn't played a single game of 40k and I bet he could figure out better balancing techniques than you.

Holy crap. That's more Dakka than a Dakkafex, which then ignores Invuls and has AP. And then quadruple the attacks, each of which hit even harder, and then with a selectable damage profile that can be swapped to anti-elite. On a unit that can be given transport options no less, and already hits from a further range. All with a better BS and WS. And all that for less points.


If that's really what we're asking for here, it's time to go back to the drawing board. As a suggestion that's just atrocious.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Rapid Fire 2 at 24" is better than Rapid Fire 1 at 30", especially when you have Deep Strike. Full Stop.

FALSE. I would much rather have rapid fire 1 at 30", for the reasons that deep strike is not nearly as good as you think it is. You want to talk about scaling? How does deep strike scale for Grey Knights? And of course you're looking at these in a vacuum, call me when Grey Knights can make use of the Greater Good, or meaningful choices for tactics.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

You aren't thinking.

No, you aren't thinking. See how this can degenerate quickly?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Even ignore the fact that you are okay with Custodes Halberds for whatever reason.

Yeah, okay, again, it's one weapon. They already have strength 5 AP-2 D3 weapons. It's not like it's some great leap to get where we're talking about.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You then want Falcions to do 3 attacks total instead.

Sure, it's a suggestion. Let's talk it through. Were these written in blood? This is the first time you've actually made an effort to discuss this, so hey, i'll take a win where i can get it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So for 100 points, we get a squad with:
1. 10-20 S5 shots that ignore Invul Saves
2. 16 attacks at AP-2 doing D3 damage, or we can go with those 6 S6 AP-3 DD3 damage

Yes, AP- guns that ignore invulnerable saves. Ignoring invulnerable saves might be too strong, but again, this would make Grey Knights actual daemon hunters. I still don't see a problem with this. Consider a squad of Harlequins. I mean honestly. Take a real look at them. Then consider the tranports they have. You think what i'm floating here is totally unbalanced, but in reality Grey Knights are so massively far behind it's not even funny.

You posted the whole profile, but let's do a comparison.

Current: 10-20 S4 shots; 11 attacks at Ap-2 doing d3 damage, improved to 10-20 S5 shots, 16 attacks at Ap-2 d3 damage. It's not like Grey Knights don't already look appealing on paper until you actually play them outside of a vacuum and you see what other armies, like Harlequins, can do.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You aren't scaling well. At all.

Grey Knights currently do not scale in the tiniest bit. Their deep strike is limited, their powers are very limited.. They NEED SOME SCALING.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
you can't take a singular ounce of criticism

Only in this post have you actually provided criticism i could make a discussion out of. The rest has been you being That Guy. Seriously, go read the fething thread.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SHUPPET wrote:

Marmatag wrote:Slayer, post your ITC profile. I'd like to see the pedigree of the man who has designated himself gatekeeper for all GK proposed changes.

I don't necessarily agree with slayerfan, but this is the most embarrassing way to try win an argument. I hope I don't have to spell out why.

When your ENTIRE argument is "TRUST ME" then it's fair to ask WHY. Think.

Much of what I put in there was thrown out because Grey Knights had it or something like it in the past. This was supposed to be a jumping off point for a discussion but devolved rapidly because this guy started flinging insults and saying "UR BAD LOL, TRUST ME." I'd be happy to push the reset button and have a meaningful discussion about Grey Knights.

But let's depart from my obviously awful suggestions and talk about Slayer Fan's. So far his "big fix" to Grey Knight paladins was to give them WS2+/BS2+ (probably because he forgot the sergeant has this already). What else you got? Show me how to balance. Seriously, you talk a lot of gak pointlessly when we could be having a good chat, so let's start with your balance ideas and work from there. I'm not as petty as you are, if they're good suggestions i'll get on board.


EDIT - also to add, my main army is Tyranids, dakka fex are overrated. They see play now because WTF else are we going to do than spam hive guards, but that's a different story. The heavy venom cannon isn't bad, by the way, good luck repoing that in GK. On a lucky roll a dakka fex with an HVC is like a squad of "dark reapers lite."

I'm pretty sure the part about ignoring invulns was for demons only, he also said it would be ap-. And I don't really know tyranids that well but something tells me they have ap on their weapons through some method. I also have a feeling that a dakkafex costs less too

And the 16 attacks with falchions(marines of all flavors should have an extra attack, and frankly most melee heavy armies but that's a whole other thread) would happen anyway if marines get bumped to 2A base.

I don't know where you're getting the selectable profile from

And carnifexs can ride in tyrannocytes. So they can get in vehicles too. Just sayin...

Feel free to correct me on tyranids because I'm not 100% on them

I'm not agreeing with the changes but be more accurate when you counter point.

akaean wrote:Let me put what you said another way;
"There is no need to make Sternguard Bolters 30 inch range and Ap-2. They're an effective weapon as is. There's no reason for them to be better than all similar imperial guns just because."
It sounds absolutely rediculous when applied to another unit- and you can't say, "but, but, but special issue ammo!" without admitting full stop that psybolt ammo is a very good reason to give GK's +1 strength to their bolter weapons.

Sure, they used to have Psybolt Ammo as an upgrade. Now it’s a Stratagem. Personally I think it should go back to being an upgrade; GK are starved for CP as it is and Stratagems’ one-use rule is too limiting. But then, I think a lot of things that are now Stratagems should go back to being upgrades or native special rules, so this is hardly a GK-specific problem. Psybolt Ammo was never standard kit for a Grey Knight. Also remember that for GK the Stormbolter is a sidearm, whereas for Sternguard it’s their sole weapon, gimmick and reason for being, so the comparison isn’t exactly apples-to-apples. That the GK’s sidearm is better than Fire Warriors’ primary rifle should tell you they’re already well enough equipped for shooting.

Quickjager wrote:
But at this point I'm looking at stupid gak like kombatwombat's suggestions and I don't see you saying that isn't dumb either.

Oh ho! Let’s dance then, sunshine. Rather than just talking gak to others and calling me/my ideas names, start actually addressing what I’ve said. What is it amongst my suggestions that’s got your feathers ruffled?

Let’s see what I’ve suggested. A slight nerf to Falchions and a one-point increase for Halberds to balance them against one another and bring them into line with the other Power Weapons. Do you honestly think I was saying ‘nerf Falchions, that’ll fix GK being underpowered’? Or did you just miss my point entirely that you need to balance the ship before loading it up? The changes were suggested in the context of giving GK boosts in other areas. Sometimes it’s better to take one step back to take three steps forward rather than just belligerently taking one step forward.

There were previous suggestions for buffs to the Psycannon and Psilencer that I said I basically agreed with, but I disagreed with increasing Incinerators’ range to 12”. I gave my reasoning that the problem was not the Incinerator but flamer weapons in general, and that it was better to suggest fixes for all flamers rather than just upgunning this specific thing in particular.

I disagreed with increasing Stormbolters to Str 5 for the reasons given above in this post. I said that the suggested Hammer profile was madness, which I’d be fascinated if you disagreed, and that the Daemon Stratagem was a terrible idea so giving it to GK wasn’t good either. Finally, I suggested that all GK Bolt weapons, Psycannons, Psilencers and Incinerators ignored Daemons’ Invul saves, which is a solid buff. If you think that buff was too much then ok, tell me why.

What in there is ‘stupid ‘, pray tell?

On the Primaris buff, why is that stupid? It seems to address the two biggest problems with Marines: T4 1W 3+ just isn’t durable, and the loss of a bonus attack on the charge. If you’re saying it’s only stupid because GW will never implement it, well then all you’re saying is that GW’s marketing team is preventing 40k from being a better game. In other news, water is wet.

Remember that GK’s design space is limited by the existence of Space Marines and Custodes. They can never have better equipment than Custodes, because if they did the Custodes would relieve them of it for their own use. They can’t even have equipment as good as Custodes - they are the Emperor’s companions, it’s simply a fact of the fictional universe that they get the best stuff, period. They also pay for the privilege (not enough in the case of Dawneagles, but the rest do). GK should have a better standard of equipment than Marines, but they’re limited there as well. GK can’t have a better profile than equivalent Marine, because they are an equivalent Marine. That’s why I keep banging on about improving the Marine statline - they need the boost damn near as much as GK do, and helping them helps GK too. You can’t just make GK tougher - against Daemons sure, but against an Earthshaker shell? Why would GK be more resilient against that?

The freedom in GK’s design space is in their special rules and psychic powers. I suggested the ignoring Invulnerable saves on Daemons as one special rule, and I’d suggest another: their Nemesis weapons do a flat 3 Damage rather than D3 against Daemons. I’d also suggest another step back, three steps forward approach: take Rites of Banishment away from Paladins and Characters, then change RoB to ‘may not use Smite.’

The tradeoff? Give GK a series of Minor Psychic Powers that are explicitly not affected by Psychic Focus, so multiple units can cast the same power. A quick attempt at these powers, remembering that most units can only cast one power a turn:

All GK:
- +2 Strength
- auto-advance 6” and can still Charge
- +1 to Invul Save or a 5++ if they don’t have one

- Strike Squads also get: reroll 1s to Hit

- Terminator Squads also get: a horde-thinning CC power similar to the old Holocaust

- Purgation Squads also get: Reroll all hits when shooting

- Characters, Dreadnoughts, Paladins and Dreadknights also get to pick one of the ones Strike Squads/Terminators/Purgation Squads have

- Librarians get them all

This would let them adjust on the fly and get powerful, fluffy bonuses. Coupled with a points overhaul and I reckon they’d be in alright shape.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:If you'll quote them I will say why they're bad.

I mean, it doesn’t exactly sound like you’re going to look at my suggestions with any objectivity here...

 Marmatag wrote:
EDIT - also to add, my main army is Tyranids, dakka fex are overrated. They see play now because WTF else are we going to do than spam hive guards, but that's a different story. The heavy venom cannon isn't bad, by the way, good luck repoing that in GK. On a lucky roll a dakka fex with an HVC is like a squad of "dark reapers lite."

No way you will convince me of that, I drew my opinion on them by using them myself, they are the core of my army. Regardless, even if you were right, you aren't asking for a Dakkafex equivalent. You're asking for a unit that makes Dakkafex look like a little bitch, many times over, and that's absurd that you think you need that to play 40k.

Slayer is pretty terrible at voicing his option without being somewhat corrosive at the same time.

I think i generally agree with him, though.

Grey knights have tons of issues, but most of them are just issues with Marines and their units.

The marine statline, their transports, and their melee abilities all suffered from the conversion to 8th. These are the things that need to be fixed before making other large changes.

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with GK being Marines with storm bolters and Force weapons. Both of those weapons are pretty good the way they are with the right general statline and delivery system. Marines just don't have either of those things right now.

If codex Marines were fixed (probably mostly by making them cheaper) so that more of their units were worth taking, all GK would likely need to be competitive is shunt back on the NDKs and and perhaps arevamp of their psychic abilities.

jcd386 wrote:
Grey knights have tons of issues, but most of them are just issues with Marines and their units.

The marine statline, their transports, and their melee abilities all suffered from the conversion to 8th. These are the things that need to be fixed before making other large changes.

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with GK being Marines with storm bolters and Force weapons. Both of those weapons are pretty good the way they are with the right general statline and delivery system. Marines just don't have either of those things right now.

If codex Marines were fixed (probably mostly by making them cheaper) so that more of their units were worth taking, all GK would likely need to be competitive is shunt back on the NDKs and and perhaps arevamp of their psychic abilities.

Exactly. Trying to fix GK without first addressing the fundamental issues Marines have first is just going to end in tears as a glass cannon army with horrible internal balance. I think a series of minor powers that don’t fall under the Psychic Focus rule and some small tweaks to the Nemesis weapons to internally balance those, plus a couple of buffs to special rules and heavy weapons would just about fix them after a points readjustment.

jcd386 wrote:
Slayer is pretty terrible at voicing his option without being somewhat corrosive at the same time.

I think i generally agree with him, though.

Grey knights have tons of issues, but most of them are just issues with Marines and their units.

The marine statline, their transports, and their melee abilities all suffered from the conversion to 8th. These are the things that need to be fixed before making other large changes.

There isn't anything fundamentally wrong with GK being Marines with storm bolters and Force weapons. Both of those weapons are pretty good the way they are with the right general statline and delivery system. Marines just don't have either of those things right now.

If codex Marines were fixed (probably mostly by making them cheaper) so that more of their units were worth taking, all GK would likely need to be competitive is shunt back on the NDKs and and perhaps arevamp of their psychic abilities.

I suppose my proposed fixes would make more sense if I proposed all my main suggestions for the Vanilla Marine codex, but yes those are fundamental issues that need to be rectified first, along with a couple of core rules fixes (Fly units need a -1 to hit after fleeing, but like I said that's a separate issue).

kombatwombat wrote:

akaean wrote:Let me put what you said another way;
"There is no need to make Sternguard Bolters 30 inch range and Ap-2. They're an effective weapon as is. There's no reason for them to be better than all similar imperial guns just because."
It sounds absolutely rediculous when applied to another unit- and you can't say, "but, but, but special issue ammo!" without admitting full stop that psybolt ammo is a very good reason to give GK's +1 strength to their bolter weapons.

Sure, they used to have Psybolt Ammo as an upgrade. Now it’s a Stratagem. Personally I think it should go back to being an upgrade; GK are starved for CP as it is and Stratagems’ one-use rule is too limiting. But then, I think a lot of things that are now Stratagems should go back to being upgrades or native special rules, so this is hardly a GK-specific problem. Psybolt Ammo was never standard kit for a Grey Knight. Also remember that for GK the Stormbolter is a sidearm, whereas for Sternguard it’s their sole weapon, gimmick and reason for being, so the comparison isn’t exactly apples-to-apples. That the GK’s sidearm is better than Fire Warriors’ primary rifle should tell you they’re already well enough equipped for shooting.

Quickjager wrote:
But at this point I'm looking at stupid gak like kombatwombat's suggestions and I don't see you saying that isn't dumb either.

Oh ho! Let’s dance then, sunshine. Rather than just talking gak to others and calling me/my ideas names, start actually addressing what I’ve said. What is it amongst my suggestions that’s got your feathers ruffled?

Let’s see what I’ve suggested. A slight nerf to Falchions and a one-point increase for Halberds to balance them against one another and bring them into line with the other Power Weapons. Do you honestly think I was saying ‘nerf Falchions, that’ll fix GK being underpowered’? Or did you just miss my point entirely that you need to balance the ship before loading it up? The changes were suggested in the context of giving GK boosts in other areas. Sometimes it’s better to take one step back to take three steps forward rather than just belligerently taking one step forward.

There were previous suggestions for buffs to the Psycannon and Psilencer that I said I basically agreed with, but I disagreed with increasing Incinerators’ range to 12”. I gave my reasoning that the problem was not the Incinerator but flamer weapons in general, and that it was better to suggest fixes for all flamers rather than just upgunning this specific thing in particular.

I disagreed with increasing Stormbolters to Str 5 for the reasons given above in this post. I said that the suggested Hammer profile was madness, which I’d be fascinated if you disagreed, and that the Daemon Stratagem was a terrible idea so giving it to GK wasn’t good either. Finally, I suggested that all GK Bolt weapons, Psycannons, Psilencers and Incinerators ignored Daemons’ Invul saves, which is a solid buff. If you think that buff was too much then ok, tell me why.

What in there is ‘stupid ‘, pray tell?

On the Primaris buff, why is that stupid? It seems to address the two biggest problems with Marines: T4 1W 3+ just isn’t durable, and the loss of a bonus attack on the charge. If you’re saying it’s only stupid because GW will never implement it, well then all you’re saying is that GW’s marketing team is preventing 40k from being a better game. In other news, water is wet.

Remember that GK’s design space is limited by the existence of Space Marines and Custodes. They can never have better equipment than Custodes, because if they did the Custodes would relieve them of it for their own use. They can’t even have equipment as good as Custodes - they are the Emperor’s companions, it’s simply a fact of the fictional universe that they get the best stuff, period. They also pay for the privilege (not enough in the case of Dawneagles, but the rest do). GK should have a better standard of equipment than Marines, but they’re limited there as well. GK can’t have a better profile than equivalent Marine, because they are an equivalent Marine. That’s why I keep banging on about improving the Marine statline - they need the boost damn near as much as GK do, and helping them helps GK too. You can’t just make GK tougher - against Daemons sure, but against an Earthshaker shell? Why would GK be more resilient against that?

The freedom in GK’s design space is in their special rules and psychic powers. I suggested the ignoring Invulnerable saves on Daemons as one special rule, and I’d suggest another: their Nemesis weapons do a flat 3 Damage rather than D3 against Daemons. I’d also suggest another step back, three steps forward approach: take Rites of Banishment away from Paladins and Characters, then change RoB to ‘may not use Smite.’

The tradeoff? Give GK a series of Minor Psychic Powers that are explicitly not affected by Psychic Focus, so multiple units can cast the same power. A quick attempt at these powers, remembering that most units can only cast one power a turn:

All GK:
- +2 Strength
- auto-advance 6” and can still Charge
- +1 to Invul Save or a 5++ if they don’t have one

- Strike Squads also get: reroll 1s to Hit

- Terminator Squads also get: a horde-thinning CC power similar to the old Holocaust

- Purgation Squads also get: Reroll all hits when shooting

- Characters, Dreadnoughts, Paladins and Dreadknights also get to pick one of the ones Strike Squads/Terminators/Purgation Squads have

- Librarians get them all

This would let them adjust on the fly and get powerful, fluffy bonuses. Coupled with a points overhaul and I reckon they’d be in alright shape.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:If you'll quote them I will say why they're bad.

I mean, it doesn’t exactly sound like you’re going to look at my suggestions with any objectivity here...

There isn't anything to argue. Your specific points are ideas that go against 8th edition design philosophy. We don't "pay" for our melee weapons, except for the hammer, because GW realized having a squad be 127 points of book-keeping was annoying. Furthermore your idea is to RAISE the cost of the melee weapons while at the same time nerfing them across the board. Did you not know GK have the melee weapons cost already built into them? It looks that way judging by the way you talk. You do talk with buffing the entire Marine lineup which I think is necessary, but doing it by just giving them the Primaris statline is not going to happen realistically. So no we don't have to ever really worry about the idea of stat overinflation. There are plenty of other possible fixes that don't involve just tossing more attacks or wounds into a profile which as I see that you do realize would lead to much more extreme outcomes.

The reasons that you argue for stormbolters is not really important to me specifically because I have never really wanted the stormbolter profile to change, I understand why some do. Once again it, we see that the basic bolter is horrid, bolters as a whole need something, but it goes without saying it can't be a universal STR, range, RoF, or D increase. Some people propose shred. There are a lot of ways to go about it but some are more complicated. I would simply make it so that against targets with a 5+ or worse save the bolter's S4 becomes S5. This is to avoid the very common pitfall of any kind of shooting killing marines easier compared to Boyz, guardsmen and the like; while at the same time making cover valuable to units with a 5+ so they can avoid the bolter penalty by standing in it and going to a 4+ armor save.

But then we run into the 8th edition design philosophy issue, MAKE IT SIMPLE. Which this doesn't.

I don't know anyone who disagrees with flamers needing their range increased, but you need to realize that if people in thread are going to approach mostly the GK problems from the GK perspective which means we only talk about incinerators. As for Psycannons I once again don't know anyone who really disagrees they are literally a more expensive and objectively worse assault cannon.

So if you want to me specifically say what is dumb, it would be the idea to just give all the marines (chaos and loyal) a primaris statline upgrade. I will never expect GW to do such a thing. Their marine statline is too "untouchable" in their eyes and the game does suffer for it. And now that a new model line has the statline they needed? I don't expect it even more as that would bite into sales. So yes, I am saying GW marketing team sucks, they get the rules or unit rolls wrong half the time as well when trying to sell something. There is a Knight Household detachment for sale right now, the bundle says it fills a basic detachment. It actually doesn't.

As to why I don't go over Marmatag's posts? Me and him have already talked till the cows came home in regards to how to go about improving Grey Knights. I won't change his mind.

Then we go into your argument that they are limited to be Marines just with better equipment and I look at Khorne Berserkers, Death Company, Vanguard Vets, Command Squads (whatever they are called now), Sternguard, Wulfen, Most of the Space Wolf line in fact, Black Knights, Deathwing, Deathwatch, and I laugh at you saying they are stuck with it. Ignoring the fluff that GK do nothing but train for decades in trials supposedly not even an average "ordinary" marine can pass. That is why I can't take you seriously, you take your own standard for what a marine is and apply it to just one faction when there is so much room for different doctrines to show different kinds of training or experiences.

As for anti-daemon tricks honestly, too many GK players get tired of people ilk saying, "hurr durr anti-daemon specialists that's why you suck". There was only two rules that ever actually scared Daemons and that was Warp Quake, a frankly op ability that locked down 3/4 of the board from deepstrikers, and Daemonbane where you literally rerolled everything against them. Anything else including the anti-daemon smite we have now? Sucks. You don't see the Deathwatch getting pigeon-holed nearly as much which is GOOD.

As for psychic powers, literally any suggestion is good you can't make it worse. Though GW keeps managing to almost do so. The largest issue with psychic powers though is that GW has never managing to make a fluffy rule that shows how GK actually fight using psychic powers. It has always been a derivative from other factions.

I would love to have creative control over Grey Knights, but I don't, playtesters will never read or even consider any idea we have so I would rather stop wasting my and others time. So I keep saying one thing. Pressure GW to actually get them to admit GK suck via email. Copy and paste it hit send do it once a week. That will be what actually gets results. Not me or anyone else saying, "Well I think they need X". GW really doesn't care about the community level feelings unless you smack them in the face, ask orks, ask CSM. I at this point just want good rules and we never get them which is why I stopped buying them. Haven't owned a BRB or codex since 6th.

This is a wishlist.
GW will not change SM codex until next one and GK need an improvement NOW.

According to this, there's nothing to nerf for "internal balance", only things to improve.

And I don't agree that GK (or others SM chapters) can't have equipment better than Custodes.
They have different equipment. And something could be similar or better. From a fluffy point of view GK should have the BEST EQUIPMENT among all SM chapters. Actually GK have less equipment and worse and can't have access to FW stuff, that's crazy.

So, please stop putting limits. There is no problem in making halberds +2 S, because Custodes will have anyway a better stat line.

We need a total change. Since it is impossible until next Codex, we should have some improvement, or quit GK, as many people already did.
According to this, the minimum we can have is:
Big points drop for almost ALL our models. All Termy IC should have a discount equal or major to 20 points (not apothecary).
All PA should have a discount from 2 to 5 points.
We need more powers, since I don't believe that they will change psychic focus rule. The six I posted some time ago and librarius could be OK. Paladins and Purifier should have an AoE psychic power different from the others.
We need Ordo Malleus KW.
Psycannon and Psylencer must to be redesigned. Psycannon must become a solid antitank and psylencer should have some rules like 1 mortal wound on 6 to wound.
We should use DS without Beta.
All our models should start with veterans stat line. Because all our brothers ARE veterans. We don't have scout and we don't have noobs.
Psyammo for everyone, by paying them as in 5 ed, or not, like stern guard or DW. It could be +1 S, -1AP, or something else. Maybe it could be a stratagem working on all the same models, like for IK new stratagem.
And despite these we will still face problems like no way to reach CC, few models, not enough toughness, no inv saves.

We need a new codex. But until then, these could be a good fix (or maybe average fix?)

About the argument related to stormbolter with +1S and ignore invulnerable, I don't see anything crazy. AP - make ignore invulnerable useful ONLY against demons. +1S means that on 20 shots against a PA instead of 2,22 damage you will deal 2,96. A difference equal to 0,74. On 20 shots and 100 points. If you play 30 PA all with +1S a whole turn in short range means that you will use 600 points to deal 17,78 damage on a PA, than means 231 points of models damaged, and 17 deaths. WITH 600 points and 30 models.
IS THIS BROKEN?

Its nice to discuss all these ideas for codex overhauls, but realistically the only thing that will change on a large scale is the points, for the foreseeable future. Erratas affect the function of the more universal rules occasionally, and beta rule as additions to core matched play rules, but a total ground up rebuild just isn't gonna happen.

Because if one codex gets such a treatment, the internet will start screaming until all codexes get it.

I have a question, why GK do not have access to stormshields?
Draigo has one, but I think he is the only models that gets one.

I think if we could get cheap stormshields on termintors and power armored dudes, the resiliance would go up a lot.
Maybe even make some special kind of unit that can lock its shields and form a phalanx. Or hvy weapon armed dudes using their SS the way XV century crossbowman used pavis shields.

I wish they would just combine it all into an Inquisition Codex. Then you could just make the Army you want.

I haven't touched my GK army since 7th, makes me sad since they were my first army when I started in 6th. I liked their lore and it seemed like an easier army to get into with the lower model count.

 Danarc wrote:
...

Big points drop for almost ALL our models. All Termy IC should have a discount equal or major to 20 points (not apothecary).
All PA should have a discount from 2 to 5 points.
We need more powers, since I don't believe that they will change psychic focus rule. The six I posted some time ago and librarius could be OK. Paladins and Purifier should have an AoE psychic power different from the others.
We need Ordo Malleus KW.
Psycannon and Psylencer must to be redesigned. Psycannon must become a solid antitank and psylencer should have some rules like 1 mortal wound on 6 to wound.
We should use DS without Beta.
All our models should start with veterans stat line. Because all our brothers ARE veterans. We don't have scout and we don't have noobs.
Psyammo for everyone, by paying them as in 5 ed, or not, like stern guard or DW. It could be +1 S, -1AP, or something else. Maybe it could be a stratagem working on all the same models, like for IK new stratagem.
And despite these we will still face problems like no way to reach CC, few models, not enough toughness, no inv saves. ...

These are all well thought out boosts/fixes - my input:
* Terminators need "Holocaust" back, iconic power.

* The idea of minor psychic powers that aren't affected by the new psychic rules is an intriguing idea. Given their current fluff of sometimes utilizing "sorcerous powers". I'd rather this then a character providing an "aura buff" providing +1 to hit or whatever.

* Personally I think the Psycannon should be more geared towards killing big gribbleys rather than vehicles (but in this edition they're mostly the same statwise).

* I especially like the "vet stat line" - Fluff wise GK are trained for 50 years minimum before they're given their suits of PA and Term armor.
- Blood Angels spend a year in a casket and then are given their scout armor.
- SW are even worse, they're trained for something like a year and then given power armor and made Blood Claws.

* I see no reason why GK couldn't have "psybolt ammo" that would make them ignore invulnerable saves, across the board. This would in actuality only affect Demons and even most of them still have a 6+ "armor" save against GK storm bolters (with their AP0).

It would also affect Tech priests *gasp*!!!!!!!

Spartacus wrote:Its nice to discuss all these ideas for codex overhauls, but realistically the only thing that will change on a large scale is the points, for the foreseeable future. Erratas affect the function of the more universal rules occasionally, and beta rule as additions to core matched play rules, but a total ground up rebuild just isn't gonna happen.

Because if one codex gets such a treatment, the internet will start screaming until all codexes get it.

Actually FAQ and Erratas included in the game rules changes. If all we'll get is points drop I hope it is a HUGE points drop.

Karol wrote:I have a question, why GK do not have access to stormshields?
Draigo has one, but I think he is the only models that gets one.

I think if we could get cheap stormshields on termintors and power armored dudes, the resiliance would go up a lot.
Maybe even make some special kind of unit that can lock its shields and form a phalanx. Or hvy weapon armed dudes using their SS the way XV century crossbowman used pavis shields.

Probably we lost the ship carried them. And Deimos forgot how to make it. There no other explanations.

 Danarc wrote:

Karol wrote:I have a question, why GK do not have access to stormshields?
Draigo has one, but I think he is the only models that gets one.

I think if we could get cheap stormshields on termintors and power armored dudes, the resiliance would go up a lot.
Maybe even make some special kind of unit that can lock its shields and form a phalanx. Or hvy weapon armed dudes using their SS the way XV century crossbowman used pavis shields.

Probably we lost the ship carried them. And Deimos forgot how to make it. There no other explanations.

I smell the possibilities for a new unit...

Defensors - 5-10 PAGK with Storm Shields & Storm Bolters or Storm Shields and NFStaves perhaps? perform the dual role of character guardians and demonic/psychic sinkholes/nullifiers...

Wishful thinking

 SHUPPET wrote:

I talk a lot of gak? I've barely even said anything in here.

Was not referring to you. Context got messed up because it was hastily typed.

It would be nice to have a productive discussion around balance, but I don't think that can happen here because reasons.

Like i said, i'm fine pushing the reset button and starting with someone else's ideas, and we can debate from there. What is even being argued at this point? It's just a slap fest.

 Lord Clinto wrote:

 Danarc wrote:

Karol wrote:I have a question, why GK do not have access to stormshields?
Draigo has one, but I think he is the only models that gets one.

I think if we could get cheap stormshields on termintors and power armored dudes, the resiliance would go up a lot.
Maybe even make some special kind of unit that can lock its shields and form a phalanx. Or hvy weapon armed dudes using their SS the way XV century crossbowman used pavis shields.

Probably we lost the ship carried them. And Deimos forgot how to make it. There no other explanations.

I smell the possibilities for a new unit...

Defensors - 5-10 PAGK with Storm Shields & Storm Bolters or Storm Shields and NFStaves perhaps? perform the dual role of character guardians and demonic/psychic sinkholes/nullifiers...

Wishful thinking

I see more likely termy with SS and Nemesis weapons. And, obviously, right wist mounted stormbolter. They would be AWESOME from a modellistic point of view, meh from a competitive one. But because they are termy in 8th edition not for other reason. Neverthless, I hope to see them.

I think the no SS is just a stylistic choice. The army is much more oriented around being offensive than defensive.