Grey Knights: First Look

A Teleport Homer, duh.

Wait, what?

Yep, the codex is leaked in its entirety already. Normally this would be a bit tricky, because it would take time to scan all of the pages, etc… except that with the new GK book, there's hardly anything in there to scan. So yeah, let's the steaming pile of garbage that we've been served up.

Oh, and before everyone gets all whiney about how I'm just being negative because of the new codex and blah, blah blah: I had three different GK armies that I fielded previously; two of them are now illegal and one is completely untenable. So yes, I am a little bit bitter about the things they did to the codex, just like how they screwed over Sisters of Battle with their new book by essentially pulling all of the options and flavor out.

With that out of the way, it's not wholly doom and gloom- there's a few neat tricks in here and there are at least some builds that appear to be functional, although just how good they are is still up in the air. But the book at least has some kind of niche, which is more than a few others can say right now.

Combat Squads, Preferred Enemy (Daemons), and The Aegis are still the same and still pretty universal across (non-vehicle) units. Psychic Pilot, however, is gone and dead.

The Grey Knight unique detachment is easily the best thing about the codex- it's 1-2 HQs, 0-4 Elites, 1-4 Troops, 0-3 Fast Attack, and 0-2 Heavy Support; a neat little twist that lets you take more fancy guys. Like all of the other ones, it lets you reroll your warlord trait as long as you roll on the GK table (yawn) and lets Deep Striking begin rolling for arrival on the first turn of the game. Holy shit! Also you can shoot + run (in either order) when you arrive, so you're essentially guaranteed to come down where you want to and to come in with most of your stuff (presuming you use a Comms Relay or other reserve enhancement.) The ability to do a Drop Pod-style alpha strike is amazing and essentially the entire codex lives on this bonus; you can assume anytime during this article I talk about the relative worth of units, I'm assuming the use of this special detachment when I do so.

The warlord traits are a lot less impressive- Hatred (Daemons) and improved casting of Banishment; Hammer of Wrath for the warlord and unit; Stubborn within 12″ of the warlord; automatic arrival and reroll scatter when DSing the warlord's unit; Counterattack for the warlord's unit; and one extra Sanctic power (hilarious with the relic that does the same- know five powers plus the Primaris!) Given how good Command and Strategic can be, I don't see this getting used much at all.

Melee weapons are now the same cost for everyone (unless you start with an “upgraded” one, like the Librarian.) Swords are the default and just have the basic AP3, Force, and Daemonbane (reroll misses and wounds against Daemons when Force is active.) Halberds are 2pts and are +1Str AP3. Falchions are 4pts and are +1A AP3. Warding Stave is 5pts and +2Str AP4 and Adamantium Will. Daemonhammer is 10pts and identical to before.

Special weapons are likewise flat costs across all similar units, with Incinerators being 5/10, Psilencers being 10/15, and Psycannons 15/20 (for power armor and Terminator armor respectively.) Psycannons, as expected, are Salvo 2/4, which is a HUGE downgrade from their previous statline- shooting at 12″ on the move is pretty balls. Psilencers gained the Force rule, which is neat and kinda unique but not actually all that useful 95% of the time. Incinerators are kinda bizarrely expensive for Terminators, since they are the only gun that doesn't benefit from Relentless, but it is what it is I suppose.

Psyk-Out Grenades deserve special note; while Mindstrike Missiles are gone, Psyk-Out Grenades take their place. They are functionally Defensive Grenades when charged by psykers and if thrown during shooting, they act as S2 Frag Grenades that cause a single Perils check on one psyker in the unit (if there are any.) The other kooky grenades are gone over to the Inquisition codex exclusively now.

The relics are mostly kinda meh, but they aren't bad and they tend to be on the cheap side. Bone Shard of Solor is 10pts and gives you a 3++ if there's Daemons nearby, improving to 2++ and Hatred against Khorne. Fury of Deimos is a Storm Bolter with more range, an extra shot, Precision, and Master-Crafted, but for 10pts that's not actually a huge improvement. Cuirass of Sacrifice is Terminator armor with IWND and FNP built in, and at 15pts it's quite affordable. The Soul Glaive is a Halberd that lets you reroll failed tests to cast Force and rerolls all hits, wounds, and penetrations while it is active. Domina Liber Daemonica gives you one extra Sanctic power and lets anyone within 6″ reroll 1s when casting Daemonology powers- at 25pts, not an awful deal.

The HQ slot easily blows away any other for total number of choices, although that's as much because of the slimness of the codex as anything; Brother-Captains are now essentially identical to SM Captains (but with ML1 and Terminator Armor for 150pts.) Grand Masters are 35pts extra for +1A, and +1ML, so not a terribly impressive deal in either case now that they have no unique abilities. The Librarian goes down to 110pts and is otherwise the same as before, but no longer plays a Special Unique Snowflake game for generating his powers; he can bump up to ML3 for 25pts extra. Interestingly, the Librarian can get a Combi-Weapon when virtually no one else can. Techmarines work as they do in other codices, coming as a “bonus” unit for 90pts- they can't get Orbital Strike Relays anymore, but can still get the Conversion Beamer. Brotherhood Champions finally picked up that second wound they've always wanted and their stances now give either Smash or reroll failed saves while in a challenge. They lost Zealot and their special sword (although theirs is master-crafted), and Heroic Sacrifice just lets them make a free swing when they die.

For the named characters, Stern is pretty identical except that he has fixed powers (Hammerhand, Sanctuary, Banishment) and when he does Banishment, it hits all Daemons within 12″ of him. He gets Stubborn as a fixed warlord trait as well. Crowe is ML2 and has all the Purifier powers, but his sword is still derpy. He gets Hammer of Wrath as a fixed warlord trait and can use both stances while in a challenge. Draigo is 30pts cheaper and his sword is S8 AP2 now, but he also has Hatred (Daemons) as a fixed trait and knows Gate of Infinity and Purge Soul as powers above and beyond the usual; that's actually pretty fancy as a trick, although his failure to fill the HQ slot (he's a Lord of War) is actually a huge problem given his cost.

Strike Squads, with the above amendments to cost on weapons and such, are 10pts more expensive but otherwise identical. Given that Psycannons got significantly worse, this leaves them without a really good role in most armies, although the possibility exists for some kind of mechanized force using Rhinos and Combat Squad shenanigans to play the Objective Secured game (this being the only time you wouldn't take their special detachment.) On the whole, though, I don't think GKSS impress much in the new book, as you can't get that mass of S5 shots to bring down light tanks anymore and Terminators do essentially everything they do at a better price point.

Speaking of which, Grey Knight Terminators: they don't suck. Finally. At 33pts per model they actually compare rather well with a lot of things and Relentless means a lot with the way GK's special weapons work now. Although you have to pay for melee weapons now, which may mean a lot of remodeling for some folks, they are solid hitters even without any combat upgrades and with Hammerhand up they will butcher most units pretty badly, even MCs and even Dreadnoughts in a pinch. I think these are the go-to Troop option (at least insomuch as you need that singular Troop squad) with the new book.

Paladins are an interesting comparison to Terminators- with the same price as before and the same statline, they come out of things looking fairly okay, though Solodins are a thing of the past. However, you still get two Psycannons in a 5man squad and the Apothecary is just a 20pt upgrade rather than the insane price it was previously. If you aren't expecting to see a lot of S8+ shots, they can be a very strong choice to throw in someone's face.

Purifiers still do what they do, although an increase to ML2 and keeping Cleansing Flame can both be regarded as major boons. Probably a good complement for the “in Rhinos” army, but less so for the teleporting one.

Dreadnoughts got moved over to Elites and are the only psyker vehicles in the codex. (I guess everyone in a tank just forgot how to cast spells.) However, at 125pts- and 25 more for the Venerable- they are pretty intensely overpriced, especially since they don't even come with a Force Weapon of any kind. Don't expect to be seeing any of these around anytime soon.

Rhinos are exactly as they are in every other book, which ends up being alright. Razorbacks are, too, which ends up being garbage. 55pts is not a good price for one Heavy Bolter, sorry.

Interceptors are slightly cheaper per model (2pts) but are the same base price because of the sergeant tax. They benefit a lot from cheaper Incinerators, but the loss of Psybolt hurts them quite a bit, so it's probably a wash.

The GK Stormraven has been brought in line with the others in all respects now. It's your only source of AA, but since you don't have a good reason to transport a Dread and can't get Psybolt, there's no a strong reason to take it.

Purgators also get hit with the sergeant tax; changes to weapon prices are a bit less clearly beneficial or detrimental to them. Teleporting in five of them with four Incinerators can be pretty hilarious against enemy infantry, but since they fight for space with the Dreadknight that may be a bit much to ask of them.

The Dreadknight itself is quite a beast; Personal Teleporter is a ton cheaper, but with the ability to DS it in turn 1 that may not be needed so much anymore. All of the weapons got cheaper and most of them got better as well- the Heavy Psycannon can fire on Salvo 3/6 mode and the Psilencer gets force just like its smaller cousin. Its stock loadout is just two Power Fists now (with 5pts to grab Force/Concussive with a Daemonhammer or 10pts for Force/MCed with a Greatsword), but the real gem here is its psychic powers- Sanctuary and Banishment means it can get a consistent 4++ in addition to T6 and 2+. Drop in, blast some infantry to pieces, and then go for some big assaults- the Dreadknight is no joke.

The Land Raider and its brethren are the same, minus Psychic Pilot and the small cost bump that came with it. No real reason to pay a ton of points for them when you can just teleport in for free.

Overall Thoughts
Hmm. Well, the unit selections are crap- you have one, maybe two units even available in most slots, so your useable pile is even smaller. And your options across different units are very same-y; the entire book is basically S4 and S7 shooting and S6 melee now. So mechanically, it's an amazingly bland book that I doubt is going to hold up well under the press of time. However, the ability to cram a bunch of Terminator-quality models into an alpha strike is pretty significant, so it may have some competitive legs under it.

All in all, though, I'm extremely disappointed with the half-assed job GW did here. A lot of people aren't happy with the Ork or SW codices, and perhaps that's fair- their is a certain lack of je ne sais quoi about them, especially when it comes to the fluff and picture sections. But the Grey Knights codex takes this leaps and bounds further, pulling almost all of the interesting parts of an already-borderline codex and giving them almost nothing in return. If this is the direction they are taking the game, I am not impressed or enthused.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

237 Responses to “Grey Knights: First Look”

  1. chumbalaya says:

    Just please keep them away from my Necrons for as long as possible.

    • Scuzgob says:

      are you ready for a drastic increase in annibarge cost?

    • Thariinye says:

      They're probably coming for Necrons and DE by the end of the year. I'm hoping against hope that they keep the special characters in DE that don't have models (or even release models for them), but there's no real chance of that. They'll probably gut the feel of both books like they've done with all the other 7e codicies thus far.

    • Kandroth says:

      /signed.

      I can just feel Abarges costing 150 and Scythes costing 185.

  2. SomeCallMeTim says:

    Draigo is S/T4 now, so S7/(9 with HH).

    Personal teleporter for dreadknight feels mandatory. Even deep-striking, the extra movement is great for catching fast stuff, like those pesky riptides. Or shunting away to contest/claim an objective.

    Purgators have no deep-strike. Night vision is totally the future though :|

    • abusepuppy says:

      I misread the Strike Force thing, so yeah, that makes Purgators pretty unattractive.

      Yeah, I messed up on Draigo slightly there. He can't shrug off Lascannons with FNP anymore, which is sad.

      I think GK are gonna end up playing an "encirclement" game, so there won't be a lot of places to escape to. 30pts is still a pretty nice price, though, so we'll see if it ends up being worth it.

      • Prometheus says:

        Purgators couldn't deep strike last codex, either. Still were pretty awesome when you could get the drop on someone with 4 incinerators, though. Rhino, LR, SR, whatever.

        • abusepuppy says:

          Oh, no doubt- I often ran a squad of five in a Razorback with max Incinerators as a "surprise, fuck you!" kind of unit. The problem is that now the main GK strategy isn't going to involve transports nearly so much, so they're a lot less useful. (The changes to 7e weapon range and allocation don't help, either.)

  3. WestRider says:

    The Ork Dex came across as kind of "meh" to me, and I quite like the SW one, but GK just got hammered here. They really needed a couple more kits added if they were going to hold up as a solo Dex.

    And, well, more flexible options :P

  4. No Remorse says:

    "Purgators also get hit with the sergeant tax; changes to weapon prices are a bit less clearly beneficial or detrimental to them. Teleporting in five of them with four Incinerators can be pretty hilarious against enemy infantry, but since they fight for space with the Dreadknight that may be a bit much to ask of them."

    Sadly Purgators don't have the Deep Strike rule.

    Totally agree on the rest :(((

    • Angrygnome says:

      "The Grey Knight unique detachment is easily the best thing about the codex- it's 1-2 HQs, 0-4 Elites, 1-4 Troops, 0-3 Fast Attack, and 0-2 Heavy Support; a neat little twist that lets you take more fancy guys. Like all of the other ones, it lets you reroll your warlord trait as long as you roll on the GK table (yawn) and lets ALL of your units Deep Strike and begin rolling for arrival on the first turn of the game."

      That little bit from the start of the article, kinda pertinent.

      All that said, I might be finding myself some more room in my hobby space with one less army to store…

  5. Kirby says:

    Deep strike + Drop Pods ally list?

    • abusepuppy says:

      Including some GK is certainly a possibility for aggressive Imperial armies. Remains to be seen whether it's better than using SW, SM, Knights, etc, though.

  6. CKuno says:

    Personally I'm completely and utterly baffled at the removal of psybolt ammo. Can't fathom why considering that it was one of the few things that really added to the "elite" feel of the codex.

    The more I read the changes though, the more I'm thinking that the best army composition will be a libby HQ, termie troops, NDK Heavy supports, at least one Stormraven, and then after that maybe interceptors and purifiers. Paladins I'm on the fence about, but can see them making more appearances than the past, especially with cheaper apothecaries. I also see Warding Staves becoming a thing (hello 4+ DtW that re-rolls ones).

    I don't know, I'm not wholly disappointed in the book, but I'm not exactly happy with the changes. It's obvious that the decision was made that GKs would become a mini-dex along the lines of Militarum Tempestus. They'll be great with allies, but without enough tricks to be good on their own.

    • erwos says:

      Baffled? C'mon, man, you and I both know that psybolt ammo was horrifically broken. S7->S8 is a huge jump due to insta-kill kicking in on most characters, not to mention that it lets you punch holes in AV14 vehicles that should be otherwise immune to autocannons.

      GKs _should_ be a mini-dex. Fielding whole fucking armies of them never made any sense from a fluff perspective. This is one of the calls that GW got right. Mind you, I feel for the folks who had armies of them that got invalidated, but they've been killing armies with every new codex release… it's not a conspiracy against GK players.

      • abusepuppy says:

        >C'mon, man, you and I both know that psybolt ammo was horrifically broken

        At 5pts, sure. But you know, when they print a new version of a codex, it's possible for them to change the price of upgrades to be different than what they were before. Maybe they could've picked a more appropriate price? Or a less appropriate one, if they're taking a page from the Wave Serpent. You know, whatever works.

        >Fielding whole fucking armies of them never made any sense from a fluff perspective

        Yes, because the fluff certainly never describes 20-50 GK going after a target and certainly not in their and other codices.

        • erwos says:

          Yeah, they could have jacked up the price, or, maybe better, limited them to actual bolt weapons as a per-weapon upgrade. But, frankly, psybolts didn't really seem in theme anyways. They turned what was supposed to be a tough close combat army with somewhat better-than-usual shooting-up-close into a hard-core shooting army that could also kick ass at close combat. Yanking psybolts turns them back into space marines++, and actually gives them a weakness – that is to say, they've got to come to you again, rather than just smash you from afar with spammed S8 autocannons.

          As for the fluff, when stories describe a bunch of GKs landing down like that, it's a huge epic event, not an everyday occurrence. Well, at least it was until Matt Ward got his greasy paws on a keyboard.

          Anyways, I sympathize more than you know. My IG army full of Medusas, Hydras, and Collosi got raped by the new codex. My CSM army… ugh, don't even get me started on how bad the new CSM codex was in general, let alone how it basically invalidated all my lists. Oh, and now they can't even properly ally together!

          So, I get why you're like "why couldn't they have just left my build alone". Been there, done that, collected multiple t-shirts. I took a hiatus from 40k after 6E and the new CSM codex came out. I still like wargaming, but GW has done its damndest to alienate me.

          • Nomeny says:

            I found the trick back in 5th, when I had several armies 'invalidated' was to simply build stock and collect everything rather than trying to cheap out min-maxing my army to that edition's rules by only buying 'good' models.

          • clever handle says:

            hold up. Are you actually proposing collecting for the pure enjoyment of it, rather than building an army because it will win games?

          • Nomeny says:

            Perhaps shockingly I'm not. I'm suggesting edition-proofing by building a collection of models beyond flavour-of-the-month competitive builds. I like winning the game, and building an army to win is part of winning the game. But given the RPS nature of the game one needs to be able to both play mixed strategies, and re-mix strategies when weighting are re-balanced.

            Of course, now that the rules aren't supporting models that aren't stock, that issue of unsupported units having their rules invalidated kind of goes away.

          • Alastores says:

            He seems to be suggesting "Buy all the models, rather than only buying the ones that you actually want to use at the moment".

          • _Garnet_ says:

            Probably not 'all' the models,more like 'buy a decent cross-section of great-to-solid units, rather than just repeatedly using the same great unit in every slot'.

          • clever handle says:

            I think what he meant was that you should buy whatever models you want & for whatever reason you want. Buy them because they perform great; because you like their place in the world's setting as expressed in the fluff; buy them because you like the models aesthetic; buy them because you've got $50 to spend & want to support your local hobby shop owner.

            or maybe I'm wrong =P

          • erwos says:

            I've been playing since the early days of 2E. I have full force org charts full of CSMs and IG. Accusing me of only have min-max'd armies is hilarious and inaccurate. Could you explain to me how I'm supposed to be using old models that literally do not exist in the current codexes? Medusas, Griffons, and Collosuses are not in the IG/AM anymore. My CSMs have had mutants and beastmen ripped out of them over time.

            I know that some people will never blame GW for anything, but they've really put marketing in charge over there, and it has not been good for the game. I eagerly await the day that they figure out how soul-destroying that kind of prioritization is.

          • Nomeny says:

            Use mutants and beastmen as cultists. Use Artillery as Artillery if you don't have the Forgeworld rules for the pieces you own.

          • clever handle says:

            sorry, I missed including the /sarcasm tag at the end of my post…. Please proceed with unbinding your panties as my off-hand comment was not intended as a personal attack ;}

          • Arc_Light says:

            "As for the fluff, when stories describe a bunch of GKs landing down like that, it's a huge epic event, not an everyday occurrence."

            Well, yeah, but exactly the same could be said for Marneus Calgar or Logan Grimnar or Abaddon showing up to a battlefield…

  7. M.Ward says:

    NDKs are the new grey knight riptides – a-a-a-autoinclude!

  8. Crynn says:

    Totally agree, I think what 7th ed adds is just crap and every codex release so far has just sucked all the life, interesting builds and fun out of the respective armies. GW Are now doing a half assed job on everything and after 18 years of playing this game and many of those as a highly competitive player who enjoyed every facet of the hobby, spending ours and converting every model in my army and almost as many painting I am leaving the hobby, at least for now. It saddens me the state of the game, how dull it is, how paper scissor rock it is becoming and quite frankly GW deserve to go out of business for the absolute crap they put out while other companies are striving to write fantastic material and rules. I love GW's models but that is no longer enough to keep me in this. Perhaps in time things will change, I hope so.

    • M.Ward says:

      Pretty sure GW will sell us the spice in form of dataslates and addons after all codices have been nerfed down. ;)

      CASH FOR THE CASH GOD!

    • CKuno says:

      You know, it's so difficult to read comments like this and not remember back to times when GW were releasing more "flavorful" codexes and all we would hear is shouts of OP and favoritism for certain armies. The 40k fan base is so very fickle. They cry for faster releases and more balanced codexes and then they cry that the releases are too fast and the codexes are too bland. It's almost like people want their armies to be OP and every other army to be nerfed (and by almost I mean that that is what it's like). However, all this huffing and puffing comes based solely on speculation, which only serves to discount it.

      Before rage quitting and lamenting the loss of your army you should maybe actually try to play a few matches with it. You don't even have to buy the new codex considering that it's been leaked in its entirety pretty much everywhere at this point. I'm personally planning on trying it out myself tonight to see what does and doesn't work and whether or not I really need allies.

      But hey, if you're willing to throw away 18 years worth of hobbying based off of a few articles on the internet then maybe you were ready to move on already anyways and there's nothing I can say to convince you otherwise.

      • fromnowondropzone says:

        Fuck it! that was the last nail in the coffin.
        For once i wholeheartly agree with puppy an all accounts.
        (and im usually the Guy who thinks puppy is to negertive) This is bullshit.
        Im of to Dropzone Commander.

        • clever handle says:

          if an appeal to reason is all that it takes to get you out of 40K…. ciao!

          • Fromnowondropzone says:

            I simply don't like the direction this Game is taking.
            High price, crappy rules, outdated mechanics and IMO not so great models anymore…
            I play Dropzone Commander exclusivly for about a year now and its just sooooo much more fun.
            (cheaper, tighter balanced, tournament supportive)
            I played 40k since late 3rd but brand loyality will only take you so far.
            Maybe i will return in 8th or 9th edition, maybe not.
            I just see no reason to continue a game that makes me more angry then happy.
            I would like to thank you all for the hours of entertainment you guys provided me with!
            Stay awesome…all of you!

      • Prometheus says:

        You seem to be saying flavorful AND balanced is too much to ask. It is not.

        • Kirby says:

          Sometimes you come out with such gems :).

        • CKuno says:

          I'm not saying that at all. Looking at the two full 7th codexes released so far I feel like there is flavor, it's just toned down. Orks are still orky and have a sense of anarchy while SW have a more animalistic, shaman style, it's just not as in your face as it was back in 4th and 5th, which produced some of the more unbalanced codexes that tended to be either super strong or weak. I do think that the new detachment system goes a long way towards providing some of that missing flavor to the army as well.

          Of course that's all just my opinion, but my point is that it really feels like if it's not one thing it's another with the online community sometimes.

          • Prometheus says:

            Maybe you misunderstand the opinion of those who you disagree with. Because it seems to me that there's a lot less flavor. I don't want crazy OP shit, but if the new codex is just the old codex minus a bunch of stuff (anything that didn't have a model, and anything they can spin into a separate book, dataslate, or formation that they can charge for) I'm not super excited. Even if they did give me 33 pt termies. I still want cool stuff. Taking Inquisition out is fine, I play Grey Knights for Knights, anyway, but I'd like at least one cool new thing, some new power, something that makes me feel plunking down $50 (for regurigitated fluff and art, of course) was worthwhile. And taking out everything that didn't have an off the shelf model is just shallow, anyway.

          • CKuno says:

            I understand completely. If your issue is that they took the existing grey Knights and turned them into a mini codex, then I agree that that is extremely disappointing. If you wish they had gotten at least one new unit with the codex, I agree with that too. GK were my first army and I want them to get cool new stuff and I was hoping for a full release as well, not this splash crap meant to cover the fact that they are a lesser army now.

            However, I disagree that they are bland and flavorless, and the same goes for Orks and SW. To be honest, I don't even know where the idea that the new codexes are bland came from. I mean, how are thunderwolves, Logan's chariot, Wolf Priests, etc, not Space Wolves? How are Morkanauts not Orky? Orks may not be whipping through the air and smashing against the other army, but there's still flavor there. Maybe it's the fact that they are releasing less new models with the new codex? I just don't get it.

            I don't know how well the new mini-dex is balanced, I did play a game using the new rules last night and won against DE/Eldar, but my buddy's dice turned on him really badly while mine were red hot. However, I tried out the new detachment, and deep striking everything first turn right in front of his army and then hacking up the leftovers felt very flavorful. It felt like I was playing Grey Knights. Not everyone may agree with me, which is fine, but the fact is that almost every opinion out there right now is pure speculation, and anyone who is rage quitting over speculation is doing themselves and the community a disservice by not at least TRYING it out.

          • Prometheus says:

            It seems less flavorful. It certainly doesn't have any ADDED flavor.

          • CKuno says:

            I hear that, and agree for the most part. I think it's a side effect of them trying to bring all the codexes more into a common thread, I just don't think that it's completely flavorless.

            On a side note, I bought the LE version too because I'm a sucker, but the awesome presentation and the fact that they are my first army was too much for me not to buy it.

          • Nomeny says:

            I feel like it's a black cup of joe compared to its previous incarnation of an orange-mocha frappuccino.

      • Kirby says:

        You will definitely never please such a volatile community at large.

        The only thing that makes sense for me at this point with their release rate and scheduling is they are setting a baseline where everything is "7th ready" and then adding on to that with minor updates. I'd love for this to be FAQs / erratas but I know it won't and it will be $$ costing Dataslates / Formations, etc.

        Still, this has a lot of potential but the issue is as seen by a lot of opinions being voiced, it drums it out for some while we're waiting.

        • rexscarlet says:

          In a perfect world 40K would have living rules like iNfinity, etc. with input from the community. (free or fee is optional)
          .
          Sad GW does not seem to grasp that people play the game, and non-players (painting and modeling only) are not the core of sales, yet so many pictures/ads of models that "players" will NEVER buy because they suck in the game.
          .
          Websites and players, like yourself, Puppy, and others, are able to find time to have a job, Blog, play, paint, model, run tournaments, AND MAKE RULES CLARIFICATIONS, house rules and etc. yet GW just cannot seem to find the time to do anything except make more and more unsupported recycled rules and charge the community for said updates (yet very few "new" models, which is odd for a "Model Company" lol;)
          .
          The Community (players) Kirby, Puppy, Frontline, Adepticon, Nova, etc. need to come together and get on the same page. (pew-pew is not the topic).
          .
          Follow a set guideline (House Rules) designed for fairness, set forth by the community, like a Tournament, of which there are several "Types" of Tournaments now BTW. The only goal a Tournament has besides fairness is "Time" constraint/allotment.
          .
          Standardized, then if you want to pew-pew, go right ahead, that is how to make the volatile community at large happy, but GW does not quite get that.

    • Rividius says:

      I'm over 40k as well. Nothing inspires me, very little mimics the fluff as I've come to know it.

      The rules are bland, and for all it's pace, the game is stagnant.

      I'll keep my eye on things, and maybe a few editions down the road it'll be back to a system that I find more enjoyable.

      Until then, I'm sticking to games I do find fun to play. Still enjoy WHFB quite a bit. Picked up X-Wing thanks in no small part to Matt Shadowlord here and Kris Sherrif's articles on BOLS.

  9. Nomeny says:

    I really dig the changes made to the Space Wolf and Grey Knight codicies to make them live options rather than one-note OP ponies.

    • fromnowondropzone says:

      Like?? what options? take thunderwolfes WOW!! ALL THOSE OPTIONS!

      • MidnightSun says:

        And Blood Claws being not a joke unit anymore, and Long Fangs not being the only choice in Heavy Support, and Wolf Priests/Ulrik getting way better, and essentially diversifying the Codex beyond Rune Priests, Grey Hunters in Rhinos/Pods with Wolf Standards, Missile Fangs and an Allied guard blob.

    • IndigoJack says:

      Or dreadknights and more dreadknights?

  10. CaptainA says:

    One thing to remember is going to be the supplements that will come out and might make GK more playable as they have been doing with other codexes.

  11. Scuzgob says:

    oh wow of course an imperium army gets a useful unique FOC. sure give the orks a billion slots of what they dont need and the ogre kingdom's ogre charge rule from fantasy, but then make the grey knight one worth using.

    as for everything else, its worrying how quickly GW is shoving the remaining codexes out. i assume theyll take a bit more time with dark eldar since they really need plastic wracks/grotesques, but blood angels and necrons will probably get the same treatment that space wolves and grey knights did

    • MidnightSun says:

      Yeah, but honestly, Orks MORE than make up for their shitty detachment in their Formations. Sure, it's an obvious microtransaction gouge, but I'll take Bully Boyz and Blitz Brigade over the GK detachment EVERY TIME.

      Also, Orks got better Tactical Objectives I guess.

    • clever handle says:

      most books are at the point where all they really NEED is internal / external rebalancing – how many editions of the ork codex have their been? Space wolves? Chaos Marines? If there are massive changes – players complain; if there are not massive changes – players complain. This is literally a lose-lose scenario for GW.

      While many Ork & SW players may feel their books didn't get the changes they "needed", many others are tickled pink. There just simply is no way to please everyone. Regarding GK – sure, the loss of psybolt ammo is odd, but is the loss of the non ACTUAL GK units really that odd? They're in the inquisition codex so are still available, they're simply not found under the aegis of the GREY KNIGHTS (!?!) is that so bad? Those elements aren't GONE…

      I'm a DE player – what do I expect when the DE are rereleased? maybe a character model or two, a model for the voidraven, hopefully some adjustment in the rolls of the flyers, a loss of FOC swaps & some minor points rebalancing, that's all & based on the trend, that's probably what I'll see.

    • abusepuppy says:

      The Ork codex is way better than the GK codex.

      • Scuzgob says:

        i know, its a strange new world we live in

      • Prometheus says:

        Uh…..no, the ork codex is pretty bad. At least I get 33 pt terminators. That makes up for a lot, actually.

        • abusepuppy says:

          40pt Meganobz are damn solid, and the formations for them and Battlewagons are no joke.

          • Prometheus says:

            Not troops now, are they? Haven't really looked at the formations, not an ork expert. Sounds like battle wagons got worse.

          • abusepuppy says:

            Shoota Boyz, although marginally worse, are still perfectly fine. The formations are what make the book work, though- WS5 Fearless Meganobz, Scout for Battlewagons.

          • Scuzgob says:

            no, they just got different. theyre still viable, its just that deffrollas are garbage now.

          • clever handle says:

            when everything scores, do troops matter beyond taking the minimums?

          • Prometheus says:

            Yeah, "Objective secured" SO they super-score.

          • Threllen says:

            Yeah except that you don't get Objective Secured when you use your Grey Knight detachment which 99.9999999% of GK players will use… so there is no difference between a Grey Knight terminator being a troop and an elite except for filling your mandatory minimum.

          • clever handle says:

            believe it or not I've had super-scoring actually matter once or twice=)

          • MidnightSun says:

            From my experience with Deathwing, Objective Secured on Terminators is pretty much irrelevant. You either die horribly or dominate the area around the objective, you don't tend to have a Terminator Squad happening to be within 3" of an Objective in the endgame that mobile OS Troops can suddenly swoop in and contest.

            Not to say you're wrong, but in my view, OS is pretty useless on anything that isn't a dedicated 'objective' unit (anything that obviously pays a bunch of points to be good at scoring over being offensive – Tacticals, Eldar Jetbikes; in fact, most Troops. Just not Terminators or anything else that pays for offensive power).

    • rexscarlet says:

      Slots do not matter, even with "Bound" lol…
      .
      Remember GW tracks everything, as they are the manufacturer.
      .
      So lets say BA, GK, and etc. sold X number of codices since 6e, GW will release the codex that sold the most FIRST, then work their way down the list, as they have ALWAYS done, as those codex customers will have to replace their codex, cha-ching.
      .
      Then take into account that the codex is crap-tastic, so customers with standing armies will have to change said army around to make it playable, thus BUY more/different models, cha-ching again.
      .
      Not rocket surgery, just a bad business practice in todays world of Interwebs, because it alienates the customer base, who then go online a voice their opinion, whereas back before the Interwebs, this practice worked for GW just fine.

      • abusepuppy says:

        >GW will release the codex that sold the most FIRST, then work their way down the list,

        Of course! Just like how they released Dark Angels first for 6E, because those have always been such a huge seller.

        Either that or you're pulling rationalizations out of your ass. I'd give 50/50 odds on either one.

        • rexscarlet says:

          lol, you always miss the point with wanting exact literal doctoral responses, rather than maybe looking at posts as metaphors, and always an ad hominem, why?
          .
          25 years of observation is all I have, I am not writing a thesis.
          .
          GW tracks all sales, as do most large companies, not hard to see what is NOT selling verses what IS selling, then go google armies and see what ones have dedicated websites devoted to them, and which ones do not.
          .
          GW has has been marketing by way of; "what was good is now bad, and what was bad is now good." for years, but the Interwebs crushed that marketing strategy in force during 5e, and is still crushing it.

          • Arc_Light says:

            Surely the more sensible business decision would be to update the items that haven't been selling well, in order to tempt more people to buy them. If people are still buying more BA codexes than DE codexes, for example, then it would make more sense to update the DE codex to boost sales of it, rather than updating a product that is still selling reasonably well without having to invest in updating it.

            The armies that consistently sell well will get more frequent updates in the long run (see SM), but they generally seem to aim for updating codexes in at least roughly age order (see CSM, DA, Tau, Eldar being the first 4 6th ed books… and 4 of the oldest books at the time).

          • abusepuppy says:

            >lol, you always miss the point with wanting exact literal doctoral responses

            >GW will release the codex that sold the most FIRST

            I sure did misinterpret those words of yours!

            >GW has has been marketing by way of; "what was good is now bad, and what was bad is now good." for years

            Exactly. For example, the Wave Serpent used to be the only good thing in the Eldar codex, but in the new edition it… er… oh.

            But in the Tyrant book, the Flyrant, the only unit that was consistently good in both 4E and 5E was changed to… hrm. Well.

            Of course for Orks, the mandatory Battlewagons of the 4E codex were replaced in the 7E book with, uh… Battlewagons that you absolutely needed to, uh, take.

            But naturally in Tau, an army almost wholly dominated by the power of Broadsides during its first two codices, had all of that overturned in the 6E book when Broadsides became the… best… unit?

      • Scuzgob says:

        thanks for this, i do enjoy a good conspiracy theory about a toy company. 7/10

      • Arc_Light says:

        "Not rocket surgery"
        What goes through your head when you write these things?

  12. IndigoJack says:

    I reach most of the same conclusions you did. You mentioned mechanized strikes, what advantage would they have over mechanized marines? There's a significant point gap between the two (>50 points), and I'm having a hard time trying to figure out how to make something that costs so much do anything effectively (especially given the severe lack of AT GKs now have).

    • abusepuppy says:

      >what advantage would they have over mechanized marines?

      Two Psycannons shooting out the top, Force Weapons once you get disembarked. Is it great? No, probably not, but it might be useable.

  13. Ramer says:

    It was about fucking time. GK where horrendously overpowered.

    Their Terminators still retain grenades, their librarian in TDA are much cheaper than vanilla one with a better gear, you don't have to pay a premium for sarge, you have HEAVY TWELVE force weapon, that means Instant Death (and with the dice pool a GK army will have, it will be easy to pull out) and boy do you know how much regular marines would have to pay for a squad full of power swords (regular, not force) and storm bolter ? TWO HUNDRED POINTS ONLY FOR THE WEAPONS, so please, just please, shut the fuck up. Compare purifiers to Vanguard Veteran. As I said, it was about time.

    It's funny to see you GK players cry, this army has been dominating the scene since it went while us vanilla player had NO CHANCE (except for bikers builds maybe) to hold our own against GK. Outgunned, outpowered in CQC, out-psyked. Now, please feel how is it to play with an army that is not utterly broken. They are still very very powerful, and not the very special snowflake Ward crapped out of his ass.

    I see people threatening to leave because of their army was nerfed. Do you know how many quit WH40K because of GK in the past years ? Yeah. Right.

    • davethegamer says:

      While I can respect the lament of the previous OP nature (and all the 'counts as" and other codex hoppers of the day) and the desire to reign the GK in (they needed it, but so do grav weapons), they were far from unbeatable – in fact, I never lost a game against GK, and that was even playing competitively.

      I do think the nerf's to dreds and psybolt is a bit of a bummer (paybolt needed a points increase, not a removal) – compared to the shooting in 5th, the psyfledred was OP, compared to the volume of shots in 7th….its right at home in my opinion.

      I also agree that if the psilincer+force works like it sounds, then it is absolutely amazing!

      GW, please hire some guys who actually play the game, then listen to them – while you may still be the "biggest" you are by far no longer the best, or only option.

    • clever handle says:

      yeah… except nobody really played GREY KNIGHTS in 6th did they? Hell, even most of their reign in 5th was populated by 1-2 squads of purifiers, psyflemen dreadnoughts & INQUISITION….

      GREY KNIGHTS never really dominated anyone's scene…. and all the elements that were previously taken in hordes are still available in codex: inquisition.

    • IndigoJack says:

      Wow dude, lose to GKs much? Maybe it isn't them, but that you're just a bad player? Just sayin, when I went against C:SM players of equal skill, it was generally a blood bath and a close game. I would trade all the force weapons in my army for some good anti-tank that doesn't either cost an arm and a leg. And why are you trying to out-assault purifiers with vanguard? wouldn't you just use them to clean up after you shot the GKs down to size? You do realize that space marines are a shooting army right? You out range, out number, and (despite what you think) out gun GKs. Seriously, I crapped myself if I saw 40 tacs in drop pods. It would take me 3 turns just to get a foothold in my own DZ, much less what they've got going on in theirs (you know, things like real ranged firepower).

      Hahahahaha no change? Did you not notice the four new units you got last edition? Or how much better chapter tactics became? Or how much cheaper your base units got? And are you really complaining that an army of psykers out matched your lone ML2 librarian? Sorry, you should probably stop using psychic powers as a crutch.

      • Ramer says:

        That's not my point dude. What i say is that most unit were point by point (much like SW btw) better than in the vanilla dex. And that being said, I reckon that Vanguard vet are crap, and we have the nifty new Honor Guard, even though this unit comes with restrictions. But, for instance, compare the firepower of SB to a Bolter. Add in the fact that you can charge afterward.

        Let's face it, one third of the army late 5th in tournament were GK. There was a reason.

        Speaking of new units, what are you speaking of ? Assault Centurion ? They're meh, 5 points more expensive than paladin, and.. will lose horribly to them. Devastator Centurion ? Ok, they are good against MEQ and TEQ. Real good. But expansive, slow and short ranged. Our new AA tank ? Not sold on them. I haven't used the storm talon yet, so can't really speak of it.

        To be honest, I only have one wish for my favorite game : balance. I don't want to play the underdog (I play Tyranids too, so talk to me about reliable anti-tank :D ), I don't wan't to play a broken army neither. I just want a game where units with the same battlefield role and abilities cost the same, regardless of the army built around them : this is the only way to promote diversity and avoid spam.

        • Sophie says:

          if strieks werent 22 pts (more than a space marine bike) and as fragile as a normal tactical marine you might have a point, actua grey knights are very expensive on a per model basis.

          • Ramer says:

            No they are not. They are 20. For 6 points (compared to a tac) you have a Storm Bolter, that is twice the firepower at 12"+ or the ability to charge @ 12"-, and a power weapon, which can easily get instant death for the whole squad, or +2 str. I don't think it's a harsh premium for ignoring most armor in the game, threatening MC under a hail of close combat attacks. One strike and the swarmlord, a riptide or a greater demon is dead. And worst, you can't even prioritize targets since ANY UNIT in the codex can do the same. Sophie, la sagesse, mouais…

        • abusepuppy says:

          >Let's face it, one third of the army late 5th in tournament were GK. There was a reason

          The exact same reason 1/3 of armies were Tau and 1/3 of armies were Eldar and 1/3 of armies were Space Marines and 1/3 of armies were Chaos Daemons when they all got their respective releases. They were the latest, greatest thing and everyone wanted to try them out. We did several articles on the subject back in the day- when when they were numerically the most common army, GK were never winning out of proportion to their attendance.

          • clever handle says:

            well your argument here isn't really true since they did have quite a bit of a bigger impact than really any of the other codexes released in 5th (except really IG & maybe necrons).

            And to say that they didn't achieve wins commiserate with their number of entries is a value-less statement:
            Skilled players with optimized lists will excel,
            unskilled players with optimized lists MAY excel,
            skilled players without optimized lists MAY excel,
            unskilled players without optimized lists will not excel.

            It is reasonable to assume that many band-wagoners fell into the category described by statements 2 through 4.

          • abusepuppy says:

            >since they did have quite a bit of a bigger impact

            Care to explain why you think this is the case?

            >And to say that they didn't achieve wins commiserate with their number of entries is a value-less statement

            But GK weren't taking all of the top slots in tournaments, either. More than other armies, yes, but as I said- that can very easily be explained by the fact that there were more of them.

          • clever handle says:

            But why where there more of them? it isn't because people thought they were so cool, innovative or aesthetically pleasing (see dark eldar & how many of them showed up…), no it was because they were THE go to codex. Any fool could take their psyfle-dreads, min-max the psy-backs, and fill the rest up with the bargain basement inquisitor of choice & his band of merry men.

          • abusepuppy says:

            >it isn't because people thought they were so cool, innovative or aesthetically pleasing see dark eldar & how many of them showed up…),

            If the codex was so powerful, why did people abandon it so quickly, exactly like they did with every other army that happens with (IG, SW, BA, Crons, DE, Tau, Eldar, Daemons)? You're either positing a constantly-ramping power level in the game- which can't be true, because older codices still win plenty of tournaments- or that people's decisions to play an army don't reflect the army's power level.

            Did people _think_ the army was more powerful? Sure, absolutely. Hell, you still do even to this day. But the tournament results do not bear out those beliefs.

          • clever handle says:

            Well, there was grey knights, then necrons, then new edition (did I miss anyone? honestly not bothered to care.) C:GK had its band-wagon jumpers, and once the "new-shiny" wore off folks …stuck with C:GK. They didn't go back to their IG, their space wolves, their lash princes, etc.

            GK was only abandoned once 6th edition came out & basically took away their biggest strengths / offered them to others: hull points reduced psyfle dreads & psychic rhinos / razorbacks to yesterday's news & allies allowed everyone to have access to the best & brightest that 40K had to offer, so the henchmen became less of a big deal.

            Look, I'm not arguing that GK is or ever was an LOLOPOMG army; I'm simply stating that in the context of 5th edition they were up at the tippy-top of the pile. They did everything 5th edition needed better than the rest, and came towards the end of an established meta.

            There's a big difference from saying they were the best of the best and saying that they're proof positive that GW didn't learn from 7th edition WHFB Chaos Daemons as they demonstrated in Codex: Tau & Codex: Wave Serpent… err Eldar…

      • whigwam says:

        Massed Psycannons aren't good anti-tank? Huh.

    • dude says:

      Do you still play 5th edition?!

    • abusepuppy says:

      > GK where horrendously overpowered

      Ahahahahahahahahaha. Since when? When was the last time GK placed decently in any tournament? I'm sorry that you hate your friend's "super OP cheesy WAAC list" that you can't ever beat because you keep taking garbage units and then complaining they don't do what the fluff says they do, but GK haven't been a good codex for a long, long time.

      Even in 5E, Grey Knights never were actually that powerful. A spoiler army for DE and Nids, to be sure, but not actually particularly powerful at all.

      • Kirby says:

        I won 6E tourneys with GK; but don't tell him that ssssssh.

      • clever handle says:

        I actually found my DE to be very effective against your average tournament GK list…

      • Ramer says:

        Yes, I only play close combat scout lists with servitor spam.

        >Even in 5E, Grey Knights never were actually that powerful.

        puppy, please. You're only lying to yourself. The power gap has been thinned by 6th and newer dexes, but please, late 5th they were completely broken.

        • Kirby says:

          No. They weren't.

          Show us proof? Where are their 60-70% win percentages across multiple tournaments?

          Just because a large proportion of the army was used in tournaments (up towards 30%) doesn't mean they were OP.

          GK were really good at racking up high win percentages in the mid to lower brackets where the army was easy to play and against those low skill opponents, was often the edge needed to get the win. When you looked at mid to high skill players though, they were right there in amongst all the 5th edition books (SW, IG, GK, BA, IG, DE with SM, Tyranids and Orks trailing closely behind).

          It's the same thing that happened in 5th edition for every book release except DE – a large proportion of players started using them, they'd jump to the top of play % and people would whine and bitch and then information would filter down to the more casual gamer and all was well again.

          • Prometheus says:

            Erm, c'mon Kirby, I played GK late 5th, they were pretty dominant. 5th ed was all rhinos and razorbacks. GK had the best razorbacks, and were ALSO the best at killing them with psyfemen and psycannons. It matterred. It's not like nothing else could win, but GK definitely had an unreasonable leg up.

            It's notthing like how Tau and eldar just rolled everything in 6th, but it was notably dominant, particularly as it was with units so similar to what all the rest of the imperium was using, yet clearly better. Replaced SW for having units that were just better for no reason.

          • Kirby says:

            So did I. And against them. They were a good army but not OP. 24" was and still is a pretty big limitation. Yes when i was using them I breezed through bad / medicore players but it was still tough games against good players / good lists.

            The statistics we have also back this up (all the way to the Necron release) both on an overall perspective (so including seal clubbing) and on a top level perspective.

          • Prometheus says:

            Huh? I thought Necrons were after GK in 5th.

            Dude, all I know is that here, in the states, all the marine players who painted their rhinos light greay when hunters were good for no reason, they painted their rhinos silver all of a sudden. That, and the facts. Razorbacks were just far superior for 10 pts more (the base 5 + psyammo), as were dreadnoughts. Both were also good at killing AV 11. It was sorta like everybody had been playing rocks, and suddenly GK got both paper and scissors.

            This is not just random new codex-ness. This is the top level players. 6th fixed it, largely (which the casuals did not realize, mocking for any GK player for years to come), but at the end of 5th, they were clearly dominant. Most Xenos sucked, and there was just no reason to play vanilla marines, or BA or DA rather than SW or even better, GK.

            Gk and Tau are my two armies, always have been. It pissed me off just as much when everyone started playing MY army as it did last year.

            You make me take you less seriously by saying they weren't powerful at the end of 5th. It's just not true.

          • abusepuppy says:

            > It pissed me off just as much when everyone started playing MY army

            Oh wow. I don't really even know what to say to this.

            Kirby has backed up his assertions with numerical data from multiple tournaments. Would you care to do the same?

          • Prometheus says:

            What, people bandwagoning onto your army, that being annoying, that's not common feeling, really?

            And I don't need stats, man, I was there. You can't quote numbers and tell me to disbelieve my lying eyes.

            Also, haven't seen these numbers, though I'm willing to believe he has them. I have to assume it's either not widespread enough or not a representative sample, though. (cuz like I said, I watched it happen)

          • Alastores says:

            If you only want to persuade yourself, then yes, it is true that you don't need stats.

            If you want to persuade others, you need more than declarative statements.

          • _Garnet_ says:

            I don't know, Kirby and AP claim to have stats on their side, but I still clearly remember GK players just casually rolling their way to victory again and again and again in my FLGS back then. This is largely a context-dependent issue, since it's not just about how good the GK player is, it's about what they were facing in their local meta and how much flexibility players had in changing their army lists. I know for a fact that my old Tau book struggled mightily to deal with Draigo, dreadknights, un-shake-able vehicles and dreadnoughts in an edition without hullpoints, and agressive deep strikers before Interceptor.

          • abusepuppy says:

            >but I still clearly remember GK players just casually rolling their way to victory again and again and again in my FLGS back then.

            Okay, let's be clear here: Yes, Grey Knights won tournaments back then. No one is pretending they didn't. The question is did they win MORE tournaments than they "should" have if the codex had been balanced? And I don't think they did, and I think Kirby's stats bear that out. As he said above, the GK codex was _great_ for stomping on newbies, but it turned out that experienced players could use their disadvantages (24" range, low model count, limited weapon options) against them and quite often did so.

            Doesn't mean GK wasn't a good army, just that it wasn't a broken-good army.

            (And Tau during that era were at just about their worst- other armies could do most of what they could do better, bar Railguns, and they were highly static in a mobile environment full of melee threats.)

          • Prometheus says:

            Here's my thing — I'm not even sure that tells you anything. Because they could really be better, yet enough casual players picked them up because they're shiny and they see the experts using them, and it was an easy conversion.

            It was clearly a broken army end of 5th. Same as Tau were last year. This is abundantly clear to most people (who pay attention to such things).

          • Alastores says:

            So abundantly clear that people are claiming direct statistics to disprove the statement that they were broken?

            Incidentally, "To most people (who pay attention to such things)" is a fallacy (True Scotsman, I think), since you are attempting to declare that the opposition simply not have been paying attention, and if they had been, they 'clearly' would agree with you.

          • Prometheus says:

            No one has cited any statistics yet. And as I said, there are a whole bunch of ways statistics can be misleading. And yes, abundantly clear. Everyone is in agreement on this except Kirby.

          • Prometheus says:

            Yeah, I'm sorry Kirby, that's not really that much data, and I'm not even sure what's there supports your point. We're getting "narrow" here, so I'm not going to point out why article by article.

            GK were broken end of 5th, it was obvious to everyone. You haven't shown me data that contradicts that. It wasn't as bad as when Tau and eldar could just wipe everyone, but it was really bad.

          • Alastores says:

            The only time anyone ever feels the need to say "It's obvious to everyone" is when it isn't.

            You aren't helping your case with these statements.

          • Prometheus says:

            Oh, whatever, go fucking take a poll, then.

          • Ramer says:

            It seems that no one beside you, me and a few select remembers the datas of tournament results. How much they dominated the scene.

            Leave it be dude. GK were PERFECTLY BALANCED, nothing else to see here, move along.

          • Kirby says:

            Except there's data right there for you to look at. And it shows they weren't dominating the scene in terms of sweeping away all competition.

            Numbers wise? Sure.

            Same with every fucking good codex release.

          • abusepuppy says:

            Well, Kirby has a small amount of data, you have a single datum (your own experience.) I'm pretty sure I know who has the larger error bar there.

          • Kirby says:

            Reading graphs is hard.

            NOVA data – GK is not sitting at a greater percentage than other armies.
            BAO data – same
            3++con date – same; we even went into specifics with GK and DE

            Yes sample sizes aren't great (particularly for 3++con) but they are a lot better than no evidence. I wouldn't stand by them in a court of law but given they are the feelings of the majority of top players at that time, lends some weight.

            Compare this to the evidence we have for Tau / Eldar in 7th from ToF – 60-70% winning percentages are significantly different than 50-55%.

          • Prometheus says:

            Yeah, you're misreading the information.

            IN each case, GK were in the top 3. So yeah, they are actually sitting at a greater percentage, just not THE top.

            IN some of those, GK were new enough people weren't even good at using them, and there was a lot of momentum and practice behind other builds. And sometimes, the two top armies had a tiny number of players, like 3-5, while GK might have 30, so it's a bad statistical sampling. The 30 GK have newbies in it, the 5 DA don't. Litlerally, NOVA I'm pretty sure Alex Fennel was one of the 5 DA, and Ben Mohile might have been another one. 40%, that throws stuff off, a lot.

            BAO is notably an aberrant format that allows FW an other crap, back when that mattered, it doesn't tell you a lot about larger 40k Meta.

            Your data doesn't say what you think it does. And starting off with things like "reading is hard" is being a jerk.

            There's literally no more room to argue this anymore.

          • Kirby says:

            We're not looking at if they are in the top 3. We're looking at their impact across the entire field. Looking at what won or what came second, etc. is the type of anted-octal evidence that everyone shat on before because yay this army won here, here and here – it must be good. There are enough tournaments going around that you could find a couple examples of your desired list winning to make a point. We're looking across the entire tournament's impact.

            Good thing I mentioned sample sizes then in the articles.

            Sure Prom.

          • Prometheus says:

            I'm saying your graphs are closer to anecdotal evidence than you think. If there 30 GK players, and they won 70%, and then there was a 1 sisters player, who won every game, the sisters will have a higher win percentage, but that doesn't at all tell you that sisters are better. What I see from your graphs is that GK did very well, despite larger #'s playing them.

            It's hard to say you can ever really have a statically sampling in 40k.

            And as I said before, your stats can't make me disbelieve my lying eyes, anyway.

          • onecrazymojo says:

            Where can I find the Nova data for '12? All the stuff I say was either anecdotal or was missing armies used. I would like to review that as well, out of curiosity.

            The ToF %'s have some issues. Since they also include a lot of local games and small scale events, a lot of those games can easily be lopsided if there aren't decent players on the other side, kind of inflating their numbers. When you restrict the data just down to the larger events, neither of their %'s are nearly as high since they aren't just "steamrolling newbs." I would hazard if you could somehow collect the data of the same kind at the end of 5th, GK would also have a disproportionate % when including the smaller venues.

          • Kirby says:

            would have to ask Mike.

            Agree re ToF – though I don't think local games functionality has been added in yet? Haven't looked in a while.

            Given the local data I have from the smaller events on the east coast of Australia, that percentage is pretty similar to what the other bigger events were showing but I didn't include the smaller events for the above reasons. I'll see if I can dig it up though and actually plug those numbers into the graphs.

          • onecrazymojo says:

            Sorry, Kirbs, but that data doesn't actually support your position. It doesn't necessarily hurt it, but it certainly doesn't help.

            While it is only one data point, let us assume that it is actually representative of the state of 5th ed 40k as a whole, without any skewed outliers in the mix.

            From here, though, there aren't a lot of actual conclusions we can make based on that link, because several significant data sets are missing. I mean, you could just assume that each and every army performed at the averaged win/loss ratio, or even that each army division each formed perfectly symmetric bell curves with most of the armies performing near the expected average and an equal number of players performing outside that range on both sides. But that is hardly ever the case, and without that assumption, your conclusion is not tenable. And since that is a hard to justify assumption, as I said, the data doesn't say what you want it to.

            A far more likely assumption would be that there was a significant proportion of those GK players that were poor generals bandwaggoning into the strongest army. And yet /despite/ those players dragging the win/loss ratio for the army as a whole down, the army still was able to score just over 50% wins. Which would be a rather strong testament to the power level of the codex.

            But, again, without the full data set, that is also hard to prove (although it is far easier of an assumption to justify).

            What we can draw from that data set though is that the power level between regular SM and the other flavors was extremely large (for no reason, as many liked to say). It also tells us that out of 16 armies, only 5 were even capable of an even win/loss ratio, with GK being one of the few lucky ones in that tier. And of that top tier, GK represented nearly 37% of those top 5 (instead of of around 20%, meaning they held nearly twice the their expected market share), which definitely lends support to claims that they were dominating the scene.

          • onecrazymojo says:

            So I got curious about that missing data and did some looking. FLG still has the full event results up, so I did a little digging. You can find it here: http://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/bay-area

            First note: your data is off a bit, Kirbs. Not a lot, but onsies-twosies here and there, but in such a small sample, it could have skewed your original number crunching.

            My quick analysis: GK were 14 of 92 armies, representing ~15% of the armies in total. For the claim that GK were not a dominating factor to hold true, than the % of GK in the different brackets should largely hold near that 15% representation. It does not.
            They composed 2 of the top 3 (66%), 4 of the top 10 (40%), and 6 of the top 25 (24%).
            Or slightly more interesting (in a statistical format), they comprised 40% of the top 5% armies, 33% of the top 10%, ~28% of the top 25%, and ~22% of the top 50%. Conversely, they only represented ~9% of the bottom 50%, ~4% of the bottom 25%, and had zero armies below that.

            So an expected range for a perfectly balanced army would have the midpoint as near as possible to 50% mark, with a fairly even distribution on both sides with diminishing numbers in each deviation. That was clearly not the case for this event. The GK midpoint looks to be about at the top 37% mark, meaning that an average skill player could expect to boost their ranking up 13 points by just using the GK codex. It also shows that even terrible players could expect to beat average/just below average players just by using the GK codex. At the top levels of skill, it would seem that a great player doubles, and in some cases almost triples, their odds of placing high by virtue of the GK codex.

            So ye… I think this data actually says the complete opposite of what you are claiming about the dominance of GK at the end of 40k, Kirbs.

          • clever handle says:

            I can only give you one thumbs up per post, but I wish I could give more. This is perfect, an in depth, well structured statistical analysis. Kudos to you for putting it together rather than simply relying upon anecdotal evidence!

          • Alastores says:

            Agreed.

          • Nomeny says:

            Yup. Excellent work!

          • Kirby says:

            To the final point (and this is why I never did these analysis) – this is where you need to look not at the groupings of the percentages within the brackets but who was taking the army.

            Let's say you've got players grouped into A through to C with A being good players, B being okay players and C being bad players based upon our subjective interpretation (i.e. those who place regularly).

            If we know half of A is taking GK, we need to weight results based upon that assuming they are likely to place already. If we see half of B taking GK and replacing As in the finals, then we have something more concrete.

            I cannot recall the exacts of the tournaments (and I'm not going to go back sorry!) but none of the players who used GK and got into the top brackets were really "surprises".

            I would certainly agree with the ascertain that using GK boosted your capacity to improve your score in the middle ranks but would be expecting that to plateau out as one reached the pinnacle of gaming skill.

            And this is always going to be the difficulty with 40k stats; we don't have an objective measure or control factor like ELO rankings to put against player names and measure with that in mind.

          • onecrazymojo says:

            I agree that those kind of metrics would add extra context, but I disagree that it would actually support your claim. It is more a lateral supporting context for the other position, actually.

            I think we can all agree that list-building and identifying strong units/rules is an important skill, particularly of the upper tier, group A players. As such, group A players will gravitate toward the strongest codexs. So whether or not those in group A placed around where everyone expected them to, the very virtue of their army list decisions highlights what the strongest armies are likely to be. And, if what you say is true (that there was no real shake-up as to where the top players placed), then by virtue of the fact that GK had a disproportionate (to their overall showing) in those top brackets underlines that the top players identified GK as the strongest dex.

            I am certainly not claiming that GK were as overpowered as some might believe they were. But the data point you gave does lend a bias that they were stronger than the vast majority of the other armies, especially when compared to vanilla marines (who actually had the absolute worst placing % in that data set. Like, below even SB).

            Also, and this might speak to the perceived OP nature of GK, but since the vast majority of players likely fall in the middle ranks, then by your acknowledgement, those are the players who will feel the sting of the power level difference in the codex the most. When a decent but average player looks over and sees someone they feel is of commensurate skill level (or even slightly worse) but placing much higher, it ingrains the notion that they only did better because GK are overpowered. Or, when the player knows they are a midtier player (based on previous showings and experience) but barely breaks even, if at all, because half their opponents were GK and seemed to have it so much easier.

            But yes, an ELO styled ranking system would be nice for additional analysis.

            (Sidenote: I never played in 5th, so I have no first hand experience or bias either way. I also couldn't even begin to guess who the 'good' players were for any attempt to identify if people were placing in their expected brackets.)

          • Kirby says:

            I agree and the posts identify a lot of the restrictions of each individual analysis (and an understanding that these are basic analysis).

          • abusepuppy says:

            The fact that you think it's "your" army is what's hilarious.

            >You can't quote numbers and tell me to disbelieve my lying eyes.

            Yes, because human perception is never biased, incomplete, or imperfect- the singular experiences of you, a person who played in one particular region of a single country and most certainly had strong opinions on the source are naturally the one and only window into objective truth.

          • Kandroth says:

            Stats are a lie. Kill a goat and read its entrails.

      • rexscarlet says:

        Do GK even have a LoW?
        Because a LoW is the new minimum standard I have been seeing on table-tops (and/or a Knight), and NOT Ghazghkull… lol…
        .
        I have two full Inquisitor Retinues since the Inquisitor codex had Grey Knights in IT, lol, and I only ever run them in small extremely friendly games, sad…

    • Kirby says:

      GK were never overpowered. Even in 5th edition they weren't.

      And to answer your question – not many. Many more people quit because they believe their army sucks (for better or worse) than people who quit because one army is viewed as overpowered by a whiny bunch of people on the Internet.

      • rexscarlet says:

        and boom goes the dynamite…
        .
        Exactly, if a player puts time and effort into learning rules, buying, building, and painting an army only to see it get wiped off the table time and time again by ANY army (not just an army the Interwebs say is overpowered) means that army probably sucks, and that player will feel all kinds of emotions that may lead them to quit playing.
        .
        Whereas if the player has an army that wins 50% of the time, even if the army is considered overpowered by the Interwebs, they will continue to play.

    • Suijin says:

      You are mostly talking about some things are better in each codex.

      I could say things like "Holy shit SM get honor guard, 2+ save with a power weapon for 25 points each!!!", "Tactical marines for 14 points with ATSKNF and Chapter Tactics!!!", "Have you seen the price of bike squads and damn White Scars!!!", "Centurions, H O L Y S H I T ! ! !", "GRAVGUNS!!!", etc., etc.

    • Innocent says:

      Man, I cannot agree more. I see all these people lamenting GK, loss of psybolts, I had 3 broken tourney armies now I have none etc.. GKWardex broke ALL the damn rules at the end of 5th ed and brought the cheese to a summit never reached before. The reason people have multiple GK armies is that it was the only thing playable at the time, and it has certainly caused a few players to quit or pause in its time. And I won't miss Ward.

      It's nice to see a semblance of attempt at standardising the codices and bring the cheese down. Maybe once they've purged all the cheese this game will have a semblance of balance again and will be playable.

  14. MidnightSun says:

    The funny bit is when they all Deep Strike down in the shape of an Ion Accelerator blast with an EWO.

  15. Ish says:

    Wait… If I’m reading this right Grey Knight Terminators are available as Troops, get a Deep Strike++, can mix shooting and assault special weapons in one squad, and cost SIGNIFICANTLY less than Deathwing Terminators!?

    (Insert incoherent raged-fueled stream on obscenities here.)

    • MidnightSun says:

      But on the bright side, we get Twin-Linked on the turn we Deep Strike and automatically come in first turn for the low, low price of ELEVEN points per model! It's a complete steal! And who could say no to mixing TH/SS and SB/PF in a single squad, I ask you? GK Terminators are Troops? Well Deathwing are essentially troops too, because why would you pass up on the bargain that Belial is?

      On a more serious note, Deathwing Knights have been pretty good in my experience but apart from that, yah, Deathwing got shat on.

      Wait, Dark Angels getting shafted? That's not like GW at all, I find this new and unexpected shift worrying.

      • Ish says:

        Can Grey Knight Termie Sergeants swap their wargear? Strictly by the book, a DW Sergeant can never, ever carry anything besides a Stormbolter and Powersword. Only and always a sword, not even a maul or axe, and forget about claws or a thunderhammer.

        • Jason says:

          Strictly by the book, he can swap those weapons. The problem is the FAQ.

          Forget the FAQ and Company Veterans are limited to three items of special equipment, but since nobody takes them anyway it doesn't matter.

    • Prometheus says:

      Yuuuuuuup. That's pretty much all I need to make an army, right there. I mean, I want more just for variety's sake, but multipurpose 33 pt termies is all that's required.

  16. clever handle says:

    1) the loss of psybolt is baffling
    2) the change to psycannons as salvo was expected by anyone with half a brain – refer to sonic weaponry for precedent
    3) the loss of the inquisitorial forces isn't really a loss – they've been shuffled into their new codex. This should have been expected. They're available as allies, or a separate CAD, not GONE.
    4) change to melee weapons is odd. I expected a change to halberds, but not the one we saw…. I expected either an I10 on the charge, or upon being charged, not functioning as 1/2-axes…
    5) loss of grenades? meh. these always came across as a silly add-on after the fact.
    6) loss of mindstrike missiles? sucks, they made sense in context of the army, but having a S8 AP1 missile is generally more effective than having a small blast effective against psykers

    I'll have to actually read the leaked codex for more..

    • IndigoJack says:

      1) Agreed
      2) I also saw it coming, but not the associated price increase. Why am I paying the same price as a plasma gun (though it's technically more since PAGKs are also giving up their force weapons) for a weapon that isn't as good?
      3) I disagree. I'd rather have seen a return of an ordo malleus codex. My GKs have been led by an inquisitor since 3rd edition. Now I have to take a GK HQ, and there aren't really any budget options (though there are some good ones).
      4) Yeah…
      5) Agreed
      6) I believe that missile is actually AP2. But yeah, psyk-out grenades doing something similar is fine (though I'm going to miss charging my dreadknight into daemon princes and having them swing at I1, and then I realized that dreadknights lost their psyk-out grenades).

      • clever handle says:

        3) well, it had to be expected. Frankly I'm surprised that the Eldar kept their harlequins (don't expect DE to!). Now that allies are a firmly entrenched thing, and have received a boost in that you can explicitly take multiple CAD (unless TO's ban multiple CAD because… reasons?) it really shouldn't be that big a deal – yes you have to pay an HQ tax but guess what? So does every other faction out there – and since Coteaz is no longer required to unlock 2+ henchmen squads, you can take a budget inquisitor to compliment your GK librarian who is costed appropriately when compared to his other marine psyker counterparts and comes with access to great powers.

    • Prometheus says:

      1) I liked them, bu c'mon, "I shoot the bullet harder with my brain" — we all knew that was dumb.
      5) Agreed. More importantly, random tables please no one.

      • abusepuppy says:

        You must HATE the new Force rule on Psilencers, then.

        • Prometheus says:

          No? A psychic bullet that does some sorta pyschic, already exists in the fluff, soul steal effect makes more sense than brain pushing = +1 str

          • Alastores says:

            As opposed to the bullet allowing the psyker to channel part of his mental prowess into a more damaging bullet?

          • abusepuppy says:

            So you're okay with psychic bullets that allow the psyker to use brain powers to increase the killing power of their weapons, but not psychic bullets that allow the psyker to use their brain powers to make their weapons stronger.

            Okay, man. Whatever.

    • rexscarlet says:

      1) So ALL the players that have three Psy-Riflemen Dreads will have to purchase different models to replace them (why Dreads were nerfed as well) remember GW tracks all sales, even FW, so knows exactly how many twin-linked autocannon arms FW sold, and how many Dreads, etc.
      3) sad, remember when the Grey Knights were in the Demon Hunters Codex, and actually worked for the Inquisition, lol…

  17. slaede says:

    Variety is a moot point because you are only restricted by limitations we place on ourselves. In reality, you have the entirety of the Imperium at your disposal as battle brothers.

    As for the power level, it is improved. You have S7 jump infantry with meltabombs, teleporting Draigowing, now with FNP for only 20 points. You can practically be guaranteed to teleport Grav Centurions around the board with ignores cover from Tigurius now. You have a sick nasty MC. You have the top two flyer, which will be the best flyer once the Night Scythe gets fixed. There is litte to complain about here.

    • whigwam says:

      Strongly agree with your take. All the complaining about this codex is laughable. It looks fine to me.

    • winterman33 says:

      Yeah as a standalone army GKs are weaker but GK + Imperium seems much stronger now. IG and GK seems hella strong.

      • slaede says:

        I wouldn't call them weaker at all. They got cheaper, and they got better against the things they were bad at killing like Land Raiders and Knights because they have meltabombs now, never mind hammerhand thunder hammers. They laugh at Wraithknights, shunt and gate their whole army into the face of Tau and blast them silly. Chaos is in huge trouble. Thunderwolf cavalry wants nothing to do with force weapons. The army is solid.

        • winterman33 says:

          Still weaker despite what you say being true. Those point reductions don't make up for the loss of henchman and the efficiency that brought to the army. Certain things got better but overall what you mention is what they already could do — only now minus about 12 warp charges and the most efficient obsec MSU in the game.

          Don't get me wrong, we agree I think in general. I just won't discount the loss of Coateaz so much that meltabombs and cheaper dreadknights make up for it.

          • clever handle says:

            henchmen aren't LOST. They're simply in codex: inquisition, which GK are freely able to ally with, just like every other forces of the imperium army.

          • winterman33 says:

            We were discussing the weakness of standalone grey knights, which is what slaede disagreed with and I rebutted. So mentioning allies isn't pertinent.

            But to your point, Inquisitor Codex henchman are nowhere near as good as the old GK ones. No psychic pilot psybolt ammo'd razorbacks. No obsec via Coteaz. 3 squads vs 6. So no the relative power lost is not made up by allying to Codex Inquisition. It is what it is though at this point.

          • clever handle says:

            2nd combined arms detachment in lieu of allied detachment.
            psychic pilot was stupid.
            yes, we can all agree that loss of magic-bullets is odd.

            if you're stuck in playing the game in a single, traditional FOC, you're limiting yourself, aren't applying the rules the way their intended, & thus don't deserve to complain. The "loss" of henchmen is different than the loss of mycetic spores since henchmen still exist as select-able choices.

          • winterman33 says:

            I agree limiting to a single source is not a good idea, but there are those that still want to so its still a discussion point. I mean there are dexes that are just fine standalone, so its not an unreasonable expectation.

            Also not saying I think GW screwed up by removing the old henchspam, I just can't agree it didn't weaken the list (for good or ill).

        • Crimson says:

          The only signifigant points drops were Terminators and the Dreadknight weapon upgrades.

          Strike squads went up, purgation squads went up, purifier squads went up, interceptor squads stayed the same (small decrease for adding addtional guys to squad).

          Daemon hammers became more expensive in the majority of units.

          Psycannons got nerfed.
          Nemesis force swords got nerfed (no more +1 invulnerable save for termies)
          Psybolts removed
          Special Grenade types removed.
          Orbital strike removed
          Warpquake removed
          All transports nerfed by removing: Aegis, fortitude and psychic pilot
          Grand masters nerfed by removing their Grand Strategy skill

          Giving squad leaders access to meltabombs and dropping a few points on melee weapons certainly didn't make up for all of that. That is despite the fact they weren't even that great in 6th or 7th edition to start with!

      • Gandasch says:

        IG with Dreadknights indeed sounds pretty brutal. They were already cheap at the cost of a LR Exterminator, only the options could make them a bit expensive. Now with cheaper options, improved ranged weapons and Sanctuary, the Dreadknight went from good to amazing.

    • abusepuppy says:

      "Variety isn't important because you can play a different army," really? What if I want to play Grey Knights and have variety?

      The Stormraven isn't even close to the "top two flyer." It's worse than the Stormtalon, the Heldrake (even with changes), the Stormwolf/fang, the Vendetta, arguably the Valkyrie, the Doom Scythe, and bunches of FW flyers.

      • slaede says:

        Come now, good Sir. If you want to use the GK book only, it's you imposing the restrictions on yourself. Ain't GW's prob.

        Almost every option GK have right now is still available to you next week. The entirety of the Inquisition is right there in the Inquisition book much as it was except that you can't have 3 henchmen with OS as your mandatory troops. So what? You can still have them, and they still score objectives. You're clinging to a somewhat outmoded concept of building an army, you must admit.

        GW chose to update the rules for the army now even though they had no models to release rather than go through the process of designing, sculpting, casting and whatever else goes into each new model that takes a year or more. Most-likely, they'll be able to release new models as they create them now, so you won't have to wait years for new stuff all the time.

        As for the flyers, not considering FW, I'll just agree to disagree with you.

        • IndigoJack says:

          So let me make sure I'm understanding this. If you're army isn't strong on it's own, buy another army to make it better? Why should that be a solution? Especially when they took an army that was fine on it's own and made it worse.

        • abusepuppy says:

          >Almost every option GK have right now is still available to you next week.

          You're dismissing "look, just because you don't get the special rule that everyone else gets that is somewhat critical to holding objectives doesn't mean you don't have a disadvantage." Also, for people that used Draigo or Coteaz as HQs for an army, now you have to spend an extra 110+pts to do what you were doing before.

          When a new codex is released for an edition, the presumption is that the game designers will IMPROVE its rules- make it more functional, bring it in line with the way the game works now, give it more useful options. Am I surprised that they removed stuff? No, not really- that inevitably happens. But the problem is that essentially nothing was added to replace the things that were removed. Even if were are super-generous and count all of the different types of Henchmen and all of the types of Assassin and all of the types of basic Inquisitor as one unit each, that means that a full 33% (8 of 24) units were removed from an already-sparse codex.

          >As for the flyers, not considering FW, I'll just agree to disagree with you.

          Okay. I think the non-appearance of the Stormraven in winning tournament armies tends to reinforce my point, though.

          • _Garnet_ says:

            People who were using Draigo are in the same boat as people who were using Ghazgul or Logan Grimnar; this is where GW is moving, taking the biggest single hero in the book and making them a Lord of War.

          • abusepuppy says:

            Yeah, I realize that, but that's not a good thing. Just moving overpriced characters into the LoW slot is incredibly lazy design.

          • _Garnet_ says:

            Unless the plan is to use them to buttress the idea that LoW are just another part of the regular table, and therefore normalize things like titans, superheavies and gargantuan creatures. In which case, well, it's not exactly diabolical genius, but it's not a bad tactic.

          • abusepuppy says:

            Titans and Draigo are not meaningfully the same at all. All it does is make the LoW slot extremely schitzophrenic, with crappy "used to be an overpriced HQ" models on one hand and game-breakers like the Transcendent C'tan on the other.

          • _Garnet_ says:

            Sure, but the more they blur the lines, the harder it is to argue that some part isn't 'real' 40K. Just saying 'nothing from Apocalypse' was super-easy, but now you have to negotiate Lords of War and, thanks to Knights, superheavies that are popping up all over the place. The big tournaments can just publish lists of what you can and can't take, but the easier you make it for someone who just picks up the rulebook and wants to start playing to conflate Draigo, Knights and Titans, the better the chances of moving the meta towards accepting these things.

            Granted, this rests on the assumption that, A, GW has a solid influx of new players who, B, are really eager to drop several hundred dollars on single-model units, but that does seem to be the logic GW believes applies, so it makes sense that it's what they'd choose based on that understanding.

      • Dakka'th says:

        http://www.3plusplus.net/2013/02/good-flyers-and-… So, what changed in your opinion between now and when you wrote this article?

        • Dakka'th says:

          Specifically, you mention Stormraven, Night Scythe, Vendetta, and Heldrake as the top flyers.
          Valkyrie, Doom Scythe, Stormtalon, Razorwing, Dakkajet all get called passable.

        • abusepuppy says:

          Several years of codex releases and an entirely new edition of the game? When no one had AA, the Stormraven was a lot better. When objectives were always sitting in the deep backfield, the Stormraven was better. When BA were a functional codex, the Stormraven was a lot better. And, I will note, the article specifically calls out the SR as the worst of the "big four" listed there.

          Of the flyers you note below, the Valkyrie changed significantly in its own rules and codex and the Doom Scythe had the nature of the game shift around it significantly. That was also when the Stormtalon was significantly more expensive than it is now and less useful.

  18. Prometheus says:

    Could be just because I'm about the "kngihts" proper, but I am OK with this. The only thing I'm really pissed about is losing psybolts (though that was always kinda a dumb concept, wasn't it)?

    33 Pt Termies are AWESOME, especially considering these are troops and have a lot of special abilities besides.

    Yeah, psycannons on PAGK are kinda useless. But conversely, Incinerators are kinda awesome. 5 pts? I will roast you. GKSS are definitely a bit less useful, but I think the ability to DS and flame is still pretty good, and you can alwasy just use them as purifiers.

    I like the idea of psilencers being force weapon. Yeah, probably never useful on infantry, but not bad against MCs, hell yeah.

    Kinda pissed about mindstriek missiles. But yeah, I'll take the psyout grenade upgrade, and the stormstikes or whatever are pretty boss for vehicle hunting. Or riptide hunting. Or even centurions.

    Don't really see myself using paladins anymore, though they're not awful.

    I liked landraiders before, still like them now. AV14 still rules, the GK let you keep it form getting melta'd. Being a dedicated transport is a little meaningless since there's less competition for heavy slots. But whatever.

  19. akornd2r says:

    i think this is gw saying, well use the ally system hell im going to abuse the living shit out of it now to help grey knights. i feel now they are their fluff small elite force mostly assisting other imperial armies

  20. Prometheus says:

    Y'know, if they are going to rebalance all the codexes downward, that's fine really, but they need to start with Tau and eldar.

    • abusepuppy says:

      It's not really a matter of being weaker, because I'm not sure the new GK book _is_ weaker than the old one- it's just a lot less interesting in most cases.

      • thinker says:

        nop … your words

      • Trentat says:

        Especially for an army that is essentially a variation on Space Marines whose modus operandi is as an autonomous strike force. Marines have an answer to everything, from anti-infantry to artillery and air power.

        Why would Grey Knights be any different?

        Why should they be reliant on other units in the vicinity (allies) to aid them in battle?

        Not only is it boring in game, it makes no sense from the story stand point.

    • Scuzgob says:

      i'd much rather have them buff everything to tau/eldar level

      when everyone is OP, ridiculous balance is achieved

      • Prometheus says:

        Yeah, except I've played Tau on Tau, it isn't that fun. Let's see who can go first/ get line of sight on the juicy bits with a Str8 AP2 cover ignoring template is not a super interesting game.

    • Innocent says:

      Agreed. Maybe the imminent change of management will see a change of direction and a total rebalance. One can hope.

  21. Prometheus says:

    BTW, might as well admit here that I bought the collectors edition, it was just so damn pretty. This after I ordered a fake Imperial Knight from Chinese forgers specifically to avoid giving GW money. (great quality, btw, couldn't be happier) Maybe I'm just filling the hole left by a lack of 7th ed collectors edition (I've always gotten those), I dunno.

    • thinker says:

      the book is still good don't worry and I agree the LE codex was so damn nice on this one ,,, you will see the codex will shine in its due time … there are many good options across all the changes … is not all loss … I for once like the idea of cheaper termies … cheaper melee weapon … cheaper personal teleporter … force psilencer … s9 ap2 at initiative draigo … stern with draigo for 2++ lols … the change of using purgation squad with allied drop pods or heck even 15pts fnp on paladins … I actually have a nice impresion out of the new revamp of GKs … still not so complex as before but now is pure GKs as it should have been many years ago … I know people would still agree GK are pure ordo malleus … but better of with the inq … and u can still ally with them … someday we might see new GK kits but for now I actually like the new dex … until things like eldar get toned down (ws specifically) I see everyone toning a bit down … but overall I'm feeling positive with this new codex … time will tell

    • abusepuppy says:

      :| You are part of the problem.

  22. Marecki says:

    Moar Terminators that are better and cheaper than Deathwing ones… Great job GW…

    • abusepuppy says:

      Let's be honest, DW Terminators are not a good measuring stick because they are not at all good. If they balance all other Termies against the DW ones, we're never gonna see a decent Terminator.

      • Bill says:

        Going to compare them to Chaos Terminators.

        2pts gives them better leadership(?), ATSKNF, Brotherhood of Psykers, Preferred Enemy Daemons and a Force Sword.

        Hammer (10pts) vs Fist (7pts).

        Sure, CSM gets access to Combi-weapons and Marks, but you have to admit that GK Terminators are either underpriced or CSM Terminators are overpriced.

        • Nomeny says:

          The CSM Terminators also get access to Combi-Bolters, which are better than Storm Bolters at 12", and Power Weapons, which means they get AP2 weapons at no additional cost. A squad of Chaos Terminators with Power Axes are going to own a squad of Grey Knight Terminators with AP3 Nemesis Force Swords, Halberds, and even Daemon-hammers. Chaos Terminators also have access to Chainfists, Reaper Autocannons, as well as Combi-Weapons. Having marks of Chaos to, say, make them tougher, faster, and have more attacks is a situational bonus.

        • abusepuppy says:

          CSM Terminators have the same Leadership, for reference.

          I think the GK ones are about in the right price range. Yes, that means that the CSM ones could stand to be a little cheaper (and/or get some more interesting abilities), but they're not awful and sometimes just being cheap is a virtue itself. There's a reason Conscripts and Grots, despite how incredibly shitty they are, are still valuable.

        • Kirby says:

          Ya but CSM termies are ass. 33 points for a GKT seems, well right finally.

          The issue with the "cheap" 2+ armor options is that you can't make them too cheap but their durability is always not going to be worth nearly double the cost of a basic 3+ model.

          I.e. if CSM termies were 25 points; you'd have people much more likely to get into them at +10ish points a CSM model. +13 from a Strike knight to a GKT? Done. +20 like last time? Get lost.

      • Ish says:

        How silly of us to compare the Termies in the newest Terminators-as-Troops codex to the older Terminators-as-Troops codex. I mean it’s not like GW has been pushing the idea that the Dark Angels First Company are the premier Terminator army since the early 1990s.

        Deathwing are shit. They shouldn’t be. That’s the problem.

        • Alastores says:

          I think the point being made is that "Because Deathwing are shit, when new terminators come out that are better, we shouldn't go "how dare these be better than my deathwing".

          Yes, Deathwing should be better. This means that when (In,what..8 weeks? :P ) Dark Angels are rereleased, other Terminator-Troop armies having better terminators hopefully will mean that the Deathwing are less crap.

        • abusepuppy says:

          I absolutely agree with you, and it really saddens me that the nominal "Terminators as Troops" codex got shafted in that regard. But what I'm trying to say there is that "X is better than Deathwing" isn't at all a useful metric because it's true for basically any functional unit. SW terminators are better than Deathwing; CSM Terminators are better than Deathwing; hell, you can even make an argument that SM Terminators are better (although I think I would lean towards DA in that case because Deathwing Assault is actually a pretty good rule.)

          But the game designers can't- or at least shouldn't- shackle themselves to 44pt Terminators as the gold standard of things. I'd love to see DA actually get a good book for once, because it's been a looooooooong time for them, but making other books bad won't solve that problem.

          • Ish says:

            I’m not bitching about everybody else getting good or decent units, I’m kvetching about the continued parade of things that make Codex: Dark Angels look so much worse with every new release. A codex released in January 2013 shouldn’t have been laughably outdated by September of that same year.

          • Nomeny says:

            Maybe if you consider that the GK Terminators start with AP3 weapons and only get AP2 weapons if they pay the points for Daemon Hammers? And that casting psychic powers comes with considerably more risk than it used to? And that they're not Fearless, which is no longer vulnerable to stuff? The lack of Armourbane weapons and good invulnerable saves should hurt., now that they don't get an invulnerable bonus from swords and warding staves. Then there's the vulnerability to Shadow in the Warp…

          • MidnightSun says:

            Having AP3 weapons isn't a huge downside though, and everyone else loses out on I4 to get AP2.

            Everyone else having severly overpriced Terminators is the reason why AP2 isn't needed – to be honest, the only time I ever see it being relevant is in combat with a Riptide or Tyrannofex, at which point you have Force Weapons, so you're going to force through a wound sooner or later (especially if you get Hammerhand up as well). Bully Boyz are also a reason for AP2, but they're probably going to be cheaper than your Terminators and with WS5 and 3 attacks base, it's going to be mutually assured destruction to send in your own Terminators against them.

          • Nomeny says:

            The lack of AP2 is pretty significant, seeing as it disadvantages them against all enemy TEQs, Sv2+ Monsters, CMs, and so on. And where someone else has one of those, they're going to be able to attack GKTs without much risk of a MAD scenario. In a 1:1 fight GKT are meat against Chaos Terminators armed with Power Axes, and that's simply because it'll be a 2+ vs 5+ fight.

          • abusepuppy says:

            Hey, I have 12,000+pts of Tyranids, you don't gotta tell me how much it sucks for all your units to be totally useless.

  23. N.I.B. says:

    Ahhahahahahaaa! / Tyranids.

    GKs down to level, next up – DE Splinter Cannons and Necron Tesla/MSS/Quantum Shielding.

  24. lords2001 says:

    It seems like GW got all the complaints about 5th ed GK's and decided to change it based on that. Psybolts, Dreads, razorbacks and psycannon spam were rather, rather nasty. 2 editions ago, at least. GK foot stopped being competitive once smash Tau hit their straps, and Eldar and SM just piled on the hurt there.

    I'm thinking 4 units of purifiers deep striking and psychic bombing a large part of the army could work, especially if they are in combat squads for additional ML. Add in 2 dreadknights and a Brother Captain and call it a day.

    Though 33 point terminators are good – lets home those centurion gravs stay at home huh?

  25. rexscarlet says:

    Here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_(Warhammer_40,…
    .
    This is how convoluted (and expensive) 40k has become, now go devote your life to it, because in a very short time 8e will drop and GW can re-sell all the same stuff all over again.
    .
    What I found most disturbing was GW selling books at stores to little Johnny (and to flgs) that will become obsolete within 30-60 days, big Skaven Bells there.

    • Scuzgob says:

      im starting to wonder why youre even here. the only posts ive seen you make are ones like these. you're preaching to the choir here, we know how expensive this hobby is but we still play it despite its flaws. if you dont like GW this much, why do you continue to come to a mainly GW focused website?

    • clever handle says:

      What's the point of this post? To showcase all the various publications over a 25+ year history? Or to try and prove that this is an expensive hobby? (it isn't.). The argument is old and flawed, the rebuttals are just as old and people just don't listen.

  26. Nomeny says:

    On an unrelated note, where did those claws on those UM Terminators come from? I've done something similar with the Combi-Bolter, but the claws elude me.

  27. Russ says:

    Well when you have "non-gamers" writing codex's and the company being run by marketers, this is what happens. No play testing and put out a book to produce sales. It is interesting what the CEO said about their input by the people who play their game. No wonder why many of my friends are going to Warmachine and Flames of War. Sad state of affairs.

  28. Prometheus says:

    BTW, why do incinerators cost 5 pts on a PAGK, but 10 pts on a termie, when they can both use them the same?

  29. Marshall says:

    Because for GK squad you lost a force wenpon, while the terminator still keep the force weapon.

  30. Gromuk says:

    so no more brotherhood banner on my terminators ? :(

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress
`