Question about Grey Hunters

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.

**Sgt_Smudge**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You'll still get games in because most people aren't ass hats about you making smarter purchases. Not my fault your local sea is clearly fitting the definition of CAAC

So perhaps you should see what the OP's environment is like first before making assumptions.

**Mmmpi**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

What's the point of doing more than one thing if you suck at everything?

TiL that plasma sucks.

You're really pushing that "do it my way" angle fairly hard.

Despite the fact that your views on what's good is still very meta dependent.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You'll still get games in because most people aren't ass hats about you making smarter purchases. Not my fault your local sea is clearly fitting the definition of CAAC
So perhaps you should see what the OP's environment is like first before making assumptions.

No kidding...

**Slayer-Fan123**

Mmmpi wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

What's the point of doing more than one thing if you suck at everything?

TiL that plasma sucks.

You're really pushing that "do it my way" angle fairly hard.

Despite the fact that your views on what's good is still very meta dependent.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You'll still get games in because most people aren't ass hats about you making smarter purchases. Not my fault your local sea is clearly fitting the definition of CAAC
So perhaps you should see what the OP's environment is like first before making assumptions.

No kidding...

Plasma doesn't suck. 3-6 Plasma shots for more than 160 points DOES suck though. Would you make the same argument if they only ever got one Plasma Gun in their squad and that's it?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You'll still get games in because most people aren't ass hats about you making smarter purchases. Not my fault your local sea is clearly fitting the definition of CAAC
So perhaps you should see what the OP's environment is like first before making assumptions.

That doesn't refute my point about making smart purchases and modeling in the first place though. Not sure what the point of your post is to be frank.

**Mmmpi**

@Slayer-Fan

"Would you make the same argument if they only ever got one Plasma Gun in their squad and that's it?"

That's not the case, so It's not an argument I feel compelled to make.

"3-6 Plasma shots for more than 160 points DOES suck though."

That would depend on the meta. 2-4 plasma shots for 103 points, while having a 2+, and ballistic skill 3+ and T4 are far better than 2-4 plasma shots that hit on a 4+ with T3, with a 4+ armor save for 98 points.

" That doesn't refute my point about making smart purchases and modeling in the first place though. Not sure what the point of your post is to be frank. "

You only don't understand because you're purposely being obtuse.

**Slayer-Fan123**

Mmmpi wrote:
@Slayer-Fan

"Would you make the same argument if they only ever got one Plasma Gun in their squad and that's it?"

That's not the case, so It's not an argument I feel compelled to make.

"3-6 Plasma shots for more than 160 points DOES suck though."

That would depend on the meta. 2-4 plasma shots for 103 points, while having a 2+, and ballistic skill 3+ and T4 are far better than 2-4 plasma shots that hit on a 4+ with T3, with a 4+ armor save for 98 points.

" That doesn't refute my point about making smart purchases and modeling in the first place though. Not sure what the point of your post is to be frank. "

You only don't understand because you're purposely being obtuse.

I love you assume the 2+ that's unlikely to happen anyway.

Also no idea what comparison unit you're quoting.

**dominuschao**

I find it funny that blood claws are being viewed as better by some when they are nearly identical only GH have guns and claws have a big drawback with a situational 1 turn advantage. GH are fine. At least as fine as marines can be. I just saw a player run 3x5 of each all slogging with tdawgs attached and honestly the GH were superior because bolter discipline but both did better than I'd ever anticipate.

If a player is considering either choice their meta is fairly friendly so it's not a make or break decision.

OP- Buy the box you'll like it.

**Slayer-Fan123**

dominuschao wrote:
I find it funny that blood claws are being viewed as better by some when they are nearly identical only GH have guns and claws have a big drawback with a situational 1 turn advantage. GH are fine. At least as fine as marines can be. I just saw a player run 3x5 of each all slogging with tdawgs attached and honestly the GH were superior because bolter discipline but both did better than I'd ever anticipate.

If a player is considering either choice their meta is fairly friendly so it's not a make or break decision.

OP- Buy the box you'll like it.

I said Blood Claws fulfill a better niche. They're not exactly much better.

**AngryAngel80**

Glad to see this is still firing off.

Kids, take your Grey Hunters, they are sweet and fun and the box is good. Also you'll enjoy the bits and things for the inevitable wolf guard set ups as well.

If you want to enrage people, run large GH squads, with maybe some pods and watch the world burn. Then, if you win, claim it's because you are a tactical genius, one whom Sun Tzu would have to admit is the master of war.

Also, keep in mind Drop pods and marine Power armored troops aren't the best in the world, so your mileage may vary, but you should still be able to win a game and when you do, drive your enemy before you and cherish the lamentation of their women as you know what is best in life. Grey Hunters.

**Breton**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Breton wrote:
Mmmpi wrote:

So a unit that can carry a few plasma guns, out-flank onto an objective, and sit in cover with a 2+ armor save, all while overriding non-troops for control of the objective. AKA Grey Hunters.

You've missed the whole point of what people are telling, probably on purpose at this point.

Its personal bias with a healthy dose of hypocrisy. They're bad because I say they're bad, even if your meta does look down on and ostracize people who don't take the basic troops in fluffy and less competitive levels and anyone who tells someone in that Meta to listbuild with those criteria in mind is evil, making them waste their money. But when I tell them to ignore the crtieria that will get them a game in the first place, and just Min-Max everything it's smart purchasing. Sure they can't get a game at all, but at least they're not getting a ton of games using models I think are stupid.

Edit to continue:
Objective Secured is such a non-rule.
Objective Secured is a non-rule because I don't play with it. I just do how much of your stuff I kill, because that's all that matters, and everyone who doesn't play the way I do doesn't count.

And where was I a hypocrite? Pray tell, please.

You'll still get games in because most people aren't ass hats about you making smarter purchases. Not my fault your local sea is clearly fitting the definition of CAAC

About the point where what you decided was a "smart purchase" was a smart purchase in every meta, even those that don't appreciate your idea of a "smart" list and telling people to play a less "smart" list to fit in with their local meta was evil or some such.

**Mmmpi**

Indeed.

**Breton**

Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
You'll still get games in because most people aren't ass hats about you making smarter purchases. Not my fault your local sea is clearly fitting the definition of CAAC
So perhaps you should see what the OP's environment is like first before making assumptions.

Good Luck with that. Several people have tried to make that point. Maybe you'll finally get through, but the usual answer from him boils down to local environments that don't agree with him are just wrong, and should be shown the error of their ways.

Oh look, I called it.

That doesn't refute my point about making smart purchases and modeling in the first place though. Not sure what the point of your post is to be frank.