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.

And you're ignoring mine: the only thing that we can say about current Space Wolves is that we don't have all their rules yet so it's too soon to say they're as bad off as Grey Knights.

Saying a codex is as bad off as an index army speaks more about the problems of the codex over the problems of the index army that is still waiting for an update.

You don’t even seem to understand my point which has nothing to do with codex versus index.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Gk definitely are a low-tier army. I collected a lot them, I converted 95% of my army. I feel let down.

I'm not saying we need a top-tier tourney busting broken list. But when I see seasoned veteran players struggling against a young newb with an army made up entirely of Starter Set marines plus whatever he found in the second-hand box, you know there is a problem.


Hypothetically, if GK kept their rules 100% as they are, how many points would they actually need to be to make them a viable, but pretty average, army? I'd have to say 18 points per model for a strike squad including their storm bolter.

Too many points, SM players would (just like last edition) point at the force weapons and go, we get a bolter at 13ppm (are bolters 1 point in addition?) why should you get a psychic powers, a better power sword, and a stormbolter for only 4 more points than us! This of course ignoring that Tactical Squads suck, but you know double standards.

To actually make GK different and worth the points, they need stat increases that COMPLEMENT their loadout, they need to differentiated not cheaper. Universal WS2+, Paladins get BS2+ AND an additional wound, all HQs need to drop 20 points in price EXCEPT GMDK, Chaplains need to be re-roll of 1's to WOUND not hit, all HQs get full-smite, Brother-Captain instead of doubling smite range can use the psychic power of GK within 6 inches to increase his stats, make Libbies the ones who double smite range and make it so they can double dip past the rule of 1, make GK techmarines useful by making it so if they are present all AP weapons are treated as 1 less, make Crowe 5 points because he still wouldn't be worth taking at that point cost.

Stuff like this could make GK work perfectly fine at their point costs.

Why would GK Techmarines give a stupid bonus like that and not regular ones?

The last 2 was me just throwing ridiculous stuff out.

Or do you think Crowe at 5 points is fair? Its free Warlord for the opponent afterall.

As for techmarines, why would anyone take them anymore? They weren't even taken beforehand, not even in vehicle heavy armies because techmarines as a whole are a failure of design in 8th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know maybe that is the balance we needed with Guilliman to begin with, make it so vehicle's require a Techmarine (or equivalent) to access rerolls to hit and wound.

problem with tech marines is keeping up with the vehicles they're assigned to. if it was easier to make/get a bike mounted tech marine they might be more popular

 Quickjager wrote:


To actually make GK different and worth the points, they need stat increases that COMPLEMENT their loadout, they need to differentiated not cheaper. Universal WS2+, Paladins get BS2+ AND an additional wound, all HQs need to drop 20 points in price EXCEPT GMDK, Chaplains need to be re-roll of 1's to WOUND not hit, all HQs get full-smite, Brother-Captain instead of doubling smite range can use the psychic power of GK within 6 inches to increase his stats, make Libbies the ones who double smite range and make it so they can double dip past the rule of 1...

This would make me a lot happier as GK player as at the moment my GK's are going on the shelf.

 Quickjager wrote:
The last 2 was me just throwing ridiculous stuff out.

Or do you think Crowe at 5 points is fair? Its free Warlord for the opponent afterall.

As for techmarines, why would anyone take them anymore? They weren't even taken beforehand, not even in vehicle heavy armies because techmarines as a whole are a failure of design in 8th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know maybe that is the balance we needed with Guilliman to begin with, make it so vehicle's require a Techmarine (or equivalent) to access rerolls to hit and wound.

Crowe needs something on his weapon basically. Even something simple as AP-1 would go a long way as long as he can keep generating attacks.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
The last 2 was me just throwing ridiculous stuff out.

Or do you think Crowe at 5 points is fair? Its free Warlord for the opponent afterall.

As for techmarines, why would anyone take them anymore? They weren't even taken beforehand, not even in vehicle heavy armies because techmarines as a whole are a failure of design in 8th.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know maybe that is the balance we needed with Guilliman to begin with, make it so vehicle's require a Techmarine (or equivalent) to access rerolls to hit and wound.

Crowe needs something on his weapon basically. Even something simple as AP-1 would go a long way as long as he can keep generating attacks.

Crowe has always been a joke with that weapon. Why can he not keep the blade of antwyr in a sheath and use a nemesis force sword? He would be way better with that 1 change.

I like the proposed changes above. Rework out hqs, our points do need an adjustment. I would keep strike squads where they are... It's the terminators that need to be reworked.

Purgation squad bodies should be cheaper since they can't deep strike (-2pts).

Why are Purifiers 26 points? Strikers or any other model with the same stat line (except -1 Ld) are only 19 points? I can't imagine a 3" smite that does 1d6 damage could be worth almost 50% more than a normal baby smite and the loss of the ability to deep strike as well.

 Primark G wrote:
You don’t understand my point. GK and SW were both top tier in fifth edition.

That doesn’t matter. In an ideal world, EVERY army would have the potential to be top tier. It’s not some rotation where every army gets to be the best for a bit.
Moreover, you’re missing everyone else’s point: that the GK codex isn’t fluffy, let alone competitive. We aren’t asking to be OP, we aren’t asking to be dominating the top tables the way Eldar are. All we want is the same treatment AM, Death Guard, and Custodes got: a codex that reflects the background of the army, and gives us more than one decent option for list building.

Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

Custodes are the same kind of army as Greyknights. GK should have similar battlefield performance - just with more psychic focus rather than everyone being an indomitable hero focus. You could probably fix the GK codex by just using the custodes army as a primer and just reducing the similar greyknight units because they are obviously worse and cost more. These are pretty obvious gripes. Your perpetual support for the trash armies was funny for a bit but now I just grow tired of it.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

Not the cool Dreadkights

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

Not the cool Dreadkights

They have a pretty mean looking FW contemptor which I am sure once it gets rules will rek a GMDK with relative ease.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

Not the cool Dreadkights

Custodes Dreadnoughts have Storm Shields and Great Swords. : (

SJ

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

So my point is valid.

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

Not the cool Dreadkights

Custodes Dreadnoughts have Storm Shields and Great Swords. : (

SJ

If you play 30k.

 Primark G wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Primark G wrote:
Then shouldn’t the title say:

"Any other Grey Knight players salty about the AM, Death Guard, and Custodes (etc.) rules?"

While that COULD be true, Custodes basically got anything that Grey Knights needed or even wanted.

So my point is valid.

No? "Could" and "should" mean different things, and the point of the people complaining about GK is that Custodes have essentially filled their niche, by being able to do everything that GK want to be able to do except actually being effective at it. AM, Death Guard, etc can be good at doing different things without it having anything to do with Grey Knights, and while I'm sure there are plenty of players salty about GK being not very good in general, Custodes being effective at what GK players see as their "schtick" is like pouring salt in the wound.

I don’t agree with Custodes being like GK. They are different in many ways such as GK primary focus on daemons.

 Primark G wrote:
I don’t agree with Custodes being like GK. They are different in many ways such as GK primary focus on daemons.

Do they? Because daemons got a stretgem that allows them to bring back to life a unit killed by a greyknights unit for 2 CP. It seems to me the daemons specialize in killing greyknights.

I meant looks, i said it was cooler hahaha

 Primark G wrote:
I don’t agree with Custodes being like GK. They are different in many ways such as GK primary focus on daemons.

You do not have to agree in order to be incorrect.

They are similar but not exact.

Having read this thread and your responses I have to presume you are simply trolling at this point?

No I’m not. The title says are any GK players upset about the new rules for Custodes. Someone said it’s not about Custodes they just wish in general GK got good rules citing several armies. It has been shown why GK and Custodes are not all that similar according to background. Look at Space Marines - they have several multi wound elite units such as terminators and Centurions both with different flavors. To me Grey Knights are a lot more like Space Marines as opposed to Custodes. Custodes have no single wound units like for example Strike Squads, Purifiers or Purifiers. So I understand that players don’t like their codex but claiming they should be as good as Custodes doesn’t make sense to me.

Here is an outsiders opinion: I have played Orks now for a good enough time to know GW favour factions and codex while leaving other factions out. I mean look at the stompa for the biggest (in more than 1 way) example of gw not even trying! So the idea that gw has created a bunch of new models around a faction, I'm sure many of the 40k devs are hyperventilating over, and also made them a little too good in comparison to another faction who play a similar role (also to sell these new models) is not outside, to me, the realmx of belief.

Other great examples can be seen in the form of razorbacks being cheaper than ork trukks for a while or marine dreadnoughts being cheaper than Ork dreadnoughts. So to me GK sound like they got shafted this edition alongside Deathwatch players. Gw can do elite armies right they just decided to kill them off to make their new elite army look cooler.

My opinion please have mercy on me as a Ork Mech Player.

 Primark G wrote:
No I’m not. The title says are any GK players upset about the new rules for Custodes. Someone said it’s not about Custodes they just wish in general GK got good rules citing several armies. It has been shown why GK and Custodes are not all that similar according to background. Look at Space Marines - they have several multi wound elite units such as terminators and Centurions both with different flavors. To me Grey Knights are a lot more like Space Marines as opposed to Custodes. Custodes have no single wound units like for example Strike Squads, Purifiers or Purifiers. So I understand that players don’t like their codex but claiming they should be as good as Custodes doesn’t make sense to me.

Nobody cares about frickin fluff. You can go to the Background section for that. We are looking strictly at crunch.

Deathwatch haven't gotten a codex yet so they may recover from this unlike the Grey Knights who are back in the queue for their next update sometime after all the codexes are out.

If anyone deserves an 8.5 codex it's GK. At this point any errata or FAQ that would be needed to make them playable would likely be so big it would be hard to navigate.

 Primark G wrote:
No I’m not. The title says are any GK players upset about the new rules for Custodes. Someone said it’s not about Custodes they just wish in general GK got good rules citing several armies. It has been shown why GK and Custodes are not all that similar according to background. Look at Space Marines - they have several multi wound elite units such as terminators and Centurions both with different flavors. To me Grey Knights are a lot more like Space Marines as opposed to Custodes. Custodes have no single wound units like for example Strike Squads, Purifiers or Purifiers. So I understand that players don’t like their codex but claiming they should be as good as Custodes doesn’t make sense to me.

To be fair, there was a time when the GK were entirely a Terminator based chapter, and have long been in the running for the most ultra elite Imperial army, particularly with the advent of Paladins in 5E, but even before that under the Daemonhunters codex, their fluff was always that they were the most ultra elite heavy infantry army out there in concept, regardless of tabletop performance.

That said, yeah, the Custodes should be in a league of their own, the issue is that they do squeeze the GK's out of a spot they traditionally filled because for 30 years the Custodes weren't much more than a rarely used background element that was never intended to see the table.

I think the stratagem pretty balanced.

It costs 2 CP, which is not nothing, and we are speaking of an army able to do 3 mortal wounds per unit on deamons, so quite a big deal. You will have to priorize and be smart on your target choosing in order to avoid the use of this stratagem on big units.