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.

1) You don't play, and I'm guessing haven't seen played, a "waac" GK army. Your army is essentially randomly chosen units. If you actually did play against an army of Eldar with units chosen at random, you'd notice that you'd end up with gak like Fire dragons on foot, avatars of khaine, storm guardians/dire avengers, support batteries, warithlords and all the other overpriced stuff that exists even in competitive codexes.

It is still much better then GK random stuff.

Yes. Even grey knights. If I take my "built for 8th ed" grey knights army with say, a stormraven full of draigo and some paladins, a pair of GMNDKs, and some interceptors, I'm going to beat the dude that bought a secondhand scatbike/wk list every single time.

Yeah, but it is never like that. People with random lists are rare, and it happens to people with armies that do not have a good list. I looked for 2 weeks before deciding to buy the GKs, couldn't find any GK lists and my friends were telling me to buy, so I can play. A random eldar lists vs a random GK list, is eldar win. And "waac" eldar doesn't even register playing vs GK, no matter what the GK player brought. I played with flyer eldar and the normal eldar soups, and I don't think running interceptors would have changed much.

Karol wrote:

1) You don't play, and I'm guessing haven't seen played, a "waac" GK army. Your army is essentially randomly chosen units. If you actually did play against an army of Eldar with units chosen at random, you'd notice that you'd end up with gak like Fire dragons on foot, avatars of khaine, storm guardians/dire avengers, support batteries, warithlords and all the other overpriced stuff that exists even in competitive codexes.

It is still much better then GK random stuff.

Yes. Even grey knights. If I take my "built for 8th ed" grey knights army with say, a stormraven full of draigo and some paladins, a pair of GMNDKs, and some interceptors, I'm going to beat the dude that bought a secondhand scatbike/wk list every single time.

Yeah, but it is never like that. People with random lists are rare, and it happens to people with armies that do not have a good list. I looked for 2 weeks before deciding to buy the GKs, couldn't find any GK lists and my friends were telling me to buy, so I can play. A random eldar lists vs a random GK list, is eldar win. And "waac" eldar doesn't even register playing vs GK, no matter what the GK player brought. I played with flyer eldar and the normal eldar soups, and I don't think running interceptors would have changed much.

Dont make claims like "With eldar even if you collected 2k pts by randomly picking units from their books, it would still be better then a WAAC GK list." if you don't want to be wrong. Because you are wrong. And you're doing it again, with "Yeah, but it is never like that. People with random lists are rare, and it happens to people with armies that do not have a good list."

people with "random" lists are rare, people with collections of units built for older editions are very, very common.

Just apparently not in groups of powergaming german teenagers.

You can not have possibly looked very hard. There is a 20+ page GK in 8th tactica, and you can search for "grey knights" in the army list forums and come up with plenty of GK lists. You bought a secondhand army for way more money than a brand new army you could have made in any configuration you wanted would have costed you. Grey Knights could come out with the most broken OP super-strong army book tomorrow, and and I'd bet you a thousand dollars that stuff like 2 rhinos for 5 power armored models, 15 randomly assorted terminators, draigo, crowe and one dreadknight would not make a list that's going to come close to scratching any faction's intelligently built army.

Why do people keep making GK threads? They're bad in 8th, and that's the ticket they'll be riding on until they get a massive redesign. To compound matters, the stratagem that just spits on them is in another codex, requiring that GK be rebalanced and also another codex be rebalanced.

I don't get it. Any complete army will trash GK. I have to add the word "complete" because some armies cannot create a complete list in and of themselves, and some one will always run in here and say "but, Inquisition!" even though they haven't been a standalone army in like a million years.

 Marmatag wrote:
Why do people keep making GK threads? They're bad in 8th, and that's the ticket they'll be riding on until they get a massive redesign. To compound matters, the stratagem that just spits on them is in another codex, requiring that GK be rebalanced and also another codex be rebalanced.

I don't get it. Any complete army will trash GK. I have to add the word "complete" because some armies cannot create a complete list in and of themselves, and some one will always run in here and say "but, Inquisition!" even though they haven't been a standalone army in like a million years.

Because they show what BS the whole " most playtested edition EVAR!!!!!! " claim was.

We were flat out promised gw had learnt their lesson and we wouldn't get a repeat of 7th, yet we have armies all over the shop again.

 Marmatag wrote:
Why do people keep making GK threads? They're bad in 8th, and that's the ticket they'll be riding on until they get a massive redesign. To compound matters, the stratagem that just spits on them is in another codex, requiring that GK be rebalanced and also another codex be rebalanced.

I don't get it. Any complete army will trash GK. I have to add the word "complete" because some armies cannot create a complete list in and of themselves, and some one will always run in here and say "but, Inquisition!" even though they haven't been a standalone army in like a million years.

People bandwagon onto a complaint and ride it into the ground over the course of several months. The other big one right now seems to be USRs. I can’t wait for the next bandwagon complaint.

I believe they are not really intended as a stand-alone army. They are, I believe, intended to be tacked into a general Imperial army as a detachment, possibly with IG or AM. They certainly aren't going to win many battles on their own!

meleti wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Why do people keep making GK threads? They're bad in 8th, and that's the ticket they'll be riding on until they get a massive redesign. To compound matters, the stratagem that just spits on them is in another codex, requiring that GK be rebalanced and also another codex be rebalanced.

I don't get it. Any complete army will trash GK. I have to add the word "complete" because some armies cannot create a complete list in and of themselves, and some one will always run in here and say "but, Inquisition!" even though they haven't been a standalone army in like a million years.

People bandwagon onto a complaint and ride it into the ground over the course of several months. The other big one right now seems to be USRs. I can’t wait for the next bandwagon complaint.

GK being awful isn't a bandwagon complaint, they are legitimately terrible.

But, i just don't see the need to rehash it every week. Yep, they're the worst codex army. Yep, they're arguably the worst army in the game.

It's just wasted energy at this point, complaining about a faction that will always be terriboo

 Marmatag wrote:

meleti wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Why do people keep making GK threads? They're bad in 8th, and that's the ticket they'll be riding on until they get a massive redesign. To compound matters, the stratagem that just spits on them is in another codex, requiring that GK be rebalanced and also another codex be rebalanced.

I don't get it. Any complete army will trash GK. I have to add the word "complete" because some armies cannot create a complete list in and of themselves, and some one will always run in here and say "but, Inquisition!" even though they haven't been a standalone army in like a million years.

People bandwagon onto a complaint and ride it into the ground over the course of several months. The other big one right now seems to be USRs. I can’t wait for the next bandwagon complaint.

GK being awful isn't a bandwagon complaint, they are legitimately terrible.

But, i just don't see the need to rehash it every week. Yep, they're the worst codex army. Yep, they're arguably the worst army in the game.

It's just wasted energy at this point, complaining about a faction that will always be terriboo

Storwmravens, Smite Spam and Conscript/Commisar spam were all rebalanced as part of community response to imbalance. That and tournament results. GW are sorta paying attention.

The difference being with weak things like GK is that they don't show up as dominating tournament results, and you don't have players using all factions complaining about OP rules from one faction. So there is less of an uproar becuase no one besides GK players care.

So... you have the dedicated players who keep making complaints and suggestions across the community until we see meaningful change. You call it annoying and a waste. I applaud them and wish I had the same energy, becuase frankly my GK are stored away waiting for the day when they are relevant again.

Spartacus wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:

meleti wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Why do people keep making GK threads? They're bad in 8th, and that's the ticket they'll be riding on until they get a massive redesign. To compound matters, the stratagem that just spits on them is in another codex, requiring that GK be rebalanced and also another codex be rebalanced.

I don't get it. Any complete army will trash GK. I have to add the word "complete" because some armies cannot create a complete list in and of themselves, and some one will always run in here and say "but, Inquisition!" even though they haven't been a standalone army in like a million years.

People bandwagon onto a complaint and ride it into the ground over the course of several months. The other big one right now seems to be USRs. I can’t wait for the next bandwagon complaint.

GK being awful isn't a bandwagon complaint, they are legitimately terrible.

But, i just don't see the need to rehash it every week. Yep, they're the worst codex army. Yep, they're arguably the worst army in the game.

It's just wasted energy at this point, complaining about a faction that will always be terriboo

Storwmravens, Smite Spam and Conscript/Commisar spam were all rebalanced as part of community response to imbalance. That and tournament results. GW are sorta paying attention.

The difference being with weak things like GK is that they don't show up as dominating tournament results, and you don't have players using all factions complaining about OP rules from one faction. So there is less of an uproar becuase no one besides GK players care.

So... you have the dedicated players who keep making complaints and suggestions across the community until we see meaningful change. You call it annoying and a waste. I applaud them and wish I had the same energy, becuase frankly my GK are stored away waiting for the day when they are relevant again.

So, let's pause for a moment.

I play Tyranids as my main army but I do advocate on behalf of armies that need a buff. You'll see me bounce into a thread and advocate for a buff to Grey Knights, or Space Marines in a general sense. (Although, I think Deathwatch and Blood Angels are significantly closer to balance than others). As well as a nerf to armies that are too strong - like Imperial Guard, or Dark Eldar.

I agree with the core premise that GK deserve a significant boost.
I further agree that the daemon stratagem is absolutely insulting to GK players.

Just don't see the point in discussing it here. The average poster on this forum doesn't play enough competitive games to have a basic understanding of what the problems are here. There are guys running around saying TAC marines are really, really good, and that they win spamming rhinos. How can you have a balance discussion like that? Or people who think giving paladins 2+ WS would suddenly make them great?

Unless you can find a way to have a productive balance discussion with this userbase, it's all just wasted energy. I'm on your side, just don't see this going anywhere meaningful. Because we've seen in a billion times.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm going to get a lot of flak for this post, but here we go.

GK need a buff in a few key areas.

1. Psychic phase - their current power set relative to the codex wherein they can be used is really, really bad. I would give these powers an average grade of a D. Gate of Infinity is barely useful, Astral Aim and Sanctuary are the two powers that really matter, but the fact that they're restricted to <GREY KNIGHTS> and only target 1 unit, as well as being 1 cast per turn, really hurt their overall utility.

My personal preference would be to expand their powerset to include all <ADEPTUS ASTARTES> powers - DA, BA, Vanilla, SW. Compare GK to daemons, where they have quite a bit to choose from, and some of those powers are flat baller status. I personally would completely rework smite in the context of GK. I would flat out take it away, in conjunction with the ability to cast a wider variety of powers, leaving smite as accessible to the actual GK HQs, but without the "Rites of Banishment" restrictions, so a Librarian might be more useful with a D3/D6 smite.

2. Basic Statlines - I would give them the attacks increase they deserve. Base 1 attack is grotesque for models that cost 21 points. Also, I would give Paladins T5. Yes, i am aware that this is very similar to Custodes. No, it's not the same, not until Paladins can take a freaking Stormshield and mix&match wargear the way Custodes do, and have access to Custodes stratagems.

3. Wargear - Their wargear needs a rework, the psilencer is pathetic, the psycannon should be 2 damage without question, and the incinerator is just too expensive, or should be higher range. I would revamp all of this, as well as their weapons in melee. I would also replace the storm bolter with a Grey Knights stormbolter which is strength5.

4. Access to more Datasheets - GK are flatly limited in what they can bring. Is there a reason they can't bring FW? Or, perhaps why they can't use Primaris? It's not like people are falling all over themselves to bring primaris anyway.

There are a lot of changes I would make. To me it begins and ends with the psychic phase. Their stratagems are awful too, but that requires creating new content as opposed to re purposing what already exists.

But why tell people to stop? This is a discussion forum, if you don't think peoples wishlisting is meaningful just don't post. Its not hurting anyone.


I don't tend to take part in this sort of thing very often either, but telling people that their discussion on various ideas is 'a waste' is kind've rude and obnoxious to be blunt. Especially when you then go ahead and post your own ideas as if they hold so much more significance.

Well since gw is to scared to open forums like every other games company people only have here to vent their frustrations.

Nastavious wrote:
considering their current state is pretty bad and everything else has had at least some thing this year, and almost everything was updated with the big FAQ its kinda sad they are just left here with nothing.

I've heard a lot about GK current rules, haven't played a game of 8th with mine yet, are they that bad?

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Nastavious wrote:
considering their current state is pretty bad and everything else has had at least some thing this year, and almost everything was updated with the big FAQ its kinda sad they are just left here with nothing.

I've heard a lot about GK current rules, haven't played a game of 8th with mine yet, are they that bad?

even a cursiory review of the codex will tell you they are in fact "that bad"

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Nastavious wrote:
considering their current state is pretty bad and everything else has had at least some thing this year, and almost everything was updated with the big FAQ its kinda sad they are just left here with nothing.

I've heard a lot about GK current rules, haven't played a game of 8th with mine yet, are they that bad?

GK are the only army with a Codex that’s not much more powerful than they were in the Index. Sure, they got an HQ DreadKnight no one wanted, but they also got nerfed with price increases, Daemon respawn Stratagem, the Beta Deep Strike rule, they original Index power never got corrected. So yeah, it’s that bad.

SJ

Dont make claims like "With eldar even if you collected 2k pts by randomly picking units from their books, it would still be better then a WAAC GK list." if you don't want to be wrong. Because you are wrong. And you're doing it again, with "Yeah, but it is never like that. People with random lists are rare, and it happens to people with armies that do not have a good list."

Maybe not every list. But most random eldar lists would, beat GK lists. And all normal have a good chance to beat the best GK lists. And by good I don't mean those FW , quad detachment lists at tournaments, vs those GK have nothing to bring, because there are no tournament winning GK list. The tournaments I have seen don't even have GK players, and I by tournaments I mean those large events with 50-100people.


No idea what germans have to do with anything. Sure no one likes them, but it is really not related to w40k or Grey Knights.

 Delvarus Centurion wrote:

Nastavious wrote:
considering their current state is pretty bad and everything else has had at least some thing this year, and almost everything was updated with the big FAQ its kinda sad they are just left here with nothing.

I've heard a lot about GK current rules, haven't played a game of 8th with mine yet, are they that bad?

They’re fragile, expensive, relatively slow, rely on deep striking which now (beta rules) is restricted on turn 1, they’ve got a mediocre chapter tactic, only one psychic discipline, and their stratagems aren’t very special.

GK aren’t unplayably bad, but they’re the clearcut worst codex army and it’s hard to identify a unique strength they have over the other five or so super Space Marine books.

Karol wrote:

Not everyone is playing in a WAAC environment, and surprising as it may seem to some people, quite a few players collect armies they like the aesthetics of, which is quite important imho if you're gonna be spending a lot of time assembling and painting the miniatures.

Ok, but how non waac does an enviroment have to be for an army like GK to be considered equal to something like eldar or IG? There would have to be like tiers of rules added to the "good" armies, to make it possible.

A codex with poor external balance will still have its problems in more casual environment, but they're easier to overcome because there's wider scope to outplay "stronger" factions. the_scotsman already spoke to this, balance between army books matters more at a top competitive level than a casual one, because the gaps in player skill, experience, and game knowledge are much narrower.

the_scotsman wrote:People with "random" lists are rare, people with collections of units built for older editions are very, very common.

This. Most people in my gaming group have armies built from collections they've built up over the years -- one chap still occasionally plays with the same space marine army he's had since 3rd ed., a light breeze could stomp that list in 8th ed. Not that we don't also see armies built specifically for 8th too, one of the guys runs a top-level tournament netlist, but he doesn't really understand why it's built the way that it is, so it doesn't perform "optimally".

A codex with poor external balance will still have its problems in more casual environment, but they're easier to overcome because there's wider scope to outplay "stronger" factions. the_scotsman already spoke to this, balance between army books matters more at a top competitive level than a casual one, because the gaps in player skill, experience, and game knowledge are much narrower.

So how would an IG army that is ok to face with GK look like?

Karol wrote:

So how would an IG army that is ok to face with GK look like?

Maybe I'm not putting my point across clearly enough -- I'm not saying there's a threshold in which the GK book is suddenly as good as the "top tier" ones. My point is that some people collect their faction for reasons other than the competitive value of their codex, and that they can do fine in their games because they're not always playing against competitive players with competitive lists. I'm not here to do scenario-building for a IG-GK game, you should head over the GK tactica thread for that kind of specific advice. It sucks for you that you're playing a weak codex against power-gamers, but pointing out that other people aren't sharing your miserable time isn't the same as saying the GK book is fine as is.

Karol wrote:

A codex with poor external balance will still have its problems in more casual environment, but they're easier to overcome because there's wider scope to outplay "stronger" factions. the_scotsman already spoke to this, balance between army books matters more at a top competitive level than a casual one, because the gaps in player skill, experience, and game knowledge are much narrower.

So how would an IG army that is ok to face with GK look like?

The ones I typically see at my club the GK usually fare just fine against:

-tank company list with primarily leman russ tanks, some forgeworld addons, militarum tempestus as troops. This list has good firepower, but is vulnerable to being tied up in melee,

-mechanized steel legion list, with Hellhound tanks, sentinels, infantry squads and bullgryn squads in chimeras.

and for eldar

-Iyanden wraith list. Highly elite, but also better suited for dealing with heavy vehicles than elite infantry with invuln saves. This has wraithblades, wraithlords, and wraithknights.

-Biel Tan aspect host list. Has stuff that works really well against GK like Shining Spears and Dark Reapers, but has other aspects that don't work well like Swooping Hawks and Striking Scorpions. GK low strength high volume firepower does pretty good against all the T3 bodies as well.

Are these competitively minded lists? No. But they're collections people have built and maintained over the years, and they are exactly the style of play that the game works best at, when theme is more important than pure power and your army book doesn't disqualify you from being allowed to play the game.

I LOL at the notion that a tank list is going to struggle against GK because of being tied up in melee. You either have to take Rhinos (which are already at 72 points a pop and therefore taking up a chunk of an already small army) or rely on Deep Strike with First To The Fray, which is already only a 50% chance to make the charge.

 nurgle5 wrote:

Karol wrote:

So how would an IG army that is ok to face with GK look like?

Maybe I'm not putting my point across clearly enough -- I'm not saying there's a threshold in which the GK book is suddenly as good as the "top tier" ones. My point is that some people collect their faction for reasons other than the competitive value of their codex, and that they can do fine in their games because they're not always playing against competitive players with competitive lists. I'm not here to do scenario-building for a IG-GK game, you should head over the GK tactica thread for that kind of specific advice. It sucks for you that you're playing a weak codex against power-gamers, but pointing out that other people aren't sharing your miserable time isn't the same as saying the GK book is fine as is.

This person has it right. I'm a grey knight player, and mostly just because of the fluff... I'm ok with them not being top tier just some minor adjustments so to bring them closer to the mean... So I just want GW to bring up the lower armies a little bit and bring down the higher armies a bit so the spread of power isn't so large... then at the casual level where people like me like to play the armies will be roughly similar and then the tournament players who can maximize their builds can still sort out what is best/not best and play competitively,

Honestly from a casual level I feel like giving them access to the space marine discipline (since I find I run out of powers to cast), give their HQ choices regular smite, and rebalance the warlord traits/relics so they are a little closer in power. mix that in with a couple point adjustments in CA and that would be enough for 90% of the market. or at least the type of player I tend to run into the most in my meta... not crazy competitive but still uses points over PL and thinks about their list.

The problem is there is no contract between strangers that dictates someone should bring a list they don't normally play, or want to play, for the sake of their opponent's enjoyment.

Balance issues exist in casual games, as well, and that's part of the major problem here. Grey Knights get trounced in casual games unless there is some serious effort to balance the lists on the part of both players.

But hey, i'm glad they work for you.

 Marmatag wrote:
The problem is there is no contract between strangers that dictates someone should bring a list they don't normally play, or want to play, for the sake of their opponent's enjoyment.

Balance issues exist in casual games, as well, and that's part of the major problem here. Grey Knights get trounced in casual games unless there is some serious effort to balance the lists on the part of both players.

But hey, i'm glad they work for you.

I'm not really sure where the survivorship bias thing is coming from, Flamephoenix182 acknowledged that GK have problems, half their post was about how in an ideal world the power spread wouldn't be so large and a list of suggestions to make the improve the competitive lot of the faction. Some of their suggestions are quite similar to the ones you posted earlier. Any clarification would be appreciated.

Flamephoenix182 wrote:
I'm a grey knight player, and mostly just because of the fluff...

Heresy!

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I LOL at the notion that a tank list is going to struggle against GK because of being tied up in melee. You either have to take Rhinos (which are already at 72 points a pop and therefore taking up a chunk of an already small army) or rely on Deep Strike with First To The Fray, which is already only a 50% chance to make the charge.

as all the ork players figured out very early on in the edition, charging with a full-dice reroll and a willingness to use a CP reroll if you roll a 5 or a 6 on one die and still fail is about a 73% chance.

The list in question typically has 3 good size squads of interceptors hiding behind whatever terrain is available, a warlord GMNDK and an allied battalion for CPs, shunts the interceptors, gates the GMNDK, and charges with everything leading with the GMNDK to try and soak up overwatch.

I've seen it played against the all-tank list with extremely good effect, I don't know what to say.

 nurgle5 wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
The problem is there is no contract between strangers that dictates someone should bring a list they don't normally play, or want to play, for the sake of their opponent's enjoyment.

Balance issues exist in casual games, as well, and that's part of the major problem here. Grey Knights get trounced in casual games unless there is some serious effort to balance the lists on the part of both players.

But hey, i'm glad they work for you.

I'm not really sure where the survivorship bias thing is coming from, Flamephoenix182 acknowledged that GK have problems, half their post was about how in an ideal world the power spread wouldn't be so large and a list of suggestions to make the improve the competitive lot of the faction. Some of their suggestions are quite similar to the ones you posted earlier. Any clarification would be appreciated.

Flamephoenix182 wrote:
I'm a grey knight player, and mostly just because of the fluff...

Heresy!

Haha I know right? But yeah I didn't realize that Survivor ship post was potentially responding to me...
To clarify I was mostly just disputing that Grey Knights (and all the weaker armies) need to be massively rebalanced and shoot them up to top tier. It doesn't matter really anyways I used to play lots of minis games that were way for focused on the competitive side and the faction balance was very tight. People still had "garbage" tier armies and "top" tier armies just because there will always be small mathematical advantages.... and that's a good thing it is a way to keep the tourney players who want that ultra competitive experience engaged as they always look for the next meta counter.
The idea I was getting across is the goal should be to get each army close enough in power level that those effects are not very noticeable at the casual stage where they are not making the ideal in game decisions, so they can have a relatively even game. no need to massively shake up the tourney meta by going "Oh it's GK turn to be powerful... and doing a massive re-balance to bring them above the curve instead of below"

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I LOL at the notion that a tank list is going to struggle against GK because of being tied up in melee. You either have to take Rhinos (which are already at 72 points a pop and therefore taking up a chunk of an already small army) or rely on Deep Strike with First To The Fray, which is already only a 50% chance to make the charge.

as all the ork players figured out very early on in the edition, charging with a full-dice reroll and a willingness to use a CP reroll if you roll a 5 or a 6 on one die and still fail is about a 73% chance.

The list in question typically has 3 good size squads of interceptors hiding behind whatever terrain is available, a warlord GMNDK and an allied battalion for CPs, shunts the interceptors, gates the GMNDK, and charges with everything leading with the GMNDK to try and soak up overwatch.

I've seen it played against the all-tank list with extremely good effect, I don't know what to say.

How many Orks exist for a single Strike Grey Knight again? Keep in mind they will probably drop a point when the codex comes out.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I LOL at the notion that a tank list is going to struggle against GK because of being tied up in melee. You either have to take Rhinos (which are already at 72 points a pop and therefore taking up a chunk of an already small army) or rely on Deep Strike with First To The Fray, which is already only a 50% chance to make the charge.

as all the ork players figured out very early on in the edition, charging with a full-dice reroll and a willingness to use a CP reroll if you roll a 5 or a 6 on one die and still fail is about a 73% chance.

The list in question typically has 3 good size squads of interceptors hiding behind whatever terrain is available, a warlord GMNDK and an allied battalion for CPs, shunts the interceptors, gates the GMNDK, and charges with everything leading with the GMNDK to try and soak up overwatch.

I've seen it played against the all-tank list with extremely good effect, I don't know what to say.

How many Orks exist for a single Strike Grey Knight again? Keep in mind they will probably drop a point when the codex comes out.

I do not understand how you're equating the cost of grey knights versus orks to my statement about how your odds figure for charging out of deep strike with a reroll was off by more than 25%.

You can just say "whoops, I was wrong, this tactic is in fact a more reliable way to get into combat than I initially estimated." You don't HAVE to pretend we were discussing something completely different to try and save yourself E-Peen points.

How do you stop interceptors from dieing on turn 1? Anything that draws line of sight to them kills them dead. And with knights being the newest army, it is impossible to get LoS blocking terrain vs them as they see everything, specially with most knight players mounting high banners on top of their knights to draw LoS better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 nurgle5 wrote:

Karol wrote:

So how would an IG army that is ok to face with GK look like?

Maybe I'm not putting my point across clearly enough -- I'm not saying there's a threshold in which the GK book is suddenly as good as the "top tier" ones. My point is that some people collect their faction for reasons other than the competitive value of their codex, and that they can do fine in their games because they're not always playing against competitive players with competitive lists. I'm not here to do scenario-building for a IG-GK game, you should head over the GK tactica thread for that kind of specific advice. It sucks for you that you're playing a weak codex against power-gamers, but pointing out that other people aren't sharing your miserable time isn't the same as saying the GK book is fine as is.

There is no GK tactica. I don't know what a power gamer is, only one of my opponents plays at any form of tournaments, the rest plays maybe at store events, some even don't do that. Everyone else seems to have fun with their lists, and not everyone has the best of the best set ups, mostly because of fear of nerfs or not being able to buy stuff like 100 firewarriors. I get it 350$ is not the same as 1000$, and that a later will always be better. But why there is a huge difference between 350$ and 500$ ?
And from what people seem to be saying GW is going to take time till december to fix GK stuff, only they don't say a thing how they will fix it. The last CA, I have been told, was ment as fix to stuff too. Maybe it was, no idea how armies changed after it, but the GK stuff in the book was nothing like a fix, it shouldn't even qualify as an errata.

Isengard wrote:
I believe they are not really intended as a stand-alone army. They are, I believe, intended to be tacked into a general Imperial army as a detachment, possibly with IG or AM. They certainly aren't going to win many battles on their own!

You’re right: they used to be Grey Knights+Inquisition+Assasins. And they had been like that since 3rd edition...aka as long as Tau and Necrons have existed as armies. It wasn’t until GW got greedy in 6th/7th with the mini-dexes and allies that GK lost all of that.