Switch Theme:

Chapter approved rumors  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
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.




Made in us
Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant






 kastelen wrote:
 themoob wrote:
Suzuteo wrote:
What about AdMech? They probably have the second worst codex after Grey Knights.


*laughs in Space Marine*

AdMech are a better combat army than Black Templar...

Yes but space marines have guilliman parking lot which is a lot better than cawl and admech AT.


Reread Cawls reroll rule.

He let's guys reroll any die. Roll a 3 but there's a - 1 which would make you fail? Reroll!
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





Cinderspirit wrote:


We dont need changes every 2 weeks. But maybe every 2-3 months would be cool. And you will always face guys who dont know all rules and changes. It happens all the time in esports aswell. Someone takes a break for a month, and after that he will have to adapt to new things. I am all for regular updates, and I think GW gets enough data through events and the internet.


Well we get changes already every 4th month.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in ru
Longtime Dakkanaut



Moscow, Russia

Suzuteo wrote:


Ryza is the poster boy for this problem. The dogma is RR1 to wound in fighting. The stratagem is +1 to wound and +1D for shooting plasma. The WLT lets you buff a non-relic weapon by 1. But none of the CC units have plasma weapons and none of the warlords are particularly good at CC, nor can they take a plasma weapon. And the relic? Not that you can even use the WLT on it, but it's a volkite gun, one that you will never take because literally only one of our stratagems works on warlord shooting anyway (and it's an interceptor-style shooting attack).
.


It's designed for Vanguard and Ruststalkers
   
Made in us
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus






Alcibiades wrote:
Suzuteo wrote:

Ryza is the poster boy for this problem. The dogma is RR1 to wound in fighting. The stratagem is +1 to wound and +1D for shooting plasma. The WLT lets you buff a non-relic weapon by 1. But none of the CC units have plasma weapons and none of the warlords are particularly good at CC, nor can they take a plasma weapon. And the relic? Not that you can even use the WLT on it, but it's a volkite gun, one that you will never take because literally only one of our stratagems works on warlord shooting anyway (and it's an interceptor-style shooting attack).

It's designed for Vanguard and Ruststalkers

If so, it was a terrible way to do it.
   
Made in us
Aspirant Tech-Adept






I play necxons and CSM. Unless CA2018 has something really relevant for them I think I'll pass on GW's annual tax on 40k players.

"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura. 
   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

Well, it sounds like there is going to be some additional options for Space Marines (Imperial Fists at least) in Chapter Approved to allow them to use the Power Fist in the Imperial Fists Primaris Upgrades

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in ua
Fresh-Faced New User




 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Well, it sounds like there is going to be some additional options for Space Marines (Imperial Fists at least) in Chapter Approved to allow them to use the Power Fist in the Imperial Fists Primaris Upgrades


Source?
   
Made in nl
Blood-Drenched Death Company Marine





The Netherlands

The Imperial Fists holiday box set has IF upgrade sprues, which seem to contains a powerfist, shown on the Intercessor Sergeant on the left:

Spoiler:

   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

shuul wrote:
 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Well, it sounds like there is going to be some additional options for Space Marines (Imperial Fists at least) in Chapter Approved to allow them to use the Power Fist in the Imperial Fists Primaris Upgrades


Source?
Warhammer 40K Facebook. I said I hoped there would be an expansion book for Imperial Fists that allowed them to use the Power Fist. They said there isn't an expansion book coming, but Chapter Approved may have new rules in it (with an ellipsis at the end, implying that it IS the case).

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer



London

That's actually great news. I've been thinking how useful it would be to have a decent melee weapon on an intercessor sergeant. Wonder if my crimson fists will be allowed it too.

It's a little worrying that he's forgotten his bolt rifle. Hopefully that'll be optional - as it is for the DA guys with power swords and stuff.

It does put a bit of a nail through reivers if intercessors are so significantly better than them in melee. Reivers are pretty awful anyway and I don't like them much, so that's kind of ok.
   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

Mandragola wrote:
That's actually great news. I've been thinking how useful it would be to have a decent melee weapon on an intercessor sergeant. Wonder if my crimson fists will be allowed it too.

It's a little worrying that he's forgotten his bolt rifle. Hopefully that'll be optional - as it is for the DA guys with power swords and stuff.

It does put a bit of a nail through reivers if intercessors are so significantly better than them in melee. Reivers are pretty awful anyway and I don't like them much, so that's kind of ok.
They explicitly said that Crimson Fists will be able to use the Power Fist.

And if you are worried about the Power Fist and the Bolt Rifle, there is always the right arm that has the Bolt Rifle slung over the shoulder and a bolt pistol in the hand. I think that crappy thing is that the Power Fist and the Plasma Pistol from the Hellblasters kit are on the same arm, so you can't parts-build a Plasma Pistol and Power Fist Captain, at least not without parts modification.

My only concern is that they could be talking about the character creation rules for Open Play in regard to using the Power Fist. I hope not, but you never know.

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer



London

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Mandragola wrote:
That's actually great news. I've been thinking how useful it would be to have a decent melee weapon on an intercessor sergeant. Wonder if my crimson fists will be allowed it too.

It's a little worrying that he's forgotten his bolt rifle. Hopefully that'll be optional - as it is for the DA guys with power swords and stuff.

It does put a bit of a nail through reivers if intercessors are so significantly better than them in melee. Reivers are pretty awful anyway and I don't like them much, so that's kind of ok.
They explicitly said that Crimson Fists will be able to use the Power Fist.

And if you are worried about the Power Fist and the Bolt Rifle, there is always the right arm that has the Bolt Rifle slung over the shoulder and a bolt pistol in the hand. I think that crappy thing is that the Power Fist and the Plasma Pistol from the Hellblasters kit are on the same arm, so you can't parts-build a Plasma Pistol and Power Fist Captain, at least not without parts modification.

My only concern is that they could be talking about the character creation rules for Open Play in regard to using the Power Fist. I hope not, but you never know.

Great. I might need a bigger pot of red paint, if my guys are going to have massive fists from now on.

I doubt it'll be just for character creation. Intercessor sergeants aren't characters, for one thing. They'd be pretty mad to bring out an actual sprue that would see hardly any use.

Sticking the power fist and plasma pistol on a captain looks like a very simple conversion, so I'm not too worried about that. Gun swaps can be done just with a scalpel. You actually get the pistol, fist and a captain in the box, so you're good to go. I wouldn't have any trouble making an intercessor sergeant with a bolt rifle and fist either, if needed, though that's a little trickier as many of the rifles in the set have left hands moulded on.

The harder thing would be removing the captain's left arm to take the power fist instead.

Overall I'm feeling pretty happy about the state of my crimson fists at the moment. I'd been able to do reasonably ok with them under the current rules, so with points cuts and a bit of extra functionality they ought to be playable. They are probably my best looking army at the moment too.
   
Made in us
Chaplain with Hate to Spare





Sioux Falls, SD

Just use the arm bit from the Intercessor kit that has the slung bolt rifle. It is a right arm.

I hope you are right about the Intercessor Sergeant being able to take the Fist in Matched Play.

I have a Power Fist and Plasma Pistol Captain already, but I might want to make my own for another army like my Deathwatch or Blood Angels.

But really, this kit did put the final nail in the coffin of Reivers. Especially if the rumored Indomitus Veterans Stratagem is true. Intercessors will have more attacks and better melee AND shooting options. They really messed up by not letting the Grapnel Launchers work on Charge.

Given the rumor that Space Marine Special Characters are getting some points reductions, putting Pedro Kantor with a bunch of Intercessors (Indomitus Veterans for added punch) sounds like a grand idea. Rerolling misses, 4 attacks each (5 Power Fist attacks on the Sergeant), throw in a Lieutenant for some added punch, and you have a cheap, but very hard hitting unit there.

5250 pts
3850 pts
Deathwatch: 1500 pts
Imperial Knights: 375 pts
30K 2500 pts 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer



London

I'm thinking the same thing about Kantor. I think I might get the new Calgar model to convert into him. That would require a little work but would be worth it, I reckon.
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Terminator with Assault Cannon






IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.
   
Made in fi
Courageous Space Marine Captain






Mandragola wrote:

It does put a bit of a nail through reivers if intercessors are so significantly better than them in melee. Reivers are pretty awful anyway and I don't like them much, so that's kind of ok.
I really don't understand why they don't let the Reiver sergeants to take the melee weapons; the same upgrade bits fit them than the Intercesors. It is completely crazy, like they want them to be terrible.

   
Made in us
War Walker Pilot with Withering Fire




 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


I have a personal theory that people tend to put more weight to thinking an army is underpowered when they own it, and stronger when they don’t. It’s like loss aversion - you’re more likely to remember when your opponent pulled off that crazy manouver to destroy you than if he tried and failed. I also suspect that’s why the SM fanbase has been complaining so loudly this edition - they got a middle-tier army through most of it and that feels weak.
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Steelcity

 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


Tournaments are a good example of what is "good" or "bad". If you lose most of your games against competitive armies played by skilled opponents then generally there are only 3 options. Your army is bad, you are not skilled or both :p Its an unfortunate truth that a lot of wargamers won't accept.

Take football, for example, if your team goes 1-15 for the year then you are a *bad* team. However if your professional team wanders over to a High School field and beats every high school team in the area that doesn't mean your team is good, it means your opponents are just that much worse than you are.

Grey Knights *are* a terrible army based on game results, model rules and points. Just because they may win in your local scene only really means the local scene isn't very strong.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/11/26 15:39:12


Keeper of the DomBox
Warhammer Armies - Click to see galleries of fully painted armies
32,000, 19,000, Renegades - 10,000 , 7,500,  
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.

Honestly, if you can't beat Grey Knights with AdMech, that says a lot about how low of skill you have as a player. You have zero excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


I have a personal theory that people tend to put more weight to thinking an army is underpowered when they own it, and stronger when they don’t. It’s like loss aversion - you’re more likely to remember when your opponent pulled off that crazy manouver to destroy you than if he tried and failed. I also suspect that’s why the SM fanbase has been complaining so loudly this edition - they got a middle-tier army through most of it and that feels weak.

Pray tell what Grey Knights players are missing out on in their codex they just NEVER noticed even though the codex has been out for a year.

In fact do me one better. Tell all of us what we're doing wrong in the Grey Knights Tactica. I'll even give you the link to make your life easier.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727042.page
Chapter Approved won't be out for a while, so your tactical genius should serve us well before we have to readjust. Looking forward to your post!

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/11/26 15:50:12


CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Archmagos Veneratus Extremis






Home Base: Prosper, TX (Dallas)

New reserve rules killed GK. They are slightly over costed and have meh strats but reality is that the reserve adjustments killed them dead as doornails. Deathwatch now do what they could do so much better. CA can't come soon enough for GK.

That said Admech isn't so much a point issue as a lack of synergy AND low unit choice.

Best Painted (2015 Adepticon 40k Champs)

They Shall Know Fear - Adepticon 40k TT Champion (2012 & 2013) & 40k TT Best Sport (2014), 40k TT Best Tactician (2015 & 2016) 
   
Made in gb
Stubborn Dark Angels Veteran Sergeant






Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.

Honestly, if you can't beat Grey Knights with AdMech, that says a lot about how low of skill you have as a player. You have zero excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


I have a personal theory that people tend to put more weight to thinking an army is underpowered when they own it, and stronger when they don’t. It’s like loss aversion - you’re more likely to remember when your opponent pulled off that crazy manouver to destroy you than if he tried and failed. I also suspect that’s why the SM fanbase has been complaining so loudly this edition - they got a middle-tier army through most of it and that feels weak.

Pray tell what Grey Knights players are missing out on in their codex they just NEVER noticed even though the codex has been out for a year.

In fact do me one better. Tell all of us what we're doing wrong in the Grey Knights Tactica. I'll even give you the link to make your life easier.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727042.page
Chapter Approved won't be out for a while, so your tactical genius should serve us well before we have to readjust. Looking forward to your post!


It's genuinely remarkable how vile you are on this forum.

My hobby instagram account: @the_shroud_of_vigilance
My Shroud of Vigilance Hobby update blog for me detailed updates and lore on the faction:
Blog 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





When your opponent fails to beat you: It's because *you* are awesome. Despite him having the better army. You're just that good.

When you fail to beat your opponent: It's because *he* sucks so bad he goes WAAC and chooses an OP army. If it were a fair game, you'd obviously win.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.

Honestly, if you can't beat Grey Knights with AdMech, that says a lot about how low of skill you have as a player. You have zero excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


I have a personal theory that people tend to put more weight to thinking an army is underpowered when they own it, and stronger when they don’t. It’s like loss aversion - you’re more likely to remember when your opponent pulled off that crazy manouver to destroy you than if he tried and failed. I also suspect that’s why the SM fanbase has been complaining so loudly this edition - they got a middle-tier army through most of it and that feels weak.

Pray tell what Grey Knights players are missing out on in their codex they just NEVER noticed even though the codex has been out for a year.

In fact do me one better. Tell all of us what we're doing wrong in the Grey Knights Tactica. I'll even give you the link to make your life easier.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727042.page
Chapter Approved won't be out for a while, so your tactical genius should serve us well before we have to readjust. Looking forward to your post!


It's genuinely remarkable how vile you are on this forum.

What's even more vile is telling people who received a poor codex that their codex is fine and offer nothing of substance after that.

I merely provided the Tactica thread so they can tell us players what we are doing wrong that their local champs avoid, and of course those people are clearly better and have more insight than any "competitive" tournament player.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.

The only thing you need to do to beat greyknights is brings your best unit. Kastellan Robots. 18 shots per turn Str6 ap-2 ignore cover and your T7 with a 2+ save (basically immune to GK only real weapon - storm bolters) Each makes up it's points in strike marines in a single shooting phase. They are really an extremely OP unit.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Powerful Phoenix Lord





Dallas area, TX

From a certain point of view, what some players could be doing "wrong" is treating this game as a super competitive balanced game, instead of what it was designed to be: just a casual way to throw dice and have fun with high quality toy soldiers.

If you expect every army to be at least middle-tier, you will be disappointed. As long as there is more than 1 Faction, there will always be a top and bottom tier. It sucks that it is GKs at the bottom right now, but the "gap" is certainly not near as bad as the prior edition's tiers

Both "sides" of this have valid points. GKs have issues and could have been designed better, yes. But they are "playable" in a casual setting, i.e. they're "fine". Not great, and I would avoid trying to win tourneys, but they win enough in casual games to still be a fun army if you talk it out with you opponent.

I think we should all avoid putting down other's opinions just because we strongly disagree with them

-

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/26 16:45:08


   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





These are great reasons to spin up threads in the Tactica or General Discussion subthreads.

(And I appologize, I got sucked in and commented off-topic above.)

The only new thing I've seen for the last *week* seems to be that GW mentioned it breifly?
   
Made in us
Devestating Grey Knight Dreadknight







 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


lol.

(Now for the full sentence to avoid having my post removed due to low effort comments)

You really need to step back and look at the game overall. You say they aren't winning tournaments but that doesn't mean they are bad, well how about the fact that no one is playing them in the first place... because they suck. Even before tournaments were happening post-IG_Codex people were antsy about how Grey Knights played because they were literally worse marines at the time. Fast forward to today you now can only take 3 GMNDK, can't deepstrike turn one, and have in fact the worse codex regardless what you think.

EDIT: For the record in 8th I have a positive win rate over 22~ games, but that is honestly because I do try to be competitive in the first match against new people, which meant when 8th first came out I was using my Scions as an ally force, drop plasma was pretty op. Also most of the people I fought were Necrons who in turn are not incredibly powerful.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/11/26 17:10:07


 SHUPPET wrote:

wtf is this buddhist monk ascendant martial dice arts crap lol
 
   
Made in us
War Walker Pilot with Withering Fire




Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.

Honestly, if you can't beat Grey Knights with AdMech, that says a lot about how low of skill you have as a player. You have zero excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


I have a personal theory that people tend to put more weight to thinking an army is underpowered when they own it, and stronger when they don’t. It’s like loss aversion - you’re more likely to remember when your opponent pulled off that crazy manouver to destroy you than if he tried and failed. I also suspect that’s why the SM fanbase has been complaining so loudly this edition - they got a middle-tier army through most of it and that feels weak.

Pray tell what Grey Knights players are missing out on in their codex they just NEVER noticed even though the codex has been out for a year.

In fact do me one better. Tell all of us what we're doing wrong in the Grey Knights Tactica. I'll even give you the link to make your life easier.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727042.page
Chapter Approved won't be out for a while, so your tactical genius should serve us well before we have to readjust. Looking forward to your post!


It's genuinely remarkable how vile you are on this forum.

What's even more vile is telling people who received a poor codex that their codex is fine and offer nothing of substance after that.

I merely provided the Tactica thread so they can tell us players what we are doing wrong that their local champs avoid, and of course those people are clearly better and have more insight than any "competitive" tournament player.


Bro, I never said Grey Knights were "fine." (Actually, I agree that they're one of the bottom-tier armies right now.) You seem very intent on reading things as personal slights against you when they're nothing of the sort.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut




HuskyWarhammer wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.

Honestly, if you can't beat Grey Knights with AdMech, that says a lot about how low of skill you have as a player. You have zero excuses.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
HuskyWarhammer wrote:
 oni wrote:
IMO, it's a 99.999% armchair generals who are simply looking at tournament representation who are saying <Faction> is bad.

I know a couple of Grey Knights players who actively play (and in local tournaments) and they do incredibly well against all manner of opponents. Grey Knights are not bad at all let alone the worst codex. Just because they're not winning tournaments doesn't mean that they're bad.

Necrons; while I have little play experience against them (really only one game - which I lost because Forge World), I do watch a lot of battle reports on YouTube and they seem fine to me.

AdMech... Yes, there are some serious deficiencies here IMO, but I may be bias because this is the faction I'm primarily playing at the moment. However, I still win about half of my games overall and consistently place in the top 50% in my local tournaments. FYI, I have not been able to beat Grey Knights with AdMech in 8th edition; ever.


I have a personal theory that people tend to put more weight to thinking an army is underpowered when they own it, and stronger when they don’t. It’s like loss aversion - you’re more likely to remember when your opponent pulled off that crazy manouver to destroy you than if he tried and failed. I also suspect that’s why the SM fanbase has been complaining so loudly this edition - they got a middle-tier army through most of it and that feels weak.

Pray tell what Grey Knights players are missing out on in their codex they just NEVER noticed even though the codex has been out for a year.

In fact do me one better. Tell all of us what we're doing wrong in the Grey Knights Tactica. I'll even give you the link to make your life easier.
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/727042.page
Chapter Approved won't be out for a while, so your tactical genius should serve us well before we have to readjust. Looking forward to your post!


It's genuinely remarkable how vile you are on this forum.

What's even more vile is telling people who received a poor codex that their codex is fine and offer nothing of substance after that.

I merely provided the Tactica thread so they can tell us players what we are doing wrong that their local champs avoid, and of course those people are clearly better and have more insight than any "competitive" tournament player.


Bro, I never said Grey Knights were "fine." (Actually, I agree that they're one of the bottom-tier armies right now.) You seem very intent on reading things as personal slights against you when they're nothing of the sort.

Your post was basically defending his view point on Grey Knights, so I'm challenging that. Simple.

CaptainStabby wrote:
If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.

 jy2 wrote:
BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.

 vipoid wrote:
Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?

 MarsNZ wrote:
ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





That's a non-sequitor.

To simplify the conversation:

-Oni posted two claims: (1) that GK aren't that bad, and (2) that many people on the forums don't know what they're talking about.
-Husky backed the theory that many people on the forums don't know what they're talking about, at least as far as claiming people often don't see balance objectively. In other words, he backed claim #2.
-You railed on Husky for supporting claim (1).
   
 
Forum Index » News & Rumors
Go to: