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.

 Blackmoor wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Actually, I would have to disagree here. I don't think that the paladins necessarily need to be scoring. They can function fine without Draigo or the GM IMO. As a matter of fact, my future "Draigowing" and "Crowe-Purifiers" will probably be without either Draigo or Crowe. I think all you need is Coteaz.

Here is a preview of what I am thinking of running:

Coteaz
Paladinstar
6x MSU Passbacks (psycannon razors)
2x dreadknights
1x psyfleman

The paladinstar here would be a suicide unit meant to rush the enemy and contest objectives.

I would love to save 220 to 275 points by not taking a grandmaster/Draigo and spend it on another strike squad but I can't.

The reason why is that I have been tabled many times except for my paladins. The last time was against flying necrons who flew around and shot everything but the paladins. Just look at this game, you could have ignored my paladins and just kill everything else and you would have won if they were not troops.

Yea I have to agree, paladins who are not troops are very easy to ignore by a lot of lists.

 Blackmoor wrote:

I would love to save 220 to 275 points by not taking a grandmaster/Draigo and spend it on another strike squad but I can't.

The reason why is that I have been tabled many times except for my paladins. The last time was against flying necrons who flew around and shot everything but the paladins. Just look at this game, you could have ignored my paladins and just kill everything else and you would have won if they were not troops.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Yea I have to agree, paladins who are not troops are very easy to ignore by a lot of lists.

While having paladins scoring is definitely useful, especially in a mission such as the Relic, to me it isn't really mandatory. It really boils down to how you design your lists. The trick is not to overload your paladins to make them into a super unit. You need to invest the majority of your points into the so-called "support" units.

Then there are the 2 different builds - either a troop-centric build in which the troops are the majority of the army and its offense as well or the opposite, in which troops are quite minimal (but still resilient) and offense comes from the rest of the army. An example of a troop-centric build is your Draigowing army in which almost every unit is scoring or can be made scoring. Another example would be my striker-spam GK list in which the majority of my army and its offense is vested into my strike squads and their S5-stormbolters and psycannons.

Then the opposite - which I shall call the balanced hammer build - is to use minimal (but resilient) troops and invest the majority of the army into the Elites/FA/Heavy Supports for offense. 2 such examples are my wraithwing necrons, where I only use 4x5 warriors and mainly wraiths and tesla-destructors for offense. The warriors are resilient because they are transported in flyers, but the majority of the offense comes from the non-troop selections. Then there is my double-trouble Chaos list, where I use cheap but quite resilient troops in zombies and focus the majority of my offense on the 2 HQ's, the heldrakes/chaos spawns and obliterators - the non-troop units.

Both are a viable build. Where non-scoring paladins may be an issue in 1 or 2 scenarios, you do have the advantage of being able to play more aggressively with them. Who cares if they live or die, but if your opponent ignores them, then they can do a lot of damage. In any case, that is what I am going to try out when I go back to my Grey Knights after the BAO.

Of course at higher points games - maybe around 2K - then I can add in a GKGM to make them scoring.

Coteaz
Paladinstar
6x MSU Passbacks (psycannon razors)
2x dreadknights
1x psyfleman

Jy2 that would be again an army that would be eaten alive by Necrons, they just love all that low armour and they can easely dance around the pallystar, i do see however do it well against a lot of other things, however i think palladins need to be scoring.

Draigo tanking for a squad of purifiers (who's other half are also scoring and can end up sitting inside a chimera box of doom with 4 psycannons in a combat squad) + coteaz henchmen tanks + a few solo scoring pallies to hold objectives from even stuff like necron fliers as they are really easy to hide actually and usually can survive the one or two things that can see them may be very fun. with DK and psyfle dreads. probably not enough points for a storm raven however but may see if true after I build it.

I shall try this later. Sounds though like JY2 may use the pally bomb + just tanks though.

 Janthkin wrote:

That's just it though - I believe shouldn't have charged you, period. Park those gargoyles 1" away to constrain Paladin movement. Now you can't advance, and can't get the Relic, until they're dead. Next turn, repeat with a unit of 'gants. And then again. Meantime, those two Flyrants focus on killing Strike squads and just plain ignore the Pallys. Make you kill units ONLY in your turn, instead of letting you kill them in his, too.

As I say, though, this benefits a lot from hindsight. (Plus Jim & I have some different approaches to how we play our Tyranids.) But Jim definitely should know how nasty Prescience + Overwatch can be; he beat me over the head with it just a couple weeks ago.

I couldn't make it there in time to screen out his paladins. Because Blackmoor went first, by the time it got to my T2, he's already able to move about 12", or 2 turns of movement. I just couldn't get there in time, at least not with the way I deployed my gargoyles, which was behind the tervigons. And the reason why they were behind the tervigons was because I wanted to put my tervigons as far forwards as possible so that its spawned gants may perhaps have been able to reach the Relic first.

Besides, screening wouldn't work in this case as his paladins could choose to assault my screening unit (thus gaining extra movement as well) and then consolidate on top of the Relic to pick it up on their next turn. Also, my closest tervigon ran out of gants on T1 after producing only 4 gants. There was no way for me to create multiple screening units as the unit of 4 gants wouldn't screen anything....it would have just given his strikers and perhaps dread an easy First Blood target.

Statistically, Prescience + Overwatch shouldn't have done as much damage as it did to my T8 flyrant:

20 psycannon shots x [((1/6 + (5/6 x 1/6)) x 1/6) + ((1/6 + (5/6 x 1/6)) x 1/6 x 1/3)] = 1.36W

On average, it would have done only 1W to my T8 flyrant.

 Dozer Blades wrote:

MSU is not viable any longer for many many reasons. 6th edition is very much so unforgiving.

It sure is. It may no longer be the top-dog competitive build, but MSU still is a very strong build even in 6th.

What it hurts most is my Crowe-Purifiers, an army that relies on both shooting and assault. But for a pure-shooty MSU army, they are still tough to fight against.

 Valek wrote:

Coteaz
Paladinstar
6x MSU Passbacks (psycannon razors)
2x dreadknights
1x psyfleman

Jy2 that would be again an army that would be eaten alive by Necrons, they just love all that low armour and they can easely dance around the pallystar, i do see however do it well against a lot of other things, however i think palladins need to be scoring.

Never said it would be perfect. Whether Draigowing with strikers or Draigowing with MSU, the fact that you are using a deathstar unit that takes up about 40% of the army means that it can always be exploited by certain armies. Any deathstar army is inherently unbalanced. It is the type of army that would either win big against most armies but will also potentially lose big when it goes up against its hard-counter. That's just something you have to deal with when playing a deathstar army.

However, don't under-estimate the resiliency of MSU. MSU is still alive and very strong, especially when anchored with a strong ground presence. Moreover, there are ways to make MSU even more resilient. The simplest is to include the ADL into the list. That makes your army twice as resilient as normal (though I would recommend an investment in dozer blades if you go this route).

 sudojoe wrote:
Draigo tanking for a squad of purifiers (who's other half are also scoring and can end up sitting inside a chimera box of doom with 4 psycannons in a combat squad) + coteaz henchmen tanks + a few solo scoring pallies to hold objectives from even stuff like necron fliers as they are really easy to hide actually and usually can survive the one or two things that can see them may be very fun. with DK and psyfle dreads. probably not enough points for a storm raven however but may see if true after I build it.

I shall try this later. Sounds though like JY2 may use the pally bomb + just tanks though.

Yeah, I doubt I can fit a raven into my list. At 2K, I'd probably add a GKGM to make the paladins and dreadknights scoring.

 jy2 wrote:

 Blackmoor wrote:

I would love to save 220 to 275 points by not taking a grandmaster/Draigo and spend it on another strike squad but I can't.

The reason why is that I have been tabled many times except for my paladins. The last time was against flying necrons who flew around and shot everything but the paladins. Just look at this game, you could have ignored my paladins and just kill everything else and you would have won if they were not troops.

 Red Corsair wrote:

Yea I have to agree, paladins who are not troops are very easy to ignore by a lot of lists.

While having paladins scoring is definitely useful, especially in a mission such as the Relic, to me it isn't really mandatory. It really boils down to how you design your lists. The trick is not to overload your paladins to make them into a super unit. You need to invest the majority of your points into the so-called "support" units.

Then there are the 2 different builds - either a troop-centric build in which the troops are the majority of the army and its offense as well or the opposite, in which troops are quite minimal (but still resilient) and offense comes from the rest of the army. An example of a troop-centric build is your Draigowing army in which almost every unit is scoring or can be made scoring. Another example would be my striker-spam GK list in which the majority of my army and its offense is vested into my strike squads and their S5-stormbolters and psycannons.

Then the opposite - which I shall call the balanced hammer build - is to use minimal (but resilient) troops and invest the majority of the army into the Elites/FA/Heavy Supports for offense. 2 such examples are my wraithwing necrons, where I only use 4x5 warriors and mainly wraiths and tesla-destructors for offense. The warriors are resilient because they are transported in flyers, but the majority of the offense comes from the non-troop selections. Then there is my double-trouble Chaos list, where I use cheap but quite resilient troops in zombies and focus the majority of my offense on the 2 HQ's, the heldrakes/chaos spawns and obliterators - the non-troop units.

Both are a viable build. Where non-scoring paladins may be an issue in 1 or 2 scenarios, you do have the advantage of being able to play more aggressively with them. Who cares if they live or die, but if your opponent ignores them, then they can do a lot of damage. In any case, that is what I am going to try out when I go back to my Grey Knights after the BAO.

Of course at higher points games - maybe around 2K - then I can add in a GKGM to make them scoring.

The major difference here though is that wraiths are faster, and those necron units are in fliers so are pretty much safe currently from any threats while being able to deploy in one turn. Paladins are slow, and so are henchmen units. Psybacks are easily taken out now. I just personally don't see the point in investing 700+ points on a unit that can be ignored. Don't forget that the new faq really hurt grey night shooting as almost all of their firepower is 24" range meaning even 4 psycanons with divination amount to gak if only 3 marines are within their kill range : / Personally I always wanted to see someone to a Corteaz Zoo keeper list with 5 man Jaekero units in chimeras 5 lascanons out the hatch? Yes please, 5 HF firing over watch from their av12? Yes please Probably the only way I will get into grey knights... Maybe convert a mighty Kong Jaekero for a DK


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Corteaz
maleus Inquisitor lvl 1


10 strikes w 2 PC
5 jokaero in chimera
5 jokaero in chimera
5 jokaero in chimera
5 jokaero in chimera

2 NDK

Psyfleman

1750

pretty funny I think even if not super durable

I meant to say mechanized MSU... Note I don't consider FlyCronz as falling under this category. I'm talking about armies with lots of razorbacks, chimeras, rhinos, etc. Sure maybe in some local meta they are top dawg but that's about it. High model count infantry heavy armies are very strong now.

Great report. It was refreshing to see a battle that didn't feel one-sided.

 Red Corsair wrote:

The major difference here though is that wraiths are faster, and those necron units are in fliers so are pretty much safe currently from any threats while being able to deploy in one turn. Paladins are slow, and so are henchmen units. Psybacks are easily taken out now. I just personally don't see the point in investing 700+ points on a unit that can be ignored. Don't forget that the new faq really hurt grey night shooting as almost all of their firepower is 24" range meaning even 4 psycanons with divination amount to gak if only 3 marines are within their kill range : / Personally I always wanted to see someone to a Corteaz Zoo keeper list with 5 man Jaekero units in chimeras 5 lascanons out the hatch? Yes please, 5 HF firing over watch from their av12? Yes please Probably the only way I will get into grey knights... Maybe convert a mighty Kong Jaekero for a DK

Right. Min-sized troops are viable as long as they are resilient. Having them in flyers help. However, as easy as it is to kill 1 psyback, it takes considerable resources to kill 6, especially if you can give them 4+ cover from the ADL. And then you want to kill my troops? Have fun dedicating the firepower of 1 entire unit in trying to kill a 12-16pt unit. Basically, this type of build makes enemy shooting rather inefficient. Either fire at my deathstar and dreads/dreadknights which is what I want you to do or waste your firepower on my ultra-cheap troops. Also, it invalidates the double/triple-helturkey CSM builds that you are bound to go up against in tournament play. Ignoring the deathstar is definitely a viable strategy....that just means that my deathstar will probably kill at least 1 unit per turn and will advance unimpeded until they are in contesting/assault range of your units. It's not all that bad if the opponent ignores your deathstar. That is because your support units should be resilient enough to weather incoming enemy fire. At least that is theory behind my build.

Corteaz
maleus Inquisitor lvl 1


10 strikes w 2 PC
5 jokaero in chimera
5 jokaero in chimera
5 jokaero in chimera
5 jokaero in chimera

2 NDK

Psyfleman

1750

pretty funny I think even if not super durable

Seems like an interesting build, but I just don't like to monkey around. j.k.

It's got some firepower, that's for sure. However, it just isn't my cup of tea. The problem with this build is that it is stagnant. Move those chimeras and the monkeys will be firing in snap-shot mode only. I'm trying to move away from a pure gunline army. Mobile firepower is where it's at, even if I'm only moving 6" at a time. I can see this as a fun build but I just can't take this type of army seriously. Never had, never will. Sorry if I appear very blunt.

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I meant to say mechanized MSU... Note I don't consider FlyCronz as falling under this category. I'm talking about armies with lots of razorbacks, chimeras, rhinos, etc. Sure maybe in some local meta they are top dawg but that's about it. High model count infantry heavy armies are very strong now.

I agree. They (pure MSU) aren't as strong as they were back in 5th, They are still good but I don't believe they are a GT-tournament-winning build anymore. They can still, however, compete against most builds.

I think an army list I'll call hybrid MSU can be strong but not mechanized MSU with lightly armored transports (LAT)... Heldrakes eat LAT for breakfast by vector striking them then burninating whatever spills out plus they (disembarking units) are more clumped since its only 3" out of a wrecked transport. On the other hand your batreps have shown that running units such as five man Warrior squads is much more tactical than running 10 man squads. On that note I think combat squadding works a lot better in sixth edition now. So if you have some MSU it can work very well and now that Devs and Havoks are a lot cheaper it can work for them as well.

Checking in a bit late due to exams. Great report as always jy2.

I think I'm with Janthkin on having your tyrants focus more on the backfield stuff and just trying to screen the relic with gaunts/gargs/etc., but I understand why you went in (and that overwatch was WAAAY above average).

Did your biovores do much this game? I don't think you mentioned them much. Seems like they'd be pretty useful for picking out psycannons.

It doesn't seem like you ever use vector strike with your tyrants. Especially now that it ignores cover, it's average damage output is actually higher than a set of devourers against marines (2.5 vs 1.25 wounds), and it lets you split fire. Like in the case of that one Striker on T2, a VS should have easily taken him out letting you put 6 dev shots into something else. Just a thought, 2 tyrants VSing on average kills a 5 man marine unit.

Unrelated Mini-rant, feel free to ignore:
And while I realize I'm perhaps the only one with this interpretation, I still don't think Grand Strategy does anything for The Relic mission. Only scoring units can seize the relic and GS/UA doesn't make them scoring, it doesn't even make them count as scoring. With the FAQ GS/UA just says:
"The nominated units can control objectives as if they were scoring units."
but everyone seems to interpret that as:
"The nominated units can do anything and everything related to mission objectives as if they were scoring units." Which is slightly different. Controlling objectives is a pretty specific action described on page 123, with very different rules to those for seizing the relic on page 131 (or line-breaker for that matter, although that really only matters for GK dreads and they seldom end up in the backfield).

@ jy2, well like I said, funny list not very competitive. I just want to see a space monkey list for some reason

I know what you mean by resiliency from MSU and don't disagree with how the list grants an edge. I simply think other armies such as necrons do it way better as they don't have a tough time with first blood, purge and the relic. Heck even in multiple objective games your going to have a tough time with henchmen IMO because they will have to leave the ADL and lets face it, if I explode your transports I shouldn't need to waste my time on your 3 man units as the explosion has a decent chance to wipe the squad with the ride. I also don't see the psybacks as much of a threat anymore, six of them only yields 18 s6 shots which is fairly weak in the current scape. Give them AC and now they are not only pricier but have gak range. I feel the GK troops slot took a hit in 6th which is why you see them allied to necrons so often. Cheap durable troops with board wide reach, seems to fill the hole nicely even if the fluff is sketchy.

Im going to a 1750 tournament next month and becasue my crons wont be ready in time, I will probably take a list similar to yours Blackmoor.

Any advise, things you would change to make it better?

And what sort or matchups would give this list a hard time?

Struggling to think of a good 1750 list at the moment so appreciate if anyone could help me out.

Also congrats on the win, was a good close game

POST-GAME ANALYSIS:

Tyranids:
Just as I expected. Draigowing is still a tough army for tyranids to play against, but not entirely impossible. I think that if the mission was anything other than the Relic, my bugs would actually have a very good chance against this army. However, the Relic (along with Purge the Alien) is probably their 2 strongest missions. Basically, 1 objective or less and it favors the paladins. 2+ objectives favors the bugs.

Blackmoor played a solid game. Other than the fact that he didn't really pay attention to the mission "details", he did what his army does best - to control the center and to shoot down the enemy. I felt that I played ok as well. Had the Relic not been the Primary, I would have done as some of the readers here suggested - give up the Relic and have my flyrants surgically strike at his strikers and dreads. But because the Relic was more important than Big Guns, I had to make a play for the Relic. My strategy was to tie them up and honestly, it should have worked. Then again, this game was a game of ups and downs and a few crucial rolls just didn't go my way. Que sera sera.

BTW, some of the extreme dice included:

- Paladins shot at my tervigon before I could cast my psychic powers. With Prescience and the Ignore Cover power, he only managed to put 2W on my tervigon.

- I fired my entire army into 1 5-man combat squad and couldn't kill it (1 survivor).

- His Overwatch took off 3W from a T8 flyrant (yet his normal shooting can only take off 2W from a T6 tervigon?!?).

- I wounded his warding stave 3 times with Precision Shots from my flyrant. He would then fail 2 of his 2+ saves.

- Zoanthropes could have potentially finished off the 3 paladins (all with 1W on each) but he denies both attempts to Smite him.


Overall, it was a great game against a very good opponent. I look forwards to a potential rematch at the Bay Area Open.


-------------------------------------------------------------------

 Dozer Blades wrote:
I think an army list I'll call hybrid MSU can be strong but not mechanized MSU with lightly armored transports (LAT)... Heldrakes eat LAT for breakfast by vector striking them then burninating whatever spills out plus they (disembarking units) are more clumped since its only 3" out of a wrecked transport. On the other hand your batreps have shown that running units such as five man Warrior squads is much more tactical than running 10 man squads. On that note I think combat squadding works a lot better in sixth edition now. So if you have some MSU it can work very well and now that Devs and Havoks are a lot cheaper it can work for them as well.

I guess we have different definitions of strong. My definition of strong is an army that has a reasonable chance to beat most other builds out there. Strong isn't an army that can beat ALL builds. That army just doesn't exist in 6E. When you factor in allies, there is always a hard-counter to almost any army out there. Even some of the strongest armies - the Necron Airforce and Tzeentch Daemons - have hard-counters that can really hurt them. I agree that hybrid MSU is IMO better than pure MSU....but that doesn't mean that pure MSU is bad or not viable anymore. It is still a viable army that can compete against most other armies.

Combat-squads and 5-man MSU units are definitely good, especially now that there is only a 1 in 6 chance of getting VP missions. The only thing you have to watch out for is that they make for easy First Blood points....though it can be argued that their transports are just as easy to kill anyways.

Bugs_N_Orks wrote:
Checking in a bit late due to exams. Great report as always jy2.

I think I'm with Janthkin on having your tyrants focus more on the backfield stuff and just trying to screen the relic with gaunts/gargs/etc., but I understand why you went in (and that overwatch was WAAAY above average).

Did your biovores do much this game? I don't think you mentioned them much. Seems like they'd be pretty useful for picking out psycannons.

It doesn't seem like you ever use vector strike with your tyrants. Especially now that it ignores cover, it's average damage output is actually higher than a set of devourers against marines (2.5 vs 1.25 wounds), and it lets you split fire. Like in the case of that one Striker on T2, a VS should have easily taken him out letting you put 6 dev shots into something else. Just a thought, 2 tyrants VSing on average kills a 5 man marine unit.

Unrelated Mini-rant, feel free to ignore:
And while I realize I'm perhaps the only one with this interpretation, I still don't think Grand Strategy does anything for The Relic mission. Only scoring units can seize the relic and GS/UA doesn't make them scoring, it doesn't even make them count as scoring. With the FAQ GS/UA just says:
"The nominated units can control objectives as if they were scoring units."
but everyone seems to interpret that as:
"The nominated units can do anything and everything related to mission objectives as if they were scoring units." Which is slightly different. Controlling objectives is a pretty specific action described on page 123, with very different rules to those for seizing the relic on page 131 (or line-breaker for that matter, although that really only matters for GK dreads and they seldom end up in the backfield).

Biovores didn't do much this game. They were mainly missing or Blackmoor was making his saves. This was one of the few games where they under-performed. Then again, they are only a 180-pt investment.

I didn't use vector strikes because I didn't have the opportunity. All the vulnerable units were just too far back, with the paladins being the only ones in the front. I suppose I could have vector striked the 1 striker left and shot at the other unit of strikers, but I didn't think about it at the time. Then I tried to use my Iron Armed flyrant to lock down his paladins. Oh well, lost opportunity.

As for Grand Strategy and the Relic, I think the intent is very clear. This is one of those rare rules that people will probably play the RAI rather than the RAW. I don't mind and would let my opponent do it and if someone disagrees, he'll probably be known as a rules-lawyer and not receive a very high Sportsmanship score (if they exist). I think most TO's would allow it.

 Red Corsair wrote:
@ jy2, well like I said, funny list not very competitive. I just want to see a space monkey list for some reason

I know what you mean by resiliency from MSU and don't disagree with how the list grants an edge. I simply think other armies such as necrons do it way better as they don't have a tough time with first blood, purge and the relic. Heck even in multiple objective games your going to have a tough time with henchmen IMO because they will have to leave the ADL and lets face it, if I explode your transports I shouldn't need to waste my time on your 3 man units as the explosion has a decent chance to wipe the squad with the ride. I also don't see the psybacks as much of a threat anymore, six of them only yields 18 s6 shots which is fairly weak in the current scape. Give them AC and now they are not only pricier but have gak range. I feel the GK troops slot took a hit in 6th which is why you see them allied to necrons so often. Cheap durable troops with board wide reach, seems to fill the hole nicely even if the fluff is sketchy.

Yermom (Nick) ran it before. I believe you can find the batrep on his blog, but this was when the GK codex first came out.

I do understand your concern about those weak MSU troops. I also see the synergy between them and heavy hammer units such as the list I faced recently at a tournament (with MSU mech, Coteaz, Mordrak + ghost knights and 3 shunting dreadknights). There is good potential there and though it isn't perfect, I think it can compete against most armies. If necessary, I may drop 1 dreadknight and perhaps 1 troop for a GKGM + psyfleman. I will see.

Necron allies is definitely a good addition to any GK army. I have tried 1 game with the combo and have liked what I saw. In that game, my D-lord + wraiths actually out-performed my 5-man paladin unit + Draigo. Necrons address one of the greatest weaknesses of the GK's and that is their mobility (or lack of).




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 tuiman wrote:
Im going to a 1750 tournament next month and becasue my crons wont be ready in time, I will probably take a list similar to yours Blackmoor.

Any advise, things you would change to make it better?

And what sort or matchups would give this list a hard time?

Struggling to think of a good 1750 list at the moment so appreciate if anyone could help me out.

Also congrats on the win, was a good close game

I'm not sure if Blackmoor will answer as he doesn't frequent dakka as often anymore, but I will give you my perspective on his GK's.

His list is pretty much optimized as it is. Keeping the core of his army, I'd try to find a way to add in some grenades for his GKGM and fit in a 3-5 man henchmen unit just for objective-sitting purposes. This then gives his strikers much more flexibility (i.e. in case he wants to deepstrike them) as well as provide more scoring units. Just try to keep 1 objective near LOS-blocking terrain where they can hide.

Really shooty armies that can insta-kill paladins will give this army a tough time. Triple-vendetta IG with demolishers, 9x broadside tau or tau/ork combo lists, the necron airforce with triple-doom scythes, 9x obliterator + heldrake CSM list and similar type lists will hurt them. Also, armies that can put out lots of screening, tarpitting units such as orks, tyranids, IG blob squad and a zombie CSM list can also give them a hard time in any matchup other than the Relic.

Hope that helped.

Thanks Jy, very helpfull. How do you think it would do against wraithwing, as that's a pretty common tournie build here now. Not many play flying circus. Cheers

 jy2 wrote:


His list is pretty much optimized as it is. Keeping the core of his army, I'd try to find a way to add in some grenades for his GKGM and fit in a 3-5 man henchmen unit just for objective-sitting purposes. This then gives his strikers much more flexibility (i.e. in case he wants to deepstrike them) as well as provide more scoring units. Just try to keep 1 objective near LOS-blocking terrain where they can hide.

Really shooty armies that can insta-kill paladins will give this army a tough time. Triple-vendetta IG with demolishers, 9x broadside tau or tau/ork combo lists, the necron airforce with triple-doom scythes, 9x obliterator + heldrake CSM list and similar type lists will hurt them. Also, armies that can put out lots of screening, tarpitting units such as orks, tyranids, IG blob squad and a zombie CSM list can also give them a hard time in any matchup other than the Relic.

Hope that helped.

I was thinking of swapping the GM's psycannon out for Rad grenades, 3 servo-skulls and psybolt on the paladins. Figured while the BS6 Psycannon is nice it's very expensive, plus if 16 twin-linked psycannon shots don't do the job 20 are unlikely to :-P

 tuiman wrote:
Thanks Jy, very helpfull. How do you think it would do against wraithwing, as that's a pretty common tournie build here now. Not many play flying circus. Cheers

That's a tough call. Wraithwing, especially with a D-lord in there, has the resiliency to survive GK shooting. They do have to be careful, however, because they won't survive prolonged GK shooting. Where necrons will have the advantage is in the Mobility department. They have the mobility to dance around the paladinstar and to go after their "support" units. And that is exactly what good players will do. But overall, they will have problems against the paladins themselves (unless the necron player is bringing multiple doom scythes), so overall, I would say the necrons are a slight favorite in any mission other than Victory Points or the Relic.

 CaptainJay wrote:

I was thinking of swapping the GM's psycannon out for Rad grenades, 3 servo-skulls and psybolt on the paladins. Figured while the BS6 Psycannon is nice it's very expensive, plus if 16 twin-linked psycannon shots don't do the job 20 are unlikely to :-P

Yeah, dropping the GKGM's psycannon would be my top choice as well.

Just to throw in my two cents, as I have spent time using Pallies.

I don't think they are worthwhile without Draigo. I just don't. Though strength 8 spam is down, the ability to tank wounds on him is very important. The 3++ helps.

I'm not crazy about MSU in 6th, but I think this army would be pretty formidable:

Draigo
Coteaz

10 Paladins, 4 Psycannons, 1 Stave, Brotherhood Banner (the rest take Hammers)
5 x 3 Henchman in Psybolt Assault Cannon Razorbacks

2 x Dredknights with Heavy Incinerator

1845 (add a Henchman or something)

You can essentially have the whole thing scoring (minus two characters). You could also give re-roll 1's to wound if you don't need scoring Dredknights.

Paladins IMO were never a real competitive list despite their high tournament placements-- they were a RPS list that people didn't know what to do against yet, as with Nob Bikers in early 5th edition. Now that Ravenwing Black Knights are in the environment, I think taking Paladins-- Draigo or no Draigo-- is an even riskier move.

 JGrand wrote:
Just to throw in my two cents, as I have spent time using Pallies.

I don't think they are worthwhile without Draigo. I just don't. Though strength 8 spam is down, the ability to tank wounds on him is very important. The 3++ helps.

I'm not crazy about MSU in 6th, but I think this army would be pretty formidable:

Draigo
Coteaz

10 Paladins, 4 Psycannons, 1 Stave, Brotherhood Banner (the rest take Hammers)
5 x 3 Henchman in Psybolt Assault Cannon Razorbacks

2 x Dredknights with Heavy Incinerator

1845 (add a Henchman or something)

You can essentially have the whole thing scoring (minus two characters). You could also give re-roll 1's to wound if you don't need scoring Dredknights.

Personally, I like Draigo myself in an army with paladins. But when you throw in Coteaz and the paladinstar in there as well, they start to add up. Just that unit alone is about 1K! I think the key to 6E "Draigo-wing" is to make the support units more resilient, not the deathstar itself. But who knows, after some playtesting, maybe I will have to put Draigo (or at least 1 GKGM) back into my list.

 Kingsley wrote:
Paladins IMO were never a real competitive list despite their high tournament placements-- they were a RPS list that people didn't know what to do against yet, as with Nob Bikers in early 5th edition. Now that Ravenwing Black Knights are in the environment, I think taking Paladins-- Draigo or no Draigo-- is an even riskier move.

You would think so, but believe me, deathstar armies are here to stay. Draigowing, nob bikers and now eldar/dark eldar seer council or harlequin-stars have consistently done well on the GT level and still currently continue to do so. I myself like to run my nob bikers with the Green Tide. Blackmoor's paladins continue to do well and people like Frankie and Sean are having much success with the Deldar deathstar armies at tournaments. You can argue that we do well because we are good players, but then again, so are our opponents as we go deeper into the tournaments. Part of the reason for the successes of such armies is that they normally have more good matchups than they do bad matchups. I would say in about 10 games, they will probably match up well in 7-8 or them on average, and we all know that in competitive play, it's all about the matchups.

And BTW, I don't think the Ravenwing Black Knights are a bad matchup for the paladins. That is because paladin shooting should hurt them, even with their T5, and then warding stave and swords can absorb their attacks in assault. Once they expend their power, they can't hurt paladins anymore. Paladin hammers, on the other hand, will still hurt.

 jy2 wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
Paladins IMO were never a real competitive list despite their high tournament placements-- they were a RPS list that people didn't know what to do against yet, as with Nob Bikers in early 5th edition. Now that Ravenwing Black Knights are in the environment, I think taking Paladins-- Draigo or no Draigo-- is an even riskier move.

You would think so, but believe me, deathstar armies are here to stay. Draigowing, nob bikers and now eldar/dark eldar seer council or harlequin-stars have consistently done well on the GT level and still currently continue to do so. I myself like to run my nob bikers with the Green Tide. Blackmoor's paladins continue to do well and people like Frankie and Sean are having much success with the Deldar deathstar armies at tournaments. You can argue that we do well because we are good players, but then again, so are our opponents as we go deeper into the tournaments. Part of the reason for the successes of such armies is that they normally have more good matchups than they do bad matchups. I would say in about 10 games, they will probably match up well in 7-8 or them on average, and we all know that in competitive play, it's all about the matchups.

And BTW, I don't think the Ravenwing Black Knights are a bad matchup for the paladins. That is because paladin shooting should hurt them, even with their T5, and then warding stave and swords can absorb their attacks in assault. Once they expend their power, they can't hurt paladins anymore. Paladin hammers, on the other hand, will still hurt.

I should be clear that I do not think that deathstar armies are inherently bad. However I think that most deathstar armies that are actually fielded are in practice not good thanks to various unbalanced choices. My experience with Paladins and Nob Bikers has been that a balanced list can easily deal with them, except perhaps in a Kill Points situation. I think such armies are only good insofar as other people take unbalanced lists that don't have answers to common threats.

You say that in competitive play, it's "all about the matchups" but in point of fact I disagree; I think matchups are only really relevant when it comes to player skill if you are using a balanced list that can truly take all comers-- in other words, I think that matchups become more and more important the less balanced your list is. A truly balanced list doesn't care about matchups. Of course, in practice a "truly balanced" list is very difficult to achieve and thus matchups will influence the game to some extent, but I really do believe that by taking an all-comers list you can greatly reduce the influence of matchups on your game.

As for Ravenwing Black Knights, it seems to me that their mobility and ability to Scout or Outflank should mean they get to dictate the terms of an engagement with Paladins, and the unit's shooting power is simply too high against a squad of Paladins for the Paladins to be viable against them, especially given that the Paladins are substantially more expensive.

Nids can have a very bad matchup if they face a mechanized DE force with 3+ venoms and an allied farseer.

 tuiman wrote:
Im going to a 1750 tournament next month and becasue my crons wont be ready in time, I will probably take a list similar to yours Blackmoor.

Good luck, and tell me how you did.

 tuiman wrote:
Any advise, things you would change to make it better?

I have been playing variations of this list for a while and all of the changes have pros and cons. You can add some henchman and a banisher for some cheap scoring units, and put them in some vehicles (either Chimeras or Razorbacks). The downside is that you are going to lose a strike squad with their shooting and warp quake to pay for them. You can take out the dreadnaughts and add dreadknights, but you will lose enhanced aegis and lose ranged anti-tank for a durable, infantry killer. You can switch out Draigo for a GK Grandmaster, and you gain his toughness and stats but you end up paying more in points and he is less customizable. You also have an option of dropping an HQ and only take Coteaz. That will save you 250-275 points, but it will mean that your paladins will not be scoring. That is a lot of points that can be spent on killy stuff, but it is a choice that you can make.

There are no real wrong answers and all of the choices are good, it is just what you want to play, and fit your playstyle (and models).

If I was going to change something it might be anti-aircraft fire, but I might have to rely on my TL dreads and Psycannons (with prescience).

And what sort or matchups would give this list a hard time?

There are 2 match-ups that give me a hard time (unlike the internet that says that there are all kinds of armies that give me trouble) those are IG with a lot of Vendettas (Demolisher cannons are not a problem because you can mitigate their damage, and they have to get within 24” where you can kill them with psycannons) but vendettas are hard as heck to hit, and can be placed where they can shoot models that you do not want to get shot, and they have a lot of TL lascannon shots.

The other is Chaos with a lot of oblits. They also have the possibility to either sit back and shoot lascannons, or if you get close, rapid fire TL plasma guns, and you do not really care for either. The other problem with them is that they have a 2+ save and 2 wounds that you can’t kill at range very easily.

Struggling to think of a good 1750 list at the moment so appreciate if anyone could help me out.

I hoped that helped!

Blackmoor has lots and lots of big tournament experience with his Paladins and that is so valuable... I think switching out for Coteaz and a vanilla Grand Master is the right move for this edition. For example if Coteaz gets the Divination psychic power to cast the 4++ invulnerable save then Paladins with swords get a 3++ in close combat... That can be very strong.

I am thinking now it's better to run units I often to refer as pseudo-deathstars... They are not true deathstars such as DraigoStar or Nob bikers but they have many of the same attributes and cost considerably less points which allows you to field more units and increase your overall shooting output which is very important in sixth edition.

 Kingsley wrote:

You say that in competitive play, it's "all about the matchups" but in point of fact I disagree; I think matchups are only really relevant when it comes to player skill if you are using a balanced list that can truly take all comers-- in other words, I think that matchups become more and more important the less balanced your list is. A truly balanced list doesn't care about matchups. Of course, in practice a "truly balanced" list is very difficult to achieve and thus matchups will influence the game to some extent, but I really do believe that by taking an all-comers list you can greatly reduce the influence of matchups on your game.

As for Ravenwing Black Knights, it seems to me that their mobility and ability to Scout or Outflank should mean they get to dictate the terms of an engagement with Paladins, and the unit's shooting power is simply too high against a squad of Paladins for the Paladins to be viable against them, especially given that the Paladins are substantially more expensive.

Actually, even truly balanced lists will have matchup problems. Such are the dynamics of 6th Ed. and its allies. I'll give you some examples. I consider my wraith flyer hybrid-necrons to be a balanced army. However, I do have matchup concerns for them. Massed 2+ armies like deathwing, psychic-heavy armies like tyranids and even deldar and infantry-heavy lists like multiple IG blob squads and the Green Tide will give my army some problems. My tyranids are really balanced IMO. However, Jaws/long fang-spam space wolves, DE venom-spam, ultra-shooty Tau and now Eldar/Dark Eldar alliances are bad matchups for them. Your Tau/space marines themselves will have problems against my wraithwing necrons. They just don't have the Volume of Attacks necessary to deal with 18 wraiths along with 2 D-lords and a bunch of flyers. Yes, balanced lists are more likely to be able to deal with the extreme lists, but even they aren't completely immune to list mismatches. Their main advantage is that in a run of several games (as in a GT environment), they can handle a wider range of army types than the unbalanced ones can.

As for the paladin-ravenwing matchup, ravenwing will have to beat them by playing laterally. Go after the rest of the army and ignore the palliestar. That is their best chance against them.

 wyomingfox wrote:
Nids can have a very bad matchup if they face a mechanized DE force with 3+ venoms and an allied farseer.

Yeah. That may be one of the toughest matchups for the bugs.

I would love to go up against this type of list. Unfortunately, it is hard to find a DE venomspam player in my area. Most of them appears to have migrated to a foot-based Eldar/DE build. But maybe that is a good thing....

 Dozer Blades wrote:
Blackmoor has lots and lots of big tournament experience with his Paladins and that is so valuable... I think switching out for Coteaz and a vanilla Grand Master is the right move for this edition. For example if Coteaz gets the Divination psychic power to cast the 4++ invulnerable save then Paladins with swords get a 3++ in close combat... That can be very strong.

I am thinking now it's better to run units I often to refer as pseudo-deathstars... They are not true deathstars such as DraigoStar or Nob bikers but they have many of the same attributes and cost considerably less points which allows you to field more units and increase your overall shooting output which is very important in sixth edition.

I think that is definitely a viable build. With my orks, I currently run primarily a green tide army with a smaller nob biker deathstar unit (though in larger games, I run a full 10-man nob biker unit). For my "Draigo-wing", I am considering dropping some paladins to fit other stuff into my list.

GodlessM had a good setup, Draigo, Coteaz, 5 paladins, 2 stormravens, 2 dreadknights, 2 10 man strike in rhinos. Had a lot of success at tournies, top 3 most times.

I am going to take Blackmoors list but add draigo, and remove a coupe of strikes from a squad to make up for it. I loose 2 bodies and a psycannon, but i feel draigo is so useful to tank the high strength shots.

Tbh i think draigo is needed atm, there is a lot of ap2 shooting out there and he will still give any non 2+ char a run for his money.

On the other hand would you consider dropping the strike squad to 7 to fit psyammo in the Paladins?

 tuiman wrote:
GodlessM had a good setup, Draigo, Coteaz, 5 paladins, 2 stormravens, 2 dreadknights, 2 10 man strike in rhinos. Had a lot of success at tournies, top 3 most times.

I am going to take Blackmoors list but add draigo, and remove a coupe of strikes from a squad to make up for it. I loose 2 bodies and a psycannon, but i feel draigo is so useful to tank the high strength shots.

Yeah, his army is balanced and there is some synergy in it. From what I've read, I believed he dropped the 2 rhinos because they were just First Blood liabilities. While he prefers death from above (i.e. more ravens), I prefer more death from below (i.e. S5 stormbolter-spam). Not that one is better than the other, but just a difference in play-style preferences.

Good luck in your tourney and let us know how it goes!

 Valek wrote:
Tbh i think draigo is needed atm, there is a lot of ap2 shooting out there and he will still give any non 2+ char a run for his money.

On the other hand would you consider dropping the strike squad to 7 to fit psyammo in the Paladins?

I like Draigo as well, but I'm probably going to try a few games without him and see how it does. Who knows, I may end up bringing back the big boss.

I would consider psybolt ammo for a 10-man paladin unit, but not for a 5-man unit.

 jy2 wrote:
Actually, even truly balanced lists will have matchup problems. Such are the dynamics of 6th Ed. and its allies. I'll give you some examples. I consider my wraith flyer hybrid-necrons to be a balanced army. However, I do have matchup concerns for them. Massed 2+ armies like deathwing, psychic-heavy armies like tyranids and even deldar and infantry-heavy lists like multiple IG blob squads and the Green Tide will give my army some problems. My tyranids are really balanced IMO. However, Jaws/long fang-spam space wolves, DE venom-spam, ultra-shooty Tau and now Eldar/Dark Eldar alliances are bad matchups for them. Your Tau/space marines themselves will have problems against my wraithwing necrons. They just don't have the Volume of Attacks necessary to deal with 18 wraiths along with 2 D-lords and a bunch of flyers. Yes, balanced lists are more likely to be able to deal with the extreme lists, but even they aren't completely immune to list mismatches. Their main advantage is that in a run of several games (as in a GT environment), they can handle a wider range of army types than the unbalanced ones can.

Fair points. I will also add that unbalanced lists often have an advantage in Battle Points events, since they have a higher chance of massacring the opponent and getting more points, while a balanced list is not as likely to outright crush anyone, even if its win rate is higher. Thus running an unbalanced list might be a better move in a Battle Points event, though I think that balanced armies still have the advantage in win/loss events.