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.

Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Karol wrote:


You know people were saying the same thing before the last update, and no such thing happened. And from what people were telling me about last 2-3 editions, the state of GK did not improve much, they keep being the weakest or one of the weakest army every edition.

Well, that was pure wish listing expectations.

The proof will be in the pudding come December.

If you’re interested in Primaris, then Deathwatch are a great way to run an all-primaris army. Space Woofs, Dark Angels and Blood Angels can all sorta do it but Deathwatch do it the best.

 Quickjager wrote:
Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Soooo...Model with better rules and equipment and identical stats should cost same as worse?

Sheesh GK are in bad shape now but that's ridiculous. Guess some people are always "we were treated badly so I want REVENGE and screw others in return"

Na, tacticals are bad, everyone thinks that, god forbid a 1 attack 1 wound model 3+ save model have some bite for its point cost. Oh wait that is right GK aren't allowed that.

 Quickjager wrote:
Na, tacticals are bad, everyone thinks that, god forbid a 1 attack 1 wound model 3+ save model have some bite for its point cost. Oh wait that is right GK aren't allowed that.

But... No marines get better than that for its point cost.

Tacticals are the jack of all trades but the master of none.
Today, more specialized Marines or Scouts are better game-wise.

 wuestenfux wrote:
Tacticals are the jack of all trades but the master of none.
Today, more specialized Marines or Scouts are better game-wise.

Sure, but just because Tacticals are poor doesn't mean GKs should cost the same with twice the firepower, force weapons, and psychic powers

Agreed, and he's not saying "GKs are over priced and are proably only worth about 13 PPM" he's saying "Grey Knights need to cost only what marines cost" which is REDICULAS

 Quickjager wrote:
Na, tacticals are bad, everyone thinks that, god forbid a 1 attack 1 wound model 3+ save model have some bite for its point cost. Oh wait that is right GK aren't allowed that.

So fix the tacticals rather than make grey knights cost same with better stuff. Make equal price and how that makes tacticals look? Eh? Surely then tacticals are fine!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wuestenfux wrote:
Tacticals are the jack of all trades but the master of none.
Today, more specialized Marines or Scouts are better game-wise.

So why would you take tacticals if for SAME PRICE you get twice the firepower, psychic abilities and force weapons which last time I checked are more mean than base tactical attacks...

You are basically saying "forget idea of better stuff costing more than weaker". So basically you are throwing whole point system to garbage bin.

 Quickjager wrote:
Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Hah, no.
Come back when vanilla marines get psychic powers, force weapons and stormbolters, which are statistically better than bolters.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Hah, no.
Come back when vanilla marines get psychic powers, force weapons and stormbolters, which are statistically better than bolters.

Not at double the cost, comparing to a tactical. When GK have same or lower resiliance comparing to normal marines. Also Force Weapons are "good" only if we play in a magical realm where GK somehow get the ability to charge across the table in a single turn, and there is no chaff in game.

Karol wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Hah, no.
Come back when vanilla marines get psychic powers, force weapons and stormbolters, which are statistically better than bolters.

Not at double the cost, comparing to a tactical. When GK have same or lower resiliance comparing to normal marines. Also Force Weapons are "good" only if we play in a magical realm where GK somehow get the ability to charge across the table in a single turn, and there is no chaff in game.

Neither of them are good, we all know that. But it's patently obvious that if we disregard points costs a normal GK is better than a Tactical Marine.

Karol wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Hah, no.
Come back when vanilla marines get psychic powers, force weapons and stormbolters, which are statistically better than bolters.

Not at double the cost, comparing to a tactical. When GK have same or lower resiliance comparing to normal marines. Also Force Weapons are "good" only if we play in a magical realm where GK somehow get the ability to charge across the table in a single turn, and there is no chaff in game.

Cheaper than they currently are, sure. But not at the same cost as a tactical marine.

Karol wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Quickjager wrote:
Until GK cost the same as Vanilla marines, while retaining all their rules and equipments, they will never be anything more than literal bottom of the barrel.

Hah, no.
Come back when vanilla marines get psychic powers, force weapons and stormbolters, which are statistically better than bolters.

Not at double the cost, comparing to a tactical. When GK have same or lower resiliance comparing to normal marines. Also Force Weapons are "good" only if we play in a magical realm where GK somehow get the ability to charge across the table in a single turn, and there is no chaff in game.

Well duh nobody says double. But here we have guy that claims GK don't deserve to cost even ONE point more than tacticals. That's silly.

You people are so pedantic. GK Strikes are not worth twice a Tactical Marine, even with all of their bling, because their bling is situationally useless. If it with just down to Stormbolters versus Bolters, the Bolters win due to 2 Tacticals having twice the Wounds as 1 Strike. The Psychic power system in 8th is hot garbage for GK, making that portion of the inflated cost useless. And without the same rules as other melee oriented armies, GK Force weapons are an equally useless cost inflation. Two Tacticals might not be worth 26 points, but a Strike is definitely not worth 22 points. That is the crux of the problem.

GK are point costed and balanced around not being targetable outside of 24”. Unfortunately, they have no rules that make them hard to target at range.

GK are point costed and supposedly balanced around getting into melee, but don’t have the ability to get into melee without getting thorn apart before the Charge, a strong chance of failing the Charge, and not enough base attacks to make the Charge worth attempting despite the other two problems. Simply the put, GK are missing rules they are paying for.

The fix GK is either a realignment of points to more realistically represent what they can do, or the addition of rules to support what they are already paying for. GW have failed so far to produce either.

SJ

Just to toss in..

When I see some GK players they don’t have any army that allows them to be successful on the field, and I’m not talking Rules, but speaking of models. So many times I have someone tell me they have 2K GK, but they have a Landraider, a Termi squad, a Dread Knight, and Kaldor Draigo, and a squad of unpainted Purgation, and wonder why they don’t win much.

If your serious about the Grey knights, work on your force, play a lot and play hard, and learn them better than anyone else, and then still be prepared to lose at times with them. But you will win games also and people will say… “I thought GK’s were underpowered. WTF”

Reemule - So you're answer to the GK problem is "just get better"? I can tell you that if we're just talking about mono GK then you have no idea what the reality of the situation is.

Not counting vehicle weapons GK have a max range of 24". They have 1 weapon that is S7 and it does 1 pt of damage with a -1AP. GK's main "heavy weapon" has a range of 24" AP0 and d3 damage. With those short ranges most of the time the model carrying the weapon has to move so they are at -1 to hit from the get go.

They have psychic abilities that are limited by the one use per turn rule and most of the offensive ones don't have the ability to select a target but must be used on the closest enemy unit. They have a smite that has shorter range than almost anyone else's and only does 1 point (except against daemons). The bigger smite option is limited to a 3" range and is only offered on 3 units.

GK has no CP recursion and no way to start with more CP than their detachments + battle forged. Even their better stratagems are over costed for their use with the exception of "only in death" which is 1 point less than in most armies.

These are probably the most obvious flaws in their design and I'm sure someone else can add to the list. If you think that you can win consistently with a mono-GK build (say 40%+ win rate at large events) then please show the rest of us how it is done.

You can't mess with GK points too much because of what they bring to the table (SBs, force weapons and psychic powers), so it's pointless asking for a huge point decrease. What you have to look at instead is how to boost the rules for GKs so that extra bling actually matters.

#1 Stormbolters. Already a great weapon, now just drop the psybolt strategem to 1CP and you're good.
#2 Force Weapons. Actually pretty damn good, problem is the 1 attack. Bump all base Grey Knights to 2 attacks base, Terminators to 3 and Paladins to 4. Just look at Custodes for their number of attacks per base.
#3 Psychic. Tougher to balance when the entire army is psykers. Without spending a lot of thought on it, I'd say keep Rites of Banishment as is (don't forget that it doesn't get harder to cast like other armies for each successive attempt), but allow the unit to cause D3 mortal wounds on a roll greater than 10 (which will be a 10+ due to brotherhood of psykers rule). Also don't underestimate the sheer number of Deny the Witch attempts they get. Vs daemons, it should be D3 wounds and only flat 3 when above 10 (and Daemons need to lose the strat that allows them to return vs Grey Knights, that is ridiculous)

Librarians should get full smite, period

Most of the other fixes needs to be the poorly (or rushed) thought out Strategems, warlord traits and relics. If SW can get a downloadable sheet to replace their traits, the GK can too. If farming is going to still be a thing, then one of the traits should get it. Unyielding Anvil might be best for that, add a 5+ return CP when strategem used or in the very least make the morale work on Imperium units, not just Grey Knights. Hammer of Righteousness and Nemesis Lord should be combined into single trait...+1 to wound and +1 damage with non relic weapons.

Strategems are really weak tbh. Psychic onslaught, psybolt ammunition and finest hour should all drop to 1 CP. The aegis should be buffed (it's rather weak) that perhaps if the deny is successful that the Psyker casting power also suffers 1 mortal wound. D3 mortal wounds might be too much, but maybe not....GKs need to get some serious teeth back and be scary, so yeah, make it D3 mortal wounds.
Other than that, they just need additional strategems, like at least another 8.

The relics are just God awful and need to be completely reworked. not even going to touch this one right now.

Psychic powers. Purge Soul is crap because GKs don't really have a way of debuffing enemy Ld, so you are never going to get a decent net difference unless you allow the GK player to roll 2D6 and pick highest. gate is fine and can happen Turn 1. hammerhand is fine too when all GK attack characteristics are bumped by 1. Sanctuary is fine too except it should also increase armour save by 1 to a max of 2+ too (like Eldar Protect).

Anyway, that would be at least a starting point for me.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Reemule - So you're answer to the GK problem is "just get better"? I can tell you that if we're just talking about mono GK then you have no idea what the reality of the situation is.

Basically yes.

And I'm standing by my answer.

And I don't care about GK over preforming or under preforming. They under preform. You GK players can't even agree why they seem to under preform from my not comprehensive look at this.

And to further clarify before a freakout... GK's shouldn't get fixed till they do some stuff like Iron out the macro level issues about stuff like Soup and CP, so they have the system they want, and then GK's can get fiddled around with.

But going back to the point about K's getting fixed, even with a fix half the GK players would still explain how stupid bad they are. So why bother.

But "get good" isn't an answer it's nothing more than a lazy person's excuse for not knowing the answer to a conundrum. It doesn't matter why anyone thinks that their army is bad all you have to do is show, through actually evidence, that it is better than what they think.

I'm not freaking out but why should GKs have to wait until the game is fixed in other places before they are made competitive in the current itineration of the game? Why can they not be brought into line now and adjusted as needed when/if GW ever brings the game into a better balance.

I agree that even if you make the GKs better, through whatever means, there will always be someone crying that it's not enough. But that's besides the point and using that as an excuse so you don't have to fix them is another lazy out.

How about putting your energy where your mouth is and come up with a try solution or show everyone how wrong they are? Otherwise you're just blowing smoke and wasting everyone else's time.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
But "get good" isn't an answer it's nothing more than a lazy person's excuse for not knowing the answer to a conundrum. It doesn't matter why anyone thinks that their army is bad all you have to do is show, through actually evidence, that it is better than what they think.

I'm not freaking out but why should GKs have to wait until the game is fixed in other places before they are made competitive in the current itineration of the game? Why can they not be brought into line now and adjusted as needed when/if GW ever brings the game into a better balance.

I agree that even if you make the GKs better, through whatever means, there will always be someone crying that it's not enough. But that's besides the point and using that as an excuse so you don't have to fix them is another lazy out.

How about putting your energy where your mouth is and come up with a try solution or show everyone how wrong they are? Otherwise you're just blowing smoke and wasting everyone else's time.

Nope.

I feel it was Off topic enough to answer what I did. I don't know what will fix GK. All i know if that GK players don't either.

There needs to be a Goodwin's law, or a Moore's law of gaming. Call it the gamer Law. Players are terrible at balance. And they don't think they are.

But back on topic, this person is asking what they should do with GK. Buy them, play them, enjoy them, ignore the whiners on dakka dakka, and expect that there is going to be some level of difficulty in winning with them at some events right now.(this last point could change at any moment)

In my opinion, the issues with GK when compared to other SM is a lack of special/heavy weapons, spicifically Plasma weapons. General lack of AP at range. Primaris Marines also can make for a good force multiplier (2W models with AP-1 on their base guns).

I feel like if GKs had a more diverse access of weapons or just a base increase of attacks without the need to take Falchions then the point cost could be justified.

Reemule wrote:

Players are terrible at balance. And they don't think they are.

Amen to that!

Everyone is an armchair game designer. Reality is most of the house rules people have that they think would fix things would actually be terrible.

Stux wrote:

Reemule wrote:

Players are terrible at balance. And they don't think they are.

Amen to that!

Everyone is an armchair game designer. Reality is most of the house rules people have that they think would fix things would actually be terrible.

At least they're trying. Better than pretending nothing is wrong, speaking of which:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Reemule wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Reemule - So you're answer to the GK problem is "just get better"? I can tell you that if we're just talking about mono GK then you have no idea what the reality of the situation is.

Basically yes.

And I'm standing by my answer.

And I don't care about GK over preforming or under preforming. They under preform. You GK players can't even agree why they seem to under preform from my not comprehensive look at this.

And to further clarify before a freakout... GK's shouldn't get fixed till they do some stuff like Iron out the macro level issues about stuff like Soup and CP, so they have the system they want, and then GK's can get fiddled around with.

But going back to the point about K's getting fixed, even with a fix half the GK players would still explain how stupid bad they are. So why bother.

Actually they ALL agree why the army underperforms. And why should players of a whole army wait until you feel soup gets fixed even though that's clearly not the issue? Fixing soup doesn't fix the army whatsoever.

Also your last paragraph there shows you don't actually care and are looking to troll.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Stux wrote:

Reemule wrote:

Players are terrible at balance. And they don't think they are.

Amen to that!

Everyone is an armchair game designer. Reality is most of the house rules people have that they think would fix things would actually be terrible.

At least they're trying.

Except they aren't really a lot of the time. Its often not about finding the best solution, it's often about everyone feeding their ego by fighting to put their own pet idea on top. It turns into a Skub war lasting 30 pages where no one agrees on anything.

If you like Grey Knights play Grey Knights. The game foes through power spikes. Grey Knights could be horrible now, but in 9th edition or 8.5, they could be the next powerhouse. You're the one building and painting them, make sure you play what you enjoy. If you're playing to win and playing to be competitive then you're going to be spending a lot more and swapping armies between events. If you bring Grey Knights and you play someone at your local store and say, hey man I'm playing Grey Knights and not looking for a competitive game, do you mind next time playing without your Castellan? More so then none people will gladly put away their competitive META army to have a fun game.

 plark wrote:
If you like Grey Knights play Grey Knights. The game foes through power spikes. Grey Knights could be horrible now, but in 9th edition or 8.5, they could be the next powerhouse. You're the one building and painting them, make sure you play what you enjoy. If you're playing to win and playing to be competitive then you're going to be spending a lot more and swapping armies between events.

Only the spikes seem to happen for GK in 2-3 editions intervals aka GK are god every 7-8 years. Telling someone who just have to wait that long, and maybe then they will be good is crazy. Most people don't even play the game that long.

If you bring Grey Knights and you play someone at your local store and say, hey man I'm playing Grey Knights and not looking for a competitive game, do you mind next time playing without your Castellan? More so then none people will gladly put away their competitive META army to have a fun game.

And at my store all opponents would tell me that they have one 2k pts army and in that army castellan is a substential part of the points, and they don't want to play less then 2000pts. May as well go around and try to ask around to find people that play narrative games. In UK that maybe a thing, but in Poland I have heard of narrative games only mentioned as part of making fun of odd western meta.

Yeah, the idea of people actually enjoying the game is hilarious.

Karol wrote:

 plark wrote:
If you like Grey Knights play Grey Knights. The game foes through power spikes. Grey Knights could be horrible now, but in 9th edition or 8.5, they could be the next powerhouse. You're the one building and painting them, make sure you play what you enjoy. If you're playing to win and playing to be competitive then you're going to be spending a lot more and swapping armies between events.

Only the spikes seem to happen for GK in 2-3 editions intervals aka GK are god every 7-8 years. Telling someone who just have to wait that long, and maybe then they will be good is crazy. Most people don't even play the game that long.

If you bring Grey Knights and you play someone at your local store and say, hey man I'm playing Grey Knights and not looking for a competitive game, do you mind next time playing without your Castellan? More so then none people will gladly put away their competitive META army to have a fun game.

And at my store all opponents would tell me that they have one 2k pts army and in that army castellan is a substential part of the points, and they don't want to play less then 2000pts. May as well go around and try to ask around to find people that play narrative games. In UK that maybe a thing, but in Poland I have heard of narrative games only mentioned as part of making fun of odd western meta.

Karol we've all been over this with you ad nauseum.

Your gaming group sounds like the most toxic one in existence. It's not a valid representation of the community in general. It's not uncommon for people to want fun less competitive games.

GW has changed significantly in the last year or so. None of the previous editions can be used as evidence for how GW will handle things in the future. It's clear they are working to balance the game in a way they never have before.

By the time it would take a normal person with a job and a mild social life to buy, build and paint an entire GK army, it's very likely GK will be better than they are now. In fact it's almost impossible that they wouldn't be.

They do need a full codex rewrite, but it's very plausible that a year from now they'll have one.