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.

snake wrote:They are certainly the most irritating. I don't think I've ever seen a bigger bandwagon. In anything.

To be fair if they had released when i had got back into 40k, I would've picked them up then instead of going with Chaos Space Marines, since I do really love the idea of them and their fluff.
The only problem for me was the metal miniatures and I hate working with metal ( I'm looking at you Obliterators that I recently bought)

Hell, even knowing what Matt Ward has written about them I still love them and are getting them, even though I'm nowhere near done on my chaos army
I've already ordered the Codex and a box of troops to mess aorund with.
Easy paint scheme, looks nice, has ( or used to have) a good background and fits into my personal favourite type of army which is elite and powerful, but small and costly
Can you really go wrong?

I figure I'll stick with the old fluff established in the Daemonhunters codex and Inquisitor rulebook. I don't want Ward touching my fluff.

Fafnir wrote:Regardless of how mediocre termispam will be, it's what I've always ran and always will run. PAGK can go eat a knife

You and I are not so unalike

Since I've been watching and playing against this new codex of late, IMHO I can say the following.

It is not about how strong the individual units are. It is how strong the combination of powers, abilities and the special tactics that are being deployed by those people who enjoy taking advantage of every nuance of the rules that the GK have at their disposal.

This is codex creep people. Remember who wrote the codex. Remember this is not about game play, this is about selling models and codexes. This codex will sell. People will buy a new GK army. People will make adjustments to their armies and buy more models as well to counter the GK lists, and Games workshop will make lots of money on it.
This is the company's, current business model. Get use to it.

To play against this army also means you might have to rethink your normal game play against them. Then it comes down to your skill level. If you are only a one trick pony mentality, then you are going to lose. You have to adapt to the situation and against your opponent.

Another thing is it scalability. They are average to strong in low points games compared to other armies. You bet that GK people would want to play 1750 list AND higher so they can get all of their toys and tactics into play. At 1500 points is the beginning of their step power curve. Under 1500 points, the games I have seen IMHO they do not scale down well.

An advantage that GK has at this moment besides all of the "combination" tactics is the "Aura of Invincibility" that it currently has by those people.

I can care less about those people who try to flaunt that aspect.

It is not about winning or losing. It is about having a fun game.

Added:

To play against a GK list you will have to be very mobile. IMHO you can not castle in a corner due to their deceptive speed. DE Mechadar, SW Drop pod (and other SM) armies, BA can stand up to a GT list. 1850 and higher are the GK's sweet spots, play a 1500 point game or under to gauge their effectiveness against your army.

Make Terrain as your friend. Understand that all is not about kill points, there are other scenarios to be played as well.

Just be on your game and you should do fine against all commoners.

Adam LongWalker wrote:
This is codex creep people. Remember who wrote the codex. Remember this is not about game play, this is about selling models and codexes. This codex will sell. People will buy a new GK army. People will make adjustments to their armies and buy more models as well to counter the GK lists, and Games workshop will make lots of money on it.
This is the company's, current business model. Get use to it.

...as opposed to company's past business model, which was apparently very different?

As a ork player GK are guna hurt us big time. No topic has given anything helpfull for orks to combat them.

I was afraid of Space Wolves, too. Then I realized that they die of 30 lasbolts to the face just like anyone else.

I am taking a liking to the SC GKM. he is quite the pimp. He is the Logan of the codex.

taylor048 wrote:As a ork player GK are guna hurt us big time. No topic has given anything helpfull for orks to combat them.

High volumes of attacks against very few guys is going to be an issue?

Orks are far better at anti-infantry than they are mech... that is just my opinion. And assuming that the new grey knights codex does mech spam... I don't see anything different fro them and regular marines except that there are less of them with some good special rules.

Grey knights are obviously the greatest army ever.

So great that my brotherhood banner bearer actually wields a keytar so that I may bury you under a hail of stormbolter rounds while melting your face with sweet sweet riffs.

But really, if you can deal with the purifiers orcs shouldnt have much issue.

Grundz wrote:Grey knights are obviously the greatest army ever.

So great that my brotherhood banner bearer actually wields a keytar so that I may bury you under a hail of stormbolter rounds while melting your face with sweet sweet riffs.

But really, if you can deal with the purifiers orcs shouldnt have much issue.

Seeing as how Purifiers should be making up the bulk of any Grey Knight army, "dealing" with purifiers is quite a big topic. "Well if you can kill off the best troops in the game and 75% of their army you should be fine".

My Loganwing is completely and utterly screwed against them.

wisdomseyes1 wrote:Every time a new codex comes out, people think it is really powerful and possibly the best. Then they get the army on the table against someone who actually knows what they are doing and find that the army is either really cruddy or is balanced.

....

Amazing psychic powers? Yes... because it is so uncommon for psychic defense to be in any competitive army. Librarians are so uncommon after all. Eldar don't exist, nor do tyranids.

High stats? Daemons have insane stats for very little. Does that change peoples opinion on them in most cases?

I haven't seen anyone saying 5th Tyranids and Dark Eldar are the uber-army to end all games. People were impressed by a few units in each (Tervigons and Zoanthropes; Incubi and Haemonculi), then or now. But as people here have brought up, Imperial codices tend to receive a little extra oomph and be more...easily competitive.

As for psychic powers, they can be countered...by SM and Eldar, and some Nids. Leaving Orks, CSM, Daemons, IG, Necrons and DE with very few options. I guess those are not 'competitive'. Maybe they should have their own tournaments.

Daemon Stats are far from insane. Most are about as tought as Chaplain Cassius, and that's for the big ones. But when you add the statline of an MC with psyker powers and powerful wargear...see how it can compound things?

Griever wrote:
Seeing as how Purifiers should be making up the bulk of any Grey Knight army, "dealing" with purifiers is quite a big topic. "Well if you can kill off the best troops in the game and 75% of their army you should be fine".

My Loganwing is completely and utterly screwed against them.

What? I cant hear you over the wickity wickity WOOOOO!!!!

Shouldnt loginwings long fangs be blowing at least 300pts of knights off the table every shooting phase? (scans cover)

Sephyr wrote:

wisdomseyes1 wrote:Every time a new codex comes out, people think it is really powerful and possibly the best. Then they get the army on the table against someone who actually knows what they are doing and find that the army is either really cruddy or is balanced.

....

Amazing psychic powers? Yes... because it is so uncommon for psychic defense to be in any competitive army. Librarians are so uncommon after all. Eldar don't exist, nor do tyranids.

High stats? Daemons have insane stats for very little. Does that change peoples opinion on them in most cases?

I haven't seen anyone saying 5th Tyranids and Dark Eldar are the uber-army to end all games. People were impressed by a few units in each (Tervigons and Zoanthropes; Incubi and Haemonculi), then or now. But as people here have brought up, Imperial codices tend to receive a little extra oomph and be more...easily competitive.

As for psychic powers, they can be countered...by SM and Eldar, and some Nids. Leaving Orks, CSM, Daemons, IG, Necrons and DE with very few options. I guess those are not 'competitive'. Maybe they should have their own tournaments.

Daemon Stats are far from insane. Most are about as tought as Chaplain Cassius, and that's for the big ones. But when you add the statline of an MC with psyker powers and powerful wargear...see how it can compound things?

Well, I believe his point was that when you look at the best elements of any given army in isolation, they tend to look overpowered. Whereas when you actually make a comprehensive wholistic assessment, many of the complaints and cries of "broken!" turn out to be unfounded. As happens most times a new codex arrives.

While only a few armies have psychic defense, when assessing the general competitive value of GK, the fact that they rely at least to some extent on psychic powers which are countered 40%-50% of the time by some of the most common armies (SM, SW, BA), and reduced in effectiveness by a couple of less-common (Eldar, Nids) is a factor in considering just how good GKs are overall. Also, while it's no DIRECT help to DE, Orks, Daemons or CSM, just the fact that GK have to deal with that impacts how many people bring them to tournaments, and indirectly helps those armies who lack defense themselves.

Mannahnin wrote:While only a few armies have psychic defense, when assessing the general competitive value of GK, the fact that they rely at least to some extent on psychic powers which are countered 40%-50% of the time by some of the most common armies (SM, SW, BA), and reduced in effectiveness by a couple of less-common (Eldar, Nids) is a factor in considering just how good GKs are overall. Also, while it's no DIRECT help to DE, Orks, Daemons or CSM, just the fact that GK have to deal with that impacts how many people bring them to tournaments, and indirectly helps those armies who lack defense themselves.

I see what you mean. However, it's not quite the case with GKs. They can't -not- bring psykers to the table, unless they run a full Inquisitor army. So the things that will be marginally effective against the top-tier armies (SW, BA, as you said) will be -very- effective against the others.

Also, having "Well, better armies will dissuade them from abusing build X, Y or Z agains tthe defenseless rabble" sounds like very dodgy design! It's a bit like going into a biker bar and start throwing your weight around on the basis that since so many people who go there are murderous bastards, people won't fight back.

(I was going to make a condom analogy that was much better, but less than appropriate)

Well, I don't know if I'd call the other armies defenseless rabble, and it may be dodgy design, but if it works, it works, right?

We don't see Eldar Bikeseer Council armies anymore because two things became extremely common- psychic defense from SM/SW/BA, and 2+ save assault terminators, which witchblades go through very slowly.

I wouldn't see that's the same thing as the GK situation, but it's related.

I look forward to a renewed sense of healthy competition.

Besides. The more armies that want to get into CC as fast as my orks, the better.

I have thoroughly read the codex and to be honest I see it as falling somewhere in the middle of the pack. It is very cool but too small to be top tier.

Sephyr wrote:
I haven't seen anyone saying 5th Tyranids and Dark Eldar are the uber-army to end all games. People were impressed by a few units in each (Tervigons and Zoanthropes; Incubi and Haemonculi), then or now. But as people here have brought up, Imperial codices tend to receive a little extra oomph and be more...easily competitive.

As for psychic powers, they can be countered...by SM and Eldar, and some Nids. Leaving Orks, CSM, Daemons, IG, Necrons and DE with very few options. I guess those are not 'competitive'. Maybe they should have their own tournaments.

Daemon Stats are far from insane. Most are about as tought as Chaplain Cassius, and that's for the big ones. But when you add the statline of an MC with psyker powers and powerful wargear...see how it can compound things?

IG are easily competitive because competitive right now means mech spam...

How many of the races in 40k are space marines? And IG with their mech spam, FAQ's tend to lean towards psychic powers work wile you are inside vehicles, but from the outside in there is nothing. Daemons kind of sort of have psychic defense, with blessing of the blood god. Past that, you are correct... those armies aren't considered competitive. Not saying they aren't good, they could probably deal with psykers.


===Rant===
Daemons: Yes. I can see how 30 points for WS5 S5 T5 I5 5 attacks rending off the charge, a 5++ save and 2 wounds isn't insane in any respect. :-/ Bloodcrushers are similar, but have an armor save and wound allocation tricks. Flamers point and kill any infantry they chose.

Bloodletters take on any space marine, and daemonettes are probably a little better with assault grenades. though both options are pretty bleh. Plaguebearers with T5 , FnP, and a 5++ invuln (though I prefer G2g in cover) means that they must be terrible scoring units. Other armies have such better choices. Horrors can't just pop transports or take out infantry with their weapon options.

Daemon Prince saddens me when i compare it to CSM... but it is still okay IMO. Not really the best :-/ People continue to take soulgrinders and wonder why they aren't winning...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I agree with black fiend... probably high middle. Not the best... That is just my opinion though.

Backfire Wrote:

...as opposed to company's past business model, which was apparently very different?

Yes, Before they become a public offering GW -was- consumer friendly. To me they were still consumer friendly up to 2002 when greed hit (via the Lords of the rings license) and we start losing that certain quality and friendliness (and I am not talking about the staff at store level) that is really needed in this hobby to stay afloat in the long run.

I really miss the quality of work (what I mean by this are the specialist games) black gobbo, The Academy (in the US) the outrider program, White Dwarf (when it was so good for reading) the quality of paints, and so on.

Today's reality is what you see on the GK codex. Written by a man who is really not qualified to be a game designer (IMHO). Then again the way the codex is written dictates what special character and special models by the higher ups. So I should cut him some slack, but not a lot, because DE and the SW, both written by Phil Kelly is enjoyable to read the fluff and well written.

And he is using the same game mechanics and criteria as Ward.

As I have said in my previous posting. The GK's can be beat. Is the GK's the best army? No. I'll give that aspect to the IG. But this codex can be manipulated to be rather obscene.

Now in praise with the GK's. I do like many of their models so in that case GW got that right.

Adam LongWalker wrote:
Today's reality is what you see on the GK codex. Written by a man who is really not qualified to be a game designer (IMHO). Then again the way the codex is written dictates what special character and special models by the higher ups. So I should cut him some slack, but not a lot, because DE and the SW, both written by Phil Kelly is enjoyable to read the fluff and well written.

Really, I fail to see what's so overpowered in the GK codex. (Maybe it's just me because I play Tau and their supposed strengths mean nothing to me.) Battle reports I've seen have hardly suggested that they will roflstomp over everybody else. It is, of course, a huge leap in power compared to old one, but it was one of the weakest books in the game, so that is only fair.

If GW was really so cynical as you suggest, I'm sure they would have made their shop window army - vanilla Space Marines - more powerful. By coincidence, that was written by Matt Ward too.

Just to clarify, I don't believe there is codex creep, conscious or otherwise. I believe there is sometimes a codex surge, sometimes a new army affects metagame so much that all subsesquent ones have to be written to match them up. As evidenced by the fact that arguably strongest armies are IG and Space Wolves, and all the subsesquent books have been weaker.

And was it really ever different? Did the goold old times not feature books which were overpowered and people running around in circles screaming "OMG ONOEZ" when new Codex broke out?

Different armies rise to the top each edition.

They have one major weakness, due to the low model count, they will suffer from bad rolls. They can win then win, then win again but then they will lose badly due to a few lucky rolls. I know SRF FRF from guard will hurt them alot, but its unlikely any guard army will get many shots of before they get in CC.

Potentially 16 S5 24" range shots and 4 or 8 S8 24" range shots is OP. I predict the biggest change is the meta of rhino-based armies. When a tac equivalent squad can put 3 to 5 S8 hits as well as probably two glances from S5 hits every turn, they will put a lot of problem on the rhino-based armies that other SM are so prevalent. The shooting is going to be pretty disgusting too as far as anti-personnel. Consider that at 24" a @180 tac squad puts out 4 to 6 wounds against a T4 opponent whereas the GK @250 is putting out 11 wounds. That is significant difference.

Agreed though the problem is going to be that a GK army is going to be outnumbered about 1.5 to 1 versus an equivalent marine so if you get "hot" rolling 1s and 2s, you are going to go down fast.

wisdomseyes1 wrote:How many of the races in 40k are space marines? And IG with their mech spam, FAQ's tend to lean towards psychic powers work wile you are inside vehicles, but from the outside in there is nothing. Daemons kind of sort of have psychic defense, with blessing of the blood god. Past that, you are correct... those armies aren't considered competitive. Not saying they aren't good, they could probably deal with psykers.


===Rant===
Daemons: Yes. I can see how 30 points for WS5 S5 T5 I5 5 attacks rending off the charge, a 5++ save and 2 wounds isn't insane in any respect. :-/ Bloodcrushers are similar, but have an armor save and wound allocation tricks. Flamers point and kill any infantry they chose.

Bloodletters take on any space marine, and daemonettes are probably a little better with assault grenades. though both options are pretty bleh. Plaguebearers with T5 , FnP, and a 5++ invuln (though I prefer G2g in cover) means that they must be terrible scoring units. Other armies have such better choices. Horrors can't just pop transports or take out infantry with their weapon options.

5++ saves are notoriously unreliable. I should know, having rolled them a lot on my CSM HQs and always seeing them eat a power fist.
However, even the good Daemon units that you describe are counterbalanced by the fact that they often arrive by Deepstrike and you never know when; and this deploy is borked against the new PAGKS and their warp quake.

Regarding the 'competitive' angle, any army can deal with anything. The problem is efficiency. Being able to do it with reliable success for a moderate cost. Buying army-wide Blessing of the Blood God is horrendously inneficient compared to, say, taking a Rune Priest.

I just get scared when I see issues tossed aside because "Well, that army isn't competitive anyway. The better ones will be able to deal with it this!" It means all many players can do is wait for the next codex, fingers crossed, and hope that they'll be the ones favored by imbalances this time around.

Then again, hopefully I'll keep my integrity and not be here in a couple of years going "The new CSM codex is really so average. The new 50-point each Obliterators that can be taken as either Heavy or Elite options are nothing major. Any Long Fang spam can deal with them!"

the problem with all these new cookie cutter codexes is because GW has moved from being a HOBBY company where the people who works there are actually involved with the game and their customers, to a company that has gone on the stocks, fired pretty much all of the original people and set a board down that doesn't asks what's cool, but instead what makes money....
shame though i liked the olden guys better.

I for one think this whole thing is going to turn out exactly like DE. Everyone at my store was like "OMG DE are going to ROFLSTOMP everyone. OMG Kabalite Trueborns with 4 DL's and Ravagers, and what's this this Voidraven Bomber is so broken its not even funny AAAAAAAAAAH!!!" Now everyone at my store cringes everytime someone walks in and wants to play DE because they are so uncompetitive even with their new codex. One of the guys at my store attended a huge GT (I forget which one it was in the PA/NJ/NY area) and he said that out of 5 games and something like 60+ people there were 4 DE players and they had a total of 2 wins between all 4 of them. Recently at the St. Valentines Day Massacre GT here in PA we had 3 DE players out of 60+ people and none of them scored even in the top 20!

I have a HUGE feeling that GK's will turn out just like DE. I know I know GW has a "thing" for Imperium armies but I think GK's are being way overhyped and rely far to much on Psychic Powers and yet to be FAQed rules like the Shunting Dreadknights. The only thing that might make GK's better (notice I said better not overpowered but better) is if GW does exactly what they did for Stormravens and that is FAQ it in their favor just to sell models. The Stormraven being able to PotMS after moving Flat Out was such an obvious sales decision it was almost comical. If they do the same to the Dreadknight then GK's might give some people, not all, but some people a lot of trouble.

I also want people to remember that most of 40K is not only about the units but about the people that play them. Above I said that the DE are not a competitive build but notice I gave examples of people playing them, I'm sure there are some people out there who can make them work VERY VERY well. Like Dashofpepper! A lot of people like to say Tau are a crappy army when in fact they are not "crappy" they are just more difficult to play than others, similar to Necrons. Will GK's be a difficult to play army? It's hard to say at this point until we get those (beautiful) models down and start rolling dice. Then we will see if they are very hard to play like Tau, Necrons, and DE. Or if they are very easy to play like Mech IG, SW, and BA's.

rana dandra wrote:

the problem with all these new cookie cutter codexes is because GW has moved from being a HOBBY company where the people who works there are actually involved with the game and their customers, to a company that has gone on the stocks, fired pretty much all of the original people and set a board down that doesn't asks what's cool, but instead what makes money....
shame though i liked the olden guys better.

I have to agree with this posting because I have stated similar issues. As I have posted earlier IMHO, GW was friendly to their customer base to around 2002, then I feel that the corporation just simply started changing to what it is now. As I have posted earlier the codex formula can be better written to be used by the masses than it is now. Phil Kelly can write. Mat Ward IMHO can not. If Mr. Kelly were to have written the GK Codex, I think it would have got a better "feeling" about the codex than it is now, because I believe he would have made it as balanced as possible with the dictates and requirements being given to him by GW. I hope Phil Kelly continues to write more codexes for GW in the near future.

I'm in the camp that does not like Mat Ward's writing style and creativity, but he is the type of writer GW wants. Since his beginnings with writing the DA codex, he's gone on to bigger and better (?) things and his creativity (?) shows with each successive book. He will make money for Games Workshop because people -will- buy the codex, just because on the spin people make on this web site and on other places (such as game stores). Like him or not and his writing style Ward is here to stay, because he makes money for them.


To BackFire.

Let us politely agree to disagree. You probably see things in your area of the world and I respect your postings.

I can only state what my area game play is at the moment and right now, my area it is highly competitive. I've seen the combination of styles being played in the GK army list. I've already stated on my other postings through out Dakka on what armies can beat the GK's from the weeks of game play with them and playing against them. Now without giving much away, I've have been playing a "Cortez" style of a list due to its flavor that it has from the older codex style. That list that I play is more for fluff than the tweaked out 6 dreadnought, or the vehicle teleportation list, and it is an decent army list to be competitive against another person instead of "the curb stomping your opponent in 3 or 4 turns" list.

You have to sometimes wonder on what is the mentality on some of those people who make those kinds of lists just to prove that they can beat just about anyone. Regardless if it is done with this codex or the BA or any other codex that is in game play, "The Win at all Cost Mentality" is not healthy for anyone as well as for this hobby. That is my personal opinion and I'll stand by that.

I'll stand by, without offending anyone, on what I have said on my postings from the perspective I have seen in my area as well as the years of experience in dealing with this "hobby". If I am wrong about or there are changes of game playing styles concerning the game play with the GK codex in my area, or what I have seen concerning this corporation, I'll make sure that I make the proper amends to what I have posted on this site.

And that is the best that I can do, because that is the right thing to do.

bang on bro

Sanguinis wrote:I for one think this whole thing is going to turn out exactly like DE.
(...)

I also want people to remember that most of 40K is not only about the units but about the people that play them.

I see no reason why it should. DE have -very- obvious and exploitable weaknesses. They were there to be seen from the first scandex. Grey Knights, on the other hand, have been the subject of lots of analysis and the worst that has come out is "they'll have a low-ish model count!". Which, as a CSM player who has to pay 250 points for 7 plague marines, I don't quite buy.

In addition, GKs seem to have good options to deal with everything. Anti-horde? Purifiers. Anti-elite infantry? Force Halberds. Anti-MCs and CC monsters? Force Halberds. Anti-artillery? Interceptors and shunting. Anti-anti-mech? Vehicles ignoring 30% of the damage table and good cover saves thanks to Shrouding. Long range Anti-mech? S8 rifle dreads hitting 3-4 shots each a turn. Model count too low? Take a scoopfull or two of melta-loaded veterans. Psyker being annoying? Hooded Librarian and army-wide psychic test penalty.

Many of those concerns, i hope, will be dispelled by actual gameplay. But not all, maybe not even most.

What is the Ork option for good long-range anti-mech?
What is the CSM option for avoid low model count or enemy psykers?
What is the DE anti-horde solution?

Are they as effective as the stuff GKs have in addition to all the other goodies?

Regarding the second point, that's a truism. Units that are good above a certain point insulate players from a good deal of mistakes. I've left my zerkers and plague marines exposed to fire and assaults more often than I should, but between armor and T4 and sometimes FNP I paid a relatively light price. Do that with a less forgiving army like DE or Eldar and you're toast.

Good player + Good Unit = Good results.
Poor Player + GREAT unit = Good results.
Great player + Good Unit = Amazing results.