Are Grey Knights Cheezy?

[Wicks]

Hey,has any of you gone in to play :lol: people refuse to play you.Or say your army cheezy?

[Something Wycked]

Nope. Did they refuse to play you because you said "Grey Knights" or did they look at your army in particular and then refuse to play you?

[Gornall]

I haven't had people refuse to play me, but I have noticed a LOT of GK hate at the local level.

[Fred Johnson the 3rd jr]

Hey,has any of you gone in to play :mellow: people refuse to play you.Or say your army cheezy?

 

 

Nope. Remember though, the excuses people give may be lies, and they may be avoiding you for other reasons. Perhaps they are jealous of your dashing good looks? Maybe people don't like your grammar choices?

 

I fear this will forever be a mystery.

[muadib02]

GK has a lot of shock and awe about it...fancy wargear, cool units etc. But their cost offsets their benefits. Anyone who refuses to play is just being a poor sport...and peoples ire is just to be expected...Tyrrannid players around here hate it when they draw me for round 1 of a tournament (ive been using my DE of late)

[BrotherWasted]

People I find are angry at Grey Knights for three reasons:

 

1. 24" shooting

2. Force Weapons all around, and

3. Draigowing

 

Cheezy? No, but the majority of the time when I pick up a game, one of these things is able to just ruin my opponent's day.

 

Hordes, Eldar, Dark Eldar and Tau hate the first one, all Marine armies hate the second (since if I need to I will just charge your units and ignore your armor - after I have blown you apart with my superior shooting), and most lists hate the third because they aren't prepared.

 

That's how I see it.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

There will always be some hate towards the better codices. Nothing new. Grey Knights don't have to be cheesy. There are lots of differing builds with the codex. If someone is giving you a hard time about your army don't worry about it. At some point in time each army is going to be a power house - now is that time for Grey Knights. A year from now it could be a completely different situation so it enjoy it while you can.

 

Draigowing is an army that is true to it's background so I don't see it as cheesy... Certainly not anymore than IG leaf blower or SW TWC|Long Fang spam... Probably much less so. GK in general has all the tools to beat all the other armies so we are back at square one in that regard.

 

G :mellow:

[greatcrusade08]

Anyone who refuses to play is just being a poor sport...

 

i disagree with this, in tournaments perhaps its true, but locally people play to have fun..

alot fo the draigo hate in my area is based on the fact that they are near unbeatable with regular armies.. true they do have some weaknesses, but most normal run of the mill opponents dont really stand a chance.

so if your opponent doesnt want to spend his only free time away from the kids and wife and job rolling dice and removing models with no chance of winning then surely you should be more understanding... no?

sure we can argue winning isnt everything, but if you dont stand much of a chance and get beaten everytime, you soon get fed up with it.

 

remember theres two sides to every story, at the moment GK are a winning army, that may change.. but you should try to be understanding of the reluctance to play instead of merely calling them poor sports

[thade]

...if your opponent doesnt want to spend his only free time away from the kids and wife and job rolling dice and removing models with no chance of winning then surely you should be more understanding... no?

 

...you should try to be understanding of the reluctance to play instead of merely calling them poor sports

This right here is brilliance. Take it to heart.

 

If it's your list that's the issue, try toning it down or under-tuning it, taking units they say are crap, so they get used to playing you (and used to you as a player). I've found that - once you're friends with people - they'll be more willing to play against (and forgive) shenanigans. :P

 

If it's the codex itself, weellll...that's a bit on the other side of things. I certainly want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but if they're unwilling to play you purely based on the book itself, that makes me wonder why. Ask them what their direct experiences with the codex have been, what lists they've each been up against, and why it's cheesy. If your list has nothing in common with what they worry about, then why wouldn't they play you after all?

 

Finally, were I in your shoes, I would be shopping around for a second place to play. <3

[Deschenus Maximus]

Draigowing is not near unbeatable by normal armies, not in the least. I'd actually say it's one of the worst lists you can do with GK. Far too many points concentrated on far too few models.

[greatcrusade08]

Draigowing is not near unbeatable by normal armies, not in the least. I'd actually say it's one of the worst lists you can do with GK. Far too many points concentrated on far too few models.

 

yet it seems to win (or come top) in alot of recent tournaments.. yes i see your point, its a rubbish build :P

[DIDM]

I am brand new to this mind you

 

 

 

 

IMO this happens in everything from games to real life. The only reason there is a new codex is because before it _____________ was in need up upgrades. Upgrades tend to mean better. There are rare cases where upgrades make a product worse, but that is counter productive from a sales point of view.

 

Now as I have heard/seen, waiting for a new codex can be like waiting for true love, and marines get all the love. BA got a lot of hate when their new codex came out, there are lots of YT vids of people complaining about them. Now you have basically The Ghost Busters get an upgrade. Ghost Busters have cool toys, but travel in smaller numbers. There is a reason why everyone that sees a GK army is like, what are you playing, 500 points? They are they Navy Seals of 40K. There needs to be a mix of big to small sized armies.

 

Lastly, IMO a true tactician SHOULD be able to win with any army. Sure there may be armies that are better than a certain army, but that doesn't get close to being a guaranteed win. One thing I find most intriguing about this game, and the reason I just started is the tactical thinking. Going into a fight expected to lose and being the smarter general and winning has to feel great. As in life, nothing is for certain, it is what you make it.

[Archon_77]

Lastly, IMO a true tactician SHOULD be able to win with any army. Sure there may be armies that are better than a certain army, but that doesn't get close to being a guaranteed win. One thing I find most intriguing about this game, and the reason I just started is the tactical thinking. Going into a fight expected to lose and being the smarter general and winning has to feel great. As in life, nothing is for certain, it is what you make it.

 

 

This.

 

I also think a LOT of the GK hate I'm experiencing locally is do the the fact that GK are COMPETITIVE now, when they frankly havent been for the better part of 6 years or so. People dont like it when they lose an auto-win that they used to have and exploit as much as possible. It's like I'm always saying to those here locally... I suffered enough back in the day, you really can't blame me if I have a winning list now and choose to play it after years of everyone laughing at my complete inability to pop vehicles, my super overpriced units that die to EVERYTHING, etc. Personally, I think the community as a whole lucked out that GW decided to neuter The Shrouding, not that 3d6 invisibility was amazing, but I half expected it to become the 2d6 night fight standard. We're up to date, and people are really struggling to handle that.

[the jeske]

people refuse to play you

unless they play nids or some sort of an army that is based around hvy use of psykers[and falls apart if it doesnt have them] then I dont see why that should happen .

yet it seems to win (or come top) in alot of recent tournaments.. yes i see your point, its a rubbish build

its good against fluff armies , but has some random match ups against stuff that spams ID stuff. its also slow + if you play in main land europe the army is too small . you have to play it at 1750 or more. Then GK razor spam is a lot more balanced to play with and less random . But it is true that some tournament did have scenarios which due to how kill points work in them favors 10 man multi wound models . But we had that with orcs start of 5th ed too.

 

true they do have some weaknesses, but most normal run of the mill opponents dont really stand a chance.

no on forces people to play with what you call normal and what I call bad lists. If someone wants to play a demi company or a list with 6 tacs against draigo wing in a kill point scenario . his own foult for thinking the game is different then it actualy is.

 

As if they are cheezy or not . unless someone means the fluff by that , then no . GK are not cheezy , multi wound allocation is just a rule . multi shot high str razor builds is a type of builds other armies can play too . good codex with many different builds of different tier . Even casual lists work just fine .

[Brother Nihm]

3. Draigowing

I swear that if I see another (uninspired) GK player field this dull (thankfully far from unbeatable, but dull) list I am going to kick someone, or something. :P

[boreas]

Hehe, Draigowing is the new tri-landraider!

 

Phil

[greatcrusade08]

no on forces people to play with what you call normal and what I call bad lists. If someone wants to play a demi company or a list with 6 tacs against draigo wing in a kill point scenario . his own foult for thinking the game is different then it actualy is.

 

uh-huh :D , please jeske when you get the urge to type.. stop yourself.

this has got to vie for the most insulting post youve made this week.

 

we are not talking tournaments here, i already accepted that caveat on my original post, we are talking games club.. who are you to dictate what army someone uses.. if they run a normal army and get killed by draigowing alot, then they wont want to play against them.. so are you then going to claim they are bad sprots and should be running something more competative?..

the game as a whole doesnt operate around tournaments, most of the time its guys like me with families/wives/jobs who just want a nice friendly game with a beer.. i want to enjoy the game not spend the whole time removing models from the table wth no hope of winning.

the fun comes from the clash of 'equal/balanced' armies, its not fun if one person gets wiped out quickly, games are more fun when they have an element of struggle, go to the wire.

 

now personally i consider myself a little more 'competative' than the average gamer and although ill gladly bemoan draigowing i wont refuse to play them, a challenge is a challenge, however i can very much understand the feelings of those reluctant to play against them

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Anyone who refuses to play is just being a poor sport...

 

i disagree with this, in tournaments perhaps its true, but locally people play to have fun..

alot fo the draigo hate in my area is based on the fact that they are near unbeatable with regular armies.. true they do have some weaknesses, but most normal run of the mill opponents dont really stand a chance.

so if your opponent doesnt want to spend his only free time away from the kids and wife and job rolling dice and removing models with no chance of winning then surely you should be more understanding... no?

sure we can argue winning isnt everything, but if you dont stand much of a chance and get beaten everytime, you soon get fed up with it.

 

remember theres two sides to every story, at the moment GK are a winning army, that may change.. but you should try to be understanding of the reluctance to play instead of merely calling them poor sports

 

 

"I only want to play against armies I feel I have a good chance of winning."

 

Funny to see all the hate here vs DW. There are plenty of other armies out there that are a lot more nasty. It's a cool army and is pretty good on the table. It's by no means point and click like say leaf blower or the old daemon bomb CSM armies.

 

G :D

[Gunslinger87]

20 points for a space marine with a forceweapon is probably the main thing. There will always be lists in a powerful codex that make people pull their hair. However, there is always the argument that those can be adapted for (since they usually serve one main purpose or have one key strategy) and generally codexes are well matched. However, when you see people disgruntled by SW troops having a bolt pistol and counter attack while SM dont.... just look how pathetic that is compared to SW or SM vs GK. Five points for something that is better than a 15 point upgrade for most other armies that can only come on specialized units hardly justifies the "GK are an elite army with many expensive shiny toys".

 

Bar not having certain options, you can theoretically line up something like 30 space marines and 4 tanks against 30 GK with power weapons and 3 identical tanks (the 5 point difference on 30 marines) and watch the difference.

 

Nobody really minds power-builds since most people play for fun and dont see them too often. A real problem arises with too cheap core units. Almost every GK player will have a few GK troops and just having these already gives them an advantage other armies will have to try hard to outplay.

 

Now I am a firm believer that if you actually try it out in reality, the randomness of dice and the many factors that come into play can make an even game out of almost anything. Or perhaps the whole game is uneven, but then the game surprisingly ends in turn 5 and the GK army that was going to wipe you out ends up short on objectives and you can celebrate a well earned draw etc.

 

Much of these conversations only occur on the internet or before and after games... while playing its only up to you how much you can enjoy it. Youre not going to play a stronger list every time... so celebrate when you win against a "theoretically" worse one, celebrate when you draw against a stronger one, or just celebrate those minor victories like killing his HQ etc. There is almost always (99% of the time) some reason to celebrate. And is 1% worth going on and on and on about on the internet? :D

 

Its not like you will be playing against GK for the rest of your life... and before you get in 50 games a new codex or even edition will come out... No worries.

 

You know... "dont worry, be happy".

[greatcrusade08]

"I only want to play against armies I feel I have a good chance of winning."

 

if thats you trying to paraphrase me, then id say youve missed the point completely.

 

And were we in the same room id demand an apology for the insult

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

http://greenblowfly.blogspot.com/2010/09/comp-onion.html

 

G ^_^

[thade]

Draigowing is not near unbeatable by normal armies, not in the least. I'd actually say it's one of the worst lists you can do with GK. Far too many points concentrated on far too few models.

yet it seems to win (or come top) in alot of recent tournaments.. yes i see your point, its a rubbish build ^_^

I'm surprised, man. It's like coming down on early 5th Ed. Deathguard, the Leaf Blower, or an all S.G. DoA list. Do you (and others) honestly think D.W. is on this level?

 

3. Draigowing

I swear that if I see another (uninspired) GK player field this dull (thankfully far from unbeatable, but dull) list I am going to kick someone, or something. :P

Um...I made it in before this cut, right? I haven't fielded the army yet, but I've been writing fluff and design for them for months now, publicly on this board. :o

[Gornall]

I was at a RTT over the weekend and my GK list scored about 55-60% the comp points of Vulkan Marines (with full FA slots), Mech Vet IG, and PMs with Oblits, Vindicator, and DP. Admittedly, part of it was my specific list, but most of it was just hate on the dex in general. I could be having a great convo with someone, but the minute I mention I play GK, the convo was over...

[number6]

People need to stop comparing choices in one codex -- and how they are costed -- with "similar" choices in other codexes ... and how they are costed. A basic space marine tactical marine is indeed the closest analog to the GK Striker, but they aren't actually the same unit, they don't serve the same battlefield roles, and they perform VERY differently on the tabletop. Same with Grey Hunters, BA assault marines, and so on and so forth.

 

And once you start attempting to compare "similar" choices across codexes outside the Marines family (e.g., DE Warriors with Tau Fire Warriors with IG Veterans with you name it....) all bets are off.

 

The thing is, jeske does have a valid point. The GK codex is not just another Space Marines variant. It is a very different army, both from what it used to be and from other "Space Marines". It is not overpowered, just different. People are having a difficult time adapting to it because it has a lot of very special rules that hurt armies that are built rather sloppily. Are you running a random assortment of units because they're cool and/or "fluffy"? Well, quite honestly, all the GK goodies do make them "better" than armies like that. A sloppy, random assortment of GK units IS better and stronger than a random assortment built from most other codexes. This is true.

 

BUT that does not mean the GK codex is overpowered. It just means that if you want to beat them, you do have to put some effort into actually building an army list that is strategically and tactically cohesive. Your usual "fluff" list simply isn't gonna cut the mustard.

 

What's interesting is that "seriously" competitive armies built from the other Marine codexes are, IMHO, somewhat better than the best GK competitive lists that can be built. That is, the GK codex doesn't scale competitively as well as the other Marines. (IMHO, I think the basic Marine codex is still the best codex yet supplied by GW. It's truly, truly amazing in it's adaptability and capability.) The reason is that "seriously" competitive builds are heavily mechanized, and without access to melta weapons, the ability of GK armies to deal with that quickly tops out. The only answer the GK codex has is Coteaz and melta-spamming warbands.

 

This is not to say that "pure" GK armies can't be tournament competitive. Surely they are. ;) But they do have their limits.

 

And if people are struggling against Draigowing, I do actually think the reason is a lack of tactical acumen on behalf of the GK opponents. Recently somebody posted about the success of Blackmoor's extreme Draigowing at NOVA, even defeating the infamous Stelek. But if you read the batrep, even Blackmoor admitted that he won only because he didn't actually "play" the game. His army was getting manhandled for the most part. What he thought was extreme unluck with his reserves rolls actually turned out to be extremely good luck because his opponent simply couldn't eliminate all of the Paladins in the single turn of play available to his opponent to do so. Had they shown up when Blackmoor initially wanted them to -- when he expected them to -- even he didn't fancy their chances of survival.

 

Draigowing can be beat. But you do have to bring the tools required. As it turns out, those same tools are the ones capable of dealing with heavy mech armies as well. It's forever surprising to me how worried people are about "hordes" of infantry, when they should be focusing on making the vast majority of their wargear purchases with the idea of killing vehicles. We've had 5th edition for 3+ years now. If people haven't yet figured out that mech is -- on average and overall -- the strongest type of army build there is -- I mean, it's right there in the rules! how can you miss it? -- there isn't much that can be done about it at this point.

[greatcrusade08]

with respect to number6 who is correct for the most part, the problem here isnt that people 'dont get' how 40k works or dont use top tier lists.. the problem posed by the OP is whether or not people refuse to play you or consider you cheesy for running GK.

 

the second half of that question can be argued about in terms of meta, but ultimately theres a big element of personal bias to those things.

 

the first half doesnt happen in tournies (people refusing to play), so coming at the question wearing your "im a top tier tournament player" attitude only serves to confuse the issue at hand..

ultimately its down to the players, is it ok for a player to refuse to play you?

its his dime and his time, so why as stated in a few of these posts would he be a sore loser or bad sport to refuse to play a game he wont enjoy?

 

in friendly games club environments youll find many fluff/theme players, people who play lists other than top tier meta lists.. why is it ok to denigrate these players for not willing to play games they will most likely lose.. isnt it thier hobby too?

tbh i find the attitudes of some gamers here a tad selfish, not a great reprisentation of tournament gamers if you ask me, and only serves to lengthen the gap between friendly and competative play.

both players must be able to enjoy the game!

 

i made a similar point earlier in this post only to be rudely paraphrased by black orange

"I only want to play against armies I feel I have a good chance of winning."

suggesting that any gamer who doesnt want to play a GK army is a bad sport, sore loser and WAAC gamer (of course casting certain accusations towards me as the author of the post he paraphrased)

 

the problem here is that many of you are refusing to see both sides of the issue. i consider myself uniquely placed in a discussion like this as im a themed player, who attend tournaments and can play competatively.. i personally wouldnt refuse to play a GK player, although i do happen to believe they are unbalanced at the moment.. but i certainly can understand why some players at games clubs and the like would rather not play draigowing armies and razor spam lists.

its thier choice and i think its wrong to think less of them for excercising thier own right to get enjoyment from thier hobby