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.

I think the Incinerator + Psycannon combo is almost certainly mathematically superior to anything involving the Psilencer, against the majority of enemy armies, particularly when you consider the relatively high points cost of the Psilencer.

That said, the psychological impact of a ranged, high-output Force weapon, against any armies with MCs or multi-wound infantry, is not to be underestimated.

The math does favor the Heavy Incinerator and Heavy Psycannon.

However, I just played my first two games with the new Grey Knights. The first game against Necrons went poorly, and I was basically tabled by turn 4. The second game, which I faced an experienced Chaos Daemons player, I managed to tie him in a game involving the Maelstrom objectives.

I got "First Blood" with the Gatling Psilencer on one of his Slanneesh daemon characters (T6). I activated force, he failed to deny, I got about 8 hits, 3 wounds, and he failed one save.

 obsidiankatana wrote:
Averages by definition happen in real life. On average. Over large pools of games. That's how they're determined. Math isn't subjective.

Well, tactial planning in a game should be based on averages.
Its the best measure to see if planning fails or not.

 Ian Sturrock wrote:
I think the Incinerator + Psycannon combo is almost certainly mathematically superior to anything involving the Psilencer, against the majority of enemy armies, particularly when you consider the relatively high points cost of the Psilencer.

That said, the psychological impact of a ranged, high-output Force weapon, against any armies with MCs or multi-wound infantry, is not to be underestimated.

And, it looks RAD.

-Matt

Does the Dreadknight have ML1 still or is it now ML2? Choosing between activating Force and Sanctuary could be a factor.

Messed around a bit with a draigo star build. Ballpark of 950 points (exact number escapes me) nets Draigo, Stern, ML3 librarian, 5 paladins with an Apothecary, 2 Psycannons, 1 hammer, 4x falchions. Ideal situation sees Draigo tanking while invisible with 2++ and FNP.

I feel like instead of the lvl 3 librarian you would be better off trying to get some more 3++ invuls in there. Also Tiggy would be better for getting invis(at around the same points)

I would not spend the points on the falcions, get the banner instead. I would go 1x hammer, 2x psycannon, 1x banner, and one apoth. I forget does the warding staff do anything other than be a power maul?

Warding staff provides adamantium will. Only reason I didn't include tigurius was to remain wholly within the GK book. And I'm unfamiliar with what the banner does. Also, within the GK book, I'm not sure where else to get 3++ from. Though an invisible 4++ and FNP unit is already incredibly hard to crack.

Reading this thread has me really excited to build up my GK's. Rites of Teleportation and Shunt seem like they will make for a really nasty alpha-strike.

 obsidiankatana wrote:
Warding staff provides adamantium will. Only reason I didn't include tigurius was to remain wholly within the GK book. And I'm unfamiliar with what the banner does. Also, within the GK book, I'm not sure where else to get 3++ from. Though an invisible 4++ and FNP unit is already incredibly hard to crack.

Banner gives +1 attack to the unit and the other banner gives +1 attack and a fearless bubble.

Fair enough if you want to stay within the book.

Putting a Stave and Banner in a squad does take out a fair chunk of the AP3 would normally have.

I wouldn't banner a squad of 5.

 ductvader wrote:
Putting a Stave and Banner in a squad does take out a fair chunk of the AP3 would normally have.

I wouldn't banner a squad of 5.

Its a squad of 8 with stern, draigo, and librarian.

Zimko wrote:
Does the Dreadknight have ML1 still or is it now ML2? Choosing between activating Force and Sanctuary could be a factor.

Did I miss something? Does the 7th edition codex say ML # is the max number of spells a psyker can cast a turn?

Indirectly yes, as you cannot cast the same power twice. However, as Force and Sanctuary are different powers, you can cast both as long as you have enough warp charges left in your pool.

 Leth wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
Putting a Stave and Banner in a squad does take out a fair chunk of the AP3 would normally have.

I wouldn't banner a squad of 5.

Its a squad of 8 with stern, draigo, and librarian.

Completely glazed past that. My bad, been playing with simple characterless Paladin squads.

 Redemption wrote:
Indirectly yes, as you cannot cast the same power twice. However, as Force and Sanctuary are different powers, you can cast both as long as you have enough warp charges left in your pool.

Indeed, doesnt matter if the Dreadknight is level 1, as long as you have dice, you can cast both of his powers

Assuming you have the points, what would you guys say is the optimal loadout for 5 paladins and 10 paladins? I'm thinking a mix of flachions and hammers. Probably not worth putting in the banner at just just 5.

Honestly I feel paladins are a go big or go home unit. They have so many things that are unit based multipliers that only really become efficient at larger sizes.

Personally, go with 10, take Stern, take either Banner, a Stave, 2 Hammers, a Meltabomb, Falchions on the Justicar, 4 Psycannons...and the rest get swords, halberds and falchions to your liking...and don't skip the apothecary.

^Talking from a pure GK perspective.

Ideally you should keep the unit small, because the additional Paladins don't really contribute much. They're just there as a distraction/anvil unit. It needs some way to fight Knights as well, I suggest some hidden Iron Priests.

Draigo as Lord of War might be restricted in some tournaments, however.

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
Ideally you should keep the unit small, because the additional Paladins don't really contribute much. They're just there as a distraction/anvil unit. It needs some way to fight Knights as well, I suggest some hidden Iron Priests.

Draigo as Lord of War might be restricted in some tournaments, however.

Which is dumb because hes clearly not a giant death robot

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
Ideally you should keep the unit small, because the additional Paladins don't really contribute much. They're just there as a distraction/anvil unit. It needs some way to fight Knights as well, I suggest some hidden Iron Priests.

Draigo as Lord of War might be restricted in some tournaments, however.

Which is dumb because hes clearly not a giant death robot

Some daemons might disagree with you there...

In his own way he's as killy as some giant death robots. In any case, LoW is clearly no longer restricted to Giant Death Robots any more.

Don't forget the 'tm' after Giant Death Robot lol

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
In his own way he's as killy as some giant death robots. In any case, LoW is clearly no longer restricted to Giant Death Robots any more.

which is why tournies need to step back and re-examine things a bit.

Grey Knights are the perfect example of why some of the "anti apoc restrictions" are gonna be silly the further into 7th we get.

clearly all the "big HQs" are being changed over to LOWs, Dragio, Logan, Ghaz, we can expect Dante to become a LOW when Blood Angels get their codex, and should GW start 7th editioning armies with 6th edition codexes big bads like Calgar and Abbadon will undoubtedly be LOWs as well.

Also restricting out any weapon that's strength D is likewise gonna be a bad move (and is likely a hold over from the old days of 6th when STR D was insanely powerful) Grey Knights would lose access to one of their sanatic disiplines.

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
In his own way he's as killy as some giant death robots. In any case, LoW is clearly no longer restricted to Giant Death Robots any more.

Yes but when you mention LoW these days what to people think? Giant tanks, giant death robots and giant monsters.

Which is dumb for restrictions as not all LoW are created equal.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
In his own way he's as killy as some giant death robots. In any case, LoW is clearly no longer restricted to Giant Death Robots any more.

which is why tournies need to step back and re-examine things a bit.

Grey Knights are the perfect example of why some of the "anti apoc restrictions" are gonna be silly the further into 7th we get.

clearly all the "big HQs" are being changed over to LOWs, Dragio, Logan, Ghaz, we can expect Dante to become a LOW when Blood Angels get their codex, and should GW start 7th editioning armies with 6th edition codexes big bads like Calgar and Abbadon will undoubtedly be LOWs as well.

Also restricting out any weapon that's strength D is likewise gonna be a bad move (and is likely a hold over from the old days of 6th when STR D was insanely powerful) Grey Knights would lose access to one of their sanatic disiplines.

I agree, but Strength D could be toned down much easier just considering it to be Str10(or 12 or whatever). Which would nerf santic diciple but not just exclude it.

D was nerfed enough in its own right to be accepted in normal games. My personal issue lies with the combined weight of fire and durability on a lot of Lords of war. For example, a Hellhammer or Stormsword scare me a lot more than a Shadowsword.

I like the larger sizes because not only does it allow you to absorb some casualties, maximize buffs but also makes multi charging much easier.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:
In his own way he's as killy as some giant death robots. In any case, LoW is clearly no longer restricted to Giant Death Robots any more.

which is why tournies need to step back and re-examine things a bit.

Grey Knights are the perfect example of why some of the "anti apoc restrictions" are gonna be silly the further into 7th we get.

clearly all the "big HQs" are being changed over to LOWs, Dragio, Logan, Ghaz, we can expect Dante to become a LOW when Blood Angels get their codex, and should GW start 7th editioning armies with 6th edition codexes big bads like Calgar and Abbadon will undoubtedly be LOWs as well.

Also restricting out any weapon that's strength D is likewise gonna be a bad move (and is likely a hold over from the old days of 6th when STR D was insanely powerful) Grey Knights would lose access to one of their sanatic disiplines.

Dutch GT is going to allow close to anything (even unbound), but does limit the LoW slot to maximum 400point models.