GK Strike Squads

[Drachnon]

I personally think Falchions only give only attack and untill GW FAQ's otherwise I'll play them like that.

 

Having that said I only use them on my grand master, my strike squad have 4 halberds each and a hammer on the justicar. I must say I love the halberds so far, though expensive in large numbers they do scare off most IC's people in my gaming group field. Since most HQ's strike at initiative 5 I have a good chance of Instant Death. Of course to make reliable in doing so they really need counter charge. Also a Strike Squad with 2 psycannons, 4 halberds a hammer + attached grand master with rad + blind grenades and counter charge can take the charge of almost any units. I had this squad charge by a full blood angel assault squad with attached librarian and priest + a squad orks (was doubles battle) and survived with only minimal losses while killing all but 1 blood angel and catching the orks as they tried to run away.

 

Please note that our group usually sticks with pretty low point games, in higher point games the role of this strike squad would be fulfilled by a unit purifiers who for the purpose of taking enemy charges are definitely better.

 

Back to the topic at hand, in my lists strike squads are equipped to be versatile, and indeed that means that they lose to dedicated close combat squads and dedicated shooting squads but overall they're a solid choice.

[Abaddonshand]

I plan on taking falchions on my paladins, regardless of the outcome of this debate. I'm struggling with interceptors however. I had a squad planne with hammer, 2 incinerators and 7 swords, psybolts. If falchions only give 1 extra attack each then 70pts for 7 attacks probably isn't worth it. If however they give 14 attacks for 70pts, then we have a worthwhile investment on a unit that can choose who it meets in combat. Don't get me wrong, just +1 attack on the falchions makes the squad do as much damage as Grey Hunters, but the cost is too high I think. The +2 makes then wipe table with Grey hunters, making the cost acceptable.

 

I hope GW FAQ it to +2 attacks, but I doubt it, so I'll be playing them +1 until they officially say otherwise. I think given that it's only 5pts for them on terminators/ paladins, this could be seen as too cheap, given that it would give you 5 attacks onthe charge, or 6 with the banner.

[AoC]

They cost as much as they would for +2 attacks. If they give +1 they would be pointless unlike every other nemesis force weapon. They give +1 attack, and +1 attack for pair of close combat weapons. There is thread about this debate.

[Marmande]

They cost as much as they would for +1 attack. Either way, I wouldn't pay for them on units that only come with 1 attack base anyways, and on the stuff with more than one attack I'd prefer going with halberds anyways.

[greatcrusade08]

They cost as much as they would for +2 attacks.

 

Cite your source.. these arent basic ccws, they are special force weapons

a Pw in the C:SM is 15 points and only grants +1A if partenered with a ccw

 

If they give +1 they would be pointless unlike every other nemesis force weapon.

i dont understand this argument, a pair of falchions will offer 1 more attack than any other nemesis weapon type.. how is that pointless?

 

They give +1 attack, and +1 attack for pair of close combat weapons. There is thread about this debate.

read the rule, they give +1 attack becuase they are a pair (it says specifically "a pair of falchions get +1A")

 

pg 37 of the BRB shows you can only get +1A for multiple weapons, you cant get the bonus from the dex and then from the rulebook, otherwise your getting +2A for two ccw which is wrong.

Its the wording in the codex that is unclear, some wargear does give bonus attacks, but the wording here shows it to be becuase there are two of them (a pair), there is no other explanation within the fluff to explain why it grants this bonus.

unless youve got more thana passing interpretation to show it gets +2A, insisiting on it is only going to upset your opponents.. its a little disrespectful to make those kind of assumptions

[Gentlemanloser]

The closest counter arguement I have is that you can purchase "A Pair of Lightning Claws".

 

If you go by the view that the NFF +1A is just a special rule for taking a pair, then the Pair of LC shouldn't give +1A either, as they don't have that special rule. It's totally unnecessary to list that "A Pair of NFF" give +1A in the codex, *if* this is the basic +1A that all paired special close combat wepaons give.

 

They are also the most expensive version of the NFW (bar the Stave), and for the standard, basic, +1A that *every* paired weapon gives, you lose either x2S, +2I or +1 Invulnerable save in CC.

 

This doesn't add up to me. The cost, and the wording, would heavily imply the +1A is in addition to the standard +1A you get for using a pair.

[lorider2]

The closest counter arguement I have is that you can purchase "A Pair of Lightning Claws".

 

If you go by the view that the NFF +1A is just a special rule for taking a pair, then the Pair of LC shouldn't give +1A either, as they don't have that special rule. It's totally unnecessary to list that "A Pair of NFF" give +1A in the codex, *if* this is the basic +1A that all paired special close combat wepaons give.

 

They are also the most expensive version of the NFW (bar the Stave), and for the standard, basic, +1A that *every* paired weapon gives, you lose either x2S, +2I or +1 Invulnerable save in CC.

 

This doesn't add up to me. The cost, and the wording, would heavily imply the +1A is in addition to the standard +1A you get for using a pair.

 

 

Well said. I agree with you, again I think various people are reading into the rules that the +1 is because they are a pair - but the rules just are not that clear. Its nothing more or less than an assumption on their part. That said, I'll also admit they could be right. This is GW and things don't always make sense, we really need to get the FAQ on this issue, end of story.

[Drachnon]

Some people say that 10 points is the price you'd pay for +2 attacks though most don't seem to have much support for that claim.

I just did the match for terminators and 10 terminators with a brotherhood banner and 9 pairs of falchions would with the +2 attack assumption give on the charges 54 power weapons attacks possibly at strength 5. The squad would cost 470 points which is pricey but I would know a better investment for power weapon attacks in any codex.

[Marmande]

It's the only paired weapon Grey Knights have access to because none of them carry pistols. It's five points to have an extra attack.

[Gentlemanloser]

But that doesn't factor in the 'cost' of losing either x2S, +2I or +1 Invulnerable save.

 

It's not just 5 points. :)

[Marmande]

Well until we break into Mat Ward's price-assigning algorithm it's five points for an extra attack.

 

EDIT: For my part, I run Strike Squads with the all-comers setup: double Psycannon, swords, Psybolts, and MC Hammer, who brings a Daemonhammer while they dance to his phat beats inside a rhino. It's a lot for what it does but I'd prefer 295 for a squad than paying an extra 45 points for extra attacks on a unit that isn't meant to get into combat at the first chance.

[greatcrusade08]

10 points for an extra force weapon attack is pretty cheap tbh.

 

If you go by the view that the NFF +1A is just a special rule for taking a pair, then the Pair of LC shouldn't give +1A either, as they don't have that special rule. It's totally unnecessary to list that "A Pair of NFF" give +1A in the codex, *if* this is the basic +1A that all paired special close combat wepaons give.

 

Actually LCs are specifically covered in the rulebook (as is every special weapon), whereas falchions are not.. as a special weapon they need to cover whether or not they allow for two to give the extra attack.. which is IMO the whole point of saying

"a pair of falchions give +1A"

 

Well said. I agree with you, again I think various people are reading into the rules that the +1 is because they are a pair - but the rules just are not that clear. Its nothing more or less than an assumption on their part. That said, I'll also admit they could be right. This is GW and things don't always make sense, we really need to get the FAQ on this issue, end of story.

 

the assumption is made by those claiming the second extra attack.. without an actual statement or FAQ allowing the +2A then its completely unreasonable to claim for it... dont you think?

 

edit: how can it be possible that ten points gives you four force weaon attacks on the charge instead of just 2.. it makes no sense and would be completely underpriced

 

But that doesn't factor in the 'cost' of losing either x2S, +2I or +1 Invulnerable save.

A strike squad has none of these things, so do not lose them

[AoC]

They cost as much as they would for +2 attacks.

 

Cite your source.. these arent basic ccws, they are special force weapons

a Pw in the C:SM is 15 points and only grants +1A if partenered with a ccw

 

If they give +1 they would be pointless unlike every other nemesis force weapon.

i dont understand this argument, a pair of falchions will offer 1 more attack than any other nemesis weapon type.. how is that pointless?

 

They give +1 attack, and +1 attack for pair of close combat weapons. There is thread about this debate.

read the rule, they give +1 attack becuase they are a pair (it says specifically "a pair of falchions get +1A")

 

pg 37 of the BRB shows you can only get +1A for multiple weapons, you cant get the bonus from the dex and then from the rulebook, otherwise your getting +2A for two ccw which is wrong.

Its the wording in the codex that is unclear, some wargear does give bonus attacks, but the wording here shows it to be becuase there are two of them (a pair), there is no other explanation within the fluff to explain why it grants this bonus.

unless youve got more thana passing interpretation to show it gets +2A, insisiting on it is only going to upset your opponents.. its a little disrespectful to make those kind of assumptions

Pair means it's two of them, it's like saying that calgar don't get bonus attack for pair of powerfists, or that pair of lighting claws don't give additional attack. The +1 attack happens to be special rule of pair of falchions. Ergo +2.

 

We will wait for the FAQ to get this solved. I shouldn't care as i play non-grey knights.

 

It's just as disrespectful as playing power list or ultramarines.

 

And strike squad do have +1 to inv from swords. Check the codex.

 

For 40 points you get 4 force weapons attack on the charge, additional wound, additional stormbolter shoot, additional inv save. For 60 (2 falchion guys 3 sword guys) you get 6 attack from the charge (compared to 6 with falchions), and 2 more stormbolter shoots and 1 extra wound with inv. You have 3 vs 4 attacks when charged in such case. How it's bargain exactly ? Maybe i'm stupid but it looks like worst trade ever.

[TyrionTheImp]

It's just as disrespectful as playing power list or ultramarines.

 

And strike squad do have +1 to inv from swords. Check the codex.

 

Since when is playing Ultramarines disrespectful? ;)

 

Strike Squads get no bonuses from the swords as they lack an invuln save to improve. It explicitly says there is no effect if the model does not have an invulnerable save. Someone needs to read a bit better me thinks before pointing it out.

[Gentlemanloser]

As said, they still get it, but it's of no use to them. Who knows, there might be *some* way to get them an Invulnerable save, even if it's in Apoc. /shrug

 

That's why Falchions cost twice the amount they do on Strikes to Terminators. The Termies *lose* the +1 Save when they purchase the Falchions. (Before someone mentions Purifiers, yeah they don't get any use from the invulnerable save either, but have discounted CC weapon prices anyway).

 

as a special weapon they need to cover whether or not they allow for two to give the extra attack.. which is IMO the whole point of saying

 

IIRC, they don't need that. It's two identical SCCW, and by the main book that gives +1A, no other rules necessary.

 

A strike squad has none of these things, so do not lose them

 

And that's why thier Falchions cost more.

 

10 points for an extra force weapon attack is pretty cheap tbh.

 

Not when you can get I6 and go before most everyone els ein the game, for half the cost. 10 points for +2A, now that's a better offer. ;)

 

Edit: Think of it this way. Purchasing NFF on Strikes for thier cost and only getting +1A in essence makes them Purifiers (without Fearless or CF) for 6 points more. That's not really a good deal.

[AoC]

It's just as disrespectful as playing power list or ultramarines.

 

And strike squad do have +1 to inv from swords. Check the codex.

 

Since when is playing Ultramarines disrespectful? :jaw:

 

Strike Squads get no bonuses from the swords as they lack an invuln save to improve. It explicitly says there is no effect if the model does not have an invulnerable save. Someone needs to read a bit better me thinks before pointing it out.

It is not, thats the point.

 

Ouch, my bad in swords case :jaw:

[Brother Valerius]

10 points for an extra force weapon attack is pretty cheap tbh.

 

No way. 10 points for a mere 1 extra attack is something I would never pay. Why on earth would I do that, when I can pay a mere 5 points to strike at I6, and likely perform better (due to striking before the enemy)?

 

This simply isn't as clear as you're insisting, GC08. Granted, it's not clear in either direction. But it's a murky grey area for now, regardless of which direction prevails in the end.

[Freman Bloodglaive]

To get an extra attack with a lightning claw you pay 15 points. To get an extra attack with a wolf claw you pay 20 points. To get an extra attack with a power fist you pay 25 points.

 

10 points for an extra force weapon attack sounds about right to be honest.

[Brother Valerius]

The benefits of a lightning claw and power fist are significantly better than the benefits of a force weapon, hence the cost. I do not feel 10 points to be worth it for a measly +1 attack with a power weapon (which is what a force weapon really is... the force weapon ability is of limited use). Particularly not when +2I is 5 points less, and most likely more effective.

[CheezeFezt]

Mathhammer. Assuming equal point value of strike GK vs vanilla marine (which will never occurs in a game), then

 

Basic combat, nobody charging, sword benefit of kill/killed by is 256%. In other word, if one had 100 pt squad, the SS kill 26.7 pt of marine while the marine killed 10.4 pt in return. Think the percentage as a measured of how well it do in a battle of attrition. The halberd is 208%. Falchion 228%. Hammer 120%.

 

If SS get the charge, sword 512%. Halberd 572%. Falchion 341%. Hammer 240%.

 

If marine charge, then sword 128%, halberd 104%, falchion 114%, hammer 49%.

 

But in a real game, you never play fair and fight equal value, you stack the deck and try to overpower your opponent. Halberd on the charge is pretty deadly, wiping out your opponent with very little loss. The sword is best in battle of attrition (eg charge didn't wipe out the enemy). Sword is better than falchion per point in most situation.

 

That said, if your enemy init is less than 4, halberd loses it value fairly fast.

 

Hammer isn't as good because Hammerhand bump up the power weapon strength, so the hammer is best use to knock out tanks.

 

NOTE: I'm playing falchion as only +1 A, not +2 A some powergamer think it gives.

[Brother Dylan]

Hammer also has the benefit in a sword squad of knocking your opp's initiative to 1.

[Freman Bloodglaive]

The benefits of a lightning claw and power fist are significantly better than the benefits of a force weapon, hence the cost. I do not feel 10 points to be worth it for a measly +1 attack with a power weapon (which is what a force weapon really is... the force weapon ability is of limited use). Particularly not when +2I is 5 points less, and most likely more effective.

 

You're right, a force weapon attack is worth less than that of a lightning claw or power fist, but you're not paying as much either. To be honest I'd never buy falchions for Grey Knights, just like I'd seldom (if ever) pay 15 points for a power weapon on a Grey Hunter. It's a technically worthless option. But then this is a Codex with a few worthless options, Brother Captain, DreadKnight, Purgation Squad. It's just one of those things.

[greatcrusade08]

This simply isn't as clear as you're insisting, GC08

If it is a grey area.. then which opinion should take precedence... wouldnt it be a little disrespectful to insist on the extra attack if its a grey area?

 

It's just as disrespectful as playing power list or ultramarines.

AoC im getting a little sick of your incessant trolling.. its not wanted and is the height of disrespect to ultramarines players... what have WE done to warrant this offense?

 

 

OK ill clear this up... show me where it says in the BRB that falchions get +1A for the pair.. we are all assuming this is the case but it isnt..

under the heading special weapons, it says two of the same special weapons give +1A, however nemesis falchions ARENT listed under the BRBs special weapons section.

 

according to RAW falchions dont get +1A for having two of them, they would therefore only get the +1A as written in the codex..

[Gentlemanloser]

They don't need to be named in the BRB.

 

The list of CCWs isn't exahustive. It's good enough that they are two, identical Special Close Combat Weapons. That itself is enough to give them +1A by default.

[greatcrusade08]

They don't need to be named in the BRB.

 

The list of CCWs isn't exahustive. It's good enough that they are two, identical Special Close Combat Weapons. That itself is enough to give them +1A by default.

 

Are they listed as SCCWs under thier heading in the codex? (i honestly dont know)

 

edit: actually your right aslong as they confer bonuses they are SCCW.. forget this argument id be wrong on this matter..