Should Paladins Be Used In 1850pts Game?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Even to Bolter fire five GKT will last longer than 10 Strikes.

 

G :)

[breng77]

That is actually not mathematically correct, to bolter fire, bot squads should survive equally well.

[RedemptionNL]

Even to Bolter fire five GKT will last longer than 10 Strikes.

 

G :)

How so? The statistical average of unsaved wounds after taking 10 3+ saves (3 1/3) is exactly the double as taking 10 2+ saves (1 4/6), meaning identical survivability in the case of twice as much bodies on the Strike Squad.

 

Of course if you have more than 5 saves to take you can take multiple saves on the same model and hope you that any failed saved are on the same model, but that also means your Psycannon is already vulnerable when you get 5 wounds, while you need to get at least 9 wounds to endanger the Strike Squad's psycannon wielders (assuming you want to keep the psycannons as long as possible).

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

As soon as the AP drops to 3 or less then the GKT are going to fare a lot better.

 

G :tu:

[RedemptionNL]

As soon as the AP drops to 3 or less then the GKT are going to fare a lot better.

 

G :tu:

 

Well AP3 bolters are not that common thankfully. :) And it's not AP3 or less either, only exactly AP3 is where GKT are more survivable, as at AP 1 or 2, GKSS are twice as survivable when in cover (each have a 4+ cover save, but GKSS have twice as many wounds), and 1.5 times as surivable when not in cover (no save but twice as many wounds versus 5+ invulnerable save).

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

That's if they are in cover which is not always the case. If my GKT are in reserve no one can even shoot them.

 

G :tu:

[RedemptionNL]

That's if they are in cover which is not always the case. If my GKT are in reserve no one can even shoot them.

 

G

 

As said, when not in cover versus AP1/2, they are also more survivable. But yes, the weakness to AP3 has been noted numerous times in this thread already. It can be overcome with Shrouding, but as that requires the investment of a Librarian, that would skew the argument. But in my meta the only common source of AP3 are Missile Launchers and Rokkits, and they usually prefer to shoot those at my Dreads. :)

 

And if GKSS are in reserve you can't shoot at them either... :tu:

[breng77]

which is true for any unit....I get the feeling this thread has really come to an end at this point.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Yeah especially since the original question was in regards to Paladins - I'm sure Strikes are way better than them too.

 

G :)

[Gentlemanloser]

No, but Pallies + Strikes are better than GKT. ;)

 

:P

[nurglez]

In regards to the question posed in the name of this thread, maybe :P

 

Part of the reason I like the Grey Knight codex is because we have discussions like this. Go to a space wolf thread about the difference between grey hunters and blood claws and its a different matter by far, as well in most other codexes.

 

All our troops are suitable in a variety of set ups, giving differing performances depending on HQ choice, as well as other selections, and even personal playing style.

 

I love paladins, I plan to only play grey knights with paladins as troops (55 points for a scoring unit after a 275 point tax, thats not bad right?), so I am rather biased, but I have planned out many other forces, coteaz henchmen spam, mordrak terminator wing, hordes of basic guys and interceptors, purgation squads, landraiders, dread spam, the works.

 

But I'm sticking with Draigo and the boys ;)

[number6]

One would think the length and depth of the discussion would indicate that the issue is not so cut and dried as some would insist.

 

Oh well. Haters gonna hate....

[Gentlemanloser]

Well, bar RLS and BO, the majority of the 'pro-GKT' discussion has been sweeping generalisation and ad homenien.

 

But you can't have everything, and haters gonna hate is about right.

 

So woud anyone disagree with;

 

In the majority of situations, Strikes outperform GKT

 

(I considered 'vast' majority, but then we would have got bogged down in a debate over the definition of vast, no doubt)

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Yeah I disagree for reasons already provided. If you feel that strongly about maybe put it in your sig so you don't have to keep repeating yourself everytime you post in this thread. That is not meant as flame bait or trolling. It just seems this has boiled down to who gets the last word.

 

And by the way I typically run a squad of 10 GKT. Yes they cost more and yes they are a lot better.

 

G :P

[Abaddonshand]

Black Orange, I also run a squad of ten GKT, at 1500pts and above. Together with a librarian they tend to dominate the field, don't they

[Crynn]

It's really as simple as no GK army that has placed at a major tournament has run terminators. So unless you think you are smater than all the other players who have decided not to run them then there is most likely a reason why they don't pop up in army lists.

 

Regards,

Crynn

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I did well at WarGamesCon with my Draigowing - the GKT were aces. I have also done very well with them at local tournaments such as taking 2nd place in the Ard Boyz preliminary and 3rd place in the semis. I also came in 2nd place this weekend in a team tourney (I was paired with a SW army). We would have taken 1st place but arrived a bit late and didn't have enough to grab all the bonus points in the first game since we started late. GKT always performed very well each game.

 

G :(

[zahroth]

Okay guys, Loved the discussion sofar: It simply exploded a couple of days ago.

 

Going back to the comparison between GKT and paladins:

First of all, what is the best unit composition for both (10-men models), so let's get some unit builds and decided for both which is best.

Add the points to both units and compare whether the additional points on the paladins are worth it?!

 

The last issue is a really tricky one: It depends on your opponent, terrain, scenario dice rolls etc, but it also depends on the rest of your army! So maybee it's a good idead to also list some of the other basic elements in the army that support the GKT or Paladins best.

 

For example, Draigo is an added value to paladins. Ans when running a full paladin lis, also NDKs have their place.

 

Because the GK codex is really good and all-round, is there a build which has more (tournament)succes then other builds?

[the jeske]

GKT do not have a best composition unit set up , because in every build you can make [be it mecha , LR rush , razor spam, draigo wing, cortez using builds , crow wings ] there are unit which out perform them . So technicly the best way to use them is either when you tailor . For example you know someone is going to bring mass dark reapers and your club policy says "no draigo wing or paladins ever" so you spam 5 man termi units [to minimize the loses from stuff like harlis or fire dragons] .

the other way is to make them as cheap as possible cannon in a 5 man . done . this way you have a sub par unit , but some left over points to buy good ones which will cover the termis being worse .

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I like a ten man squad as follows:

 

Justicar - halberd

2x daemonhammer

2x halberd & daemonhammer

5x halberd

 

- psybolt ammo

 

G :sweat:

[number6]

In the majority of situations, Strikes outperform GKT

Yes. Without reservation. ;) For reasons already discussed.

It's really as simple as no GK army that has placed at a major tournament has run terminators. So unless you think you are smater than all the other players who have decided not to run them then there is most likely a reason why they don't pop up in army lists.

That doesn't "prove" anything other than nobody happens to have done it yet. Furthermore, what constitutes a "major" or "competitive" tournament, anyway? It's an entirely subjective, opinionated "measure". Stelek famously pooh-poohs virtually all tournament scenarios AND the army lists in them. Is he right? Wrong? Who's to say? How do we know that the games I play in my local tournaments (typically around 30 players) aren't more competitive than the ones that get blogged on the internet?

[Gentlemanloser]

Yes. Without reservation. For reasons already discussed.

 

What reasons?

 

Strikes outshoot GKT.

Srikes are more durable.

They have a better selection of Psychic Powers.

They have a better Selection of Transports.

They can sweeping advance.

They have more attacks in CC than GKT.

 

On the other hand;

GKT have a slight advantage with Leadership.

GKT can get CC weapon upgrades for free.

Potentail Wound allocation shenanigans. Mostly used to try to stack extra unsaved wounds that have wrapped 'round the smaller Squad size. Not as usual as it is on 2W minis.

 

What have I missed?

[number6]

What have I missed?

Morale.

 

How cover is generated for your Strikers. Is it self-generated or on the table? Either way this impacts your ability to move them around the battlefield. Take away cover, and your assumptions about survivability go out the window.

 

What I'm getting at is the Movement phase. GKTs have much more freedom of movement than Strikers as a result of their armour and invul saves. They don't rely on cover nearly as much. This is tactically significant.

 

The availability of AP3 weaponry in your enemy's force. (As noted earlier, many many armies can -- and often do -- have lots of AP3 weapony. Not just AP3 and better, but specifically AP 3. For example, the spamming of missile launchers in Marine armies -- the most common army on tabletops -- is so prevalent that you can't just ignore it; it's an important consideration.)

 

Wound allocation shenanigans to mitigate torrents of fire. GKTs an do this, Strikers cannot.

 

Integration of GK HQs. Sure, they can technically join any squad, but unless you put Strikers in either a land raider or stormraven you'll be forced to footslog your Strikers if you want an IC to boost them. No Rhinos or Razorbacks for your Strikers if you join an HQ to them! (Few of us build army lists where the Strikers actually make the best use of Stormravens or land raiders. Usually, purifiers or terminators are the best units for that.) But GK HQs can join with terminators either on foot or in all the rides that you would naturally want them in anyway. Thus your tactical options with Strikers are limited vis-a-vis your willingness to employ HQs with them. (And IC boosting did come up in arguments in this topic.)

 

Shall I go on? :) As I've said multiple times, there is much more to quality analysis than simple algebra in a vacuum.

[Gentlemanloser]

Morale.

 

No, that's above.

 

The GKT have a very slight advantage over the Strikes.

 

How cover is generated for your Strikers. Is it self-generated or on the table? Either way this impacts your ability to move them around the battlefield. Take away cover, and your assumptions about survivability go out the window.

 

What? No. Cover isn't part of this. It's never been.

 

The Strikes are more durable, regardless of cover.

 

What I'm getting at is the Movement phase. GKTs have much more freedom of movement than Strikers as a result of their armour and invul saves. They don't rely on cover nearly as much. This is tactically significant.

 

That really depends on your opponent. Massed Plasma/Melta and the GKT suffer the same.

 

And have a hard time accessing Transports to protect them.

 

The availability of AP3 weaponry in your enemy's force. (As noted earlier, many many armies can -- and often do -- have lots of AP3 weapony. Not just AP3 and better, but specifically AP 3. For example, the spamming of missile launchers in Marine armies -- the most common army on tabletops -- is so prevalent that you can't just ignore it; it's an important consideration.)

 

Availability of AP2/1, and noted earlier the current Meta make Melta guns very attractive, and a lot of armies spam these.

 

Wound allocation shenanigans to mitigate torrents of fire. GKTs an do this, Strikers cannot.

 

A good point. Although Wound Allocation doesn't really matter on single wound minis. If we were talking about Pallies here this would actually have weight. But hey, I'll add it above.

 

Integration of GK HQs. Sure, they can technically join any squad, but unless you put Strikers in either a land raider or stormraven you'll be forced to footslog your Strikers if you want an IC to boost them. No Rhinos or Razorbacks for your Strikers if you join an HQ to them! (Few of us build army lists where the Strikers actually make the best use of Stormravens or land raiders. Usually, purifiers or terminators are the best units for that.) But GK HQs can join with terminators either on foot or in all the rides that you would naturally want them in anyway. Thus your tactical options with Strikers are limited vis-a-vis your willingness to employ HQs with them. (And IC boosting did come up in arguments in this topic.)

 

Inquisitors and the BC.

 

Shall I go on? As I've said multiple times, there is much more to quality analysis than simple algebra in a vacuum.

 

Please do.

 

You've offered nothing to counterbalance the advantges Strikes hold over GKT.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Something to note regarding meltas - it's not always easy to get the meltas in range to shoot because of their short range... So often they are not a real threat.

 

GKT have the advantage of mobility over Strikes due to being relentless and this can be fairly huge depending upon the circumstances - especially if you're playing an infantry army.

 

Strikes are nowhere near as good a melee unit as GKT. No one is going to pay the points to arm Strikes with halberds and I rarely if ever see them armed with even a daemonhammer.

 

Warp Quake is only good versus deep striking armies - so often it's worthless.

 

G :D