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.

I love the new Codex and it has really has me excited to play. I don't even mind that they aren't self-sufficient because it lets me have my Imperial Knight and Imperial Fists all in one go with needing a whole bunch of different armies.

A good amount of guys are buying the new codex in my local gaming group as well to get GK allies because of how well they fit that role. It definitely seems like all in all this was a win.

chnmmr wrote:
For me, the reason I am not saying much and I am sure others are not saying much is because there is little to say. There is very little to this codex, very little variation and mechanically far blander than it was before. I played a game with my GKs vs some nids and while I won, I realised that I'll probably be playing the same librarian/terminator/DKnight list over and over because that is all there is. yes I know there are strike squads, paladins, etc, I just believe that there GK codex is severely limited when it comes to viable lists now.

That being said though, they make it easy for GK to ally or be allies and I think that is where the creativity truly begins. I actually like that the GKs aren't self-sufficient and need allies or be allies because it allows the encouraged use of other codices. I know that makes it so someone who wants to play GK would have to buy two codices at least for them to get the most out of their army but in the end it is nice. When this new Codex came out, I went into a list making creative mode like I have never done before because before hand, the GK were so expensive, they needed to be taken as a lone force or with huge amounts of henchman which I saw spoiling the flavor of the GK as much as having to ally them to other Imperial forces. Now? I am working up different ways to run them with my Imperial Fists and Imperial Knight, and now they feel like that exclusive fighting force like they are suppose to be as an Imperial Force comes in from the front laying down fire, the GK DS in the back striking at a key point to cripple an enemy. That is everything a GK is suppose to be and I love it even if the standard template for the GK is Librarian, Terminators and DKs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dezstiny wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
It's a combination of things I think.

For starters, I think everyone was semi expecting a subpar released by now, we are used to it - wasn't as much of a surprise as others.

Secondly, the main complaint everyone has about the codexes is not actually that it's poorly written, or lack of playable units, or stupid nerfs, these are all just scapegoat acceptable reasons to express disappointment at the fact that their army got weaker.
I discovered this with the Nid release, as soon as the Skyblight dataslate dropped, 95% of the people complaining about the "blandness" of the codex were suddenly all smiles and thanking GW for coming through with some "better written formations". When in reality, Skyblight is one of the blandest builds in the game, the list practically writes itself, everyone just changed their tune because they received a top Flyer Spam tier build to cheese with. And the reality of the codex being poorly written was still just as prominent as ever, people just used it as a scapegoat to begin with.

GK got stronger, much more blatantly than the other dexes, and also mostly to models already used competitively. Even though they lost more than half their codex, there is the least complaining so far. This is not a coincidence.

Totally agree, Gk players lost half its codex, but as long as they are still highly competitive, nobody seems to care to much. I mean tbh there is literally 1 build to play then you + an ally and that is Draigo, Libby, Termis and 2x Knights but as long as it does work and is enjoyable to the player... no complaints.

I believe that give it a month or 2 and GK players will stop playing as much given the totally linear nature of the faction right now. I mean you go that build or some manner of Deepstriking 4 Terminator squads, and even then the list looks very much the same, because all you added were 3-5man terminator units, maybe a unit of interceptors combat squaded and a stormraven... I mean at the end of the day... one can only play a list so many times and win until they finally bore of playing out the same strategy over and over again.

I disagree because that is the beauty of DSing in the first place, the flexibility of being able to put units where you need them, hopefully, when you need them. I have never had a a rinse repeat strategy with GK despite having pretty much the same list for a good while and I haven't gotten bored either because each battle is different with a different mission set and a person who uses different tactics. You can't play Maelstrom missions like you would regular missions and you can't just go killing things either. Part of the reason I have won my games is applying DS in the correct ways to win the mission and this makes so no battle is the same, only set up is quicker because I know what I am taking all the time. DS is probably one of the most flexible mechanics for getting units around where they need to be besides using units like bikes and on top of that, we have shunters. Using the same tactics every game because you are using the same list every time is just bad strategy.

valace2 wrote:
I actually quite like the new dex, after 6th dropped I shelved my knights. I used a lot of psyfle dreads and Razorbacks before the coming of hull points, so there was no point in running them into a wall against Necron, Tau, and Eldar.

I won't be bringing those units back, but I do have a couple dreadknights and a couple Storm Ravens that I am itching to get back on the table, but more importantly I am foaming at the mouth to run a Draigo Cent star. Grav Cannons where ever I want them sounds just brutal. They seem like a logical ally for my Imperial Fists, I can also run my cheaper terminators in my Spartan Assault Vehicle.

I have been playing my 30k Adeptus Mechanics lately, but I am going to give them a break and ally up my Fists and Knights.

I can not tell you how awesomely Imperial Fists and Grey Knights compliment each other. Just ran what you are proposing (I can give you my list if you want) and it worked wonderfully. Absolutely loved the way everything works now.

And as for everything else, to me the GK codex was a pretty good update. It trimmed the fat so to speak. Did GW make mistakes to get here? Yeah, they did but they have been showing a willingness to correct them. This constant railing against them is getting tiring. Do the GK have to rely on allies to be competitive? Yes. Do I care? Nope. It let's me run several different elements of my scattered interests in the Warhammer 40k because a contingent of GK running with a bigger force like Space Marines or Imperial Guard is more fluffy than taking Coteaz and an army of Henchman. That isn't GK. Far from it. Now the army runs like the fluff says it does and it is competitive. This satisfies my interest in the game both from a playing the tabletop to my interest in the fluff. That is my opinion and there is nothing that anyone has said against this that is going to change that opinion. I can kind of the complaints but some of these aren't as valid as others. I am also willing to give GW a bit of leeway here because they have been shaping up their act. The last days of 6th was having me considering hanging up the hobby but the release of 7th and everything has me thoroughly enjoying the game again.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
When the Inquisition were cut from the Sisters codex, I rejoiced. Finally, we were our own army again, respectable and independent!

The situation is slightly different because Grey Knights have always been tied into the Inquisition rather than having it shoe-horned in, but I think the same kind of feeling can be explored. Welcome to independence, baby codex.

This is much of the same with the Grey Knights, especially considering both the book fluff and the Black Library fluff. Grey Knights are connected to but not ruled by the Inquisition.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

I'll admit I haven't read the GK Codex yet, so I'm more basing info on what I've heard and how some of their more interesting things were removed (Inquisition could totally change a GK list and added whole other dimensions to the list-building process). I'm not so concerned about its strength level as I don't play as or against GK outside of the very rare pickup game, but my point is that their options have been reduced significantly. It's the same sort of problem I have with the Nids codex, although in that case it's more because the options they have are mostly utter trash, leading to mono-builds.

But as for Sisters, I know they're powerful, I actually love their current Codex. I don't understand why everyone says they're lower-tier, it's like they've never seen the rules. However, it never-the-less lacks options just from the physical lack of units that GW has given us to play with. It basically boils down to spamming special weapons, ideally through MSUs in transports imho (in fact, I'm starting a small Sisters force based around this philosophy).

I can agree that the options were numerically reduced, but you can play with the same stuff using the Codex: Inquisition with very little difference in the list. So the book makes more sense being on its own now andf i think that was GW's thought too: we sell more codex: Inquisition by doing it and we make the actual codex ABOUT grey Knights instead of about this Henchman shenanigan. We Hi-lite the things that are Grey Knights and we diminish those that aren't yet the option to include that stuff is still there.

The TO's are slowly realizing that multiple detachments just is the way it's going to be. militarum Tempestus actually kinda started that revolution going but Grey Knights cinched it. 2015 will be the year of the Multiple Detachment forces and I really haven't seen enough compelling abuse, other than flying Daemon Circus lists, to really worry me...and even those lists were pretty much already uber with just allies, so whether it swings the pendulum much is debatable to say the least.

I partially blame the Henchman lists for the separation in the first place. What was the point in taking a codex about the GK if you were going to side track that and go for Coteaz and his Henchman anyway? It left a large portion of the codex out so what did GW do, streamline the process by giving separate codices. The GK are no less viable than they were and imo, they are more viable in their current form and I have had great success with making lists for them. GK now have the most cost effective Terminators in game, have an awesome MC, Draigo is back with a vengeance, arguably one of the best ML3 Psykers (Farseer is good but GK Librarian wins in the psychic defense game) in game, Purifiers are still awesome, maybe a bit more awesome because of soul blaze being attached to all the incinerators and cleansing flame and Interceptors are still worth their points. Do I miss psybolts? Yeah but I am kind of thinking it was a point sink anyway with the performance I have been getting out of lately. The thing I miss the most is storm bolters to rear armor and not being as affected by T5 as much but other than that, my army seems to be able to function quite well without it. I miss Mordrak but they gave his power to the entire army so you don't have to take a certain unit to Alpha Strike it. Stream lined the codex to be the Deep Striking army of the game. Did I mention we have soul blaze now?

So I am not upset by this, rather I am happy about it. I remember not to long ago when I would come here and ask what is a good GK list and someone would give me a list that was pure Henchman and Coteaz without a single GK in it. Are people that surprised when they decided to split the codices? And it has been drifting towards this for a while and the writing is on the wall, GW wants to encourage allies where allies should be and giving autonomy to codices where it is appropriate and I like this fluff addition.

 TheKbob wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
Because removing options completely is better than just balancing them properly! Great logic!

Sigh. More strawman fallacy I see.

Not at all what I said, but hey, qq all you want. The codex is better off one than previously, as a concept. It's now actually GK, not coteaz and friends.

Really? Because as a concept, a product that Games Workshop wants me to purchase at $50 USD, it fails. It has much less content and deleted the capabilities of playing my army in a reasonable fashion. And no, the hand wave of "Unbound" means you've already failed any sort of reason or logic.

Sorry, you can have all Inquisition, Assassins, and Grey Knights in one book and still offer all three as individual items. Then that's the best of both worlds for all players. Not reducing options, deleting stuff, and then charging triple the price to get it all back.

Now, to play devil's advocate, ask a Chaos Marines player if they like all the different Chaos and Traitor forces mashed together in one force that gives the flavor of each but doesn't explore either with much depth. If Chaos players were satisfied with this, why do they want separate books for each Chaos god or a book that explores and gives better rules to Legions like the Night Lords and Alpha Legion who work fundamentally different from their Chaos counterparts?

I see this as the same thing, the Sisters and Grey Knights may be apart of the Inquisition but are fundamentally different from the Inquisition and other Imperial forces to warrant their own codices and I will enjoy that fact as well as mix and match with other Imperial books because they are all battle brothers and can act as one force anyway, the individual paying attention is nice and makes each army feel unique though. My one wish is not to have all these forces slammed back into one codex that is the Inquisition but that Chaos is treated the same way and some of their forces who deserve individual attention, get the same treatment.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Envihon wrote:
Did I mention we have soul blaze now?

Soul Blaze?! NOOO!!!!!

Welcome to the ranks of the Thousand Sons, now that you have mastered our ultimate power, you must join us... or die.

NEVER! Ours is a sanctified soul blaze that burns Chaos to their very core! Back vile daemon!

 SHUPPET wrote:

 Envihon wrote:

 TheKbob wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
Because removing options completely is better than just balancing them properly! Great logic!

Sigh. More strawman fallacy I see.

Not at all what I said, but hey, qq all you want. The codex is better off one than previously, as a concept. It's now actually GK, not coteaz and friends.

Really? Because as a concept, a product that Games Workshop wants me to purchase at $50 USD, it fails. It has much less content and deleted the capabilities of playing my army in a reasonable fashion. And no, the hand wave of "Unbound" means you've already failed any sort of reason or logic.

Sorry, you can have all Inquisition, Assassins, and Grey Knights in one book and still offer all three as individual items. Then that's the best of both worlds for all players. Not reducing options, deleting stuff, and then charging triple the price to get it all back.

Now, to play devil's advocate, ask a Chaos Marines player if they like all the different Chaos and Traitor forces mashed together in one force that gives the flavor of each but doesn't explore either with much depth. If Chaos players were satisfied with this, why do they want separate books for each Chaos god or a book that explores and gives better rules to Legions like the Night Lords and Alpha Legion who work fundamentally different from their Chaos counterparts?

I see this as the same thing, the Sisters and Grey Knights may be apart of the Inquisition but are fundamentally different from the Inquisition and other Imperial forces to warrant their own codices and I will enjoy that fact as well as mix and match with other Imperial books because they are all battle brothers and can act as one force anyway, the individual paying attention is nice and makes each army feel unique though. My one wish is not to have all these forces slammed back into one codex that is the Inquisition but that Chaos is treated the same way and some of their forces who deserve individual attention, get the same treatment.

CSM player here, and although the individual flavour and rules could use some work, there's absolutely nothing wrong with them being in the same book. I could see some people maybe wanting codex: death guard etc but that's never going to happen, plus it's less of a money grab this way and allows me more flexibility. It's certainly preferable to the alternative of well, having nothing but one faction to choose from.

Having multiple factions in the one codex is proven to work well, look at this years SM book.

But those are all the SM Chapters that follow the Codex Astartes and get their own Chapter Tactics to give the nuances to the different Chapters but the Chapters that highly deviate from it like the Space Wolves, Blood Angels and Dark Angels (Technically could throw the Grey Knights in there as well), all have their own codices with their own set of unique rules set to that Chapter. Are there CSM that operate roughly the same way? Yes there are but there are others like the Iron Warriors and the Alpha Legion that deviate from this "Chaotic catch-all" that would deserve their own codex. I would also love to see a Codices or even just a supplement devoted to the Four Chaos Gods that would cover both CSM and Daemons.

Quickjager wrote:
In regards to the book as a whole.

Conceptually *cough* it is a worse book actually, we are being charged more for even less fluff, Modrak? Gone. Thawn? Gone. Stuff added to replace it? Nada, zip, zilch, nothing.

From a Table perspective, it's worse; less units less rules, higher price.

If you argue this is a GOOD codex compared to what we had, which was the same but even more! Then would you kindly give me your money, because for some reason you are laboring under the idea giving away money is a good idea.

Besides... there was that leak of the entire codex on Dakka...

Actually, it expands the fluff quite a bit, detailing the 8 Brotherhoods and their purpose as well as the other aspects of the Chapter itself. Mordrak is still mentioned but it is true, he doesn't get a full page like he used to and Thawn got little in the old codex. So it expanded on other areas and other characters of the codex while removing two.

Functionally, the codex has gotten better and I have gotten a streamlined Codex that I have always wanted without the clutter of the last Codex trying to muscle the Inquisition in. When the prevailing army became Henchman, I was wondering what the point of having a GK codex actually was so when GW did this, I was happy about it. To me, the made actual GK units useful instead of just having Henchman be the only cost effective list. And a lot more people have taken notice to the point that I know a lot of people in my local group are buying the codex to get them as allies because of how viable they are. The new codex has helped me, not hurt me and my games have been pretty awesome with the new rules and mechanics. I think the GK are going to come back in big way.

I feel bad for those who did mix the two armies, but really, those are few and far between. From my perspective you used the 5th edition codex in one of two ways: To play GK with actual GK units despite the over-costed units or you used GK codex to play the Inquisition with Henchman even though the title of the codex was Grey Knights...so when the split happened with the original e-book release of the Inquisition codex, I didn't here many of either party complaining. And really that is the reason why GW split it, how would you feel that the players marginalized most of the Codex to play a small portion of that codex so what do they do, they make it so that it is its own codex. Why are you mad about that? It would seem a simple cause and effect issue here. Instead of buying the full codex for GK to get your Inquisitorial army, you just pay for the e-book and don't have to buy the GK book. Not only that but the Inquisition book has fluff pertaining to just the Inquisition with it's specific characters and nuances.

I just don't understand how people don't see how we got here from people using the Henchman spam to that influenced the separation of the Codices. Not to mention the tactics are fundamentally different tactics between the two Codices with the Inquisition being almost a specialized AM and the GK being the Deep Strike and Psychic specialists of the Imperium. Many would agree that the SoB are better off when not slammed together with the Inquisition as the Witch Hunters so why would you get on the GK being separate? Not only that but the Inquisition feels like the Inquisition now (Especially the way the old allies matrix used to work out since the GK weren't Battle Brothers with anyone, it allowed every Imperial force to take them, like it should be since the Inquisition is the overarching force while the SoB and the GK more specialized.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, quick addendum, the Nemesis Strike Force was the best thing to happen to the GK. Not only does it allow you to take only 1 troop but it highlights the fact that these guys are suppose to be Deep Striking. Teleportation is their biggest asset and the codex is highly geared to this playstyle which only hinders one unit: Purifiers but I have been hearing a lot of good solutions to this so yeah, as a player who loves this mechanic, it is nice to have the codex reward that with a detachment that was geared towards my playstyle.

 Anpu42 wrote:
Has anyone noticed that this seems to be the only place that there is people complaining about the Codex and it is a thread dedicated to complaining about the new Codex.

That should tell us something.

Yeah, over in the Tactics Discussion, most GK players are excitedly talking about all the new things they have done with their GKs using the new Codex.

Quickjager wrote:

 Envihon wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Has anyone noticed that this seems to be the only place that there is people complaining about the Codex and it is a thread dedicated to complaining about the new Codex.

That should tell us something.

Yeah, over in the Tactics Discussion, most GK players are excitedly talking about all the new things they have done with their GKs using the new Codex.

I'm doing both, want me to take my wine to that thread as well? I'm also in another thread on how to make the two under performing units in the codex SS and Purgs a more desirable choice, compared to the other units in their slots. This codex has done many things, and people are going to disagree in the direction where it went. GK players will either as I mention suck it up and play the good units they have, because undoubtedly they do have them, or shelve their army to go with another faction that offers more versatility at a lower point cost.

The codex as it stands is overpriced for what players were given originally, less content for more moolah? But it's up to the individual player if its worth the price.

EDIT: Also correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the Space Wolf release was CONSIDERABLY better, more models, kept the same units everything was more or less still viable with that new flyer taking the spotlight.

You see, people complaining about "overpriced codices" is a bit much, mostly because the GW is shifting from paperback to hardbound books which do cost more to produce so we will see an increase no matter what to off set the cost of making the hardbound book, there is no getting away from that unless people are saying that they are not wanting the hardbound books which is another complaint entirely. Again, I like them, the keep better and are made better than the paperback. Regular use tends to get the paperbacks beat up after awhile.

Also, GW wasn't promising anything like new models or anything like that because in terms of an update, GK wasn't that far behind seeing as they were updated at the end of 5th right before 6th came out. This was a quick release to update the GK fully into 7th since they had to do with one of the major changes in 7th regarding the Psychic Phase and the fact that they lost their codex powers in favor of getting their discipline that only they can cast with any regularity and less risk. This wasn't a full update and GW never said it would be, if they did, I could see a lot of these complaints being more valid. They smoothed out the wrinkles that faced the codex since it came out late in 5th and then the rapid change from 6th to 7th. GW did what they said they did and it is a good product that I am satisfied with. It gave me what I wanted and unexpectedly since no one knew about this release until it happened. This wasn't a restructuring or a major overhaul that was needed to bring the army in line with the rest of the game like the SW, just a short jump from 5th to 7th to bring everything into a neat and tidy umbrella.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 Yonan wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
While technically part of the Ordo malleus, the GKs operate largely independent of Inquisitors.

Its just that an Ordo Malleus Inquisitor can have a direct line to the GKs if things get out of hand. But rarely are their forces operating in tandem.

You will notice that very few of the engagements mentioned in any of the GK codices show Inquisitors and GKs together. Most Imperial forces operating with GKs are ones already in the combat zone. Less likely to be Inquisition.

Also notice that GKs aren't forced to include Inquisitors in their army, or Inquisitors forced to include GKs. It worked perfectly fine with both in the one codex. The only thing gained in this new codex was a page of tweaks that could have been done with inquisition still included. There was certainly no discount applied for removing something that is now sold separately.

How are you running non-coteaz inquisitors, using the 5th ed book, without GK? Please let us know where this mythical troop-less Foc can be found. Or accept what you just said was another untruth.

When did the amount of models become the barometer for how much a codex costed? What about the amount of fluff or other areas that are expaned? GK may not have the Inquisition still with it but the fluff section has gotten bigger and despite having less units than the Eldar codex, it is still thicker than the Eldar codex so it has more content than the Eldar. So yes, less units but more content in terms of other areas in the codex as they distinguish the GK as a force onto their own that the Inquisition sometimes uses. It makes the GK feel like the independent faction like they actually are with their own traditions and uses. The Inquisitorial Codex does the same thing for the Inquisition and fills you in more about what that faction is all about. So why is the amount of units such an importance?

 Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
Can I have Mordrak and Thawn back?
Can I also have the option for running an inquisitor/ inquisitorial things without having to pay for a separate book?
Can I take an assassin that isn't a vindicare (when I feel like swapping a strike squad out), without having to buy a separate book?

I think as a 'pure' grey knight player I've lost out. First I'm paying more for the book (hooray things I never really ran got a buff), lost the building blocks of my army (Mordrak, Thawn and psybolt ammo), lost access too the things I might want to try to add variety (inquisitors/ henchmen/ assassins), oh wait... I can BUY a separate book to re-include them. This is okay, it makes my smaller codex and it's even smaller DLCs worth it.

Mordrak's mechanics are still in the game, only now they have been made army wide. Hey, do you want to Alpha Strike your entire army instead of just ONE unit out of the codex? Can't do that in 5th Edition but wait, the new Codex has a way to Alpha Strike everything on Turn 1 as long as it can Deep Strike, so GKSS, Terminators, Paladins, and Nemesis Dreadknights can all Deep Strike Turn 1 with the new Nemesis Strike Force Detachment so that it has expanded to more than just one HQ unit? Oh, and now every single HQ also has access to the exact mechanic that only Mordrak had? So if that was a building block of your entire army, it would seem that this new codex encourages the playstyle that came with Mordrak.

Mordrak was key in my strategy and all my play tests lately, I have been winning because of the Nemesis Strike Force. Terminators are now cheaper so to run a GM, 5 Terminators and Librarian that Deep Strike Turn 1 which was the way to play Mordrak, is still viable and cheaper because unlike the Ghost Knights, I can put a Psycannon on those Terminators. Oh, and the Ghost Knights didn't have access to Psybolts. Your complaint that your "building blocks" have been taken away are unfounded and this codex highly caters to those who liked to Deep Strike and Shunt their armies.

Super Newb wrote:
Environ, it's not the exact same mechanic. Mordrak always came down turn 1 with no scatter. No one can do that now, well an hq can if you get the right warlord trait but that's it.

Anyway, the Nemisis Strike Force detachment is great, I agree with you there. Running and shooting after deep striking is very nice and of course so is coming down on turn 1 on a 3+.

To give Mordrak's rules to everyone in the army would be overpowered compared to the rest of the game, it would be that the GK players could just put everything where they like without consequence and just give them auto-win tactics so those measures were put in place to balance it out but still, being able to Deep Strike Turn 1 is a huge advantage and if you work a Comms Relay and then go second leaving your entire army off the board, you just basically denied your opponent a turn. Still a risky move but it is still there. The Nemesis Strike Force Detachment and the Warlord trait more than make up for the loss of Mordrak because Mordrak and his Ghost Knights were only one unit with capabilities that are basically army wide. That is huge and in the games I have played it has made the difference. People who used GK as Deep Striking and Shunters should be seeing their playstyle rewarded with this codex which is why I like it so much.

I digress though, let us look at how we got here. At the end of 5th, GK were ruling the game, placing high in the Tournament scene and it really didn't seem like it was going to change, until the changes in 6th happened. With this we saw the fall from grace of the GK especially in the tournament scene now that Draigowing was a lost strategy to the rules of 6th. This lead to two major flaws to appear for the GK, lack of mobility and lack of anti-armor but the GK weren't without their tricks and several ways to get around this became apparent. Running Rhinos and Psybacks became popular especially with Purifier spam armies as well as exploiting the Deep Striking and Shunting mechanics so we saw armies rise that used Shunting DKs and Interceptors with one specific unit at its head, Mordrak and his Ghost Knights. Anti-armor could be solved with psybolted autocannon dreadnoughts or using those DKs to punch things. (I sometimes used Eldar to solve my mobility problems since I didn't trust Rhinos after having bad experiences with them but this was after the Eldar release) Still, anti-armor was the biggest problem but there was one place that all these previous problems could be solved: Coteaz and his Henchman. Not only was Coteaz cheap for what he brought but he also turned an elite unit into a troop unit. This lead to more and more people just dropping the GK out of the list completely in favor of taking nothing but Henchman and ignoring most of the book. GW took notice and eventually came up with the supplemental Inquisition Codex allowing not only for all Imperial forces to take an Inquisitor but now you could have the Henchman army that you wanted as well as have it be your own Inquisitor if you didn't feel like taking Coteaz, plus let's face it, an Ordo Malleus Inquisitor in Terminator armor with a Psycannon was pretty awesome. This is what would lead to the eventual split and I was waiting for a FAQ to come out making the Inquisition part of the GK obsolete and forcing people to buy the Inquisition codex if they wanted to have Inquisitors and their Henchman in their armies but that never happened and mostly because 7th would drop to yet again change things. Another sign GW had big plans to change the way the GK and the Inquisitors operated was the fact that only GK units could use Sanctic with only Periling on double 6s instead of all doubles. The Inquisition still has it FAQ included with the GK Codex though so it was bound to go either way until the unexpected announcement of the release of a new GK codex that would bring the GK into 7th properly. And that is how we arrived to this point. The official removal of the Inquisition out of the GK codex and a Codex devoted solely to the GKs eliminating any chance of using the GK codex for Inquisition forces.

Looking at it this way, the split was a long time coming after the ending of 5th and the emergence of those separate strategies. It was at that time that it looks like GW realized the flaw in the 5th edition codex and they sought to fix it by not only giving the Inquisition players their own codex but also started to work on ways of restoring a viable GK codex that actually makes their codex useful to use the GK. People did mix the two but with how expensive the units were, you had to go one way or the other either with one of the pure GK armies or the Henchman army to get the full effect. I was told many times to keep what I liked or keep the Dreadknights and go full Henchman, that was the advice all over Dakka at the time. Take a small piece of this kind-of useful GK unit and fill the rest of the points with cheap Inquisitorial Henchman. That didn't feel like GK to me, that felt like the Inquisition but I trudged on trying to come up with pure GK solutions with minimal Inquisition which is why I eventually with Mordrak and shunting units. It was the most effective at the time, not tournament worthy but able to hold it's own in casual games so I grew satisfied but hungered to get a pretty good tournament level army so I started experimenting with allies anyway. It was obvious back then that the anti-armor was huge chink in the GK strategy so I used Henchman, I used Fire Dragons and I used Space Marines which is the strategy I would later keep. Then 7th edition hits and I see my GK army get a bit better, still not up there but better especially with GK being able to dominate in the Psychic Phase and then this unexpected Codex release out of no where right when I was getting comfortable in 7th. At first, I freaked out too, loss of Psybolts and Mordrak with Psycannons going Salvo made me almost loose my crap too, that they ruined my army but I bought my Codex anyway. I got through 6th and I would get through this too because I like the GK a lot. I started to toy around with everything and with the new points restructuring, the inclusion of the Nemesis Strike Force Detachment and I saw the light and got excited to play test. When I did I was decently surprised to see the GK functioning like they were suppose to with my play style being rewarded by the Codex this time. Honestly, the only time I really have missed Psybolts is on T5 and above opponents, other than that, the army functions well. Albeit, there is still an anti-armor gap but it can be remedied with a few creative ways.

 SHUPPET wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:



In any case, for those of you that say you pay for the codex for its rules content alone.
Seriously, you guys have no business buying a codex, ever. no matter how vast or impressive it might be.
If all you care about is the rules, they are on the internet, for free, just get battlescribe or the likes.
Why would you even NEED a codex for just a rules section?

Well for starters people care differing levels about the lore, and no matter what level, they still need a codex to play the game. I know plenty of people who are invested in this game to the point of having multiple armies who don't know and in some cases don't particularly care to listen to anything revolving around the fluff, instead just enjoying the strategy game aspect of the largest tabletop strategy game in the world. Remember, not everyone's hobby is the same as yours.

That being said, i have yet to see a post like this in this thread. Your average person obviously appreciates good fluff in a codex, but you can get good fluff any number of novels and there is plenty of online lore encyclopaedia/depositories that work just as well as the dex or better, while the same can't be said vice versa for army rules, they are in the codex alone. Stop being ridiculous, the primary motivation for every PLAYER who buys a dex is the rules. Using a large fluff section to excuse poorly written/lack of gameplay rules for the army makes my head hurt.

There are people who just buy the Codices for the fluff and see the Codices as the final word on the fluff when it disagrees (and it happens quite frequently) with the things that Black Library produces so the Codices are seen as the source books for all the fluff. This makes them especially important to those who like to read about the word, otherwise people wouldn't of been so up in arms about the Bloodtide incident, which got ret-conned in this edition or that Draigo was a mary sue, also ret-conned in this edition. I know people who buy the Codices and they don't even play because they like to read them. To discount the fluff that is within a codex is to be missing half the worth of the Codex in the first place otherwise they would of do what they did with the Core Rulebook and split everything up but the Codices are split up and the fluff is still in there contributing to worth of the Codex itself and should not be discounted. The fluff and everything that goes into the codex adds value to it whether you acknowledge it or not, the rules are just a part of Codex.

Even if you want to side skirt the issue of the bulk of a codex being fluff with the unit sections being the smallest part of a codex, no one has addressed those points I brought up in that long post above this one where looking at how we got here and how everyone was surprised by this when it could be seen a mile away once people just started taking Inquisition units out of the GK codex without taking GK and how really, the split is our fault because of using the codex in that way.

Also, how many people here have actually play tested the new rules for the army? Really dug into the codex and not just sat there saying this sucks because things I like were taken out? My play testing has a stark difference to the "this codex sucks" to this is an awesome codex where all the rules work in concert for an awesome strategy and we may actually see GK return to the tournament scene, maybe not any pure GK but definitely GK with allies or another army with GK allies. To me that is enough if GK return to tournaments even as just allies because it shows that they added enough mechanics and made the units more efficient that it becomes competitive. Right now, that is looking like it is the case which is just another reason why I am satisfied with this codex.

 agnosto wrote:
After a couple of games, I've decided to shelve my GKs. I'm heavy PAGKs and the new dreadknights with terminator friends thing turns me off.

Are they normal GKSS or Interceptors?

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
After a couple of games, I've decided to shelve my GKs. I'm heavy PAGKs and the new dreadknights with terminator friends thing turns me off.

How has the codex impacted PAGKs against Termies? Just the increase on special weapon prices?

People heralding how great Terminators are is maybe making people think that is the only way to field GK when it's really not. PAGKs got better, with GKSS probably better if they go with Incinerators vs. Psycannons. I think Interceptors can stick to using the Psycannon because they can keep the Salvo range. Incinerators are still really good though S6 and they have Soul Blaze. Furyou Mike has it, it really shouldn't of affected your PAGK. Unless you face a lot of AP3 in your local gaming group.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Envihon wrote:

Incinerators are still really good though S6 and they have Soul Blaze. Furyou Mike has it,

It's Miko.

Soul Blaze really isn't worth writing home about though.

Sorry it was an autocorrect that I didn't catch.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 agnosto wrote:

 Envihon wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
After a couple of games, I've decided to shelve my GKs. I'm heavy PAGKs and the new dreadknights with terminator friends thing turns me off.

Are they normal GKSS or Interceptors?

They're regular. I've got 40 PAGKs that I used to use as a ground-pound force. The change to salvo on psycannons has really put me off the whole army now. 24" salvo....yeah. Now my psyfleman dreads are near worthless IMO (amazing how one pt of S makes such a difference). Psibolt ammo in general being gone was a big blow to me and IMO compensated for the lack of range on all weapons in the army.

I ran a straight GK force without the cheesy internet gimmicks or special characters so my units are all kitted wrong to fit the new play style and I'm not investing in bits and tearing painted models apart to tack on incinerators and personal teleporters.

I have 10 terminators; not nearly enough to run an effective deep-striking force which seems to be the new play-style.

I face a lot of AP3/2 against my regular opponent, a CSM, heavy Nurgle player.

10 Terminators is really all you need. I only field about 5-10 terminators at a time. And you could deep strike all those PAGKs in during the first turn to be within Incinerator range or 12" with Psycannons. I do it all the time and it has become easier to do this in the new codex.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
I love this new codex. With it, I can play the exact sane way I've been playing my GK army since 5th. Pre-5th, it was Water Warror. Post-5th, it was Ghostwing, followed by Shuntwing in 6th. 7th? I swap out Mordrak and his Ghostly Bodyguard for Draigo and more Interceptors. And best part? I don't have to buy a single new model.

SJ

This is exactly what happened to me but what made me happier is that I could bring out all those Terminators that I had shelved that I never though I would use again except the 5 I was painting to be Mordrak's Ghost Knights. I am kind of glad, I never got around to painting them and now I get to use all my Terminators again.

I loved running Mordrak but not because I was attached to the character. He had an awesome story but I loved him for his rules. Since his rules still exist and are army wide, I am not that upset by the loss of Mordrak as a unit. GW didn't even deem him important enough to warrant a specific model.

Yeah, I am almost done with this thread. I came here for discussion, not so much a condescending and know-it-all tone of how everyone is wrong and the people that disagree are right.

I may have phrased something that could be a bit mis-leading but it was far from wrong. The essence of the Grey Knights are still contained in this book. The essence of Mordrak is still in the book. What made Mordrak good which was an alpha strike first turn to go in concert with a shunting move, is still in the codex and my point was that the players who played Mordrak lists should actually like this book instead of lamenting the loss of that specific character. No longer do you need to take a specific HQ to build a strategy around because the entire book now supports the strategy which to me is a reason to celebrate it.

Have you even done any play testing? Seen the failings of the book or simply doing the "equations" and calling it crap. If my play tests would of failed, I would of admitted to it and perhaps moved on to do more of my Imperial Fist army but the codex does work as intended and is an enjoyable, fun codex to play with. My GKs have done really well in matches, my tactics and strategy have never been stronger, this is with missing a key character in my strategy, Mordrak but my army still plays like it did when I had Mordrak, the only difference is that is does it more efficiently. And I will take real world results over some guy on the internet just saying that it is crap.

Super Newb wrote:

 Envihon wrote:
Yeah, I am almost done with this thread. I came here for discussion, not so much a condescending and know-it-all tone of how everyone is wrong and the people that disagree are right.

What does this even mean? Who is saying everyone is wrong? Where? Care to find a quote of this claim you just made?

I may have phrased something that could be a bit mis-leading but it was far from wrong. The essence of the Grey Knights are still contained in this book. The essence of Mordrak is still in the book. What made Mordrak good which was an alpha strike first turn to go in concert with a shunting move, is still in the codex and my point was that the players who played Mordrak lists should actually like this book instead of lamenting the loss of that specific character. No longer do you need to take a specific HQ to build a strategy around because the entire book now supports the strategy which to me is a reason to celebrate it

You. Said. Something. 100% Incorrect. It is not a crime to point that out (nor is it a crime to admit when one totally messes up a sentence and ends up stating a falsehood). Mordrak's rules aren't army wide now. You said they were. That is flat out, 100% wrong. There is no other way to state it. I corrected you, that's all. Now, of course, some similar to Mordrak stuff is army-wide, similar in that a form of first turn deep strike can happen (a form of first turn deep strike vastly different than Mordraks first turn deep strike mind you, the only similarity is potentially deep striking on the first turn). Words have meaning and when you are so imprecise in what you are trying to get across that you actually state falsehoods, people are going to call you out on it. Now, thankfully, you used much better language just now "the essence of Mordrak is still in the book." That's a lot broader and includes what you explained nicely now I about Mordrak lists. That's a good paragraph. But come on man, you gotta admit you wrote a sentence that was absolutely 100% false earlier. Mordrak's rules aren't army wide. He auto deep struck on turn 1, army-wide doesn't have that now, they have to roll for it. He didn't scatter, army-wide now does. He and his squad could either run or shoot, now army-wide they can do both. Very different rules-wise.

And I will take real world results over some guy on the internet just saying that it is crap.

Who said this? Are you referring to me? Care to find a quote? What are you even talking about here? Did I say anything about how deep strike and shunt lists play competitively? Nope. I just said Mordrak wasn't in the codex (along with a ton of other stuff removed). Then you said that false statement about Mordrak and his rules, I corrected you and here we are. So I am not sure why you are implying things I never said. This is why quoting your fellow commenter is important.

Saying Mordrak's rules are army wide, isn't 100% wrong, maybe misleading but not 100% wrong. If I would of said something like "Every rule Mordrak had exactly the way Mordrak had it is now army wide" that would be an incorrect statement. "Mordrak's rules are army wide now" is vague enough to be a correct portrayal of the new rules that the GK have but misleading at the same time but the statement still contains no specifics so it can't be 100% wrong. This is arguing semantics at this point though which has nothing to do with the subject at hand. I can admit my mistakes and I admit to the statement being misleading but not wrong. An attempt to show people that Mordrak wasn't eliminated merely had his rules taken and basically given to the whole army because Mordrak was probably the one thing that functioned like GK do in the fluff. A way to show those who are having misgivings that Mordrak was gone, that they still have the army they had in the 5th edition codex. Someone has already detailed how to make a Mordrak and even GW said that they may have been taking some of the named characters away but they were making sure that their rules were still in the codex. To have given Mordrak's exact rules to the army would have been ridiculously good and made non-GK players flip tables, people already got upset when it was just Mordrak and his Knights so this is something that I had in mind when making such a statement and something that I think that readers are also discern if they knew Mordrak's rules. I don't like to be outright condescending to people and if someone was mislead by it, to ask questions instead of flipping out and belittling other posters which makes for a distasteful conversation. I am not deliberately trying to mislead people, merely not have anyone give up one the army because of some changes when the essence of the character they liked are contained within the codex.

Super Newb wrote:
Oh my god, are you serious!?

Literally NONE of Mordrak's special rules are available army wide. Not his ghost friends rule, not his auto first turn deepstrike, not his no scatter deep strike.

It's ok, you slipped up and said an entirely wrong sentence. It happens. Get over it already.

You see this is where one twists words to make sure that their points are the ones that come out on top. You have been splitting hairs and nit-picking every argument in order to belittle and trying to show how right you are over every one else while completely ignoring other parts of their points. I explained myself and this post here addresses nothing I said. This post might as well of said "I am entirely right and you are wrong regardless what you have to say, so agree with me and say I am right, you are wrong". You haven't contributed constructively to the conversation for quite a while but continue to degrade not only the arguments but the people themselves. I said that my sentence may have and can be misleading which is why I later fully explained my sentiments later in the post and I have explained it several times but you are the only one who continues to have a problem with it. To what end?

Super Newb wrote:

 Envihon wrote:

Super Newb wrote:
Oh my god, are you serious!?

Literally NONE of Mordrak's special rules are available army wide. Not his ghost friends rule, not his auto first turn deepstrike, not his no scatter deep strike.

It's ok, you slipped up and said an entirely wrong sentence. It happens. Get over it already.

You see this is where one twists words to make sure that their points are the ones that come out on top. You have been splitting hairs and nit-picking every argument in order to belittle and trying to show how right you are over every one else while completely ignoring other parts of their points. I explained myself and this post here addresses nothing I said. This post might as well of said "I am entirely right and you are wrong regardless what you have to say, so agree with me and say I am right, you are wrong". You haven't contributed constructively to the conversation for quite a while but continue to degrade not only the arguments but the people themselves. I said that my sentence may have and can be misleading which is why I later fully explained my sentiments later in the post and I have explained it several times but you are the only one who continues to have a problem with it. To what end?

WHAT!? That is the least accurate summary of what has occurred. I said your comments on the "essence of Mordrak" were good. I have said quite a few times that I like the new deep striking formation in the GK dex. Go back and look and see for yourself.

Now I *also* pointed out that you said something entirely incorrect. In that first post I said I wanted to be sure no one reading this thread would get the wrong idea. Which is why I went over how your statement was wrong. And it is wrong. 100% wrong. And for some reason you are taking extreme offense to me pointing out this simple slip-up of yours. I don't know why. One of the other posters said mistakes happen. And they do. All the time, to everyone, including me. Get over it.

I have looked on the past comments, and most of your comments have been frankly, insulting quips back and forth to people. I am also not the only one to call you out for your behavior. It is not what you said but how you said it. A lot of your posts have been insulting. I am not taking offense to what you said but how you said it and the way you point it out which only contributes to escalate the situation instead of having a civil conversation on the pros and cons of a codex.

You are still arguing semantics and I still do not believe that my statement was not "100% wrong" but it did in fact, need more clarification when I say that Mordrak's rules were still in the book and army wide. Previously in the post, I pointed out why the modification was needed for those rules and why with what they did with the rules, why they couldn't just make a carbon copy of Mordrak's rules, again, you ignored that post which was a previous clarification before these latest serious of posts. I don't know why it upsets you to have it phrased that way. I simply wanted to convey that Mordrak and his strategy are basically still in the codex. That is all. How this lead you to have the reaction you had, still escapes me. I can understand pointing it out or asking for clarification but frankly, many of your responses to me and other people is uncalled for.

 SHUPPET wrote:
What on earth is the matter with correcting someone putting incorrect information out there? Or is it just because you stand on the side of the fence that Envihon sits on? Because thats genuinely what it sounds like. "I'll argue my perspective to the death in this thread - wait whats that? Someone pointed out a mistake in the logic we are pursuing? Dude, nobody cares about that, this thread is all about how CORRECT we are, we don't need our MISTAKES pointed out by people who DISAGREE with our opinion !"

There is nothing wrong with it, as I said in my last post which you conveniently ignored so that you could still make a "point". I pointed out that it was the way he has been conducting himself and the way he has been saying things that have been a bother. It became clear that he doesn't want to have a discussion but just prove how right he is which he did in an ungraceful manner that insults people. I corrected and clarified what I said which doesn't make someone "100% wrong", just that I made a vague, possibly misleading statement but he continued to insist that I was "100% wrong" in order to show how right he actually was. There is quite a difference in pointing out something and doing what Super Newb was doing. There is no getting around that.

You accuse someone else about having a bias because we are on the same side of the argument but it is easily turned around on you as well. This wasn't even an issue about the original post but how someone acting distastefully spiraled the conversation our of control and by making posts like this, you are only contributing to it. Again, I ask, to what end?

Super Newb wrote:
I'm at a loss for words Anpu. My post was clearly not about you. See mentions to "your friend", me repeatedly saying 'he' and not 'you' and *all* the context or explicit statements referencing someone else regarding: Mordrak's rules and the correction there of. I just can't even.

Point is you're chewing me out, even though Envihon behaved in a very inappropriate, thread destroying manner. All because of a simple correction which blows my mind. All I wanted was clarity, for people to know Mordrak's rules aren't actually army-wide. And that humble goal was met with extreme push back, by Envihon, and then less extreme push back, but still push back from the likes of Grey Templar, that n guy I ended up ignoring and you. Why? I don't know. But I am not going to comment on my correction of Mordrak's rules anymore. Because this is well beyond ridiculous right now. Good day.

There is something we can agree on. Like I said, many of times that you seem to ignore was that I had no problem with being corrected, otherwise I wouldn't of clarified my statement and we would have been going on about another topic. My main problem was your behavior and attitude to not only me but others in this thread and your constant insistance on the point that I was a 100% wrong. If you would of been fine with just the clarification, you would of left it there and it wouldn't of gotten to this point but your constant push to have to be right about the statement and the way you have stated things in this post is what got us here. Now your attempt to turn around things and say that myself and everyone else derided the thread in order to try and save face but you have been constantly belligerent and belittling. I am sorry for my actions that lead to this but you have yet to take appropiate actions to even confirm your inappropiate behavior.

 Psienesis wrote:
... the Inquisition has basically been removed from its involvement with the Sororitas. It would seem that they are no longer the Chamber Militant of the Ordo Hereticus, they simply "work closely together"... but that's only a minor part of the issues with the SOB.

So wait, they did something similar to the Grey Knights. Are the moving away from having a Chamber Militant for the three major branches? What would that make Death Watch then?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Quickjager wrote:
The codex is NOT balanced internally, the only slot that could be argued for is the Elite slot, which ironically is also the LEAST contested slot because we have up to 4 units in it.

Externally... yes I could see that being true, once a pass over Eldar has been made even though it isn't a ridiculous stomp like TauDar was.

HQ we already know who we are taking
Troop we already know who is better in point efficiency. Only reason to take PAGK is to go double CAD and have 4 Dreadknights.
HS we already know who we are taking
FA MOST of the time Stormraven will be taken competitively because it is our AA, doesn't stop me from doubling down on Interceptors.

Elites are really the only place in the codex we have a semblance of actual flavorful choice that remains competitive.

I will say that although liking the new codex, you have a point. There is a set way to take GK. For HS, Nemesis Dreadknights all day long. You will never see a Purgation squad on the table. Troops are pretty much going to be Terminators or maybe some cheap GKSS for someone running a Purifier army. Other codices do have more options but I feel like this is how GW wanted to go anyway. They were essentially making an army that is specialized in Deep Striking and the GK most certainly do it the best. So list building might be boring but you at least get an effective army is the one take away from this.

 Psienesis wrote:

So wait, they did something similar to the Grey Knights. Are the moving away from having a Chamber Militant for the three major branches? What would that make Death Watch then?

Dunno, but it would appear to be the case (IRT Chamber Militants). If they ever have a Codex: Deathwatch or Codex: Ordo Xenos, I suppose we'll find out. As it currently stands, the DW is the only Chamber Militant still directly attached to the =I=. Though, with more and more information coming out about that Chapter, they may get set apart and get the "but works closely with" line that the Sisters got.

But would that be possible. I can understand why the GKs got released from the Inquisition and almost can see the same for the Sisters but aren't the DW Marines directly commissioned by the Inquisition to serve under them? I don't know much about them so I don't know if they have a command structure like the GK and the Sisters that exist outside of the Inquisition.

And, yeah, Purgation Squads lost their usefulness once they lost Astral Aim. They aren't like the Devastators of SM who get actual long range heavy weapons so they can sit in the backfield behind cover and shoot. The 24" range on a squad like that is limiting and you can no long put them out of line of sight to pull off what they did with Astral Aim. Unless I am trying to get the Brotherhood detachment, I probably would never take a Purgation squad ever again because Dreadknights are that much better. With the Nemesis Strike Force only having two HS spots in the first place, I would rather fill that with a unit that can use it's heavy weapons effectively.

 Anpu42 wrote:

 Envihon wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:

So wait, they did something similar to the Grey Knights. Are the moving away from having a Chamber Militant for the three major branches? What would that make Death Watch then?

Dunno, but it would appear to be the case (IRT Chamber Militants). If they ever have a Codex: Deathwatch or Codex: Ordo Xenos, I suppose we'll find out. As it currently stands, the DW is the only Chamber Militant still directly attached to the =I=. Though, with more and more information coming out about that Chapter, they may get set apart and get the "but works closely with" line that the Sisters got.

But would that be possible. I can understand why the GKs got released from the Inquisition and almost can see the same for the Sisters but aren't the DW Marines directly commissioned by the Inquisition to serve under them? I don't know much about them so I don't know if they have a command structure like the GK and the Sisters that exist outside of the Inquisition.

And, yeah, Purgation Squads lost their usefulness once they lost Astral Aim. They aren't like the Devastators of SM who get actual long range heavy weapons so they can sit in the backfield behind cover and shoot. The 24" range on a squad like that is limiting and you can no long put them out of line of sight to pull off what they did with Astral Aim. Unless I am trying to get the Brotherhood detachment, I probably would never take a Purgation squad ever again because Dreadknights are that much better. With the Nemesis Strike Force only having two HS spots in the first place, I would rather fill that with a unit that can use it's heavy weapons effectively.

True, they were not as good as they were, but is can still some uses for them. I will have to play test them a few times before tossing them aside. I still would like a Squad of them, for completeness sake if anything else.
Also Every Codex has one Unit that is not as good as the others and Purgation Squad seem to be that, but one unit does not make the Internal Balance within a Codex an issue, even one with this few units.

That is true. I really like the Purgation Squads too. I always thought that Astral Aim was an awesome ability. It is a shame that they have just become a glorified GKSS that can take more heavy weapons. I don't think we will see our Dreadnoughts being fielded anytime soon either. The loss of psybolt ammo hit them hard and they are basically as good as any other SM Dreadnought now. It is a shame really.

That being said, I don't think the GK codex is as cut and dry as some have made it but I do think there are two distinctive styles of play now. Nemesis Strike Force utilizing deep strike and the shunt or the Purifier spam known from last edition with options to stick them in tin cans and run them over or utilizing the allies matrix to take SW allies and drop pod the Purifiers in.