When GKs get 6th ed codex

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Sorry, RD, wasn't trying to hammer out how to make those lists 'work'.

Just ocntinuing the discussion with Number6 about not running 'competitve' lists.

I feels it's really a grey area about what a non fun list is, and how a player should (if they should) start to go around 'comping' themselves to make weaker lists.

And does an intentionally weak list equal fun?

If so, then sure;y the most fun you could get would be to run the weakest list possible.

Dunno why the internet still agonises over this topic. Build a list you like, play it the way you wanna play. Provided you're not breaking any of the rules, who cares? People obsess way too much over other people's perception. I laughed at people to their face when they groaned about 'stupid OP Knights', and I laugh now when they moan about Daemons or Tau. There is no such thing as a perfect list, and anyone who says they don't build competitive lists is delusional. We all build our armies with the full intention of winning with them. If you really are a 'fluff player only', play my servitor list and tell me winning doesn't matter.

A dev cent can only have an ML not a CML and they cant fire overwatch as they are SNP, this seems to be a common mistake atm.

Ah, my bad. That's kinda lame, it's not even twin-linked either, unlike the arm weapons.

And to return to topic, i would like to see a drop in the personal teleporter for NDK's as its far to high especalky when you can get wings for other MC's for less.

Nah, I think it's about right. You get a shunt move as well don't forget, and he isn't bound by the janky FMC rules. He's a 2+/5++ 4-wound MC with base S10 don't forget, there is a reason his base price is so high. His guns are overpriced though.

The easiest way to tell if a list is "WAAC/competitive" is if it spams a unit or two and the scoring units are clones of each other. They are generally unimaginative. The times I really have a issue with those lists is the dude that always plays them but never has/will play in a tournie.

So? I've seen lists with huge unit variety stomp, and I've seen spammy lists fail when they hit their matchup nightmare. Also, putting labels on people on the basis of their list is something Warseer would do. I'd like to think we're better than that here.

My mate runs a 6 Tac Squad SM list, which are idnetically equipped.

I roll him every game.

His list isn't competitive, and he has little fun with the performance of his spam list (but desires to run a list that is 'core' marine units, tacs/assaults, rather than rarer non standard units)

Haha oh wow. Spamming Tac squads is 4th edition herp derp at its finest. Why would he still play such a boring and slow list?

It seems at the speed GW are now producing codexes that they are aiming to get a release in for each army before 7E. If the next edition sticks to the four year release pattern then I can see them just about accomplishing that at this rate. However, much like 5E I expect that the Grey Knights/Inquisition codex will be amongst the last few to be released.

As for supplements, they appear to be little more than post-codex bonus packs. Pretty sure a codex will come first before they do that.

Yeah but I don't think we're even going to get a supplement. We've already been re-worked via the FAQ's put out, and there are no 'variant' Knight lists, unless they do something crazy like an all-Purifier list, or an Inquisition list resurrecting Stormtrooper Troops and what not.

Seems all pretty sad... Show that 40k is overall a pretty crappy game. Lucky for me, I play with a gaming group that usually likes to try stuff and build non-internet lists. We also usually play 2vs2, with changes the dynamic and game balance (for the better, most of the time as, statistically a "better" codex will be matched with a "worst" codex).

Lol, why do you still play it then? I like 2v2, but it's really hard to balance sometimes, especially if your team partner only has certain models to work with. I'm glad it works for you guys though, 1v1 can get stale after a while.

Well, there's always a Sisters-eque digital update, including dedicated Warlord and Psycher tables at a minimum.

Please no. 'Grand Strategy' is already better than the stupid Warlord traits by a country mile. Also, forcing us to roll randomly like Fantasy is dumb. It's okay for Divination, as there is only one cornercase power (Scriers Gaze), but our codex powers are a mixture of 'that was good before 6th' and 'that's good in certain matchups'.

[Gentlemanloser]

Dunno why the internet still agonises over this topic. Build a list you

like, play it the way you wanna play. Provided you're not breaking any

of the rules, who cares? People obsess way too much over other people's

perception. I laughed at people to their face when they groaned about

'stupid OP Knights', and I laugh now when they moan about Daemons or

Tau. There is no such thing as a perfect list, and anyone who says they

don't build competitive lists is delusional. We all build our armies

with the full intention of winning with them. If you really are a 'fluff

player only', play my servitor list and tell me winning doesn't

matter.

 

Because then you face the Flying Circus, or the WD buffed Flamers.

 

There are times when you'd get more 'fun' after seeing your opponents list by just packing up and going to do something, anything, else.

 

And that's hardly good for the game.

 

 

Haha oh wow. Spamming Tac squads is 4th edition herp derp at its finest. Why would he still play such a boring and slow list?

 

Because to him, that's what Marines are.  Tac squads.

 

It was just an example of how spamming scoring units can fail utterly to make a 'competitive' list.

 

 

Please no. 'Grand Strategy' is already better than the stupid

Warlord traits by a country mile. Also, forcing us to roll randomly like

Fantasy is dumb. It's okay for Divination, as there is only one

cornercase power (Scriers Gaze), but our codex powers are a mixture of

'that was good before 6th' and 'that's good in certain matchups'.

 

We'd still have TGS.  A Warlord table would be in addition to that.

 

Asfor a PP chart, it all depends on what the default one is.  And what

buffs they would give libbies for removing the option to purchase as

many powers as you wanted.

[boreas]

I still play because despite being a crappy game, it can be made fun by people you play with. The models and fluff are cool. But all I read here is:

 

-Centurions break the game.

-Unless you're playing Tau, Eldar or daemon, you don't have a faire chance of winning

-You should spam good units and avoids sub-par unit, even if cool.

-Do not play the army you like, you will lose. If you happen to like a strong army, you'll win but be branded a powergamer!

-yaddi yadda.

 

Which show that 40k is a crappy game. Or possibly it's made that way by crappy players. I think the original topic was to find out what might be coming in a theoretical next codex. What could be fun or rebalanced. Instead, I kinda of found out why I don't play at gaming stores or in tournaments. The time and effort put into assembling and painting a cool 40k army is not worth it if you can't play it because of the so-called "metagame". And spending this much time and effort on an army you don't like, but that can win, is totally nuts...

[Reclusiarch Darius]

placeholder, for some reason my post won't go through

[number6]

boreas, on 17 Oct 2013 - 17:59, said:

I still play because despite being a crappy game, it can be made fun by people you play with. The models and fluff are cool. But all I read here is:

-Centurions break the game.

-Unless you're playing Tau, Eldar or daemon, you don't have a faire chance of winning

-You should spam good units and avoids sub-par unit, even if cool.

-Do not play the army you like, you will lose. If you happen to like a strong army, you'll win but be branded a powergamer!

-yaddi yadda.

Which show that 40k is a crappy game. Or possibly it's made that way by crappy players. I think the original topic was to find out what might be coming in a theoretical next codex. What could be fun or rebalanced. Instead, I kinda of found out why I don't play at gaming stores or in tournaments. The time and effort put into assembling and painting a cool 40k army is not worth it if you can't play it because of the so-called "metagame". And spending this much time and effort on an army you don't like, but that can win, is totally nuts...

I repeat, 40K is "crappy" only if what you want is a game as tournament-ready and rules-tight as, say, Magic: The Gathering. Let us just acknowledge reality, shall we? 40K never has been this kind of a game. I myself have bemoaned this fact many times. And sometimes I still get irked. Because the other reality is: GW really could tighten the game up to be that way.

However, they never have, and they never will. Where does that leave us?

I would say the models, fluff, and game rules still combine to make the game not only playable, but fun.

True, some units are just terribad. And some are so good they are virtually "auto-include". (Looking at you, heldrakes! )

But when you don't approach the game solely as a competitive affair, it really does open up the box-o-fun.

I'm not saying you should be allowed to take nothing but Tac squads and expect to win. Rather, you should be allowed to spend your points on merely OK units because they are cool, or fluffy, or you just plain like them, because you have a fair expectation that your opponent won't be fielding 5 Wave Serpents or 3 Heldrakes.

Once you can reasonably expect that your opponent is not trying to dominate the game play, list building possibilities really open up.

You still need to defend against flyers. But you don't necessarily have to defend against 6 of them. Or have to defend against 3 land raiders. Or nothing but bikers with grav guns. Or any other kind of extreme build that can often prove to be "competitive" in actual tournaments, but which commit the commonly espoused sins of "spamming" and "overpowered ".

Just ... have a talk with your mates. Maybe you'll be surprised. There are a LOT of fun toys, and most of us want to play with all of them at once. Usually, that is not compatible with building a "tournament-competitive" list. Such lists tend to leave a lot of otherwise fine toys on the shelf.

[boreas]

Obviously (atlhough, maybe not!), my comment about 40k being a crappy game is not completely serious. But it is a very bad ruleset in the sense that it needs a lot of player consent in order to have fun and balanced game. One might argue that it's less a game than and activity with a basic set of rules that a given gaming group must build upon in order to have a nice time consistently.

 

But when I read long discussion about what you should or shouldn't play in40k in order to have fun and/or win a reasonnable ratio of game against players of the same skill, I find it maddening. OK, 6 tac squads might not be good and maybe shouldn't be. But what about 4 tac squads with different equipment, possibly sub-par? They represent a "valid" 40k concept (in that 4 tac squads are something logical to find on a 40k battlefield, compared to, say, 36 jokaeroes).  As I pointed out, building a nice, painted 40k army demands too much effort to have to bend to the "needs of the metagame". At least, with M:TG, you can just go and buy more cards...

[Gentlemanloser]

One might argue that it's less a game than and activity with a basic set

of rules that a given gaming group must build upon in order to have a

nice time consistently.

 

Which is all well and good.  We've been houseruling games since we started PnP roleplaying 20 odd years ago,

 

But if you have to put that much work and effort into the system, why should you be expected to *pay* for it?

 

Release the rules for free, pay for the minis.  Job done.

 

 

Once you can reasonably expect that your opponent is not trying to

dominate the game play, list building possibilities really open up.

 

Been there, done that. ;)

 

Problem is, it's actually impossible.  Just as impossible as GW releasing a balanced 40k.

 

When you start to 'comp' it opens unending adjustments, becuase the game isn't and *can't* be balanced.  Especially by the players.

 

So the game is fun if you agree not to use 3 Helldrakes.  How about 2?  1?  None?  then the Chaos players gets frustrated becuase without Helldrakes thier Codex is insipid and lackluster.  And now they expect *you* to comp down as well.

 

In the end, the only real 'balance' you can try to achieve in 40k is to all throw out any sense of balance yourself, and agree to go 'ard boyz' and try to build and bring the best list you possibly can.

 

And some players don't like that.

 

End of the day, it's the only 'balance' standard we all have in common.

 

Do your best to bring your best.

 

Or accept that your fluffy 6 Tac Squad Marine list is going to be rolled every single game you play.

[boreas]

That's pretty much my point: when a game allows you to build 100 different lists and 6-8 of those will win 75% of the time, 10-12 will win 50% of the time and 80-84 will win 25% of the time, you've created a pretty bad ruleset. It's the beef many players have (and justifyably so) with GW. In my opinion, reasonnable listbuilding is a better solution than the "no hold's barred" approach, though. Not only is it more fun, but it actually allows you to build the army you actually want.

 

Not only that, but I find it makes you a better 40k player. Playing the same "optimized" list over and over is makes the game stale and blunts your strategic sense. In an extreme way, playing a seemingly random list agains a similar list forces you to think about using a new tool kit.

 

But I think we're diverging from the OT a bit much here! It was more fun when the discussion was more about the "what" and "hows" of the next codex! Sororitas, Daemons, CSM, DA, Eldars, Necrons, SM and Tau have had updates. That leaves BA, DE, IG, Orks, SW and Nids at the most before we get a new codex. Two year, I guess, although turnover could accelerate since the number of kit GW has to produce for each realease is lower in some cases (BA, SW and IG come to mind).

[lokyar]

there is a REASON we dont get stormshields: our nemesis force swords

2+ inv save in CC on every model is a: completely overpowered B: makes warding stave useless

[Gentlemanloser]

So don't have NFS give +1 Invulernable Saves.

 

Or state they don't work with Storm Shields.

 

It's not really an excuse.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

It's pretty weird that swords give that +1 to invul in melee. On any of the PA squads, it's completely irrelevant, as they have no invul save. On Terminators, there are free I6 or free thunderhammers as alternatives, so it's a very cornercase option. 

 

I think not having storm shield isn't a make or break. If we got them, we'd have to pay for them, and that would jack up our price to Deathwing levels, which would make fielding our Terminators even harder than normal. I think the warding stave could've been made to work against ranged attacks (still only 1 per squad of course), and thus would give us something similar (put the warding stave guy out front, but rolling a 1 means you lose the protection). 

 

If we were re-designing the nemesis weapons, I'd go with;

- halberds as is (I6 isn't unbeatable, new Daemons are faster with their Princes)

- hammers as is

- swords give a 5+ invul in melee. If the model already has an invulnerable save, they allow you to re-roll invul saves in melee (giving +1 is usually irrelevant, a re-rollable 5+ is better than a 4+ but worse than a 3+). 

- falchions give +2A but the model doesn't get the bonus attack for charging

[Valerian]

If we were re-designing the nemesis weapons, I'd go with;

- halberds as is (I6 isn't unbeatable, new Daemons are faster with their Princes)

- hammers as is

- swords give a 5+ invul in melee. If the model already has an invulnerable save, they allow you to re-roll invul saves in melee (giving +1 is usually irrelevant, a re-rollable 5+ is better than a 4+ but worse than a 3+). 

- falchions give +2A but the model doesn't get the bonus attack for charging

Yeah, those would work. You could provide Storm Shield options to Terminators/Paladins, but just limit them to 2 per squad: they'd have to pay, they'd lose their Storm Bolter, and they couldn't really spam them. Once you've adjusted what the NFS does, then Shields can become viable again.

[Gentlemanloser]

I'd change the weapons to;

 

Nemesis Force Sword: 6++ Save or +1 to any exisitng Invulernerable Save (much like the mark...).  Max Save of 3++ (So works with an Iron Halo, but not a Storm Shield)

Nemesis Force Halberd: +1I, Master Crafted.

Nemesis Daemonhammer: x2S, AP2, Unwieldy, Daemons reroll any sucessful Invulnerable Saves.

Nemesis Falcions: +1A (in addition to +1A from using two CC Weapons).

Nemesis Warding Staff: 4++ Save for unit from Shooting Attacks, 2++ Save in CC for weilder.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

 

Nemesis Force Sword: 6++ Save or +1 to any exisitng Invulernerable Save (much like the mark...).  Max Save of 3++ (So works with an Iron Halo, but not a Storm Shield)

Nemesis Force Halberd: +1I, Master Crafted.

Nemesis Daemonhammer: x2S, AP2, Unwieldy, Daemons reroll any sucessful Invulnerable Saves.

Nemesis Falcions: +1A (in addition to +1A from using two CC Weapons).

Nemesis Warding Staff: 4++ Save for unit from Shooting Attacks, 2++ Save in CC for weilder.

I'd raise the sword to a 5+ invul and make the bonus only apply to saves against wounds in melee. Making it work against ranged attacks is non-sensical and would be kinda silly on Strikes. They're already great value for 20 points (if only Heldrakes and Riptides didn't exist, we'd be able to field them more often...). 

 

+1 Initiative is too low to be useful. +2 means we slap Slannesh at the same time and can kill a lot of MC's and characters before they swing. It has to compete with the hammer on our heroes and Terminators don't forget, and the hammer being AP2 and S8 has a lot going for it. If it's supposed to be the 'speed kills' option, +2 is fine. As I mentioned before, Daemon Princes come with I7 by default anyway. 

 

I like your warding stave idea, it would make it very viable on all squads and justifiable for the cost. That alone would make Strikes and Purifiers viable again against Tau/CSM. 

 

Daemonhammer doesn't need to force re-rolls to saves. What needs to happen is the Grimoire needs to be FAQ'd to max out at a 3+ invul, and we need to be given 'Null Zone' as a purchable psychic power on Librarians. That way, we can still do that trick, but it requires an expensive toolbox hero and it doesn't just gimp Daemons, it gimps Deathwing and Stormhammers in general. 

[Gentlemanloser]

All good (Yeah, I should have stipulated the NFSword shoudln't give an Invulerable to shooting, CC only!), I suppose the NDH depends on desgin.

 

Do you want to stick to anti Daemon only (like our PE)?  Or do you want to give us more general counters.  Dameon rerolls would I suppose be 'cheaper', as they are more specific.  While Null Zone more expensive as it's a more general ability.

 

But hey, anything that moves 40k away from Rock Paper Scissors hard counters is good in my book!

[hisdudeness]

I would love to see GK be a direct counter to Daemons, some Chaos, and parts of Nids; as in have some pretty good advantages against them.  And would be fine with them being just another PA army against every other army.

 

Over all it would be nice if there was a 'chain balance' system fro 40k.  Each codex has a counter for 2-3 codexes and weakness for 2-3 codexes, with all others being equal.  With allies the game over all would be pretty balanced.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

 

Do you want to stick to anti Daemon only (like our PE)?  Or do you want to give us more general counters.  Dameon rerolls would I suppose be 'cheaper', as they are more specific.  While Null Zone more expensive as it's a more general ability.

Nah. I think our 'Preferred Enemy' is already plenty powerful, I've won games with it (it's like another 'Prescience' re-roll only it works for failed wounds). I'd up the price of 'Null Zone' to 10pts, as it's not as cornercase as the other psychic powers. You can't make it too expensive, as some armies literally don't care (Nids, IG, Orks, Necron infantry). 'Null Zone' is only valuable if you're forcing those invuls too, which is something people forgot last edition Marines had it. 2+ saves will still end you if don't apply AP2 to the problem. 

 

 

I would love to see GK be a direct counter to Daemons, some Chaos, and parts of Nids; as in have some pretty good advantages against them.  And would be fine with them being just another PA army against every other army.

If we had 'Null Zone' and 'Dark Exocommunication' wasn't terrible, we would be. As is, we get the PE bonus and our general preference for DPS over low AP output means we're quite good at murdering them (mass storm bolter will force failed saves, even on ScreamerStar, its only T3 don't forget). Grimoire need a big nerf first though, re-rollable 2+ invul is broken beyond words. 

 

 

Over all it would be nice if there was a 'chain balance' system fro 40k.  Each codex has a counter for 2-3 codexes and weakness for 2-3 codexes, with all others being equal.  With allies the game over all would be pretty balanced.

That sorta does happen. It's just that xenos are super-viable at the moment, it's forcing Marine players to get mobile and stop relying on their 3+ saves to win by averages. That's why Sternguard and Tac squads are back on the shelf, and you're seeing more Azrael/Rune Priest+IG Blob, Deathwing, Knightwing, and Biker lists come back. Riptides and Heldrakes need an nerf though. It would be as simple as;

 

- Ion accelerator is S8 AP3, Nova Charge takes it to S9 AP2 ordnance. That way, Tau players still get their cheese, but they can't turn on the 3++ or the double-tap secondary power every freaking turn and never ever take a risk on the main gun (because currently there is no reason in hell they'd ever Nova Charge the IA). Also, markerlight counters impose -1 modifiers to cover, not this broken insanity of '2 counters = Ignore Cover'. The Multi-Spectrum Suite should force re-rolls to cover saves, not just flat-out Ignore Cover. Command Node should give Preferred Enemy, not 'Prescience' with no drawback (herp derp). 

- Heldrake Baleflamer is AP4, the turn it uses its daemon power ability it becomes AP3. Again, risk-reward.

[thraxdown]

We did a thread similar to this a while ago, 

 

Mordrak - Make him an Independent Character, however, he loses First to the Fray.  Ghost Knights stay as an option, but now get all options that other GKT get (e.g. Psycannon or Incinerator).  Ghosts Knights no longer disappear when Mordrak is removed as a casualty (they stick around to protect him, or his remains until the battle is over), and still generate new members if he takes Wounds.  Ghosts Knights have the Shrouded special rule.

 

Valerian

 

I like the idea they stick around to protect him.  What if after Mordrak is killed the ghost knights remain but cannot move further than 3 inches from where Mordrak was when he was slain?

 

 

Put me in the camp that doesn't want all of the other SM toys.  I want to be as different from other SM chapters as possible.  

[Gentlemanloser]

I like that. :)

 

Place a counter where Mordrak 'died', and the Ghost Knights stay within 3" to protect him.  Would need some ruling for assaults, pile ins and fallbacks, etc.

 

It's the Inquisitorial Units that make us different to other SM.

 

Remove those (or give them to everyone via a new Codex...) and you might as well roll us into the SM Codex.

[jamsight]

I'll be happy with points drop across the board and access to anti tank that doesn't cost also maybe just maybe ap2 swords instead of +1 invulnerable in CC, except CC is dead so old school psybolts :) and Grav weopens would be groove

[Grand Master Caloth]

we wont see grav guns. period.  And AP2 Swords, also near-guarenteed to not happen. hell, the DA only have Sammael's, I think Azrael's is AP3. And we do have Anti-tank without paying, its S5/S10 in the rear when we charge. Our Psycannons are amazing, so idk why anyone would not use them. If they went back to old school and said no Invul saves....  no, cause we would counter so many things its rediculous.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Grav guns make little sense in an anti-daemon force. AP2 swords....I think Draigo's Titansword should be AP2, but nah, AP3 is the new deal. 

 

Our anti-tank is woeful, it's easily our biggest weakness. That why bringing fast Allies with melta or long-range S9/10 is very helpful to our lists. 

 

Psycannons ignoring invul was never especially powerful, they were still only S6 back then. Now of course...I'd just put 'Null Zone' on the Librarian. 

[Deamon Wolf]

What's the betting that now codex inquisition is out we are going to loose the Assassin section, I personally love the vindicar and evesor assassins but as they are technically a section from the new inq dex I doubt we will keep them,

So the real question comes will we have new GK characters for the 6th ed dex? The cm dex has 6 the da dex has 5 we currently have 4

( not including thrawn), also we will need some anti air and anti tank ok we have the raven and the dreads and landraiders but the purgation squads could become a lot more useful if we could give them sky fire for their power.

 

I know loads of people like the new crusaders but in fluff terms they have no place in our chapter

( unless we get ret conned) I also think that they are a lot of points for 1- 3 man squad

 

I think the interceptors are a great unit but that they should either be made troops or given something as at the moment they are good but need work

 

Paladins are fine the way they are

 

Terminators need a second power

 

Strikes are fine

 

We need access to relic combat or tactical dreads for fire power/ alternative to the NDK

 

I think that the raven is cool but the transport and then assault rules for this flyer new to be changed ( like have the ability to move max speed not shoot but have the transported unit deploy and assault flyer stays flyer instead of hovering),

 

 

And finally if / when we get 6th ed dex I think we should have the ability to field some form of xnos tech cannon or

Assault servitors just to make us more different from the smurf dex

[MayorDaley]

 

I know loads of people like the new crusaders but in fluff terms they have no place in our chapter

( unless we get ret conned) I also think that they are a lot of points for 1- 3 man squad

 

 

 

What are these? and where are they found?

 

Cheers

 

 

Edit: Are they the Warband Crusaders?

[Brother Captain Sirus]

Assassins didnt go into the codex:inquisition to my knowledge. So unless there is an update i didnt know about we still have them.