Fixing Daemonhunters

[Prathios]

A) Dreadnoughts with shrouding: in my list, I assumed this was an option worth 40pts. I plan to playtest it that way, but that doesn't mean we should stop discussing here in the meantime. Unless, of course, no one has anything more to say until we see it in action.

 

since I champion this cause all I can say is I think you'll find through play testing that 40pts is far too many and you don't get anywhere near what you pay for with it. Again I don't think its op at... oh say... free. We only have 1 heavy support AT weapon and that's a dread at armor 12... I think it balances things nicely to make it more survivable. And once again I say that if it had 12 rail guns and a orbital lance cannon I can see the argument of it being very OP but with one twin linked las gun a d a missile at its best AT config its just not that nasty a punch to warrant using such kid gloves. So like I said last time I think you are a bit too paranoid to make something too powerful and over compensated with a 40 point charge. Again though I welcome the testing to prove my theory correct :angry:

 

If I were playing against a DH player with my Black Templar army I would be happy to allow him this feat.

[FunkyEntropy]

One thing I noticed is that you took Digital Weapons for a couple of your characters/squad leaders. I can't help but wonder if they might deserve a clipping from the points trimmer for the following reason:

 

As it stands, Digital Weapons cost 10p (if i remember correctly) and grant one reroll per turn.

Mastercrafting costs 15p for NFW and grants as many rerolls as one needs per turn.

 

Given that the lowest attack characteristic one can find where its actually worthwhile is 3 attacks (Justicar), Mastercrafting costs 5p per potential attack reroll.

Digital Weapons are 10p for 1.

 

Given that odds are you'll whiff at least once but not strike out completely, it's a little harder for me to judge where cost/effectiveness ratio ends up. My guess is that its probably around 5~7 points for Digital Weapons. Yes, always the cost cutter, I know.

 

-----------------------

 

Regarding stormbolters & jump troops, isn't changing the weapon profile also unprecedented? I can't think of any examples off the top of my head where a specific unit moving caused a true change in the guns' profile. Again, I can't think of a fluffy reason for a guns profile to change when it's being used by jump troops. And by that I mean I can't think of a logical, fluffy reason for jump troops to not be able to take pot shots at a target that their grounded brethren would be able to shoot at with the same weapon from the same distance.

 

--------------

 

Shrouding sounds like it might end up working. I have a hunch that the point cost might wind up falling down to the 20~30 point range (30 most likely) because shrouding does jack against anti-tank drop troops, which just about everybody seems to have these days.

 

-------------

 

I really don't care much one way or the other about preferred enemy: daemons. I'll leave that for other people to decide, although for the record I am leaning ever so slightly towards no and just leaving things as they are.

[Ominous Anonymous]

Super-quick update.

 

1) I incorporated the proposals from post #226 into the official changes on the first page of the thread

 

Looks good, no complaints here.

 

2) I'm also making the Vindicare BS7. It's an incredibly small change in power, but I feel the need to make him actually the best marksman in 40k, and to actually use that high-BS table GW so graciously put in the BBB.

 

I'm kinda wishy-washy on this, but I'm leaning towards agreeing with you. I liked the idea of having BS6 in combination with the Headshot! rule because even if you missed, you then either missed or scored a wound, which added to the fearsomeness of the model. Now he'll have a higher chance to hit anyways, but takes away the gamble aspect. This also feels like we'll have to bump the score up a tad, maybe 5 or 10 points? Just a first impression.

 

3) I've written up the first army list using these new rules! You can find it here. Please take a look and comment, either on army composition in and of itself, or on how it incorporates and makes use of our new rules.

 

The list doesn't look too bad, but I got a definite feeling that except for the number of units in each unit and some names, that I was looking at...a Space Marine list. Maybe because the last game I played involved my friend's Salamanders and dropping two dreads with multimeltas and...yea, and now they're Grey Knights. :tu:

 

But getting back at the list, I'd add a few more ablative wounds to that bike squad so a round a decent shooting after they forgot to turbo-boost will spell doom for them.

 

4) I've also asked the PCA community about modeling the dodge tomahawk for our lancers. That thread can be found here.

 

Again, while I'm not 100% behind the idea, I'm am interested in what will come of all this. ;)

 

A) Dreadnoughts with shrouding: in my list, I assumed this was an option worth 40pts. I plan to playtest it that way, but that doesn't mean we should stop discussing here in the meantime. Unless, of course, no one has anything more to say until we see it in action.

 

40pts seems a tad high, in spite of what evil, malicious things a Dread with our new shrouding rules and a TL Lascannon could do

 

B} Preferred Enemy - Daemons: This sort of got dropped without having actually been officially rejected. It would not involve a point increase at all, but would instead mean either that Daemonic Infestation would get more powerful, or that we would get another pro-daemon special rule. I'm not pushing this idea, but I'd at least like to resolve it properly.

 

I say no, because I'd rather Grey Knights be an army that can take on different armies normally, but have wargear/HQ options that give them advantages against Daemons like the Daemonhammer, Grimoire, etc. Adding in Preferred Enemy in addition to everything else we can do to Daemons would be a bit too much and I'd rather Daemonic Infestation not get more powerful or just removed entirely. (But that's another discussion. Short version: No.)

 

C) Jump Packer Storm Bolters: Altering BS while moving is unprecedented, so I'm not a fan. Granted, I personally have always thought that all weapons should be allowed to be fired on the move, with a -BS modifier replacing the assault/heavy/rapid fire distinctions. But that's not minimalistic, so it's a discussion for another time. For the time being, it's a question of whether their storm bolters should have different ranges depending on whether or not they use their jump packs that turn, and if so, how much should the range be decreased?

 

Actually, I'd like to revisit the idea of having Jump Packs and bikes at all. I know, I know, it's been discussed before, and if you'd rather we take to PMs so the thread doesn't become clogged with the debate, that's fine, but I feel that we shouldn't make an exception here to this discussion's main rule in adding new units in spite of unused FA slots, commissioned artwork, etc. Don't take it the wrong way, but I after rereading through the thread like we haven't explored this debate enough.

 

As an aside, however, I think a rule should be added to Death Cult Assassins:

 

When working as a Strike Force, Death Cult Assassins do not have to work quite as closely as a regular unit of fighters and may be placed up to 4 (or up to 6) inches apart.

 

The point here being that in such a small group with only a scant 6 wounds toughness 3 and a 5+ invulnerable save makes the unit very vulnerable to blast weapons, so allowing the DCAs to spread out a bit (like you should field them anyways! :P) will allow them to hopefully avoid this.

[Mutt-Man!]

5) At the moment, we have 3 unresolved issues (yes, I re-read all 10 pages... again!):

 

A) Dreadnoughts with shrouding: in my list, I assumed this was an option worth 40pts. I plan to playtest it that way, but that doesn't mean we should stop discussing here in the meantime. Unless, of course, no one has anything more to say until we see it in action.

 

B} Preferred Enemy - Daemons: This sort of got dropped without having actually been officially rejected. It would not involve a point increase at all, but would instead mean either that Daemonic Infestation would get more powerful, or that we would get another pro-daemon special rule. I'm not pushing this idea, but I'd at least like to resolve it properly.

 

C) Jump Packer Storm Bolters: Altering BS while moving is unprecedented, so I'm not a fan. Granted, I personally have always thought that all weapons should be allowed to be fired on the move, with a -BS modifier replacing the assault/heavy/rapid fire distinctions. But that's not minimalistic, so it's a discussion for another time. For the time being, it's a question of whether their storm bolters should have different ranges depending on whether or not they use their jump packs that turn, and if so, how much should the range be decreased?

 

Other than those three issues, I think we're just waiting on Codex: IG.

 

 

Dreadnoughts with shrouding, hm.. With a minamilist approach. I think I would try going with giving it for free. Just because I am used to chaos selection, and viewing over new choices (every dex is getting new heavy support these days). So make it free for now. Even if the shrouding can be evil, at the same time modifications would be made and only the best of the best would be placed inside these coffins.

 

Preferred enemy: Daemons is a good idea. Make it standard, I suppose since it is limited after all in some uses like bloodletters. The codex came out properly, and DH are good at fighting them. Might as well try and balance out the factor that they cant use much boomstick-esque weapons. (Rather then psycannons). Remove if playtest ends up annihilating the daemons at their absoloute best.

 

Jump Packs. Ok so they dont sport rhinos because of space issues for their polearms. They have integrated storm bolters, and they have shrouding. Alright thats a bit over the top. How many fast GK's do we see? Maybe if they JP around their shrouding wont count, because obviously the cloud is behind them as they move/disturbed by the jets. Personally speaking the JPs would be spendier for them because of their melee potential as well. So again, give it a proper cost, remove shrouding and leave their storm bolters as-is with their other gun options. (obviously psycannons are very powerful with these guys) It will add perspective but a cost to reflect it for the issue of being ranged and mobile yet unscoring. (regular troopers will be removed while these guys stay back? its a choice to make..) I propose the cost of 31 points or around there. Instead of being bike-compared, its more or less comparing them with the terminators you can use instead teleporting in, as well as teleporting GK's. (I assume their teleporters were to make up for the lack of jump packs but if you guys want them, its cool =)

 

 

***remove if its against forum rules or if you feel like it***

As for the thing on IG... I have the datasheet of their stats of weapons in hand. If you search google for the french IG datasheet it will lead you to it. (I wont link it here). You will see, first hand that the hellgun IS in fact AP3. There will be new heavy support that will be very strong. (Yes the 20 shot punisher leman russ is there too, ouch~) Even the humble Exerminator got an upgrade (AC's are separate, no longer twin-linked). I'll stop there on that issue. Check out the datasheet for yourself.

***remove if its against forum rules or if you feel like it***

[Lungboy]

I know the DoW games aren't canon fluff-wise, but they include teleport packs as well as jump packs in DoW2. Is there any "proper" fluff for Marine teleport packs, and if so, wouldn't it make sense for the GK to have them?

[Prathios]

On the Jump pack storm bolter idea... I had a thought that would get totally around all this. What if Jump Pack Grey Knights didn't have a storm bolter... How about 2 Nemesis swords. Make them CC machines with melta bombs and no ranged weapons. This limits their utility but makes them a bit more unique. I would certainly take them as a fast attack CC machine would be a nice unit for the GK and giving up the storm bolter I think could help with their costs. Just a thought. Perhaps even give them the lightning claw rule with re-rolls for wounding due to the dual wielding specialty. This might be too big a change but I thought I would see what you guys think. (*prepares to get flamed*) <_<

[Mani]

Regarding stormbolters & jump troops, isn't changing the weapon profile also unprecedented? I can't think of any examples off the top of my head where a specific unit moving caused a true change in the guns' profile.

"Rapid Fire." Some weapons can be fired accurately at a longer distance when standing still but have a shorter effective range when the user is moving because he just can't take the time to aim. Since it's an assault weapon, and therefore more conducive to use on the move, say that it takes the more violent, disruptive move of a jump to force a shortening of effective range.

 

While we're talking about precedent, there is precedent for jump troops with fully-functioning storm bolters (BA assault veterans), though not an entire unit, but BA are kind of jump pack specialists. Normally jump troops get pistols, template weapons, meltaguns, or rapid fire weapons. Can we make a case for GK being as good with their jump packs as Blood Angels assault veterans? I'm inclined to say "no", so I still stand by my original suggestion.

 

On the Jump pack storm bolter idea... I had a thought that would get totally around all this. What if Jump Pack Grey Knights didn't have a storm bolter... How about 2 Nemesis swords. Make them CC machines with melta bombs and no ranged weapons. This limits their utility but makes them a bit more unique. I would certainly take them as a fast attack CC machine would be a nice unit for the GK and giving up the storm bolter I think could help with their costs. Just a thought. Perhaps even give them the lightning claw rule with re-rolls for wounding due to the dual wielding specialty.

Now that's an idea I hadn't thought of. I feel like the whole "storm bolters and true grit" thing is sort of a definitive characteristic of the knights, and I'm loath to abandon that. Further, having two NFWs would only give a knight the same base attacks as he has with a storm bolter thanks to true grit (except on the charge) so I feel like it would take something a little more special to make that worthwhile, though I'm not sure I like the lightning claw rule as the answer to that question. Interesting thought.

[FunkyEntropy]

Rapid fire is actually part of the weapon profile, so it isn't what I was talking about when I was talking about modifying a weapons characteristics. I figured people would get that I meant an actual change to a pre-existing weapon profile, but apparently not.

 

Actual change to weapon profiles, as in bolters suddenly becoming ordinance, battle cannons becoming rapid fire, or stormbolters suddenly having a range of 12".

 

[edit: giving them a Hit penalty makes them less effective at using stormbolters than the BA assault vets, so no worries there.]

[Prathios]

Regarding stormbolters & jump troops, isn't changing the weapon profile also unprecedented? I can't think of any examples off the top of my head where a specific unit moving caused a true change in the guns' profile.

"Rapid Fire." Some weapons can be fired accurately at a longer distance when standing still but have a shorter effective range when the user is moving because he just can't take the time to aim. Since it's an assault weapon, and therefore more conducive to use on the move, say that it takes the more violent, disruptive move of a jump to force a shortening of effective range.

 

While we're talking about precedent, there is precedent for jump troops with fully-functioning storm bolters (BA assault veterans), though not an entire unit, but BA are kind of jump pack specialists. Normally jump troops get pistols, template weapons, meltaguns, or rapid fire weapons. Can we make a case for GK being as good with their jump packs as Blood Angels assault veterans? I'm inclined to say "no", so I still stand by my original suggestion.

 

On the Jump pack storm bolter idea... I had a thought that would get totally around all this. What if Jump Pack Grey Knights didn't have a storm bolter... How about 2 Nemesis swords. Make them CC machines with melta bombs and no ranged weapons. This limits their utility but makes them a bit more unique. I would certainly take them as a fast attack CC machine would be a nice unit for the GK and giving up the storm bolter I think could help with their costs. Just a thought. Perhaps even give them the lightning claw rule with re-rolls for wounding due to the dual wielding specialty.

Now that's an idea I hadn't thought of. I feel like the whole "storm bolters and true grit" thing is sort of a definitive characteristic of the knights, and I'm loath to abandon that. Further, having two NFWs would only give a knight the same base attacks as he has with a storm bolter thanks to true grit (except on the charge) so I feel like it would take something a little more special to make that worthwhile, though I'm not sure I like the lightning claw rule as the answer to that question. Interesting thought.

 

Could bump their base attacks to 2, or make the whole squads weapons count as power weapons. Might make em a tad pricey but they would be something to be feared. I was thinking basically the CC answer to GK with Psycannons at range. We have one end of the spectrum what about the other? Yeah I don't care for the lightning claw rule either but I figured they needed something.

[Apogee]

Quick suggestion for the Vindi - I like what someone mentioned above about using the high-BS table. I say, make him BS 10, so he'd need to roll two ones to miss. However, if he misses on the first roll and hits ont he second, the wound can be allocated byt he opposing player as normal. It's hard to track a single target in a warzone, and he may need to take a target of opportunity instead...

[Mutt-Man!]

I think the no-shrouding for jump packs and bikes is a bit fluffier and easier for gameplay. It removes harsh shoot and run tactics that tau favor, and gives them a difficult avenue of advance when using packs to get to grits with the enemy. Being non-scoring also part of the agenda.

 

I mean, how can a bash of mirages and mixed images stay with someone moving 50+mph? Sure if your orks with oil and kicking up dust clouds that would work. But not the streamline GK's that dont over-supe their engines/thrusters.

[Prathios]

I think the no-shrouding for jump packs and bikes is a bit fluffier and easier for gameplay. It removes harsh shoot and run tactics that tau favor, and gives them a difficult avenue of advance when using packs to get to grits with the enemy. Being non-scoring also part of the agenda.

 

I mean, how can a bash of mirages and mixed images stay with someone moving 50+mph? Sure if your orks with oil and kicking up dust clouds that would work. But not the streamline GK's that dont over-supe their engines/thrusters.

 

I don't necessarily disagree with your point of no shrouding on fast attack stuff but... from a fluff standpoint the speed the unit is moving at should have no bearing on a psychic power. It moves at the speed of thought... so 50mph is standing still to it. Shrouding is their psychic glare basically so you see it based on the speed their psychic power travels, which is instantly.

[Ominous Anonymous]

Why are we only discussing the possibility of Jump Pack marines, though? What about a unit of Grey Knights that must be held in reserves until turn 2 but are given Heroic Intervention, so they can Deep Strike and possible assault? We've added the Null Zone to a list of psychic powers we can purchase, why not keep the Grey Knight Teleportation squad as a unit that can purchase the Gate and use Heroic Intervention afterwards, or a psychic power that combines the two, thus preventing a first turn assault if that would be deemed too unfair when the entire army Deep Strikes..

 

I just feel like we could work within the codex rather than adding Jump Packs to a Grey Knight and then try to power down a Grey Knight to justify it without upsetting balance. Personally, if we were all agreed to go forward with Jump Packs we would have to give them a different form of Stormbolter that may be better (extra shots, lower AP?) but only has a short range to balance it, and at that point we've gone outside the codex.

[Aidoneus]

Or... I can't believe I'm even going to say this... we could abandon jump packers altogether. The storm bolter issue is very problematic, and I don't see a good compromise available. We're keeping bikers, no matter what. I think they fit the theme of being knights perfectly, I think they can be made to look very sleek, I think they fill a necessary niche in our army, and they're not presenting any balance/rules problems at all. Jump packers... well, to be honest, they're there because they were in that artwork, and I felt that was the direction GW was going to go. But for our project, we don't necessarily need to keep 'em. We have the one FA option in the form of bikers, so jump packers aren't strictly necessary.

 

Played a game today with the new rules. 1000pts. I'll post a batrep as a separate thread, and throw up a link in the first post of this thread. One question that came up though is defensive grenades on GKTs. TJ (my friend) made the argument that terminators never get grenades, period. I think he's right on that point. My thought was it should be something all GK get, so that they can receive a charge as well as they give one. However, the counter to that is that GKT do in fact get extra attacks on the charge. So we could fix this by making the defensive grenade mechanic part of Shrouding or Rites or something, or we could just leave it off altogether.

 

Shrouding on dreads is going to cost points, period. It may or may not be broken, but you absolutely cannot argue that it isn't a benefit, and for every benefit you pay points. The question is how many points. Honestly, I think 40 is probably too much, but I want to start conservative, try it out, and if we see it's simply not making 40pts of difference in the game, we can lower it from there. My guess is that it's going to end up around 30pts, but it's really hard to tell before playtesting.

 

For master-crafting, it actually does the same thing as digi weapons in that it only allows 1 re-roll. The difference is that you can put it on a ranged weapon if you want to. Anyway, those are the standard costs for digi weapons (spiky bits in the old chaos codex) and master-crafting, and they've been pretty consistent through the years, so I'm probably just going to stick with convention on this one.

 

Vindicare's not going to BS10. At the moment, no one in the game has a higher BS than 6, so simply going to 7 is enough to say he's the absolute best. That's really all I wanted from that particular switch. It's a 1/36 difference to-hit, so it's really minimal.

 

As it stands, the Lancers are 3-6 models, counting the justicar, much like ravenwing bike squads. Do you want me to up that to 3-8, like a normal spacie bike squad, sans attack bike? I don't see it making much difference, so I suppose I could. Personally, I don't think I'd ever spend points on more than 6, but that's just me.

 

I don't want to mess with Deathcult coherency. I think I've done enough for them with the psuedo-combat squad rule. After that it's getting into unprecedented territory, and somewhat wish-listy.

 

Mutt-man, I realize there are leaked IG rules around, but I prefer to have the actual codex in my hand before considering anything 100% true. It's just me. Anyway, I think those aspects of the project can wait until the codex comes out before being updated.

[Ominous Anonymous]

Or... I can't believe I'm even going to say this... we could abandon jump packers altogether. The storm bolter issue is very problematic, and I don't see a good compromise available. We're keeping bikers, no matter what. I think they fit the theme of being knights perfectly, I think they can be made to look very sleek, I think they fill a necessary niche in our army, and they're not presenting any balance/rules problems at all. Jump packers... well, to be honest, they're there because they were in that artwork, and I felt that was the direction GW was going to go. But for our project, we don't necessarily need to keep 'em. We have the one FA option in the form of bikers, so jump packers aren't strictly necessary.

 

Jump packs might make sense, but only because of a commissioned piece of artwork (and I think we used to have them in 2nd edition, but we also used to have a Guardsman who shot Horus in the face and not Scooby Doo right away after seeing the God-Emperor of Mankind absolutely creamed, but that's getting rhetorical), and we don't even know if A) That was only meant for a Gamesday and B ) if GW even wanted Jet Packs in the picture. A titan, lightning claws, maybe even a Heavy Bolter is fine considering the varied use of Storm Bolters, but there's never really been anything about Jet Packs. I haven't even read the Grey Knights books, but were they even referenced there?

 

There's still a main problem with bikes: there's absolutely no fluff for them as far as I know.

 

Played a game today with the new rules. 1000pts. I'll post a batrep as a separate thread, and throw up a link in the first post of this thread. One question that came up though is defensive grenades on GKTs. TJ (my friend) made the argument that terminators never get grenades, period. I think he's right on that point. My thought was it should be something all GK get, so that they can receive a charge as well as they give one. However, the counter to that is that GKT do in fact get extra attacks on the charge. So we could fix this by making the defensive grenade mechanic part of Shrouding or Rites or something, or we could just leave it off altogether.

 

Do Chaos Terminators get grenades? I could see the reasoning in not giving frags to a unit armed with Power Fists and their equivalents but our terminators are more often than not making use of our initiative.

 

Shrouding on dreads is going to cost points, period. It may or may not be broken, but you absolutely cannot argue that it isn't a benefit, and for every benefit you pay points. The question is how many points. Honestly, I think 40 is probably too much, but I want to start conservative, try it out, and if we see it's simply not making 40pts of difference in the game, we can lower it from there. My guess is that it's going to end up around 30pts, but it's really hard to tell before playtesting.

 

It should be expensive, but not 40 points expensive, that's nearly a third of the entire unit already. 30pts feels more reasonable, but this is up for testing.

 

Vindicare's not going to BS10. At the moment, no one in the game has a higher BS than 6, so simply going to 7 is enough to say he's the absolute best. That's really all I wanted from that particular switch. It's a 1/36 difference to-hit, so it's really minimal.

 

For purely curious reasons, how many other models even have BS6? Or BS7 for that matter? I'm not sure if we're just adding a new member to the BS6 club or breaking new ground, which I'd like to avoid if possible.

 

As it stands, the Lancers are 3-6 models, counting the justicar, much like ravenwing bike squads. Do you want me to up that to 3-8, like a normal spacie bike squad, sans attack bike? I don't see it making much difference, so I suppose I could. Personally, I don't think I'd ever spend points on more than 6, but that's just me.

 

If we have to go with bikes, might as well make them the same size as SM bike squads to reflect our Troop choices having the same size. An attack bike isn't out the question if we're already so far out, but that's just me poking fun at bikes. :huh:

 

I don't want to mess with Deathcult coherency. I think I've done enough for them with the psuedo-combat squad rule. After that it's getting into unprecedented territory, and somewhat wish-listy.

 

DCAs wouldn't be unique if they could space out 4' apart, considering it's only three models; vehicle squads can do it as well. ;)

 

My reasoning is that as it stands now you generally play with your DCAs supporting each other, just not in a unit, so you want them to be close together but not so close as to have a Plasma Cannon-laden Devestator squad ruin your day and earn an easy 3 KP, or any (large) blast weapons for that matter. Just a thought.

[Grand Master Iapetus]

On the topic of dreadies: what about giving a twin linked Psycannon option?

[Mutt-Man!]

Well I suppose for GK themes, the "Chariot" is the land raider. The Knightly siege engine, being dreadnought. The mounted knights being bikers. Teleportation removes jump pack requirements in most respects. Terminator armor, which does not incorporate heavy bolters/plasma cannons etc are restricted due to specific fluff issues of course. Though its hard to imagine a storm bolter on a bike, it would be like telling everyone "Why only sternguard get special ammo?" sort of feel. Regular bikes, just the melee weapon lacking the storm bolter.

 

Speed of thought creates the shrouding. However the shrouding becomes manifest at a certain rate, just like a smoke fume belcher you see on halloween. Strap that to a car and go beyond 20mph, you wont notice any smoke at all. That is my reasoning behind no shrouding for fast stuff.

 

I still think the shrouding for dreadnoughts is ok being free. Its not like we attach 3 twin-linked plasma rifles to jet packs and dance around vehicles. (Tau)

 

Hey I didnt see if there was a certain change. Are we able to consider whole new vehicle possibilities for the army as GK standalone choice? (If they get a GK codex, it would be theirs and not the inquisitions)

 

I would put my vote on a Psy-Predator. Turret weapon as normal, bu with possible psycannon side sponsons and the like. Would be interesting, no? I know they are anti-rhino and all. Perhaps run with new dreadnoughts and land raiders like the usual updates. I keep forgetting they streamline now each new codex =\.

[Ominous Anonymous]

On the topic of dreadies: what about giving a twin linked Psycannon option?

 

While, as a player, I'd be more inclined to give a heavier weapon to a vehicle, but fluffwise I would love to see Dreads having the option. We could even make it an option for mounting on a DCCW and removed its TL status...

[Razmus]

2) I'm also making the Vindicare BS7. It's an incredibly small change in power, but I feel the need to make him actually the best marksman in 40k, and to actually use that high-BS table GW so graciously put in the BBB.

 

 

Quick suggestion on the Vindicare:

 

24 inches and less = BS 7

25-40 inches = BS 6

40 inches and more = BS 5

 

My two cents,

Raz

[Prathios]

I think on the bike versus jetpack debate you've essentially just decided you like/dislike one and that's it. When you start a thread like this it seems that you start losing focus and progress when you start unilaterally deciding on topics because of your preference. Saying you're keeping bikes no matter what but jetpacks are gonna have to go cause of storm bolters feels like an enforced bias. There have been several solutions to a problem that again seems like its unnecessary because we are adding a totally new unit to the codex. I kinda feel like Tyrak at this point, and that we might just scratch them both and stick to changing what we have rather than making new units. Because for every pro/anti arguement for either unit there is a pro/anti for the other. Jet packs make them seem more like regular marines and make storm bolters too good... bikes make them seem more like marines, make storm bolters amazing too and can't be deep struck which is the whole point of the team when trying to fit the fluff for a fast attack unit. If you cut one you should cut both since it appears the only arguement you can give boils down to "i like/dislike." Its your thread you can do what you want but you decrease the projects integrity with decisions like this.

 

On the ballistics skill of the Vindicare, there are several bs7 units in the game. Such as Phoenix Lords. Is he fluff wise as good at they are at shooting... tough call... but I'm inclined to say yes.

 

No to terminator grenades. Nobody else gets em so neither should we... unless we pay points, after all its a benefit. But from a fluff standpoint termy fingers are too large and bulky to fiddle with grenades in the head of combat. Try pulling a pin with a power fist.

 

As for dready shrouding, there are already a ton of examples of free upgrades for no points... like our thunder hammers. Or for instance how about the 1 point increase from an IST to a sister. You tellin me that the sisters aren't getting a ton of stuff free on that? Benefits are benefits, they are what they are but you're failing to put these points changes in context with the army as a whole. Unless you wanna give us devastator squads and predator annihilators I think the dreads need more love. And let me ask you, how many people here are gonna pay 200 points for a dreadnought with shrouding, cause I sure as heck won't. Need I remind anyone that shrouding is basically only going to help a percentage of the time based on distance? 40 points is worth a terminator and is literally half the base cost of a dreadnought. 30 points is enough to buy a rhino transport and still puts a Hellfire at 190 points, thats just short of a land raider still. Nobody is going to pay that many points for an armor 12 unit.

 

I think that if we are going to try and wrap it up so that we can submit it this thread is going to have to come to a great deal many more mutual consensus's. Because the last few threads are starting to show large gaps in our reasoning behind some of our arguments.

[Lungboy]

On the topic of dreadies: what about giving a twin linked Psycannon option?

 

While, as a player, I'd be more inclined to give a heavier weapon to a vehicle, but fluffwise I would love to see Dreads having the option. We could even make it an option for mounting on a DCCW and removed its TL status...

 

The Psycannon is already a GK Dread option in the IA2 update. It's 10 points and not twinlinked (i think i can say that as the pdf is a freely available download). However, they removed the option to add a ML instead of the cc arm, and made it more expensive :lol:

[Ominous Anonymous]

The Psycannon is already a GK Dread option in the IA2 update. It's 10 points and not twinlinked (i think i can say that as the pdf is a freely available download). However, they removed the option to add a ML instead of the cc arm, and made it more expensive :whistling:

 

Well that's a shame, then. At the very least perhaps Dreads should be moved to the Elite slot? 90% of the time I need those Heavy slots for transports, but rarely use up my Elite slots for Terminators when most of them are in a retinue for my HQ.

 

EDIT: On second thought, in an army that can entirely deepstrike the need for transports might be lessened. However, perhaps a switch could still be considered.

[Venerable Rhadamanthus]

And hey, did everybody forget something. Shouldn't Daemon hunters have Preffered (sp) Enemy: Daemon? Since they kinda fight them all the time, wouldn't they be used to fighting them???

This is worth considering. All else aside, one has to admit, it just plain makes sense! So let's go back to our three questions? Is it in the fluff? Absolutely. Is it minimalistic, in the terms I spelled out? I think so, in that it doesn't change the structure or gameplay of the army. Lastly, is it overpowered? This seems to be where most of the criticism has come from, and so is the point we need to address.

 

How could we make this more balanced? Well, for one, we have Daemonic Infestation. Is that enough? Under the old rules, it was more than enough for the Knight's benefits against daemons. Of course, we have (in this project) been increasing our power against daemons. However, Chaos Daemons is far more daemons, and much better quality daemons, than existed at the time of our original codex. So we have to ask, does everything balance out, or are we left, all things considered, too good against daemons?

 

Honestly, I'm leaning towards the former. That is, I think (tentatively) that everything will be balanced if we add in this rule. But I'm not sure. I'd like to hear arguments, not just opinions, referring to relevant rules and changes. And if you think it would unbalance us, perhaps instead of discarding the idea, we might think of alternative ways of re-balancing ourselves against daemons specifically, in terms or daemon-specific rules, and not mere point-hikes.

 

I'll try to lay out my argument against Preferred Enemy: Daemons.

 

Firstly, I'm starting from the assumption that if you want something, you pay points for it, either as part of your base cost or as an optional upgrade. My argument will be built on this foundation, as to me it seems to follow the well-established GW points system.

 

If we get Preferred Enemy: Daemons, we will have to pay points for it. There are two ways of doing this:

 

As part of the Grey Knights' base cost - we end up paying additional points for an ability that only works against Daemonic armies. Against all other armies we will be unfairly handicapped and at a disadvantage. Considering the already high price tag of Grey Knight units, charging us even more for (in most cases) nothing doesn't seem to work to me.

 

As an optional upgrade - why on earth would Grey Knights, the premier daemonhunters of the Imperium, have being good at their job as an optional upgrade?

 

Another option would be to give Grey Knights Preferred Enemy: Everyone. The downside to this is that we may well be puttin all our eggs in one basket. Can we really afford to tie up so many points in a single Grey Knight, given the rapidly-increasing number of AP 3 weapons out there?

 

Whilst I'm not in favour of Preferred Enemy at all, if we were to give Grey Knights something similar we should make it work in a similar manner to The Aegis, or The Shrouding. They are abilities stemming from the Grey Knights' training to combat Daemons, they are effective against all enemies. Whatever happens, we should not be forced to fork out for shiny new abilities that don't work 90-95% of the time.

 

 

I like the idea of Preferred Enemy: Daemons. It fits. That's what they train for, fight, etc all their lives. Daemons are, by definition, the GK's preferred enemy.

 

Then again...I understand the points issue. Damn GK's are expensive enough as it is!

 

I can see two ways of dealing with it.

 

1. You do something similar to what the old Dex did in giving Daemons something to balance it out without adding points and making the GK's pay for something that only works against X. And don't charge GK's for it.

 

2. You make it an ability that a Justicar, GM, BC has. Sort of like the Chaplains have their Liturgies of Battle (old Litanies of Hate). Adjust from there.

 

My $.02 worth.

[Ominous Anonymous]

2. You make it an ability that a Justicar, GM, BC has. Sort of like the Chaplains have their Liturgies of Battle (old Litanies of Hate). Adjust from there.

 

I like this idea, perhaps make it an item, maybe even the Librarium Daemonica itself. :)

 

We could make it so only a Grand Master (as opposed to a Captain-level Force Commander or somesuch) be given access to it, and it gives PE: Daemons to all models with the Grey Knight special rules. This way we have access to an edge against Daemons when we need it, but aren't forced to pay for it all the time. Thoughts?

[Mutt-Man!]

Just thought of this shortly before poking my head in here while replying to another thread.

 

Infiltrating GK's. (In response to bikes/jump packs being un-do-able)

Shrouding, Teleporting in before the battle (like FA GK's)... Sounds like an easy outflank maneuvre right? Teleport in on a far flank then run there flanking the enemy.

 

I havent really read that anywhere, think I did once but I forget where. Infiltration for GK's? You decide. =)