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.

Hey Dakka,

I originally posted this under army builds for a Grey Knight Draigowing: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/558916.page but felt that with the finesse of moving around IC's it would fall under tactics. Here is the post:

*since there has been some confusion, consult page 16 in your rulebooks; it explicitly states that LOS allocates wounds to any model with 6'. Again, unless there is an FAQ or errata I missed (apologies if I did) I believe this to be correct.

After much tweaking and testing, I've found the ultimate composition for a beastly and super cheesy draigowing. The finesse of this build lies more in unit placement than comp itself, but i'll get to that after; here are the details:

*this is just the pally-deathstar; it is all one giant squad with all HQ's attached. Add in other units per your choosing.

HQ - Draigo
HQ - Libby

10-15 pallies, whichever gear you prefer, but mix it up for versatility.
Brotherhood banner, psybolt, apothecary.

Seems pretty cookie cutter right? You can adjust the number of pallies but ultimately it doesn't matter too much on the pallies but the IC's, and how you place/leverage them.

For this tactic, place draigo and the Libby on the perimeter of the deathstar; whether they are b2b with you other pallies or just barely on coherency, doesn't really matter as long as they are in the front facing your opponent and most likely to be closest model and thus get wounds allocated to them.

Now one of the biggest changes in 6th that affected/caused issues for draigo wing was wound allocation; before, the player could choose where to allocate wounds among his own squad. Pallies being 2-wound units allowed you to be cheap and rather than putting two wounds on one pally and killing him, you would put one wound on one pally, and one on another to keep them both alive and fighting. Now since the nearest model takes the wound, the pallies would be forced to be picked off one by one with all the front pallies dying and all the back pallies remaining unscathed.

Here's where the IC's come in; with them taking all the wounds they can negate this with Look Out Sir. IC's pass their LOS rolls on 2+, making it very probable. So from here, wounds get allocated to the IC, take LOS rolls, and allocate the wounds to any model within 6" of the IC. This way, you can mimic 5th edition by allocated one wound per pally to maximize the survivability of the squad. Stack that with the apothecary's FNP and you got one tanky squad.

Side note: I would stay away from multiple pally squads. Withe the squad upgrades you get more bang for your buck the more palsied are in the squad. I saw once a draigowing with 2 5-man pally squads, each with psyammo apothecary and banner. What a waste of points! Combine them into one big squad and they all get the same benefits for cheaper.

- W

"Rainbows are magic; magic is heresy!"

Thanks to the FAQ, with multiple models in base contact once you pick one to be the 'nearest' wouldn't you need to kill it off before you can pick another?

 Shandara wrote:
Thanks to the FAQ, with multiple models in base contact once you pick one to be the 'nearest' wouldn't you need to kill it off before you can pick another?

just confirmed this from another thread. It is closest model, and this was changed in the most recent errata which a fellow dakka-er brought to my attention.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m2590005a_40K_RULEBOOK_v1a.pdf

Although this tactic may still be slightly viable, I would not recommend it at this point as you may as well wave goodbye to your IC's. At least LOS is still able to allocate wounds among squad members, just not as op.

- W

You can somewhat pull this off by putting Draigo in front and the libby and two pallies equidistant behind him. You can LoS the wounds onto the pallies or the libby and then if they are LoS to the libby he can spread them back further into the squad. The biggest factor is you have to have the models in a strange grid structure with no distance variation.

AFAIK You cant "pass the wounds farther back" with a librarian.

Much like dice rolls, you can only re-do it once. If you LOS a wound from Draigo to the Liby, the Liby is stuck with it as it says you can only ever re-allocate a wound once.

I've done this with my jetSeer council before when I did not get fortune and got 4 'renew' powers with my warlocks.

I would put one farseer behind the other one. I would take wounds on the first one until she took 2 wounds, then LoS them back to the other one. Provided I did not take more than 4 wounds, I was good.

On the following turn, my warlocks would cast 'renew' to heal those wounds back.

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
AFAIK You cant "pass the wounds farther back" with a librarian.

Much like dice rolls, you can only re-do it once. If you LOS a wound from Draigo to the Liby, the Liby is stuck with it as it says you can only ever re-allocate a wound once.

Ya, in fact thats not how i originally intended it. I was mistaken as I missed the errata, but the plan was to just have another IC to have more LOS and thus more even wound distribution. That is a cool idea though, LOS-ing one wound to another character, and then he LOS's again to a pally. That would be cool.

After thinking more on it, it may be viable if you go dual force org and have 4 IC's orbiting the pallystar; for each IC there would most likely (or you would place the models so) that each IC would have a different model that is closest to it (almost like each IC has a designated body guard to take wounds), thus LOS would help you achieve more even wound distribution keeping the pallystar alive for longer.

This is a stretch I admit, I would have to try it on the table to see how it plays out.

wpartri1 wrote:

 Steel-W0LF wrote:
AFAIK You cant "pass the wounds farther back" with a librarian.

Much like dice rolls, you can only re-do it once. If you LOS a wound from Draigo to the Liby, the Liby is stuck with it as it says you can only ever re-allocate a wound once.

Ya, in fact thats not how i originally intended it. I was mistaken as I missed the errata, but the plan was to just have another IC to have more LOS and thus more even wound distribution. That is a cool idea though, LOS-ing one wound to another character, and then he LOS's again to a pally. That would be cool.

After thinking more on it, it may be viable if you go dual force org and have 4 IC's orbiting the pallystar; for each IC there would most likely (or you would place the models so) that each IC would have a different model that is closest to it (almost like each IC has a designated body guard to take wounds), thus LOS would help you achieve more even wound distribution keeping the pallystar alive for longer.

This is a stretch I admit, I would have to try it on the table to see how it plays out.

LOS is strictly limited to being used once. You cannot LOS a LOS even with multiple characters. Pg 16 "Only one Look Out, Sir attempt may be made per wound allocated. - Once the wound has been transferred(or not), no further attempts to reallocate it can be made."

No matter what you do, all rules are based on the closest model. You can set multiple models to be equidistant, but that relies heavily on placing, which your opponent is just going to move and realign to defeat.

To keep them that close, you probably have to reduce distance between models (you would waste movement each turn aligning a large structure), which increases your vulnerability to blasts and templates.

Sorry, no free lunch.

ughhh, I want a free lunch.

I guess I'm just trying to find a way to achieve even wound distribution by leveraging certain rules. One of the strengths of the pallystar in 5th was that you could distribute wounds among the entire squad to maximize its survival time. With closest model wound allocating, I thought maybe LOS wound be a way around this, but no cigar.

I'm realizing that very specific and tedious unit placement may be the only way around this, but again this can be countered by your opponents movement. You may be able to lure your opponent into making bad movements in order to finish off your half-health pallies, but I feel like we're splitting hairs at this point.

Any further advice? Please don't tell me to sell all my GK's and pick up tau.

wpartri1 wrote:
One of the strengths of the pallystar in 5th was that you could distribute wounds among the entire squad to maximize its survival time.

Sorry, ain't 5th ed no more. There is no reason that you can't play Grey Knights in 6th. They are reasonably Killpoint resistant, and still have a number of nice abilities and powerful units. The thing you can't do is assume your 5th ed tactics still work. 2+ armor deathstars aren't as strong in this edition. Troops and mobility are more key. Focus on rethinking your codex, not looking for loopholes in the BRB.

And no, don't chase the army dejour. But do reevaluate your strategy preference.

wpartri1 wrote:
ughhh, I want a free lunch.

I guess I'm just trying to find a way to achieve even wound distribution by leveraging certain rules

I'd hate playing against someone who tries this..... Even if you could do it, you'd rapidly find that everyone else in your gaming group would (a) refuse to play you or (b) start doing it themselves. So either you get no games at all, or the games you do get to play quickly devolve into faffing about with model placements and argueing about distance measurements.

I'm all for GW proving clearer rulesets but imho one of the best things 6th edition fixed was wound allocation (although there are, admittedly, still ways to abuse it)

wpartri1 wrote:
I guess I'm just trying to find a way to achieve even wound distribution by leveraging certain rules. One of the strengths of the pallystar in 5th was that you could distribute wounds among the entire squad to maximize its survival time.

This is exactly the tactic that 6th ed wound allocation was designed to eliminate, because it just annoyed people... and not just opponents. One of the reasons I stopped playing with my Orks in 5th edition was that distributing wounds amongst my Nob Mob was just painfully tedious.

I don't approve of this kind of interpretation of the rules, it goes against the spirit of the game and would just be annoying to play against, if someone tried this with me I'd try to avoid playing them in the future. The 6th ed rules killed off this type of sillyness for a reason. You need to learn new ways to play and explore other options in your dex, rather than trying to shoehorn your existing lists and tactic in. For me, trying new things with a new dex is one of the highlights. I'm currently graplling with the new Sisters dex (sorry Adepta Sororitas) and looking at ways to utilise the new rules rather than just running my list from the wd dex and wondering why it doesn't wwork a well. GK are still a cool army with a solid codex, no longer top tier in the competitive scene from what I understand but still good for casual gaming.

D

Point taken. Lets nip this thread in the bud.