Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 18:58:44
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
blaktoof wrote:I disagree. If a tac marine is 14 points, gaining deepstrike, a stormbolter, wc for the unit, psychic powers, psykout grenades, preferred enemy daemons, aegis, and a ap3 forcesword for 4 pts over the cost of a tac marine is insanely good.
Loses Bolt Pistol, and is currently 7ppm over a Tact Marine. It also loses a lot of versaility Tacts can have. Also you're counting being a Psyker twice (once for the powers a second for the WC), why? And we can assume at least some of those rules are basically Chapter Tactics and not counted in their total (and even if being a Psyker is, then it's likely spread across the full unit not on a single model).
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/19 19:56:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 19:05:11
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight
|
blaktoof wrote:I disagree. If a tac marine is 14 points, gaining deepstrike, a stormbolter, wc for the unit, psychic powers, psykout grenades, preferred enemy daemons, aegis, and a ap3 forcesword for 4 pts over the cost of a tac marine is insanely good.
Saying a power sword is bad.on a tac marine is.like saying I could buy a Honda civic, or magically spend 8,000 more and geta special Mercedes that would have so many upgrades included it would cost 24,0000 more to add the same to a normal Honda civic.
The power sword is essentially free to the strike squad, no idea how getting ap3 attacks in melee is bad.
it's 7 points 50% upgrade.
Also to the other poster if you had no real AA outside your own flyer you'd know
|
SHUPPET wrote:
wtf is this buddhist monk ascendant martial dice arts crap lol
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 20:13:00
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Warplord Titan Princeps of Tzeentch
|
ClockworkZion wrote:blaktoof wrote:I disagree. If a tac marine is 14 points, gaining deepstrike, a stormbolter, wc for the unit, psychic powers, psykout grenades, preferred enemy daemons, aegis, and a ap3 forcesword for 4 pts over the cost of a tac marine is insanely good.
Loses Bolt Pistol, and is currently 6ppm over a Tact Marine. It also loses a lot of versaility Tacts can have. Also you're counting being a Psyker twice (once for the powers a second for the WC), why? And we can assume at least some of those rules are basically Chapter Tactics and not counted in their total (and even if being a Psyker is, then it's likely spread across the full unit not on a single model).
Even spread across 5 bodies, a psyker level is 5 points each (as its 25 point base to anyone who CAN buy one, and even these are the "additional levels", who are not quite as valuable as the first)
Storm bolter over bolter+pistol can be regarded as a "wash trade", and the combination of PoS, PE, DS and Aegis is by itself are more than worthy chapter tactics.
This still leaves out psykout grenades and force swords.
So even if I discount the ML to mere 15 points for the lack of ability to roll powers (and Id still reckon its worth more, as said the first level is more important than the next due to how the system works) that is 3 PPM, making the grenades and the force swords being ought for 3PPM.
Say what you like about force swords being suboptimal on mere tacticals, its still just 3PPM. a fifth of the general price of the inferior power swords. one can say you get discount for lack of choice, but its still a good buy.
Not claiming that the SS are the end-all-be-all super trooper, but they are pretty good for what you pay.
|
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 20:20:15
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
BoomWolf wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:blaktoof wrote:I disagree. If a tac marine is 14 points, gaining deepstrike, a stormbolter, wc for the unit, psychic powers, psykout grenades, preferred enemy daemons, aegis, and a ap3 forcesword for 4 pts over the cost of a tac marine is insanely good.
Loses Bolt Pistol, and is currently 6ppm over a Tact Marine. It also loses a lot of versaility Tacts can have. Also you're counting being a Psyker twice (once for the powers a second for the WC), why? And we can assume at least some of those rules are basically Chapter Tactics and not counted in their total (and even if being a Psyker is, then it's likely spread across the full unit not on a single model).
Even spread across 5 bodies, a psyker level is 5 points each (as its 25 point base to anyone who CAN buy one, and even these are the "additional levels", who are not quite as valuable as the first)
Storm bolter over bolter+pistol can be regarded as a "wash trade", and the combination of PoS, PE, DS and Aegis is by itself are more than worthy chapter tactics.
This still leaves out psykout grenades and force swords.
So even if I discount the ML to mere 15 points for the lack of ability to roll powers (and Id still reckon its worth more, as said the first level is more important than the next due to how the system works) that is 3 PPM, making the grenades and the force swords being ought for 3PPM.
Say what you like about force swords being suboptimal on mere tacticals, its still just 3PPM. a fifth of the general price of the inferior power swords. one can say you get discount for lack of choice, but its still a good buy.
Not claiming that the SS are the end-all-be-all super trooper, but they are pretty good for what you pay.
They're okay. Not good, just okay. And I really feel they're too fragile to cost as much as they do right now. A 3+ doesn't go nearly as far as it used to against shooting thanks to all the AP2/AP3 that is in the game now and because of it I really think that all models in Power Armor are a bit overpriced.
Cut all power armor by a point or two and then we'd probably be on the same page on how good that really is or not.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 20:25:05
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Warplord Titan Princeps of Tzeentch
|
If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
|
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 20:31:00
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
BoomWolf wrote:If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
I play Sisters and I can't even stand the 12ppm I pay for Battle Sisters. 20 points is highway robbery!
And Crisis Suits also have extra wounds.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/19 20:31:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 20:49:44
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
|
ClockworkZion wrote: BoomWolf wrote:If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
I play Sisters and I can't even stand the 12ppm I pay for Battle Sisters. 20 points is highway robbery!
And Crisis Suits also have extra wounds.
And Shield Drones.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 20:53:52
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight
|
AnomanderRake wrote: ClockworkZion wrote: BoomWolf wrote:If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
I play Sisters and I can't even stand the 12ppm I pay for Battle Sisters. 20 points is highway robbery!
And Crisis Suits also have extra wounds.
And Shield Drones.
And Shoot and Jump
|
SHUPPET wrote:
wtf is this buddhist monk ascendant martial dice arts crap lol
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 21:11:28
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Evasive Pleasureseeker
Lost in a blizzard, somewhere near Toronto
|
ClockworkZion wrote: BoomWolf wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:blaktoof wrote:I disagree. If a tac marine is 14 points, gaining deepstrike, a stormbolter, wc for the unit, psychic powers, psykout grenades, preferred enemy daemons, aegis, and a ap3 forcesword for 4 pts over the cost of a tac marine is insanely good.
Loses Bolt Pistol, and is currently 6ppm over a Tact Marine. It also loses a lot of versaility Tacts can have. Also you're counting being a Psyker twice (once for the powers a second for the WC), why? And we can assume at least some of those rules are basically Chapter Tactics and not counted in their total (and even if being a Psyker is, then it's likely spread across the full unit not on a single model).
Even spread across 5 bodies, a psyker level is 5 points each (as its 25 point base to anyone who CAN buy one, and even these are the "additional levels", who are not quite as valuable as the first)
Storm bolter over bolter+pistol can be regarded as a "wash trade", and the combination of PoS, PE, DS and Aegis is by itself are more than worthy chapter tactics.
This still leaves out psykout grenades and force swords.
So even if I discount the ML to mere 15 points for the lack of ability to roll powers (and Id still reckon its worth more, as said the first level is more important than the next due to how the system works) that is 3 PPM, making the grenades and the force swords being ought for 3PPM.
Say what you like about force swords being suboptimal on mere tacticals, its still just 3PPM. a fifth of the general price of the inferior power swords. one can say you get discount for lack of choice, but its still a good buy.
Not claiming that the SS are the end-all-be-all super trooper, but they are pretty good for what you pay.
They're okay. Not good, just okay. And I really feel they're too fragile to cost as much as they do right now. A 3+ doesn't go nearly as far as it used to against shooting thanks to all the AP2/AP3 that is in the game now and because of it I really think that all models in Power Armor are a bit overpriced.
Cut all power armor by a point or two and then we'd probably be on the same page on how good that really is or not.
Sometimes I really have to question if everyone is forever playing games on Planet Bowling Ball, against an army that magically only has access to ap2/3...
The last event I took my Sallies to back in late July, I wasn't having any problems at least gaining cover saves when I needed them, and I was able to roll (and promptly fail the majority!) of my 3+ saves against at least 50% of my opponents' shooting.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 21:16:24
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Warplord Titan Princeps of Tzeentch
|
2 wounds, at 53 points means 26.5 points per wound. suits can go for higher than that, 53 is my "budget" suits who are not all-the-way equipped.
Shield drones-don't even know how to answer that one, but "not really noteworthy" will probably be it.
Shoot and jump-that's filed under "mobility", that I mentioned they have.
Jeezus you guys are too harsh on trying to argue. even when I make a jest and compare something completely relevant that just shares the T4 3+ defense you start throwing things at me x_x
I even put a smiley and everything, its not poe's law...
|
can neither confirm nor deny I lost track of what I've got right now. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 21:56:53
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
AnomanderRake wrote: ClockworkZion wrote: BoomWolf wrote:If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
I play Sisters and I can't even stand the 12ppm I pay for Battle Sisters. 20 points is highway robbery!
And Crisis Suits also have extra wounds.
And Shield Drones.
Which double as extra wounds too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Experiment 626 wrote:Sometimes I really have to question if everyone is forever playing games on Planet Bowling Ball, against an army that magically only has access to ap2/3...
Cover only goes so far, especially in a Deep Striking army that can have bad scatters. Yes, it's important, but it doesn't mitigate the problem as well as people claim it does. Especially when the opponent out ranges you and you have to potentially expose yourself to danger to engage them.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
BoomWolf wrote:2 wounds, at 53 points means 26.5 points per wound. suits can go for higher than that, 53 is my "budget" suits who are not all-the-way equipped.
Shield drones-don't even know how to answer that one, but "not really noteworthy" will probably be it.
Shoot and jump-that's filed under "mobility", that I mentioned they have.
Jeezus you guys are too harsh on trying to argue. even when I make a jest and compare something completely relevant that just shares the T4 3+ defense you start throwing things at me x_x
I even put a smiley and everything, its not poe's law...
I was hardly being harsh. When I am it's usually pretty easy to tell since I don't restrain my blue language nearly as much.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/19 22:00:34
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/19 22:07:25
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Monstrous Master Moulder
|
ironhammer2194 wrote:
Anti vehicle: Hammers, dreadnoughts with lascannons, Dreadknights, and Stormravens are all viable options that can dish out damage to all vehicles including armour 14.
Durability: They're as durable as any other power armour faction out there. Rhinos, land raiders can keep them safe from enemy fire and you can always attach a terminator armored character to strike squads to soak up wounds.
As you can see, the GK codex does a good fob of giving you options in all of the above areas, but there are a couple that they are lacking in.:
Most of what you said is a decent analysis, except these 2 so called good points.
GKs suffer from no having enough tools for busting vehicles early on. If your idea of effective anit-vehcile is "hit it with a hammer", "the odd single lascannon on ridiculously expensive platforms (dreads and landraiders nowadays)" or "use stormsravens in turn 2", you are sadly mistaken that that's effective. Being a superelite army, GKs suffer more than any other army out there from leaving tanks with big scary guns on the table for too long. You can see your army evaporate before your eyes from a single demolisher that you didn't manage to take out, one ravager, one plasma vet squad etc.
For the very same reason, GKs are about as glass cannon as they get. Even my regular DE opponent says it's amazing how fragile GKs now feel. The transports got nerfed and they now have to rely on deepstriking, and this leaves them insanely vulnerable... You are staring at the T and armor waaaaaay too much and completely forgetting about points per model to gauge an army's durability correctly.
In general, IG are considered a tough army to annihilate, as are orks. Is it because of their insane armorsaves? Hardly... It's about the sick amount of models they put on the board. Now look at the model count of a GK army... It's vulnerable, very vulnerable... because every single casualty stings like nothing else.
So 2 of the things you listed as "strong characteristics" of a grey knight army might just be what I consider their biggest drawbacks so far.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/19 22:08:15
The boy, I say, the boy is as sharp as a sack of wet mice... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 14:25:08
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Powerful Phoenix Lord
|
ClockworkZion wrote: BoomWolf wrote:If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
I play Sisters and I can't even stand the 12ppm I pay for Battle Sisters. 20 points is highway robbery!
And Crisis Suits also have extra wounds.
I would gladly pay an extra 3 ppm to give my Guardians a 3+ armour save.
|
Greebo had spent an irritating two minutes in that box. Technically, a cat locked in a box may be alive or it may be dead. You never know until you look. In fact, the mere act of opening the box will determine the state of the cat, although in this case there were three determinate states the cat could be in: these being Alive, Dead, and Bloody Furious.
Orks always ride in single file to hide their strength and numbers.
Gozer the Gozerian, Gozer the Destructor, Volguus Zildrohar, Gozer the Traveler, and Lord of the Sebouillia |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 15:03:07
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
Happyjew wrote: ClockworkZion wrote: BoomWolf wrote:If you feel 20 PPM for a tac marine is too fragile imagin how I feel about my 53+ point crisis suits
(given, they ARE armed like gods for the price, and very mobile, but pretty squishable)
I play Sisters and I can't even stand the 12ppm I pay for Battle Sisters. 20 points is highway robbery!
And Crisis Suits also have extra wounds.
I would gladly pay an extra 3 ppm to give my Guardians a 3+ armour save.
Vets are roughly ~6ppm (maybe less if you assume their commander is more expensive). That puts Sisters at double their cost for that 3+ armor save and the change in wargear. But you add a single point and you get a CSM whose stateline trumps a Sisters, add another and you get a Tact Marine who gets Chapter Tactics for free. Compared to a Vet we get a lot for 6pts, but once Marines enter the picture you see how far off the pricing is. And we consider them to not be pointed fairly either, which only makes it worse when you realize how much is being paid to make that small upgrade versus how little they have to pay to upgrade over the Sisters.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 15:17:25
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Killer Klaivex
The dark behind the eyes.
|
ClockworkZion wrote:
Vets are roughly ~6ppm (maybe less if you assume their commander is more expensive). That puts Sisters at double their cost for that 3+ armor save and the change in wargear. But you add a single point and you get a CSM whose stateline trumps a Sisters, add another and you get a Tact Marine who gets Chapter Tactics for free. Compared to a Vet we get a lot for 6pts, but once Marines enter the picture you see how far off the pricing is. And we consider them to not be pointed fairly either, which only makes it worse when you realize how much is being paid to make that small upgrade versus how little they have to pay to upgrade over the Sisters.
I agree, but I think marine pricing is a big part of the issue.
They're on the elite end of troops - with 3+ saves, a statline of 4s, and a ton of special rules, yet they still cost less than 15pts per model.
It means that things below them start to get a bit 'squashed', if you see what I mean. I mean, Gaunts are on the opposite end, with a statline of 3s, a poor weapon and a save that's negated by most basic weapons. And, they cost 4pts per model. So, you've got just 10pts of space to cram in a variety of statines and rules between gaunts and marines. You have dark eldar and eldar - which are skilled but fragile, you have SoB, which are skilled and somewhat fragile (T3 but with a good save), Orks with a mixed statline (inc. T4 but a negligible save), Necron Warriors, CSM (marine statline, but lacking most of the marine goodies) etc.
I don't know, maybe I'm looking at this wrong, but it just seems like there isn't much space to properly represent the differences between troop choices.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/20 15:17:53
blood reaper wrote:I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote:Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote:GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
Andilus Greatsword wrote:
"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"
Akiasura wrote:I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
insaniak wrote:
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 15:32:31
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
I agree that the points costing system is a bit nuts right now, but I never could find a good way to fix it either.
I wouldn't mind it if Marines (and other Power Armor) wearers went up in cost as long as some kind of bonus came into effect to balance out their lower numbers. A 3+ just doesn't go as far as you think it would (or should) which is a large part of the reason GKSS are so bad: there really isn't any durability there.
Maybe if Power Armor had a free 6++, or gave a bonus to toughness or gave 6++ FnP or an extra wound or something it'd make the higher points cost of PA models more palatable, not to mention actually push them back up a bit to give some more breathing room for weaker models.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 15:39:47
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Killer Klaivex
The dark behind the eyes.
|
ClockworkZion wrote:I agree that the points costing system is a bit nuts right now, but I never could find a good way to fix it either.
I wouldn't mind it if Marines (and other Power Armor) wearers went up in cost as long as some kind of bonus came into effect to balance out their lower numbers. A 3+ just doesn't go as far as you think it would (or should) which is a large part of the reason GKSS are so bad: there really isn't any durability there.
Maybe if Power Armor had a free 6++, or gave a bonus to toughness or gave 6++ FnP or an extra wound or something it'd make the higher points cost of PA models more palatable, not to mention actually push them back up a bit to give some more breathing room for weaker models.
I think part of the problem is that 40k has done nothing but escalate. Armies are access to bigger and bigger guns - with many being AP2/3, yet few are actually paying a reasonable price for them. And, then you have the current vehicle-damage system - which rewards only the weapons with the best possible AP.
Rather than buffing power armour, I think it would be better to actually scale the game back a bit and reduce the power of a lot of weapons. Otherwise, we're just continuing the escalation.
|
blood reaper wrote:I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote:Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote:GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
Andilus Greatsword wrote:
"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"
Akiasura wrote:I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
insaniak wrote:
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 15:50:11
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
vipoid wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:I agree that the points costing system is a bit nuts right now, but I never could find a good way to fix it either.
I wouldn't mind it if Marines (and other Power Armor) wearers went up in cost as long as some kind of bonus came into effect to balance out their lower numbers. A 3+ just doesn't go as far as you think it would (or should) which is a large part of the reason GKSS are so bad: there really isn't any durability there.
Maybe if Power Armor had a free 6++, or gave a bonus to toughness or gave 6++ FnP or an extra wound or something it'd make the higher points cost of PA models more palatable, not to mention actually push them back up a bit to give some more breathing room for weaker models.
I think part of the problem is that 40k has done nothing but escalate. Armies are access to bigger and bigger guns - with many being AP2/3, yet few are actually paying a reasonable price for them. And, then you have the current vehicle-damage system - which rewards only the weapons with the best possible AP.
Rather than buffing power armour, I think it would be better to actually scale the game back a bit and reduce the power of a lot of weapons. Otherwise, we're just continuing the escalation.
Reducing the power of the guns only gets people using less of them, as the vehicle damage chart only really rewards AP1/2 to be used anyways (and honestly I like the current damage system, it balances things nicely.
Really I think the issue is that we have too many weapons that are mainly anti-tank that double down as anti-infantry (with large blasts and the like). Reducing them from large to small and small to a single shot (or multiple shots but at a reasonable number) might actually bet the better method for fixing the problem in that regard.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/20 16:37:04
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Killer Klaivex
The dark behind the eyes.
|
ClockworkZion wrote:
Reducing the power of the guns only gets people using less of them, as the vehicle damage chart only really rewards AP1/2 to be used anyways (and honestly I like the current damage system, it balances things nicely.
But that's the thing - you can't just escalate endlessly. You have to reign it in somewhere.
ClockworkZion wrote:
Really I think the issue is that we have too many weapons that are mainly anti-tank that double down as anti-infantry (with large blasts and the like). Reducing them from large to small and small to a single shot (or multiple shots but at a reasonable number) might actually bet the better method for fixing the problem in that regard.
I could definitely get behind that.
|
blood reaper wrote:I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote:Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote:GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
Andilus Greatsword wrote:
"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"
Akiasura wrote:I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
insaniak wrote:
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 03:25:34
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
ClockworkZion wrote:blaktoof wrote:I disagree. If a tac marine is 14 points, gaining deepstrike, a stormbolter, wc for the unit, psychic powers, psykout grenades, preferred enemy daemons, aegis, and a ap3 forcesword for 4 pts over the cost of a tac marine is insanely good.
Loses Bolt Pistol, and is currently 7ppm over a Tact Marine. It also loses a lot of versaility Tacts can have. Also you're counting being a Psyker twice (once for the powers a second for the WC), why? And we can assume at least some of those rules are basically Chapter Tactics and not counted in their total (and even if being a Psyker is, then it's likely spread across the full unit not on a single model).
if GKs are so bad maybe you should just play with space marines....you can use the same model and call them "made up chapter x" who has the chapter tactics of whatever chapter you want.
I counted psychic powers and WC separately because one you can basically double the effect of if you combat squad them.
they are 6 points more than a tac marine, at 20pts a model, the base unit is higher by 10 pts because they are required to take the stat upgrade for the units character, but the base model is 6 more.
they have a lot of extra special rules for 6 pts that are all useful.
I would gladly pay 6 pts for any model in any army I play to pick all of that up.
I am not sure what versatility tacs have that is so great that people are talking about, if they are so amazing why do we not see more tactical marines with all this versatility all over the place. Heck you could just take 3 terminators as your 1 troop in a NSF and then take SM allies for their chapter tactics and amazing tac marines, and stop complaining.
or we can be realistic and say strike squads are pretty damn good at 20pts a model, I would much rather get their abilities than be a khorne berzerker with a chain axe for twenty two points a model.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/21 03:27:45
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 04:01:13
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
blaktoof wrote:if GKs are so bad maybe you should just play with space marines....you can use the same model and call them "made up chapter x" who has the chapter tactics of whatever chapter you want.
Because some people don't "get it" let me break down why that is a really bad post:
I don't play Grey Knights. Hell I have a Sisters of Battle avatar and an Ecclesiarchy rank under my name. WTH do you keep thinking I play Grey Knights?
"Play something else" is not a valid post in Proposed Rules. If you can't offer actual commentary about the ideas being presented and instead want to tell people to play something you probably shouldn't be here because you're spamming, not helping.
blaktoof wrote:I counted psychic powers and WC separately because one you can basically double the effect of if you combat squad them.
That's a horrible justification honestly. They cost the game regardless how you take them and no one runs 6 squads of GKSS in a list so you always have the slots you need in Troops to just take another unit that has the same effect, which is better since you get another Justicar that way as well.
blaktoof wrote:they are 6 points more than a tac marine, at 20pts a model, the base unit is higher by 10 pts because they are required to take the stat upgrade for the units character, but the base model is 6 more.
I looked at some things today. A Space Marine Scout is cheaper than a Stormtrooper by two points. Hell a Stormtrooper is the same cost as a Battle Sister despite the worse save (most of the other stuff can be 1:1 like weapons, but the save is worse). The points costing in this game makes no sense from book to book and frankly I'm not going to try and justify it based on what a Tact Marine costs anymore: they cost too damn much for the internal balance of their book. That's all that really matters at the end of the day seeing as external balance on points costs doesn't really exist.
blaktoof wrote:I would gladly pay 6 pts for any model in any army I play to pick all of that up.
You know what else has a 6 point increase? Sisters over IG Vets. Yet it's a one point increase from a Sister to a CSM, and only another point to a Tactical Marine.
So, no I don't care that they get a lot in 6 points becuase I'd argue for small point upgrades Marines get relatively FAR more from Sisters to Tacts or even CSM to Tacts.
blaktoof wrote:I am not sure what versatility tacs have that is so great that people are talking about, if they are so amazing why do we not see more tactical marines with all this versatility all over the place. Heck you could just take 3 terminators as your 1 troop in a NSF and then take SM allies for their chapter tactics and amazing tac marines, and stop complaining.
Weapon options is the big thing. As are transport options. They have 3DTs to choose from and can carry weapons to help counter any army in the game.
blaktoof wrote:or we can be realistic and say strike squads are pretty damn good at 20pts a model, I would much rather get their abilities than be a khorne berzerker with a chain axe for twenty two points a model.
When we take into account the facts: GKSS are gak (also Berserkers are gak), so no, your point is still wrong.
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/21 04:02:10
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 04:04:52
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
|
Yet again, this is Proposed Rules, this is not "Go play a different army, you whiny sod." We're here operating under the assumption that the GK book is, if not the worst piece of crap in history, inadequate for what it purports to represent and the serial escalation of 40k has invalidated certain grandfather-clause assumptions (15pt power weapons/plasma pistols, the durability of the power-armoured body).
Last I checked the conclusions we'd come to were that fair nerfs to allow for points reductions to regular Strike Squads were changing the swords from Force Weapons to regular close combat weapons with 'reroll successful Inv saves against wounds inflicted by this weapon' and pegged standard PAGK at closer to 17-18ppm, change to two Attacks base (to avoid the confusing wording of old True Grit) possible, with revision to the psycannon profile for range/usefulness to power-armoured bodies and expanded heavy weapon selection to certain units still under discussion.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 04:16:33
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
AnomanderRake wrote:Yet again, this is Proposed Rules, this is not "Go play a different army, you whiny sod." We're here operating under the assumption that the GK book is, if not the worst piece of crap in history, inadequate for what it purports to represent and the serial escalation of 40k has invalidated certain grandfather-clause assumptions (15pt power weapons/plasma pistols, the durability of the power-armoured body).
Last I checked the conclusions we'd come to were that fair nerfs to allow for points reductions to regular Strike Squads were changing the swords from Force Weapons to regular close combat weapons with 'reroll successful Inv saves against wounds inflicted by this weapon' and pegged standard PAGK at closer to 17-18ppm, change to two Attacks base (to avoid the confusing wording of old True Grit) possible, with revision to the psycannon profile for range/usefulness to power-armoured bodies and expanded heavy weapon selection to certain units still under discussion.
Actually after looking at how poorly balanced points costs are across the game for sometimes drastically different models and units I'm down for just dropping their points regardless. If a Tact Marine can gain ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics for a single point over a CSM (who gets a drastically boosted statline over both Stormtroopers and Battle Sisters for a single point), then it shouldn't matter what the difference between Tact Marines and Grey Knights is because it's not being determined that way.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 04:30:26
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
|
ClockworkZion wrote: AnomanderRake wrote:Yet again, this is Proposed Rules, this is not "Go play a different army, you whiny sod." We're here operating under the assumption that the GK book is, if not the worst piece of crap in history, inadequate for what it purports to represent and the serial escalation of 40k has invalidated certain grandfather-clause assumptions (15pt power weapons/plasma pistols, the durability of the power-armoured body).
Last I checked the conclusions we'd come to were that fair nerfs to allow for points reductions to regular Strike Squads were changing the swords from Force Weapons to regular close combat weapons with 'reroll successful Inv saves against wounds inflicted by this weapon' and pegged standard PAGK at closer to 17-18ppm, change to two Attacks base (to avoid the confusing wording of old True Grit) possible, with revision to the psycannon profile for range/usefulness to power-armoured bodies and expanded heavy weapon selection to certain units still under discussion.
Actually after looking at how poorly balanced points costs are across the game for sometimes drastically different models and units I'm down for just dropping their points regardless. If a Tact Marine can gain ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics for a single point over a CSM (who gets a drastically boosted statline over both Stormtroopers and Battle Sisters for a single point), then it shouldn't matter what the difference between Tact Marines and Grey Knights is because it's not being determined that way.
We're trying to be fair; " GW doesn't care about balance" is no reason for us not to care about balance. Automatically Appended Next Post: (We do care about balance, by the way)
(Or at least I do)
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/21 04:30:47
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 04:59:35
Subject: Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis
On the Internet
|
AnomanderRake wrote: ClockworkZion wrote: AnomanderRake wrote:Yet again, this is Proposed Rules, this is not "Go play a different army, you whiny sod." We're here operating under the assumption that the GK book is, if not the worst piece of crap in history, inadequate for what it purports to represent and the serial escalation of 40k has invalidated certain grandfather-clause assumptions (15pt power weapons/plasma pistols, the durability of the power-armoured body).
Last I checked the conclusions we'd come to were that fair nerfs to allow for points reductions to regular Strike Squads were changing the swords from Force Weapons to regular close combat weapons with 'reroll successful Inv saves against wounds inflicted by this weapon' and pegged standard PAGK at closer to 17-18ppm, change to two Attacks base (to avoid the confusing wording of old True Grit) possible, with revision to the psycannon profile for range/usefulness to power-armoured bodies and expanded heavy weapon selection to certain units still under discussion.
Actually after looking at how poorly balanced points costs are across the game for sometimes drastically different models and units I'm down for just dropping their points regardless. If a Tact Marine can gain ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics for a single point over a CSM (who gets a drastically boosted statline over both Stormtroopers and Battle Sisters for a single point), then it shouldn't matter what the difference between Tact Marines and Grey Knights is because it's not being determined that way.
We're trying to be fair; " GW doesn't care about balance" is no reason for us not to care about balance.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
(We do care about balance, by the way)
(Or at least I do)
The point is that external balance isn't a focus (interal balance is most of the time) so arguing the cost relative to Tact Marines is pointless at this juncture and the focus should be on internal balance, because that is the issue that prompted the conversation about GKSS being overcost in the first place.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 05:25:27
Subject: Re:Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Do Grey Knights need more Internal Balance? Or External Balance? If the answer is internal Balance, amend the codex within your group yeah?
The easiest way, would be to give Grey Knights all of the Chapter Space Marine options.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 06:54:00
Subject: Re:Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter
|
Clefty wrote:Do Grey Knights need more Internal Balance? Or External Balance? If the answer is internal Balance, amend the codex within your group yeah?
The easiest way, would be to give Grey Knights all of the Chapter Space Marine options.
The heart of the matter! We are here to discuss, brainstorm, and otherwise hash out the how of the amendments, putting suggestions to the community to tease out better/more balanced adjustments.
As to internal vs. external balance both matter; we're not going to get somewhere perfect on either with simple adjustments (the way the dice work in 40k means it's nigh-impossible to get something on the extremes of individual scariness to be 'fair'), but we're going to do our best.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 07:50:41
Subject: Re:Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Regular Dakkanaut
|
Well, from what I have seen, attempting to attain both Internal and External balance is a fools errand.
If Chapter Tactics:Grey Knights is out of the question, then perhaps allowing them to take Heavy Support options from Codex: Space Marines might do the trick.
Now this would only work if the major beef with GK in their current rendition is their lack of anti-tank/flyer. If you want to make GK's more cost efficient, I would give them some form of statistical buff. Maybe WS:5 or the Crusader USR. Hell, maybe even both?
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/21 07:51:41
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 10:45:08
Subject: Re:Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Sword-Wielding Bloodletter of Khorne
|
Clefty wrote:Do Grey Knights need more Internal Balance? Or External Balance? If the answer is internal Balance, amend the codex within your group yeah?
The easiest way, would be to give Grey Knights all of the Chapter Space Marine options.
 what would be the point of playing vanilla marines then?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2014/09/21 10:54:01
Subject: Re:Balancing Grey Knights
|
 |
Killer Klaivex
The dark behind the eyes.
|
Clefty wrote:Do Grey Knights need more Internal Balance? Or External Balance? If the answer is internal Balance, amend the codex within your group yeah?
The easiest way, would be to give Grey Knights all of the Chapter Space Marine options.
And Codex One-upmanship rises again.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/21 10:54:29
blood reaper wrote:I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
the_scotsman wrote:Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
Argive wrote:GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
Andilus Greatsword wrote:
"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"
Akiasura wrote:I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
insaniak wrote:
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet. |
|
 |
 |
|