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.

To completely derail the thread OP.

SM vanilla power at 1850pts

HQ - Libby, Terminator, SS, (null zone + vortex)

EL - 5 TH/SS terminators in Land Raider (or Redeemer with MM)
EL - Dreadnought with MM
EL - Dreadnought with MM

TR - 10 SM, Lascannon, flamer, Lazorback
TR - 10 SM, Lascannon, flamer, Lazorback
TR - 10 SM, Missile, meltagun, combi-melta, fist, rhino, HK

FA - 2 Attack Bikes with MM

HV - Thunderfire Cannon
HV - Predator with heavy bolters


Build it, play it and win.

Surtur wrote:
But back to the topic. For those proclaiming the balance of Grey Knights look no further than a direct comparison between them and Codex Space Marines. Basic power armor grey knights vs tac marines. 4 points more for considerably better shooting and CC, cheap thunder hammer, ability to take options at 5 man, ability to double up on the special weapons, all weapons are assault and transports that don't need extra armor for a few points more.

For one less point than a tac marine you can get a death cult assassin. One is an "well rounded" (highly debatable) and the other is an atrocious min maxed model. One has an ok ranged weapon and will get 1 attack base and what is considered good stats. The other has an invuln save as good as a terminator's, 3 attacks base, ignore armor, same strength, higher initiative higher WS can be combined with ridiculously stupid grenades that will gimp the assaulted squad's ability to retaliate in addition to psychic powers to enhance their strength. Not to mention a player can prevent exposing their techmarine and librarian by abusing the assault rules so that neither sees combat but lends their support. Mean while genestealers are 1 point less, 1 attack less, no invul, no synergy on this level, rend instead of ignore armor, no transport.

That's an interesting way of spelling "I didn't read page 2 and on before replying."

Meanwhile their terminators get better cheaper assault cannons, potential for multi-wound, apothecary, banner for +1 attack, a 2++, +2 initiative or 4++, ect.

It's "etc.", and those terminators get the 2++ or 4++ in close combat only, cost potentially more than your regular terminator, with an apothecary that is crazy expensive, require an expensive special character to be troops (which is a big deal because you can't field many of them without making them your only option). I still do not believe you have read any page of this discussion beyond the first, and I'm being generous there.

Let's not forget that all of their weapons become +1 S better for about 5-10 points or 20 if it's a squad. This means my base squad without special weapons can glance a rhino on the front or pen a chimera on the side or glance a predator on the side or a vindicator or pen venoms/raiders or wound tyranid MCs on 5s or pen ork trucks or DO I REALLY HAVE TO GO ON?

I don't know. Do you need to go on? If you have no melta, then you're relying on subpar weapons to crack open vehicles. If you have no plasma, then you're relying on subpar weapons to kill MCs. The average case for two shots of plasma wounding a TMC is 1.11 wounds. The average case for 20 S5 storm bolter shots is 20 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/3 = 1.48 wounds. This is assuming 3+ armor on the TMC. You spent less points on the plasmagun than you did on the psybolt ammo, more points on the GK than you did the Tacs who carried the plasmagunner, and that doesn't include the fact that the GK required a full squad of marines to pull off, while the Tacs only needed a single guy remaining, or the bolter fire from the tacs which would wound on 6+ still.

Then we have their transports. 5 points more for psychic power to ignore stunned or shaken. Also the 50 point razorback with the psyammo that can act as a cheap assault cannon in a pinch.

S6 does not an assault cannon make. Fortitude is pretty useful, yes. I will not argue against that. It is still affected by hoods though, and it's still requires a leadership roll.

Oh but they have a weakness of psychic hoods and shadow in the warp and seer stones BUT OH WAIT LITERALLY EVERYTHING IN THIS ARMY IS DESIGNED TO DESTROY PSYCHERS AND THEY HAVE A HOOD TOO. Trying to deepstrike? Too bad, warp quake servoskull enjoy the mishap.

Uh, what? Warp quake is broken, and can autowin a game against daemons if you tailor your list for it, but what do servoskulls have to do with the time of day? What bearing does their anti-psyker stuff have on their vulnerability to anti-psyker stuff? You just seem angry.

This is the problem. They have ridiculous options that they never pay full amount for, they cover their own weakness exceptionally well, their abilities get way out of control into limiting how an opponent can play, and their units and options are severely underpriced. I cannot see how you think this is fair and balanced. If you look away from the super competitive for a moment and compare to lower tier codexes or more casual play it's completely overpowering. Even in top tiers, why is a terminator list doing so well? Deathwing has always been considered a fun solid list, but it's not super competitive. Why is it that suddenly Draigowing is a serious threat to top tier armies?

There is a concept referred to as "opportunity cost" at work here. You can't remove the force weapons from the GK, no matter how hard you try. They're bolted on. Same thing with Aegis, same thing with all of the other "ridiculous" options. For that, you're paying C:SM cost + 25%. In return, you get no access to the conventional weapons that marines get, including any of the standard heavy weapons as well as melta and plasma. You DO get a badass generalist weapon in the psycannon, but it's a poor replacement for either of those guns, and it's only a medium range weapon. So far, the only ability you've listed as limited to an opponent is warp quake, and yes, I do agree, it has the penchant for being abusive, just like options in other codexes. Remember the fit thrown about CSM's Lash of Submission when it came out?

And actually, post-DA FAQ, Deathwing actually seems pretty competitive nowadays. There was a chart indicating that they were making a comeback in the tournament scene as well.

ShumaGorath wrote:

But calling an entire book OP because you're discouraged/frustrated that you personally can't beat a couple of guys at your shop? I think you need to take a step back and realize that maybe, you aren't thinking of how to outplay them. Rather than saying "I outplay them and out list build them and still lose".

I didn't start this thread.

No, but it was started based on your position in another thread, and you've continued the opinion of GK are overpowered. You'll see above I stated you think the book is OP, not that you made this thread.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Sounds like excuses to me. The first step to improving is to acknowledge that maybe you aren't outplaying them, and aren't out list building them.

Except in many cases I am. I'm pretty good at this game. I can recognize massive errors in the play of my opponents and I can also recognize when they don't matter in the slightest because (as many celebrity bloggers are starting to point out) the actual input from across the table doesn't matter to the gray knight book as much as making a few crucial saves.

1) "Celebrity" bloggers? Really? That's your source?
2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

ShumaGorath wrote:

As for that specific draigo-wing scenario.

Don't clump.

Let him smash a 200 point skimmer + 500 point cargo straight into you. Blow up the raven (it's AV12, it ain't hard) and eat the charge from the paladins.

With missiles
1 in 2 to destroy on pen.
1 in 3 to pen.
1 in 3 to get past turbo boosted shrouded cover.

With hit rolling it requires about 21 missiles to down it 50% of the time. What about that "ain't hard"?

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game. If he turboboosted forward, he isnt disembarking that turn. Also, now he has draigo, 5 paladins, and a libby in there? (Which wouldn't fit). With libby + pallies + raven thats a 700 point brick, that's half his army at 1500! Also, shrouding is a psychic check, and is susceptible to a hood since it's right in your face (if you brought one).

ShumaGorath wrote:

They will kill your unit, yes. Now move everything else away and let them waddle around the rest of the game all sadfaced for being slow.

And then I lose two of the games three scenarios.

How? You've gotten 1 KP, and lost 1-2 to the paladins. They're in one spot, so maybe, maybe, they're denying you an objective. That hardly loses two of the games three scenarios.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I'd be curious to see what list you're using, though we are venturing slightly off topic I suppose...

Yes.

No, but it was started based on your position in another thread, and you've continued the opinion of GK are overpowered. You'll see above I stated you think the book is OP, not that you made this thread.

I haven't been an active part of the GK bashing in the thread for like 15 pages. When I was I was the closest thing to a moderate opinion in this thread.

1) "Celebrity" bloggers? Really? That's your source?

The feth do you want for a source beyond personal experience and blogs? You think Reuters is polling people for their opinions on GKs?

2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

I've been playing it for 13 years and I get complimented on my play. There is no absolute observer here and we don't know eachother so you're going to have to believe me.

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him. Either way, going from 21 to 15 in the transition between melta and missile is still utterly insane for that kind of a threat delivery system, and you casually stated that it was easy. Requiring more heavy weapons than I can bring in a 1750 list is not easy by any definition.

How? You've gotten 1 KP, and lost 1-2 to the paladins. They're in one spot, so maybe, maybe, they're denying you an objective. That hardly loses two of the games three scenarios.

One scenario is kill points and the other has two objectives. I might be able to zoom some tacs onto his, but they have to survive over there and I'm at a distinct disadvantage.

Yup, that pretty much confirmed it, it's you, not the book.

How the feth does agreeing that we're off topic mean that its me and not the book? Do you have stock in space marine codexes or something? Why did you suddenly turn into an ass?

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

ShumaGorath wrote:

No, but it was started based on your position in another thread, and you've continued the opinion of GK are overpowered. You'll see above I stated you think the book is OP, not that you made this thread.

I haven't been an active part of the GK bashing in the thread for like 15 pages. When I was I was the closest thing to a moderate opinion in this thread.

1) "Celebrity" bloggers? Really? That's your source?

The feth do you want for a source beyond personal experience and blogs? You think Reuters is polling people for their opinions on GKs?

2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

I've been playing it for 13 years and I get complimented on my play. There is no absolute observer here and we don't know eachother so you're going to have to believe me.

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

How? You've gotten 1 KP, and lost 1-2 to the paladins. They're in one spot, so maybe, maybe, they're denying you an objective. That hardly loses two of the games three scenarios.

One scenario is kill points and the other has two objectives. I might be able to zoom some tacs onto his, but they have to survive over there and I'm at a distinct disadvantage.

Yup, that pretty much confirmed it, it's you, not the book.

How the feth does agreeing that we're off topic mean that its me and not the book? Do you have stock in space marine codexes or something? Why did you suddenly turn into an ass?

1) You responded rudely, I responded curtly, you responded nastily in your most recent. Name calling, dropping the f bomb, etc. is typically frowned upon on these boards

2)The "it's you not the book" was more to your entire post, which came off as a page of denial as to why it couldn't possibly be your fault for losing the games.

3) In the kp scenario you're dead even, you've lost a unit to what he charged, and you've killed the raven, in this hypothetical. In the 2 objective mission, yes, you may have to go get his and not just hold your own. But he isn't going to be walking back to his with that unit any time soon.

4) I don't need to believe you, as I believe, and apologies if I'm wrong, you stated in previous pages, proof is in tournament finishings. How about letting us know what large-scale events you've performed well in (anything bigger than an RTT or the silliness that is ard boyz)?

5) Nice quip about reuters, minus the language. My point was more that internet bloggers hold no water, they're aren't sources, they're just other random guys spouting off, typically unfounded, opinions. When you use them to back up your point, expect for it to be questioned in a reasonable discussion. When you state "im pretty good at this game" and "nameless bloggers agree with me", don't be too surprised when people don't just go "oh, okay then".

1) You responded rudely, I responded curtly, you responded nastily in your most recent. Name calling, dropping the f bomb, etc. is typically frowned upon on these boards

I did after you started flaming me. Not before. Note that my post comes after yours.

2)The "it's you not the book" was more to your entire post, which came off as a page of denial as to why it couldn't possibly be your fault for losing the games.

Yes, because pointing out the numerical requirements for the things you said were "easy" and pointing out the deficiencies in your glorious battle plan paint me as a someone in denial of their own poor skills. That's it.

In the kp scenario you're dead even, you've lost a unit to what he charged, and you've killed the raven, in this hypothetical. In the 2 objective mission, yes, you may have to go get his and not just hold your own. But he isn't going to be walking back to his with that unit any time soon.

In the KP scenario He hasn't charged one squad in isolation. I'm going to lose others. I can't stuff my entire army in one land raider and then fly it into the sky out of their range. A 30 inch threat bubble in the center of the board covers a large percentage of the table. He can start picking off transports at his leisure. As for taking his objective, did you know that draigowing armies have other units in them? Shocking I know. Those ones typically stand on his objective. Many of them exist for the pure purpose of killing transports, making the long haul to his objective kinda hard.

I don't need to believe you, as I believe, and apologies if I'm wrong, you stated in previous pages, proof is in tournament finishings. How about letting us know what large-scale events you've performed well in (anything bigger than an RTT or the silliness that is ard boyz)?

I live in Maine. Bring an RTT here and I'll have something beyond ARD boyz and the local scene.

Nice quip about reuters, minus the language. My point was more that internet bloggers hold no water, they're aren't sources, they're just other random guys spouting off, typically unfounded, opinions.

you sound pretty high up in that ivory tower right now.

When you use them to back up your point, expect for it to be questioned in a reasonable discussion. When you state "im pretty good at this game" and "nameless bloggers agree with me", don't be too surprised when people don't just go "oh, okay then".

This is the nature of subjective experiential discussion. You're going to have to get used to it since you clearly don't want to do the mathammer side.

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

Damn, I fail math. On the other hand, looks like someone's had a critical failure on his politeness roll...

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

Damn, I fail math. On the other hand, looks like someone's had a critical failure on his politeness roll...

I apologize, you just said the exact same thing as targetwag in reply to me. He was flaming me in other areas, so I was started to get the feeling I was being ganged up on and I was getting aggravated.

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

You don't have any guns other than missiles? Like...meltaguns maybe? They may ignore the 2d6 armor pen, but they don't ignore AP1, and you can count immobilized into the pool of results there, because immobilized is basically the same effect on the game.

Thats why I said one in two. There aren't three destroyed results on a pen. As for melta, it's marginally more effective than missiles but requires proximity to the deathstar and sacrificial units. The more I sacrifice the more I'm going to lose via KPs by having three times as many as him.

Just saying, if he's turboboosted, immobilized is upgraded to wrecked, so in that case there would be three destroyed results on a pen.

THAT IS WHY I SAID ONE IN TWO. Did you know that 3 in six, which would be the destroyed results on a turbo is a one in two chance? Math!

Damn, I fail math. On the other hand, looks like someone's had a critical failure on his politeness roll...

I apologize, you just said the exact same thing as targetwag in reply to me. He was flaming me in other areas, so I was started to get the feeling I was being ganged up on and I was getting aggravated.

Flaming you? I was disagreeing with you. Flaming is when someone just rips someone else a new one and rails on them, or as good ole urban dictionary defines it:

1. To engage in an online argument usually involving unfounded personal attacks by one or more parties.

So in actuality, since I didn't stoop to personal attacks, but you started swearing and namecalling...you're flaming me. It's still a polite fail, as the almighty walrus spoke of.

Flaming you? I was disagreeing with you. Flaming is when someone just rips someone else a new one and rails on them, or as good ole urban dictionary defines it:

1. To engage in an online argument usually involving unfounded personal attacks by one or more parties.

2) What makes you pretty good at this game? The fact that you think you're pretty good at this game? I'm not trying to be harsh, but some humility might help you improve your play and win matchups you currently think aren't your fault for losing.

I consider this to be a flame. The direct implication that I am poor at this game and that my play is directly at fault for my feelings of codex inadequacy is something you derived from nothing but the need to find a fault other than those that I've listed. That fault happens to involve me as a person and carries negative connotations.

So in actuality, since I didn't stoop to personal attacks, but you started swearing and namecalling...you're flaming me. It's still a polite fail, as the almighty walrus spoke of.

Yup, that pretty much confirmed it, it's you, not the book.

There is no way to take this other than as a personal attack since that's precisely what it is. I responded with sarcasm and a harsher tone. I have yet to flame you and the closest that I've come to it come after you started up the bad discussion engines.

ShumaGorath wrote:

I consider this to be a flame. The direct implication that I am poor at this game and that my play is directly at fault for my feelings of codex inadequacy is something you derived from nothing but the need to find a fault other than those that I've listed. That fault happens to involve me as a person and carries negative connotations.

He might have worded it stiffer than you'd like, but it's a valid consideration. If I play a game with people, and I lose, and ESPECIALLY if I get on a losing streak, I don't assume that the armies that I'm playing against are just better, or imbalanced in their favor. I say, "guys, seriously, what am I doing wrong?"

I've taken it to extremes. I have notepads that have recorded die roll I make that happens within the fringe of the probability curve. I keep notation of how each of my armies does against other particular opponents. I change things up, I try to figure out what I've done wrong.

He might have worded it stiffer than you'd like, but it's a valid consideration. If I play a game with people, and I lose, and ESPECIALLY if I get on a losing streak, I don't assume that the armies that I'm playing against are just better, or imbalanced in their favor. I say, "guys, seriously, what am I doing wrong?"

The general consensus in my group after such discussions is "Play blood angels or wolves they're better". It's a hard argument to ignore given the costing of a lot of key units. As for his verbage, it would of been better if he didn't end his post with "Yep, its you not the codex". That was just trolling.

I've taken it to extremes. I have notepads that have recorded die roll I make that happens within the fringe of the probability curve. I keep notation of how each of my armies does against other particular opponents. I change things up, I try to figure out what I've done wrong.

That's not a bad idea, though I've been through the ringer on this issue enough to know that without dramatic remodeling and rebuying of my army I'm going to be stuck in the third tier. I know the inadequacies of my army and what needs to be improved to improve performance, but the fixes are untenable or unavailable to me. I don't want to play a vulkan semi MSU or mechspam list and I dont have the hundreds of dollars (or the willpower) to purchase 50 bikes. After placing second last week I tried to pick up a thunderfire and didn't because I'm not King Midas and that things 50 dollars. The kinds of lists I like to run work perfectly well in Blood angels and space wolves because the costing on units like devastators and the inadequacies of tactical marines don't exist. Long and short range AT is built into cheaper or more mobile platforms and their fringe units are significantly more capable (wolf lords v captains, rune priests v librarians, furioso v regular dreads, BA mech v C:SM mech etc).

Just because the marine codex has gotten up in a few tournaments (which is impressive and kudos to those players) doesn't make it a good or adequate book. When most forms of tournament placing feature the same couple of units redundantly placed in every list there are issues. No one would argue that paladin spam or the leafblower are the only realistically viable builds for IG or GKs, but there is some pretty strong teeth to the contention that outside of some outliers like good bike performance (which is heavily dependent on the opponants list), space marines have only one repetitiously well performing list variation (vulkan). I find it sad that so many units that are the heart and soul of the marine army, the games flagship army, are poor. Terminators are poor, predators are fairly poor, devastators are significantly overcosted, assault squads are almost useless, dreadnaughts are cheap multimeltas and little else, etc.

<lay off each other, folks, before I have to get firm>

Hello clueless people. Check out the army rankings in the
US:
http://www.rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=13
Orks. Whowuddathought? GK's #4

UK:
http://www.rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=9
Yup, GK #1

Australia:
http://www.rankingshq.com/rankings/default.aspx?GameSystemId=3&RegionId=1
Yup GK #1

So I guess GKs ARE the current top dogs. Easy to play in tournaments.

N.I.B. wrote:Hello clueless people. Check out the army rankings in the

So I guess GKs ARE the current top dogs. Easy to play in tournaments.

Interesting data. According to your theory, the top 5 armies are:

AUS:
GK
CSM
Eldar
DE
Chaos Daemons

US:
Orks
SW
IG
GK
BA

UK:
GK
BA
IG
DE
SW

GK are on all three lists, which make them pretty decent. Interesting that AUS (the largest data set) has three armies considered to be the worst in this edition in the top 5 (CSM, Eldar, Chaos Daemons). Still interesting to look at.

pretre wrote:

N.I.B. wrote:Hello clueless people. Check out the army rankings in the

So I guess GKs ARE the current top dogs. Easy to play in tournaments.

Interesting data. According to your theory, the top 5 armies are:

AUS:
GK
CSM
Eldar
DE
Chaos Daemons

US:
Orks
SW
IG
GK
BA

UK:
GK
BA
IG
DE
SW

GK are on all three lists, which make them pretty decent. Interesting that AUS (the largest data set) has three armies considered to be the worst in this edition in the top 5 (CSM, Eldar, Chaos Daemons). Still interesting to look at.

I wouldn't consider either eldar nor Daemons to be the worst armies for tournament play currently. They've had consistent showing and without an edition change mech eldar will always be able to place well as long as it doesn't get really bad matchups. Reserve turbo boosting onto objectives just works.

ShumaGorath wrote:I wouldn't consider either eldar nor Daemons to be the worst armies for tournament play currently. They've had consistent showing and without an edition change mech eldar will always be able to place well as long as it doesn't get really bad matchups. Reserve turbo boosting onto objectives just works.

I probably should have been clearer in saying that they were the worst books, but not necessarily the worst at tournament play.

daedalus wrote:
That's an interesting way of spelling "I didn't read page 2 and on before replying."

So can I just pick over parts I don't want to debate too?

It's "etc.", and those terminators get the 2++ or 4++ in close combat only, cost potentially more than your regular terminator, with an apothecary that is crazy expensive, require an expensive special character to be troops (which is a big deal because you can't field many of them without making them your only option). I still do not believe you have read any page of this discussion beyond the first, and I'm being generous there.

4++ is still better than a normal termie and if you didn't want that you could go with +2 initiative. Even if you went with basic terminators, special weapons only and didn't chase the big options you still have a rather nasty advantage with S7 rending shooting, tougher in CC with a slight sacrifice to your to wound roll and don't lose initiative. And you make out for 5 points less than assault cannon marines.

I don't know. Do you need to go on? If you have no melta, then you're relying on subpar weapons to crack open vehicles. If you have no plasma, then you're relying on subpar weapons to kill MCs. The average case for two shots of plasma wounding a TMC is 1.11 wounds. The average case for 20 S5 storm bolter shots is 20 * 2/3 * 1/3 * 1/3 = 1.48 wounds. This is assuming 3+ armor on the TMC. You spent less points on the plasmagun than you did on the psybolt ammo, more points on the GK than you did the Tacs who carried the plasmagunner, and that doesn't include the fact that the GK required a full squad of marines to pull off, while the Tacs only needed a single guy remaining, or the bolter fire from the tacs which would wound on 6+ still.

Plasma only does .88 wounds rapid fire. Bolter rapid fire would do .74 wounds. So about one and a half. Now you're at 12 inches with an entire squad and one pissed off trygon. If you were at 24 inches for safety, well you're now doing about .75 wounds. So the storm bolter did slightly less at 12 inches and it's doing the exact same at 24 which is now double what that entire tac squad just did. They never needed to close the gap to 12. If either squad got into combat with it, one squad would be down a few guys but have a nice trophy, the others would probably be getting mulched with nothing to show for it. A 25% premium really isn't translating well here and you didn't even let the grey knights take a special weapon to boot.

S6 does not an assault cannon make. Fortitude is pretty useful, yes. I will not argue against that. It is still affected by hoods though, and it's still requires a leadership roll.

LD 10. S6 can still go a long way if you're short on points. Granted it's not getting rid of armor every so often nor penetrating land raiders, but it can go a long way towards glancing or penetrating their transports on a budget.

Uh, what? Warp quake is broken, and can autowin a game against daemons if you tailor your list for it, but what do servoskulls have to do with the time of day? What bearing does their anti-psyker stuff have on their vulnerability to anti-psyker stuff? You just seem angry.

I thought I recalled servo skulls increasing scatter distance. I apologize and retract that. AS for the anti psyker run around, it's them covering their ass in a number of ways. Mindstrike missiles, psyk-out grenades, culexus assassin and the other little goodies they have in their arsenal to take out their weakness. Not many armies get that luxury.

There is a concept referred to as "opportunity cost" at work here. You can't remove the force weapons from the GK, no matter how hard you try. They're bolted on. Same thing with Aegis, same thing with all of the other "ridiculous" options. For that, you're paying C:SM cost + 25%. In return, you get no access to the conventional weapons that marines get, including any of the standard heavy weapons as well as melta and plasma. You DO get a badass generalist weapon in the psycannon, but it's a poor replacement for either of those guns, and it's only a medium range weapon. So far, the only ability you've listed as limited to an opponent is warp quake, and yes, I do agree, it has the penchant for being abusive, just like options in other codexes. Remember the fit thrown about CSM's Lash of Submission when it came out?

And actually, post-DA FAQ, Deathwing actually seems pretty competitive nowadays. There was a chart indicating that they were making a comeback in the tournament scene as well.

I understand opportunity cost from economics. They still have those options else where in the codex. What happened in trade is they got the psycannon which you see as inferior, but I disagree. I get 4-8 shots with them per squad, more than I would out of special and/or heavy weapons, and I can remain highly mobile and retain my effectiveness at maximum weapon range of a respectable 24." If I sit still with them I have quite good odds of penetrating a land raider. I can accept they have force weapons, but they need to pay for it. As is, their combat effectiveness with storm bolters and force weapons is exceeding 25% of a tac marine. A wound from a grey knight can be up to three times the effectiveness of a tac marine's in close combat and they're putting more shots down range before hand. I'm sorry, I don't see the tac marine making up the 4 point difference any time soon.

Mindstrike only comes int play IF they take a sr which can be a limiting factor due to a lone sr is a bullet magnet and causes you to find ways to make it more survivbale which again forces choices. Never in my life seen a culexus assassin in any list so thats not really a method of defeating psykers. Most Draigo lists have a libby but seldom do you see hoods in a purifiers list so they have at best improved aegis on models that never move forward there by limiting its usefulness..

So we come to the ONLY methd that consistant Pyskout grenades. Those do nothing against the new faq sotw, eldar farseer/eldrad, hoods etc unless trying to kill them in cc. So that would mean by and large every army can overcome the "weakness" by killing it.

Also as far as cc, those nfw everyone is so scared of may not even ensure a victory vs gaunts etc in cc. Squad of 10 purifers go into cc even with cf are unlikely to kill an entire squad of gaunts that cost a little less then half. Plus being str 4 may not even wound something like trygon before they are killed due to being fearless.

Just because you don't use something, doesn't mean it's not there. Grey Knights are still fresh and draigo/purifiers/henchies are the quick and easy lists.

10 purifiers will do about 15 wounds to a full squad of guants before combat begins from cleansing flame meaning 12.5 dead. Not to mention shooting putting out 20 shots to do 8.89 wounds (saves vary). So how can they not kill the remaining 8 or 9?

As for the odds of killing a trygon, 11 attacks will result in .91 wounds. That's if you get charged. If you charge on the other hand 1.75 wounds. You strike at the same time either way. He'll do about 3-4 wounds, but he will die.

Surtur wrote:
So can I just pick over parts I don't want to debate too?

Depends. If it's because they've been beaten into the ground a million times, yeah, I guess you can. If not, you can explain to me why Fire Dragons are so much better a bargain than IG vets. Or why Long Fangs are a better deal than C:SM Devs. It's because they don't balance similar units in a vacuum. They balance armies. Either that, or the game is ENTIRELY unbalanced at ALL levels, and we're just spinning our wheels fruitlessly.

4++ is still better than a normal termie and if you didn't want that you could go with +2 initiative. Even if you went with basic terminators, special weapons only and didn't chase the big options you still have a rather nasty advantage with S7 rending shooting, tougher in CC with a slight sacrifice to your to wound roll and don't lose initiative. And you make out for 5 points less than assault cannon marines.

Storm shields? For 'free'? I'd rather have a constant 3++ than have I6, any day. Or are you talking about Tac Termies, specifically? They were considered lackluster by most before the GK codex dropped. Also, with the psycannon, the S7 rending shooting is all you have. You can't choose to get a CML. You can get S10 hammers, but you can't get a chainfist. Those are the breaks.

Plasma only does .88 wounds rapid fire. Bolter rapid fire would do .74 wounds. So about one and a half. Now you're at 12 inches with an entire squad and one pissed off trygon. If you were at 24 inches for safety, well you're now doing about .75 wounds. So the storm bolter did slightly less at 12 inches and it's doing the exact same at 24 which is now double what that entire tac squad just did. They never needed to close the gap to 12. If either squad got into combat with it, one squad would be down a few guys but have a nice trophy, the others would probably be getting mulched with nothing to show for it. A 25% premium really isn't translating well here and you didn't even let the grey knights take a special weapon to boot.

I was assuming a 2+ for some reason on my 'to wound' for the plasmaguns. Not sure why. The reason why I didn't give the GK a special weapon is because we were talking about how effective the psybolt ammo was, and we're already 40 points more expensive on the GK squad than the SM squad. For the 40 points, you could buy a rhino to sit the Tac squad in to better protect the Tacs at close range.

We could include psycannons if you wanted, but then I'd want to include a plasma cannon or multimelta shot, and maybe also a combi-plasma firing. At any rate, we are also assuming that you're working with a 3+ armor save TMC, which is also not always the case. So it's not a perfect comparison, but what is?

LD 10. S6 can still go a long way if you're short on points. Granted it's not getting rid of armor every so often nor penetrating land raiders, but it can go a long way towards glancing or penetrating their transports on a budget.

It's an option, but it's not the most durable one. Razorspam is universally considered a 'power build' though.

I thought I recalled servo skulls increasing scatter distance. I apologize and retract that. AS for the anti psyker run around, it's them covering their ass in a number of ways. Mindstrike missiles, psyk-out grenades, culexus assassin and the other little goodies they have in their arsenal to take out their weakness. Not many armies get that luxury.

Yeah, they have a lot of stuff to put psykers in their place, however, it's not like that's an issue in every game. You're probably not willfully running your Farseer/Libby into melee combat. The mindstrike missiles are nasty, but they're useless if your opponent can keep his psyker in a transport.

I understand opportunity cost from economics. They still have those options else where in the codex. What happened in trade is they got the psycannon which you see as inferior, but I disagree. I get 4-8 shots with them per squad, more than I would out of special and/or heavy weapons, and I can remain highly mobile and retain my effectiveness at maximum weapon range of a respectable 24." If I sit still with them I have quite good odds of penetrating a land raider. I can accept they have force weapons, but they need to pay for it. As is, their combat effectiveness with storm bolters and force weapons is exceeding 25% of a tac marine. A wound from a grey knight can be up to three times the effectiveness of a tac marine's in close combat and they're putting more shots down range before hand. I'm sorry, I don't see the tac marine making up the 4 point difference any time soon.

To say that the psycannon is 'inferior' was not really what I was trying to get at. Don't get me wrong, it's a good gun. But it's not a melta, and it's not a MC/Terminator killer like plasma. It's decent anti-horde, but it lacks the range of a heavy bolter. It's essentially the supergun of the generalist mindset. It's good at taking down anything, but it's not specialized to do it. As far as having all of the other options available elsewhere in the codex, they do, but how do you afford to put it all in one list? Most of the counter-arguments I've read seem to fail to realize that you only have a limited amount of points and FOC to operate within. It all comes down to figuring out how on earth the 'detractors' of the codex expect you to take that nasty henchman army, two stormravens, three venerable dreadnoughts, paladins, purifiers, warp quake spam, dreadknights and whatever happens to be their personal goat, all at the same time.

They have a lot of options and a lot of them are really good; so, in knowing you're facing GK, there's no way to anticipate what you'll be fighting until you see it on the other end of the table. I think that's what's really pissing people off.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Surtur wrote:
10 purifiers will do about 15 wounds to a full squad of guants before combat begins from cleansing flame meaning 12.5 dead. Not to mention shooting putting out 20 shots to do 8.89 wounds (saves vary). So how can they not kill the remaining 8 or 9?

EDIT: I found a better one, see below. The mean implies that odds are you're going to fail that LD test, with decent odds of your Knight of the Flame's head popping. That's quite a risk to take.

As for the odds of killing a trygon, 11 attacks will result in .91 wounds. That's if you get charged. If you charge on the other hand 1.75 wounds. You strike at the same time either way. He'll do about 3-4 wounds, but he will die.

How do you get the 11 attacks? In your math, did you take into consideration SitW? Odds are that you're not getting that LD test again.

Stop whining, every knew book that comes out is "OP?" so stop QQing and get over it. What I would like to happen and hopefully you guys would to, is that GW comes out with all the new codexs for each army in bulk when a new rule set comes out. But they dont, because they can make more money by selling a codex one at a time and make it "OP", so everyone will want to buy it, then on to the next codex lol.

ParatrooperSimon wrote:QQing

This is not the first time I have seen this written. What does this mean?

daedalus wrote:

ParatrooperSimon wrote:QQing

This is not the first time I have seen this written. What does this mean?

<take it elsewhere; you're off-topic. ParatrooperSimon, if you can't participate in the thread without being derogatory towards posters with a different view point, I can remove you from the thread.>

daedalus wrote:

ParatrooperSimon wrote:QQing

This is not the first time I have seen this written. What does this mean?

QQ looks like two eyes crying. So 'QQ more n00b' would mean 'cry more new player'.

In a tournament I don't see GK as being all that superior. Sure they can have an answer for everything but it does come at a cost and in some matchups the answer is going to mean wasted points. The advantage is in having all the answers means you don't have any auto-lose matchups.

Where they do get broken is when they can build for a specific opponent.

It still comes down to a properly built and PLAYED army can beat a properly build and half-a$$ed played army.

Admittedly, some codexes have some auto-lose situations and some will find the GK nigh unto unbeatable but the thing to remember is a GK is going to be a small force whether purifiers, paladins, terminators or even standard strike marines. They have T4 and 3+ armor saves but they are not going to survive forever.

Ah, thanks. I feel old now.

I don't remember anyone calling 5th ed Tyranids OP. Either way, you can't just poison the well like that, claiming that anyone that complains is a bad. Despite what some say, there are legitimate reasons why this codex is more powerful that other codexes and why people hate going up against it.

Edit: And QQ refers to how in Warcraft 2 one could quickly end a match by pressing alt+Q+Q, so it basicly saying "rage quit"