PDA

View Full Version : Should GK only be Good Against Demons?



Pages : [1] 2

Nicha11
04-02-2009, 09:29
I've heard people argue that if Grey Knights are redone they should be good against demons, but average against everything else.

I am completely against this, who would choose to play such an unbalanced army???

How would GK players feel knowing they have an automatic advantage versus demons, but an auto disadvantage against others.

What does the rest of Warseer think?

Hellebore
04-02-2009, 09:35
From a background point of view, because their sole remit is fighting daemons, their gear would not be optimal against non daemonic adversaries. They expanded their arsenal for the daemonhunters codex specifically to make them a balanced army, despite their extremely specialised role.

However, it is possible to do both without disadvantage. The rule that allows daemons to keep recycling back onto the table is a good example.

If grey knights possess equipment that is better against daemons, then any daemons they fight receive some kind of counter advantage.

It's not much different than one army having hatred: Orks - it only works on orks, but when it does, they are at a massive advantage.

Hellebore

Oberon
04-02-2009, 09:44
Ironically, at the moment they are good against others, but bad against daemons. Same with the old chaos codex, when they had CSM too. So the new thing would be a complete turn around, but IMO not a good one. GK surely are good against daemons, but I'd say if you can kill daemons with your sword, you must be able to kill guardsmen with that same sword too. Bad example, everyone can kill guardsmen with anything...
Some ability like the new SM psychic power that forces inv saves to be rerolled, would be good. Now it is kind of hard for GK, as the enemy has power weaponry and ward saves and gets their core units on the field over and over again, GK has difficult terrain all over them against daemons. Fair trade.

Adra
04-02-2009, 09:51
No it would be silly to make them ONLY good against demons because no one would ever use them. They need to be expensive, powerful, and scary against everything, but also have some added bonus against demons. the balance can come from expense and added bonuses demons may get against GK like recycle.

hawo0313
04-02-2009, 09:52
I agree with nicha11 imagin playing deamons and your army which is already struggling (a bit) in warhammer 40k was put at a disadvantage for namesake I think that the two teams should try and find a balance instead of giving one team an advantage against another. And if they did do this terrible thing noone would play them it would be like saying why play a team that can only beat deamons when you can play space marines who will probably be better against deamons anyway and retaian balance against other teams. If you want to back up the fluff play campaigns.

Bekenel
04-02-2009, 10:01
As I said in the thread re: making GK better..

Grey Knights are the best Space Marines. Whilst yes, their training is mostly against Daemons and the associated Chaosy bits, they are still the best soldiers the Imperium has. They should be decent against all armies (which every Codex should aim to be), but have a distinct set of abilities purely to fight Daemons. As already mentioned, the book currently has rules which are designed to balance GK vs Daemons, which they should improve and keep. That way, if GK and Daemons do fight, it should hopefully be balanced - hopefully.

BigRob
04-02-2009, 10:08
Grey Knights will often have to fight cultists, chaos marines, chaos mutants, spawn beasts etc as well as the deamons. Therefore they need to be able to handle the mundane and the deamonic. With the new deamon engines they need to keep access to the anti tank weapons.

Yes, give them good rules against deamons (preferred enemy, shrouding, aegis suits etc) but they are carrying stormbolters, flamethrowers and big choppy axes which will work just as well against Orks as it does against deamons. The old rules for having adversaries in the deamonhunters book were good fun as well.

mughi3
04-02-2009, 11:19
Even now GKs can be an effective force but they suffer from being way to expensive just for what they can do.
They can do some nifty things especially against chaos/demons but even so the points are still to high.

They also seriously lack in the transport and long range firepower department(although FW has done a but to help out in that department...unfortunately not tournament legal though).

Tymell
04-02-2009, 11:37
It's an interesting problem: armies that in background terms should have advantages against particular enemies, but in game terms this can unbalance them.

You could compare it to how Catachans can work: they work best in jungle environments, so the Catachan player brings along plenty of such scenery for the battle, because it makes sense that they'd only really be deployed in such environments.

Likewise, it makes sense that daemonhunters would only usually be used against daemons or those linked with them. Which is where that adverseries rule comes in, that anyone being fought against gets daemons. Alas, the problem with this is that terrain is one thing, actual forces are another.

In truth, the way I see it, daemonhunters should not be -bad- against any army. They should be reasonable, just as any other match-up (at least in theory) is. But they should have a particular edge against daemons, and this edge shouldn't be something they have to pay much for: the whole point is it's built-in, and it would only be going to waste unless there were some kind of rule about all enemies having to use daemons (maybe there could be something about daemonhunters getting their win results from killing enemy daemons, regardless of any mission objectives?)

Corrode
04-02-2009, 12:00
The easiest solution is to balance GK like you would any normal army - able to take all comers, fight a variety of opponents, etc. After all, they're still Space Marines, they're still wearing power armour and using bolters (well, mostly) and they're still going to be able to take anything the galaxy throws at them. Any arguments about how they're "BETTER AT FIGHTIN DAEMONZ SO THEY SHOULD SUXXOR AGAINST EVERYTHIN ELSE" are moronic, since there's no good reason that fighting something powerful should entail being worse at fighting lesser things.

That said, there really should be a way to represent the whole Daemonhunters angle - why not have a few back of book 'extra missions' like the old Adversaries rules? Codices seem to be getting bigger anyway, so it's not like there's a space issue. The Witch Hunters codex even had a small army list in that let people take additional HQs and such to represent 'witch' forces - why not do the same for the GKs (I have no idea if the current DH codex already does this).

Anyway, you could have a bunch of special rules and over the top scenarios with the opponent having Daemons possessing his troops or popping up everywhere, and the GKs' training giving them some amazing advantage to represent all that training etc. Something so the fluff nuts get to play and go 'wow, I really do feel like my tiny toy soldiers are amazing Daemon-killers and not just regular 8-foot-tall power-armoured genetic freaks'.

zombied00d
04-02-2009, 12:35
Grey Knights need a point reduction on basic troops. Not so much on terminators. And they need viable anti-vehicle and fast attack options.

While the anti-demon rules are very fluffy, they add little to the army save penalizing them when facing one or two specific armies, as such, they should be done away with as a built in, automatic cost.

The_Outsider
04-02-2009, 12:42
Here's a hint: make a lot more of the weapons designed to kill daemons have rubbish AP - but ignore invulnerable saves.

I.E give (say) justicar NFW the ability to ignore inv. saves but not armour. S6 is still monstrous against nll other races (with only a few mdoels affected by lack of inv. save - namely warlocks), but daemons get butchered.

[edit] OK, my example doesn't involve AP, but you get the idea......

EVIL INC
04-02-2009, 13:58
Grey knights should be better. This is not only my opinion but it is also a statement based on the fluff.
The grey knights are "better" then your average marine and just as intelligent. Why would they purposely take useless equipment against an opponant? It is not like they dont have the resources to get what they need.
As others have said, they will have to face a variety of opponants.
1. Cultists and chaos marines obviously.
2. Eldar/dark eldar as they vie with them for access to sites.
3. "Gaurd" renegades.
Heck there might even be times when they are called to fight reguler battles simply out of neccessity in that they might be the only marine type forces available to "get there" in a timely enough manner to be of any use.
The list goes on.
I would like to see thier special rules remain but also have the ability to take more of the reguler heavy and special weapons rather then being restricted ontly to the ones that you pay extra points for to ignore invulnerable saves. That would demonstrate thier other roles.

laudarkul
04-02-2009, 14:12
They also seriously lack in the transport and long range firepower department(although FW has done a but to help out in that department...unfortunately not tournament legal though).


Maybe the new codex will contain those FW improvments (they could be launch just to solve the GK problems for a while till the new codex appear).

Carlos
04-02-2009, 14:18
Daemonhunters shouldnt be anything against any army, because they shouldnt be an army at all. Make a unit of GKs (upgradable to termies) like the Legion of the Damned and leave it there.

sigur
04-02-2009, 14:53
The main problem here is that GK aren't meant to be an army in the first place.

I would much rather like to see the possibility for Imperial armies to get themselves an allied squad of GK terminators and that's it. The should cost much and be good against daemons. Of course they're also a tad better than normal SM Terminators (like +1WS, funky equipment and possibility to be upgraded to psykers) but cost so much that they aren't really much worth it against other foes than daemons.

Flame Boy
04-02-2009, 17:31
The main problem here is that GK aren't meant to be an army in the first place.

I would much rather like to see the possibility for Imperial armies to get themselves an allied squad of GK terminators and that's it. The should cost much and be good against daemons. Of course they're also a tad better than normal SM Terminators (like +1WS, funky equipment and possibility to be upgraded to psykers) but cost so much that they aren't really much worth it against other foes than daemons.

This is how I remember them working, and it's how I remember Grey Knights operating. They always seemed to me to be the sort of thing you'd fast track to a warzone that was getting unstable, and they would tip the balance for the regulars to win. Having large groups of Grey Knights together is described as being extremely rare.

Tymell
04-02-2009, 18:16
The main problem here is that GK aren't meant to be an army in the first place.

I would much rather like to see the possibility for Imperial armies to get themselves an allied squad of GK terminators and that's it. The should cost much and be good against daemons. Of course they're also a tad better than normal SM Terminators (like +1WS, funky equipment and possibility to be upgraded to psykers) but cost so much that they aren't really much worth it against other foes than daemons.

A good point. Truth be told, Grey Knights, like their ordo xenos counterparts the Deathwatch, don't really need their own army. I too would feel better if they were an option that could be taken by Imperial armies. The witchhunter side isn't so bad, because armies of Sisters are perfectly fitting. Although even there, I feel it'd be better to drop the whole "hunter" army thing, just call them "Sisters of Battle", and leave them with the option to take various other things that fit in with their style/outlook (e.g. penitent engines, arco-flagellants, etc).

Loopstah
04-02-2009, 18:25
I certainly hope they don't reduce Grey Knights to a add on force or cripple them against anything but Daemons.

There are enough justifications for why the Grey Knights would be fighting any army in the codex, so I'm happy that they could potentially end up fighting anyone, and should be able to put up a decent fight if they did.

Maybe they could limit their availability in an Ordo Malleus army to limit Pure Grey Knight forces and boost the role of Stormtroopers and Inquisitors though. I feel a lot of people forget you can actually take units that aren't Grey Knights in a Daemonhunters army.

Vedar
04-02-2009, 18:31
GK seems to me to be pretty bad agaisnt Daemons right now. My daemons are still picking bits of GK armor from between their toes.

Space marines are currently much better against daemons with STR6 swords and re-rolling INV save. I you have to reroll INV saves you pretty much have already lost. Space Marine psychers continue to be the best in 40K.

Rydmend
04-02-2009, 18:35
My theory was that they should be on par with every other army. Others in this thread have stated the obvious, they are elite space marines, they should be able to handle *ANY* situation and stand a fair chance.

To all those who say they should only be applicable when fighting daemons, well, that is just silly.

If a greyknight can banish a daemon prince they can kill a carnifex. If they can stop a horde of daemons they can stop a horde of orks. I'm sure if they were tracking down a cult leader in some sector of the galaxy and they came under attack from a mass of feral orks or a tyranid splinter fleet or a dark eldar raid or stumbled onto a necron tomb world they would be able to handle themselves.

40kdhs
04-02-2009, 18:38
GKs should be good against EVERYBODY for a few reasons:

1- They are good enough to kill daemons. Why do they suck at killing at everything else? It doesn't make any sense.

2- What will happen if an Imperirum force isn't available to fight when GKs are in the position to fight?

3- I will never spend thousand of dollars to build up a force to fight 1 ARMY because it's ridiculous and crazy.

Lewis
04-02-2009, 18:42
I always saw them as incredibly powerful combat psykers, chosen to fight demons because on a one on one level this is the most effective use of their powers.

40kdhs
04-02-2009, 18:47
Some people don't like to see GKs as an army because they don't want their 'SM' to have serious competition with GKs.

EVIL INC
04-02-2009, 19:09
I am of the sort that agrees that they should not be thier "own" army.
Having the option to take a unit in a gaurd or marine army. Sounds good.
If they were to make an inquisition codex that had the possiblity to take some in an army would be good too.
If they were to remain as an individual army as they are now, they would need to be altered to suit but best if they werent.

ReveredChaplainDrake
04-02-2009, 20:28
The GK answer all wraps up into how the entire Inquisitiorial chamber militant triad should be handled. Have your "neutral" storm troopers as your Inquisitorial foot soldiers and your Inquisitors as your normal HQs, but have 3 HQs (Grandmaster, Canoness, ...mid-level Librarian thingamajig... Codicer?) and each unlock the ability to take their Chamber Militant as Troops, be they Grey Knights, Sisters of Battle, or Deathwatch. Many HQs screwing the FOC is pretty much the status quo these days.

As for the GKs themselves, I'm for the much simpler approach. Scrap True Grit, give them 2 attacks, and be done with it. Maybe give them a teleport mechanic, and/or grenade them up. And for the Emperor's sake, don't make them give up their Nemesis Force Weapon if they take a special gun. (My philosophy on Psycannons and Incinerators is that, while they're nice weapons, why should I pay points on an already grotesquely-expensive model to get worse in just about every situation but one?) If they need any specific anti-Daemon stuff, make it have to do with Daemon shooting. That, or get rid of it altogether. Why is it that the Aegis, designed to repel daemonic sorcery, is absolutely worthless against Daemons? :wtf:

Also, the recycle mechanic has to go. No anti-Daemon rule can be so good that all Daemon troops, who are all very good in their own rights, will recycle forever. The rule worked for when it was written, but it becomes massively overpowered in an environment where the way to win 2/3 of all missions is to swarm the Objectives with Troops.

I've heard the Sisters described as an ideal model of how to write a "-Hunter" codex. They've got their own little anti-psyker gimmicks with their wargear, but they can handle generally everything else thanks to their universal "Faith" mechanic, similar to how all GKs have Shrouding and True Grit.

holmcross
04-02-2009, 20:34
Well, even though they're highly specalized, a single GK has many times the 'killing power' then a standard marine. By how much, who knows. They could run into problems when fighting enemies that are very alien (Necrons for example) or aliens that have tactics that they're not totally optimized for. Like, take Orks for example. They'd be overrun by sheer number. Sure, the Orks that they did kill would have holes the size of a football field in them, but they're just not prepared to handle swarms of opponents. You have to take into account that they're always deployed in much, MUCH smaller numbers then any other marine.

They're optimized for countering "daemon tactics" and approaches, so it could be an issue if a giant pyramid of death is raining down death from above, or if they're being sniped by railguns half a planet away.

I don't like the idea of them being a standalone army at all, thier scarcity is one of the things that make them so cool. They're the rarest and most elite force the Imperium has, and they RARELY (if ever?) field an entire force.

I also don't like the idea of a Inquisition codex being released that combines SoB, DH and Ordo Xenos into a single army. That would be retarded in so many ways. The Inquisition doesn't work that way.

holmcross
04-02-2009, 20:43
If a greyknight can banish a daemon prince they can kill a carnifex. If they can stop a horde of daemons they can stop a horde of orks. I'm sure if they were tracking down a cult leader in some sector of the galaxy and they came under attack from a mass of feral orks or a tyranid splinter fleet or a dark eldar raid or stumbled onto a necron tomb world they would be able to handle themselves.

One of the problems is that people are comparing single units to other single units. A single GK is a very formidable match for pretty much any standard troop (and even many elites) in a 1v1 situation. But are they ready to handle a ocean of Orks? Or do they know how to deal with Necron technology/tactics? Probably not very well. They may have picked some knowledge up before they became GKs on handling other races (assuming the memories exist after the personality/memory implant process that GKs go through), but for the most part, I'd say they'd have to

DH spend 100% of thier time prepairing to fight chaos forces. Odds are many of them don't know squat about races like the necrons or tau.

Kelderaith
04-02-2009, 23:15
I still can't understand why people keep pointing out that GK shouldn't be army wide... of course they always acts in single squad and are very scarse, but so are SM damnit! I don't think "strike force" to assassinate an enemy leader should be comprised of 40 or so marines with 2-3 dreads yelling "FOR THE EMPEROR!" as they land (I know it seems weird, but that's the kind of force people play in average 1500 games), kind of lose the whole purpose of doing your job cleanly and efficiently. Nor do I think that average game should have a 2-1 or 3-1 ratio in favor of orks or guardsmen for example, it should be hilariously high. Fluff and gameplay will never be equal, that is what is called "game balance".

To come back to topic, I think GK should be good against anyone, but have a special thing against daemon. By special thing, I am not saying a very unique ability that makes them fighting daemon a "gg no re" game, but more likely them being very good against daemon (which they are not atm) while the daemon gets an advantage himself to counter balance this thing (like the recycling thing they got atm, but worked around a bit because it is too good atm). This would mean that games vs daemon (or vs Gk in the daemon perspective) wouldn't be boring, it would just change the whole dynamic of the game to better fit how and what happens when Gk deal with Daemons.

ReveredChaplainDrake
04-02-2009, 23:39
DH spend 100% of thier time prepairing to fight chaos forces. Odds are many of them don't know squat about races like the necrons or tau.
Possibly, but this is the Inquisition. They expect to find Chaos within the ranks of Orks, Tau, Eldar, Tyranids, and even IG and Space Marines. That's why they're called the Inquisition. I would suspect that Inquisitorial Storm Troopers, at least, have some extra-discipline training. And Grey Knights are, after all, Space Marines. I would not put it beyond any faction of the Inquisition to know at least something about all sorts of foes.

revnow
04-02-2009, 23:55
So, I'm not sure what the claims that Daemonhunters are currently bad against daemons are based on, but at least in theory 5th Edition made Daemonhunters better against C: Daemons than any other army.

- Daemons without "cloud of flies" or "aura of acquiescence" charge Grey Knights at I1.
- They have S5 template weapons that ignore invulnerable saves.
- They are one of the few armies with a force weapon that ignores eternal warrior.
- Unlimited range psychic hoods.
- Land Raider Crusaders that are 20 pts cheaper than their SM counterparts and can fire their Hurricane bolters even after moving at cruising speed. THey also have the new PotMS.
- A basic troop unit that is S6, has a stormbolter, is semi-immune to psychic attacks, is WS5, and in MEQ armor no less.
edit: Oh yeah, almost forgot, 3rd Edition smoke, which means no penetrating hits on the turn the first half of the Daemons arrive.
@Vedar: I don't know who you played, but they need to look at their rulebook, rethink their list, and try a new strategy.

Rydmend
05-02-2009, 00:03
One of the problems is that people are comparing single units to other single units. A single GK is a very formidable match for pretty much any standard troop (and even many elites) in a 1v1 situation. But are they ready to handle a ocean of Orks? Or do they know how to deal with Necron technology/tactics? Probably not very well. They may have picked some knowledge up before they became GKs on handling other races (assuming the memories exist after the personality/memory implant process that GKs go through), but for the most part, I'd say they'd have to

DH spend 100% of thier time prepairing to fight chaos forces. Odds are many of them don't know squat about races like the necrons or tau.


Small grey knight squads are constantly being deployed to help imperial guard fight daemonic incursions. Often the imperial commander consults with the greyknights on tactical issues or even gives temporary leadership of imperial forces to the grey knights during such situations. This would imply that they must know something about standard military tactics and large battle formations. Alot of the fluff deals with the grey knights stopping renegade guard or pdf cultists and mutants, this means they know how to deal with tanks, armor and mortal infantry as well as dealing with warp entities.

Would they be best suited to handle Eldar? No but I think they stand a good chance of adapting and countering an Eldar attack. If greyknights were deployed on a planet to deal with some kind of daemonic entity and eldar, tyranids or orks poked their head in....I wouldn't automatically discount the greyknights.

To say they are best suited for daemons might not actually mean anything at all in terms of effectiveness against other armies. It might actually make them overkill for normal situations such as an ork infestation. I mean an elephant gun is best suited for killing elephants but it'll kill just about anything else just as easily.

A good example would be a special ops team which deals strickly with terrorist cells and has all the training to deal specifically with counter-terrorism SAS or seal team 6 come to mind). They need to have a base military background before being inducted to those special units and that combat experience doesn't just vanish once inducted. Those special skills they learn for fighting a particular threat might actually strengthen them as a whole. I bet if you took that spec ops team and pitted them against a standard military unit they would give them a run for their money. Yea, they don't deal with standard military engagements on a regular basis but I'm sure they wouldn't just roll over.

Toe Cutter
05-02-2009, 00:06
Actually thinking about it - not something I've really done before - if you make the grey knights good against everyone with decent fast attack and heavy support units, don't you run the risk of creating something thats essentially just yet another marine variant? Do we really need another one of those? Shouldn't they be more than just 'ooh shiny silver/grey marines'?

Whats potentially worse is that if you make them a stand alone army with fancy new fast attack and heavy support thats radically different to normal space marines and is actually good and works, I'd give it six months tops before either all the mareeeen boyz are playing nothing but grey knights or they've whinged enough to start pilfering the best of the grey knights toys into their new codex (only better naturally cos they're marines - does it shine through much that I'm a guard player still bitter about ordnance theft by any chance :) ). Then you've got the same thing as the first point - grey knights slowly becoming nothing but marines with different hats.


GKs should be good against EVERYBODY for a few reasons:

3- I will never spend thousand of dollars to build up a force to fight 1 ARMY because it's ridiculous and crazy.

:confused: just how many grey knights do you intend to buy?

Occulto
05-02-2009, 00:49
The main problem here is that GK aren't meant to be an army in the first place.

Very true.

I still believe that by limiting yourself to part of a codex, you're always going to handicap yourself. Pure GK players take this even further, by refusing to use not only the Inquisitorial stuff, but also denying themselves inducted IG forces.

It's Codex: Daemonhunters after all, not Codex: Grey Knights.

If I play Tau and refuse to use Hammerheads or Broadsides (because it's against my theme) how valid are my complaints that I struggle to take down tanks?

40kdhs
05-02-2009, 18:18
DH spend 100% of thier time prepairing to fight chaos forces. Odds are many of them don't know squat about races like the necrons or tau.

Your arguement is not logical.

1- It's silly to think that GKs have NEVER heard Tau or Necrons.
2-Everybody has been fighting Chaos for years and Chaos is very powerful. Does it really make any sense when GKs can handle chaos and daemons but can't handle anything else?



Originally Posted by sigur
The main problem here is that GK aren't meant to be an army in the first place.


It's the problem because GW DID not do it. They can be an army.




I still believe that by limiting yourself to part of a codex, you're always going to handicap yourself. Pure GK players take this even further, by refusing to use not only the Inquisitorial stuff, but also denying themselves inducted IG forces.

It's Codex: Daemonhunters after all, not Codex: Grey Knights.

If I play Tau and refuse to use Hammerheads or Broadsides (because it's against my theme) how valid are my complaints that I struggle to take down tanks?


Even if you USE everything in the DH codex, your list is not that good either.



just how many grey knights do you intend to buy?


I already have enough models to play a 3k pt game.

40kdhs
05-02-2009, 18:29
So, I'm not sure what the claims that Daemonhunters are currently bad against daemons are based on, but at least in theory 5th Edition made Daemonhunters better against C: Daemons than any other army.


I'm going to prove you WRONG




- They have S5 template weapons that ignore invulnerable saves.


You have to come close to daemons units in order to do it. The only way to do it is to DS. If you are not within the range, your GKs are FINISHED.



- They are one of the few armies with a force weapon that ignores eternal warrior.


It's debatable because FW in BRB doesn't say so.



- Unlimited range psychic hoods.


SM doesn't have it?



- Land Raider Crusaders that are 20 pts cheaper than their SM counterparts and can fire their Hurricane bolters even after moving at cruising speed. THey also have the new PotMS.


SM LRC doesn't have PotMS? The fact of the matter is GK LR/LRC is not really any different from SM's one. The only difference is 'GK'.



- A basic troop unit that is S6, has a stormbolter, is semi-immune to psychic attacks, is WS5, and in MEQ armor no less.


Would you think that they are kick ars with these good stats? Not many 40k players agree and It's the saddest part because they have their ars handed down by the #1 enemy that they are sworn to DEFEAT.



edit: Oh yeah, almost forgot, 3rd Edition smoke, which means no penetrating hits on the turn the first half of the Daemons arrive.
@Vedar: I don't know who you played, but they need to look at their rulebook, rethink their list, and try a new strategy.

I would love to trade you 3rd smoke with something else. How about a new C:GK for this Christmas?:D

As you can see, GKs can't do much with this third smoke and good stat.

AdmiralDick
05-02-2009, 18:45
I've heard people argue that if Grey Knights are redone they should be good against demons, but average against everything else.

they should certainly be better against daemons than other opponents, but i don't think they should ever be just average.


I am completely against this, who would choose to play such an unbalanced army???

why should they be an 'army'?


How would GK players feel knowing they have an automatic advantage versus demons, but an auto disadvantage against others.

that would be a different kettle of fish. i'm not sure i've heard anyone mention the idea of an disadvantage for playing against non-chaotic opponents.

but then, i suspect that a lot of people would assume that weapons that had a particular effect only against daemons would be a 'disadvantage', even though it would be by definition.


What does the rest of Warseer think?

i personally don't agree with armies of GKs, but would like to see units of Uber-hard GKs that are Uber-Uber-hard against daemons.

i agree that the recycling of daemons against them might be an interesting starting point for a counter rule. though obviously the idea would have serious flaw against all daemon armies, and even limiting it to only Troops selections would be a nightmare in objective based missions. so unless a better balance could be struck GKs would end up being worst against those that they were supposed to be best against.

40kdhs
05-02-2009, 18:59
why should they be an 'army'?


Like every codex, GKs have HQ, troop, fast attack, Elite, and heavy support choices. The saddest part is they are not working well.

1- Do you feel threatened when GKs challenge your SM supremacy?

2- If GKs are doing well against daemons, why can they not defeat others?



i agree that the recycling of daemons against them might be an interesting starting point for a counter rule.

It happened to GKs in 4th edition and it was not even funny. If you play a capture mission with this special rule, GKs will never capture any objective because they don't have any 'troop' units to do so.

Occulto
05-02-2009, 23:21
Even if you USE everything in the DH codex, your list is not that good either.

That doesn't change my point that it'll still be better than pure GK.

More bodies on the ground, access to better AP through Storm Troopers and/or inducted IG, better Anti-Tank...

Ordo Malleus
05-02-2009, 23:50
I have to be honest, I get annoyed when people start saying that Grey Knights/Daemonhunters should not be their own army, and should only be available as limited selection in other Imperial Armies.

I also have to say that I'm probably one of the few fans of how the current Codex for the Daemonhunters works, they can be standalone, or they can be taken by other armies.

From a background perspective, the Grey Knights sometimes do need to operate as a standalone force, they deal with threats (and I paraphrase...) "that would shatter the sanity of even a 'normal' Space Marine", they deal with the stuff that even the Emperor's 'finest' can't hack, and need to be able to do it themselves, they are the final line of defence against Daemonic manifestation on a grand scale - These guys are the best of the best operational warriors in the Imperium. Period.**

Many people, often Space Marine players, do not like the fact that there are warriors that are 'harder' or 'tougher' than their own armies, and get very defensive about the whole situation (Sorry, I don't mean to be derogatory, but I find that SM players seem to exult in killing Grey Knights...).

As for putting them in a mixed Ordo Inquisition codex, I say bring it on, this is what the army needs - Attention, renewed interest, and the ability to pull its weight on the table. To make them available to Imperial Guard and Space Marines as a 'special option' and remove their ability to be played as a standalone army is frankly stupid - Why would Games Workshop do this? They have a line of models, if they change the rules for them, they would be play tested and developed in line with every other army - Why remove a potential source of revenue by making them available only to IG and SM, and not on their own? Also, why alienate the DH/GK players that are out there already?

As for making them good only against Daemons, again, why? Games Workshop would lose an army, and yet sill have to develop new rules! Better to have them the way they are, standalone AND able to be taken by SM and IG. Anyway, what good would it be to have Grey Knights only against Daemons and no-one else? You can just imagine it on the battlefield...

Inquisitor: "Grand Master Sabandoth, we've found the daemonvessel, it's that Eldar Farseer over there, the one who's trying to open a warp gate!"
Grand Master: "Great, go get him then!"
Inquisitor: "But that's your job..."
Grand Master: "Whoah, whoah, whoah! We're not qualified to fight ELDAR, we're DAEMON-hunters, remember? You deal with him. I'm off to go lacquer my armour, ring me if a Bloodthirster turns up."

Daemonhunters and Grey Knights are supposed to be able to deal with the Daemonic Threat, whether it comes in the form of human cultists, possessed Eldar, or daemon-worshiping fluffy bunny rabbits; the Grey Knights should be able to toast them all.

Now just to make it clear, I don't think Grey Knights should turn into ultimate killing machines that merely sneeze and whole armies die, they should be balanced within line of everyone else and made available as allies or standalone.


*dismounts soapbox*

Apologies for the rather ranty nature of that one, I'm just passionate about this kind of thing, and a little tired at the moment :)

** - Notice I say 'operational' - Custodes are a whole different kettle of fish!

Hicks
06-02-2009, 00:09
No they shouldn't only be good against daemons. The current codex gives enough reasons why GKs would fight other armies already. The GKs are the best soldiers the Imperium can produce. Soldiers, they don't wear robes and crucifix, they don't just rely on prayers and faith to vanquish the daemonic for them, they tear daemons appart with storm bolters and NFW and they have no mercy. As far as I know stormbolters and NFW wielded by uber marines should be able to hurt most things you would encounter on the tabletop and I don't see why the GK's other toys shouldn't either. I think the army should be balanced against anything and have a couple dirty tricks against daemons, but the codex shouldn't be so centered on actual daemon hunting. That would be like making ultramarines suck against everything but nids, or eldars incapable of dealing with anything but chaos. Sworn enemy =\= sole enemy.

RichBlake
06-02-2009, 00:09
Whats all this about recycling?

Last time I checked the recycling rule applied to "lesser daemons" and "daemon packs" and other specifically listed units, all of which do not exist anymore.

There is an arguement to say that the daemons listed in the codex don't exist any more so their specific powers don't work. The way I look at it though since all Daemons have the special rule "Daemon" that makes them a daemon.

Also:

Daemons do not strike at I1 against daemonhunters, they roll a difficult terrain test AS IF they were going through difficult terrain.

Incinerators are good against daemons, sadly it involves you getting close, which is bad.

GKGM Force Weapons ARE NOT stopped by Enternal Warrior, as they do not cause "Instant Death".

DH have lots of advantages against Daemons, the problem is you have to pay for them. This usually isn't a problem but it means to get any real advantage against your foe you need to know you're going to be fighting daemons, which means that you need to tailor your list.

The only advantage GKs get against daemons is the fact they need to roll difficult terrain tests to assault. YES ignoring invulnerable saves is nice but tbh when most daemons have a 4+ or 5+ normal flamers work just as well.

GK's should be awesome against everyone, and should have better "base" advantages against daemons, but they don't.

revnow
06-02-2009, 00:16
@40kdhs: This is a conversation I am willing to have.


You have to come close to daemons units in order to do it. The only way to do it is to DS. If you are not within the range, your GKs are FINISHED.

Or you could be smart and put them in a Land Raider and drive them up to the Daemons, unload, and then incinerate them. If you are deepstriking with GK (Terminators or Fast Attack GK) you are doing something wrong. Mobility and consistency absolutely key when playing Daemonhunters, especially against Daemons.


It's debatable because FW in BRB doesn't say so.

Actually, the BRB is very clear on this issue. On pg. 50 at the end of the very first non-bold script paragraph, it reads "The following general rules explain how psychic powers are employed. Exceptions to these rules are covered in the Codexes." This includes the rules for force weapons, which would make the rules for Damonhunter's force weapons listed in the wargear section of C: Daemonhunters one of those exceptions. Barring that, in case of conflict GW has made it very clear that Codex overrides BRB. So I repeat, a S6 force weapon that ignores eternal warrior on a model that can take wargear that halves the WS of Daemons and/or subtracts 1 from their initiative. Statistically, a Grand Master equipped with Sacred Incense, Grimoire of True Names, and a Storm Shield should be able to take down a non-Slaaneshi Daemon Prince without taking a single wound. That's a <200 pt. model that can easily kill almost any Daemon monstrous creature with impunity. And a lot of other Monstrous Creatures for that matter.



Unlimited range psychic hoods.
SM doesn't have it?

No, they do not. The range of a SM librarian's psychic hood is 24"


SM LRC doesn't have PotMS? The fact of the matter is GK LR/LRC is not really any different from SM's one. The only difference is 'GK'.

My point there is that a GK Land Raider is comparable to a SM Crusader with regard to everything but the assault cannon, which I think is more than made up by the fact that the GK Crusader can fire its hurricane bolters after having moved at cruising speed, along with the MM using PotMS. The important thing is that for all that, the GK Crusader is 20 pts cheaper, a good deal I think. Additionally, with the popularity of terrain in 5th Edition GK LR/LRCs can take Difficult Terrain modifications (dozer blade eqv.) for a measly 5 pts, unlike their SM brethren.


Would you think that they are kick ars with these good stats? Not many 40k players agree and It's the saddest part because they have their ars handed down by the #1 enemy that they are sworn to DEFEAT.


My argument is that the Daemonhunters are bogged down by archaic tactics, mediocre generalship, lack of a knowledge of the Codex's position in 5th Edition rules and a severe lack of variety, not by their basic troop choice. If you were to add up the value of everything a standard GK has, my guess is it's well worth the 10 more pts they cost compared to a Space Marine. My only complaint is that the whole squad can't take frag grenades. But, when riding in Crusaders,that hardly matters.

Look at the armies succeeding in 5th Edition. The all have tough, flexible, elite (albeit expensive) troops. Troops that can play a bigger part in the game than just sitting on objectives all game. Daemonhunter players need to start thinking about how to employ those troops in ways that maximize their utility. Players need to stop trying to think about holding five objectives and start looking into holding 1-2 while making the opponents game a living tarpit. Grey Knights aren't the kind of units you can table with, but they are the kind of units you can consistently win close games with.


I would love to trade you 3rd smoke with something else. How about a new C:GK for this Christmas?

As you can see, GKs can't do much with this third smoke and good stat.

If they were being played properly they could. Glancing smoke is a godsend in the 5th Edition world of drop pod/melta/chainfist/War Boss powerclaw/Deffrolla/AP1 hell. It gives GK Land Raiders a full turn to approach with a minimized risk of a destroying hit.


I'm going to prove you WRONG

You still have yet to addressed the whole, Daemons without frag eqv. assault GK at Initiative 1 issue (which is huge for an assault oriented army). Or for that matter, double mystics, which give a fairly wide swath of deepstrike protection against and all deepstrike army.

Like I said, C:Daemonhunters has very little (read minuscule) competitive variety, but certain combinations can be used to make the Daemonhunters, and more specifically, Grey Knights a very powerful army against Daemons. And a better than mediocre army against a lot of other lists for that matter. All of the above is really just meant to illustrate this point with regard to the topic.

40kdhs
06-02-2009, 03:01
Or you could be smart and put them in a Land Raider and drive them up to the Daemons, unload, and then incinerate them.


2 LRs cost 1/4 of 2000 pts and it also means that you don't have a lot of models on the table.

What will you do if your opponent has 3+ daemons units around? Are you going to drive up and disembark and incinerate one of the units to dead?

After doing that, your GK unit will be attacked by another daemon unit. Your GK unit definitely costs more than a killed daemon unit. Is it a fair trade?





Actually, the BRB is very clear on this issue. On pg. 50 at the end of the very first non-bold script paragraph, it reads "The following general rules explain how psychic powers are employed. Exceptions to these rules are covered in the Codexes."


It's your interpretation. I'd like to see it that way but other people told me differently. Until i see a new DH or GK codex, it's going to be a debatable issue. I hate the fact that I have to argue with other people about this FW thing because it's the only thing GKs have when GW should do its job.





You still have yet to addressed the whole, Daemons without frag eqv. assault GK at Initiative 1 issue (which is huge for an assault oriented army). Or for that matter, double mystics, which give a fairly wide swath of deepstrike protection against and all deepstrike army.


If you look at DH codex, the terminology of daemons only covers 1 or 2 daemons unit. All daemons special rules are outdated. The other armies don't need any daemon special rule and they are doing good against. Why do GKs struggle against daemons with all special rules?

thechosenone
06-02-2009, 04:55
The main problem here is that GK aren't meant to be an army in the first place.

I would much rather like to see the possibility for Imperial armies to get themselves an allied squad of GK terminators and that's it. The should cost much and be good against daemons. Of course they're also a tad better than normal SM Terminators (like +1WS, funky equipment and possibility to be upgraded to psykers) but cost so much that they aren't really much worth it against other foes than daemons.

If i agreed any harder my head would explode.

GK are a specialized force that are sent out to deal with demons or are attached to serve under an Inquisitor who is investigating demons. They are not, nor is their evidence to support that i'm aware of, a singular fighting force that is expected to take on all comers. There's no reason they should be involved in a pitched battle with a Tau Sept world, nor do they have much cause to be wading into a hoard of rampaging orks. Can these situations occur, sure but with the commonality to justify a full army?

THe options are not there to support your forces as a full army. You have no range and why should you? YOur strength is in CC. Your designed to kill things with invul saves where heavy shots are less effective. The way the Demon hunters book is set up is highly suggestive of the way your army ought to be played, in tandum with other inquisitorial forces. Sisters in the witchhunter book have a more varied back ground to suggest independent operations but they also have units that cover all angles. GK have no Exorcist or cheap effective transport. Your left to foot slog to the enemy or ride expensive land raiders.

My overall point is this; the Ordo Malleus and GK should be good at fighting DEMONS cause that's their job. I know at this point armies won't be canceled but there needs to be some concenus among GK players that if you ignore half of your codex your at a disadvantage. Among some of my armies i play chaos. One of the things i play is a thousand sons force. So i'm ignoring lots of units in my book but i don't see it as something to improve, its just my choice of army building. GK players see it much differently.

Alright. Flame on.

thechosenone
06-02-2009, 05:13
In general i play a GK pure force about once a week. A good friend of mine plays them. He frequently requests i play my demons against him. He doesn't state a reason but honestly i imagine that a lot of it has to do with how ineffective GK is against other forces.

My demons have never lost nor drawn to him. He plays all the tricks and the above mentioned combo of G master with all the anti demon tools mentioned. Doesn't help against the inevitable rush of a greater demon. The only Greater Demons i don't rush at him are GUO and LOC. KOS does alright and BT annhilates. Why, because for five points i become mostly immune to the G master's weapon. And satistically speaking half his retinue's attacks hit. Roughly seven. Of those about four will wound and i'll save roughly two of them. BT strikes back wiping on average about three of the knights, none of the hits can be placed on the G master or he'll instant death. And the only reason i charge this unit is because its epic. Tactically speaking i should be hosing it with horrors and flamers then charging it with my soul grinder. Locking him with my soul grinder feels wrong and i've only ever done it once.

There effectiveness against demons is not all that great.

40kdhs
06-02-2009, 05:15
There's no reason they should be involved in a pitched battle with a Tau Sept world, nor do they have much cause to be wading into a hoard of rampaging orks. Can these situations occur, sure but with the commonality to justify a full army?


Did you look at the last pages of DH codex? GW listed 999999 reasons why DH fights different armies. So much for daemonhunters!



GK have no Exorcist or cheap effective transport. Your left to foot slog to the enemy or ride expensive land raiders.


If GW didn't copy and paste LR/LRC and dreadnought from SM codex to DH codex, GKs might have more options. My point is can GKs be an army IF GW gives them more options and make them better? The answer is YES.




the Ordo Malleus and GK should be good at fighting DEMONS cause that's their job.


If 'daemons' supposes to be GK's job, why are SM and IG fighting them?

You need to understand that everybody inside and outside the Imperium is stealing GK's 'job' and the saddest part is every army is doing a better job at fighting daemons than GKs.

Now, GKs need to go out and try to get their job back and the only way another force will give GKs the job is we have to fight them.



My overall point is this; the Ordo Malleus and GK should be good at fighting DEMONS cause that's their job. I know at this point armies won't be canceled but there needs to be some concenus among GK players that if you ignore half of your codex your at a disadvantage.



Nobody ignores the half of the DH codex. It doesn't matter how you spin or put the blame on the DH or GK players, DH codex was POORLY WRITTEN. The fact that GW hasn't done anything to improve DH codex tells you something when the rules are absolutely outdated.


It's the reality that we need to accept and move on.

revnow
06-02-2009, 06:24
Daemons do not strike at I1 against daemonhunters, they roll a difficult terrain test AS IF they were going through difficult terrain.

and then


The only advantage GKs get against daemons is the fact they need to roll difficult terrain tests to assault.

Which means Daemons w/o cloud of flies or aura of acquiescences assault at I1

Read the rules for assaulting into cover. What kind of terrain it is or if it counts as "cover" doesn't matter one bit anymore in 5th Edition. What matters is if you have to roll dice to assault. If dice touching the table is required for you to assault a unit, and you don't have assault grenade eqv., the assaulting unit hits at I1.

This is why it is so important for Daemonhunters to fully understand 5th Editions rules. So very many of them made this codex better comparable to other codices.

The Inquisition as a whole desperately needs a new codex, but that doesn't mean that there arn't competitive formations out there, especially with regard to Daemons.

40kdhs
06-02-2009, 06:32
and then

Which means Daemons w/o cloud of flies or aura of acquiescences assault at I1

Read the rules for assaulting into cover. What kind of terrain it is or if it counts as "cover" doesn't matter one bit anymore in 5th Edition. What matters is if you have to roll dice to assault. If dice touching the table is required for you to assault a unit, and you don't have assault grenade eqv., the assaulting unit hits at I1.

This is why it is so important for Daemonhunters to fully understand 5th Editions rules. So very many of them made this codex better comparable to other codices.

The Inquisition as a whole desperately needs a new codex, but that doesn't mean that there arn't competitive formations out there, especially with regard to Daemons.

If you look at the terminology of daemons in DH codex, this special rule doesn't apply to every daemon unit in daemons army.

Occulto
06-02-2009, 06:35
If you look at the terminology of daemons in DH codex, this special rule doesn't apply to every daemon unit in daemons army.

Have you had someone honestly say their daemons weren't subject to these rules? :eyebrows:

40kdhs
06-02-2009, 06:56
Have you had someone honestly say their daemons weren't subject to these rules? :eyebrows:

Yes, many times because they pointed out that the ' considered daemon' units in DH codex are NOT the same as the one in daemons codex.

GW didn't clarify anything in DH FAQ. It's what it's.

Occulto
06-02-2009, 07:08
Yes, many times because they pointed out that the ' considered daemon' units in DH codex are NOT the same as the one in daemons codex.

GW didn't clarify anything in DH FAQ. It's what it's.

*facepalm*

You must play against some really enjoyable people. :rolleyes:

40kdhs
06-02-2009, 07:19
*facepalm*

You must play against some really enjoyable people. :rolleyes:

It's tough out there. I or any GK players should NOT be in this position if GW did its job. To me, daemons is daemons regardless of what they are called.

When somebody point out the terminology of daemon in DH codex and I CAN NOT come up with an official FAQ to resolve this problem, i'm stuck with the outdated rules. I'm ready to move on because I accepted the fact that we weren't good against daemon / chaos in 3rd, 4th, and 5th UNTIL we receive our new codex.

I'm not a kind of guy who believes that GKs solely kill daemons because many armies out there that don't suppose to kill daemons end up killing them any way.

Occulto
06-02-2009, 07:26
It's tough out there.

That's got to be the lamest thing I've heard since the bad old days of: "terminators don't wear terminator armour."


I or any GK players should NOT be in this position if GW did its job. To me, daemons is daemons regardless of what they are called. You go by the book.

When somebody point out the terminology of daemon in DH codex and I CAN NOT come up with an official FAQ to resolve this problem, i'm stuck with the outdated rules.

I'd just like to see someone argue with a straight face that nothing in an army called Chaos Daemons is subject to the rules that affect Daemons which are contained in the Daemonhunters codex.

Sorry mate. You need to get some new opponents. Some that don't hide behind such a lame technicality.

I reckon GW haven't updated it, because they think no one could be that petty/pedantic/pathetic. :eyebrows:

40kdhs
06-02-2009, 07:34
I'd just like to see someone argue with a straight face that nothing in an army called Chaos Daemons is subject to the rules that affect Daemons which are contained in the Daemonhunters codex.

I reckon GW haven't updated it, because they think no one could be that petty/pedantic/pathetic. :eyebrows:

I asked GW employees about it and guess what? They go by the book.



Sorry mate. You need to get some new opponents. Some that don't hide behind such a lame technicality.


I asked people why I wouldn't see a new codex soon. The answer was it wasn't sold well even though it's a bad codex. If nobody has any problem accepting this answer as a lame excuse, why do i have a problem accepting a lame technicality from other players?

oldgamer56
06-02-2009, 08:31
As I see it, the problem is more with the tournament vs friendly game conflict.

DH in particular was designed to allow players to use an interesting but rare unit in friendly games where the opponent was using forces of chaos. It was never designed to be a take on all comers list. And it was never designed for large games or competitive tournaments.

WH seems to have avoided the "niche unit" better, but that is supported by the fluff.

The problem is that people then want to use GK like a SM strike force and it just is not set up that way.

Compounding the issue is the lack of foresight by GW to compliment the new powerful Daemon Codex with a new DH Codex or reasonable FAQ to update the current DH codex to make them competitive. I think GW underestimates the number of loyal GK player there are. GK units are consistently the most expensive 40K units on eBay. :(

But if you are going to insist on play DH/GK as an all comer list, then you have to accept you are doing so for the enjoyment of using units you like vs the overwhelming need to win. Just the state of the game right now.

Can you win occasionally? Yes :D Consistently, No:cries:

And yes, I have and play DH/GK. Love the fluff, accept the limitation and believe someday we will get the codex we need.

(I would love to see the standard setup for tournaments be bring 2500, then pick 1500 based on what opponent you draw each game. What I want to play against nids is not the same to play against tau. Then I could always make room for some DH/GK.)

AdmiralDick
07-02-2009, 05:40
You could compare it to how Catachans can work: they work best in jungle environments, so the Catachan player brings along plenty of such scenery for the battle, because it makes sense that they'd only really be deployed in such environments.

Likewise, it makes sense that daemonhunters would only usually be used against daemons or those linked with them. Which is where that adverseries rule comes in, that anyone being fought against gets daemons. Alas, the problem with this is that terrain is one thing, actual forces are another.

its an interesting concept though. perhaps taking GKs should allow your opponent to count up to 3 pieces of terrain as 'corrupted' per unit of GK (similar to Stratagems), which would offer them some kind of bonus, and a bigger bonus for Daemons or CSM.

its only the barest bones of a concept at the moment, but it would somewhat justify the appearance of GKs against non-daemonic opponents.


GKs should be good against EVERYBODY for a few reasons:

1- They are good enough to kill daemons. Why do they suck at killing at everything else? It doesn't make any sense.

because daemons aren't necessarily better on a spectrum of opponents. they are just wildly different from other foes and the stakes against them are much higher, making them formidable enemies, without actually being any harder to kill or causing any more casualties than the average Eldar or Ork force. killing regular, worldly opponents is, for the most part, a similar activity, so an Imperial commander who can take on Tau can probably take on Hrud (though obviously their will be aliens that are harder to counter and will need to be dealt with by specialists like the DW). but having anti-daemon weaponry is unlikely to prove fruitful against other adversaries.

pray and faith works a treat against Bloodletters, but Orks are less forgiving.


2- What will happen if an Imperirum force isn't available to fight when GKs are in the position to fight?

personally, i have always imagined that they would simply walk away. its not their problem and they don't have to deal with it. i also believe that if GK had been supporting another Imperial army whilst fighting a combined force of Chaos and xenos, once all the Chaos had been wiped out, they would be more concerned with dealing with the Imperial army that witness Chaos than the aliens that are at hand.

and this stance was fully backed up by the GK Redeemer Force datasheet. the GK are utterly single-minded in their cause, to the degree that others might regard their actions as illogical if not traitorous (their only saving grace being that they define what is and isn't traitorous).


3- I will never spend thousand of dollars to build up a force to fight 1 ARMY because it's ridiculous and crazy.

that's cool.

but its not a reason. simple ways around this would be; choose to play a different force of your own volition or have GW drop GKs as a playable force in 40k and force your hand in the decision making process.


I still can't understand why people keep pointing out that GK shouldn't be army wide... of course they always acts in single squad and are very scarse, but so are SM damnit!

not in the same way at all. if you were to take an average of all the combats that GKs take part in, their would rarely be more than one single unit in any given deployment, as they would be supporting an already beleaguered Imperial army. if you were to take the same survey of of SM chapters deployments you would never see them field only a single unit. they would almost always deploy as either part or all of a company.

just to say that they are both rare is utterly misleading. they operate fundamentally differently and that should be manifest in the rules.

personally i would like to see GW move forwards and say that there are actually SM organisations that are not part of the Chapter/Legion structure, such as Custodes and Death Watch, and that the GK should be one of those. they should completely drop the term 'Chapter' in reference to GKs and make clear that it is only ever used as an epithet or mark of respect and they do not adhere to the Codex Astartes in any way shape of form and are actually exempt from doing so. but that is only what i would do.


Your arguement is not logical.

1- It's silly to think that GKs have NEVER heard Tau or Necrons.

i can't say that this is any more logical. having heard about an opponent (even if you've never seen one) isn't the same thing as having developed tactics and equipment to deal with said opponents and having fully trained your men in said tactics and use of equipment.


2-Everybody has been fighting Chaos for years and Chaos is very powerful. Does it really make any sense when GKs can handle chaos and daemons but can't handle anything else?

i don't think i really understand your point. are you suggesting that because Eldar have been fighting Chaos since the birth of Slaanesh the GKs should be amply able to lay the smack down on them?

my point would remain the same, Chaos isn't necessarily 'harder' to beat than Nercons, its just that the consequences of failure are much more insidious and the tactics require to not do so are vastly different (just shooting them is not enough).


Like every codex, GKs have HQ, troop, fast attack, Elite, and heavy support choices. The saddest part is they are not working well.

1- Do you feel threatened when GKs challenge your SM supremacy?

how did you guess that i play SM and that i worry that a new GK army might topple me from the leader board at my local store?!

:wtf: i don't think that i have ever come across a more pompus and ridiculous retort in the whole time i've used this forum.


2- If GKs are doing well against daemons, why can they not defeat others?

you've really got a bee in your bonnet about this one, haven't you. i'm not going to answer it a third time, but i will point out that i never suggested that they shouldn't be able to fight well against all opponents. it might be more helpful to the discussion if in future you read posts before responding to them.


It happened to GKs in 4th edition and it was not even funny. If you play a capture mission with this special rule, GKs will never capture any objective because they don't have any 'troop' units to do so.

i actually offered a critique of the concept of recycling units in my post, but i guess you didn't red that either. my suggestion was that having some rule that benefits the Daemons when facing GKs is a good idea, and that recycling as is, is not a good idea, but is an interesting starting point (because it doesn't make the daemons any better, it just means that they don't go away). the terrain concept might also be an interesting starting point for discussion.


I have to be honest, I get annoyed when people start saying that Grey Knights/Daemonhunters should not be their own army, and should only be available as limited selection in other Imperial Armies.

i equally get annoyed when people unequivocally say that players should be entitled to field a wholly GK force. so far few people have actually tried to back up the position, beyond: "i've already got an army and don't want to have to retire some of the miniatures" (which they would do anyway if a new Codex: GK came out with differing unit selections and plastic models) and "since the release of the codex there has been all kinds of reasons given as to why the GKs would be fighting as a full army against non-chaotic opponents" (which is an unusual position to take as the background relies of the fact that the army already exists, rather than the rules reflecting the background).

i'm not personally saying you (Ordo Malleus) should bare the weight of this defence on your shoulders, just that i would like to see the "GK as an army" supporters defend their position for a while and your post led quite nicely into that.

if we assume that GW announced that the up coming C: IG was going to contain a unit of GK Terminators as a 0-1 choice or special character (as the [Craftworld] Eldar have got Harlequins), and that this was going herald the end of GKs as a playable army outside of Apoc, what would you, or anyone else who would like to defend the position, say to get them to think otherwise?


I also have to say that I'm probably one of the few fans of how the current Codex for the Daemonhunters works, they can be standalone, or they can be taken by other armies.

whilst i'm not a fan of the concept of GKs as an army, i must say i am a fan of the creativity of design during the late 3rd ed and early 4th era, and the C: DH stands out as a clear example of that. it s deeply flawed in a number of ways, but it has a number of brilliances (the retinues and ability to field units in other armies are the two biggest for me). its a shame that the approach wasn't continually developed into 5th. being able to take Harlequins in both Eldar and DE armies would have been very appropriate, and just imagine the possibilities if daemonic units had been available to all other armies (bar a couple like GKs and Necrons for thematic reasons).

sadly those days are behind us, and it looks like either GKs are going to be lost as allies or as an army. personally i think the background and rules should be in favour of allies over an army, but i suspect that GW will see it differently.


As for putting them in a mixed Ordo Inquisition codex, I say bring it on, this is what the army needs - Attention, renewed interest, and the ability to pull its weight on the table. [...] Why remove a potential source of revenue by making them available only to IG and SM, and not on their own? Also, why alienate the DH/GK players that are out there already?

i doubt that a mixed codex will lend much to the factions involved, instead it will likely make them blur into one, which is something that i think none of us would like to see. the next generation of players would likely not be able to tell you the difference between GKs and SoB other than one of them has bewbs. and whilst it might be easy to level accusations that they ought to read the background a bit better, that won't actually make the problem go away. the main way in which people interact with the background is by playing the game and that will always be true. GKs and SoB will end up being tide together in peoples minds, and codexes show that when players make their mind up developers tend to follow (like charging defilers into combat and realising that they weren't designed for that and so moaning until they are).

also, it will not do the development of the armies any good at all. DH and WH are very complex already, now imagine throwing in AH (or XH) and trying to write background accurate, balanced and fun rules for them. i personally wouldn't relish the task, and i suspect that any such document would receive hails a lot of flack long before it even touched the shelves.

worse still, even with short lived interest in a new codex, simply consolidating a couple of poorly performing armies into one book is not going to make either sell any better. its just a way of fiddling the numbers.

if GKs were available in IG armies as a 0-1 choice then there is no reason to assume that IG players wouldn't pick a unit up as a matter of course, and as they are metal minis they have certainly already made their money back for the mould. i'm not sure whether the expense put into a new codex would generate enough income to make such a venture worthwhile, unless they were going to completely redo the range in plastics, which is a new ball game altogether.


Did you look at the last pages of DH codex? GW listed 999999 reasons why DH fights different armies. So much for daemonhunters!

that, to me, rather smacks of insecurities. i don't recall ever seeing such a list in a Eldar or Ork codex. it ends up being a forced excuse rather than a justified reason.



If 'daemons' supposes to be GK's job, why are SM and IG fighting them?

why are their other people in the building when the Ghostbusters turn up? because they were surprised and haven't called in the GKs yet?


You need to understand that everybody inside and outside the Imperium is stealing GK's 'job' and the saddest part is every army is doing a better job at fighting daemons than GKs.

if that's true then its even more vital that the GKs role is not watered down into a bog-standard, takes-on-all-comers SM force and remains purely and distinguishably an anti-daemon force. that GKs aren't currently very good at that is hardly surprising as their codex was written for a completely different version of the game. either way, trying to get them to balance in the middle ground so that they are a reasonable army is not really a helpful goal.


Now, GKs need to go out and try to get their job back and the only way another force will give GKs the job is we have to fight them.

:) whilst it is an amusing joke, it doesn't add weight to your argument.

starlight
07-02-2009, 05:52
I think that:

a) Grey Knights should have bonuses and penalties when fighting Daemons. Bonuses such as they have now, penalties like Without Number and the like.

a) Grey Knights should be about as good against regular Marine Infantry with Storm Bolters and Power Weapons when fighting everyone else. Not great, but good enough with a capable gamer. :)


Personally I look forward to using my all infantry Grey Knight force against anyone. :) I just wish it was a little better value for the points. :(

thechosenone
07-02-2009, 06:23
Admiral Dick puts the argument against GK very well.

Few points.

1. I was called on the 99999 reasons a GK could fight something that isn't a demon. The Admiral put it nicely but when your telling me that the reason your GK can come at my ork or necrons is because their possessed or working for rogue psykers or mistaken for demons ect.... all your telling me is that either the enemy army needs a special rule to reflect that or your army is led by an idiot commander that mistook a necron cult for a demon worshipping cult. You have two pages in a book that say "We've created an army that only fights one enemy but here's some reasons that you can justify playing against X Y and Z. Seriously? In the Grim Darkness of the Future thre are many skewed reasons and mistaken ventures that bring the GK out to war.

2. If the army is to fight all comers, and this is one of the strongest arguments against GK that's a little ignored, you need units and weapons and abilities that you have no business having. A GK has no need to carry around a las cannon, it has no reason to have whirlwinds and Vindicators. Its not laying siege to anything. I'm talking on a practical common battle field. If you name an odd situation where you need a vidcator i'll tell you to play it in apocalypse or barring that i'll say i can think of a situation where my Iron Warriors should have an Earth Shaker platform. My IW is more plausable then a GK with a vindicator. To make it playable against all comers means the inclusion of non-thematic equipment. Argue thatsuccessfully and you make headway in proving an all GK force should be out there. Don't argue it successfully and you fall into either the category of "Your army shouldn't exist" or the category that every cult chaos player is in where if he plays pure his army suffers and he deals with it.

3- Your army won't be discontinued. It ought to be but it won't. GW has never invalidated army... er well squats they did. But any one who played forty K, like myself back then, can tell you that few players got screwed there. No one played it and the concept was poor. Either way, one army in the history of the game and no army in the recent history(Previous three editions) has been dropped. You'll still have an army and gods know what hokey thing they'll do to get it in one book, make sense and dumb it down.

4 other things kill demons better now. Yes because demons are now a full playable army so they have been fleshed out to be playable. Demon hunters were designed to be really good and killing three army selections from a previous codex. Deal with that ok. Its like saying an army of tankbusta can't properly hold its own against endless swarm style nids. Tank huntas are designed to be awesome at killing two or three slots of every army's options. THE ONLY reason GK are a little better off is because the army selections they were designed to kill came from fast attack and troop and HQ so they needed to have more then one weapon in their arsenal to do that. Arguing for all GK to be balanced is like me arguing to have an all Tankbusta army that is more balanced to kill hoards

40kdhs
07-02-2009, 06:33
If you read SpaceWolves codex, GKs teleported and attacked them.

A small number of GKs can stop a daemon army but they can't stop another army. Does it really make any sense?



1. I was called on the 99999 reasons a GK could fight something that isn't a demon. The Admiral put it nicely but when your telling me that the reason your GK can come at my ork or necrons is because their possessed or working for rogue psykers or mistaken for demons ect.... all your telling me is that either the enemy army needs a special rule to reflect that or your army is led by an idiot commander that mistook a necron cult for a demon worshipping cult. You have two pages in a book that say "We've created an army that only fights one enemy but here's some reasons that you can justify playing against X Y and Z. Seriously? In the Grim Darkness of the Future thre are many skewed reasons and mistaken ventures that bring the GK out to war.


Regardless of what is wrong or right, we go to war for different reasons.




2. If the army is to fight all comers, and this is one of the strongest arguments against GK that's a little ignored, you need units and weapons and abilities that you have no business having. A GK has no need to carry around a las cannon, it has no reason to have whirlwinds and Vindicators. Its not laying siege to anything. I'm talking on a practical common battle field. If you name an odd situation where you need a vidcator i'll tell you to play it in apocalypse or barring that i'll say i can think of a situation where my Iron Warriors should have an Earth Shaker platform. My IW is more plausable then a GK with a vindicator. To make it playable against all comers means the inclusion of non-thematic equipment. Argue thatsuccessfully and you make headway in proving an all GK force should be out there. Don't argue it successfully and you fall into either the category of "Your army shouldn't exist" or the category that every cult chaos player is in where if he plays pure his army suffers and he deals with it.


IG and SM don't suppose to fight daemons because of their corruptable mind but they are fighting them any way. How do you justify it?



4 other things kill demons better now. Yes because demons are now a full playable army


In the previous version, daemon was not a full army but they are now. Why can we not have a full GK army?



Arguing for all GK to be balanced is like me arguing to have an all Tankbusta army that is more balanced to kill hoards

An army needs to be balanced regardless of who they are fighting for.

holmcross
07-02-2009, 08:08
If GK's became a strong standalone army, everyone would play them. I'd say the majority of MEQ armies would be Grey Knights.

They'd no longer be uncommon/rare on the table.

They'd no longer be as impressive.

Can't have your cake and eat it too.

I like the idea of certain armies being exclusive to people who sacrifice in-game power for fluff. There are a decent amount of players who really enjoy fielding fluffy armies that are uncommon to encounter, simply because they're not as good as a more powerful, less fluffy build. DH have been that army for quite some time. As long as the army is playable (which GKs are, easilly) I think its fine, and in a sense even good that they're not optimized for tournement play.

Inquisitor_Ra
07-02-2009, 08:11
id hate to post this question here sine i dont think it belongs on this at all but what page in there codex does it list the cost for there armoury stuff, i cant find it at all.

holmcross
07-02-2009, 08:40
Your arguement is not logical.

1- It's silly to think that GKs have NEVER heard Tau or Necrons.
2-Everybody has been fighting Chaos for years and Chaos is very powerful. Does it really make any sense when GKs can handle chaos and daemons but can't handle anything else?

Logic, eh Spock? I can play that game. Your statement:

A. Grey Knights can beat Chaos, and Chaos is very powerful.
B. Necrons, Tau (...etc) are very powerful.
C. Ergo, Grey Knights can handle Necrons, Tau (and anyone else who is very powerful.)

... what? Ok, so according to you:

A. A bright lance can easilly destroy a land raider, which is very powerful.
B. A monolith is very powerful.
C. Ergo, a bright lance can easilly destroy a monolith.

Check your own logic before you attempt to critique others.


1- It's silly to think that GKs have NEVER heard Tau or Necrons.

So what? "Hearing" about a race doesn't mean you know how to defeat them in an encouter. "Hearing" about them doesn't mean they have the equipment/preperation to deal with an force which uses unconventional methods of combat. The Grey Knights wargear is fine tuned to handle the forces of chaos. So what happens when they engage a typical force of necrons? Whoops, all that shiny anti-warp equipment/psychic powers/training doesn't mean anything. S6 force weapon attacks against a monolith! Have fun with that. Against an enemy like that, they're effectively slightly better then the standard marine, but in much smaller numbers. We're not talking an auto-loss here by any means, but I'd say the odds are definitly against the GK's comming out on top.

quigglebert
07-02-2009, 10:23
Some people don't like to see GKs as an army because they don't want their 'SM' to have serious competition with GKs.

hah, that i love, but to be honest the storm troopers are a bigger threat to the marines, whome are genrally complacent about hellguns, and the storm troopers genrally out number them

as for being only able to kill daemons effectively, when a grandmaster can use his force weapon to full effect and kill charecters again then come back to me, daemons are the only army a greyknight army would truly struggle against, fix that first.

40kdhs
07-02-2009, 14:54
They'd no longer be as impressive.



Current GKs aren't that impressive. If you don't do anything to improve them, how can they be better?



So what? "Hearing" about a race doesn't mean you know how to defeat them in an encouter. "Hearing" about them doesn't mean they have the equipment/preperation to deal with an force which uses unconventional methods of combat. The Grey Knights wargear is fine tuned to handle the forces of chaos. So what happens when they engage a typical force of necrons? Whoops, all that shiny anti-warp equipment/psychic powers/training doesn't mean anything. S6 force weapon attacks against a monolith! Have fun with that. Against an enemy like that, they're effectively slightly better then the standard marine, but in much smaller numbers. We're not talking an auto-loss here by any means, but I'd say the odds are definitly against the GK's comming out on top.


IG and SM aren't capable of fighting daemons. Why are they fighting them?
What will GKs do if their HQ or station is attacked by Tau or another race? Are they going to SURRENDER because they don't know how to DEFEAT these races? Please................



If GK's became a strong standalone army, everyone would play them. I'd say the majority of MEQ armies would be Grey Knights.


Not many people play GKs. If it's the reason why GKs shouldn't be an army, it's not a valid one because SM will always be GW's favorite army whether people play GKs or not.

Grand Master Raziel
07-02-2009, 15:29
I've heard people argue that if Grey Knights are redone they should be good against demons, but average against everything else.
...(snip)...
What does the rest of Warseer think?

To answer your question, no, Daemonhunters should not be fantastic against Daemons and sub-par against everything else, because the Ordo Malleus does not only fight against Daemons. They're also obliged to fight any forces that they suspect might be under the influence of daemonic entities, which could well be any force in 40K. They also need to be able to defend themselves against all comers. It's not like they're going to twiddle their thumbs if attacked by Orks, or as if the Tyranids are going to give them a pass on being eaten because their remit is to fight daemons and not aliens.

thechosenone
07-02-2009, 15:44
hah, that i love, but to be honest the storm troopers are a bigger threat to the marines, whome are genrally complacent about hellguns, and the storm troopers genrally out number them

as for being only able to kill daemons effectively, when a grandmaster can use his force weapon to full effect and kill charecters again then come back to me, daemons are the only army a greyknight army would truly struggle against, fix that first.

Demons are the only.... seriously? No GK struggle against everything except maybe Hoard armies since they can put out a lot of shots a ok range. GK struggle against shooting armies because they have no fast means to reach fire lines and no long ranged weapons that aren't attached to a 250pt landraider to fire back with. They struggle because their HQ choice is way over costed to just be really good in CC. They struggle because their basic trooper is two points cheaper then a Necron Immortal and less durable and with weaker shooting. They struggle because no GK player EVER wants to use his 160+ point troop squad to sit around and objective claim. His strength is in cc so they rush to CC.

In general i think the points are laid out here for you Pro GK guys and i'd like for you to answer them rather then running your own arguments. Because every time you do I or someone else tackles your arguments but the main points against the GK as a balanced army are ignored. They are as follows:

1) GK are a specialist Force tasked with eliminating one specific enemy. GK fight demons. Their wargear and special abilities are geared toward fighting demons. Your weapons special rules are geared toward killing an army with invul saves only. There is only one army like that. GK have no balancing units that even the playing field toward non CC non hoard armies. You are an army tasked with one specific enemy. Encounters with non chaos forces are rare because by the narrative your based in the Terran home system and your not out crusading to capture worlds and purge the stars of xenos filth. The need for equipment to fight non chaos enemies that might be working with chaos is faulty. If a GK suspects that tyranids or orks are possessed he's not going to decide to take heavy bolters and flamers he's going to gear up with more incinerators and psicannons. If i suspect someone of demonic affiliation you bring weapons to combat the demon aspect since its your first priority. Weapons that kill demons kill xenis and heretics too.

2) Your background doesn't support plausible narrative for fighting non-chaos armies. Your examples on PG 52-53 are rude. Here's what i mean. Everyone of your examples listed force a story based implication onto your opponent that he may not agree with. For example, anyone with a DH codex turn to PG 53 with me and look at Tau examples. Lets do them one by one from the perspective of little billy farsight. option one-"My Tau is gunna do some vague evil? What if i'm sure my Tau is not a bad guy and is just defending a sept world. The second part of option one suggests i may get to field demons too. Do I?" Option two "That starts off pretty cool but the barriers between reality thing suggests i get to play some demons too, do I?" Option three "Neat a possessed psyker! you have a model i can borrow to play him and some rules?" Option four "OMFG i'm collecting pieces to a powerful artifact called an astral key.... OMFG that sounds awesome. What can i do with it, i get powers on the table right?" Option five-"Oh yeah that makes sense. I'm attacking something and your protecting it. Sounds like every game i've ever played but sure. Its weird cause you don't have a lot of stuff for me to even attack right? oh well, game on" The general ones i'm not gunna talk about, on pg52, but they all suggests i should be playing a possessed commander. If little billy Farsight asks the "What do i get to play question" based on these options he'll be very saddened to know that not only did his GK opponent not bring an chaos models for him to use but that even if he did, the random build options a page prior are awful. In fact i own all codexes produced with a few very small exceptions and in none of them that are not DH is there DH v something that i snot chaos ever portrayed or written about. Its suggestive of the intent of the authors, not proof as other examples abound but an additional chip in this category. in summery of point two you are forcing on your opponent story lines he may not agree with and offer no exciting rules or style of play in recompense for it. To play against some armies said armies have to behave differently then they normally would. Rude.

3) Your codex has options you willingly choose not to play. You suffer for that. The only non GK unit ever played by a GK player is an inquisitor with mystics. If they stray to play that why won't they stray to play allied guard, storm troopers, demon hosts assassins ect. Look, i get the need and desire to play pure. I play two pure chaos armies. TS and EC. I love them. I don't however lament how my EC can't take down tanks easily and how my TS can't kill enough of a hoard army before getting rolled. Pure armies are good at one thing and not at another. Even in Fluff specialization of forces is mention. IW broke the walls at Terra and laid siege to Hydra Cordatus. Arhiman found a mystic road into the webway and he turned all the TS into dust filled shells with magick, Imperial Fists squared off with the Siegemasters of the IW, ect ect ect. What you don't see is the TS pulling out their CC specialists and fighting against some tyranid swarm in an epic battle. You don't see the IW infiltrating an imperial hive and creating a network of spies and cultists ect ect. When you look at narrative and base the army and rules around it you realize there are few forces that are good at everything.

4) the role of the GK is not infringed on by other armies fighting demons too and doing it well Other Xenos armies fight demons well is not the issue. Other races should have means of fighting demons. Other Imperial armies fight demons because they are the first ones plagued with them or tasked with dealing with it. GK are a single large(ish) organization of astrates. I as planetary governor am not going to call for one specific chapter first because 1) they may be far away and thus slow to respond 2) will judge me very poorly and may kill me for having demons sack my world. This view is justified by narrative in the DH codex and the GK legendary formation apoc sheet. The army most commonly fighting demons is whatever is being plagued by demons first or is closest to respond. That's almost never going to be GK. GK equipment and rules are better for dealing with demons at the moment then most other races. I play demons. I'd rather have a a bunch of battle suit wearing tau shoot my demonettes then a few incinorators or psicannons. I'm wounded on the same number but atleast i can make a save against the rail cannons.

I think that is the summary of the points against GK. If a GK supporter wants to put up counter points in a logical fashion i'd be happy to tackle them but let's answer each others points instead of ranting like loons here.

quigglebert
07-02-2009, 16:18
the reason i say that the only army GK struggle against is the daemons is due to the massive loss of effectiveness that all the shiny new rules have brought about on the greyknights, for the purpouse of a NFW it counts as an force weapon, and when a successful psychic test is passed it causes instant death on a target, suddenly mr blood thirster is no longer scared of that shiny tin man underneath him, the fact daemons dont roll for instability means that another rule is negated, yes the greyknight still count as diff terrain for daemons when charging is a moot point, im not sure about the daemonic infestation as i aint got a daemons codex handy, yes there are the powers that have a bit of punch but the new daemons codex has removed alot of the greyknights effectiveness along with 5th edition rules, the greyknights are a very effective army but against daemons they really dont cut it anymore

against shooty armies you have to make the best use of cover and shrouding, and skip the shooting and run if you really need to cross ground, the grey knights truely excell against standard marine armies, and i know this as i have to face many marine players at my ccurrent gaming club as its still the most popular GW army for 40k

thechosenone
07-02-2009, 16:46
the reason i say that the only army GK struggle against is the daemons is due to the massive loss of effectiveness that all the shiny new rules have brought about on the greyknights, for the purpouse of a NFW it counts as an force weapon, and when a successful psychic test is passed it causes instant death on a target, suddenly mr blood thirster is no longer scared of that shiny tin man underneath him, the fact daemons dont roll for instability means that another rule is negated, yes the greyknight still count as diff terrain for daemons when charging is a moot point, im not sure about the daemonic infestation as i aint got a daemons codex handy, yes there are the powers that have a bit of punch but the new daemons codex has removed alot of the greyknights effectiveness along with 5th edition rules, the greyknights are a very effective army but against daemons they really dont cut it anymore

against shooty armies you have to make the best use of cover and shrouding, and skip the shooting and run if you really need to cross ground, the grey knights truely excell against standard marine armies, and i know this as i have to face many marine players at my ccurrent gaming club as its still the most popular GW army for 40k

I completely get where your coming from. But honestly its just the flow of the game. GK were great against three unit types from old chaos marnies codex 4th ed. They are not great against a book full of options and builds at the moment and that sadly isn't a problem fixable with an FAQ. It needs a redesign. Its debatable if it needs to be something worthy of an army wide codex or if they should just be units in other armies but either way your out gunned. As a demon player who frequently goes up against a GK player i can say that its a hard battle for the GK and one that i've never lost to. However, instability being lost was exchanged for not recycling demon units. I can tell you that the only units mentioned by name in DH codex toward demons that still exist today are greater demons and nurglings. The demons aren't demons argument is one that i think i started or at least posted the first thread about it in the rules section. I know it well and in practice no one honors the cheese that is that rule. The army is still well geared toward killing demons. The entire army's list of heavy and assault weapons AP every demon. The HQs in the army ignore eternal warrior. No demon will ever strike first on the charge against a demon hunter. If a GK thinks outside the purest ideology and takes an Inquisitor with mystics he's got a great advantage on demons.

Znail
07-02-2009, 17:06
If GK's became a strong standalone army, everyone would play them. I'd say the majority of MEQ armies would be Grey Knights.

They'd no longer be uncommon/rare on the table.

They'd no longer be as impressive.

Can't have your cake and eat it too.

I like the idea of certain armies being exclusive to people who sacrifice in-game power for fluff. There are a decent amount of players who really enjoy fielding fluffy armies that are uncommon to encounter, simply because they're not as good as a more powerful, less fluffy build. DH have been that army for quite some time. As long as the army is playable (which GKs are, easilly) I think its fine, and in a sense even good that they're not optimized for tournement play.

So, you expect GW to make GK bad, so that they will sell badly, all to make sure they stay a rare sight on the tabletop? Do I realy have to explain the problems with that reasoning?

quigglebert
07-02-2009, 19:21
@thechosenone

im not a puritian GK player, the only GK i use are one unit of 5 termies or 2 of 5, i run as many storm troopers as possable with a couple of dreadnoughts for the anti-tank requirements, but the fact of the matter is that even when using a balenced DH force as a whole your still against the odds to win against a daemon force although in the campaign im currently in im gonna have to have mystics.

holmcross
07-02-2009, 21:30
So, you expect GW to make GK bad, so that they will sell badly, all to make sure they stay a rare sight on the tabletop? Do I realy have to explain the problems with that reasoning?

Except GK are not bad. Pure forces are perfectly fine in casual and friendly games. Just like most thematic armies (at least when we were in an addition that thematic armies available to players)

holmcross
07-02-2009, 21:39
Current GKs aren't that impressive. If you don't do anything to improve them, how can they be better?

I'm talking about their fluff, and the added value via their scarcity. If they were put on the same level as any other marine army (in truth they'd probably end up being better) I'd estimate that 1/3 of the armies you face would be Grey Knights.


IG and SM aren't capable of fighting daemons. Why are they fighting them?
What will GKs do if their HQ or station is attacked by Tau or another race? Are they going to SURRENDER because they don't know how to DEFEAT these races? Please................

Nobody suggested anything about surrendering, and I don't know where you are coming up with the claim that IG and SM 'can't fight daemons.' This passage makes no sense.




Not many people play GKs. If it's the reason why GKs shouldn't be an army, it's not a valid one because SM will always be GW's favorite army whether people play GKs or not.

Right, because GK aren't essentially everything that space marines are, only more elite and badass?

Khornies & milk
07-02-2009, 21:40
Except GK are not bad. Pure forces are perfectly fine in casual and friendly games. Just like most thematic armies (at least when we were in an addition that thematic armies available to players)

That's how I played them as well, although the majority of my opponents aren't into power-lists, so the GK's were relatively competitive.

Oh, and holmcross...you shouldn't double-post, just edit and/or multiquote.

Corrode
07-02-2009, 22:36
holmcross, no-one cares about the 'added value' GKs get from being rare besides those people who have to be incredible special flowers in everything they do. I suspect that most people would rather just have one more army that was both interesting to play, interesting to paint and model, and competitive - giving people more options is never a bad thing. Further, '1/3 of marine armies will be GK' is an absurd claim - the reason most people play Marines is that they have a wide, well-supported model range and a high degree of customisation potential - you can come up with any Chapter fluff and colour scheme you like, pretty much. People aren't going to start playing Grey Knights just because suddenly they're competitive unless they already have an interest.

Nakor
07-02-2009, 22:36
daemons are pretty tough, so you have to be pretty tough to fight them. that doesnt mean however that when you find your beating on orks instead of daemons you automagicaly become weaker. sure the equipment isnt as effective, but bolter rounds in the face kill you no matter what race your from.

Grand Master Raziel
07-02-2009, 22:36
A couple points I want to address here.


2) Your background doesn't support plausible narrative for fighting non-chaos armies.

Actually, it does. Grey Knights are the enforcement arm of the Ordo Malleus, who are going to stick their oar in anywhere where they might suspect there's either a major daemonic infestation, or some serious danger of a daemonic incursion being caused, wittingly or unwittingly, by whatever agencies are involved. Also, Chaos cults tend to pop up everywhere, not just in the Imperium. Sometimes, an Inquisitor Lord might be able to call on other Imperial forces to deal with such matters, and sometimes they can't. When they can't, the forces that the Ordo Malleus has to draw on had better be up to the task.

A seperate, but no less legitimate argument, is that your point does not consider the fact that anyone who collects an army is going to want to play that army with an expectation at having a reasonable chance of winning. An army that's fantastic against one particular army but severely handicapped against all other armies is not a good formula for fun games, and is not going to sell well.


3) Your codex has options you willingly choose not to play. You suffer for that.

In the case of many players, that might not be true. In my case, it is not. I've been using the entirety of available units right from the moment I decided to collect a standalone DH army. My DH armies have always had ISTs, Assassins, and DCAs in addition to the usual run of GKs, GKTs, and the Inquisitor Lord and his fire-support retinue. The only unit that I didn't use was the Daemonhost, and that's because you can't use Daemonhosts in the same army list as any GK units. I also use Inducted IG, which does help, but it's a case of supplementing what is widely regarded as the weakest army in the game with elements from what is widely regarded as the second-weakest army in the game. More recently, I've been monkeying with a Radical DH force with no GKs, instead using...well, everything else in the dex (including Daemonhosts) and a healthy contingent of inducted IG. That's my antagonist force, for when I play against someone with a protagonist army (Space Marines, IG, etc). So, I've used everything one can.


I'm talking about their fluff, and the added value via their scarcity. If they were put on the same level as any other marine army (in truth they'd probably end up being better) I'd estimate that 1/3 of the armies you face would be Grey Knights.

I don't think that's necessarily the case. Most serious DH players aren't looking for GKs to be Ultramarines with NFWs. What we would like is an army that can be reasonably thematic without being unreasonably gimped. A lot of the specifically anti-daemonic options in the dex (psy-powers, wargear, certain upgrades) are foolish to take because they're expensive and of no use at all against non-daemonic forces. Other than that, there's a laundry list of little buffs that DH players would like - things like frag grenades for our PAGKs, a couple of decent Fast Attack choices (one for GKs, one for non-GK forces), a decent Heavy Support choice that isn't a GK unit, a decent midrange GK Hero, and having Inquisitors/Inquisitor Lords and their retinues not suck at everything but fire support. Taken as a whole, that stuff would not turn DH armies into Space Marines++, but it would be a considerable improvement to the Daemonhunters list.

ruttman15
07-02-2009, 23:06
they shouldnt. it makes them so hard to use... i think they should have buffs vs. all "enemies of the empirium" cuz otherwise, its just hoping you get matched to daemons.

Occulto
07-02-2009, 23:48
I asked GW employees about it and guess what? They go by the book.

Receiving a paycheck from GW does not make one lick of difference whether someone is reasonable or not.


I asked people why I wouldn't see a new codex soon. The answer was it wasn't sold well even though it's a bad codex. If nobody has any problem accepting this answer as a lame excuse, why do i have a problem accepting a lame technicality from other players?

Asked whom? Guys in the Studio?

As far as I'm aware, nothing official has been given as a reason why the Inquisition is not on the radar. There's certainly been plenty of speculation.

You are but one of many who want their codex updated ASAP. If DH was done next, then someone else wouldn't be next. That's what's always going to happen.

The Orange
08-02-2009, 00:03
IMO
Daemon Hunters should be good against everyone.
Pure GK should be good against Daemons.
The Daemon Hunters codex can sure use a re-write, but their are other armies in that boat too.

Fluff wise I don't think theirs much support for GK pure armies being able to take on everyone else. They are a specific weapon designed to fight a specific foe, just like how you design a flamer to take out a lot of lightly armored troops, not to kill a tank 300 feet away.

Think about it logically, you've got 1 chapter of these guys in the universe, their all supposed to be uber tough psykers (able to resist corruption etc.) and you've got thousands if not billions of worlds to try to protect with these guys. Would you rather spend your time training them to take out daemons, or would you cut down their training so that they can be thought how to operate battle tanks, conduct siege warfare, ride bikes, etc. ?

GK, by the fluff, are a rare tool of the Inquisitions to use against Daemons, their are plenty of grunts in the Imperium to take on everything else. I imagine GK strike teams are assembled and utilized in very specific actions, i.e. go in, kill daemons in the center of the **** storm and get the hell out. They are not there to take the hill, they are not there to capture objectives, they are not there to lead the assault, they are there to deliver the final decapitating blow to an uncommon enemy. Fluff wise the only time a pure GK army needs to be pulled together is when theirs a full daemon army to deal with, against any other army the Imperium should be covered because that's what all those SM and IG were trained for, remember?

And no, just because GK can kick the crap out of daemons does not mean they can kick the crap out of everyone. Just because each and every GK is extremely well trained and extremely well equipped does not mean that the GKs chapter has the infrastructure to conduct warfare against full fledged armies. These guys are trained to go mono-a-mono with daemons, get in their face and bust some heads, and not much more. That's why there's the inquisition behind them, that's why there's inducted IG and SM, those guys do the dirty work of taking the battle field and setting the stage so the GK can go in quickly and do their specialized job. That way instead of having a full company of GK fight off one daemon infested world, you can split up that company, support them by basic troops, and fight of several daemon infested worlds.

40kdhs
08-02-2009, 17:31
Nobody suggested anything about surrendering, and I don't know where you are coming up with the claim that IG and SM 'can't fight daemons.' This passage makes no sense.


Of course, it doesn't make sense to you because you don't want to see a full GK army.



Right, because GK aren't essentially everything that space marines are, only more elite and badass?

They are according to the 'fluff'.



Originally Posted by thechosenone
Your background doesn't support plausible narrative for fighting non-chaos armies.


the reason we didn't see a full GK army was we didn't have a daemon army in 3rd and 4th edition. Because we see a daemon army, we'll see a GK army. You need to have an opened-mind if you wish to learn anything new about our secret organization.

Just because you haven't heard about GK fighting with other races, it doesn't mean that it hasn't happened. Agree?

In fact, why do you not ask any SpaceWolves players about their fighting with GKs if you don't own a SW codex?


Receiving a paycheck from GW does not make one lick of difference whether someone is reasonable or not.



Yes, I know it. If you have a dispute with another player about GK special rule and need to have an 'official' to clarify it in GW tournament, GW employees are the final answer.

AdmiralDick
08-02-2009, 22:09
2) Your background doesn't support plausible narrative for fighting non-chaos armies.

i'm inclined to agree, though i think i made that point clear earlier. however, this is going to be an issue however GKs make it to the table-top, unless there is a complete prohibition on fielding GKs against anyone who wasn't Chaotic.

i don't think i'd want to go down that route myself, i'd prefer to allow players to be able to field them as a 0-1 or special character unit and just let them use their own faculties to work out who they should and should not play against. that allows players the freedom to say that their Eldar or Tau really are Chaotic (even if Bregalad spins in his grave ;)).

if you're still not sold on the concept, then how about taking the 'corrupt terrain' train a bit further. if a unit of GKs allowed the opposing player to 'corrupt' up to 3 pieces of terrain, that offered all units in that army some kind of buff, it doesn't have to be big, but something that indicates that they are corrupt. and Chaotic units could get a bigger buff from this terrain, like we've all been discussing.

that way players can choose whether they want to be corrupt or not, and will give a bit more table top justification for seeing GKs.


holmcross, no-one cares about the 'added value' GKs get from being rare besides those people who have to be incredible special flowers in everything they do.

i don't think that's true at all.

the added value of rarity makes the GK everything they are. without that they are just SM with a rather ugly colour scheme.

i could very easily say that only GK fanbois think that quantity is better than quality, and much as it might be true, it would be petty. however, i have noticed far fewer people that are impressed by seeing their opponents field GKs than every before the C: DH was published. GKs are drab and dull and a new all-GK codex would generate a small amount of short-term interest, but it would not make the army more popular (except with new-starters, who generally pick up the latest armies released by GW. i know i did back in 2nd.)


Actually, it does. Grey Knights are the enforcement arm of the Ordo Malleus, who are going to stick their oar in anywhere where they might suspect there's either a major daemonic infestation, or some serious danger of a daemonic incursion being caused, wittingly or unwittingly, by whatever agencies are involved. Also, Chaos cults tend to pop up everywhere, not just in the Imperium. Sometimes, an Inquisitor Lord might be able to call on other Imperial forces to deal with such matters, and sometimes they can't. When they can't, the forces that the Ordo Malleus has to draw on had better be up to the task.

this doesn't address the point at all. it just confirms it.

thechosenone was saying that the justification for fielding GKs is to just call all your opponents 'chaotic', which is to completely deny that particular race's background and relies on a crutch that no other army has to. no one else has to make up a false accusation about their enemy simply to fight them.

plenty of other armies that don't have rules don't require such maccarthyism like excuses to take to the battlefield, and would be equally deserving of the attention. Hrud, Slaan, Kroot Mercs, LatD, AdMech, any of the other first founding SM/CSMs, (even, dare i say it, the Death Watch); the list is as long as my sizeable arms. Demiurg would likely please as many previously disaffected players as would leave the hobby over loosing their all-GK rules.


A seperate, but no less legitimate argument, is that your point does not consider the fact that anyone who collects an army is going to want to play that army with an expectation at having a reasonable chance of winning.

the argument stands regardless of people's feelings, but thechosenone does not attempt to find a bridge between the two problems. the reason that he/she/it [delete as applicable] does not, is because they have already indicated that they do not feel that an entire army of GKs is the correct way to represent them, so sees no reason to try and look for ways around this situation when they feel none can be found.

perhaps you might be able to come up with some kind of bridge between the disconnected ends if you think that its possible.


I don't think that's necessarily the case. Most serious DH players aren't looking for GKs to be Ultramarines with NFWs.

i'm not sure how you would make them anything but that (or DA/BA/BT/SW with NFW). the current codex is hardly exotic in comparison to the bog-standard. the problem with a full army is that they necessarily have to be more mudane. you have to have standard and elite troops, and that pretty much shoots GKs dead in the water. and to make the army roughly comparable in power to other armies (so that its competitive, but not over competitive) you have to kick them whilst they are down.

sure, they might not be Ultras, but they are never going to end up striking the right cord.

thechosenone
09-02-2009, 03:21
Fantastic points admiral dick and i think i gave you credit for creating one of the points i touched on in some earlier post.

massey
09-02-2009, 05:06
There are a lot of MEQ armies. Making Grey Knights one more wouldn't hurt.

I think Demonhunters/Grey Knights should be balanced against all lists. Grey Knights don't only attack demons. Remember, they attacked and butchered the... Fire Hawks? Somebody like that, the ones who are rumored to now be the Legion of the Damned. So obviously they are good at fighting more than just demons. Anyone who can kill an entire SM chapter in one assault is going to be skilled at regular warfare.

As to whether this would make Tau or Eldar or whoever chaotic, I don't see the problem. The Fire Hawks weren't chaotic -- the Inquisition just happened to think they were. So what if your Tau army is just sitting around defending its sept world? There might be a dirty book somewhere in there, so the Grey Knights have come to destroy you before you summon a demon or something. Whether your good guy Tau happen to know about said dirty book, well, that's up to you. You know, assuming such a book exists at all. Maybe after the battle, the GK say "hey, my bad" and leave. It's not like the Inquisition hasn't been wrong before. And it's no worse an excuse than Dark Eldar trying to take Demon slaves, or Ultramarines versus Ultramarines, or the Nids trying to eat Necrons. Or those classic battles when Abaddon flies halfway across the galaxy to attack the almighty Tau.

Personally, I'd want to see GK done as a Legion of the Damned style add-on for regular SM. Since the SM codex is already out, however, that seems unlikely.

Would GK replace regular marines? Nah. You can give them different strengths and weaknesses than standard marines, just like Space Wolves or Black Templars. I'd use game mechanics that gave them advantages against demons, but it wouldn't be JUST against demons. Let them shoot at deepstrikers. Give them an invulnerable save. Give them weapons that are useful against monstrous creatures. Give them psychic powers that are good against multiple opponents. These powers will differentiate them from SM, give them advantages againt demons (as well as others), and in general make them an elite army, like Deathwing. Deathwing, after all, is bigger and more badass than regular SM, but I don't see a rush of people running out to buy it.

thechosenone
09-02-2009, 05:38
There are a lot of MEQ armies. Making Grey Knights one more wouldn't hurt.

I think Demonhunters/Grey Knights should be balanced against all lists. Grey Knights don't only attack demons. Remember, they attacked and butchered the... Fire Hawks? Somebody like that, the ones who are rumored to now be the Legion of the Damned. So obviously they are good at fighting more than just demons. Anyone who can kill an entire SM chapter in one assault is going to be skilled at regular warfare.

As to whether this would make Tau or Eldar or whoever chaotic, I don't see the problem. The Fire Hawks weren't chaotic -- the Inquisition just happened to think they were. So what if your Tau army is just sitting around defending its sept world? There might be a dirty book somewhere in there, so the Grey Knights have come to destroy you before you summon a demon or something. Whether your good guy Tau happen to know about said dirty book, well, that's up to you. You know, assuming such a book exists at all. Maybe after the battle, the GK say "hey, my bad" and leave. It's not like the Inquisition hasn't been wrong before. And it's no worse an excuse than Dark Eldar trying to take Demon slaves, or Ultramarines versus Ultramarines, or the Nids trying to eat Necrons. Or those classic battles when Abaddon flies halfway across the galaxy to attack the almighty Tau.

Personally, I'd want to see GK done as a Legion of the Damned style add-on for regular SM. Since the SM codex is already out, however, that seems unlikely.

Would GK replace regular marines? Nah. You can give them different strengths and weaknesses than standard marines, just like Space Wolves or Black Templars. I'd use game mechanics that gave them advantages against demons, but it wouldn't be JUST against demons. Let them shoot at deepstrikers. Give them an invulnerable save. Give them weapons that are useful against monstrous creatures. Give them psychic powers that are good against multiple opponents. These powers will differentiate them from SM, give them advantages againt demons (as well as others), and in general make them an elite army, like Deathwing. Deathwing, after all, is bigger and more badass than regular SM, but I don't see a rush of people running out to buy it.

I respect differing points of view but i think there is a lack of honesty in how "alike" it is to compare grey knights causes of battling other non chaos forces to the reasons other forces might tangle.

Tyranids will eat the tomb world unless its barren, in which case the battle in question probably isn't taking place.

Dark Eldar are likly to encounter and fight slaanesh demons perhaps because they aren't buying their soul's safe from she who thirsts. Other demons can suffer and suffering of any kind is the winsauce of a dark eldar. Ultra Marines really don't fight ultra marines and in battle like that i just always assume its a training exercise.

Again i respect other views on this but your opinion on all GK forces going to war is either "regardless of what race you are and no matter your background you have a chaos item or are hidden chaos agent" or... "Oops my bad. Let's get back to jupiter's moons now"

I'm not saying i couldn't think of at least a dozen different neat ways for GK to be involved in a fight with non-chaos but each one of them is an exception, a rare odd occurrence. Your army's gaming career is a series of oops moments and chaos encounters where no chaos is meant to be.

As far as the balance you mentioned. They can already shoot at deepstrikers assuming they play an inquisitor and mystics which some purist players don't. Their force weapon can kill anything in the game regardless of Eternal Warrior, a trait i suspect will carry over to 5th ed DH codex. I'm not sure why you'd give them invulnerable saves. They already have shrouding and they already are too expensive to make functional. They are as varied and balanced as possible while still reflecting the POINT OF THEIR EXISTENCE in game. THey can't be both balanced and super awesome at murdering demons ok. GK players can't have both. Its not like tau all have Holy hatred toward race X while still having regular Tau benefits and restrictions.

40kdhs
09-02-2009, 19:02
Ultra Marines really don't fight ultra marines.

Are you serious?:confused: :wtf: Do you know why we have 'chaos' SM? Please do not forget how Emperor was killed. In the history of mankind, we have been fighting each other for decades.

How could you possibly tell everybody with a straight face that we haven't had any conflict within Imperium?




THey can't be both balanced and super awesome at murdering demons ok. GK players can't have both. Its not like tau all have Holy hatred toward race X while still having regular Tau benefits and restrictions.

Why can we not have a balanced GK army? You talk as if a GK player will get an automatic win when he faces a daemon army. If we are going to use your logic, GKs are killed when their HQ or station is attacked by another force because they can't defend themselves against 'none chaos' armies.

holmcross
09-02-2009, 21:10
Of course, it doesn't make sense to you because you don't want to see a full GK army.

No, it makes no sense because you're not referencing anything I said, nor are you making a logical progression to your conclusion. Your statement is too ambiguous and non-sequitur to give a real response to.


They are according to the 'fluff'.

Painfully obvious sarcasm anyone?

ceaser543
09-02-2009, 21:11
As all DH players would of realised that GK are yes fluff wise geared towards fighting demons on the table the only real advantge is the pyscanon and incinarator. (spell) Yes the rules are trying to state a clear advantge demons but one rule is that all demon troops get to recycle and tehre is a note under it that says that they added it because basicly this argument would appear...

40kdhs
10-02-2009, 00:11
No, it makes no sense because you're not referencing anything I said, nor are you making a logical progression to your conclusion. Your statement is too ambiguous and non-sequitur to give a real response to.



Have you not asked any SW player about why they fought GKs?

The Orange
10-02-2009, 01:50
Have you not asked any SW player about why they fought GKs?

And this justifies GK having a full army somehow? And aren't the SW still around, it doesn't look like the GK did that great of a jab does it? :p

Commander Farsight fights orks regularly, by your logic, that is "They fight other armies therefore they must be a full army themselves" I can reasonably say that Farsight should not be under any silly restrictions such as 0-1 tanks, 0-1 broadside units, etc. After all he has an army and they should have more then one tank lying around right :rolleyes:.

And what about the rest of the Ordo Mallus? Indoctrinated IG/SM allies etc. are their to provide the complete army that the GK are not supposed to be. If GW makes GK a full army whats the point of having Inquisitors, inducted guardsmen, etc.? You know that 99% of DH are going to be pure GK if GW made them capable of being a pure army. Thus ruining the whole reason for having INQUISITOR codices.

revnow
10-02-2009, 02:20
@ceaser543: The only problem is that the sustained attack scenario rule no longer exists in 5th Edition, and there is no listing of the rules for it in Codex: DH, which means that the Daemonic infestation rule is now simply ignored. Just another reason why Daemonhunters have dramatically improved against Daemons as a result of 5th Edition.

thechosenone
10-02-2009, 03:35
Are you serious?:confused: :wtf: Do you know why we have 'chaos' SM? Please do not forget how Emperor was killed. In the history of mankind, we have been fighting each other for decades.

How could you possibly tell everybody with a straight face that we haven't had any conflict within Imperium?




Why can we not have a balanced GK army? You talk as if a GK player will get an automatic win when he faces a daemon army. If we are going to use your logic, GKs are killed when their HQ or station is attacked by another force because they can't defend themselves against 'none chaos' armies.

So with your first point and in a logical calm fashion i can respond. Again your example of why we fight is another "Chaos is involved or oops no chaos my bad back to titan." In your ultra marine example you are either playing a historical refight (Which isn't very historical since there is no reference material to speak of regarding traitor ultra marines) or your playing out some ultra rare exception to the rule type battle. And I'm sorry but unless chaos is involved there is no reason for Grey Knights to be fighting loyalist imperial forces(Codex loyalist i mean) And you throwing a chaos story hook on someone else is just bad story telling unless your opponent somehow agrees to that. I get that not everyone cares about story and narratve during game play but if your spending 25 bucks on a book you must give some care and credence to the information there in eh?

Now for your second point. You cannot have a balanced army for several reasons. first, by definition you are not a balanced force. You are supposed to excel at killing demons, i'm sure you can find some reference to your demon killing expertise somewhere in Codex: Demonhunters. Secondly, by giving you advantages in fighting demons and no drawbacks while fighting demons while making you more adept at fighting all comers you are gaining only advantages. Third you have a str 5 template weapon option that ignores all but armor, you have a 3 shot str 6 weapon that is assault and ignores invul, you have an force weapon that trumps eternal warrior, you have shrouding. These are all things that function vs all enemies. These are not trit things i've mentioned. Finally, Inquisitors have all the special weapons that devastators will have, a trio of outflanking death cult assassins are pretty cool, Callidus assassins are made of winsauce, Chimera riding stormtroopers with a pair of plasmas is sweet anti MEQ and you can make a rather large area tricky to spend time in with orb bombardment. What did i just name, everything in your codex that based on a willing decision made i assume out of sound mind and body you ignore to play a thematic and fun army of all GK.

Now to all you defenders of GK, Admiral DIck, Orange and myself have laid out very intelligent cogent and rational points. I myself laid out 4 extremely well thought out clear points in post 67. few pro all GK posters have responded to them. I and the above people i mentioned answer every specific claim put forth by the pro side. Try responding to our points in full rather then just choosing key phrases and thinking up rare exceptions to the rule to justify your argument.

40kdhs
10-02-2009, 17:47
And this justifies GK having a full army somehow?


It simply proves that GKs also fight none chaos armies. You aren't honest when telling everybody that GKs only fighting daemons.



And what about the rest of the Ordo Mallus? Indoctrinated IG/SM allies etc. are their to provide the complete army that the GK are not supposed to be. If GW makes GK a full army whats the point of having Inquisitors, inducted guardsmen, etc.? You know that 99% of DH are going to be pure GK if GW made them capable of being a pure army. Thus ruining the whole reason for having INQUISITOR codices.

Now to all you defenders of GK, Admiral DIck, Orange and myself have laid out very intelligent cogent and rational points. I myself laid out 4 extremely well thought out clear points in post 67. few pro all GK posters have responded to them. I and the above people i mentioned answer every specific claim put forth by the pro side. Try responding to our points in full rather then just choosing key phrases and thinking up rare exceptions to the rule to justify your argument.

If it's the case, so be it.You can't tell people how to play their army. Just because Inquisitors are included in DH codex, it doesn't mean that i'll use them. If I can paint my army however I want, why do I need to play the way you want?

Your objection to a full GK army has nothing to do with the fluff or game but your own selfishness. It's really sad when people like you are not willing to see an expanded GK army.



So with your first point and in a logical calm fashion i can respond. Again your example of why we fight is another "Chaos is involved or oops no chaos my bad back to titan." In your ultra marine example you are either playing a historical refight (Which isn't very historical since there is no reference material to speak of regarding traitor ultra marines) or your playing out some ultra rare exception to the rule type battle. And I'm sorry but unless chaos is involved there is no reason for Grey Knights to be fighting loyalist imperial forces(Codex loyalist i mean) And you throwing a chaos story hook on someone else is just bad story telling unless your opponent somehow agrees to that. I get that not everyone cares about story and narratve during game play but if your spending 25 bucks on a book you must give some care and credence to the information there in eh?


In the beginning, you don't want to see a full GK army because we are 'daemonhunters' and we only fight 'daemons'. It's not really true. When I ask you if you know anything about the fight between GKs and SW, you ignore this simple fact and still assert that GKs only fight daemons.

You simply can't pick and choose which historical event to your liking even though it happened. The fact that it happened tells us that there is a chance which GKs will take the fight to the enemy of Imperium even though we don't know much about it. After all, we are a secret organization.



Now for your second point. You cannot have a balanced army for several reasons. first, by definition you are not a balanced force.


The reason it is not a balanced army because GW didn't do a good job. It's that simple. I believe that it can be a balanced force IF we want it to be.




You are supposed to excel at killing demons, i'm sure you can find some reference to your demon killing expertise somewhere in Codex: Demonhunters. Secondly, by giving you advantages in fighting demons and no drawbacks while fighting demons while making you more adept at fighting all comers you are gaining only advantages.


Just because you have a balanced GK army which is good against everybody, it doesn't mean that we will be better than SM because it'll never happen. How do I know? SM and chaos have been GW's 'favorite' ones in the last 20+ years and they are not going to change it when a full GK army comes out. They certainly will not make a new daemon army less competative.




Third you have a str 5 template weapon option that ignores all but armor, you have a 3 shot str 6 weapon that is assault and ignores invul, you have an force weapon that trumps eternal warrior, you have shrouding. These are all things that function vs all enemies. These are not trit things i've mentioned. Finally, Inquisitors have all the special weapons that devastators will have, a trio of outflanking death cult assassins are pretty cool, Callidus assassins are made of winsauce, Chimera riding stormtroopers with a pair of plasmas is sweet anti MEQ and you can make a rather large area tricky to spend time in with orb bombardment. What did i just name, everything in your codex that based on a willing decision made i assume out of sound mind and body you ignore to play a thematic and fun army of all GK.


What do you try to prove? DH is still the 'weakest' codex?

thechosenone
10-02-2009, 21:09
40KDHS...

I'm not getting anywhere with you here am I?

The logistics of you being sent against non-chaos forces is answered in your opinion by historical exceptions to the rule. So there is the clear line between us. You use exceptions as justifications, i use intent as justification. For the record, you are typing things about my stance that aren't true. I haven't ignored historical events. UNLESS your playing historical refights then the narrative suggests GK are used for Demon hunting. You can't even claim that your historically refighting the H. Heresy because the knights didn't exist then. Its the same as telling me there is common evidence to show that every faction and race is on every world battling a ten way fight because in several campaigns its been like that. There are Exceptions to the rule and then there is the common way things should be. So to summarize our first difference... Exceptions to the rule are enough to justify anything VS the intent of the faction dicates the way it should be.

The second difference has to do with the balance of the army. You seem to think that GW did a bad job on your codex and with any FAQS and support. I'm not even gunna cite how little your army is played to warrant massive support. The real issue is this, the GK which are a facet of the DH codex were released with a specific theme in mind. Not shooty, not CC beasts, they were the bane of chaos. And they succeeded under 4th in being a strong army to face all but the most twinked out demon bomb or IW list. In 5th there is a whole army out there called Chaos demons. They are balanced to fight all comers with no racial advantage. GW is doing a fine job of releasing an army that sold well and making a balanced list, they are not doing a fine job of backtracking to fix an army list where players ignore 1/2 the codex choices.

To continue the second difference between us on Balance. You see all the things i named: Chimera plasma teams in alright armor, Inquisitor teams with all the heavy weapon options you need and free shots on DS units, Flank marching power weapon assassins, Orb bombardments and you can even take allies from Guard and SM if you want. The allied factor is something i never mentioned but i will now, you can be all the balanced you want to be by selecting troops from balanced armies. Again, if your playing only a few select choices from a list then why do you expect to be balanced. Shrouding, that's a great power. All your units are fearless. Come on, what do you want. Tell me what units you want!? I don't complain that if i play only tzeentch/thousand sons that i'm gunna get rocked by hoards and that GW ought to do something about that. I mean... my god... there is actually supporting narrative for lone chaos legions. So to summarize the second difference between us you believe that the existing units despite all the GK special rules and weapons and gear to eliminate demons you need to be more balanced toward everything and pointing out units you don't play doesn't help any because you won't play them. Where as i say that by ignoring units in your list you are willingly throwing aside balance in favor of theme and should put up with that even though you have special rules and weapons that function against all armies equally well.

My final request or question is this: What types of units or balance do you want? WHat is missing from your book? I'm past the why we fight idea because there is just a fundamental disconnect between what i consider rude story telling and what you consider kosher. I wanna focus on what rules/weapons and units you feel your missing and why you think you should have those units.

The Orange
10-02-2009, 21:09
It simply proves that GKs also fight none chaos armies. You aren't honest when telling everybody that GKs only fighting daemons.
I never said they don't, no one said they don't. They do fight more then just daemons. Just because they fight more then daemons doesn't mean they do it regularly, it does not mean they do it unsupported by anyone else in the Imperium (Inquisitors, IG, SM, etc.), and finally it doesn't mean they do it well. Thus just because they fight other armies does not justify them being a competitive army on their own.


If it's the case, so be it.You can't tell people how to play their army. Just because Inquisitors are included in DH codex, it doesn't mean that i'll use them. If I can paint my army however I want, why do I need to play the way you want?
Quite right you are, but that's not what were discussing. We're discussing weather GK deserve to be a competitive army on their own or not. While their is no doubt the codex is in need of a revision codex DH has several options to deal with other armies as need be, GW has written the codex with each unit in there to have specific roles. If a player chooses to play a themed army to ignores certain units, then they should accept the fact that they will lack those abilities that those ignored units provided.


Your objection to a full GK army has nothing to do with the fluff or game but your own selfishness. It's really sad when people like you are not willing to see an expanded GK army.
Prove it, how am I being selfish? Otherwise stick to actually supporting your arguments instead of attacking people who disagree with you. :eyebrows:


Just because you have a balanced GK army which is good against everybody, it doesn't mean that we will be better than SM because it'll never happen.
What does that have to do with anything said here? No one here is saying their afraid that GK will become powerful then SM. People are saying, if it did happen, then everyone would be playing GK instead of SM, thus GK won't hold that special collectors army flair. How proud are you going to be of your GK army when you walk into a tournament and more then 50% of the people there have it? Maybe you could care less, but I think some people like the fact that their armies are rare both in the fluff and on the tabletop. Turing GK into a powerful self contained army would be IMO an insult to their image, especially since so much of their image had to do with the rarity of them.

loveless
10-02-2009, 21:14
Folks, I had only to check two things to know why these posts were so bloody long.

1) Is the topic Grey Knights?
Check.

2) Is 40kdhs one of the people posting?
Check.

Note to you lot - you will never convince 40Kdhs of ANYTHING that relates to Daemonhunters/Grey Knights no matter what proof, reasoning, or logic you apply. He is very set in his beliefs about them and has accepted them as canon. Trust me. I've been here. Twice.

It's honestly probably best to just move along and let him continue in his own personal bliss :p

Just take it from someone who's tried to carry on a GK thread before...it's best to move along.

thechosenone
10-02-2009, 21:23
Folks, I had only to check two things to know why these posts were so bloody long.

1) Is the topic Grey Knights?
Check.

2) Is 40kdhs one of the people posting?
Check.

Note to you lot - you will never convince 40Kdhs of ANYTHING that relates to Daemonhunters/Grey Knights no matter what proof, reasoning, or logic you apply. He is very set in his beliefs about them and has accepted them as canon. Trust me. I've been here. Twice.

It's honestly probably best to just move along and let him continue in his own personal bliss :p

Just take it from someone who's tried to carry on a GK thread before...it's best to move along.

Thanks loveless for the information. Its nice to know where your fellow gamer is coming from and i was kind of getting sure that 40KDHS was most likely a hardcore fanatic about his army. Nothing wrong with that i guess though it sort of colors the argument at times.

I'm not afraid to hold a conversation with fanatics. I mean, it takes all the effort of typing on a keyboard.

My wish is that he'd just explain himself on the points that are mentioned. Why he thinks its ok to justify GK armies and them fighting anything they want by either pointing to exceptions or attaching chaos story arcs to opponents. I wish he'd explain why he deserves balance when he willing ignores units in the codex. Why he deserves balance against enemies he wasn't intended to fight. Why the rules that he has which are useful against all enemies isn't enough balance for an army intended to fight only one type of foe. We all respond to each point he lays out fairly and without bias or accusation.

Turok117
10-02-2009, 21:37
GK's should have some advantages versus demons, duh.

However, they should not be penalised versus other armies. Don't give them ADVANTAGES versus other specific armies, just make them big and scary and better than your average infantryman (when points are ignored, of course).

Justicar Myo
11-02-2009, 00:45
Now i agree with the fact that GK are good agianst deamons but they have some of the same stuff as other chapters so they should at least be good vs cultist because most cultist (unless there are of khorne) they might need a deamon to give them any real power over a Space Marine i mean i dont think there is a single cultist of Tzennch that goes down to the gym and works out every day:p

Justicar Myo
11-02-2009, 00:58
now Chosen is right in to the fact that GK has all of the other people in there army so dont just go out saying that GK needs a full army because they do if you were to just put all aspects of the Malllus togather in to one army you get some thing that can fight deamons and do some dmg on other stuff.

Justicar Myo
11-02-2009, 01:05
What does that have to do with anything said here? No one here is saying their afraid that GK will become powerful then SM. People are saying, if it did happen, then everyone would be playing GK instead of SM, thus GK won't hold that special collectors army flair. How proud are you going to be of your GK army when you walk into a tournament and more then 50% of the people there have it? Maybe you could care less, but I think some people like the fact that their armies are rare both in the fluff and on the tabletop. Turing GK into a powerful self contained army would be IMO an insult to their image, especially since so much of their image had to do with the rarity of them.

That right i like the idea of me haveing GK and my firends not. now what i do is some times if i am not at a tournament my and my firend mix armies (not like i have eldar with necrons i mean like mixing Loyal chapters with Loyal chapter and my firends will mix Chaos with Chaos) so i like the idea of having the some what rare GK

Corrode
11-02-2009, 01:14
I've said it before and I'll say it again - catering to the needs of players to be special snowflakes is not a good way to run a business. There's already a huge number of ways to make your army unique, via conversions, paintjobs, putting lightbulbs inside them, and so on. Even just using the vanilla forces gives you a huge amount of variety, let alone counts-as forces like Traitor Guard, Mechanicus, Rebel Grotz and so on. Taking an already semi-established army and making it harder to play and collect to accommodate the needs of 14 year olds to feel like they play 'teh rarest and bestest marinez!' is ridiculous - all the arguments that 'GK should be more expensive so that less people play them!' are insane, as are the ones that state GK should be uncompetitive in order to stop people playing them. Surely making more competitive armies will see more variety of opponents (not less) and enhance everyone's experience?

The Orange
11-02-2009, 01:25
all the arguments that 'GK should be more expensive so that less people play them!' are insane
Not one single person here has made that argument. :confused:


Surely making more competitive armies will see more variety of opponents (not less) and enhance everyone's experience?
Which can be done by updating the Ordo Mallus. Why does it have to specifically be GK that get their own special army? Who's catering to the needs of "I'm special" 14 year olds now?

GK (like many things in 40k) are cool but that doesn't mean they should get their own army.

Corrode
11-02-2009, 01:48
Not one single person here has made that argument. :confused:

Not in this thread, but I've seen it said before (I believe it was in a thread discussing which armies needed to get plastics next).



Which can be done by updating the Ordo Mallus. Why does it have to specifically be GK that get their own special army? Who's catering to the needs of "I'm special" 14 year olds now?

GK (like many things in 40k) are cool but that doesn't mean they should get their own army.

I wasn't arguing that the GK should get their own army, I was simply making the point (which to be honest is probably getting repetitive) that they shouldn't be forced into this niche of 'anti-Daemon only', and that making them uncompetitive for the sake of 'making them rarer' is a bit silly.

The problem at the moment seems to be that people take Daemonhunters and Grey Knights as being the same thing. They're not. Every time this gets brought up the focus is almost exclusively on the Grey Knights, as though the DH contains no other options (a point already made by thechosenone).

Absolutely, if one wants to field pure Grey Knights, one should be able to. And absolutely, if one does so, one should expect them not to play particularly well - much as if you ran a Space Marine army with only scouts, or Tyranids with nothing but Termagants, or so on. Any list which ignores most of the options in its codex is going to end up massively broken - whether they're unplayably bad or exceedingly good isn't the point.

That said, Grey Knights should be a viable option within the context of the wider Daemonhunters codex. The GKs themselves shouldn't just be anti-Daemon. As has been made clear by the apparent confusion between the GKs and the DH as a whole, they're the main selling point of the army for more than a few people, and they're certainly the biggest visual draw. If they become an uber-specialised anti-Daemon unit, then they become a unit that never sees a tournament list or even a friendly take-all-comers list.

Armies which don't play to what people like about them do not do well. GKs are a key visual component of the DH codex. That doesn't mean that they should become its focus or even its only content (being super-cool doesn't justify that) but they should not be a worthless/over-specialised/niche choice, either. A player should be able to make a DH army list and choose Grey Knights and not think 'oh well, hope I fight a Daemon player!'

Ideally, we'd be in the situation where taking a pure Grey Knight force is a viable choice - but not one that's either massively over- or underpowered compared to a combined-arms DH force. That would take a balanced codex, though, and since those only seem to roll around every so often it'd take quite some luck.

The Orange
11-02-2009, 04:02
Well I don't quite see where our views are opposed then :confused:. The issue here is not so much about restricting GK even more to their daemon killer role, but rather expanding them to a non-daemon hunting role. Their is no confusion between GK and DH were all specifically talking about GK.

And as pointed out several of their abilities apply universally to all armies (their storm bolters are just as effective, their shrouding works just the same, etc.) so are you saying they should become even more powerful? I was under the impression that as a unit GK marines and GK terminators were quite good already.

massey
11-02-2009, 04:18
Now, I disagree that GK (as an army) should be able to slaughter demons with their eyes closed. If they were a unit in a SM codex (just like lesser demons are a unit in the Chaos codex), I wouldn't have a problem with it. But as a stand-alone army? Nope.

Why? Because of points.

A 1500 pt GK army should fight a 1500 point demon army fairly evenly. This isn't about fluff, it's about play balance. If the GK massacred the demons, they'd need toned down. Now does this mean GK aren't good at fighting demons? Nope, just that eventually, enough demons will drag down even the GKs. For instance, no one will say that one GK all by his lonesome should be able to defeat 1000 Bloodthirsters. Even if one GK was equal to 1000 Bloodthirsters, that would just give us a nice point value for him. So there's some balance there somewhere. We just have to find it. Theoretically, a demon army would have larger numbers than the GKs, which would give you that nice "small army of butt-kickers taking on the hordes of hell" feel.

Maybe all GKs have storm bolters and artificier armor, in addition to their NFW. Keep their costs the same. Give their HQs a "demon slayer" weapon that uses the old force weapon rules, not the new ones. You can both balance the army so that it appears as though an equal-point GK army is outnumbered against demons, as well as make it versatile enough to fight other armies.

By the way, GK having cool old psychic hoods really doesn't mean anything since demons don't use psychic powers.

revnow
11-02-2009, 05:34
@massey: The Grey Knight Grand Master does have a Force Weapon that uses the old "slain outright" rules. And the psychic hood issue was meant more as an example of how Grey Knights have become better as a result of 5th Edition. You are correct that it is in fact not relevant to Daemons.

Corrode
11-02-2009, 12:13
Well I don't quite see where our views are opposed then :confused:. The issue here is not so much about restricting GK even more to their daemon killer role, but rather expanding them to a non-daemon hunting role. Their is no confusion between GK and DH were all specifically talking about GK.

And as pointed out several of their abilities apply universally to all armies (their storm bolters are just as effective, their shrouding works just the same, etc.) so are you saying they should become even more powerful? I was under the impression that as a unit GK marines and GK terminators were quite good already.

I think I'm actually replying to an entirely different thread, having completely lost the point of where this one was going. I don't think GK should be particularly more powerful, I just think that artificially pushing them into an 'anti-Daemon' niche is silly. Since from the title that appears to be the premise of the thread, then it seems a valid point to make.

40kdhs
11-02-2009, 17:56
40KDHS...

I'm not getting anywhere with you here am I?

The logistics of you being sent against non-chaos forces is answered in your opinion by historical exceptions to the rule. So there is the clear line between us. You use exceptions as justifications, i use intent as justification.


You need to be flexible and you need to adapt and change when a new situation occurs because not everything you planned will go accordingly. Agree?




For the record, you are typing things about my stance that aren't true. I haven't ignored historical events. UNLESS your playing historical refights then the narrative suggests GK are used for Demon hunting. You can't even claim that your historically refighting the H. Heresy because the knights didn't exist then.


GKs were created to PREVENT this kind of situation from happening again.Agree?
If we had had GKs, we would NOT have been in this situation because GKs would have CRUSHED these traitors.




GW is doing a fine job of releasing an army that sold well and making a balanced list.



If it was balance, the majority of 40k players would not consider it to be the weakest codex. Agree?
If it was 'sold well', a new DH codex would not be at the end of the line, would it?





To continue the second difference between us on Balance.


The only difference that you and I have is you spin your way of out the current DH problems while I acknowledge the problems exist in DH codex.

You'll never have a better codex if you pretend that everything is OK when it's not. I'll not agree with what you are saying because I have been playing a pure GK army for 4+ years.



Orb bombardments


It sounds good on paper but it doesn't have any practical use in the game because it always SCATTERs on the same piece of terrain. It's useless.


and you can even take allies from Guard and SM if you want.


There are a few problems:

1- IG and SM can 'win' without 'allying' DH. Why can GKs do that?
2-If you ally SM directly from DH, you can't have GK units. However, a SM player can have a GK unit without any problem. Is it weird?
3-Do you see a lot of 0-1 ALLIED restrictions in DH codex? I thought that DH inquisitors had UNLIMITED 'resources' at their disposal?



The allied factor is something i never mentioned but i will now, you can be all the balanced you want to be by selecting troops from balanced armies.

Again, if your playing only a few select choices from a list then why do you expect to be balanced.


If a DH codex works, you will never ally, won't you? Do you see a SM player ally a DH unit? No?

What is wrong with the picture when a DH 'army' has its ars handed down by #1 sworned enemy?

It tells you so much about the balance of a DH codex, does it?



Shrouding, that's a great power.


It's hardly great when you roll 3d6 x 3 on a 48" x 72". It only works if your opponents ROLL 3x1s. Otherwise, your opponents will see you pretty much every time.

Again, it's only good on paper.



All your units are fearless. Come on, what do you want.


I don't want to see a fluffy paper army.I want a good working GK army and you need to have more than 'fearless' and WS5S6 to make it work against everything.

The Orange
11-02-2009, 21:04
I rescind my earlier comment Corrode, we now have someone using DH and GK interchangeably.


If we had had GKs, we would NOT have been in this situation because GKs would have CRUSHED these traitors.
:p Sorry but that's such a fanboy statement. Between one chapter of GK and 9 traitor legions still lead by their Primarchs, I know who my money would be on. Even If you put just the 9 traitor primarchs in a room with the whole GK chapter I'd still bet that the odds haven't changed much. Oh and you kindly gave absolutely no credit to the Ordo Mallus too (yea this thread is going nowhere fast).

I won't even bother replying to anything else you posted 40kdhs because their irrelevant complaints that don't address the original issues of "A GK army", but instead make it look like you've got an argument when you've really just switched topics on what to bitch about. Anyone here would agree that DH could use a boost, that's not what were talking about though, were talking about boosting GK to be their own independent army, so kindly stick to the topic or stop because your true fanboyism is starting to show in your weak attempts to defend your position. Learn to debate properly or accept that you've lost :eyebrows:.

And a final point, just because you think the GK are the coolest badasses in the entire 40k universe doesn't mean they should get their own army. So far all I've herd is "everyone says DH are the weakest" (which is a completely subjective complaint) and "DH are supposed to kick everyone's ****" (pure fanboyism), please get some better ammunition then that if you want to continue debating.

Leo
11-02-2009, 22:15
Hi,



Now to all you defenders of GK, Admiral DIck, Orange and myself have laid out very intelligent cogent and rational points. I myself laid out 4 extremely well thought out clear points in post 67. few pro all GK posters have responded to them. I and the above people i mentioned answer every specific claim put forth by the pro side. Try responding to our points in full rather then just choosing key phrases and thinking up rare exceptions to the rule to justify your argument.

Well, after searching the thread for some time, I found no such thing, but Iīll try to respond to that wall of text, that you pointed out.



1) GK are a specialist Force tasked with eliminating one specific enemy. GK fight demons. Their wargear and special abilities are geared toward fighting demons. Your weapons special rules are geared toward killing an army with invul saves only. There is only one army like that. GK have no balancing units that even the playing field toward non CC non hoard armies. You are an army tasked with one specific enemy. Encounters with non chaos forces are rare because by the narrative your based in the Terran home system and your not out crusading to capture worlds and purge the stars of xenos filth. The need for equipment to fight non chaos enemies that might be working with chaos is faulty. If a GK suspects that tyranids or orks are possessed he's not going to decide to take heavy bolters and flamers he's going to gear up with more incinerators and psicannons. If i suspect someone of demonic affiliation you bring weapons to combat the demon aspect since its your first priority. Weapons that kill demons kill xenis and heretics too.


I donīt get what youīre trying to say here. First you say, that Demonhunter equipment is supposed to be specifically useful against demons, than you say that things that make Demons dead also work against other stuff. That I canīt disagree with but how is this a point against Grey Knights?
Are you argueing that Demonhunters and more specifically Grey Knights have no need for anti tank equipment? That would be a little off considering the large amount of big critters and walkers in demon armies.



2) Your background doesn't support plausible narrative for fighting non-chaos armies. Your examples on PG 52-53 are rude. Here's what i mean. Everyone of your examples listed force a story based implication onto your opponent that he may not agree with. For example, anyone with a DH codex turn to PG 53 with me and look at Tau examples. Lets do them one by one from the perspective of little billy farsight. option one-"My Tau is gunna do some vague evil? What if i'm sure my Tau is not a bad guy and is just defending a sept world. The second part of option one suggests i may get to field demons too. Do I?" Option two "That starts off pretty cool but the barriers between reality thing suggests i get to play some demons too, do I?" Option three "Neat a possessed psyker! you have a model i can borrow to play him and some rules?" Option four "OMFG i'm collecting pieces to a powerful artifact called an astral key.... OMFG that sounds awesome. What can i do with it, i get powers on the table right?" Option five-"Oh yeah that makes sense. I'm attacking something and your protecting it. Sounds like every game i've ever played but sure. Its weird cause you don't have a lot of stuff for me to even attack right? oh well, game on" The general ones i'm not gunna talk about, on pg52, but they all suggests i should be playing a possessed commander. If little billy Farsight asks the "What do i get to play question" based on these options he'll be very saddened to know that not only did his GK opponent not bring an chaos models for him to use but that even if he did, the random build options a page prior are awful. In fact i own all codexes produced with a few very small exceptions and in none of them that are not DH is there DH v something that i snot chaos ever portrayed or written about. Its suggestive of the intent of the authors, not proof as other examples abound but an additional chip in this category. in summery of point two you are forcing on your opponent story lines he may not agree with and offer no exciting rules or style of play in recompense for it. To play against some armies said armies have to behave differently then they normally would. Rude.


A little news flash here: Whenever two armies square off against each other there are some background issues that are taken for granted in that there is some kind of reason that those two armies meet.
This reason can be more easily explained within the confines of the background, like Ultramarines fighting Tyranids, or it could be little far fetched, like Space Wolves fighting Tau (who live on the other side of the Galaxy) or Necrons fighting Tyranids.
One of the most improbable occurence is the demon invasion, which only takes place in very few places (Demonworlds within the Eye of Terror) or when a few specific presets are met, like massive preparations of Chaos Cults or powerful artifacts being activated in the right place in the right time.
Whenever I face demons I accept the fact that there is some valid reason for this fight. Sure, I could throw a fit and scream that itīs totally rude that my Eldar are supposed to have triggered a Demon invasion, log on to Warseer and tell everyone that I want the army to go away, but I consider that a little inane.



3) Your codex has options you willingly choose not to play. You suffer for that. The only non GK unit ever played by a GK player is an inquisitor with mystics. If they stray to play that why won't they stray to play allied guard, storm troopers, demon hosts assassins ect. Look, i get the need and desire to play pure. I play two pure chaos armies. TS and EC. I love them. I don't however lament how my EC can't take down tanks easily and how my TS can't kill enough of a hoard army before getting rolled. Pure armies are good at one thing and not at another. Even in Fluff specialization of forces is mention. IW broke the walls at Terra and laid siege to Hydra Cordatus. Arhiman found a mystic road into the webway and he turned all the TS into dust filled shells with magick, Imperial Fists squared off with the Siegemasters of the IW, ect ect ect. What you don't see is the TS pulling out their CC specialists and fighting against some tyranid swarm in an epic battle. You don't see the IW infiltrating an imperial hive and creating a network of spies and cultists ect ect. When you look at narrative and base the army and rules around it you realize there are few forces that are good at everything.


Yeah, so? Is this supposed to convince someone that Grey Knights need not be effective against anything but Demons? Just a few lines up (ok, more than a few) you said, that stuff that kills Demons, also kills Orks and Tyranids. Sure, there will always be bad matchups for every army, but on the other hand, all those pure armies can do their particular thing very good. Grey Knights arenīt even that hot at Demonkilling. I donīt think, they should ever be top tournament material in their own right (or even with the rest of the Ordo Malleus) but there is no need to deliberately put them down.




4) the role of the GK is not infringed on by other armies fighting demons too and doing it well Other Xenos armies fight demons well is not the issue. Other races should have means of fighting demons. Other Imperial armies fight demons because they are the first ones plagued with them or tasked with dealing with it. GK are a single large(ish) organization of astrates. I as planetary governor am not going to call for one specific chapter first because 1) they may be far away and thus slow to respond 2) will judge me very poorly and may kill me for having demons sack my world. This view is justified by narrative in the DH codex and the GK legendary formation apoc sheet. The army most commonly fighting demons is whatever is being plagued by demons first or is closest to respond. That's almost never going to be GK. GK equipment and rules are better for dealing with demons at the moment then most other races. I play demons. I'd rather have a a bunch of battle suit wearing tau shoot my demonettes then a few incinorators or psicannons. I'm wounded on the same number but atleast i can make a save against the rail cannons.

Chances are, that as an Imperial Governor you wouldn't call the Grey Knights at all because you've never heard of them. You would possibly request assistance from the Inquisition but itīs more likely that itīs the Inquisition informing you of the imminent demonic threat.
Other than that I don not understand your point unless itīs to say that Grey Knights are rare and thus shouldnīt exist. Yes other armies fight demons too, so....?




I think that is the summary of the points against GK. If a GK supporter wants to put up counter points in a logical fashion i'd be happy to tackle them but let's answer each others points instead of ranting like loons here.

Thatīs a good one.




And what about the rest of the Ordo Mallus? Indoctrinated IG/SM allies etc. are their to provide the complete army that the GK are not supposed to be. If GW makes GK a full army whats the point of having Inquisitors, inducted guardsmen, etc.? You know that 99% of DH are going to be pure GK if GW made them capable of being a pure army. Thus ruining the whole reason for having INQUISITOR codices.

Do I know that? Already it is possible to generate pure Grey Knights armies but I know plenty of mixed Demonhunter forces.
And inducted units arenīt exactly Ordo Malleus, are they? They just fight for them for a time. Ordo Malleus would be everything directly found in the Demonhunter Codex and aside from Grey Knights there arenīt that many of them. Granted, some are vital as support for Grey Knights, but they arenīt really the core of the army.
Without Grey Knights there is one kind of infantry, two transporters, one HQ and a sack full of Assassins. Not exactly mind boggling, is it?

thechosenone
11-02-2009, 23:06
OMG Leo you've stepped in from nowhere and now i am undone....


Seriously, you enter this argument by slyly insulting a well written summerization of my points. Good job. You twist the fact that i say in one spot weapons that kill demons also kill other stuff blah blah blah. assault 3 str 6 ignore invul is what it is to anyone its shot at. That's all purpose with a hint toward demon killing. I have no idea what you mean about me pointing out dh units that aren't used and you responding so what. People, no one in the chaos marine camp complains that their TS lack close combat power ok. Its like me cliaming an ork army maxed out with tank bustas should be effective against hords cause i really like tank bustas. If you use only one option you deny yourself options. Your initial point about the concept of getting to the battle field is childishly black and white and dumbed down. Here's the issue. Getting two forces to battle is one thing, having to ignore the context and written material of someone elses book to play a game is another. It only applies if you enjoy the narrative but for those that do its a big sticking point.

the supporters of all GK armies are so awfully caustic its insane. Never in a post that wasn't containing a direct nasty statement toward me or someone else have i responded here with negative view on someone else or their argument's worth.

Newsflash here: your entire argument is based on little twist of words and arguments taken out of context or without regard to the intention. You've brought nothing new to the pro GK side and you blow off the two greatest arguments for the Non GK side which is the story arc and the ignoring of DH units other then GK is not a factor that should be considered in an attack on GK as an army. Over the course of 40 some posts since post 67 no one has seemed to have want to insult my summery. Must have worked for everyone else. Even 40Kdhs argues the merit of his case and contends with the points rather then approach the subject like you have.

Corrode
11-02-2009, 23:22
I rescind my earlier comment Corrode, we now have someone using DH and GK interchangeably.

I suspected I was right! This kind of crap is why the Inquisition codices are such a mess. It would probably work far better if SoB broke away entirely to form their own army (which is viable, given that the 'Ordo Hereticus' link is a bit tenuous since they're more to do with the Ecclesiarchy) and a simple 'Codex: Inquisition' was released containing GKs, Inquisitorial Forces and maybe Deathwatch in some capacity.

Perhaps a structure along the lines of:

HQ: Inquisitor, GK Grandmaster, Deathwatch Captain
Elites: GK Terminators, power armour GKs, Deathwatch Patrol, Assassins
Troops: Inducted Guard, Stormtroopers, maybe something new?
Fast Attack: Problematic, but maybe centred around some kind of fast deployment vehicle or Deathwatch jump packers?
Heavy Support: Provided by inducted Guard tanks and maybe something new

I'm fairly unfamiliar with the Deathwatch fluff, but is this in any way viable? It's more of a wishlisting post than anything else, but I'm wondering if it wouldn't resolve the problem. People can still use their uber-cool GREY MARINES, but there's a balance of 'proper' Inquisitorial forces, too, as Inducted Guard form the bulk of the army. GKs are returned to their (rightful) place as elite troops, letting them be suitably expensive and cool, but a combined-arms Inquisitorial force is promoted as an ideal.

Khornies & milk
12-02-2009, 00:46
I think you anti - GK guys have put up valid points arguing against 'pure GK' lists...however, until the Inquisition armies get new Codexes not much will change, so we'll still have Threads like this popping up regularly with the same old to-ing and fro-ing ad nauseam.

When GW finally get around to a Codex:Deamonhunters or Codex:Grey Knights the one thing I see as a definite is that for them to sell well they are going to have to uber them up so they become competitive in the Metagame, something they are most definitely not, regardless of how they're configured. Most Inquisition Players play 'pure GK' (or pure SoB for that matter) so GW will have to take this on board if they want the new Codex to sell well. To garner high numbers of new Inq Gamers the non-competitive tag will have to be a thing of the past.
GW are endeavouring to make all their minis in plastic, and everytime I hear this it comes with the proviso that to warrant doing this GW needs to be certain that the Codex will be a winner...hence harking back to the point about making them competitive.

Fluff-wise....all GW have to do is create some background story, or expand on the current fluff, saying that a number of GK Squads were deployed to counter some form of Chaos-y taint, eliminate some Psyker (Chaos have them I believe) and Bob's your Uncle.

It isn't beyond belief that this is how GW will go, and a lot of GK players will be happy.

thechosenone
12-02-2009, 01:48
I think you anti - GK guys have put up valid points arguing against 'pure GK' lists...however, until the Inquisition armies get new Codexes not much will change, so we'll still have Threads like this popping up regularly with the same old to-ing and fro-ing ad nauseam.

When GW finally get around to a Codex:Deamonhunters or Codex:Grey Knights the one thing I see as a definite is that for them to sell well they are going to have to uber them up so they become competitive in the Metagame, something they are most definitely not, regardless of how they're configured. Most Inquisition Players play 'pure GK' (or pure SoB for that matter) so GW will have to take this on board if they want the new Codex to sell well. To garner high numbers of new Inq Gamers the non-competitive tag will have to be a thing of the past.
GW are endeavouring to make all their minis in plastic, and everytime I hear this it comes with the proviso that to warrant doing this GW needs to be certain that the Codex will be a winner...hence harking back to the point about making them competitive.

Fluff-wise....all GW have to do is create some background story, or expand on the current fluff, saying that a number of GK Squads were deployed to counter some form of Chaos-y taint, eliminate some Psyker (Chaos have them I believe) and Bob's your Uncle.

It isn't beyond belief that this is how GW will go, and a lot of GK players will be happy.

Pretty reasonable. I'm all for having great army options in our game and I'm a huge fan of the inquisition so i'd love to see what the future holds.

loveless
12-02-2009, 02:34
I suspected I was right! This kind of crap is why the Inquisition codices are such a mess. It would probably work far better if SoB broke away entirely to form their own army (which is viable, given that the 'Ordo Hereticus' link is a bit tenuous since they're more to do with the Ecclesiarchy) and a simple 'Codex: Inquisition' was released containing GKs, Inquisitorial Forces and maybe Deathwatch in some capacity.


Agreed!

The Sisters would work better in a Codex: Sisters of Battle or a Codex: Ecclesiarchy than an Inquisition book.

And just because I felt like posting this somewhere (I'm sure someone's brought it up already, but I didn't see it)

"The Grey Knights were permanently attached to the Ordo Malleus, becoming the hammer with which these servants of the Emperor would smite the forces of Chaos, and one of its Grand Masters is traditionally a member of the Inner Conclave of the Inquisition."
-Codex: Daemonhunters, page 6

To me, that reads as the GK and the OM are joined at the hip.

thechosenone
12-02-2009, 03:04
Agreed!

The Sisters would work better in a Codex: Sisters of Battle or a Codex: Ecclesiarchy than an Inquisition book.

And just because I felt like posting this somewhere (I'm sure someone's brought it up already, but I didn't see it)

"The Grey Knights were permanently attached to the Ordo Malleus, becoming the hammer with which these servants of the Emperor would smite the forces of Chaos, and one of its Grand Masters is traditionally a member of the Inner Conclave of the Inquisition."
-Codex: Daemonhunters, page 6

To me, that reads as the GK and the OM are joined at the hip.

Actually that was never posted. Contribution sir. Good reading and research

40kdhs
12-02-2009, 16:49
"The Grey Knights were permanently attached to the Ordo Malleus, becoming the hammer with which these servants of the Emperor would smite the forces of Chaos, and one of its Grand Masters is traditionally a member of the Inner Conclave of the Inquisition."
-Codex: Daemonhunters, page 6

To me, that reads as the GK and the OM are joined at the hip.


1- If Ordo Malleus inquisitors request GKs to do something else besides killing daemons, will GKs refuse?
2-GW constantly change their 'fluff'.

You need to think big and deep because 'daemon' is not the only thing which EXISTs in the universe.


I rescind my earlier comment Corrode, we now have someone using DH and GK interchangeably.


I don't play a DH army. I play a pure GK army because I don't want to have anything to do with inquisitors.




:p Sorry but that's such a fanboy statement. Between one chapter of GK and 9 traitor legions still lead by their Primarchs, I know who my money would be on.


GKs will win the fight because you haven't heard your Primarch killing any Daemon Prince. Guess what? my GKs have been there and done that while being outnumbered by 2:1 or more. I'm not sure if your Primarch can handle a GK GM.:p

Yes,I still put my money on my GKs. BRING IT ON.:D




Oh and you kindly gave absolutely no credit to the Ordo Mallus too (yea this thread is going nowhere fast).


Why should I give any credit to inquisitors when they haven't done anything in Imperium?



I won't even bother replying to anything else you posted 40kdhs because their irrelevant complaints that don't address the original issues of "A GK army", but instead make it look like you've got an argument when you've really just switched topics on what to bitch about.


You are unfair. If your camp didn't tell everybody how 'balance' and 'sold well' DH was, I wouldn't be bitching about it. Agree?




Anyone here would agree that DH could use a boost, that's not what were talking about though, were talking about boosting GK to be their own independent army, so kindly stick to the topic or stop because your true fanboyism is starting to show in your weak attempts to defend your position. Learn to debate properly or accept that you've lost :eyebrows:.


You don't get it, do you? I bitch because I hope that GW are going to learn 'their mistakes' from the current DH codex so that a new GK can be better.

You will never be better if all you do is to tell people about the 'good job' that you have done in the last 25 years.:eyebrows:




And a final point, just because you think the GK are the coolest badasses in the entire 40k universe doesn't mean they should get their own army.


I have my opinions and you have yours. Even though I don't like what you write, i'm not going to tell you to shut up. What you need to do is to learn how to respect people's opinions and stop telling everybody 'how they should play their army'. Agree?


So far all I've herd is "everyone says DH are the weakest" (which is a completely subjective complaint)


It's the truth and you need to accept it regardless of how you feel about it.




and "DH are supposed to kick everyone's ****" (pure fanboyism), please get some better ammunition then that if you want to continue debating.

I didn't say it. All I said was GKs CAN fight anybody if they can fight a daemon army. Please don't put your words on my mouth.

loveless
12-02-2009, 16:57
...Just a note. When the Space Puppies called in the Grey Knights to deal with Angron (Daemon Primarch of the World Eaters Legion), it took a good 100 Grey Knight Terminators just to send him back to the Warp.

That's from Lexicanum, which in turn references WD151.


Now, let's consider what would happen if a Daemon Primarch with a little more finesse than Angron bothered to show up. A Grey Knight is good at dealing with Daemons, but a Daemon Primarch is likely going to wipe the floor with any Grey Knight that doesn't bring back-up.

The Orange
12-02-2009, 17:56
1- If Ordo Malleus inquisitors request GKs to do something else besides killing daemons, will GKs refuse?
2-GW constantly change their 'fluff'.
See this is what I'm talking about, both these points are irrelevant for the discussion yet you say them as if they defend your position, but they don't. If a Tau ethereal told a Shas'O to go fight daemons that doesn't suddenly mean I have Daemon Hunter Tau that are good at hunting daemons, and what are you trying to imply when you say GW can changer their fluff?


GKs will win the fight because you haven't heard your Primarch killing any Daemon Prince. Guess what? my GKs have been there and done that while being outnumbered by 2:1 or more. I'm not sure if your Primarch can handle a GK GM.:p
1. Why are you assuming I have a primarch, do you take me for some SM fanboy who's trying to t-bag the GKs :confused:
2. Yea I don't know any stories about primarchs beating up daemon princes, I do however know that Sanguinus (Blood Angels Primarch) singlehandidly beat down a greater daemon of Khone at the Gates of the Emperiors Fortress during the Horus Heresy, as already mentioned Angron took down his fare share of GKs for fun, and while loosing in the end Horus beat the crap out of the Emperor who I think you would agree is far more powerful then the GKs. Based on these fact I think the GKs are in a world of hurt if they face off against the Primarchs. So tell me, based on what exactly do you make the claim that if the GK were around they would have prevented the Horus heresy?


Why should I give any credit to inquisitors when they haven't done anything in Imperium?
I was specifically referring to the fact that it was the Ordo Mallus who were tasked with watching the Imperium for daemon corruption not the GK alone, but thanks for again reinforcing my point about fanboyism.


You are unfair. If your camp didn't tell everybody how 'balance' and 'sold well' DH was, I wouldn't be bitching about it. Agree?
No I don't agree because your arguing for pure GKs not DH, many of us have already agreed that DH are in need for a revamp. So again, stop switching your position. It is you who are being unfair by making one argument (for GK) then ignoring our criticisms by switching to another topic ( for DH) thus making it look like we have unfair criticisms. :eyebrows:


I bitch because I hope that GW are going to learn 'their mistakes' from the current DH codex so that a new GK can be better.
See there you go switching back to GKs now when you were just talking about how DH need a revamp. Who is being unfair now?


Even though I don't like what you write, i'm not going to tell you to shut up.
Let me clarify what I meant, I was not telling you to shut up, I was telling you if you want to keep arguing please do so in the proper manner instead of the backhanded way you have been conducting this argument so far. You've claimed that your own assumptions are facts ("DHs are the weakest"), and have attacked posters instead of the arguments("Of course, it doesn't make sense to you because you don't want to see a full GK army.") , trying to paint is in a bad light to discredit us, while simultaneously switching your own argument to make it seem like you have the highground.


What you need to do is to learn how to respect people's opinions and stop telling everybody 'how they should play their army'.[/b] Agree?
Are we telling you how to play your army? (I don't think anyone has yet told you you can't run you pure GKs army as they currently are) Or are you telling us how you want to play your army? (saying GKs should be their own army balanced against everyone)


It's the truth and you need to accept it regardless of how you feel about it.
I don't need to accept anything, and I wont especially when not well supported, or when someone uses backhanded tactics to try to convince me.

Corrode
12-02-2009, 18:04
1- If Ordo Malleus inquisitors request GKs to do something else besides killing daemons, will GKs refuse?
2-GW constantly change their 'fluff'.

You need to think big and deep because 'daemon' is not the only thing which EXISTs in the universe.

The argument was 'GKs should be kept with the Inquisition,' not 'OMG TEH GKZ ONLY KILLZ DAEMONZ.'




I don't play a DH army. I play a pure GK army because I don't want to have anything to do with inquisitors.

That's your choice, but you're going to find it an uphill battle to convince anyone that pure GK is a good idea for a Codex. A mixed-forces codex is far better in terms of balance, wider appeal and fluffiness.




GKs will win the fight because you haven't heard your Primarch killing any Daemon Prince. Guess what? my GKs have been there and done that while being outnumbered by 2:1 or more. I'm not sure if your Primarch can handle a GK GM.:p

Hahahaha.

Hahahahahahahaha.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Read up on what a Primarch is. Seriously. Just check out Angron or Sanguinius or Horus or any of them, they're far more capable than any GK Grandmaster. Daemon Princes really aren't that big a deal in the grand cosmic scheme of things.


Yes,I still put my money on my GKs. BRING IT ON.:D

Sure.



Why should I give any credit to inquisitors when they haven't done anything in Imperium?

Yeah, inquisitors only hold the power of life and death over any planet they come across. I'm pretty sure GKs don't have the power of Exterminatus. Seriously, have you read any of the fluff at all?


You are unfair. If your camp didn't tell everybody how 'balance' and 'sold well' DH was, I wouldn't be bitching about it. Agree?

What are you talking about? Everyone acknowledges DH are comparatively weak, and we all know DH didn't sell well - partly because of the expensive metals involved, partly because it's a bad over-specialised army, partly because in the last 10 years it hasn't been updated once.


You don't get it, do you? I bitch because I hope that GW are going to learn 'their mistakes' from the current DH codex so that a new GK can be better.

You will never be better if all you do is to tell people about the 'good job' that you have done in the last 25 years.:eyebrows:

25 years? GK were present as a unit prior to 3rd edition, but the idea of GK as an army only showed up in around 2002. Good job.

And for god's sake stop confusing DH and GK. GK are a PART of the Daemonhunters army, they're not an army on their own however much you might wish it.



I have my opinions and you have yours. Even though I don't like what you write, i'm not going to tell you to shut up. What you need to do is to learn how to respect people's opinions and stop telling everybody 'how they should play their army'. Agree?

You're being told to shut up because you change your position constantly and it comes across as trolling.


It's the truth and you need to accept it regardless of how you feel about it.

I agree it's true, that doesn't mean other people do.


I didn't say it. All I said was GKs CAN fight anybody if they can fight a daemon army. Please don't put your words on my mouth.

They can. That doesn't mean a solo GK army (rather than GK as a part of Daemonhunters) is a good idea.

Further, I would like to give you a fluffy bunny and a kitten for being such a good sport.

thechosenone
13-02-2009, 04:17
Corrode, You do little to make a cogent argument regardless of the side when a great deal of your post is extremely negative. Even if you think your opposition poster is negative, rise above.

On the part of the Anti- full army GK crowd i apologize for the tone of that post. Community is the number one thing on the forum and i don't want people to lose sight of that. Your post is as negative as LEO's from the previous page. Regardless of opinion everyone should maintain a little bit of dignity here.

starlight
13-02-2009, 04:33
Posts not dealing with the Topic at hand can expect to be Deleted. Members who Edit their own Posts before I have to will likely face fewer penalties than those who make me work... :eyebrows:


Stay On Topic or the Thread will be Deleted. Personal attacks and derogatory remarks will not be tolerated.


starlight

40kdhs
13-02-2009, 17:33
Read up on what a Primarch is. Seriously. Just check out Angron or Sanguinius or Horus or any of them, they're far more capable than any GK Grandmaster. Daemon Princes really aren't that big a deal in the grand cosmic scheme of things.


Your SM is always the best. I get it.



Yeah, inquisitors only hold the power of life and death over any planet they come across. I'm pretty sure GKs don't have the power of Exterminatus. Seriously, have you read any of the fluff at all?


I know what kind of powers inquisitors have because I own a DH codex.
Inquisitors are like politicians because they can't do anything except BS all years long. I don't have any respect for these individuals.




25 years? GK were present as a unit prior to 3rd edition, but the idea of GK as an army only showed up in around 2002. Good job.


You don't get it, do you?

Would you expect a company to do a good job at producing a DH codex with all the experience which it had prior to 2003?

If you look at all 3rd codexes, why were some good or bad?



And for god's sake stop confusing DH and GK. GK are a PART of the Daemonhunters army, they're not an army on their own however much you might wish it.


Daemon is not part of chaos? Without a possesed person, how could you see a daemon? Yes, you see a daemon army. What's wrong with your arguement?




it comes across as trolling.


I have to call you on it. It's BS. Here is the reason. I have been a member of this forum since 2006. From 2006 to the current, I have had 540 posts while you have 109 posts within 3 months. If I were a troll, I would be the worst troll you have ever seen. Agree?

If you keep up with your BS, you probably have more posts than me at the end of 2009.



you change your position constantly


Let see who change the position. OK?

In the beginning, the reason you didn't want to see a GK army was GKs shouldn't fight anybody else except daemons because it was GW's intention.

After I pointed out the fight between GKs and SW as another GW's 'intention' and other valid reasons for GKs to be an army, you and your anti GK army group immediately abandoned your previous arguement and switched to 'i don't want to see another SM army' theme.

It's another bogus arguement which has no value at all and shows everybody how close-minded and selfish you are. What you try to do is to make sure that nobody is better than your ultra SM.

1- What do you see when you look at chaos army? You'll see Khorn, Nurgle, and so on. You basically see the same thing as other SM armies such as BA, DA, SW,and BT. What make these armies unique and special are their 'god' and special rules even though everybody knows that all of them are 'marines'.

How could you possibly tell everybody that you don't see anything special and unique when you look at GKs?

2-You don't mind seeing 6 different 'chaos' armies but you are worried about a GK army even though BA,DA,SW,BT stands next to your ultra space marine. What is wrong with the picture?

If your arguement is GKs are still SM, they shouldn't be an army based on it. My question for you is why the hell do you need to have 6 different chaos armies when they are 'chaos'? or why the hell do you need to have SW,DA,BA, and BL when you already have a ultra SM army and they are 'marine'?

I don't know about the rest of you but I'm tired of seeing my GKs staying behind a big 'blue' brother and the only thing we fight is daemons while your SM can do whatever you want.

Your reason for GKs not to be an army has nothing to do with the fluff or game because I already proved that it's not the case. You simply are afraid that GKs will challenge your SM supremacy.

Corrode
13-02-2009, 17:52
Your SM is always the best. I get it.

You don't. Primarchs aren't Space Marines. They're much, much more than that. Comparing a Primarch to a Space Marine, even a Grey Knight, is like comparing a T-rex to a cockroach.


I know what kind of powers inquisitors have because I own a DH codex.
Inquisitors are like politicians because they can't do anything except BS all years long. I don't have any respect for these individuals.

Yeah, totally. Inquisitors don't do anything. In fact they're so boring that they should be removed. (hint: there's a game all about Inquisitors 'doing things'. It shouldn't be too hard to find.)


You don't get it, do you?

Would you expect a company to do a good job at producing a DH codex with all the experience which it had prior to 2003?

If you look at all 3rd codexes, why were some good or bad?

Some were good and some were bad. They always are. I'm not sure what that has to do with my point, which was that Grey Knights hadn't really been approached in this way before. Surprisingly enough when GW try new things they don't always work.


Daemon is not part of chaos? Without a possesed person, how could you see a daemon? Yes, you see a daemon army. What's wrong with your arguement?

There is a difference. The Grey Knights are organisationally part of the Ordo Malleus. Daemon armies are something else entirely - the reason you shouldn't see a Daemon army is that it, as you say, requires a cult to summon it. We aren't discussing whether or not Daemon armies are fluffy or viable, though.


I have to call you on it. It's BS. Here is the reason. I have been a member of this forum since 2006. From 2006 to the current, I have had 540 posts while you have 109 posts within 3 months. If I were a troll, I would be the worst troll you have ever seen. Agree?

If you keep up with your BS, you probably have more posts than me at the end of 2009.

Possibly. I'm often quite a prolific poster. I'm not sure what your point is except 'you post more than I do, which makes me not a troll.'


Leaving out the middle bit because it didn't apply to me.


It's another bogus arguement which has no value at all and shows everybody how close-minded and selfish you are. What you try to do is to make sure that nobody is better than your ultra SM.

Yeah, really. What people are interested in here is Ultramarine superiority. I myself am a fanatical Ultramarine player, and I'd actually like to see all other armies removed. GW should release two codices only; Codex: Ultramarines which has the best army in the world, and then Codex: Things for Ultramarines to Kill. C:U would get updated every month cos Ultramarines are just that awesome.


1- What do you see when you look at chaos army? You'll see Khorn, Nurgle, and so on. You basically see the same thing as other SM armies such as BA, DA, SW,and BT. What make these armies unique and special are their 'god' and special rules even though everybody knows that all of them are 'marines'.

How could you possibly tell everybody that you don't see anything special and unique when you look at GKs?

The difference is that the 'Chaos Marine' factions are ALL CONTAINED IN ONE BOOK. You don't have Codex: Khorne Chaos Space Marines, Codex: Nurgle Chaos Space Marines, Codex: Slaanesh Chaos Space Marines, Codex: Tzeentch Chaos Space Marines, Codex: Chaos Undivided Space Marines. You have one book which has the options of constructing various god-themed forces (options which have actually become more limiting in this edition.

As for the various SM codices, I actually agree with you on that one. DA and BA should almost definitely have been rolled into Codex: Space Marines. BT and SW are possibly structurally different enough to merit their own Codex, but not by much.

GKs are unique, special flowers. That's why they're already in their own book, and have a number of GK-exclusive special rules.


2-You don't mind seeing 6 different 'chaos' armies but you are worried about a GK army even though BA,DA,SW,BT stands next to your ultra space marine. What is wrong with the picture?

There aren't 6 different Chaos armies. There's 2, one of which is Daemons, so really for the purposes of this argument there's 1, which is Codex: Chaos Space Marines. There's options within a single codex to create a different force, but... that's kind of how codices work. What exactly is your objection? Should Chaos just have 'Chaos Space Marine' as their only troops choice?


If your arguement is GKs are still SM, they shouldn't be an army based on it. My question for you is why the hell do you need to have 6 different chaos armies when they are 'chaos'? or why the hell do you need to have SW,DA,BA, and BL when you already have a ultra SM army and they are 'marine'?

Repeating your point three times doesn't make it more emphatic. See above for an analysis of why there aren't '6 different chaos armies' and why the separate Marine codices are, in fact, a flawed idea.


I don't know about the rest of you but I'm tired of seeing my GKs staying behind a big 'blue' brother and the only thing we fight is daemons while your SM can do whatever you want.

Your reason for GKs not to be an army has nothing to do with the fluff or game because I already proved that it's not the case. You simply are afraid that GKs will challenge your SM supremacy.

This last bit is so neurotic and paranoid it's laughable. Nobody is out to get you, nobody hates Grey Knights because they're 'threatening' Space Marines. This is possibly the world's most anti-Space Marine board. I don't even play Space Marines; I don't know about loveless or the other anti-GK posters, but I suspect most of them have at least one other non-SM army. I even support your argument that GKs shouldn't be Daemon-specialised, because I think they should be an elite unit within a wider DH force (which in itself is able to take all comers).

To reiterate:

a) A new Daemonhunters Codex, balanced around taking on all comers (as opposed to just Daemons) is a good thing for the game. It expands player choice, allows for the creation of a myriad of different forces, and brings an Inquisitorial flavour which is lacking at the moment.
b) A GK-only army is a bad idea, in terms of fluff (for many people it wouldn't 'sit right'), in terms of upsetting those who bought into the combined-arms feel of the Inquisitorial codices (since splitting off GK leaves the Inquisition with... Inducted Guard and SoBs, and SoB have a MUCH stronger argument for being a separate force) and in terms of sales. Yes, GK might be super-cool, but they'll be competing directly with Space Marines. They're either going to be more powerful, in which case GW threatens their biggest-selling line (which is never, ever going to happen) or they're going to be weaker, in which case the kids who think Grey Knights are liek teh uberest thing ever will buy one box, and then everyone else will leave them alone.

Too much time on my hands? Me? Never.

The Orange
13-02-2009, 19:29
Your SM is always the best. I get it.

What you try to do is to make sure that nobody is better than your ultra SM.

You simply are afraid that GKs will challenge your SM supremacy.

:wtf: someone has a real bone to pick don't they. Whats the deal? Papa smurf push you down on the playground or something? I don't even have a SM army, and I doubt anyone here has specifically said weather or not they have one, once again you choose to attack us instead of our arguments and make false accusations. You see my avater, just move you eyes a little to the left, see that? Its a Tau Fire Warrior, besides that I also collect Eldar. Xenos for life ;).


I know what kind of powers inquisitors have because I own a DH codex.
Maybe instead of thinking that your DH codex is the end all source material for everything that has to do with Inquisitors you should maybe um...read more. Just incase Corrode's point didn't get across GW made a game called "Inquisitor", their are tons of books from the Black Library who's central characters are Inquisitors. They are most definitely not only politicians and I suggest you bone up on your fluff before making another false accusation implying that they do nothing.


If you look at all 3rd codexes, why were some good or bad?
Not sure what point your trying to make but they were all bad, because they were all rushed out because the entire 40k system got a revision which the old codices were incompatible with.


Daemon is not part of chaos? Without a possesed person, how could you see a daemon? Yes, you see a daemon army. What's wrong with your argument?
Nothing is wrong with his argument. Can you not field a pure GK army? Existence of said army does not justify the need for that army to be competitive against everyone.


I have been a member of this forum since 2006. From 2006 to the current, I have had 540 posts while you have 109 posts within 3 months. If I were a troll, I would be the worst troll you have ever seen. Agree?
Post count is irrelevant for determining if someone is trolling, all that matters is their behavior in a topic.



In the beginning, the reason you didn't want to see a GK army was GKs shouldn't fight anybody else except daemons because it was GW's intention.
You are mis-representing our arguments. There's no problem with having a GKs army, however we disagree with the notion that said GK army should be made better against all other armies. A DH army should be improved on to make them better against all armies. GK however should remain aimed at being best against daemons. Weather they currently fulfill that roll or not is not the issue at hand so please don't pull that tired string again about how DH are the weakest army of all.



After I pointed out the fight between GKs and SW as another GW's 'intention' and other valid reasons for GKs to be an army, you and your anti GK army group immediately abandoned your previous arguement and switched to 'i don't want to see another SM army' theme.
I did no such thing, don't you dare accuse me of avoiding your arguments :eyebrows:. I appreciate the fact that your trying to steal my arguments though :p. I replied saying it was perfectly fine for GK to face off against other armies, but their was no reason to change them so that they would be as competitive as any other army in doing so. The GK attacked the SW because they suspected chaos corruption, did they not? So contrary to what you said that does not show that GWs intention was for GK to constantly face off against other armies.


What make these armies unique and special are their 'god' and special rules even though everybody knows that all of them are 'marines'.

How could you possibly tell everybody that you don't see anything special and unique when you look at GKs?
I disagree. What I see is established background for each faction to have their own distinct armies. GK do not run under a similar vein, they are, background wise, attached to the Ordo Mallus.


2-You don't mind seeing 6 different 'chaos' armies but you are worried about a GK army even though BA,DA,SW,BT stands next to your ultra space marine. What is wrong with the picture?
Oh your going to hate this :cheese:. Are their 6 different chaos codices? Nope, theirs only 2. Can you field several different armies based on any one of those codicies? Yes you can, as you said I can have a khone army, or a nurgel army, or a slannesh army, etc. All from the same book too, fancy that. Wait now, isen't that exactly the same when your fielding a GK army from the DH codex? Yup I think so. But wait a moment, that doesn't mean fielding a Khone army is the same as fielding a GKs army, right? Lets think about that for a moment....if I field an all Khone army do I get a good all around army, or a thematic army that may have specific strengths and specific limitations? and if I field an all GKs army do I get an all around balance army or, again, a thematic army with specific strengths and limitations? Whoa now, they don't seem to look all that different, do they? So thinks for giving us another point of support for our side. ;)

And just to pre-emt any further discussion on that point (since I know you'll pull out some more trash talk on the SMs), the SM codex can represent specific factions too (2nd founding, 3rd founding, etc.), special HQ= special armies unlike others. Same with Dark Angels, Belail = Deathwing army, jetbike dude = Ravenwing army. Granted you could make some arguments about SW and BA, but one is even older then your coveted DH codex while the other is only available in online format because it's basically a rehash of the DA codex with the BA units shoehorned in there.

loveless
13-02-2009, 19:49
Folks, I'm going to make a suggestion here.
It's going to be tough to do, but I think it's going to salvage a lot of problems.

I vote we just ignore 40kdhs and his comments if we want this thread to go on. Outside of his posts and the replies to them, I think there's some decent back and forth going on.

So, Corrode, The Orange - join me in just moving along and let's try and salvage this thread so that starlight (or other members of the =][=) don't have to close it.

Corrode
13-02-2009, 20:00
Probably for the best. So, I do in fact think GK should be good against other things, but in the context of an elite unit for a wider Daemonhunters codex (itself balanced against other codices rather than being 'themed' or 'fluffy').

Discuss.

Chaplain Dionitas
13-02-2009, 20:03
I field mostly GK's but I have an Inquisitor and retinue with some happy go lucky ST's Occasionally I'll throw an assassin in there. As of late, I haven't had much luck with them except for the last game where my eversor shredded some orks and even got a few more with his bio-meltdown!

loveless
13-02-2009, 20:21
Well, since the Grey Knights and Ordo Malleus are effectively joined at the hip, I don't think we'll be seeing them split off from each other anytime soon.

I suppose the actual question is: "How can you improve Daemonhunters" as opposed to "How can you improve Grey Knights". We shouldn't be looking for ways for the Grey Knights to support themselves in battle, but how to create a decent synergy with Grey Knights, Inquisitors, Storm Troopers, and so on.

Just as going mono-Daemon is potentially a bad idea in Codex: Chaos Daemons, going mono-Grey Knight should likely be a potentially bad idea in Codex: Daemonhunters. While it should definitely be possible, the book should attempt to make Stormtroopers and the like an acceptable option as well.


Actually, this may warrant a new thread. If anyone agrees, send me a message and I'll start one up. I'll even attempt to watch it closely and close it down if things get out of control (obviously I can't cross out posts, but I can still close the thread if i start it...I think...).

Otherwise, this is fine.

Corrode
13-02-2009, 20:30
I suggested in another post that one should entirely remove the ability for mono-Grey-Knight armies. Not by deleting them or anything - simply by making GKs of all flavours Elites. Then you can promote a strong synergy with Stormtroopers, Inducted Guard and perhaps something else that makes up the mass of Inquisitorial foot soldiers. GKs fit the role of the 'souped-up bad boys who get called in when the going's tough', which seems more natural than the 'so... we're trying to capture that bunker, let's hold it and twiddle our thumbs. Shame none of those Guard regiments were here, again.'

loveless
13-02-2009, 20:35
Well, I wouldn't make them all elites, necessarily. You don't want to totally invalidate someone's army if you can help it (I'm looking at you, Fantasy Chaos :p).

I could foresee them in every slot but Troops as a possibility.
HQ - GK Grandmaster
Troop - none
Elites - GK Terminators, GK Dreadnoughts
Fast Attack - GK Teleport Squads
Heavy Support - GK Purgation Squads and potentially a GK Land Raider akin to the Forgeworld one

I could still see PAGK in a Troop position, but it would emphasize the Inquisitorial nature a bit more if they had Stormtroopers to cover the points while the GK go out to smash some skulls.

I would suggest to take away inducted anything and instead give the Daemonhunters something wortwhile in their own book to take the place of inductees.

Corrode
13-02-2009, 20:43
What would you replace inducted Guard with? There's only so many types of human troops you can come up with before they're all basically the same, and Guardsmen seem perfectly suited to the role of cannon- and objective-fodder.

And yeah, I meant more along those lines (with a GK HQ choice, and GK-based HS/FA, just not Troops).

loveless
13-02-2009, 20:50
Well, maybe not a replacement, exactly, but something that comes from their own Codex. You could still call it "Inducted Guard" if you wanted, but I was specifically meaning taking away the need to buy Codex: Daemonhunters AND Codex: Imperial Guard to play the army.

Corrode
13-02-2009, 21:16
Of course, I'm being an idiot. I'd forgotten about that requirement.

loveless
13-02-2009, 21:46
Actually, that's not a bad idea.

Troops: Inquisitorial Stormtroopers; Inducted Guard Platoon; something else

I don't know what that something else is, it could be Grey Knights.

As to the Grey Knight question (addressing the thread title :p), they should be "better" than Space Marines with some bonuses against Daemons. Their Psy weapons are already effective against them. Likewise, giving them Preferred Enemy Chaos (or Preferred Enemy Daemons, depending upon your interpretation of certain Chaos Space Marine units) would give them a boost against the correct enemy without needing to penalize them much against non-Chaos armies. They'd be ever-so-slightly overcosted against non-Chaos armies, but not enough to the point that they'd be unusable.

Occulto
13-02-2009, 22:42
I'm wondering just how much better should GK be to SM? Has it been mentioned amongst all the bickering?

I suppose Fearless, S6, true-grit, storm bolter and psychic hood wielding guys aren't good enough? :eyebrows:

Each squad has access to a heavy flamer or a superior heavy bolter. Both weapons ignore invulnerable saves - something beyond every other army bar Necrons and a single Assassin.

What else do they need? AT? For that you take Dreads and/or Landraiders. Plenty of armies succeed without needing dedicated AT weapons in every squad.

How super should GK be before they end up being flat out broken?

Corrode
13-02-2009, 22:45
Occulto, I'd say they're fine. My opinion was less 'omg grey knights should be amazing' and more 'I would rather see GK as amazing elite troopers who are effective against all-comers, rather than having them be specifically tailored to anti-Daemon (via having equipment or rules which only affect Daemons, or something else entirely).'

If they're already in that position, then it's probably best to just leave them as they are.

loveless
13-02-2009, 22:52
GK are probably pretty good as is, really. Their special rules just need a little fixing to fit in with the current Chaos Marine/Chaos Daemon set up.

Options:
Fearless or ATSKNF - they are Space Marines, after all, but they only need one. Frankly, Fearless is rather crappy for a Close-Combat unit, what with No Retreat, but it sounds better for the GK.

NFW - All fine. However, they should create a weapon that characters can upgrade to in order to bypass Eternal Warrior.

True-Grit Lose the rule, give them another attack on their profile. The only problem is that this gives them another attack on the charge if I remember right. Admittedly, that's probably alright as GK should likely smash through something in the first go bar extraordinary circumstances (yes, I realize I just said that about Daemonhunters). This is a liablity in and of itself, as it's often better to be in combat for 2 rounds instead of 1.

Storm Bolters - a bit much, but it's iconic and should really stay.

Aegis - Probably a bit much. Maybe switch this to work against Chaos Daemon shooting or something...it needs work.

The Shrouding - Oy...it's a good rule, but, jeez...it's pointless as it stands, but improving it is just asking for a points hike.

*reads above* Well...they sure as heck aren't going under 25 points a model...

Occulto
13-02-2009, 22:59
Occulto, I'd say they're fine. My opinion was less 'omg grey knights should be amazing' and more 'I would rather see GK as amazing elite troopers who are effective against all-comers, rather than having them be specifically tailored to anti-Daemon (via having equipment or rules which only affect Daemons, or something else entirely).'

If they're already in that position, then it's probably best to just leave them as they are.

I was more wondering about our rather prolific GK player. ;)

The problem with Daemonhunters, is if you start boosting GK too much, then you run the risk of the army becoming too strong when combined with things like inducted IG.

I'm not sure how much 40kdhs has considered this especially as he's obviously looking at this from a very specific angle. What boosts and bonuses apply to pure GK will inevitably apply to mixed armies. Just because he doesn't use mixed forces, does not mean everyone does.

Also, if they do get more powerful, then it's not going to come for free. As a DW player, I say think very carefully about wanting a small model count elite army - it's not all candy and roses.

thechosenone
13-02-2009, 23:01
Agreed with Loveless' idea regarding moving along


As far as the replacement of inducted imperial guard the rumors from codex Imperial Guard are promising and the possibility of Penal Troopers is good, in fact a lot of the options in there make me not want to see the allies for that book go. But if they had to i think keeping the storm troopers is a strong choice. they are just cheap enough to be bought en mass and just effective enough to be all around useful but also are a worthy choice to screen GK units.

loveless
13-02-2009, 23:03
@Occulto - we're trying not to stir up anything, so we're doing our best to avoid another drawn out argument that goes nowhere. For the sake of the thread, take up arguments with 40kdhs to private messages. No offense, I'd just rather we salvage this thread if we can.

Occulto
13-02-2009, 23:29
@Occulto - we're trying not to stir up anything, so we're doing our best to avoid another drawn out argument that goes nowhere. For the sake of the thread, take up arguments with 40kdhs to private messages. No offense, I'd just rather we salvage this thread if we can.

Fair enough.

My own personal opinion?

GK should be good, but should excel at anti-daemon. Everything I've read suggests this - that an Inquisitor will rock up to a planet, find something suspicious and when it looks like a full on daemon incursion will he/she call in the GK as a last resort. They're way to precious a resource to be dragged into every confrontation with a rogue psyker.

It is the Daemonhunters as a whole, who should be capable of handling every situation.

Khornies & milk
14-02-2009, 00:36
In my opinion the reason (not the only one of course) why people start(ed) fielding 'pure' GK lists is because in the main Inquisitors, IST's and Assassins aren't all that good for the points.
* The majority-build for Inq/retinues is as a shooty firebase, because an assault-based one sucks.
* IST squads typically are dead after 2 rounds, and having achieved sweet #&.
* Assassins are very hit & miss, and even my favourite Eversor can't match it with a lot of the scary IC's I come across.

I would love to see a more capable c/c Inquisitor and retinue build in the future.

There are rumours in the IG Threads that say the ST's are getting AP3 Hellguns. If that becomes a reality then I see that flowing into the IST's which along with cheaper Inq. Chimeras will buff them considerably.

As for GK/GKT's...saying they are OK as is isn't correct, and some of their Stats and Weaponry/Wargear costs are crazy.
* Our GM should get a Stat boost, as according to the Background He is the ultimate Warrior, and superior in every way to a SM IC. At the moment a SM Captain has a better WS and his other stats are the same. The GM should also be given Eternal Warrior when the time comes.
* Our minor Hero (BC) should have at least 2 wounds instead of the 1 currently.
* Psycannons cost should either be dropped 10 pts or buffed up, as it costs the same as an assault Cannon.
* speaking of assault Cannons...all weapons should have the same stats regardless of who's using them.
*Some of the Psychic Powers are redundent and need fixing, but seen as I have never used any I can't really suggest any improvements.
*GK/GKT's are absolute Gods at DS'ing, so let's see that reflected in their abilities, so only roll 1 D6 to determine distance scattered.

There are others but I'm taking the wife out for Valentine's Day so......................

loveless
14-02-2009, 04:07
Well, the basic cost of a PAGK is likely to stay the same if we try to pump them up at all.

The Grandmaster should get a boost, indeed - sort of a Chapter Master++ really, with the option to ignore Eternal Warrior with his force weapon, a psychic hood probably, and so on.

I'd almost rather see something besides the Brother Captain as a "minor hero". Although, fluffwise, you need something besides a Grand Master, so I suppose Brother Captain makes sense. 2 wounds would be preferable to 3, roughly keeping him the same cost as he is now with a WS boost.

Most non-plasma weapons have been adjusted to be relatively cheap. Dropping it 10 points sounds decent, since it's stats are already impressive.

I'd rather see Assault Cannons void from the next Codex, replacing them with Psycannons across the board to make everything a bit more rare and baroque.

Aubec le noir
14-02-2009, 11:43
I agree with the two last posts, for the buffs and so on...
in particular for the BC which is a pity. I made a topic that way
I think too that the replacement of assault cannons by psycannons would be more fluffy and fun.
The access of anti-vehicule weapons should be good too.
this could be easy following te SM codex.

but what is really bother me is the actual non specificity against Deamons of the GK.
since the release of the new Deamons Codex, nearly all the gear and particularities of the GK are useless : the deamons powers are no longer psychic powers and all deamons get the eternal thing (so see you Aegis suits 80% of the psychic powers and Nemesis weapon)

Still I always will play GK, for the too cool minis in metal, for their fluff and History and for the possibility to mix them up with the other ordos to constituate an Inquisition Army of the 3 ordos (all in metal except vehicles), wich is an old dream. And it should be a pity to me that the GK were be limited at only an ally :cries:

By the way you've got a possibility to decrease the GK weakness by adding to them sisters of battle for exemple who have a little more fire power and number, even if they lack heavy weapons too !

Aubec :chrome:

Corrode
14-02-2009, 11:47
Mixing SoB and GK is probably a no-go; SoB are an entirely different organisation and really should be a stand-alone army (either as Codex: Sisters of Battle like in 2nd Edition or as part of a broader Codex: Ecclesiarchy).

Aubec le noir
14-02-2009, 11:53
still SoB are an ordo of the Inquisition like GK or DW and for the moment the rules specifies it clearly.
so why would you miss this possilibity ?
Aubec :chrome:

Corrode
14-02-2009, 12:04
You certainly can do it at the moment. We were discussing the possibilities of a new Codex though, which may well disallow the 'Allies' rule.

Inquisitor_Tolheim
14-02-2009, 18:37
Well, the basic cost of a PAGK is likely to stay the same if we try to pump them up at all.

The Grandmaster should get a boost, indeed - sort of a Chapter Master++ really, with the option to ignore Eternal Warrior with his force weapon, a psychic hood probably, and so on.

I'd almost rather see something besides the Brother Captain as a "minor hero". Although, fluffwise, you need something besides a Grand Master, so I suppose Brother Captain makes sense. 2 wounds would be preferable to 3, roughly keeping him the same cost as he is now with a WS boost.

Most non-plasma weapons have been adjusted to be relatively cheap. Dropping it 10 points sounds decent, since it's stats are already impressive.

I'd rather see Assault Cannons void from the next Codex, replacing them with Psycannons across the board to make everything a bit more rare and baroque.

Definitely agreed on the assault cannon idea. I was thinking: Why not make the "psycannon bolts" upgrade replace any heavy bolter on a vehicle with a psycannon, and replace the assault cannons with psycannons? it fits with the army feel and would be a great way to help distinguish them. I mean Psycannon bolts on a land raider crusader seems like a very, very fluffy Grey Knight unit.


You certainly can do it at the moment. We were discussing the possibilities of a new Codex though, which may well disallow the 'Allies' rule.

I know it's likely inevitable, but can I say that I REALLY don't like this?

In my opinion, allies (or inducting) should be an ability tied to an inquisitor lord. This makes the Lord a more attractive HQ option, and fits with the fluff idea that Inquisitiors draw from whatever military support is available to mount an offensive. I may start a thread on this topic to get a feel for what others think. (as an aside, wouldn't allies in the Daemon codex be nice too? Daemons allied with guard = LaTD)


In my opinion the reason (not the only one of course) why people start(ed) fielding 'pure' GK lists is because in the main Inquisitors, IST's and Assassins aren't all that good for the points.
* The majority-build for Inq/retinues is as a shooty firebase, because an assault-based one sucks.
* IST squads typically are dead after 2 rounds, and having achieved sweet #&.
* Assassins are very hit & miss, and even my favourite Eversor can't match it with a lot of the scary IC's I come across.

As an idea for assault Inquisitors, part of the problem will be mitigated by different points costs for their weapons when compared to the costs for Grey Knights. Why buy a Daemonhammer for XX points on an inquisitor when it is better on a Grey Knight Hero for the same cost? Special items like a Daemonhammer could also give a +1 s bonus (after doubling, per the rulebook), making them attractive and fluffy choices for all comers armies, not just ones who know they will be fighting daemons.

As a potential add on to help flesh out the list: what about the adeptus arbites? You have arbite enforcers who could have suppresion shields and shock mauls (potential cc troops), bike riding arbites (much needed fast attack), Tarantula sentry guns (immobile heavy weapons with armor 10 all around?), and k9 units (another possible fast attack choice).

Of course, I love the arbites so I may have a skewed opinion. I know that as an inquisitor they would be the first group I would requisition. :)

For the Grey Knights setup:


HQ: Grey Knight Hero (Grand master/improved BC as detailed by others)
Elites: GK Terminators squad
Fast Attack: GK teleporter squad (can take a psychic power and use it as a squad ability like terminators? This might be a cool fluffy buffing option.)
Heavy Support: Pergation Squad and Land Raiders, possibly 0-2 Dreadnoughts (I like the Forgeworld LR better and with the crusader it would be a fluffier choice then the standard LR or dreads, but I hate to invalidate models already in play unless absolutely neceessary.)


Grey Knight Teleporters can be troops with a GK hero, allowing the purists to keep their armies.

As for the Grey Knight special rules, I would go with:

Preferred Enemy: Daemon (no brainer, really)
The Shrouding (as is. Useful without being a be-all, end all ability)
Improved Deep Strike (to encourage DSing, perhaps 1D6 scatter?)
Fearless/Know no Fear (Fearless is almost worse with CC, but as Loveless said makes more sense)
Psychic Warriors (Grey Knight squads can take psychic powers, used like the Terminator squads currently, at points cost)

Corrode
14-02-2009, 18:41
I'd actually forgotten about Arbites. That could make up our missing 'extra Troops thing', Arbiters Enforcers. Give them shock mauls and suppression shields as you said, or shotguns and flamers for a close-range fire support unit (although that might overlap with Stormtroopers?)

You then have a set-up with Grey Knights forming the elite strike force, backed up by a mob of Arbites blasting away the small things and holding objectives. That could work quite well, and is a bit more 'combined arms' which is a nice Inquisitorial theme.

xibo
14-02-2009, 19:58
actually demon hunters have an inquisitor retuinist that allows the inquisitor's squad or if multiple retuinists are around any squad to shoot on deepstrikers, which is pretty powerfull against demons IMO.

i think DH should remain able to be played as an army on their own, but one that is very hard to play if only GK are being used. a guard commander can decide to sacrifice half a platoon only to pull attention away from something else, but a GKM should hardly be allowed to get away with doing such an expending move with his GK.
GK should IMO have some boni against demons per default ( like the proposed inv-safe reduce/ignore for nemesis force weapons ) and be about the same as their marine counterparts against everything else.

AdmiralDick
14-02-2009, 20:19
Well, I wouldn't make them all elites, necessarily. You don't want to totally invalidate someone's army if you can help it (I'm looking at you, Fantasy Chaos :p).

agreed, but then the other side of the coin says that we shouldn't refrain from making difficult decisions just because it will upset some people.

but on the whole i would rather see armies being continually expanded and reinterpreted in a manner appropriate to the ethos of the game and respectful of the already established background.


I could foresee them in every slot but Troops as a possibility.
HQ - GK Grandmaster
Troop - none
Elites - GK Terminators, GK Dreadnoughts
Fast Attack - GK Teleport Squads
Heavy Support - GK Purgation Squads and potentially a GK Land Raider akin to the Forgeworld one

whilst i don't think that it is the best solution, i think that leaving GK from the Troops selection would be a middle ground that would be acceptable. i'm not a fan of PAGK at all, but making them all some kind of specialist in comparison to standard Tactical Marines would be a big step in the right direction.


I'm wondering just how much better should GK be to SM? Has it been mentioned amongst all the bickering?

whilst it might be a somewhat inflammatory question, it is still worth asking and it is important to try and find an answer.

an equally important question as others have pointed to is how should GKs compare to Daemons and CSM? its all very well standardising GKs by fiddling a stat here and a points cost there, but how they relate to the chief reason that they exist at all has to be more profound than that. as i said in the beginning, GK should be good against everyone (they are humanities finest) but there needs to be some unique relationship between Daemons and GKs that is not accessible to other armies, and stat and point changes are never going to be that relationship.


NFW - All fine. However, they should create a weapon that characters can upgrade to in order to bypass Eternal Warrior.

i think that simply bypassing over-used special rules is a recipe for disaster. one of the best games i've ever played, Pirates of the Spanish Main, was very nearly ruined by such short sighted game design.

there was an ability that allowed ships with massive crews to travel vastly faster and further than other ships, leaving most forces that did not included them in their wake. so WizKids in their infinite wisdom introduced an ability that pwnd ships with large crews, crippling them to the spot, and the worst part was, this 'solution' was cheaper than the problem. people quickly realised that there was no longer a point in taking large crewed ships because everyone else was packing a 'mermaid' to ruin their day. this killed a lot of tactics and abilities, because they had been designed to be used with the large crews. so WizKids came up with an 'even better idea', in which they released a new ability that could kill pretty much all others before they'd even been announced, and yes, it was cheaper than the problem it was meant to solve.

in the end people had to agree simply not to take any of the offending pieces, just so the game could be played, and of course the original ability was still a problem, because WizKids had never supplied a decent solution. it was not a very clever chapter in games development history.

Eternal Warrior is already an over used and often entirely unneeded 'solution' to another over used ability (Instant Death). i don't know what the right solution is, but i do know that simply side stepping it is never going to fix it. next edition, i can practically guarantee you that they will have to make Eternal Warrior into something else, because they've given it to too many units (just like Rending).

similarly, 40dhs has suggested that they ought to have more AP2/3 weapons, but i feel that that is the wrong solution to a unnecessary problem. the whole reason that 3+ armour is annoyingly difficult to crack, is because that's exactly what its supposed to be. Power Armour is the pinnacle of personal protection, and the idea is that it should always offer you some protection. the problem we currently have is because GW have removed armour modifiers, which would solve the problem beautifully, in a stroke. PA would provided some help in most situations, unlike Flack Armour, but the help it offers would fluctuate depending on the situation, unlike know where the options are all or nothing. plenty of other games currently have armour modification mechanics, so its not like its impossible.


GK should be good, but should excel at anti-daemon. Everything I've read suggests this

in spite of the bitterness of many of the arguments so far, i think that this is something we have pretty much all agreed on from the start.


I know it's likely inevitable, but can I say that I REALLY don't like this?

either way GW is going to alienate players. do they cut the connections with IG and SM completely and effectively end the last 20 years of GK background? or end the GK as a playable army and upset those people who have invested in the force since the current codex.


I'd actually forgotten about Arbites.

something like Arbites would be cool, but Arbites themselves wouldn't fit the theme at all (they are crowd control and policing on heavily populated Imperial planets, and the very, very, very last defence against invaders) nor would they really fill the gap left for them very well (unless they are totally reinterpreted).

Inquisitor_Tolheim
14-02-2009, 20:48
either way GW is going to alienate players. do they cut the connections with IG and SM completely and effectively end the last 20 years of GK background? or end the GK as a playable army and upset those people who have invested in the force since the current codex.


I have to say I don't think it has to be both.

Inducting would have to be reinterpreted to make it a little more balanced (off the top of my head, one troops choice inducted = one option from somewhere else on the FoC) and I would tie it to Inquisitor Lords to help them become more appealing in comparison to the mighty Grey Knights Hero option.

If you want to run pure Grey Knights, you would still be able to. FA Grey Knights become troops choices with a GK hero. But if you want to run a force with inducted guard or marines you're not running a "pure" grey knights force anyway, so taking the Inquisitor Lord shouldn't be too onerous a requirement.

Keep in mind we want to avoid interchanging DH and GK in our discussion. GK is a pure Grey Knights force taken willfully against other options in a Daemonhunters Codex, and should be handicapped in some manner for that choice. DH is a daemonhunters army taken from the entire codex, potentially including GK. GK armies would not get induction rules. DH armies should (IMHO of course).


something like Arbites would be cool, but Arbites themselves wouldn't fit the theme at all (they are crowd control and policing on heavily populated Imperial planets, and the very, very, very last defence against invaders) nor would they really fill the gap left for them very well (unless they are totally reinterpreted).

Do you have a replacement suggestion? I could see an inquisitor calling on the Arbites when he needed an on hand force that he could be fairly certain was aloof from the population. While it's true that Arbites are a policing force more then a military organization, it's tough to come up with something that won't be "the guard in a different outfit". Arbites have established fluffy units that could flesh out fast attack and heavy support, two areas that are dominated entirely by Grey Knights at the moment (with the exception of the orbital strike, which is cool but hardly a unit). With Arbites, I would see the Army as something like this:


Heavy Support: Inquisitor Lord, Grey Knights Hero
Elites: Officio Assassinatorium Operative, Death Cult Assassins, Daemonhost, Grey Knight Terminators
Troops: Inquisitorial Stormtroopers, Arbite Enforcer Team, Inducted PDF Platoon (If induction rules are scrapped)
Fast Attack: Power Armored Grey Knights (Troops with GKH), Arbite Biker Squad, Arbite K9 Unit, Vendetta Gunship (?)
Heavy Support: GK Purgation Squad, Land Raider (and variants), GK Dreadnoughts, Orbital Strike, Tarantula Sentry Guns (GK Heavy Support units require a GK hero)


Thats 2 HQ, 4 Elite (two of which are mutually exclusive), 3 troops, 4 Fast Attack (with rumored new guard Valkyrie variant), and 5-7 Heavy support (one of which is not a unit).

In comparison the current guard codex has 1 HQ (+3 advisors and many HQ Platoon add ons), 5 Elites, 3 Troops, 3 Fast Attack, and 4 Heavy support.

It's not a perfect comparison, of course, but the armies have close to the same number of units. My list has a -1 disadvantage in Elites and a +1 advantage in Fast Attack and HQ. And think of all the new Arbite models GW could sell with the new codex.

EDIT: Whoops, also has an advantage in HS. So not as good as I thought, but still not absolutely terrible.

holmcross
14-02-2009, 21:59
It is the Daemonhunters as a whole, who should be capable of handling every situation.

You mean the Inquisition. There is a reason why its composed of three branches, and not just a giant ordo mallus.

Occulto
14-02-2009, 23:20
Eternal Warrior is already an over used and often entirely unneeded 'solution' to another over used ability (Instant Death). i don't know what the right solution is, but i do know that simply side stepping it is never going to fix it. next edition, i can practically guarantee you that they will have to make Eternal Warrior into something else, because they've given it to too many units (just like Rending).

How about this?

GK force weapons - cause d3+1 wounds against any model with Eternal Warrior. Against all other models, it functions as normal.

I agree simply bypassing EW is not the answer. But I still think GK should have some bonus against it - random wounds is a compromise between "does nothing" and "slays them outright."


an equally important question as others have pointed to is how should GKs compare to Daemons and CSM? its all very well standardising GKs by fiddling a stat here and a points cost there, but how they relate to the chief reason that they exist at all has to be more profound than that. as i said in the beginning, GK should be good against everyone (they are humanities finest) but there needs to be some unique relationship between Daemons and GKs that is not accessible to other armies, and stat and point changes are never going to be that relationship.

Preferred enemy is the obvious one for GK.

But on the flipside, how to rework the Daemonic Infestation rule? Putting the apparent issue with terminology aside, is recycling units appropriate for an army that's entirely deamonic?


You mean the Inquisition. There is a reason why its composed of three branches, and not just a giant ordo mallus.

True - but if we're talking about the Daemonhunters Codex, the other Ordos don't necessarily figure in the equation. :D

Grand Master Raziel
14-02-2009, 23:54
In regards to army design, Daemonhunters units should have abilities that are useful against all armies in the game, but are thematically appropriate as anti-daemon measures. What Mystics do is a fine example of that kind of thing: getting to take potshots at incoming Deep Strikers as they arrive is pretty useful no matter what army you're playing against, but it's very anti-daemon thematically. A bad ability is something like the Sanctuary psychic power, which can completely shut down any assault-based daemons, but is totally useless against any other army. Make Daemonhunters armies have more abilities like Mystics and less (preferably, none) of the abilities like Sanctuary in the next go-around.

As for PAGKs - no, they don't need plasma or melta weaponry. They also don't particularly need any massive changes, just tweaks: give them frag grenades, downcost incinerators and psycannons, and I'd like to see the Shrouding be made more effective, a la Stealth Suits or Space Clowns. I can count on one hand the number of times I've had opponents miss a chance to shoot at my GKs because of the Shrouding. I wouldn't be surprised if they also ditched True Grit and just gave each PAGK an additional attack on his profile (2 for regular GKs, 3 for Justicars). I'd also like it clearly spelled out that PAGK Justicars can (or can't) use psychic powers. The way the current dex reads, I'd say they can't, but the FAQ specifically refers to Justicars having psychic powers, so that one's a little murky.

As for Eternal Warrior screwing up NFWs, that's not really a problem for most of the army, as there aren't that many T3 multi-wound models running around with Eternal Warrior in the first place. It really only becomes an issue with the Grand Master. I don't think having that guy's NFW bypass Eternal Warrior is going to lead to the ruination of 40K. He could also be WS6, while we're at it. I'm not going to begrudge SM Masters and Captains having WS6 and demand that the GK GM be WS7 because he's just that much cooler than the SM Heroes. He really ought to have higher WS than his subordinate troops, though, so WS6 works for me.

40kdhs
15-02-2009, 01:08
I

Maybe instead of thinking that your DH codex is the end all source material for everything that has to do with Inquisitors you should maybe um...read more. Just incase Corrode's point didn't get across GW made a game called "Inquisitor", their are tons of books from the Black Library who's central characters are Inquisitors. They are most definitely not only politicians and I suggest you bone up on your fluff before making another false accusation implying that they do nothing.


Why dont you tell me what they actually do besides asking somebody else to fight for them or killing another inquisitor for different reasons?




Can you not field a pure GK army?


You are a shorted-sighted and close-minded person. When you can't lead, you follow. Do you understand what it means?

1-Why can't I play my pure GK army when I can paint it however I want?

2-Is it correct to say that you choose to play an army because you like the models? In my case, I like GK models more than the others in DH. Therefore, am I not justified to field a GK army?

You are undoubtly a hypocrite. I don't tell anybody which models they should use in their army. Please stop telling me how I should play my army.


Existence of said army does not justify the need for that army to be competitive against everyone.


1-The 'existence' also says that IG and SM are not capable of fighting 'daemon' but do you see IG and SM players not using their armies to face a daemon or chaos army? No?

2-Do you know that DH army could have been sold well if your 'existence' did a good job at writing DH codex?

3-If your 'existence' only focused on what is good for the game system and community instead of talking too much, you wouldn't see a lot of problems in the system. Am I right?

If I were you, I wouldn't raise your 'existence' too much.




Post count is irrelevant for determining if someone is trolling, all that matters is their behavior in a topic.


Yes, it is because if you are passionate about a certain topick, you will post. Otherwise, why bother?

When it comes to GKs, i care about them because i want them to be better.




You are mis-representing our arguments. There's no problem with having a GKs army, however we disagree with the notion that said GK army should be made better against all other armies. A DH army should be improved on to make them better against all armies. GK however should remain aimed at being best against daemons. Weather they currently fulfill that roll or not is not the issue at hand so please don't pull that tired string again about how DH are the weakest army of all.


You don't want to see better GKs because they challenge your SM's supremacy and it's the truth. You need to be honest about it.

Please don't use the 'GK only fighting daemon' banner to make them 'less effective' than certain armies because it's a lie.

If you really care about the 'balance' of the game, you need to tell GW that every army should be 'treated' equally.



but their was no reason to change them so that they would be as competitive as any other army in doing so.


I don't know what your personal problem with GKs is but you need to be open-minded when it comes to new and improved GKs.

When you look at them, you need to think that they will bring a new challenge and something special to the game instead of putting them behind Ordo Malleus's closet.



The GK attacked the SW because they suspected chaos corruption, did they not? So contrary to what you said that does not show that GWs intention was for GK to constantly face off against other armies.


If GW didn't want GKs to attack SW, why did it mention it? Do you know what you are saying?




I disagree. What I see is established background for each faction to have their own distinct armies. GK do not run under a similar vein, they are, background wise, attached to the Ordo Mallus.


You are willing to do that to other SM chapters but you are not going to do the same to GKs. You are bias.

Occulto
15-02-2009, 01:46
You don't want to see better GKs because they challenge your SM's supremacy and it's the truth. You need to be honest about it.

Put a sock in it mate. I've just reread everything The Orange has posted in this thread and:

a) He has never said that.
b) He doesn't even own/play SM

So maybe honesty is a virtue you should employ yourself.

Grand Master Raziel
15-02-2009, 05:49
You are a shorted-sighted and close-minded person. When you can't lead, you follow. Do you understand what it means?

1-Why can't I play my pure GK army when I can paint it however I want?

2-Is it correct to say that you choose to play an army because you like the models? In my case, I like GK models more than the others in DH. Therefore, am I not justified to field a GK army?

You are undoubtly a hypocrite. I don't tell anybody which models they should use in their army. Please stop telling me how I should play my army.


Etc...

Look, speaking as a long-time DH player...stop helping. It doesn't make the rest of us look good when you carry on without manners and make personal attacks on other posters.

In regards to this particular point, here's a hypothetical. Let's say I play Eldar. I want to make an all Aspect Warrior army, because I think the models are cool. I go and do this, make an army with only Aspect Warriors and no models that are not Aspect Warriors. My army is functional, but doesn't work as well as armies that include things like Farseers, Falcons, Rangers and Wraithlords in support of the Aspects. I cannot then turn around and claim that the army is deficient, because I'm not using it in the way that the designers intended. It's the same thing with playing an all-Grey Knights DH army. The army will function without Inquistor Lords, Assassins, and ISTs, but it functions better with them, because the list is designed for units like that to support the GKs. GKs do many things very well, but those supporting units can do some very useful things that GKs can't, like light up enemy Terminators with plasma (ISTs), run around with meltaguns blowing up Land Raiders (ISTs), hold objectives while GKs run around butchering things (again, ISTs), or kill the Nightbringer in a single turn of close combat (ISTs...no just kidding, in that case the Eversor Assassin), and so on. Now, I'm not saying that GKs couldn't use some improvements, but they don't need to have access to plasma guns or meltaguns because DH armies have ISTs for that. If you're not using the ISTs because you like the GK armies so much, then you're prioritizing esthetics over functionality - which is not nessarily the wrong thing to do, but it does mean that you're knowingly accepting the fact that your decision might mean that your army is less effective that it would otherwise be.

Anyway, what's wrong with Stormtrooper models? Well painted, I think they look quite awesome.

40kdhs
15-02-2009, 16:48
Put a sock in it mate. I've just reread everything The Orange has posted in this thread and:

a) He has never said that.
b) He doesn't even own/play SM

So maybe honesty is a virtue you should employ yourself.

1- How can GKs be better when they are always behind Ordo Malleus's door? Just because we have a full GK army, it doesn't mean that GKs don't help inquisition any more. Furthermore, it's the best interest for the inquisition to have a full GK army so that inquisitors don't have to request for SM's assistance any more. I'm sure that you want to know what else GKs can do besides killing chaos and daemons and the only way you can see it is a GK army.

2-He said that he didn't own / play SM but why is he so interested in Ordo Malleus affair if we are not his biggest 'threat'? I have to wonder why he doesn't want to see a full GK army.



Look, speaking as a long-time DH player...stop helping. It doesn't make the rest of us look good when you carry on without manners and make personal attacks on other posters.


I asked tough questions and it's inaccurate when you interpreted them as personal attacks. I don't have any problem with what you are saying here because you are entitled for your opinions. However, the problem that I have with some of you is your 'outdated' way of thinking.

1-Nobody supposes to be better than 'SM'. Not even GKs? Come on.
2-Instead of having an open-mind to a new and interesting idea and looking at a GK army as a new challenge because they bring something special and unique to the game like all existing armies, you shut it down by upholding GW's 'intention' when you fully know well that GW hasn't been consistent with their 'fluff' and 'philosophy' when it comes to choose an army to play.




In regards to this particular point, here's a hypothetical. Let's say I play Eldar. I want to make an all Aspect Warrior army, because I think the models are cool. I go and do this, make an army with only Aspect Warriors and no models that are not Aspect Warriors. My army is functional, but doesn't work as well as armies that include things like Farseers, Falcons, Rangers and Wraithlords in support of the Aspects.


1- GKs have GK HQ, troop, FA, elite, and 'heavy supports'. Do you have something like that in your 'aspect warrior' army? No? Just because you use all 'aspect warrior' units at 1 slot, it doesn't mean that you have a 'pure aspect warrior' army.

2-According to 'fluff', a GK GM lead a GK unit to kill a Daemon Prince. As far as everybody knows, your 'pure aspect warrior' units haven't done anything 'impressive' or 'noticeable'.

Yes, you can build your 'pure aspect warrior' army but yours don't have what GKs have.

Inquisitor_Tolheim
15-02-2009, 17:18
1- How can GKs be better when they are always behind Ordo Malleus's door? Just because we have a full GK army, it doesn't mean that GKs don't help inquisition any more. Furthermore, it's the best interest for the inquisition to have a full GK army so that inquisitors don't have to request for SM's assistance any more.

2-He said that he didn't own / play SM but why is he so interested in Ordo Malleus affair if we are not his biggest 'threat'? I have to wonder why he doesn't want to see a full GK army.

I think we're approaching this from the wrong direction and we're never going to reach any kind of agreement. 40kdhs is as entitled to his/her opinion about the fluff of a fictional universe as everyone else.

40kdhs, I can tell that you passionately love playing full Grey Knights and want very badly for the army to be expanded into it's own army list. What would you change about the army if you were in control of the design? Could you present us with a homebrewed codex or some modifications to the existing army list that demonstrate what you mean? While you've said that you want the GK to be more competitive apart from the other units in the codex, I haven't managed to gather what you have in mind. If you can let us know what codex changes you want made to the GK, we should be able to carry on a discussion based on ideas about game rules, rather then interpretations of the fluff.

Znail
15-02-2009, 17:19
Etc...

Look, speaking as a long-time DH player...stop helping. It doesn't make the rest of us look good when you carry on without manners and make personal attacks on other posters.

In regards to this particular point, here's a hypothetical. Let's say I play Eldar. I want to make an all Aspect Warrior army, because I think the models are cool. I go and do this, make an army with only Aspect Warriors and no models that are not Aspect Warriors. My army is functional, but doesn't work as well as armies that include things like Farseers, Falcons, Rangers and Wraithlords in support of the Aspects. I cannot then turn around and claim that the army is deficient, because I'm not using it in the way that the designers intended. It's the same thing with playing an all-Grey Knights DH army. The army will function without Inquistor Lords, Assassins, and ISTs, but it functions better with them, because the list is designed for units like that to support the GKs. GKs do many things very well, but those supporting units can do some very useful things that GKs can't, like light up enemy Terminators with plasma (ISTs), run around with meltaguns blowing up Land Raiders (ISTs), hold objectives while GKs run around butchering things (again, ISTs), or kill the Nightbringer in a single turn of close combat (ISTs...no just kidding, in that case the Eversor Assassin), and so on. Now, I'm not saying that GKs couldn't use some improvements, but they don't need to have access to plasma guns or meltaguns because DH armies have ISTs for that. If you're not using the ISTs because you like the GK armies so much, then you're prioritizing esthetics over functionality - which is not nessarily the wrong thing to do, but it does mean that you're knowingly accepting the fact that your decision might mean that your army is less effective that it would otherwise be.

Anyway, what's wrong with Stormtrooper models? Well painted, I think they look quite awesome.

I think you are overvaluing the Stormtroopers a wee bit. For this to even have some noticeable effect so would you need to fill all your Troops with IST in Rhinos, wich obviously wont leave you any Troops slots for GK's.

But you would have more of a point if you were talking about inducted IG as they do have options that make more of a diffrence for less. If either IST or GK were given replacement units that fill the same roles as the inducted IG then things would be fine.

Corrode
15-02-2009, 17:36
1- GKs have GK HQ, troop, FA, elite, and 'heavy supports'. Do you have something like that in your 'aspect warrior' army? No? Just because you use all 'aspect warrior' units at 1 slot, it doesn't mean that you have a 'pure aspect warrior' army.

2-According to 'fluff', a GK GM lead a GK unit to kill a Daemon Prince. As far as everybody knows, your 'pure aspect warrior' units haven't done anything 'impressive' or 'noticeable'.

Yes, you can build your 'pure aspect warrior' army but yours don't have what GKs have.

We're supposed to be leaving you to stew in your own juices, but I couldn't resist this one.

1- Yes, Aspect Warriors do. Do you know what Aspect Warriors are? A pure AW army looks something like:

HQ: Autarch
Elites: Howling Banshees
Troops: Dire Avengers
Fast Attack: Shining Spears
Heavy Support: Dark Reapers

All of those are 'Aspect Warriors' and that's not even half the possible Aspect Warrior choices in the Eldar Codex. You can easily build a pure Aspect Warrior army. What exactly was your point?

2- Aspect Warriors haven't done anything impressive or notable? Really?

Honestly at this point I'm pretty sure all you've done is pick up a DH Codex, read the two bits of fluff that talk about how amazing GKs are, and decided that nothing else will be as good. You dismiss the elite troops of other armies as 'not doing anything', you dismiss Inquisitors (the most powerful single individuals in the Imperium, in terms of how much relative force they can apply to any situation) as 'politicians who do nothing', you claim constantly that for some reason non-Marine players just love Marines so much that they don't want GKs to challenge 'SM supremacy'. You honestly don't have a clue about anything beyond your own army and it's depressing to watch you continue to argue by sticking your hands over your ears and going LA LA LA GKS ARE THE BEST.

40kdhs
15-02-2009, 17:48
Honestly at this point I'm pretty sure all you've done is pick up a DH Codex, read the two bits of fluff that talk about how amazing GKs are, and decided that nothing else will be as good.

I have played a pure GK army for 4+ years. GKs have the 'fluff' to back up and every unit starts with 'GK'. Untill you can show me your 'impressive aspect warrior' fluff, your aspect warrior army is like IG and SM. Nothing is really special.

Khornies & milk
15-02-2009, 21:19
I don't know why the OP doesn't just close this Thread and start up a new one focussing specifically on improving ALL the Units available in the current DH Codex. Mind you, if people did a search you'd find quite a few 'like' threads on this very subject, so I don't know if anything new will come out of it...but you never know.

This roundabout this thread is on is making me (and the majority of others I suspect) nauseous.

Corrode
15-02-2009, 22:23
I have played a pure GK army for 4+ years. GKs have the 'fluff' to back up and every unit starts with 'GK'. Untill you can show me your 'impressive aspect warrior' fluff, your aspect warrior army is like IG and SM. Nothing is really special.

You know what I'm done with this. You've played GK for 4 years? Gratz, I played Marines for 8 and Orks for 4 or so. I've dipped into a multitude of other armies - Dark Eldar and Witch Hunters in 40k, Lizards, Orcs n Goblins, Beasts and Tomb Kings in Fantasy. I have no particular bias, and I really enjoy the concept for most races and at some point or another have wanted to collect an army for each and every one of them.

When the DH Codex was released I thought GK were amazingly cool. I still did until recently. You, personally, have soured me to them. The sad thing is, I actually mostly supported your viewpoint. I thought GK should be relatively more powerful. I thought they should become an uber-elite unit capable of taking on all-comers, possibly even the single best unit in the game. I truly believe that Grey Knights deserve to be form a major part of an improved Daemonhunters Codex, and that they should be a viable choice for any DH player.

I have advocated this again and again, in fact. But to hell with it. At this point Id honestly like to see them Squatted, removed from the game entirely, meeting an ignominious end at the hands of something entirely inappropriate. I'd like to see their Codex removed from the shelves, their moulds destroyed and any fluff reference to them removed. Why? Just to spite you.

Good job.

Occulto
15-02-2009, 23:32
I have played a pure GK army for 4+ years. GKs have the 'fluff' to back up and every unit starts with 'GK'. Untill you can show me your 'impressive aspect warrior' fluff, your aspect warrior army is like IG and SM. Nothing is really special.

Pretty much anything to do with Biel-Tan?

thechosenone
16-02-2009, 01:18
Look, everybody who is responding to 40KDHS at this point is just arguing for the sake of arguing. If anyone keeps responding to the same drek he rehashes then your just as thick headed at this point. the logical points were laid out repeatedly by me, and The Orange and Admiral Dick and others. Other armies like cult chaos and monotheisitc demon do not complain about lack of choice when ignoring options in codex, An army designed to combat one foe may not be balanced to fight other foes without support, An army that rudely insinuates story arcs on other armies to justify play ect ect ect.

He doesn't like these points on a very fundamental level. Its like trying to argue capital punishment when half the party can't agree on the definition of life. We're better off all shaking hands and agreeing to disagree here and just talking about what would make a good balanced DH and what roles GK would play in DH.

Khornies & milk
16-02-2009, 01:20
Couldn't agree more.

The Orange
16-02-2009, 02:04
GKs have the 'fluff' to back up and every unit starts with 'GK'. Untill you can show me your 'impressive aspect warrior' fluff, your aspect warrior army is like IG and SM. Nothing is really special.

(slaps hand on lap) Gosh darn it 40kdhs you've convinced me. No one is special compared to the GK. GK can do everything. The Imperial Guard, Imperial Navy, Space Marine Chapters, Inquisition, Mechanius, etc. should all give up their jobs and retire to some small farm on the far side of the Segmuntus. The GK can handle the defense of the entire Imperium because everyone else is just not special enough. :p

All kidding aside you need to step back for a moment 40kdhs. This is a hobby, theirs the fluff aspect and then theirs the game aspect but you should be aware that these don't line up. As much as GW will try the table top game will never truly represent the fluff because if it did, we'd have a horribly broken game (your GK would autowin every game). Vise verse if the the fluff represented the table top game, well it would suck because every dies on the table top. A books no fun if the protagonists constantly die off, and/or fail to overcome in surmounting odds. You've been making your arguments by mixing both perspectives here and sorry but that's just not going to work. Most posters here know the difference and tailor their arguments keeping this in mind. Example you could say; GK need to be more powerful because currently any daemon army is kicking the heck out of them on the table top. But you can't say GK need to be more powerful because page 27 of the DH codex had this story about how a grandmaster took on 50 billion greater daemons and won. Yes GK are special in the fluff, if you read any other codex you'll realize that every book says their own guys are special, this does not mean they'll be any more special then any other model on the table top.

Also I think you need to step back a bit because i think your getting too invested in this all. Some of the comments you made make me suspect your living in a fantasy world, other comments border on paranoia.

He said that he didn't own / play SM but why is he so interested in Ordo Malleus affair if we are not his biggest 'threat'?
I mean honestly what is this? Do you think theirs some conspiracy made up of SM fans out there that are trying to get rid of the GKs? I don't play SMs, I base my opinion on the fact GW have written the fluff to support the idea that GK primarily support the Inquisition, not running and maintaining a completely separate army on their own. If that's too hard for you to believe then either your a young kid just overly hyped about his own army (nothing wrong with that) or your a person who seriously needs an intervention to occur.

thechosenone
16-02-2009, 03:29
I think you are overvaluing the Stormtroopers a wee bit. For this to even have some noticeable effect so would you need to fill all your Troops with IST in Rhinos, wich obviously wont leave you any Troops slots for GK's.

But you would have more of a point if you were talking about inducted IG as they do have options that make more of a diffrence for less. If either IST or GK were given replacement units that fill the same roles as the inducted IG then things would be fine.

I personally wouldn't use more then one Power Armored GK unit. Its SO many points for not that much bang. I'd make my Elite terminator GK and assassin to be honest.

Stormtroopers are just to sweet to pass by. good weapons, targeters, the best basic transport aside a wave serpent and good special weapon options. I'm a fan.

Grand Master Raziel
16-02-2009, 04:29
We're better off all shaking hands and agreeing to disagree here and just talking about what would make a good balanced DH and what roles GK would play in DH.

You're probably right, but I'm going to have this one last go, just to see if something sticks.



1-Nobody supposes to be better than 'SM'. Not even GKs? Come on.

Well, it depends on what you mean by that. If you mean that the basic GK trooper should be better than the basic SM trooper, then I would agree with you. However, you don't need to make any rules changes to make that happen, because the basic GK trooper is already better than the basic SM trooper: higher WS, strikes at 2 higher strength, has more attacks in close combat, totes a storm bolter instead of a bolter, and has the benefit of the Shrouding and Aegis rules. Nine times out of ten, your basic GK trooper will mop the floor with your basic SM trooper. Heck, a basic GK trooper can probably consistently take on and defeat two basic SM troopers, who between the two of them actually total more points than the basic GK trooper. So, in that sense, GKs are better than Space Marines.

If, on the other hand, you mean that GK armies ought to always be more powerful than an equivalent points value SM army (or any army, for that matter), then you're going to run into problems. Hypothetically, no army should be better than any other army. I'm not naive, I know that certain dexes are more powerful than other dexes. However, ideally, given two players of equal skill and equal access to units in their individual armies, both players should have pretty close to an even chance of getting a win. That's called game balance, and it's healthy for the game as a whole. Otherwise, if one army is clearly better than all the others in the system, then that army will tend to be played a disproportionate amount of the time (I do not, however, think that this is the reason why SM armies are the majority by a wide margin, but that's a whole different discussion). So, making GKs better than all other armies in the system is a bad idea, because it would lead to GKs being played disproportionately.

In addition to game balance, all armies should also be at least somewhat different from each other, otherwise we might as well all be playing Axis & Allies, or Chess. This generates variety, which is what makes the game more interesting than a simple board game. In order to get variety, you can't give every single army all the same things. That's why SM armies get the things they do and GKs get different things - because they're different armies. If GKs got to access the same kinds of upgrades as Space Marines, then what would make them different? You can't just make them Ultramarines with NFWs, because that would be lazy, sloppy, and boring. So, they get different strengths and weaknesses, based on thematic principles, but always with an eye towards game balance, because it's no fun to play against an overpowered army, and each game should be fun for all the players involved, otherwise it fails as a game.


1- GKs have GK HQ, troop, FA, elite, and 'heavy supports'. Do you have something like that in your 'aspect warrior' army? No? Just because you use all 'aspect warrior' units at 1 slot, it doesn't mean that you have a 'pure aspect warrior' army.

Well, Corrode beat me to it. He forgot to mention that you could also get Striking Scorpions and (I think) Fire Dragons in the Elites slot, and Swooping Hawks out of the Fast Attack slot. It would really help you develop as a player if you read the other dexes in the system - it's clear you haven't read Codex: Eldar, at the very least.


2-According to 'fluff', a GK GM lead a GK unit to kill a Daemon Prince. As far as everybody knows, your 'pure aspect warrior' units haven't done anything 'impressive' or 'noticeable'.

Well, Aspect Warriors are Eldar who have chosen to become a reflection of one aspect of the Eldar war god, hence the term Aspect Warriors. They take it to Chaos all the time, for at least as long as Imperium has existed. So yeah, they have at least as much claim to being cool like that as GKs do. It's just that you won't find their fluff in Codex: Daemonhunters. Oddly enough, it's in Codex: Eldar.

thechosenone
16-02-2009, 04:45
Grandmaster Raziel... if you must, then you must. I mean, your points are fine ones but they are not new ones, just rephrased ones from earlier. They're good but they aren't getting across to him. Like i said before, his conception of what balance means and what effect it should have on your gaming when you ignore units in your codex are very different from ours. If there can be no agreement on the effect of ignoring units and what 'balanced' is then i wouldn't continue it.

korskarnkai
16-02-2009, 10:02
There is plenty of fluff supporting GK fighting non-demonic opponents. I'm pretty sure that they destroyed an errant marine chapter, whilst Eisenhorn had a grey knight kill team sent after him in Malleus.

TheMuumio
16-02-2009, 11:23
How come a topic titled "Should GK only be Good Against Demons" turned to "Should GK be its own army", "My GK's beat your Primarchs" or "Inquisitors suck".
It's best for everyone to keep GK's on OM codex but with the possibility of making pure GK list. If you want to use only GK's then fine, be my guest, but you shouldn't expect it to be as good as a list made from the whole codex.

thechosenone
16-02-2009, 15:35
I think the name of the thread should be changed but all in all its a good discussin

Chaplain Dionitas
16-02-2009, 16:08
I personally wouldn't use more then one Power Armored GK unit. Its SO many points for not that much bang. I'd make my Elite terminator GK and assassin to be honest.

Stormtroopers are just to sweet to pass by. good weapons, targeters, the best basic transport aside a wave serpent and good special weapon options. I'm a fan.

Ding! Ding! Exactly! I've been fairly successful with my Eversor as of late. I've gone with

1 squad of ITS

1 Squad of power armoe GK's

1 Squad of termies

Inquisitor Lord w/ retinue

1 eversor or culexus



I haven't tried the callidus yet. Not real sure how I'm going to try that one out yet.


On a side note: I think 40kwhatshisname is paranoid about the stigma of DH being a weak army. So I gues his reasoning is to make a full GK army.
Me personally, I like being the underdog. Plus I have to rely more on tactics as opposed to having really good odds on dicerolls.

loveless
16-02-2009, 19:02
...Somehow I knew this would happen if I left for the weekend :p

Ah well. I'll have to see if I can come up with a sane way to organize this discussion later...

Xelloss
16-02-2009, 19:02
Since this thread goes nowhere (stop picking on 40kdhs, argument ad personam always the worsest), I will lead it in an other direction by asking :

Does the anti-demon powers of the GK only works against chaos, or against any warp-powered entites ?

(and, yes, I got this idea from DoW)

loveless
16-02-2009, 19:09
Since this thread goes nowhere (stop picking on 40kdhs, argument ad personam always the worsest), I will lead it in an other direction by asking :

Does the anti-demon powers of the GK only works against chaos, or against any warp-powered entites ?

(and, yes, I got this idea from DoW)

It should effectively work against anything "Warp-Spawned"

1) Daemons
2) Daemon Princes
3) Possessed and Possessed Vehicles
4) Lords wielding Daemonic Weapons
5) Eldar Avatars

And it's not just the GK that have anti-daemon powers - the entire Ordo Malleus (of which the GK are a part) have methods of dealing with daemonic entities.

40kdhs
16-02-2009, 19:14
How come a topic titled "Should GK only be Good Against Demons" turned to "Should GK be its own army.

They go together because the focus here is 'GK'. If the answer is NO, GK isn't an army or vice versa.




I have advocated this again and again, in fact. But to hell with it. At this point Id honestly like to see them Squatted, removed from the game entirely, meeting an ignominious end at the hands of something entirely inappropriate. I'd like to see their Codex removed from the shelves, their moulds destroyed and any fluff reference to them removed. Why? Just to spite you.

Good job.

You prefer to choose your feeling than reasoning and it's not a good way to discuss a subject.



An army designed to combat one foe may not be balanced to fight other foes without support, An army that rudely insinuates story arcs on other armies to justify play ect ect ect.

He doesn't like these points on a very fundamental level.



It's fundamentally flaws. What do you mean when you mentioned 'support'? What kind of support are you talking about?

If you look for the 'support' within DH codex, it's inadequate. If you look for the support outside of DH codex, i'm not sure 0-1 restriction is good enough.

The Orange
16-02-2009, 19:36
How come a topic titled "Should GK only be Good Against Demons" turned to "Should GK be its own army"
Because the OP was asking weather GK should only be good against Daemons or good against everyone. I.e. should GK be expanded so they can be competitive as anyone else, and most likely lose their special Daemon hunter role.


They go together because the focus here is 'GK'. If the answer is NO, GK isn't an army or vice versa.
that's not quite right. Weather an army is good or not does not change the fact that they are an army, and currently you can still take a GK army (on the table top).


You prefer to choose your feeling than reasoning and it's not a good way to discuss a subject.
Either prove were arguing from our feelings :rolleyes:, or take a bit of your own medicine. There's plenty of fluff supporting GK being a branch of another army, and there's the fact that GW designed them as such. Just because GK once in a while get sent off to squash stuff on their own does not prove they have the capability to operate as a full army like the other factions. They don't hold sieges, they don't conduct campaigns, they don't do crusades. They go where their told to, zip in quickly and kill everything, and then go home. That's not an army, that's a kill team.

The current DH codex represents that quite well I think, and even lets players try out fielding nothing but GKs too. And while I agree the codex does need to be re-done and powered up I think GW should keep the set up similar, being able to build a balanced force using units from different Imperial armies, while still allowing players to field pure armies, albeit with certain strengths and weaknesses.

Xelloss
16-02-2009, 20:07
It should effectively work against anything "Warp-Spawned"

1) Daemons
2) Daemon Princes
3) Possessed and Possessed Vehicles
4) Lords wielding Daemonic Weapons
5) Eldar Avatars

And it's not just the GK that have anti-daemon powers - the entire Ordo Malleus (of which the GK are a part) have methods of dealing with daemonic entities.

I'm wondering : could the GK be good not against entire armies, but against some of their units ? we can imagine that like avatar, other armies have some warp entities vulnerable against the OM training...

IMO, GK should be tough as hell (deamons are pretty nasty stuff), quite expensive but with a good efficience. They should outlive their demonic faws, outnumbered but not powerless.
Their role could be anti-heavy infantery, a little anti-MC and anti-mecanized units. They should be "weak" against light infantery (not enough attacks to deal with them).
From a fluff point of view, they are not some small fries killer, they deal with important targets. A rule such as they are not stuck in melee with low-level deamon could be interesting, and if generalized with other armies (like GK are not stuck in melee against troop units, unless there is a IC in it, if so they can "make their way" to them when removing casualties) it will become a great new way of fighting.

What do you think of my idea folks ? Surely it needs improvement, but still !


EDIT :
After some reflection, it seems that GK can't be a real resiliant unit (for them to be they should then be a lot durable). But they could have the following rule :
"if GK are victorious in a combat phase, they can choose to desengaged as they make their way through the enemy unit. The losing unit is not destroyed, and can consolidate".

40kdhs
16-02-2009, 20:26
Either prove were arguing from our feelings , or take a bit of your own medicine.


I only responded to Corrode because the reason he didn't want to see a GK army is to '**** me' off.




There's plenty of fluff supporting GK being a branch of another army, and there's the fact that GW designed them as such. Just because GK once in a while get sent off to squash stuff on their own does not prove they have the capability to operate as a full army like the other factions. They don't hold sieges, they don't conduct campaigns, they don't do crusades. They go where their told to, zip in quickly and kill everything, and then go home. That's not an army, that's a kill team.


It's an inaccurate way to portray it. When a war starts, 'marine' is the first one to see the battle field. After that, 'army' arrives to control the ground. Yes, 'marine' is not a 'kill team'.

The Orange
16-02-2009, 21:38
I only responded to Corrode because the reason he didn't want to see a GK army is to '**** me' off.
Oh right, their was that, nothing to see here then :p. However he did make several points before then, and you are again mis-representing his arguments by boiling it all down to "feelings". I find it to be quite rude tbh.


It's an inaccurate way to portray it. When a war starts, 'marine' is the first one to see the battle field. After that, 'army' arrives to control the ground. Yes, 'marine' is not a 'kill team'.
Uh, no that's not true. Usually it's the IG that sees most of the fighting, simply because their so numerous. True SM come in and support the IG here and there, but they usually do this as an army. I can't remember which Forgeworld book it was, but if you read them you'd see that while the IG were laying siege to the forces of Chaos, a DA contingent came in to support them. They flew in, pushed the Chaos forces out of the Starport (note this probably is not the same as an airport) with no help from the IG, and little to no communication with them. They brought in their own armor, their own troops, and their own space fleet for the action, once done they left, leaving the IG to take the spaceport, thus eliminating the main access way for the Chaos side to get reinforcements. That's the sort of objectives that SM are trained to accomplish, GK however are trained to kill daemons. GK are their to cut the head off the snake, not clear the path to get to the head of the snake (that would be the job for an army).

Corrode
16-02-2009, 22:59
Clearly they don't teach reading comprehension on Titan, just several chants:

'GKS ARE TEH BESTEST!'
'GKS WIN YOU ALL SUX!'
'MOON-LANGUAGE IS MAKE BEST LANGUAGE FOR DEBATE!'

I'm pretty sure anyone who claims that any race is the best because 'one piece of our own codex's fluff says how amazing we are!' and refuses to even consider that other races even possess elite units (or units worth considering at all) is probably not the person to be talking about 'reasoned debate'.

thechosenone
17-02-2009, 04:08
You know... despite a nice few posts about how we were gunna drop the debate with 40KDHS because of disagreements in the fundamentals of the arguments we really just keep going back. Its like arguing with him is everyone's guilty pleasure at this point.

This is a vicious circular argument. Look. Here, i'll say "40KDHS you're ignoring half the units in your codex to make a theme based army so it may not be balanced" and he'll say something like there should be better balanced options for GK which we'll argue about. I'll say something like "Other armies like all TS or all EC or something like that don't complain they're missing choices when they make a theme army" and he won't really respond to that. I'll say something like "Psy cannons are great assault weapons with better str then a H bolter, Incinerators are too. Shrouding affects all armies and protects GK from long ranged fire at on average 32 inches and that all GK units basically have a psychic hood which all work against any army is balanced enough" and he'll claim that these aren't enough and don't make up for glaring weaknesses<which are self imposed in part by unit selection>. I'll say something like "When an army has to impose rude story elements on armies that don't support them in order to justify playing them and that's weak" he'll either ignore it, cite exceptions and rare circumstances to justify or say that "we all have reasons that we fight" or whatever.

seriously its endless. As much as some of us enjoy point counter point i'm sure he does too. He probably loves being the only one defending the concept.

I'm not calling him or or saying anything snappy or rude here. Its the way these arguments go. I've been part of the thread since page one and i'm saying these without bias here. Anyone that steps back and looks can see its the same circle of responses each time.

loveless
17-02-2009, 05:05
I'm going to get in touch with a moderator tomorrow to try and get suggestions on starting a Daemonhunters concept thread without it degrading into pointless arguments. However, it's far too late here for me to be bothered with it now.

I'm vastly interested in people's concepts of how the army should be, but I don't want the circular arguments that keep happening.

40kdhs
17-02-2009, 05:09
Of course, we also see some people who think that DH codex is 'good' one even though the majority of players disagree.




This is a vicious circular argument. Look. Here, i'll say "40KDHS you're ignoring half the units in your codex to make a theme based army so it may not be balanced"


If a DH codex is 'balance', why do the majority of players think that it's the weakest codex? and why does 'DH' army have hard time against chaos and demon?

The problem here is not about 'GK' but DH codex.




I'll say something like "Other armies like all TS or all EC or something like that don't complain they're missing choices when they make a theme army"


They are 'better' than your DH army, aren't they?




"Psy cannons are great assault weapons with better str then a H bolter, Incinerators are too.


When you use these weapons against 3+AS armies, they have their normal AS. When they shoot at GKs or DH armies, we have 'cover save' or no save at all. Is it a fair?

Yes, your mentioned weapons are good against 4+AS and demon units but they are CHEAPER than your 'GK' units.

5GKs with 2 psy cannon cost 200 pts. Do you know how many models in other armies I can get with the same point cost?

If we 'stand and shoot' at each other, you are going to loose because you don't have the number.




Shrouding affects all armies and protects GK from long ranged fire at on average 32 inches and that all GK units basically have a psychic hood which all work against any army is balanced enough"


Shrouding doesn't work as advertised. How are you going to accomplish the mission if you keep your GK units at the corner of the table at all the time?

48"x72" table is not big for you to hide. Will your shrouding work if a drop pod army shows up next to you? No?

Like DH codex, your 'shrouding' only sounds good on the paper but it doesn't work in the game.




"When an army has to impose rude story elements on armies that don't support them in order to justify playing them and that's weak"


When you look at other armies, you don't see them having any 'special rules' toward a particular 'enemy' but they are in a better shape to fight everybody than your DH codex.

Is it laughable and pathetic when an army has its ars handed down by its #1 enemy even though it has 'special rules' toward its #1 enemy?

It's very special, isn't it?



he'll either ignore it, cite exceptions and rare circumstances to justify or say that "we all have reasons that we fight" or whatever.


Please don't tell me that I ignore all your questions because I answered them all. When your camp uses 'GK only fighting demon' arguement, I proved that it was not so.

The only difference between you and me is i don't deceive people by doing what you are doing now.



Clearly they don't teach reading comprehension on Titan, just several chants:

'GKS ARE TEH BESTEST!'
'GKS WIN YOU ALL SUX!'
'MOON-LANGUAGE IS MAKE BEST LANGUAGE FOR DEBATE!'


It's the only way that we maintain our strong 'faith' and 'spiritual belief'.;)

The Orange
17-02-2009, 05:30
I have to apologize thechosenone, I couldn't help myself. But that response up there to you, yea it cracks me up :p. (resisting the urge to tear up that post, oh so tempting :evilgrin:)

I'm all for seeing an updated GK/DH army, but I hope I never have to see GK bikers, assault marines, devastators, etc. Some new units would be cool, but I hope they won't be copying the SM, and will remain focused on killing daemons. And when all is said and done, if somethings good at taking out bloodthursters and daemon princes, then their probably pretty well equipped to face off with other armies HQ's and elites. That to me is what GK should be, the elite ready to take on anyone else elite, not take on everything else anyone else has.

holmcross
17-02-2009, 08:24
I love it when people take a hard stance on an issue, then desperatly try to backwards-engineer evidence and reasoning to support thier stance. It almost gives the appearence that they're being deductive.

Almost.

Voodoo Boyz
17-02-2009, 13:37
Wow this thread is pretty amazing in the vitriol some people have.

Grey Knights are an interesting can of worms from a "Games Workshop Army/Product" perspective.

I shall focus mainly on Gameplay, since Fluff is there to be entertaining and while "GK's only fight daemons" is great fluff, the fact that they are an army people collect and play games with, they need to be balanced in game terms as they will obviously see playtime against all other armies in the game.

Grey Knight Gameplay Problems

Grey Knights suffer from two very specific problems in game play terms.

#1.) They lack effective Anti-Tank Weapons.
#2.) They are too expensive for what they do.
#3.) They lack the variety a fast attack option brings.

Dealing with #1 is fairly straight forward. I will come out and say something I'm sure some will disagree with:

Any argument about Grey Knights not getting access to more anti-tank weapons is a ridiculous notion that should be disavowed.

There are Soul Grinders, Defilers, and Daemonically Possessed Chaos Tanks. By fluff Grey Knights would have methods to defeat these things, and there's the whole "they have access to the best equipment in the Imperium" kind of thing.

Solving #1 is then very easy: Power Armor Grey Knight Squads have access to Meltaguns and may forfeit their Storm Bolter to take one. This could be expanded to allow GK Termies to take a Multimelta in addition to the Psycannon/Incinerator options, and the heavy support squads can take Multimeltas.

That's it, problem literally solved in one very fast swoop that is in no way overpowering.

BAM, now GK's have the ability to deal with Chaos Armor options and then now can be balanced against other armies by having valid anti-armor options.

Solving #2 is fairly straight forward as well, simply drop the points slightly on Power Armored GK's. Compared to similar troops from Chaos or even Elites from the SM Dex, it's fairly obvious they're over pointed. Allow PA GK troops to purchase drop pods or purchase a teleport ability.

Solving #3 is slightly tricky. You don't want "mirror images of SM" in all that GK's do, or they lose their special quality. Also a GK army should inherently be small and striking on the table. So, I'd say that the only unit you add to the GK's is Grey Knights on Bikes. This would make for an awesome model, would be expensive, probably not overly worth taking (a lot like SM bikes now), but would be very fitting with the "Knight" theme and give them a decent option.

Other Gameplay considerations
Getting access to drop pods is an obvious thing for GK's, and fits their fluff. It makes their Dreads better or at least more appealing gameplay wise. It also sells the nice model GW just released. Additionally PA GK's should have access to Rhino's. This is not 3rd Edition and them having access to Rhinos is not a game-breaking factor anymore.

Also bring their Land Raider options in line with the ones in the SM Codex.

Nemesis Force Weapons are an odd thing. Now that Daemons have eternal warrior across the board, being force weapons is probably not the best thing for them. Give them the ability to use it as a force weapon, but against Daemons they have the option to take a psychic test and then have the option to ignore invulnerable saves rather than inflicting instant death.

I believe with the above changes you could make a "Pure GK" army that was moderately competitive against all forces and would have rules in character with them being made to kill daemons without making for one sided games against Chaos.

Games Workshop Product Implementation Issues

While I'm sure that SoB & GK players want their armies to have their own Codex's, I don't think that's feasible from a GW Product perspective. Plus we already have heard rumors of a consolidated =][= Codex.

The best thing that GW could do is roll everything into one book, GK's, Sisters, and =][= units. Given HQ options and the trend GW has gone with other codex's one could make a mixed Inquisition army or a pure force simply by limiting themselves on unit selection.

Each unit type would have an entry in each FoC selection and could be very easily streamlined to represent the changes in GK's above and the various Sisters unit types.

loveless
17-02-2009, 14:17
Hmm...thread's recovered a bit... :p

Thoughts:
- A "consolidated" Inquisition Codex is going to be too big in the unit choice section to be done well - I'd almost see them going down the paths of Inquisiton and Ecclesiarchy, since that's about an even split, unit-wise.
- I'd still rather see a Nemesis Force Weapon ignore Eternal Warrior in the hands of a Grand Master, but ignoring Invulnerables isn't bad, either. Probably the same effect in the long run, since I'm wary of letting them pop Greater Daemons in one hit.
- Drop Pods don't especially feel Grey Knight-y to me. They seem to be more of a teleport group. I think offering that in more places would be effective - even going so far as to allow Dreads to teleport onto the battlefield.

Voodoo Boyz
17-02-2009, 14:59
Hmm...thread's recovered a bit...:p

Thoughts:
- A "consolidated" Inquisition Codex is going to be too big in the unit choice section to be done well - I'd almost see them going down the paths of Inquisiton and Ecclesiarchy, since that's about an even split, unit-wise.
- I'd still rather see a Nemesis Force Weapon ignore Eternal Warrior in the hands of a Grand Master, but ignoring Invulnerables isn't bad, either. Probably the same effect in the long run, since I'm wary of letting them pop Greater Daemons in one hit.
- Drop Pods don't especially feel Grey Knight-y to me. They seem to be more of a teleport group. I think offering that in more places would be effective - even going so far as to allow Dreads to teleport onto the battlefield.

#1) I don't think a consolidated Dex would be bad. Some Sisters units would probably get rolled up (Dominion/Celestine squads) into an elite choice, leaving Seraphim as the sold "Sisters" Fast, and give them 1 Elite as well. Heavy would have the respective Dev units, Exorcists for Sisters, Dreads for GK's, Land Raiders for both.

The most crowded section would be Elites since that's where all the =][= stuff is in general, but with a consolidated book it could just rival the Marines in size. Remember it's supposed to be a large codex that can make mixed forces, pure forces, etc. The most important thing is that it supports a model range without forcing GW to have to expand and support even more models while still presenting a set of rules for the models already released to follow.

Best thing about the Consolidated book is that it would take very few "model releases" to support it. Plastic GK kit, plastic Sisters Kit, Accessory Sprue for each and you're done.

#2) NFW's should only be able to ignore Invulns on Daemons only, and after a psychic test is passed. I say that only because it's only used on the GK Grand Master, and I don't like having one special rule that trumps a core special rule (Eternal Warrior trumping Instant Death/Force Weapons) then in turn get trumped by another rule.

#3) Drop Pods are used by the GK in the fluff (BL Novel) and brings them in line with Marines, helps make them more competitive, gives a reason to take dreads, and lets GK players buy an existing plastic kit. Win-Win all around, IMO. :D

loveless
17-02-2009, 15:03
Ehh...maybe - admittedly, the Ecclesiarchy fan in me wants to see more crazy stuff from them, but I'll be happy with anything Inquisitorial just so I have a Codex that isn't tiny :p

I haven't read any of the BL GK stuff - and I suppose it would help move the Drop Pods a bit more if the GK could use them (as if GW were having trouble selling them :p)

Znail
17-02-2009, 16:27
I dont think NFW needs to get any better against Daemons. It will be too hard to balance out the GK advantages with compensations for the Daemons if the GK gets too much counter stuff.

I think Meltaguns are a bit too easy solution to the GK lack of anti-tank. I think there should be some GK unique weapon, similar to how Psycannons and Incinerators are diffrent from the normal weapons others use. Maybe a more expensive meltagun with 18" range and ignore invulnerable saves. That would fit in as a third weapon alternative as upgrade for all GK units. The higher cost would make it so its not as easily spammed as normal Meltaguns while giving an option that works atleast. I think a basic Meltagun would be a bit to cheap solution anyway, maybe Multi-melta would work as its a bit cooler, althou not nearly as easy to actualy use in play. Multi-melta in some servo type harness so it can fire as a meltagun on the move, that would work and need less extra rules perhaps.

But maybe some additional vehicle is a better idea. Maybe a bit more Dreadnaught options would work out well. The idea of teleporting Dreadnaughts arent bad. I think the idea of teleporting could also be elaborated for GK, maybe an option to beam out of the field so to be repositioned elsewhere.

Chaplain Dionitas
17-02-2009, 16:43
Don't change the NFW just change the Eternal warrior rule (As it's too late to do that). Of course that won't happen. In the hands of a GM, FW should ignore the Inv save as he's the pinnacle of a GK.

If they consolidate them all into one codex, I hope it's a big one. It'd have to be

Meltas and Multi-Meltas aren't a bad idea but I agree on the point of having a unique AT weapon.

The biggest thing, I think, Are the rules regarding instablilty tests and minor psychic powers. There are only a few psychic powers that are worth using

Voodoo Boyz
17-02-2009, 16:57
I was thinking that a Melta makes it nice and simple for GW's modeling side of things.

There is no such thing as "too easy an AT option". If you make it too long range (18") or Ignore Invulns then you're looking at it being way too powerful.

Melta Guns are effective since it fits with the "Move & Shoot" playstyle of the GK's, and forces them to get close to deal with Tanks, which makes for a more fun game for both sides. 40k becomes much better as a game when armies are forced to engage in close range fire-fights.

Multi-meltas should be limited to Dreads or the Dev Squads, even putting them on Termies may be a bad idea, though it would make them more unique.

Also for the NFW, maybe it just will be a regular force weapon and just not be useful against Daemons? You'd lose character, but be more balanced overall against all forces.

Inquisitor_Tolheim
17-02-2009, 20:25
Excellent post, Voodoo Boyz. If I may:


#1) I don't think a consolidated Dex would be bad. Some Sisters units would probably get rolled up (Dominion/Celestine squads) into an elite choice, leaving Seraphim as the sold "Sisters" Fast, and give them 1 Elite as well. Heavy would have the respective Dev units, Exorcists for Sisters, Dreads for GK's, Land Raiders for both.

The most crowded section would be Elites since that's where all the =][= stuff is in general, but with a consolidated book it could just rival the Marines in size. Remember it's supposed to be a large codex that can make mixed forces, pure forces, etc. The most important thing is that it supports a model range without forcing GW to have to expand and support even more models while still presenting a set of rules for the models already released to follow.

Best thing about the Consolidated book is that it would take very few "model releases" to support it. Plastic GK kit, plastic Sisters Kit, Accessory Sprue for each and you're done.

I can see where you're coming from, but I still think splitting the forces into Codex: Inquisition and Codex: Sisters would be a better move. Fluff reasons aside, the Sisters and the Grey Knights together in one codex (particularly with the upgrades recommended earlier) would completely invalidate many of the Inquisition specific models. As it is a WH player who takes Inq. Stormtroopers is laughed off the table, and the assassins, while cool, have a tendency to under perform with seraphim and other WH units on the table. By splitting the two codices you allow each army to be balanced on its own, rather then bringing in a mess of synergy concerns.


#2) NFW's should only be able to ignore Invulns on Daemons only, and after a psychic test is passed. I say that only because it's only used on the GK Grand Master, and I don't like having one special rule that trumps a core special rule (Eternal Warrior trumping Instant Death/Force Weapons) then in turn get trumped by another rule.

Why only on Daemons? It would be simpler to make it ignore invulnerable saves on everything, and would be a nice boost to an expensive and understandably powerful unit. Have it require a psychic test for a (slight) element of risk and you're good.


#3) Drop Pods are used by the GK in the fluff (BL Novel) and brings them in line with Marines, helps make them more competitive, gives a reason to take dreads, and lets GK players buy an existing plastic kit. Win-Win all around, IMO. :D

While this is true, part of what separates GK from other space marine armies is their use of teleportation tactics. Why hurtle yourself towards the planet and expose yourself to AA fire when you can hurtle out of a hole in space time into the enemy line? (And expose yourselves to the horrors of the warp... ok, so it's not a perfect argument.)

I'd rather see Dreadnoughts and PAGK given the ability to Teleport with a 1d6 scatter, and completely eschew drop pods and rhinos. This fits with the feel of a deep striking elite force focused on the elimination of a specific thread via teleportation. Land Raiders (all three variants, if I were designing the codex) would still be available with the "Psycannon Bolts" upgrade performing additional functions (assault cannons replaced by twin linked psycannons, flamethrowers on new variant replaced with incinerator equivalent, etc.)

Hitting a few points from your earlier post:


Solving #1 is then very easy: Power Armor Grey Knight Squads have access to Meltaguns and may forfeit their Storm Bolter to take one. This could be expanded to allow GK Termies to take a Multimelta in addition to the Psycannon/Incinerator options, and the heavy support squads can take Multimeltas.

This works. Another idea I've seen kicked around is a new psychic power that can double as an anti-tank attack (S8/9, AP1 maybe?) Give the option to use Psychic abilities as a squad (ala terminators) to your PAGK. This is a fluffy option, adds some more choices to squad loadouts (PAGK holocaust!), and helps further differentiate GK from their blue bretheren. To balance the psychic goodness, you could drop PAGK down to leadership 9/8 (Which would only affect their psychic powers, as they are already fearless).


So, I'd say that the only unit you add to the GK's is Grey Knights on Bikes. This would make for an awesome model, would be expensive, probably not overly worth taking (a lot like SM bikes now), but would be very fitting with the "Knight" theme and give them a decent option.

Not really a fan of Grey Knights on bikes for the same reason I don't like Grey Knight Rhinos: it moves them closer to being standard space marines. The Grey Knights should teleport into the heart of the enemy forces, not ride up towards them on bikes. (EDIT: Not to mention we already have a "special marines on bikes" force available in the DA.)

In my mind, everything (barring Land Raiders, which are another can of worms altogether) should be able to deepstrike onto the field. This gives them the "mobility" to reach their opponents while still ensuring that they play significantly different from other space marine forces. Perhaps a rule that allows the Grey Knights +1 on their reserves roles or lets you roll for them all at once would be in order?

Of course, I look at the Grey Knights as an elite component of a larger Inquisitorial army. Sure you could take a full Grey Knight army, and even be quite competitive with it with some skilled gaming, but at the cost of diversity. So rather then create new GK units that don't fit the "elite teleporting force" mantra, I'd rather see some other FA options given (such as Arbites/Stormtroopers on bikes, the Valkyrie Gunship pattern rumored for the new IG codex, etc.) that compliment the Grey Knights a fill a different niche.

Grand Master Raziel
17-02-2009, 20:31
Any argument about Grey Knights not getting access to more anti-tank weapons is a ridiculous notion that should be disavowed.

There are Soul Grinders, Defilers, and Daemonically Possessed Chaos Tanks. By fluff Grey Knights would have methods to defeat these things, and there's the whole "they have access to the best equipment in the Imperium" kind of thing.

Well, the obvious counter-argument would be: Isn't that what GK Dreadnoughts and GK Land Raiders are for? It's not like GKs are completely without anti-armor ability. You can also give meltabombs to the Justicars of PAGK squads, and with 2 S6 attacks per trooper (especially automatically hitting rear armor), they're a threat to most armor right out of the box, as it were.


Solving #1 is then very easy: Power Armor Grey Knight Squads have access to Meltaguns and may forfeit their Storm Bolter to take one. This could be expanded to allow GK Termies to take a Multimelta in addition to the Psycannon/Incinerator options, and the heavy support squads can take Multimeltas.

Hmm...I do see where you're coming from thematically. However, I'm a little leery, especially of the idea of giving multimeltas to GK Termies - I think that would make SM players howl - maybe CSM players, too, though they do get Obliterators, which do a very similar thing.


Solving #2 is fairly straight forward as well, simply drop the points slightly on Power Armored GK's. Compared to similar troops from Chaos or even Elites from the SM Dex, it's fairly obvious they're over pointed. Allow PA GK troops to purchase drop pods or purchase a teleport ability.

I'd also lean more towards Teleport ability than drop pods. You could probably just have them do it for no increase in base cost, as these days an all DSing army really wouldn't stand out quite so much, what with drop pod SM and Daemon armies.


Solving #3 is slightly tricky. You don't want "mirror images of SM" in all that GK's do, or they lose their special quality. Also a GK army should inherently be small and striking on the table. So, I'd say that the only unit you add to the GK's is Grey Knights on Bikes. This would make for an awesome model, would be expensive, probably not overly worth taking (a lot like SM bikes now), but would be very fitting with the "Knight" theme and give them a decent option.

Or jetbikes, which would be sufficiently different from available SM units to keep things from getting to Ultramarinesy. Speaking of which, instead of giving standard GK squads the option of taking meltaguns, if GKs got units of bikes/jetbikes whose specific task was to take on and destroy Chaotic armor, that would give pure GK armies a little more anti-armor punch without running the risk of turning them into Ultramarines with NFWs. Jetbikes would be cooler, but bikes are easier, and could mostly be done with existing plastic components. A while back, I started a just-for-yuks (and possibly entering into painting competitions) project to convert a squadron of GK bikers. The project stalled because I lost interest in working on something that I couldn't use on the tabletop, but I did succeed in producing one biker with a GK halberd arm and various SM bitz - in particular, Black Templar Mk II Crusade helmets, and a little sculpting of green stuff on the chest and shoulder pad to give him the sword-and-book symbol. I'm not that good at scuplting, so if I were going to complete the project, I'd probably just give the other squadron members pre-existing Inquisitorial shoulder pads, either from the SM Commander or the Deathwatch Kill Team pads. Anyway, the point is, it'd be viable to do as a plastic kit.


The best thing that GW could do is roll everything into one book, GK's, Sisters, and =][= units. Given HQ options and the trend GW has gone with other codex's one could make a mixed Inquisition army or a pure force simply by limiting themselves on unit selection.

Each unit type would have an entry in each FoC selection and could be very easily streamlined to represent the changes in GK's above and the various Sisters unit types.

The unified =][= dex is really only superficially attractive, as the only units the armies in question really share in common are the Assassins, DCAs, Inquisitorial Stormtroopers, and transports. Even the Inquisitors and Inquisitor Lords are different, because they have different options for different purposes. Of the two, Witch Hunters have the more complete army list, and would lose more in the transition, but combining them would prevent the DH list from becoming fully fleshed out, too. Also, you're forgetting that the proposed unified =][= dex was supposed to include the Ordo Xenos list, which is probably what killed it, because I doubt GW has any idea what they want to do with the Ordo Xenos list. You could pretty much just attach an allied Inquisitor Lord to a black-painted SM army straight from Codex: Space Marines, and have an appropriately thematic Ordo Xenos list.


#2) NFW's should only be able to ignore Invulns on Daemons only, and after a psychic test is passed. I say that only because it's only used on the GK Grand Master, and I don't like having one special rule that trumps a core special rule (Eternal Warrior trumping Instant Death/Force Weapons) then in turn get trumped by another rule.

Here, I disagree. Immunity to Instant Death existed in 3rd (pioneered by the 3.5 Chaos dex, I believe) and 4th editions, but did not protect against force weapons because force weapons had a seperate mechanic from Instant Death. Having force weapons cause ID is a 5th edition streamline that (I think) had the unintended consequence of making ID immunity effect force weapons as well as the traditional sources of ID. Allowing the GK Grand Master to ignore Eternal Warrior redresses the balance, allowing him to work the way that he was intended to work. Even if it only worked against Chaos and Daemon models, it would be enough. In the meantime, maybe GW will fall out of love with Eternal Warrior, and curtail its proliferation - maybe even reduce the amount of it about. Tyranids could lose it if Warriors were T5, because the whole point of the Synapse ID-protection was so Warriors wouldn't get insta-gibbed by lascannons and krak missiles, so if Warriors were T5, they wouldn't need it anymore. I know that's a bit off-topic, but it's an example of where GW could easily reduce the amount of ID-immunity running around without upsetting the fan base too much.

40kdhs
18-02-2009, 18:10
Well, the obvious counter-argument would be: Isn't that what GK Dreadnoughts and GK Land Raiders are for?

It's the worst counter-argument because you solely depend on these vehicles to kill tanks.

What will GKs do if they are destroyed or ineffective? Your GKs will be screwd because they don't have anything to kill vehicles. By giving GKs some anti-tank weapons, they can handle the vehicle in case GK dreadnought or LR is destroyed.

RexTalon
18-02-2009, 19:20
I've heard people argue that if Grey Knights are redone they should be good against demons, but average against everything else.

I am completely against this, who would choose to play such an unbalanced army???

How would GK players feel knowing they have an automatic advantage versus demons, but an auto disadvantage against others.

What does the rest of Warseer think?
What I think is that you have the same brain sickness as half the people on this forum.

Average does not mean disadvantaged.

Average is exactly what we should ALL be, but people jot down fake W/L/D scores into their sig just so people won't think they're average. People throw a fit because their new army book isn't above average. Average is normal, and people want to feel like they and their chosen army are more than that. They want to feel special, but they're not. It's the human spirit to achieve greater expectations, but it's reality to assume an average position in society.

As far as this game of 40k is concerned, average is what a balanced army list should do against another balanced army list. 40k should be like two people rolling dice. One will come up a winner and the other a loser, but the dice represent the army lists in this case. Each die is equal.

The only variable aside from the die roll should be the way you play your army and the detail you put into the hobby.

Grand Master Raziel
18-02-2009, 19:59
It's the worst counter-argument because you solely depend on these vehicles to kill tanks.

What will GKs do if they are destroyed or ineffective?

Well, the smart ones might whistle up some Inquisitorial Stormtroopers with meltaguns to deal with the issue. Given the available background material, GKs are infinitely rarer than ISTs, so you'd think that anywhere you might find GKs, you'll also find a plentiful supply of ISTs, because any crisis that rates GK attention probably had ISTs there trying to deal with the matter first.

Another point: that's the nature of a finesse army, which Daemonhunters armies certainly are. You have to use the right units on the right targets, otherwise things tend to fall apart. In that respect, Daemonhunters armies are a lot like Eldar armies. Asking for GK units to get meltaguns would be kind of like asking for Striking Scorpions to all be armed with storm bolters, or for Fire Dragons to all get power weapons and 3 attacks in close combat.

Anyhow, even if GK squads got the option to take meltaguns, it's still not necessarily a good idea to arm them so. With each invididual GK having a storm bolter, GKs can be kept moving while putting out a respectable amount of anti-infantry firepower. The upgrades they currently have, incinerators and psycannons, are also essentially anti-infantry weapons, and so have good synergy with the storm bolter fire. On the other hand, if a squad of GKs had meltaguns, then every time they turned those meltaguns on an appropriate target, all that storm bolter fire goes to waste. You're better off putting your anti-armor firepower in a unit specifically tasked to deal with armored threats and using the GKs against infantry, which they are well suited to engage and defeat.

Khornies & milk
18-02-2009, 21:01
@40Kdhs...quite a few of us have put our ideas forward on how to make DH better, so how about you joining the fray with some actual ideas yourself instead of just been
anti-this-and-that.

I have a feeling that your way of making DH better, and specifically your beloved GK's is to make them SM lookalikes, which will be the absolute ruin of them imo.

Prove me wrong............

Xelloss
18-02-2009, 21:39
Prove me wrong............

Please, keep personal discution in PM...

Khornies & milk
18-02-2009, 22:53
Please, keep personal discution in PM...

Oh please...there'e nothing personal about it!
seen as 40K dhs has been backward in coming forward with coming up with his own ideas, and shoots down virtually every suggestion that's been bought up within the confines of this Thread with his own brand of vitriol, I'd like to see his ideas on improving DH as they may add a considerable contribution to the thread.

Seems a reasonable request to me.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
18-02-2009, 23:05
Average does not mean disadvantaged.

Average is exactly what we should ALL be, but people jot down fake W/L/D scores into their sig just so people won't think they're average. People throw a fit because their new army book isn't above average. Average is normal, and people want to feel like they and their chosen army are more than that. They want to feel special, but they're not. It's the human spirit to achieve greater expectations, but it's reality to assume an average position in society.

[...] average is what a balanced army list should do against another balanced army list [...]

The only variable aside from the die roll should be the way you play your army and the detail you put into the hobby.

QFT!

This man is right. Every army should be average. It's called 'balance'.

I want my codex average. Not overthetop crap.

40kdhs
18-02-2009, 23:10
Well, the smart ones might whistle up some Inquisitorial Stormtroopers with meltaguns to deal with the issue.


If you use them in a rhino as a 'suicide' unit , is it cheaper to use than GK dreadnought and LR? Even if you use them that way, it doesn't guarantee that they will do their job.

In a pure GK army list, the rest of your GK units can't handle tanks if GK dreadnought and LR are destroyed.

I don't like to depend on certain units to do the job because I can be screwed if they fail. By giving GK units some kind of anti-tank weapons, they can still do their job even though another unit fails.




Given the available background material, GKs are infinitely rarer than ISTs, so you'd think that anywhere you might find GKs, you'll also find a plentiful supply of ISTs, because any crisis that rates GK attention probably had ISTs there trying to deal with the matter first.


In the second edition, GKTs had access to melta and plasma gun. Yes, it was a huge contradiction to what you think. I like the background and everything but your 'army' has to work in the game because it doesn't do you any good if your army sucks on the table while it's great in the fluffs.


Oh please...there'e nothing personal about it!

seen as 40K dhs has been backward in coming forward with coming up with his own ideas, and shoots down virtually every suggestion that's been bought up within the confines of this Thread with his own brand of vitriol, I'd like to see his ideas on improving DH as they may add a considerable contribution to the thread.

Seems a reasonable request to me.

I put my own ideas on 'Better GK' thread and this one too if you look around.

thechosenone
18-02-2009, 23:14
Please, keep personal discution in PM...

I'm not sure where you were when 40kDHS has all sorts of less the kind responses to folks who are not saying anything rude to him.

And 40DHS, in your scenario where your landraider and dreadnought were killed you still want more anti tank!. Your stuff got blowed up man, it happens. You have lost your ranged anti tank. You certainly have your ability to wound most tanks on a 4+ in cc with basic weapons. The only thing you don't have are las cannon and multimeltas in squads. Why do you think you deserve them when you gained much better personal wargear. So without a landraider or a dreadnought you fail to be able to kill only monoliths and land raiders in cc without wargear like melta bombs. Face it, sometimes your on the field you just don't have the weapon you need to kill the armor out there. Tyranids deal with that all the time. They have to walk up and chop up their enemy vehicles. Aside from venom cannons(that can only glance) and warpblast they lack tank poppers. Before you shout barbed strangler the template is almost always used to ice infantry. So... ASIDE dreads and landraiders and landraider variants you more anti tank.

Please stop cherry picking people's posts and actually throw an idea at us. I'm not sure you'd have anything to post if it weren't for your responses to us?

Good ideas that have been seen to make GKs who ignore IST and orb bombardment more playable(not all mine. some are)

+Melta guns in squads(Even though its a pick from SM)
+Perhaps a powerfist or Eviserator (Again more picks from other armies)
+A psychic power that his a high str, medium range high AP shot similar to Bolt of change(not particularly thematic but why not)
+Teleport as a squad option that doesn't make them fast attack.
+perhaps some sort of scout skill that could be gained by troops with teleport that don't use reserves to come it.
+GK with jump packs (another SM pick)

40kdhs
19-02-2009, 00:02
And 40DHS, in your scenario where your landraider and dreadnought were killed you still want more anti tank!. Your stuff got blowed up man, it happens. You have lost your ranged anti tank.

It doesn't happen that way if your GK units have anti-tank weapons. Is it your idea how to 'balance' an army?

thechosenone
19-02-2009, 01:14
40DHS. Your right. I give. You win as far as anti tank goes. Your GK should have any weapon a devastator squad has access to and you should have Psy cannons and incinerators while keeping your shrouding giving you an average chance to outshoot a similar squad with the same weapons. So back that with dreads and Landraiders. You should be the best all round anti-tank and anti infantry army around. YOU ARE THE.... WINNNNEEEERRRR! Congratulations. you've won me over. Orange, Admiral Dick anyothers i've missed. There it is. You now have a new enemy in the argument against GK. <smears body with gun metal and mithril paint, grabs lawn shovel and chants invocations to the immortal emperor>

thechosenone
19-02-2009, 01:16
Oh also... i'll find it hard to be a GK fanophile without some good ideas to champion. can you tell me what good new balanced ideas i should be championing?

loveless
19-02-2009, 01:23
To be fair...GK are pretty decent at scrapping non-Landraiders in close combat. You know. Being Strength 6 and all - they're glancing most vehicles on 4's and penetrating them on 5+'s. Effectively, every Grey Knight unit is already outfitted with an anti-tank weapon.

Also, don't forget that you can give Grey Knight Terminators Thunder Hammers and Storm Shields for free. That should add in additional anti-tank oomph.

The problem comes with Landraiders and Walkers - which typically don't show up in spades. Here you're dealing with AV 12-14 - not ideal for S 6, and AV 14 presents a problem for Thunder Hammers as well.

However, the fact that you really don't need close combat support from Dreadnoughts, what with Strength 6-8 on all of your Grey Knights. They become an acceptable platform for Lascannons, Multimeltas, and Missile Launchers.

You can take the standard "Godhammer" Land Raider for a bit more anti-tank power - 2 TL Lascannons on an AV 14 platform is considerably more resilient in 5th edition. Even a Crusader (a better option for the increased transport capacity) comes with a Multimelta to potentially deal with vehicles (and I've blasted my share of vehicles with a Land Raider mounted Multimelta).

Characters and Brother Captains can take Combi-meltas (Note that Justicars can't due to the odd caveat in the armoury). It seems popular in other armies as effective anti-tank, so what's wrong with it here?

There you go. Anti-tank in a Grey Knights-only list.

thechosenone
19-02-2009, 01:41
Nice try Loveless but as a new GK convert what I want is all that stuff you mentioned but i ALSO want my GK squads to have a bunch of move or fire weapons that are good at tank killing while making by prowess in CC moot.

loveless
19-02-2009, 01:45
Nice try Loveless but as a new GK convert what I want is all that stuff you mentioned but i ALSO want my GK squads to have a bunch of move or fire weapons that are good at tank killing while making by prowess in CC moot.

You stopped being funny about 2 posts ago, thechosenone :p

Seriously, though. Cut it out.

Khornies & milk
19-02-2009, 02:40
It doesn't happen that way if your GK units have anti-tank weapons. Is it your idea how to 'balance' an army?

So for AT DH can have
Godhammer Raiders
TLLC/ML Dreads
Meltabombs
IST Squads w/ Meltaguns
Hammerhand
S6

but to be balanced they also need Lascannons and Multi-Meltas in their Squads as well...to me that means that you want DH/GK to be just another SM army.

I'm not saying that we don't need more AT but not at the expense of just making us mirror SM.

thechosenone
19-02-2009, 03:31
You stopped being funny about 2 posts ago, thechosenone :p

Seriously, though. Cut it out.

If I gotta...

I just don't see the logic in his arguments so i figured if i seeing it from his perspective it might help. It didn't. After three posts i'm back where i belong. Though still waiting on constructive efforts on the part of Pro all Gk army supporters to actually improve their army. Trust me, if they posted them again they are welcome to do so again because i and many others here are very familiar with reposting an argument. Its not all that bad when you get used to it.

thechosenone
19-02-2009, 03:33
So for AT DH can have
Godhammer Raiders
TLLC/ML Dreads
Meltabombs
IST Squads w/ Meltaguns
Hammerhand
S6

but to be balanced they also need Lascannons and Multi-Meltas in their Squads as well...to me that means that you want DH/GK to be just another SM army.

I'm not saying that we don't need more AT but not at the expense of just making us mirror SM.

Don't forget melta strike. Its seriously not a bad choice considering the reduced scatter with the FAQ. Its something that can harm without offering up KP and can make an area unsafe for an enemy without fear of retaliation.

Khornies & milk
19-02-2009, 03:48
If I gotta...

I just don't see the logic in his arguments so i figured if i seeing it from his perspective it might help. It didn't. After three posts i'm back where i belong. Though still waiting on constructive efforts on the part of Pro all Gk army supporters to actually improve their army. Trust me, if they posted them again they are welcome to do so again because i and many others here are very familiar with reposting an argument. Its not all that bad when you get used to it.

Why repost? There's been quite a few posts with people saying how to improve a pure GK list.

The main argument against a pure GK list is that they shouldn't be allowed in the first place, which is different to them not been able to be improved on.

I play both pure DH and pure GK, infact I also use them with SoB, so I cover a lot of the bases.

Like I've said before, if GW decide to have a pure GK list as an option in the new Codex (whatever format it becomes) then for it to sell well they need to improve the areas where us Gamers see a weakness in the list
i.e. anti-tank, redundent Psy/Powers, overcosting of some weapons, lack of a decent mid-range IC, poor Inquisitor/retinue options.

fix those and a lot of people will be happy little bunnies, AND I think more people will consider collecting and playing them.

Personally I think that GW have a hell of a job on their hands getting it right, and it might be too hard.

loveless
19-02-2009, 03:53
The thing is...there really isn't a lack of anti-tank. There's a lack of ranged anti-tank, sure, but there's still lascannons in the army.

However, I think that they should have a unique vehicle. This could be something anti-tank, but anything unique would be good.

The Orange
19-02-2009, 04:00
In a pure GK army list, the rest of your GK units can't handle tanks if GK dreadnought and LR are destroyed.

:wtf:, so you want everything then? You want your GK squads to do everything possible. That could happen, but are you ready to pay through the nose for it? And here I thought GK were expensive enough :rolleyes:.

Honestly this is the weakest argument you've put out. "Oh Noz! I can't do anything against tanks if my anti-tank stuff gets killed" Guess what, every army is like that. My Tau have to rely on Broadsides and Hammerhead tanks to take out enemy armor, I guess were in the same boat then eh? Where are my tank busta Fire warriors? Cuz gosh darn it if my enemy is able to take out all my anti-tank stuff I needz my troops to step up and fulfill a role they weren't supposed to. :eyebrows:

And as far as anti-tank goes, does it get much better then a landraider? I mean common, 2 twin-linked BS4 lascannons, on what is one of the toughest tanks in the game. How does that not properly represent the GK, it's rarer, tougher, and more deadly then the average tank, in other words it's ELITE.



I just don't see the logic in his arguments
Their is none, 40kdhs will say anything to make it look like he has a retort.


Every army should be average. It's called 'balance'.

I want my codex average. Not overthetop crap.
Yes I agree, DH should be average, they should be competitive.

Znail
19-02-2009, 04:22
Hmm, something in the Fast Attack slot would be ideal if we are to wish for a new vehicle. Landspeeders or Bikes are the classic SM fast vehicles and it would sadly be hard to make a new unique one from them.

But personaly I would want something BIG! An extra heavily armed Dreadnaught or something like that (shouldnt there be some non-chaos defilers for instance?). I mean, if the GK needed exta anti-tank then they wouldnt ask to be handed out little meltaguns, they would ask for something heavy duty! They wouldnt think like powergamers and consider Meltaguns great as they are cheap. Hmm, maybe giving Terminators Multi-Melta arent such a bad idea as it fits in with that concept and no other Terminators have that (apart from Obliterators).

Khornies & milk
19-02-2009, 04:25
And as far as anti-tank goes, does it get much better then a landraider? I mean common, 2 twin-linked BS4 lascannons, on what is one of the toughest tanks in the game. How does that not properly represent the GK, it's rarer, tougher, and more deadly then the average tank, in other words it's ELITE.


I agree with this but don't forget that it does come with a high cost (pts-wise), and is only available as a HS slot.

there are drawbacks is all I'm saying.

The Orange
19-02-2009, 04:31
don't forget that it does come with a high cost (pts-wise)

Also in keeping with the general trend of GK me thinks, :p.

Grand Master Raziel
19-02-2009, 05:29
If you use them in a rhino as a 'suicide' unit , is it cheaper to use than GK dreadnought and LR? Even if you use them that way, it doesn't guarantee that they will do their job.

Well, a squad of 6 ISTs with meltaguns costs 80pts. Give them krak grenades so they have a backup in case the meltas whiff, and you're talking 92pts. That plus a Rhino with extra armor and smoke launchers will run you a grand total of 150pts, which isn't bad, considering. Not quite as cheap as a GK Dread, but a lot cheaper than a LR. For a few more points, you can upgrade the sergeant and give him a teleport homer, so teleporting GKs and GKTs can teleport nearby risk free.

As far as guarantees go, nothing in this game is guaranteed. You could have a full-strength squad of Khorne Berserkers pile into a tiny little mob of Grots and still lose combat. It's not likely, but it happens. Sometimes the dice don't roll the way you'd like. Playing in a way that minimizes the negative effect of bad dice rolling is this little thing that we like to call tactics. Sometimes, though, you have to gamble.


In a pure GK army list, the rest of your GK units can't handle tanks if GK dreadnought and LR are destroyed.

That's not really true. They can't handle LRs and Monoliths, but they have a fair chance against most other vehicles, and that's without the possibility of taking meltabombs or thunder hammers.


I don't like to depend on certain units to do the job because I can be screwed if they fail....(from another post-GMR)It doesn't happen that way if your GK units have anti-tank weapons. Is it your idea how to 'balance' an army?

Yes, actually. Many armies are balanced that way - Eldar, Dark Eldar, and Tau at the very least. So, DH armies are in good company in that regard. The game developers do not have any obligation to us as players to make sure that every single unit is good at every single task, or even to make sure that particular units are good at all the tasks we might want them to do, only that each army has something in it to deal with any challenge that might face the player in question and that every unit is useful for something. In this instance, Codex: Daemonhunters meets both of those criteria. It contains competent anti-armor units, and Grey Knight units have many uses they can be put to. They're weak at killing tanks, but that is not a design flaw.

Jokubas
19-02-2009, 05:43
Let me just Deepstrike into this thread...

(Disclaimer: Most of my knowledge from the game comes from the Daemonhunters Codex, the 3rd Edition rulebook I haven't read in forever, and what I've gathered from reading forums and wikis.)

Should GK only be Good Against Demons?
No, that's silly, but they shouldn't be good against everyone either.

To the main question: Grey Knights are trained for a specific role, but they're still the elite of the elite. The main reason why Grey Knights don't typically fight non-daemons is because there aren't even enough to fight off the daemons.

That said, I don't think they're invincible or anything. They don't have as much variety because they don't need it for their primary objective. That will leave them open to things they're not used to fighting. Plus, they're only human, well, super-human I guess, but still. ;) I feel like I used a little too much praise up there.

As to the question that seems to be going around as to what to do with them (and the Daemonhunters), I honestly could take a million options. Before I get into that, I will just say that Daemonhunters (and Grey Knights specifically) are what got me into 40k, and looking toward their future is what keeps me in.

I sympathize with people who want them returned to a single elite squad, even though I had no idea that was how they originally were until recently. That would be cool and would leave me with more variety than I've let myself have.

I wouldn't mind seeing a combined Inquisition Codex, but I see many places where they could easily make it suck.

They honestly could focus primarily on Grey Knights, and it seems to be a very popular way to run Daemonhunters, but I'll instead focus instead on expanding on what we have.

One of the first things to bug me about the Daemonhunters after I started playing is what I felt was a lack of variety (I don't like the allying system, and it's honestly kind of a bandage for that problem anyway; it's my opinion, but from what I've heard, GW's moving that direction). I don't know enough about most other armies to know how true that is, but it's led me to think of a lot of different things.

First of all, I'd like to see Puritan and Radical Inquisitors expanded upon. Currently, a Radical trades all GKs for just Daemonhosts. I think Radicals should also get access to some kind of mutants for troops, and maybe these so-called "Soulguards" that Quixos used in the little story on page 58. It seems so obvious to me, especially since that story describes a Radical army, but those options aren't in the Codex. A few daemonic artifacts available to Radicals would be neat as well.

Puritans are mostly fine, I think, because they have the attractive benefit of Grey Knights. For both Inquisitors, I'd like to see Adeptus Arbites be represented here too, and have models, just because they're cool (I had no idea who these guys were until recently, and I like 'em, but I don't know if I'd get around to converting some). :)

Now I'm gonna get to Grey Knights. This kinda applies to my opinion of both a Daemonhunters army and Grey Knights focused. I'd really, really like to see more here. Personally, I'd love to see at least one (preferably all) of the following: jump-packs, bikes, and drop pods, not because I think they particularly need any of them, or because I think it fits their fluff, but because if I had my way, every army would have them. ;)

I do think I can justify at least two of them, however.
Jump-Packs: In the 3rd Edition rulebook I have, it says that guys with teleporter packs count as jump troops. Would it be too hard to believe that these Deepstriking fiends might have developed a more reliable short-range version of it?

Bikes: No current fluff supports this that I'm aware of, but I think you can make it fit if you wanted to. You simply have to design the models in a way that evokes the image of a mounted knight instead of a biker. Nemesis Force Lances... sleek bikes inspired by horses maybe? Jetbikes look cool and would fit the Grey Knights' rare, elite nature, but that would step on the Dark Angels (fluff-wise, I wouldn't be surprised to find out the vaults on Titan have a few jetbikes locked away).

Drop Pods: I really know nothing about whether or not these would fit, other than the fact that I like them for some reason and have already bought one to go with my army regardless of its playability.

Other ideas I've heard people talk about:
Deepstriking: I've heard daemons rely on this too, and it would be neat to parallel the armies a bit by having them both use it a lot. I don't like the default randomness of it though.

Orbital Strikes: I like Orbital weapons normally, but most people seem to share my feeling that these just aren't really reliable enough. Call me crazy, but I think it would be cool and unique to see these somehow turned into some kind of unit, or at least something that you can depend on, even if it's expensive. I don't know how they could do it, but it would really show the power the Inquisition has in bright, explosive beams of light.

Other Dreadnought Options: I'm aware of variants, but I don't know anything about them, so I can't say much here. That Ironclad one running around here looks appropriately elite and tough for the Grey Knights, but I have no idea if it would really fit. As to people who say Dreadnoughts don't fit Grey Knights' fluff, I'll say something about that. Marines are forced into that continued service, right? They could change it so that Grey Knight Dreadnoughts are ones who chose to keep fighting. Would that work? I don't really know enough.

Voodoo Boyz
19-02-2009, 13:46
This is getting very silly.

If Land Raiders & Dreads (and to a lesser extent their S6 weapons in assault) were even remotely acceptable Anti-Tank solutions for Grey Knight armies then we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.

They're not good or effective answers. IST's and Orbital Bombardments aren't either, even for people who don't care about pure GK armies. If IST's could take heavy weapons, they'd maybe be a decent option, but unless they also can deepstrike, then they will continue to suck in terms of AT duties.

Melta's in GK squads makes sense and fits Imperial Army doctrines. Grey Knights as an army are more similar to SM than they are to Tau or Eldar. They don't get specialist squads, they are meant to be outfitted to handle any kind of Daemon/Chaos threat. As it is now, they can't and have massive problems vs. most lists because they can't effectively deal with armor - and instances of Chaos Armor is quite very common.

You give the basic units access to Meltaguns (not Multi-meltas, not Lascannons, not Missile Launchers) you solve this problem without it being completely over bearing as a solution. It still brings plenty of risks, but it's an acceptable solution to the problem and makes them much more viable against all other armies as well.

You guys go on and on about them not being like Marines, but seriously that's what they are. They would still be a radically different force compared to regular SM's. We're not giving them any heavy weapons, I'm not recommending Jump troops, but stuff that keeps them viable against all comers, makes them much more fun to play as a result, and keeps them unique.

The Orange
19-02-2009, 15:59
If Land Raiders & Dreads (and to a lesser extent their S6 weapons in assault) were even remotely acceptable Anti-Tank solutions
Did not mean to imply that they were, I was simply pointing out the absurdity of 40kdhs argument of "what do I do when all my anti-tank gets killed?"

He could have said, GK anti-tank options are too limited and I would have agreed to some extent, he could have said GK anti-tank options are way overcosted for what their capable of, and I would have agreed to some extent. But no, what he said instead (when you boil it all down) is "I want anti-tank abilities to be built into everything GK, because I don't want to have to worry about losing it when a unit gets killed" which is outrageous IMO.


even for people who don't care about pure GK armies....they will continue to suck in terms of AT duties.
I'm sure most people are in agreement that DH need to be rebalanced, this would probably include giving them more anti-tank options.


Melta's in GK squads makes sense and fits Imperial Army doctrines. ... and instances of Chaos Armor is quite very common.
I still think it's horribly un-thematic, a GK trading in his NFW for a multi-melta? No they are not SM, SM are trained to handle any battlefield situation, GK are trained to handle Daemons. Yea theirs Chaos armor out their, but I'd think that's something you'd stear your GKs away from and focus your DH/IG/SM anti-tank stuff on. GK are mainly for killing daemons, not everything with the word Chaos stamped on it.

"OMG its a Chaos Bunker, lets call in the Grey Knights"
"OMG we found a stash of Chaos Bolter, we need a Grand Master to handle these" :rolleyes: See what I'm getting at?


You guys go on and on about them not being like Marines, but seriously that's what they are. They would still be a radically different force compared to regular SM's.
Yea, their radically different from SM because each one's a psyker/librarian able to use a NFW, if you start trading those in for melta-guns you might as well start inducting regular SM into their ranks.


but stuff that keeps them viable against all comers, makes them much more fun to play as a result, and keeps them unique. Again bypassing the point of the thread? I agree that giving GK anti-tank, making them more competitive, etc. makes them more fun to play, you can say that about any army. If I gave Khorne bezerkers long range artillery, that would make them more fun against horde/long range/ armor heavy armies. That doesn't change the fact that it's not really kosher with the fluff.

So again, due to the fluff, do I agree that GK should become a regular all-comers average army? No, I think they should remain the Elite Badasses they are able to stomp on most anything they get their hands on. They should be that unit you don't want to engage up close, that unit that you either give a wide birth, or send everything you have at. You start putting them in roles to do everything else a regular army does then you'll need to start making them more mediocre to fit army balance, and thus you start killing that image/ideal.

Ubermensch Commander
19-02-2009, 16:12
@Jokubas
Yknow, I really wanted to see a combined Inqusition codex, if for no other reason than to FINALLY be able to make Inquisitor Luffkraft of the Ordo Xenos to pursue my Claws of Cthulu Genestealers(Honestly I just feel annoyed as two of the three Ordos have been addressed...I feel unbalanced! haha) but your photoshopped codex image has converted me sir! If a GK only codex was as badass inside as that thing looks on the outside, I would be compelled to go out and buy a Grey Knights force!

loveless
19-02-2009, 16:25
You know what's really sad? That photoshop job is going to get flitted around as "official" by the people who don't know any better.

*sigh* We'll probably see a thread in the rumour board before month's end.

Voodoo Boyz
19-02-2009, 16:47
Did not mean to imply that they were, I was simply pointing out the absurdity of 40kdhs argument of "what do I do when all my anti-tank gets killed?"

He could have said, GK anti-tank options are too limited and I would have agreed to some extent, he could have said GK anti-tank options are way overcosted for what their capable of, and I would have agreed to some extent. But no, what he said instead (when you boil it all down) is "I want anti-tank abilities to be built into everything GK, because I don't want to have to worry about losing it when a unit gets killed" which is outrageous IMO.

I agree that his argument is flawed.

I'm not saying build AT options into every GK choice. I said "add multimeltas to their dev squad equivalent", but that was just for completeness sake. Ditto on the Termies. I think that if you just gave PAGK's access to Melta Guns along with Psycannons or Incinerators, then you're golden in terms of rounding out their choices.

I'm perfectly open to discussion that Termies/GK Dev Squads don't need Multimeltas. Heck I don't think they'd even be taken often if they were available to be perfectly honest, so if you think that's more unbalanced then hey I've got no objection to them being removed.


I'm sure most people are in agreement that DH need to be rebalanced, this would probably include giving them more anti-tank options.

Well at least we're in agreement then. From my perspective giving them things like Lascannons is a bad idea, same on Missile Launchers. I don't think they should get Predators either, I'm trying to keep them more unique & true to the playstyle & fluff where they deepstrike into place and get into close fire fights or assaults.




I still think it's horribly un-thematic, a GK trading in his NFW for a multi-melta? No they are not SM, SM are trained to handle any battlefield situation, GK are trained to handle Daemons. Yea theirs Chaos armor out their, but I'd think that's something you'd stear your GKs away from and focus your DH/IG/SM anti-tank stuff on. GK are mainly for killing daemons, not everything with the word Chaos stamped on it.

"OMG its a Chaos Bunker, lets call in the Grey Knights"
"OMG we found a stash of Chaos Bolter, we need a Grand Master to handle these" See what I'm getting at?

Well Termies would drop their Storm Bolters for the Multi-Melta if they got it, since that's what happens now for the other weapon options.

In terms of the Melta Guns, you could have the PAGK's give up the Storm Bolter for it, which makes a ton more sense.

And I believe you're misconstruing my point. By the Fluff GK's have access to the best equipment in the Imperium. As it stands they can not effectively deal with Chaos Armor, even specifically Daemon Infused Chaos Armor - Defilers, Possessed Vehicles, Soul Grinders. To me and my fluff sensibilities, it is patently ridiculous that a GK can't attach a Meltagun to his arm instead of a storm bolter, or give up the storm bolter and carry a Melta (rather than have it be strapped to the arm).

Also by the Fluff they use Drop Pods in addition to Teleportation.




You guys go on and on about them not being like Marines, but seriously that's what they are. They would still be a radically different force compared to regular SM's.
Yea, their radically different from SM because each one's a psyker/librarian able to use a NFW, if you start trading those in for melta-guns you might as well start inducting regular SM into their ranks.

Look, you've already agreed with me that GK's need more anti-tank options. They already use equipment that Marines use. They use equipment the IG & Sisters use. By the fluff they have access to the best equipment in the Imperium.

They're still Marines by nature. They have an equivalent to Tactical Squads, to Dev Squads, and Terminator Squads. They need AT options that are mobile and fit their fighting doctrine.

Meltaguns do this.
Other Imperium Anti-Tank Options do not do this.

This isn't an overpowered option to add. I think people don't like it because it is such a very simple & basic solution to their problem, and it wouldn't require major changes to most GK play styles.




but stuff that keeps them viable against all comers, makes them much more fun to play as a result, and keeps them unique.
Again bypassing the point of the thread? I agree that giving GK anti-tank, making them more competitive, etc. makes them more fun to play, you can say that about any army. If I gave Khorne bezerkers long range artillery, that would make them more fun against horde/long range/ armor heavy armies. That doesn't change the fact that it's not really kosher with the fluff.

How am I bypassing the point of the thread? The question is if they should only be strong against Daemons.

My first post here disagreed with that notion, and put forth some very simple ideas that would make them back on par with Daemons which at the same time would make them very balanced against all other armies, fixing the main issue their current rules have in terms of dealing with armor without being over powered.

Fact is that Daemons have tough armor to crack (soul grinders), as do Chaos armies that use Daemonically enhanced vehicles (Defilers, Vindi's/Preds, Land Raiders) all of which the GK's current rules have them as terribly ill-equipped to deal with.

And FYI, Khorne DOES have long range artillery & fire support/anti-tank. Defilers, Preds, Vindi's, and Mark of Khorne Havoks. Khorne is about martial prowess and only in recent fluff has he been the BURN MAIM KILL HUUUUUR! god, which GW has come back around to avoiding (MoK Havoks).


So again, due to the fluff, do I agree that GK should become a regular all-comers average army? No, I think they should remain the Elite Badasses they are able to stomp on most anything they get their hands on. They should be that unit you don't want to engage up close, that unit that you either give a wide birth, or send everything you have at. You start putting them in roles to do everything else a regular army does then you'll need to start making them more mediocre to fit army balance, and thus you start killing that image/ideal.

Giving a unit of PA-GK's access to a max of Two Meltaguns is giving them a roll to do everything else?

I don't know what game you're playing but PAGK's aren't a unit that can't be beaten in assault, especially by Daemons or other Chaos Dedicated Assault Units. Even GK Termies are going to struggle against equivalent elite Daemon assault units.

I'm talking about giving them access to the tools necessary to do the job an army needs to do in game, and what they do by definition in the fluff.

Look, by even agreeing that GK's need more anti-tank options you're going to give them the option to be somewhat viable against all armies. They will still probably be not that great (25 point basic troopers that die like regular MEQ's means you're going to struggle no matter what you do), but at least they have that RETARDED GLARING WEAKNESS that does not jive with their fluff fixed.

40kdhs
19-02-2009, 17:01
Oh also... i'll find it hard to be a GK fanophile without some good ideas to champion. can you tell me what good new balanced ideas i should be championing?

It's difficult for me to do that because you are not open to any new suggestion.



Characters and Brother Captains can take Combi-meltas (Note that Justicars can't due to the odd caveat in the armoury). It seems popular in other armies as effective anti-tank, so what's wrong with it here?


The problem is it hits or misses. Trying to do it without a drop pod is dangerous.

So for AT DH can have

Godhammer Raiders

TLLC/ML Dreads

Meltabombs

IST Squads w/ Meltaguns

Hammerhand

S6

but to be balanced they also need Lascannons and Multi-Meltas in their Squads as well...to me that means that you want DH/GK to be just another SM army.

I'm not saying that we don't need more AT but not at the expense of just making us mirror SM.

Be honest here. You can't have any new suggestion without feeling like SM because they have everything. I thought nobody had S6 weapon except GKs but SM have it too. If you look at all the wargears in warhammer, they are identical and the only difference you see among them are the name, description, and the point cost.

If we can come up with a new weapon or psychic power which acts like 'multi-meltas', GKs are not SM.



so you want everything then? You want your GK squads to do everything possible. That could happen, but are you ready to pay through the nose for it? And here I thought GK were expensive enough .


Why do you raise the point cost of a GK when all i want is a new gun? I don't mind seeing them expensive as long as they are good on the table.




Honestly this is the weakest argument you've put out. "Oh Noz! I can't do anything against tanks if my anti-tank stuff gets killed" Guess what, every army is like that. My Tau have to rely on Broadsides and Hammerhead tanks to take out enemy armor, I guess were in the same boat then eh?


We are not in the same boat because you can have more hammerheads and broadsides than us. Yes, you still have points for something else after spending for mentioned units. You pop a LR/LRC on 4+ while GKs have to do it on 5+. Your comparison is not valid.



And as far as anti-tank goes, does it get much better then a landraider? I mean common, 2 twin-linked BS4 lascannons, on what is one of the toughest tanks in the game. How does that not properly represent the GK, it's rarer, tougher, and more deadly then the average tank, in other words it's ELITE.


If my GKs costed 15 pts, I wouldn't mind having a LR. If you spend too much points for LRs/LRCs in a DH/GK army list, you don't put a lot of infrantry units on the table.

Jokubas
19-02-2009, 19:16
You know what's really sad? That photoshop job is going to get flitted around as "official" by the people who don't know any better.

*sigh* We'll probably see a thread in the rumour board before month's end.

:mad: Completely wasn't thinking of that, sorry. Geez, I hope it can be stopped. :(

Chaplain Dionitas
19-02-2009, 19:25
Why is it un-thematic for a GK to drop his NFW for a melta or a multi-melta when they drop them for psycannons and incinerators? I see absolutely nothing wrong with them having melta weapons. Bikes is iffy but I would get over it. As a GK/DH player, my army has a fluff quality to it.

Grand Master Raziel
19-02-2009, 19:25
If Land Raiders & Dreads (and to a lesser extent their S6 weapons in assault) were even remotely acceptable Anti-Tank solutions for Grey Knight armies then we wouldn't even be having this discussion in the first place.

They're not good or effective answers. IST's and Orbital Bombardments aren't either, even for people who don't care about pure GK armies. If IST's could take heavy weapons, they'd maybe be a decent option, but unless they also can deepstrike, then they will continue to suck in terms of AT duties.

Well, I've barely used GK LRs (and that's been a Crusader), so I can't comment on that too much. However, with 5th edition's vehicle rules and the FAQ bringing the GK LR up to speed with the SM LR, it seems to me like it's a very viable choice that most DH players just haven't really gotten around to noticing yet. Dreadnoughts and ISTs I can comment on, however, and I've found them to be reasonably effective for most of my anti-tank needs. I agree that Orbital Bombardments are a joke, though. It's like taking a 60-80pt handicap, for all the good it does. That could be dropped to make room for other stuff.


Melta's in GK squads makes sense and fits Imperial Army doctrines.

So, ISTs with meltaguns (which are cheaper and can be mono-tasked to hunting and killing vehicles) are not a viable choice, but GKs with meltaguns (who are more expensive and would need to be used against a broad spectrum of threats) are? That does not make a lot of sense.



And I believe you're misconstruing my point. By the Fluff GK's have access to the best equipment in the Imperium. As it stands they can not effectively deal with Chaos Armor, even specifically Daemon Infused Chaos Armor - Defilers, Possessed Vehicles, Soul Grinders. To me and my fluff sensibilities, it is patently ridiculous that a GK can't attach a Meltagun to his arm instead of a storm bolter, or give up the storm bolter and carry a Melta (rather than have it be strapped to the arm).

Well, if the thematic issue is dealing with Chaotic armor, then a thematic solution would be to give an existing GK weapon a bonus against Chaotic armor. The psycannon, for instance, could gain an extra D6 of armor penetration against all Chaos vehicles, or even just the specifically daemonically possessed ones (Defilers, Soul Grinders, and any vehicles with the Daemonic Possession upgrade), and that would solve the problem right there without altering what options GKs do and don't get.


This isn't an overpowered option to add. I think people don't like it because it is such a very simple & basic solution to their problem, and it wouldn't require major changes to most GK play styles.

No, I don't like it because I don't think it's thematically apt. I also don't like it because it doesn't mesh very well with the inherent abilities of the rest of the GK squad. This is not to say that I don't think GKs couldn't use some more anti-armor goodness, but tasking it to the power armored GK squads is not the way to go. Personally, I'd build it into the almost-entirely-undeveloped Fast Attack category - GKs on bikes or jetbikes with meltaguns and meltabombs. You might also tweak the existing Heavy Support - drop the price of GK Dreads a bit, give them the option of replacing their DCCW with a second TLLC arm, for instance.



I don't know what game you're playing but PAGK's aren't a unit that can't be beaten in assault, especially by Daemons or other Chaos Dedicated Assault Units. Even GK Termies are going to struggle against equivalent elite Daemon assault units.

Well, there's nothing that can't be beaten. As far as Imperial units go, though PAGKs are one of the tougher nuts to crack. Facing off against, say, Khorne Berserkers, the Zerks would be hitting on 4+ instead of the 3+ they'd be hitting most anything else with, they'd be facing getting hit back with 2 attacks against the 1 attack they'd otherwise usually expect, and get wounded on 2+ instead of getting wounded on 4+ or even 5+. Against Daemons, yeah, that can be a thorny proposition, but catch those very same Daemons in the open, and GKs can really make them suffer. The disparity against Daemons also has a lot to do with the fact that Codex: Daemonhunters is much older than Codex: Chaos Daemons, and the DH book does not have a fully-realized army list.



Be honest here. You can't have any new suggestion without feeling like SM because they have everything. I thought nobody had S6 weapon except GKs but SM have it too. If you look at all the wargears in warhammer, they are identical and the only difference you see among them are the name, description, and the point cost.

That's distorting the facts just a bit. In a SM army, there's a handful of figures that can take S6 weapons. You're not likely to see more than one or two, unless your opponent is silly enough to take Honor Guard. By comparison, every single GK (except for PAGKs with incinerators or psycannons) has a S6 weapon. Not the same thing at all.


We are not in the same boat because you can have more hammerheads and broadsides than us. Yes, you still have points for something else after spending for mentioned units. You pop a LR/LRC on 4+ while GKs have to do it on 5+. Your comparison is not valid.

That's also not an entirely accurate representation of the facts. Yes, a Hammerhead with a railgun is more likely to get armor penetration than a LR with lascannons with any single particular shot, but you're leaving out the facts that A: LRs have 2 lascannons vs the single railgun of the Hammerhead and B: a LR's lascannons are twin-linked, and so therefore a lot more likely to hit. So, a little Mathhammer, Hammerhead vs Land Raider vs an AV14 target:

Hammerhead: single shot, hits on 3+, pens on 4+, chance of destroying the target: 11%
Land Raider: two shots, hits on 3+ with a reroll, pens on 5+, chance of destroying the target: 20%

So, a Land Raider is actually more likely to knock out another Land Raider in a singe round of shooting than a Hammerhead is. Furthermore, a Tau army can't have more Hammerheads than a GK army can have Land Raiders, because they're both Heavy Support choices.

Now, it is true that Tau can have more Broadsides than GKs can have Dreadnoughts, but each Broadside can only fire one shot per turn, whereas Dreads can fire two, and move more reliably. Besides, Tau are a shooty army with next to no close combat ability whatsoever. You can't say that you want GKs to have better anti-tank ability because Tau are better at anti-tank than GKs are, because you're forgetting about the balancing issues. Or, do you think Tau should be as good in close combat as GKs are? Tau players might certainly think that their army's weakness in close combat is as pressing a problem as GKs' weakness against armored vehicles.


If my GKs costed 15 pts, I wouldn't mind having a LR. If you spend too much points for LRs/LRCs in a DH/GK army list, you don't put a lot of infrantry units on the table.

Well, that's the challenge to making army lists: you generally can't get in every single thing you'd like to get in. DH players are not unique in this regard. Everyone experiences the same problem.

loveless
19-02-2009, 19:41
:mad: Completely wasn't thinking of that, sorry. Geez, I hope it can be stopped. :(

Oh, I seriously meant to say "nice job!" on the photoshopping, too, I just forget :angel:

And I wasn't trying to put you down if you happened to have taken it that way - it's just that the 2009 Release Date thread in Rumours has gone completely insane and can't be brought back into the realm of reason :p

But yeah...it looked really good!

Voodoo Boyz
19-02-2009, 19:52
GMR:

I wouldn't call a 250 Point investment that is not as good as the current SM Land Raider (PotMS differences) as a valid Anti-Tank platform.

Too much investment for too little in return in an army where troops choices cost 250 Points for a semi-decent squad.

As far as IST's go - IST's are T3, 4+ Armor, and can't deepstrike or take Drop Pods. Give them deepstrike, and now we're talking about a valid option. Doesn't help Pure GK players though.

And before someone starts with the "Pure GK vs. DH army" thing (again) lemme just say this: People want to play a Pure Grey Knight Army with just Grey Knights in it. If they didn't we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Games Workshop is a company that wants to make money with new army releases, given the amount of untapped potential they have with fleshing out GK's into their own force similar to Sisters - I think it's safe to say that GK's will get more options when it's codex time. ;)


Well, if the thematic issue is dealing with Chaotic armor, then a thematic solution would be to give an existing GK weapon a bonus against Chaotic armor. The psycannon, for instance, could gain an extra D6 of armor penetration against all Chaos vehicles, or even just the specifically daemonically possessed ones (Defilers, Soul Grinders, and any vehicles with the Daemonic Possession upgrade), and that would solve the problem right there without altering what options GKs do and don't get.

Not to sound offensive (I'm not trying to be), but you're dancing around the issue here.

Problem: Grey Knights struggle against almost every army because they lack anti-tank options.
Solution: Grey Knights get mobile anti-tank options.

Argument Against it Thus Far: GK's shouldn't get it because they kill Daemons and aren't trained to kill armor. It's a weakness built into the army that they should still have.

Counter Point: GK's, by the Fluff would need to kill Armor brought by Daemons and Chaos and thus would carry effective anti-armor weapons that are otherwise widely available to every other army in the Imperium.

Point is, they need a fix. This fix patches the problem & helps against all other armies.

Unless you're going to argue that GK's should suck against other armies and only be good against Chaos & Daemon armies, then that kind of solution is undesirable.

Now if you want to discuss that point again, we can do that, but bottom line is that they need AT options and Meltas fit their mobile/deepstrike playstyle more than anything else.

Heck, if you want to make it a Psychic power available to Justicars for 50 Points and make it a Multi-Melta equivalent, Hey, I'm down with that too. I just want to see them become viable.


No, I don't like it because I don't think it's thematically apt. I also don't like it because it doesn't mesh very well with the inherent abilities of the rest of the GK squad. This is not to say that I don't think GKs couldn't use some more anti-armor goodness, but tasking it to the power armored GK squads is not the way to go. Personally, I'd build it into the almost-entirely-undeveloped Fast Attack category - GKs on bikes or jetbikes with meltaguns and meltabombs. You might also tweak the existing Heavy Support - drop the price of GK Dreads a bit, give them the option of replacing their DCCW with a second TLLC arm, for instance.

GK Bikes sound like a great idea and if you want to task them with hunting armor by giving them Meltas, I could swing with that.

But please lets not pretend that a Dread with 2 TL Lascannons in heavy would fix the problem. Dreads don't work because they die too easy, are expensive, and (to a lesser extent) eat Heavy Slots.

Now maybe make that an Iron Clad GK Dread, with access to a Drop Pod & A Multi-Melta + TL LC, and maybe we've got something. ;)

As far as meshing with the task of PAGK's, I think it would complicate things, but if anything anti-tank GK squads (5 man strong) would be a nice support unit to take.

Jokubas
19-02-2009, 20:26
Oh, I seriously meant to say "nice job!" on the photoshopping, too, I just forget :angel:

And I wasn't trying to put you down if you happened to have taken it that way - it's just that the 2009 Release Date thread in Rumours has gone completely insane and can't be brought back into the realm of reason :p

But yeah...it looked really good!

Thanks. When I first saw that piece of art I thought it would look good on a Codex, and one day I just got bored. Parts of it were really rushed, but I was constantly comparing it to a real one. :)

I would love for it to be 2009, as it would finally get me to really come back to 40k instead of just acting like it, but it's not happening this year (the release that is, hopefully I'll come back sooner ;)).

As for the current line of discussion... my inexperienced self has always felt that Daemonhunters need at least one other option for anti-tank, but the only thing I really know about that kind of stuff is that lower AP numbers are better.

One other thing I'd like to say though. I would consider playing a non-pure GK army if the other choices were more attractive (visually as well as statistically). For instance, I ditched my Inquisitor HQ as soon as I got Terminators because I personally cannot stand the hero and his band of mutant misfits. That option should be there, but I'd prefer to make an Inquisitor and his band of heroic comrades. In other words, I'd like to see the retinue at least feel like other heroes who have been through everything with the Inquisitor, whereas now they feel like wireless augmentations only there to boost some stats and provide cover.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
19-02-2009, 21:10
GK Bikes sound like a great idea and if you want to task them with hunting armor by giving them Meltas, I could swing with that.

But please lets not pretend that a Dread with 2 TL Lascannons in heavy would fix the problem. Dreads don't work because they die too easy, are expensive, and (to a lesser extent) eat Heavy Slots.


Bikes ? Why not jetbikers. But this is different issue.

Maybe give them another version of cyclone missle launcher. S8 AP3 ignore inv saves and have AP1 against daemonic vehicles ? problem solved.

Another solution - make their psychic bolts double/add 2 strenght against daemonic vehicles. It doesnt require even changing anyone models ... sigh.

And dreads does not sucks. They are even underpriced atm. TL lascannon is good anti-tank. you can give them missle launcher if i remember right. Slot doesnt mattern. After new codex, psycannon/assault cannon could potentialy be good anti-tank too.

P.S: land riders are quite capable in anti-tank. and survivable.

Edit: or give grey knights characters ability to call melta torpedos [S10 AP1 small blast for example]. problem solved. All without even changing single assembled model.

loveless
19-02-2009, 21:31
You know...there's really not a _good_ reason to give the Grey Knight units better anti-tank.

I mean, heck, should a mono-Slaanesh Daemons army get the option for meltagun-equivalents in their units?

The fact is - the current book _has_ options for anti-tank - the plethora of options for the GK units we've already mentioned, meltaguns on IST in Chimeras/Rhinos for speed, inducted units, Orbital Bombardment, etc. etc.

If you choose to not make use of all of your options, then you have to face the consequences. So dealing with tanks is a bit tougher for GK than your bog-standard Space Marine. Well, there are other options in the book.

And I'll say it again - Strength 6 can pop most vehicles in close combat with some luck - and Strength 8 can do it with a lot less luck. Basic GK are Strength 6 and GK Terminators can have Strength 8 just by swapping your weapon loadout.

You'll have problems with Land Raiders, Monoliths, and potentially Walkers. Ho hum, big deal - lots of armies have problems with them.

If you really, really want ranged anti-tank...
You've got lascannons available on your vehicles.
You can induct units with lascannons.
You can take IST with meltaguns.
You can get multimeltas on your vehicles.
You can get missile launchers on your Dreadnoughts.
You can induct units with missile launchers.

The options exist - it's up to you not to use them.


Now, that being said, I feel that many of them need recosting, as a good lot of the options come at an unnecessary premium.

However, there's no reason to have to give ranged anti-tank weapons to Grey Knights - UNLESS a Codex: Grey Knights appears instead of a Codex: Daemonhunters/Inquisition.
As long as there are other options to get your anti-tank fix, it's not the weapon options that are the problem -

- it's the point cost of getting those weapons for the platforms they come on.

Znail
19-02-2009, 22:13
An interesting comparison when talking about pure-GK is pure-SoB. They have similar extra options apart from their own units. SoB are specialists on hunting rogue psykers while GK hunt daemons. They have the exact same need for being good against other things then their special targets. The difference is that SoB is a well rounded army and quite able to take on any other army while GK struggles. So what is strange with expecting some improvements to GK if there are a new codex?

We also need to remember that inducted IG and SM will most likely be gone in the next codex as GW wants codexes to be stand-alone. So unless IST gets access to the old IG stuff so is there more or less a must the GK's gets new tools.

loveless
19-02-2009, 22:18
You can crunch Sisters in combat a bit easier than you can crunch Grey Knights in combat. They aren't bad at it - what with Acts of Faith and all - but they're not amazing at it.

Much like Grey Knights and anti-tank. They're not bad at it, but they're not amazing at it.

The Witch Hunters codex has Close Combat units in it - Repentia, Arcos, Penitent Engines - they're just too expensive for what they do. On a similiar note, Daemonhunters have Anti-Tank units that are too expensive for what they do.

I'd like the Sisters to have a bit more oomph in Close Combat, but I think that can be partially fixed by recosting the Close Combat units of the Ecclesiarchy.

Likewise, I think a lot of the Daemonhunter problems with anti-tank could be fixed with some recosting or refocusing on the current anti-tank options.

Acheron,Bringer of Terror
19-02-2009, 22:58
Geez. Options not only are re-costed, but sometimes they change.

For example, grey knight squad could have psychic power called 'omg pwn' which acts as anti-tank weapon with S9 AP1.

Or perhaps grey knights [terminators/tacticals/devastators] could have since the beginning weapon called 'holy railgun', which acts as Strenght D 72" weapon.

Grey Knight might need heavy weapons. Why not?

Edit: you sound like person who say out loud:

It's no problem your nurgle troops cannot harm vehicles. Just use, ya know, those Tzeentch super-anti tank options or deal with it.

Despite common knowlegle that some people want mono-god approach.

You fail to spot that.

Jokubas
19-02-2009, 23:08
However, there's no reason to have to give ranged anti-tank weapons to Grey Knights - UNLESS a Codex: Grey Knights appears instead of a Codex: Daemonhunters/Inquisition.
As long as there are other options to get your anti-tank fix, it's not the weapon options that are the problem -

- it's the point cost of getting those weapons for the platforms they come on.

You do have a point here. I'd want it either way simply because I want more options; I haven't played out existing options enough to know or care if it's needed.

The Orange
19-02-2009, 23:53
Why do you raise the point cost of a GK when all i want is a new gun?
Because the potential upgrades to a unit factor in their cost. A SM in a tac squad upgraded with a Heavy Bolter is cheaper then a SM in a devastator squad (they may have changed this in the latest codex, i don't know). Similarly Tau crisis suit bodyguards cost more then regular crisis suits pretty much because they can take more wargear then regular crisis suits. We have to pay for the ability to have more options before we even buy those options, and weather or not we get those options.


We are not in the same boat because you can have more hammerheads and broadsides than us.
We all have 3 HS slots don't we?


Yes, you still have points for something else after spending for mentioned units.
Yea because LR and Dreads do more then shoot 1 bullet in a turn. If the problem is cheap anti-tank then maybe you should look into what the DH can offer.


If my GKs costed 15 pts, I wouldn't mind having a LR. If you spend too much points for LRs/LRCs in a DH/GK army list, you don't put a lot of infantry units on the table. And thats no different for any other army. My Tau broadsides tend to cost about 100pts a pop with relatively essential upgrades. That is a significant chunk out of my pt's total for what are essentially oversized TEQs. You have problems keeping your dreadnaught alive? Have you tired hiding it in cover, have you tried limiting it's vulnerability to enemy anti-tank weapons by screening it? Maybe you should figure out some strategies instead asking for a "easy button/quick fix" from GW. This is supposed to be a game of tactics you know, your not supposed to just march out in the open and roll some dice.


Why is it un-thematic for a GK to drop his NFW for a melta or a multi-melta when they drop them for psycannons and incinerators?
Because psycannons and incinerators are blessed weapons specific for taking out daemons :confused:.



And before someone starts with the "Pure GK vs. DH army" thing (again) lemme just say this: People want to play a Pure Grey Knight Army with just Grey Knights in it. If they didn't we wouldn't even be having this discussion....
Not to sound offensive (I'm not trying to be), but you're dancing around the issue here.
So whats your point? (some) People want it so GW should just cave in to demand? Or because people want it you can just skip over what the detractors have to say? Lets get something cleared up the issue here, in this specific topic, IS "Pure GK vs. DH army". Your the one skirting the issue, you have bypassed the entire point of this thread, assumed GK need to be their own army, and started listing off how it needs to be done.


Games Workshop is a company that wants to make money with new army releases, given the amount of untapped potential they have with fleshing out GK's into their own force similar to Sisters - I think it's safe to say that GK's will get more options when it's codex time. ;)
I'm still waiting for Primarch models :rolleyes:.



Heck, if you want to make it a Psychic power available to Justicars for 50 Points and make it a Multi-Melta equivalent, Hey, I'm down with that too....

Now maybe make that an Iron Clad GK Dread, with access to a Drop Pod & A Multi-Melta + TL LC, and maybe we've got something. ;)
You know it's funny, on the one hand you guys complain about your anti-tank being to expensive for what they do, and on the other you accept the idea of expensive anti-tank stuff.



SoB are specialists on hunting rogue psykers while GK hunt daemons.
Which hunters specialize in hunting down witches, but the SoB are the mitary arm of the Escillary (I know I'm spelling that wrong), not just WH troops. If I'm not mistaken SoB are more numerious then GK (not just one chapter of them), and serve as bodyguards for the Escillary, not to mention serve as guardians for their churches, and IIRC carry out crusades in the name of the Emperior as well as protect pilgrims. Again GK were specifically designed, armed, and trained to handle taking down daemons.


The difference is that SoB is a well rounded army and quite able to take on any other army while GK struggles. Not really, they have one decent long range anti-tank weapons which is quite easy to kill. Their army specializes in mid-range fire fights and little else, and the fact that they currently do so much better then GK can be IMO attributed to the fact that basic SoB troops are pretty undercosted for their abilities.



Grey Knight might need heavy weapons. Why not?

Edit: you sound like person who say out loud:

It's no problem your nurgle troops cannot harm vehicles. Just use, ya know, those Tzeentch super-anti tank options or deal with it.

Despite common knowlegle that some people want mono-god approach.

Um...yea, that's how its supposed to be. Death Guard were supposed to be an army that gets in your face (short range firefights), not one that stands back and shoots at you from afar. They weren't supposed to be a balanced force, so if you want a balanced force you take one, but it won't be pure Death Guard. :confused: What part of a "thematic lopsided army" are you guys not understanding?

I can do a thematic Tau army, noting but actual Tau, no xenos, guess what? I lose absolutely all my hth options in doing so. I can do a thematic Eldar army with mostly Warthguard and Wrathlords, guess what? I lose cheap infantry, I lose good hth troops, and I lose plentiful anti-tank weapons. I can choose to do a thematic Nidzilla list, guess what?... Do I need to go on?

Necromancer2
20-02-2009, 00:02
There is nothing wrong with the current GK's. And NO, they shouldn't be only good against Daemons... just more able to handle them.

thechosenone
20-02-2009, 01:13
Look, i don't think anyone has an issue with GK getting a melta gun option. If your Purgation squad or whatever it is that gets four heavy weapons choices wants melta guns go for it. Its a ten point upgrade that's only really anti tank effective at 6 inches. woo hoo. I can't see why you think that solves that much of a problem but why not.

The Multi Melta is another issue entirely. First off, why would you want it considering every other option for heavy weapon is assault. It means if you have one multi melta and want to fire it you can't move the rest of the squad and if your popping a tank the other weapon choices are useless. It would be as much of a hassle for a GK as a heavy weapon that was move or fire would be for an ork boyz squad. Your better in CC then shooting. So unless your taking four multi meltas then the purgation squad is pointless. And again, a multi melta is only really effective at 12 inches. If i were an uppidy GK player i'd be complaining for Las cannons. That way you have distance and more effective hitting power regarless of range and placement.

For an assault army i just don't see why you'd want a move or shoot weapon, especially one only effective at 12 inches. As far as putting it on a terminator. I really don't like it. DS multi melta on a model that is relentless and has the chance of a shrouding going in its favor. Unless it costs about about as much as an oblitorator then i'm not in.

and 40DHS... there you go calling people out on specifics. I'm not sure what makes you think i'm not open to ideas. I posted some of my own. Your the one that just won't budge on anything and reletlessly goes after individuals rather then laying out an issue. IF i were you. rather then saying "chosen one you aren't open to new ideas" and that being the end of your post to me you could have said "chosenone, your not open to new ideas such as...." I don't know why its hard for you to combine a passionate defense of your point of view with substance.

Inquisitor_Tolheim
20-02-2009, 02:27
You can crunch Sisters in combat a bit easier than you can crunch Grey Knights in combat. They aren't bad at it - what with Acts of Faith and all - but they're not amazing at it.

Much like Grey Knights and anti-tank. They're not bad at it, but they're not amazing at it.

The Witch Hunters codex has Close Combat units in it - Repentia, Arcos, Penitent Engines - they're just too expensive for what they do. On a similiar note, Daemonhunters have Anti-Tank units that are too expensive for what they do.

I'd like the Sisters to have a bit more oomph in Close Combat, but I think that can be partially fixed by recosting the Close Combat units of the Ecclesiarchy.

Likewise, I think a lot of the Daemonhunter problems with anti-tank could be fixed with some recosting or refocusing on the current anti-tank options.

Very well said, Loveless.

I also want to point out that Inquisitorial Stormtroopers seem to be severely undervalued in this thread. Pop them in a rhino (or deepstrike them) give them a melta or two and charge/drop them onto the enemy armor. I've had nothing but success with my Stormtroopers (accepting the fact that they're suicide squads. They're guardsmen, it's what they do).

Znail
20-02-2009, 02:46
Look, i don't think anyone has an issue with GK getting a melta gun option. If your Purgation squad or whatever it is that gets four heavy weapons choices wants melta guns go for it. Its a ten point upgrade that's only really anti tank effective at 6 inches. woo hoo. I can't see why you think that solves that much of a problem but why not.
My main obvjection is that Meltaguns are one of the most popular anti-tank weapons so adding it to GK will just add another army to the list who uses it. At the very least so would I want it to get some unique rules and a higher cost so it wouldnt just be be given to every GK squad. I also think that GK has alot of 'bling' factor with them being pretty decked out in good armament by standard, so going for the cheapest anti-tank weapon you can find doesnt quite fit my image of them.

I expect GK to request a realy strong anti-tank weapon, not the cheapest one and hand it out in numbers. If the strong weapon (Multi-melta) is too heavy to carry normaly and shoot then I expect them to ask for some anti-grav or something.

Similarily, deepstriking meltaguns are so cheapskate, I want deepstriking Dreadnaughts as its alot more cool!


The Multi Melta is another issue entirely. First off, why would you want it considering every other option for heavy weapon is assault. It means if you have one multi melta and want to fire it you can't move the rest of the squad and if your popping a tank the other weapon choices are useless. It would be as much of a hassle for a GK as a heavy weapon that was move or fire would be for an ork boyz squad. Your better in CC then shooting. So unless your taking four multi meltas then the purgation squad is pointless. And again, a multi melta is only really effective at 12 inches. If i were an uppidy GK player i'd be complaining for Las cannons. That way you have distance and more effective hitting power regarless of range and placement.
I am not suggesting it because its the optimal choise. One of the main reasons is actualy that Multi-Meltas arent that great on foot soldiers so is hardly used and would thus be more unique. With the normal cost of Lascannons so would it be rather absurdly costly to field a GK squad armed with them too.


For an assault army i just don't see why you'd want a move or shoot weapon, especially one only effective at 12 inches. As far as putting it on a terminator. I really don't like it. DS multi melta on a model that is relentless and has the chance of a shrouding going in its favor. Unless it costs about about as much as an oblitorator then i'm not in.
A GKT squad cost at a minimum more then double the cost of an Obliterator so it will obviously not be as cheap anti-tank. A minimum sized squad of GKT cost more then the same number of Chaos Terminators all armed with combi-meltas as well. I dont think there is any danger that GKT would be the envy of CSM as far as anti-tank goes.