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.

Not too much, I mean, if 10-15 orks reaches a 5 man squad, it COULD be lethal...Unless GK have 2-3 attacks a piece in which case... Ork mobs are going to suffer... Plus the GK could fire their Storm-bolters and crush those remaining... So... I'm not too sure. Though the Dreadnought does scream Psycannon of DOOM!!!

olympia wrote:I have to say this codex is sounding rather crap (which is sad because I was hoping that GK would be my first imperial army). I don't care what buffs you have, if you have a low model count army my lootas will kill you to death and my 6pt. boyz with four attacks on the charge will kill you to death.

Yeah, this codex sure will be terrible considering NOBODY HAS SEEN THE THING YET. I absolutely hate it people who judge a book by it's cover when there's not even a cover to judge it by. Call the book crap all you want when it comes out, but at least wait a few months, jeez. Also, weight of dice will kill anything, which is kind of the Orks' MO. That's the problem for any small, elite army, and it's designed to be that way.

Footsloggin wrote:Not too much, I mean, if 10-15 orks reaches a 5 man squad, it COULD be lethal...Unless GK have 2-3 attacks a piece in which case... Ork mobs are going to suffer... Plus the GK could fire their Storm-bolters and crush those remaining... So... I'm not too sure. Though the Dreadnought does scream Psycannon of DOOM!!!

Currently GKs have 2 base attacks with True Grit and i don't see them losing that.


i really doubt Dreds will begin to carry 12 shot Psycannons, especially not if the weapon is AP3 like the Rumors suggest. 6 shot maybe, that or just a TL, 3 shot psycannon.

Yeah I thought about that. Even funnier when you snipe their painboy sitting in a deep/expensive Nob unit. Or an Apoth in a command squad. Or a Sang. Priest....

Seems like with upgrade characters the Vindicare might come into his own.

sourclams wrote:Vindicare sniping PK Nobz makes Boyz squads very, very, very, very poor counters to GK. A single successful Hit/dead result with the 2 wound shot and the Dreadnought just screams OM NOM NOM and rolls its face around until all the Boyz are dead.

In our current meta alot of the players employ transports and lots of heavy tanks, does the new GK codex already cover AT area?
My apologies if this is already answered.

As far as AT goes, I think GW will give us some good counters, with the Vindicare's Turbo-Penetrator round with a 4d6 to Penetrate...

I am not convinced we'll get good counters.

Basically we have the usual problem that even the "professional game designers" at GW haven't studied game design! They've just played a lot of 40K, and mostly, a lot of beer and pretzels "fun hobby" 40K.

So they're not even aware the basic principles of competitive game design. Even a good read of most of www.sirlin.net could get them to a decent amateur level of game design, but it's clear they've not done that, as we regularly see codices designed without failsafe counters as described here:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/balancing-multiplayer-games-part-3-fairness.html

We wouldn't see the current mech preponderance if they had. So I'm not convinced the GKs will hold up, competitively. I'll be very pleased if they do -- I have a load of the metal minis that I will very happily turn into an army once I see the codex, if it's viable to do so -- but if not, I guess they can go back on eBay...

GKs most likely AT will be AssCans, they ARE better at taking out AV14 than lascannons.

I believe it is rumoured that assault cannons are one of the 4 heavy weapons GK have at their disposal, along with psycannons, incinerators, and a last one I cant quite remember.

Ian Sturrock wrote:I am not convinced we'll get good counters.

Basically we have the usual problem that even the "professional game designers" at GW haven't studied game design! They've just played a lot of 40K, and mostly, a lot of beer and pretzels "fun hobby" 40K.

So they're not even aware the basic principles of competitive game design. Even a good read of most of www.sirlin.net could get them to a decent amateur level of game design, but it's clear they've not done that, as we regularly see codices designed without failsafe counters as described here:

http://www.sirlin.net/articles/balancing-multiplayer-games-part-3-fairness.html

We wouldn't see the current mech preponderance if they had. So I'm not convinced the GKs will hold up, competitively. I'll be very pleased if they do -- I have a load of the metal minis that I will very happily turn into an army once I see the codex, if it's viable to do so -- but if not, I guess they can go back on eBay...

Thats all because GW is in business to make money, not good balanced games. They know that domination sells. Thats why it seems like every codex released trumps most/all before it. There are a good amount of people out there who just need to have the latest, most powerful army. SO GW continues to supply it to them. I think GK will be competitive...too much so actually. They should be a terror against daemons, and just extra strong SM to everyone else. However, I fear that they will simply kill everything as well as they should daemons only.

Look at the original Necrons release...they were ZOMG nasty. SO many people complained the GW nerfed them. Then they figured out that nerfing isnt as good for sales as simply making progressively more powerful armies.

Why do you think that GW has never made a 40k (or WHFB) creation system? Almost every other game system does. Well, for GW there are 2 reasons:

1) They dont want people to think its ok to use non GW minis in a GW system. GW has a big nazi side to them...its GW, only GW, always GW or GTFO.

2) One doesnt even exist in house. Everything is assigned a points value at random. Why do you think that some options have different costs for different armies. Someone pointed it out between SM codexes...option A costs XX points in codex 1, but it costs XXX in codex 2. It was the same option for the same troop type, but 2 different values in 2 different codexes...i think it was a wepaon in generic SM compared to SW, but I could be wrong.

IMO it would be great to add new units or modify existing ones and have it be game legal, but that will surely never happen.

i think GKs might get a melta weapon in the same vein as Psycannons and Incinerators are upgrades of their weapon types.

Psychic powers will likely fill this gap too.

Ragnarok2070 wrote:Wonder if my old Daemonhunter List will still be viable in the new Damonhunter Codex.

Of course not.

Go and look at the last Guard and Tyranid Codices. Now look at the current Guard and Tyranid Codices. Notice any similarities between the two, other than the names of the units and most of their profiles? No? Well that's because they changed virtually every rule.

Expect the same for the GK's (the fact that it's Codex: Grey Knights and not Codex: Daemonhunters should tell you everything you need to know really).

Grey Templar wrote:i think GKs might get a melta weapon in the same vein as Psycannons and Incinerators are upgrades of their weapon types.

We did that. Called it a Paraclete Torch for the Meltagun, and Paraclete Charges for Meltabombs. They were no different to standard ones, but got bonuses vs Daemonic vehicles.

and while you may still be able to run ISTs and Inquisitors you can expect them to get the nerf horrible or be made so there would be no reason to take them over GKs.

ISTs will get the same rules as the ones in the Guard Codex, making them an utterly non-viable choice.

Of course... ISTs don't make for a viable force as it stands now, so no real change except you'll be bringing less of them as they now cost more than a fething Marine...

Ian Sturrock wrote:
Why do you think that GW has never made a 40k (or WHFB) creation system? Almost every other game system does. Well, for GW there are 2 reasons:

1) They dont want people to think its ok to use non GW minis in a GW system. GW has a big nazi side to them...its GW, only GW, always GW or GTFO.

2) One doesnt even exist in house. Everything is assigned a points value at random. Why do you think that some options have different costs for different armies. Someone pointed it out between SM codexes...option A costs XX points in codex 1, but it costs XXX in codex 2. It was the same option for the same troop type, but 2 different values in 2 different codexes...i think it was a wepaon in generic SM compared to SW, but I could be wrong.

IMO it would be great to add new units or modify existing ones and have it be game legal, but that will surely never happen.

There was one. People even reverse engineered it back in 2nd and 3rd ed. But there are a few huge problems with using a creation system:
1) Making a creation system that is functional and balanced takes a million times longer than doing one that's "mostly right."
2) Even assuming you can make one that's functional and balanced, you need to test units in game and make adjustments to the points costs, because there will always be loopholes.
3) Creation systems lock you down in terms of what you can do and create in a system. If you come up with a funky new idea, there's a good chance you'll need to redo the whole creation system from scratch to incorporate it. Which means all your points costs are now incompatible. YAY.
4) If you tweak the rules, even a bit, to provide better balance, this can and will cascade down and make every unit now worth something different. Which means a complete redo of the creation system.

Your best bet is to have a system that is "mostly right," use it to get a points value, and then playtest the heck out of the unit, making adjustments to the points. But even making the system "mostly right" can take forever.

That all said, GW's testing and wording is not good. If they have realized the above (and it seems likely given JJ's comments), then I suspect their corporate masters have clamped down on testing, as it is one of the more vague and unreliable aspects of the business and therefore "must be reigned in." Plus, time spent doing a full on public-usable creation system instead of one only the game devs can use is time they could be making a new codex, or pushing out more models. Game dev is not cheap and does not bring tangible business benefits in the eyes of those who only see bottom lines.

-John

I agree with the above statements. I agree a lot.

From a game design point of view, it's not that good an idea to have a completely flexible force creation system. Opening up the options to such an extreme degree increases the chance that a dominant strategy will emerge, rendering all other builds obsolete. If you think the tournament scene is dominated by a small number of builds now, it'd be a lot worse with a points-based setup that let you effectively build your own codex from scratch.

I don't believe GW are deliberately designing bad codexes. I just don't think they really know how to design good ones.

they may also deliberatly nerf/buff armies to increase sales from bandwagon hoppers.

the one army that never gets buffed/shafted too much is Codex SMs.


i think that the next Guard codex will probably tone them down. or 6th Edition will nerf ordinance and Vehicle heavy armys.

Gks were pretty lame, new codex will make them competitive.


the Cycle of power shall continue.

I just don't hope they jump from extremes. I'd like to take my GK army as a fun army, rather than just putting it down and saying I WIN! I'd enjoy a challenge to beat my opponent. When I win, I deserved it, when I lose, my opponent bested me. I'd rather win from tactical decisions, based upon HAVING those units to field, not simply outclassing him on EVERY field.

One codex to rule them all.

One codex to find them.

One codex to bring them all. . .

And in the darkness bind them.

puma713 wrote:One codex to rule them all.

One codex to find them.

One codex to bring them all. . .

And in the darkness bind them.

That will be the next CSM Codex.

puma713 wrote:One codex to rule them all.

One codex to find them.

One codex to bring them all. . .

And in the darkness bind them.

More like:

One Broken codex to nuke them all
One Broken codex to find them
One Broken codex to make them call
"what do you mean it can hit embarked units and cover saves don't apply?"

No jumping to conclusion now!

In all honesty, this is not a codex to rule them all, it seems they are rounding out the GK and making them a little better against Daemons, and a whole lot better against other forces than they were prior to this...

Anyone know if they got rid of "Out the Heretic" the rule that made one enemy troops choice count as Daemons.

I tried to run some Cyrx minis from warmachine once. Out of nowhere I was hit in the back of the head with a Ghazkull mini. Just outside my window, I saw someone in a Union Jack outfit running away with their middle finger in the air. After that, I only and always use GW minis. That Ghazkull mini was also very well pAinted.

Heres hoping our sacred GK dont turn into space puppies / Twlilight 40,000 yeah?

I want GK to be a respectable and competitive race, and do not plan to field [Mod Edit - Please, remember the rules of this site. Thanks!] units like mephiston or those space wolf psykers. If it turns out that GK become TFG, then at least I will be a respectable opponent.

It is my dearest hope that GK turn a page in the Games Workshop book, and usher in a new era of races, fair, balanced races.

Oh wait, this is GW were talking about. Right.

I know what you mean and I don't have the best hopes about it all...

However, the Dark Eldar Codex at least seems to be good and pretty balanced. Then again, who actually is it making the Grey Knights Codex?

Step 1: Extract Phill Kelly Gene Seed
Step 2: Clone Phil Kelly
Step 3: Phil Kelly original and clones work on codex writing
Step 4: Profit



Until then, it's going to be a mix-mash of different writers with various degrees of success.

I'd have to agree, but Mr Kelly isn't perfect by any means. Thunderwolf Cavalry, Rune Priests and Long Fangs say so.

Just Dave wrote:I'd have to agree, but Mr Kelly isn't perfect by any means. Thunderwolf Cavalry, Rune Priests and Long Fangs say so.

Yeah, he's their best by far.

As far as 'better units' in each dex, if I was writing a dex I wouldn't be too concerned about it. Like the article someone posted earlier (Which was excellent by the way, thanks to whomever posted it!) pointed out, there will always be top/middle/bottom tier aspects of each codex (Or in game design). It's simply inevitable. However, what Kelly does do well is;

Get the background right
Match the units to the background
Match themes to the units/background
Make almost all the choices viable (No garbage tier, simply lower-higher)


His books are fun to read, fun to play and fun to tinker with. Take the Wolf dex.....it's the ultimate counts as dex. Why? Because you can tinker all damn day with the thing! Thundercav heavy, Wolf Guard Heavy, GH Heavy, Long Fang Heavy, etc etc. Just a damn fun dex to play (against and with). Themes abound and the codex lets you use your imagination. Fun first, everything else after.

can anyone sum up so far what the rumors are?
In the few pages i've read I have got:
AP3 psycannons
plastic heros
no allies
T5 W2 FNP termies
termie troops
halberd upgrade
no radical inq.
HQ that unlocks ISTs
re-rolling Sv
+2S everywhere
valks
stormravens ?
hellhounds
banners in kits ?
chaplain ?
justicar char.
paladin char.
scenery ?
most are psykers
different psychic powers
blast weapons!
PAGK=SM sarge stats
wound daemons on a 2+. ?

that's including other GK threads. Those that I missed quote this and add.