So how OP are we anyway?

[*Furyou Miko]

SoB are definitely tier 3, not 4, for three reasons;

 

Cheap rending heavy-bolters

Cheap twin-linked Scouting meltaguns

The Exorcist.

[Stormshadow]

Now that I play Grey Knights instead of Daemon Hunters I find it a lot easier to win. I can also vary my army list and play with a lot of different builds and still win. I have never felt that I am overpowered though. More experiments than my opponent, maybe, and sometimes I have rely been playing the rock to his scissor. Some codex’s have more builds to choose from when making all comers lists, but I have a hard time believing that any of them are overpowered. I stomped both SW and DA with my old DH lists. And I have had my ass handed to me by some Armies considered to be really bad and outdated. I was actually really happily surprised when I read through the codex for the fifth or sixth time. Most good things are so expensive that you rely have to think twice before taking it, like an Apothecary, Dred Knight with teleport, Teach Marin grenade caddy ore a wording stave. Some things are just super good, plain and simple. Like Psyfelman dreads and Force Weapons on regular marines. This throws a wrench in to army’s that spam Rhinos and Razorbacks. And every one that said “I have thunder wolf cavalry, you lose!” had to actually think before charging head long into our regular bare bone troops. The Codex was a game changer when it came, but I do not think it is overpowered, or rather, all codexs are overpowered when they come out, but then the armys out there learn to deal with them, and everything balances itself out.

 

We will have to see what happens in 6th however, I have a filing it may take a turn to the ludicrous if we get an extra attack for the storm bolters and an invulnerable parry save due to the swoards (+1?).

[Brother Nihm]

The GK is an army with the tools to handle any situation, it is the elite army.

 

Do I find it OP?

No.

 

Do I find it easy to play, for both newbies and veterans?

Yep.

 

There are many choices in the book that are point and click they and do not require the greatest of generals to use. The model count is low to boot so it is an obvious "starter army" for many.

A book full of such units, with an experienced general behind it means that other books, with lesser units / situational units, used by a similarly competent player, will be fighting a harsh uphill battle to win in the basic missions.

 

 

Overall I do think that GW did a good job with the GK (and SW) book, but how I wish they would update all the other books to be comparable in their own way, yesterday.

[Captain Idaho]

Overall I do think that GW did a good job with the GK (and SW) book, but how I wish they would update all the other books to be comparable in their own way, yesterday.

 

Well if they updated the other Codex books quicker it wouldn't be a problem, but because they don't it creates a massive disparity in gaming environments. There is a problem with the Codex if this is the case, in my humble view.

 

It's not so much how competetive a player's list is against it, what I find a more substantial problem is it forces other armies to reduce their varied and balanced builds so they can stand a chance against the top tier.

 

Still, that could be a problem I have with 40K though, because I prefer varied and balanced builds against each other because the winner of games with 2 such games is determined by skill more than the paper-rock-scissors of list building people prefer now a days.

 

I reckon 6th edition will promote this idealodgy by the way. :tu:

[dswanick]

The GK is an army with the tools to handle any situation, it is the elite army.

 

Do I find it OP?

No.

{snip}

 

A book full of such units, with an experienced general behind it means that other books, with lesser units / situational units, used by a similarly competent player, will be fighting a harsh uphill battle to win in the basic missions.

I'm sorry, but that is the definition of OP. If two players of similar skill level can't have a competative game using the same points totals from different books then the one book is Over Powered compared to the other. That GKs have the tool for every job, in every all comers list when every other book requires compromises and weaknesses in certain aspects of the game is the definition of OP.

And again, the "model count" claim is a myth. Yes, GKs will have a lower model count if you go balls to the walls with upgrades or high-cost units. But compare a GK list consisting of :

HQ: Grey Knight Brother-Captain (1#, 150 pts)
  1 Grey Knight Brother-Captain, 150 pts ((C:GK, pg. 23); Unit Type: Infantry; Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Iron Halo; Terminator Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Storm Bolter; And They Shall Know No Fear; Independent Character; Preferred Enemy (Daemons); Psyker (Mastery Level 1); The Aegis; Hammerhand; Psychic Communion)

Troops: Grey Knight Terminator Squad (5#, 225 pts)
  1 Grey Knight Terminator Squad, 225 pts ((C:GK, pg. 27); Unit Type: Infantry; And They Shall Know No Fear; Brotherhood of Psykers; Combat Squads; Preferred Enemy (Daemons); The Aegis; Hammerhand)
  1 Terminator Justicar (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Terminator Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Storm Bolter)
  3 Terminators (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Terminator Armour; Storm Bolter; Nemesis Force Halberd)
  1 Terminator (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Terminator Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Psycannon)

Troops: Grey Knight Strike Squad (6#, 195 pts)
  1 Grey Knight Strike Squad, 195 pts ((C:GK, pg. 28); Unit Type: Infantry; And They Shall Know No Fear; Brotherhood of Psykers; Combat Squads; Deep Strike; Preferred Enemy (Daemons); The Aegis; Hammerhand; Warp Quake)
  1 Justicar (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Power Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Storm Bolter)
  3 Grey Knights (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Power Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Storm Bolter)
  1 Grey Knight (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Power Armour; Psycannon)
  1 Razorback ((C:GK, pg. 33); Unit Type: Vehicle (Tank); Transport Capacity: 6 models; Access Points: 3; Fire Points: 0; Smoke Launchers; Psybolt Ammunition; Twin-Linked Assault Cannon; Psychic Pilot; The Aegis; Fortitude)

Troops: Grey Knight Strike Squad (6#, 195 pts)
  1 Grey Knight Strike Squad, 195 pts ((C:GK, pg. 28); Unit Type: Infantry; And They Shall Know No Fear; Brotherhood of Psykers; Combat Squads; Deep Strike; Preferred Enemy (Daemons); The Aegis; Hammerhand; Warp Quake)
  1 Justicar (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Power Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Storm Bolter)
  3 Grey Knights (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Power Armour; Nemesis Force Sword; Storm Bolter)
  1 Grey Knight (Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Psyk-out Grenades; Power Armour; Psycannon)
  1 Razorback ((C:GK, pg. 33); Unit Type: Vehicle (Tank); Transport Capacity: 6 models; Access Points: 3; Fire Points: 0; Smoke Launchers; Psybolt Ammunition; Twin-Linked Assault Cannon; Psychic Pilot; The Aegis; Fortitude)

Total Roster Cost: 765

versus

HQ: Space Marine Captain in Terminator Armour (1#, 140 pts)
  1 Space Marine Captain in Terminator Armour, 140 pts (Unit Type: Infantry; Iron Halo; Power Weapon; Storm Bolter; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Tactics; Independent Character)

Elite: Terminator Squad (6#, 270 pts)
  5 Terminator Squad, 270 pts ((C:SM, pg. 64 & 136); Unit Type: Infantry; Power Fist x5; Storm Bolter x4; Assault Cannon; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Squads; Combat Tactics)
  1 Sergeant (Unit Type: Infantry; Power Weapon; Storm Bolter; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Squads; Combat Tactics)

Troops: Tactical Squad (7#, 181 pts)
  5 Tactical Squad, 181 pts ((C:SM, pg. 59 & 134); Unit Type: Infantry; Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Power Armour; Bolt Pistol x5; Bolter x5; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Squads; Combat Tactics)
  1 Sergeant (Unit Type: Infantry; Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Power Armour; Bolt Pistol; Bolter; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Squads; Combat Tactics)
  1 Razorback (Unit Type: Vehicle (Tank); Transport Capacity: 6 models; Access Points: 3; Searchlight; Smoke Launchers; Twin-Linked Assault Cannon)

Troops: Tactical Squad (7#, 181 pts)
  5 Tactical Squad, 181 pts ((C:SM, pg. 59 & 134); Unit Type: Infantry; Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Power Armour; Bolt Pistol x5; Bolter x5; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Squads; Combat Tactics)
  1 Sergeant (Unit Type: Infantry; Frag Grenades; Krak Grenades; Power Armour; Bolt Pistol; Bolter; And They Shall Know No Fear; Combat Squads; Combat Tactics)
  1 Razorback (Unit Type: Vehicle (Tank); Transport Capacity: 6 models; Access Points: 3; Searchlight; Smoke Launchers; Twin-Linked Assault Cannon)

Total Roster Cost: 772

Given equal generals, which army do you put your money on? And do you think the +1 model per unit really gives the C:SM player any hope of prevailing? And at 1,000pts which army has more points available for additional units and additional upgrades? Which army has the availability of better upgrades?

Shall we list some of the advantages of C:GK over C:SM in these lists?

Free power (we can ignore that they're Force Weapons against this C:SM list) weapons, free I6 CC attacks, +1S Assault Cannons which can count as Assault 2 in their Strike Squads, +1S in their Assault Cannon (or equivalent) in the Troops Terminator Squad and the two Razorbacks, free Psychic Powers, and all for -3 models total?

[RedemptionNL]

That's more a problem with the Tactical Squads and Tactical Terminators in Codex: Space Marines being underwhelming though. Only switching out the Tactical Terminators with a squad of 6 TH/SS terminators already throws the balance around quite a bit.

[Res Ipsa Loquitur]

I like the pattern that's revealing itself it here and I'd like to add to it; Barcelona aren't a great football team; every other team in Europe just plain sucks. The Yankees have only won so many World Series because all the other MLB teams suck. The Canadiens have only won so many Stanley Cups because all other hockey teams are awful.

 

Likewise, Grey Knights aren't overpowered at all; all other Codexes just aren't good enough.

[breng77]

THe problem with GKs is in fact a problem with the game, moreso than with the codex.

 

GKs are not overpowered when compared to other top tier armies played by players of equal skill.

 

Space Wolves and IG almost always result in a close game for my GKs, and Necrons have also been proving to be quite good.

 

The problem is that against the second tier and lower armies, GKs can be very overpowering, and the tools they have really hurt these lower tier armies.

 

Codex Blood Angels gets hurt by High Initiative power weapons, and massed anti-vehicle shooting, but a good mech list can still hold its own decently well.

 

Codex space Marines, was already out paced by Wolves and BA in most areas, but its top lists can still do pretty well against good GK lists.

 

Tyranids, ...are pretty bad in general, but they meta better against GKs than they do against say space wolves.

 

Dark Eldar, are one of the only armies that metas well against most other lists but, gets killed by Grey Knights, but then again they do the same thing to Nids, and Chaos Daemons (worse in many ways, because as a Daemon player, venom spam is as close to an auto-loss as exists in 40k).

 

In order of this game to be balanced GW would need to release all of the codices at the same time (say the beginning of an edition), with the current model, you are looking at New books competing with 5-7 year old books, and with the way GW writes that equates to bad balance.

[Captain Idaho]

breng77; you make a lot of sense there in that post.

 

I would like to say also, I don't see why GW can't release Codex books all at once in the future and support the with additional releases at a later date, now they have the ranges substantiated. It would of course be a big shake up but I'd imagine it would be extremely profitible

[breng77]

The issue I think is that they are worried about not having consistent staggered releases. I think the priviateer press model (though I prefer the GW games) is a better release model. Release a book with units for all factions, then later release a big book of containing all current options.

 

For Instance at the release of 6th Ed, the release a book with several generic HQ options, Troops, and maybe 1 of each other slot, for all armies. All of which have been tested and are balanced with the new rules. Then state that these replace the same units in the present codex (at first). Then say 2 or 3 months later release an expansion with More options for each book (again tested against the current units, replacing old units.), and keep this moving forward.

[dswanick]

breng77; you make a lot of sense there in that post.

 

I would like to say also, I don't see why GW can't release Codex books all at once in the future and support the with additional releases at a later date, now they have the ranges substantiated. It would of course be a big shake up but I'd imagine it would be extremely profitible

I agree with you, breng77 makes a lot of very valid points.

That said, I sometimes wonder if it's a marketing decision on the part of GW. Codex creep = bandwagon codex jumping on the part of a lot of the tournament crowd. As well as new-unit sales on the part of tournament and casual gamers alike. If they released all the major codex's at the start of an Edition cycle, many players would stick more to their chosen army(ies) resulting in less migration from the last "OP" to the new "OP".

[breng77]

OF course game balance issues are also caused by GW wanting to write rules to fit fluff, and not playtesting assuming someone is trying to write an over powered list. If you ever read their battle reports, they never spam stuff, they play wonky missions, etc, and I think sometimes they assume everyone should or does, play that way.

[Brother Captain Kezef]

There is a comercial aspect to staggered lists.

 

GW makes a fortune on bandwagoners who jump to the next codex because it's bound to be good due to codex creep.

[breng77]

yup, which is one reason they are not interested in a balanced game. Arguably though they would make more money on a steady basis, if they released good new units for each army, then even non-bandwagoneers would be dropping some money.

[the jeske]

GW makes a fortune on bandwagoners who jump to the next codex because it's bound to be good due to codex creep.

what would be all nice and true , if people would have stoped playing SW and IG because of the "OP" GK and there should be a lot more nid armies for sell then we normaly see on e bay. People didnt jump on to BAs because the army is actualy hard to play , much harder then SW or GKs.

 

 

 

The problem is that against the second tier and lower armies, GKs can be very overpowering, and the tools they have really hurt these lower tier armies

ergo people should not be playing bad armies or if they do then they should understand that the chance of them losing is bigger . Simple as that . that is how life works .

[breng77]

If those people really want to win that is true. But that also assumes equal level of generalship. While it is easy to say don't play bad armies that ends up hurting the game, as many don't have the cash to bandwagon jump and many more simply like the army they already have.

[nurglez]

Not everyone want's to play at tournaments and win big, some people play for fun and choose units they like over cost effective choices.

 

Is it fair that jimmy and billy, friends who start playing 40k and pick armies they like the look off, who just happen to choose codex's of different power? (lets say grey knights and tau).

 

I would love for GW to release all the codex's at the same time, and at least have them vaguely balanced. I'd happily wait a few years (been waiting longer then that for a decent chaos codex!) for GW to get it's act together and re balance the game.

 

I play Draigowing. Only grey knight's I own, and I fell in love with them before the internet started going on about how powerful they were. I was actually shocked to win my first few games, as when I had started loganwing I lost the first 4-5 before I figured out how to play them (yes I love low model count armies).

 

I don't play draigowing for friendly games much anymore, as it was so demoralizing to look across the battlefield at my friend's face as they shoot everything and I take maybe 3-8 wounds and lose no models. I've lost about 10% of the game's I've played with them.

 

As everyone else has said above, it's the fact we can beat armies at their own game. I6 force weapons + sanctuary mess up close combat armies, storm bolters + psycannon's for mid range vs everything, and shrouding + stunlock immunity (mostly) to use against shooty armies.

 

And don't even get me started on our libby's...

[Reclusiarch Darius]

I'm sorry, but that is the definition of OP. If two players of similar skill level can't have a competative game using the same points totals from different books then the one book is Over Powered compared to the other. That GKs have the tool for every job, in every all comers list when every other book requires compromises and weaknesses in certain aspects of the game is the definition of OP.

 

:D Are you trolling? Please be yes

Other army books suck or are good irrespective of Knights. What Knights affect is the meta-game. The meta-game is what matters, not whether your Tau win or not (or whatever other punching bag codex out there).

40k will never be 'every army is exactly the same and exactly balanced', because that would be boring as hell. Instead, we have nuanced armies that contain a mixture of meh, well-rounded or insanely geared towards 1-3 aspects of the game (Paladins cheat a little as they are durable/shooty/hacky, but the 'balance' there is Elite slot and expense in points). The trick in building a 'balanced' list is bringing hard counters and strong elements to important aspects of the game.

As the meta-game stands now, that means reliable suppression, reliable anti-tank, either a counter to or a heavy assault unit of your own, and mobility. Anti-infantry is endemic to all armies, unless you really overbalance on the anti-tank front (squads have special weapons typically, the rest can do anti-infantry, and tanks often have multiple weapons systems or their weapons are flexible enough to kill manz as well).

 

And again, the "model count" claim is a myth. Yes, GKs will have a lower model count if you go balls to the walls with upgrades or high-cost units. But compare a GK list consisting of :

 

Hahahaha

Brother-Captain: You must be joking

Terminator combat squad: :)

Strike combat squad in assault cannon Razors: Oh wow

 

Terminator Captain, why?

Tac Terminators, again why?

Tactical combat squads in Razors, why?

 

So, in a parallel universe where people only take terrible units and configurations, both lists are still equally bad. Strikes shoot a little better, thats really it. All you've proven is that you can make equally bad armies with the same model count from both codices. Skill challenge: repeat the above example, but using Henchmen. Bonus points for combat servitors, Banishers and/or storm shields (multiplier if you get all three).

 

Knights are a noob-slayer army. If you bring terrible lists, or terrible tactics (the two are kinda inter-related), you will lose to even a basic Knight build. That is not an imbalance in armies, that is being a terrible general. And before people make out that this is somehow unique, IG do exactly the same thing (and I predict Chaos will be the same). You bring a list that can't deal with armour spam and infantry hordes, you will be drowned under their sheer firepower and battlefield presence. IG can even trade with Knights fairly well, our tiny squad and model count is pretty much ideal for them (they focus down our TDA units, and our PA squads die like Tac Marines so we're nothing out of the ordinary in terms of target priority).

[Captain Idaho]

Grey Knights are not a noob beating army. What you have basically described is everyone should build the same net list for their army and if they don't and lose it's their problem. But this is the problem caused in part by the Grey Knight Codex being so good in many of it's builds, other Codex books have to be heavily skewed towards being able to beat them to stand a chance or be a hideous net list.

 

Building a balanced list to be able to deal with Imperial Guard armour AND infantry spam, Ork Battlewagons or infantry and all the rest, plus be able to stand a chance against Grey Knights, is impossible for some armies. Grey Knights can do it though, which is why they are so strong.

 

How can you take all comers and be a "good general" like you say if it is not possible to defeat differing armies using the same list yet those same opponents can do so?

 

40k loses more of it's charm; not everyone can build an army to their own specifications and stand an equal chance of winning, with 40k essentially losing more variety.

[dswanick]

I'm sorry, but that is the definition of OP. If two players of similar skill level can't have a competative game using the same points totals from different books then the one book is Over Powered compared to the other. That GKs have the tool for every job, in every all comers list when every other book requires compromises and weaknesses in certain aspects of the game is the definition of OP.

Other army books suck or are good irrespective of Knights. What Knights affect is the meta-game. The meta-game is what matters, not whether your Tau win or not (or whatever other punching bag codex out there).

40k will never be 'every army is exactly the same and exactly balanced', because that would be boring as hell. Instead, we have nuanced armies that contain a mixture of meh, well-rounded or insanely geared towards 1-3 aspects of the game (Paladins cheat a little as they are durable/shooty/hacky, but the 'balance' there is Elite slot and expense in points). The trick in building a 'balanced' list is bringing hard counters and strong elements to important aspects of the game.

As the meta-game stands now, that means reliable suppression, reliable anti-tank, either a counter to or a heavy assault unit of your own, and mobility. Anti-infantry is endemic to all armies, unless you really overbalance on the anti-tank front (squads have special weapons typically, the rest can do anti-infantry, and tanks often have multiple weapons systems or their weapons are flexible enough to kill manz as well).

Did I say 'exactly balanced and exactly the same'. Hmm, why no, I didn't. But Codex's can be balanced against each other without being 'exactly' the same. The problem is - some Codexs don't have 'hard counters' and 'strong elements' in them, and others have to sink so many points into one 'hard counter' that their entire army suffers for a lack of other 'hard counters'. Grey Knights on the other hand have 'hard counter' built into every core unit in their force, and pay the same or fewer points for them than do other armies with similar units.

And again, the "model count" claim is a myth. Yes, GKs will have a lower model count if you go balls to the walls with upgrades or high-cost units. But compare a GK list consisting of :

Hahahaha

Brother-Captain: You must be joking

Terminator combat squad: :P

Strike combat squad in assault cannon Razors: Oh wow

 

Terminator Captain, why?

Tac Terminators, again why?

Tactical combat squads in Razors, why?

 

So, in a parallel universe where people only take terrible units and configurations, both lists are still equally bad. Strikes shoot a little better, thats really it. All you've proven is that you can make equally bad armies with the same model count from both codices. Skill challenge: repeat the above example, but using Henchmen. Bonus points for combat servitors, Banishers and/or storm shields (multiplier if you get all three).

No, what I've proven is that you only want to see what you want to see and anything that doesn't fit your rose-colored world view is a result of other people needing to 'learn to play' or 'taking terrribad units'. I made two lists using equivalent units from these two dexs. One force is clearly, obviously the superior force - in every way you wish to compare them. But you go on telling yourself that Grey Knights are winners because of your awesome list-building skills and table-top generalship. :tu:

Knights are a noob-slayer army. If you bring terrible lists, or terrible tactics (the two are kinda inter-related), you will lose to even a basic Knight build. That is not an imbalance in armies, that is being a terrible general. And before people make out that this is somehow unique, IG do exactly the same thing (and I predict Chaos will be the same). You bring a list that can't deal with armour spam and infantry hordes, you will be drowned under their sheer firepower and battlefield presence. IG can even trade with Knights fairly well, our tiny squad and model count is pretty much ideal for them (they focus down our TDA units, and our PA squads die like Tac Marines so we're nothing out of the ordinary in terms of target priority).

And what happens when the 'newb' brings the GK army up against the veteran C:SM or C:CSM list? Why yes, they still routinely tie/win. Why? This is the part where you wax poetic about how 'balanced' Grey Knights are and the vet player is just 'terribad'. ;) But do it quitely - because I won't be listening...

[Commander Sasha]

ergo people should not be playing bad armies or if they do then they should understand that the chance of them losing is bigger . Simple as that . that is how life works .

But 40K isn't life, it's a game, that I have spent £1,000s on over the years. I don't want to have to play as aggressively as you suggest if I am to stand a chance.

Not everyone want's to play at tournaments and win big, some people play for fun and choose units they like over cost effective choices.

 

Is it fair that jimmy and billy, friends who start playing 40k and pick armies they like the look off, who just happen to choose codex's of different power? (lets say grey knights and tau).

Units, and armies too; I use C:Tyranids, I should not HAVE to dump them and buy GK if I don't want to.

 

I don't play draigowing for friendly games much anymore, as it was so demoralizing to look across the battlefield at my friend's face as they shoot everything and I take maybe 3-8 wounds and lose no models. I've lost about 10% of the game's I've played with them.

 

As everyone else has said above, it's the fact we can beat armies at their own game. I6 force weapons + sanctuary mess up close combat armies, storm bolters + psycannon's for mid range vs everything, and shrouding + stunlock immunity (mostly) to use against shooty armies.

 

And don't even get me started on our libby's...

This is the problem with unbalanced Codices. My 'Nid all-rounder list can cope with most armies (ie my losses are MY fault!); my Genies and Zoe's can do IG, my troops can manage against most others.

In our gaming group, we have most armies represented, and we all get a fair amount of wins against each other, including against Nurglez' CSM, Loganwing and DE.

Even a few un-optimised GK lists have proven fair; it's the optimised lists that are unbeatable; too many little things like stacking powers, over-powered grenades, too many power weapons etc. Were these things limited, GK would have been a good army, not an OP one.

 

When friends can't bring their models to the table because it is demoralisingly hopeless for their other friends, the game is wrong.

[dswanick]

Even a few un-optimised GK lists have proven fair; it's the optimised lists that are unbeatable; too many little things like stacking powers, over-powered grenades, too many power weapons etc. Were these things limited, GK would have been a good army, not an OP one.

 

When friends can't bring their models to the table because it is demoralisingly hopeless for their other friends, the game is wrong.

QFT, the heart of the problem. Most days I don't even consider playing my Grey Knights for this reason. It's pretty sad when my gaming buddies would rather play my Space Wolves or home-brew 30k Great Crusade dex.

[Stormshadow]

Talking about overpowered, has any one tried Apocalypse with here knights :) ?

 

Attach 5 Grand masters with Psycannons and 5 Librarians with Warp rift to Mordrak and make a precise deep strike B). I must say I felt pretty overpowered at that point. Mohahaha

[Gentlemanloser]

I prefer to DS Mordrak with a Vortex Grenade.

 

Oh, so you bought a Baneblade?

 

*bamph*

[Morollan]

Even a few un-optimised GK lists have proven fair; it's the optimised lists that are unbeatable; too many little things like stacking powers, over-powered grenades, too many power weapons etc. Were these things limited, GK would have been a good army, not an OP one.

 

When friends can't bring their models to the table because it is demoralisingly hopeless for their other friends, the game is wrong.

QFT, the heart of the problem. Most days I don't even consider playing my Grey Knights for this reason. It's pretty sad when my gaming buddies would rather play my Space Wolves or home-brew 30k Great Crusade dex.

 

One of my friends stopped playing his GK and went to Ultramarines because one of our other friends (he plays Tyranids) basically couldn't play against them.