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.

Tomb King wrote:So its safe to say that a large majority think Grey Knights are OP. Though it wouldnt hurt to have a more detailed poll for the main page or something.

Yeah except no. This poll is horribly flawed and as such completely null and void.

Redbeard wrote:

NeutronPoison wrote:Present a list that won a recent national-level tournament containing a Land Raider or Stormraven. I think you'll find it a difficult exercise.

This is a ridiculous standard on which to base whether something is good or not. At the top levels, at the national tournaments, it isn't the quality of the lists that is making the difference, it is the quality of the generals, and games often come down to which player made one mistake. Blackmoor took his draigowing to Nova, and got 2nd place to a Space Wolf list. Reading his reports of the game, he admits to a couple of mistakes that cost him the game.

Based on your assertion that, in order to be good, you have to have won a national-level tournament, we can clearly conclude that draigowing armies aren't good, because it didn't win the event. Ridiculous.

Two things to remember;
1) tournament performance typically lags about a year behind codex release schedules. Why haven't we seen GK winning a ton of tournaments? Because that year isn't up yet. Because people have been playtesting, painting, and so on, last year, in order to field the army this year. We saw this with Space Wolves, with Guard, and any number of other books. Wait another year and you'll see tournament results to match.

2) I believe that evaluating the strength of a codex based on tournament wins is a waste. Good generals win with what they're comfortable with, and what meshes with their playstyle. And good generals win tournaments, not good lists. If you want to really evaluate the strength of a codex, ignore the top and bottom 10% of finishes (the best and the worst players), and see what lists are dominating the middle 80%. That's where you'll find lists overcoming play skill.

+1 Amen to everything in here.

wuestenfux wrote:

juraigamer wrote:I still feel IG are more OP than grey knights.

Seconded.

Its easy to say this but I am curious as how you come to this conclusion.

IMHO the Tier atm is as follows:

GK (read thread )
SW (Almost as diverse as GK)
IG (all shooting need weight of dice)
DE (Good at combat and shooting but still made of glass)
BA (the emergence of GK hurt them bad)

This biggest issue for IG is the inability to push people off of objectives. The rest of those top tier armies all have strong shooting with assault troops. IG just has strong shooting, you can take ogryns, rough riders, or infantry blob that is combat oriented but good luck having them accomplish what you need them to do.

@Tomb King

Just because people don't use the tools of their codex properly doesn't mean the codex isn't amazing. Ogryns for example are hell on wheels when played properly.

Hulksmash wrote:@Tomb King

Just because people don't use the tools of their codex properly doesn't mean the codex isn't amazing. Ogryns for example are hell on wheels when played properly.

Force them to take morale tests (not too difficult) and they're gone. Stubborn is nice. Stubborn on an 6 or 7 isn't so much. If you're sticking a Lord Commissar with them, you're looking at a 200pt+assault unit that breaks when an opponent kills that S3 T3 I3 5+sv (4+ at best) commissar. Also, point for point, they don't pack a spectacular amount of resiliency or CC killyness.

My gut instinct has always been something like.

IG are VERY effective against Grey Knight armies. IG are effective against most(all?) other armies. Grey Knights are VERY effective against all other armies.

The difference, I feel, and I accept this is just more personal feeling, that the big difference between Guard and Knights, is that you can build a strong guard army in a club setting (EG, not taking 3 vendettas, or loads of hydras, or fully melta vets) without your opponents feeling, 'frak this piece of crap' whereas, everything in a grey knights army is so much better than everyone elses, it's a rare game where an average clubby can sit and say 'come on then, lets see what happens.'

Vaktathi wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:@Tomb King

Just because people don't use the tools of their codex properly doesn't mean the codex isn't amazing. Ogryns for example are hell on wheels when played properly.

Force them to take morale tests (not too difficult) and they're gone. Stubborn is nice. Stubborn on an 6 or 7 isn't so much. If you're sticking a Lord Commissar with them, you're looking at a 200pt+assault unit that breaks when an opponent kills that S3 T3 I3 5+sv (4+ at best) commissar. Also, point for point, they don't pack a spectacular amount of resiliency or CC killyness.

Why spend those kinds of points on a commissar? Is it really that hard to keep them within 12" and pay 15pts for a re-roll? And likely the only test you'd be able to force them to take is one for popping their transport which only increases the likelihood of being near the CCS. Of course it's possible I could be wrong, it's happened before.

Oh I disagree on the point for point on resiliency and damage output. In codex they are the best buy point for point for resilience and CC. Across codexes they aren't to far off but very few armies with units more cost effective have the same amount of support fire available from their army.

Hulksmash wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:@Tomb King

Just because people don't use the tools of their codex properly doesn't mean the codex isn't amazing. Ogryns for example are hell on wheels when played properly.

Force them to take morale tests (not too difficult) and they're gone. Stubborn is nice. Stubborn on an 6 or 7 isn't so much. If you're sticking a Lord Commissar with them, you're looking at a 200pt+assault unit that breaks when an opponent kills that S3 T3 I3 5+sv (4+ at best) commissar. Also, point for point, they don't pack a spectacular amount of resiliency or CC killyness.

Why spend those kinds of points on a commissar? Is it really that hard to keep them within 12" and pay 15pts for a re-roll? And likely the only test you'd be able to force them to take is one for popping their transport which only increases the likelihood of being near the CCS. Of course it's possible I could be wrong, it's happened before.

Oh I disagree on the point for point on resiliency and damage output. In codex they are the best buy point for point for resilience and CC. Across codexes they aren't to far off but very few armies with units more cost effective have the same amount of support fire available from their army.

Having run ogryns a couple of times in list usually on a noncompetitive standard I am very aware of their capabilities. They can fire there ripper guns and do a few wounds before charging. However, they will still lose a combat to a space marine tactical squad with a power fist especially if they dont get the charge. They are fun and fluffy but have no room in a competitive list for multiple reasons
1. They are too expensive for what they do.
2. They are only leadership 7, that means I would have to baby sit them with a CCS to make sure they keep going.
3. Statistically they would lose to a basic tactical squad that had a powerfist/weapon.
4. They have no support, most effective combat oriented units are effective because other units work in unison with them. I wont be assaulting my veterans up next to some ogryns .

I ran them in this recent mega battle I fought in with a lord commissar. Commissar got killed and I lost combat by 1 or 2. They failed and ran and that was pretty much all she wrote. You have to roll a 7 for the order to work on them and vox casters only work if both units have them. Ogryns cant get vox casters.

Hulksmash wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:@Tomb King

Just because people don't use the tools of their codex properly doesn't mean the codex isn't amazing. Ogryns for example are hell on wheels when played properly.

Force them to take morale tests (not too difficult) and they're gone. Stubborn is nice. Stubborn on an 6 or 7 isn't so much. If you're sticking a Lord Commissar with them, you're looking at a 200pt+assault unit that breaks when an opponent kills that S3 T3 I3 5+sv (4+ at best) commissar. Also, point for point, they don't pack a spectacular amount of resiliency or CC killyness.

Why spend those kinds of points on a commissar? Is it really that hard to keep them within 12" and pay 15pts for a re-roll? And likely the only test you'd be able to force them to take is one for popping their transport which only increases the likelihood of being near the CCS. Of course it's possible I could be wrong, it's happened before.

Oh I disagree on the point for point on resiliency and damage output. In codex they are the best buy point for point for resilience and CC. Across codexes they aren't to far off but very few armies with units more cost effective have the same amount of support fire available from their army.

Either way, they still require babysitting, which, for a unit like them (and their previous fluff) is rather silly, and as noted elsewhere a basic tac squad with a powerfist stands a good chance of roughly equalling them or even beating them in combat. If they were Ld 8/9 instead of 6/7 and 5ppm cheaper, they'd be solid units with a much higher profile, but at 40ppm and Leadership that requires babysitting (meaning your company command must at least mostly where the Ogryns go), they're just too finicky and situational to get working well routinely.

We're dragging the thread off topic but I think you're both wrong. To each their own.

And secondly and on topic GK's aren't OP.

Vaktathi wrote:

Fearspect wrote:You got me, I didn't realize I was being trolled until you tipped your hand with that last post.

Well, I guess if arguing that not having meltaguns in every troops unit isn't by any means a crippling issue and pointing out they have decent melta access regardless and a huge array of other quite capable AT options to balance that out, I guess I am trolling.

Either that or I've made my point if that's the only response possible.

Hmm

Psirifle Dread 4 S8 shots with 90% accuracy

Psicannon 2 or 4 S7 shots with 67% accuracy

Meltagun with 67% accuracy (90% in vulkan list)



To simplify 33% of all pens are deadly 50% of melta hits are deadly. So to combine 30% kill on psirifle shot 22 % on psicannon shot. 33% on melta, 45% vulkan list.

AV 14 Psirifle 0% Psicannon 0% Melta 2% Vulkan 2.5%
AV 13 Psirifle 5% Psicannon 0% Melta 5.5% Vulkan 7.5%
AV 12 Psirifle 10% Psicannon 3.5% Melta 11% Vulkan 15%
AV 11 Psirifle 15% Psicannon 7.3% Melta 16.5% Vulkan 22.5%

A psi-rifle is comparable to melta except against AV14. Also this is not taking into account 6" or less range where a melta will truely outperform but still needs to hit.
On the other hand a rifle dread gets 4 shots and can shoot out to 48" versus the melta needing to get within 6" to truly shine.

Based on these simplified looks, a psirifle is going to give me 4 shots to kill a rhino with about the same performance as a meltagun that has gotten in range.

What is my point? With the one exception of AV 14 targets, a GK can equal melta-dependant marines for ability to drop vehicles. Then add to that psicannons and a GK can drop anything with ease except for AV 14 and perhaps AV 13 targets. For that the limited access to meltas and multi-meltas of a GK should be good enough to take down the 200+ pt cost AV 14 targets that an enemy presents you with.

Hulksmash wrote:We're dragging the thread off topic but I think you're both wrong. To each their own.

And secondly and on topic GK's aren't OP.

Agreed on off topic. you might have issues with being stubborn though. I can atleast admit im wrong when I am. On topic, you might be wrong again as the general majority is heavy set on voting them as OP.

Put it this way. Your no doubt a good player but, if I had the ability to build me an all comers gk list I could be your all comers list 9 of 10 times regardless of who was the better player. If you lived closer I would show you this in person. A strong GK list in the hands of a good player can only be beat by making mistakes or rolling poorly.

Tomb King wrote:Put it this way. Your no doubt a good player but, if I had the ability to build me an all comers gk list I could be your all comers list 9 of 10 times regardless of who was the better player. If you lived closer I would show you this in person. A strong GK list in the hands of a good player can only be beat by making mistakes or rolling poorly.

You're a cool guy, TK, but that's pretty unlikely. Hulk's been around the block a couple times.

Also, it's only 7 hours, start driving! http://g.co/maps/enj35

Tomb King wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:We're dragging the thread off topic but I think you're both wrong. To each their own.

And secondly and on topic GK's aren't OP.

Agreed on off topic. you might have issues with being stubborn though. I can atleast admit im wrong when I am. On topic, you might be wrong again as the general majority is heavy set on voting them as OP.

Put it this way. Your no doubt a good player but, if I had the ability to build me an all comers gk list I could be your all comers list 9 of 10 times regardless of who was the better player. If you lived closer I would show you this in person. A strong GK list in the hands of a good player can only be beat by making mistakes or rolling poorly.

Oh I can admit when I'm wrong. I'm just don't believe I am about this

I also wouldn't place a massive amount of faith on the "General Majority" of the an online forum. Other people can explain the issue with the poll better than me.

As for the 9/10 times you'd beat one of my all comers lists with a GK list you build you probably can man. I barely even know how to play this game. Which is awesome since a new edition might be coming out and bringing everyone back down to my level

Hulksmash wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:We're dragging the thread off topic but I think you're both wrong. To each their own.

And secondly and on topic GK's aren't OP.

Agreed on off topic. you might have issues with being stubborn though. I can atleast admit im wrong when I am. On topic, you might be wrong again as the general majority is heavy set on voting them as OP.

Put it this way. Your no doubt a good player but, if I had the ability to build me an all comers gk list I could be your all comers list 9 of 10 times regardless of who was the better player. If you lived closer I would show you this in person. A strong GK list in the hands of a good player can only be beat by making mistakes or rolling poorly.

Oh I can admit when I'm wrong. I'm just don't believe I am about this

I also wouldn't place a massive amount of faith on the "General Majority" of the an online forum. Other people can explain the issue with the poll better than me.

As for the 9/10 times you'd beat one of my all comers lists with a GK list you build you probably can man. I barely even know how to play this game. Which is awesome since a new edition might be coming out and bringing everyone back down to my level

Ya me either, its why we were both at the finals for ard boyz. The 9/10 is because of the codex not because of the skill level involved. Your actually 1-0 against me when we met at the BugeaterGT and you had that unkillable termy for the win lol.

Tomb King wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:We're dragging the thread off topic but I think you're both wrong. To each their own.

And secondly and on topic GK's aren't OP.

Agreed on off topic. you might have issues with being stubborn though. I can atleast admit im wrong when I am. On topic, you might be wrong again as the general majority is heavy set on voting them as OP.

Put it this way. Your no doubt a good player but, if I had the ability to build me an all comers gk list I could be your all comers list 9 of 10 times regardless of who was the better player. If you lived closer I would show you this in person. A strong GK list in the hands of a good player can only be beat by making mistakes or rolling poorly.

Oh I can admit when I'm wrong. I'm just don't believe I am about this

I also wouldn't place a massive amount of faith on the "General Majority" of the an online forum. Other people can explain the issue with the poll better than me.

As for the 9/10 times you'd beat one of my all comers lists with a GK list you build you probably can man. I barely even know how to play this game. Which is awesome since a new edition might be coming out and bringing everyone back down to my level

Ya me either, its why we were both at the finals for ard boyz. The 9/10 is because of the codex not because of the skill level involved. Your actually 1-0 against me when we met at the BugeaterGT and you had that unkillable termy for the win lol.

Do I hear a rematch in the works?.................LOL

I think Hulksmash needs to write and Ogryn Tactica.

The Internet would explode!

Already did 6 months ago

http://hulksmash-homeplace.blogspot.com/2011/06/ogryns-shunned-abused.html

Now just repost it to Dakka!

(BTW, love the name of the blog)

Inquisitor_Dunn wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:

Tomb King wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:We're dragging the thread off topic but I think you're both wrong. To each their own.

And secondly and on topic GK's aren't OP.

Agreed on off topic. you might have issues with being stubborn though. I can atleast admit im wrong when I am. On topic, you might be wrong again as the general majority is heavy set on voting them as OP.

Put it this way. Your no doubt a good player but, if I had the ability to build me an all comers gk list I could be your all comers list 9 of 10 times regardless of who was the better player. If you lived closer I would show you this in person. A strong GK list in the hands of a good player can only be beat by making mistakes or rolling poorly.

Oh I can admit when I'm wrong. I'm just don't believe I am about this

I also wouldn't place a massive amount of faith on the "General Majority" of the an online forum. Other people can explain the issue with the poll better than me.

As for the 9/10 times you'd beat one of my all comers lists with a GK list you build you probably can man. I barely even know how to play this game. Which is awesome since a new edition might be coming out and bringing everyone back down to my level

Ya me either, its why we were both at the finals for ard boyz. The 9/10 is because of the codex not because of the skill level involved. Your actually 1-0 against me when we met at the BugeaterGT and you had that unkillable termy for the win lol.

Do I hear a rematch in the works?.................LOL

I was definitely looking forward to one. Unfortunately there are a host of things keeping me from this years bugeater which include my honeymoon and possibly orders that trump the honeymoon. I will have to see what events they have this year. Might not be an ard boyz this year. There is no date for it.

There is always a way to beat an army. Purifier spam does to kps Draigo wing can only hold so many objectives henchman lack frag grenades... Whoever said ba took a hit because of their release are right but I continue to play my Doa against them. If I had asked the to what time the game ended instead of my opponent I would have went on to win the tournament. I rematches him down the road and massacred him so yes gk lack weaknesses but they can still lose to being overwhelmed

GK are powerful, but like most newer marine codexes, they become extremely boring to play against after a while since you literally are facing the same build over and over again. I also think that is a symptom of 5th edition game design. I hope that changes somewhat for 6th.

Yes they are overpowered does it matter not really my shooty Dark angels destroyed a greyknights last week.

everything has trouble with lascannons and meltaguns

captain collius wrote:Yes they are overpowered does it matter not really my shooty Dark angels destroyed a greyknights last week.

everything has trouble with lascannons and meltaguns

Your shooty dark angels involved las cannons and meltaguns? Where is the missle launchers? haha

I am wondering what will be the next heavyweight codex released by GW. It seems like they decided to boost two scrub armies in fifth edition.

-666- wrote:I am wondering what will be the next heavyweight codex released by GW. It seems like they decided to boost two scrub armies in fifth edition.

Maybe the Tau Empire wont be ashamed to call itself an empire anymore. haha!

Tau were OP in 4th. I doubt they will get any significant boost.

Psycannons are more effective against AV14 per weapon than both multimeltas and Space Marine krak missile launchers.

Their rending attribute gives them a D3 die on a successful roll of 6 on the penetration roll. Shot per shot, this means they are statistically slightly less likely than a multi-melta to "penetrate" AV14, but they are equally likely to glance. On a glancing hit, the multi-melta's AP1 +1 roll to damage table is superior to a glance on a psycannon, however, the psycannon penetrates more often than it glances, and the result of a psycannon penetration is functionally the same as a penetrating hit with regards to damage table rolls. With 4 extra attack rolls, the ability to put 2 psycannons in a single squad for a mere 10 points a piece, and identical range to multi-meltas, Psycannons outperform multi-meltas against AV14.

Math redone. This time more carefully (e.g. statistical probability versus mean).

Multi-meltas individually have an 11.1% chance to cause a glancing hit, which is effectively a -1 damage penetrating hit on the damage roll. By contrast, each shot of a Psycannon has a 7.4% chance to cause a penetrating hit on the damage roll, which is functionally equivalent to a multi-melta glancing hit. With 4 attacks, statistically this works out to a 26.5% chance to cause a penetrating hit, which is over double what a multi-melta can put out per hit. Psycannons have an additional chance to cause a glancing hit.

By contrast, a Space Marine missile launcher can cause a glancing hit at an 11.1% rate against AV14 at 48" range. It is worth noting, however, that the Psycannon not only can cause penetrating hits, but cause penetrating hits more frequently than missile launchers can cause glancing hits.

Leenus wrote:
I think it is completely unreasonable to think similar units should be costed similarly between codexes *IF* you understand that GW's mission is to make money and sell models, not to produce the most balanced game possible.

Do you work for GW? Do you have stock? If not, then you shouldn't be concerned with things from GW's perspective. Start acting like a consumer, because you are one.

Unless your objective is to -buy- the greatest number of models as possible and -lose- the greatest amount of money possible for GW's benefit, then you absolutely should not be following that line of reasoning, because it does not apply to you.

Psycannons are pretty much the same math as assault cannons in 4th, and I can say pretty surely that melta out performs both in 5th because of the ap1 rule. Also, bs4 hits on a 3, that's a 67% chance, not a 50% chance.

If you're going to calculate probability, use an excel sheet and the binomial theorem.

You CANNOT calculate multiple shots by figuring out one shot and then multiplying the result by 4.

Doing it that way means you count some of the shots multtiple times when the landraider has already died, which is incorrect.

scuddman wrote:Psycannons are pretty much the same math as assault cannons in 4th, and I can say pretty surely that melta out performs both in 5th because of the ap1 rule.

I'm afraid not. Rending allows the psycannon to deliver penetrating hits to AV14. Melta cannot cause penetrating hits to AV14. On a glancing hit, the Melta's AP1 adds +1 to the damage roll of a glancing hit on an armor penetration roll of 6, however, because the glancing hit rules include a -2 to damage rolls, the result is inferior to a penetrating hit (page 61, 5th ed rulebook). The 4 shots of the psycannon allow it to put out multiple times the number of penetrating shots compared to the multi-melta.

Psycannons are simply better against AV14 per weapon than a multi-melta.

scuddman wrote:
Also, bs4 hits on a 3, that's a 67% chance, not a 50% chance.
Doing it that way means you count some of the shots multtiple times when the landraider has already died, which is incorrect.

My mistake, fixed
At least I think so.