A 'close source' reveals information from the new WD.

[Adeptus]

This begs some interesting questions: is it worth dropping OS, an FA, HS, and 2 Troops slots for RoT? How about for a single extra Elite slot? What about for both?

I've always played pure knights and in all my time since 5th edition, I never fielded more than four Troops choices, and I struggle to remember a time I could afford three of either Heavy Support or Fast Attack. When you exclude Henchmen, Grey Knights are simply so expensive that I really don't feel like the loss of slots hurts us.

 

Even more interesting is: will Purifiers get Deep Strike? If they don't, then the dilemma becomes even more clear--you cannot have an extra Elite slot and maximize RoT usage (at least where Purifiers are involved). If you can teleport Purifiers now, then suddenly the detachment becomes a lot more interesting.

Well, I'd be surprised in Purifiers are still such a no-brainer choice in the new codex. First, I really hope that Paladins get a boost or a points decrease, and secondly I'd bet my left nut that Purifiers will only be able to take ONE heavy weapon per five men, not 2 per five. At the moment they just completely over-shadow every other unit, not least because they carry four heavy weapons.

[Valerian]

 

But it's still your choice, if you don't feel like using the Space Wolf Tactical Objectives, or the Ork specific ones, if you're an Ork player, etc.

 

Val, theres actually no choice.  If you're playing Tactical Objectives, they must replace.  There is no "may" in the verbiage.  

 

 

Really?  Didn't expect the use of Faction-specific TOs would be mandatory.  Don't have my books to hand, though.  Interesting. 

Even more interesting is: will Purifiers get Deep Strike? If they don't, then the dilemma becomes even more clear--you cannot have an extra Elite slot and maximize RoT usage (at least where Purifiers are involved). If you can teleport Purifiers now, then suddenly the detachment becomes a lot more interesting.

 

 

Please let Purifiers Deep Strike, please let Purifiers Deep Strike!!! Crosses fingers.

[BladeGaurd]

 

But, on the other hand, if you just want the Rites of Teleportation then you don't have to focus on Elites per se and you can just use a lot of Deepstriking Strikes and Terminators.

 

This begs some interesting questions: is it worth dropping OS, an FA, HS, and 2 Troops slots for RoT? How about for a single extra Elite slot? What about for both?

 

How often do you max out your FA, HS, and have 5 troops in your Grey Knight army? At 2000 pt I tended to max out my HS with land raiders and dreadnoughts which are both now not going to be taken in that section. I tended to use only 1 or 2 FA. My normal troop number is between 3-4 various Grey Knight squads, about 50% terminators. The loss of OS is important but not sure how it will affect the game vs being able to scatter after your deepstrike.

[Deamon Wolf]

do we know if we are still keeping the Falchions weapon option?

[lt051]

Falcions were in the army builder entries as 4 Pts I believe, so it would seem so

[Templar1]

I'm not sure this new formation is worth losing Objective secured. The rules are nice but in my opinion do not justify losing the regular formation rules. Objective secured terminators are just too awesome.

[Valerian]

I'm not sure this new formation is worth losing Objective secured. The rules are nice but in my opinion do not justify losing the regular formation rules. Objective secured terminators are just too awesome.

 

Although you are not incorrect, one thing to consider is that Objective Secured only comes into play when your units are being opposed at the vicinity of an Objective.  Given the close quarters domination potential of Grey Knights (AP3 and AP2 (Hammers) throughout all units, with Hammerhand, etc.), there is a greater than decent chance that you'll be able to clear Objectives of enemy units pretty easily, once you actually make contact. 

[AnImA8]

 

This begs some interesting questions: is it worth dropping OS, an FA, HS, and 2 Troops slots for RoT? How about for a single extra Elite slot? What about for both?

I've always played pure knights and in all my time since 5th edition, I never fielded more than four Troops choices, and I struggle to remember a time I could afford three of either Heavy Support or Fast Attack. When you exclude Henchmen, Grey Knights are simply so expensive that I really don't feel like the loss of slots hurts us.

 

 

 

 

 

But, on the other hand, if you just want the Rites of Teleportation then you don't have to focus on Elites per se and you can just use a lot of Deepstriking Strikes and Terminators.

 

This begs some interesting questions: is it worth dropping OS, an FA, HS, and 2 Troops slots for RoT? How about for a single extra Elite slot? What about for both?

 

How often do you max out your FA, HS, and have 5 troops in your Grey Knight army? At 2000 pt I tended to max out my HS with land raiders and dreadnoughts which are both now not going to be taken in that section. I tended to use only 1 or 2 FA. My normal troop number is between 3-4 various Grey Knight squads, about 50% terminators. The loss of OS is important but not sure how it will affect the game vs being able to scatter after your deepstrike.

 

I'm gonna address both your responses at the same time since you both had similar comments about my points. Just because I say that we lose 2 Troops, 1 FA, and 1 HS by using this detachment does not mean that I ever suggested or intended to max out all of those options. My point is that if you take this detachment it is no longer even possible to take three of either of those slots.

 

For me, I played with almost exclusively psyflemen dreadnoughts even when they were supposedly "bad", and one thing I can tell you is that I really didn't like using two. Two just never seemed to cut it, whereas three really was the difference between success and failure at times. If I take this detachment I no longer even have that option, nevermind how many Troops or FA I take.

 

At which point, my question is: is it worth it? And I suppose that's a loaded question atm because we don't have the codex in front of us and couldn't say how much stuff costs yet anyhow. But it is an interesting trade off worth discussion.

[BladeGaurd]

 

I'm gonna address both your responses at the same time since you both had similar comments about my points. Just because I say that we lose 2 Troops, 1 FA, and 1 HS by using this detachment does not mean that I ever suggested or intended to max out all of those options. My point is that if you take this detachment it is no longer even possible to take three of either of those slots.

 

For me, I played with almost exclusively psyflemen dreadnoughts even when they were supposedly "bad", and one thing I can tell you is that I really didn't like using two. Two just never seemed to cut it, whereas three really was the difference between success and failure at times. If I take this detachment I no longer even have that option, nevermind how many Troops or FA I take.

 

At which point, my question is: is it worth it? And I suppose that's a loaded question atm because we don't have the codex in front of us and couldn't say how much stuff costs yet anyhow. But it is an interesting trade off worth discussion.

 

 

I have no clue if it is worth it for you. Everything is pointing to dreadnoughts being elites only, so you can still take 3 or as many as 4. The point I was making is more along the lines of other then 1 section chances are you are not going to max out the normal combine arms detachment (which we can still take), so I see that as not so much a ruff trade.  If it might change you list, such as I am looking into a second dreadknight and going from none to 2.  I will probably try a fair number of games with this formation before I solidly go one way or the other.

 

As an acid I have never been a huge fan of the psyflemen preferring either the lascannon, plasma cannon or multi melta depending on the roll I wanted and have only recently been using the assault cannon; the change to rending hit its anti tank power hard making only useful at striping hull points vs vehicles.  Good bye to 6 dreadnoughts, not sure if anyone used 6 of them, most I did was 2.

[Adeptus]

For me, I played with almost exclusively psyflemen dreadnoughts even when they were supposedly "bad", and one thing I can tell you is that I really didn't like using two. Two just never seemed to cut it, whereas three really was the difference between success and failure at times. If I take this detachment I no longer even have that option, nevermind how many Troops or FA I take.

 

At which point, my question is: is it worth it? And I suppose that's a loaded question atm because we don't have the codex in front of us and couldn't say how much stuff costs yet anyhow. But it is an interesting trade off worth discussion.

I see where you're coming from, but with this detachment I don't think I'd consider ANY unit that couldn't deepstrike. I'd want to maximise that first turn potential by getting as many units as possible up in the enemies grill in turn one.

[Valerian]

 

For me, I played with almost exclusively psyflemen dreadnoughts even when they were supposedly "bad", and one thing I can tell you is that I really didn't like using two. Two just never seemed to cut it, whereas three really was the difference between success and failure at times. If I take this detachment I no longer even have that option, nevermind how many Troops or FA I take.

 

At which point, my question is: is it worth it? And I suppose that's a loaded question atm because we don't have the codex in front of us and couldn't say how much stuff costs yet anyhow. But it is an interesting trade off worth discussion.

I see where you're coming from, but with this detachment I don't think I'd consider ANY unit that couldn't deepstrike. I'd want to maximise that first turn potential by getting as many units as possible up in the enemies grill in turn one.

 

 

Agreed, which is how I've always wanted to play my Grey Knights anyway, so win-win.

 

V

[Bionicman]

 

For me, I played with almost exclusively psyflemen dreadnoughts even when they were supposedly "bad", and one thing I can tell you is that I really didn't like using two. Two just never seemed to cut it, whereas three really was the difference between success and failure at times. If I take this detachment I no longer even have that option, nevermind how many Troops or FA I take.

 

At which point, my question is: is it worth it? And I suppose that's a loaded question atm because we don't have the codex in front of us and couldn't say how much stuff costs yet anyhow. But it is an interesting trade off worth discussion.

I see where you're coming from, but with this detachment I don't think I'd consider ANY unit that couldn't deepstrike. I'd want to maximise that first turn potential by getting as many units as possible up in the enemies grill in turn one.

 

 

True, but only if psyflemen are not needed for (light) AT. If we are loosing melta and lascannon completely (except Dreadnoughts and SR) there are only two choices: psycannons - which are more expensive than before (+5 pts if I remember correctly) or CC with hammers. Seems that we still need dreadnoughts for heavy and light AT, and if they move to elite then these 4 slots are definetly needed.

[Gentlemanloser]

Two things not to overlook about the Nemesis Strike Force Detachment.

 

1: You can take it more than once.

 

Want 4 Heavy Slots?  You just need to have two NSF Detachments.

 

2: This basically allows the GK to field a 'Primary' Allied Detachment

 

Want to use an AD, but want your Warlord to come from it?  Use the NSF Detachment.  And don't reserve anything.

 

It has the same compulsory 1HQ + 1Troop as an AD.

 

Edit:

 

A third thing

 

3: You cannot use any Detachments in an Unbound Army

 

Play Unbound and you lose the option to first turn Deep Strike your Grey Knights on a 3+

[AnImA8]

@Adeptus and Bladeguard: the psyflemen case I was making was just to clarify my position by way of an example, whether or not it's dreadnoughts we're talking about is beside the point. A more relevant case for everyone interested in this Detachment is the Dreadknight, which you can only take 2 of in this instance. Many people I know prefer to max out their lists with three Dreadknights because AP2 is so prevalent that they need all the 2+ wounds they can get. Between only being able to take 2, and the loss of Objective Secured on Terminators, this Detachment may not be worth the Rites of Teleportation even though it works for both of those units.

Having said that, GL makes a good point as always that taking two such detachments is actually easy since the Troop requirement is reduced to one. The loss of cheap Inquisitors means we have to take two really expensive HQ's now, but that combined with 2 squads of Terminators allows us to field up to 8 Elites and 4 HS. When would you be able to use up all those slots in 1750-1850 points? Dunno, but the point is some interesting lists can come out of it.

[Quozzo]

Unless GW have some magical unit hidden away from the leaked boxed sets then paladins are going to be the only unit in elites capable of deepstriking. I really dont think even with a minimal of 3 paladins per unit that anyone will require more than 4 elite slots. Although they will be the only unit with 2 psycannons per 5 that can get within your opponents deployment zone turn 1 and fire each psycannon at full effectiveness, providing our land raiders cant deepstrike ;)

[Valerian]

True, but only if psyflemen are not needed for (light) AT. If we are loosing melta and lascannon completely (except Dreadnoughts and SR) there are only two choices: psycannons - which are more expensive than before (+5 pts if I remember correctly) or CC with hammers.

Psycannons are more expensive on Power Armour, but cheaper on TDA, so it's pretty much a wash.

[Valerian]

Unless GW have some magical unit hidden away from the leaked boxed sets then paladins are going to be the only unit in elites capable of deepstriking.

You say that as if you already know the new special rules for the units in the new codex; I caution against the assumption that the special rules won't change from the 5e to 7e codex.

[Quozzo]

Purifiers wont get DS for several reasons. The first is because strikes get it, second is because you dont pay a premium for deepstriking 2/5 psycannons, and thirdly because if they do deepstrike then paladins will simply be an overpriced upgrade for purifiers for all intents a purposes. I may not know whats in the next codex but an educated guess leads to only one conclusion.

[thraxdown]

I see where you're coming from, but with this detachment I don't think I'd consider ANY unit that couldn't deepstrike. I'd want to maximise that first turn potential by getting as many units as possible up in the enemies grill in turn one.

I don't know. Might not be a bad idea to put some purifiers in transports, flat out them into the opponents grill and have everyone else deep striking in. Opponent is still going to have some tough decisions to make,

[ChaoticEric]

I'm not sure this new formation is worth losing Objective secured. The rules are nice but in my opinion do not justify losing the regular formation rules. Objective secured terminators are just too awesome.

I might have missed something but if we're talking about the nemesis strike force detachment, why would we loose objective secured if we use it? I thought it's a detachment that can be taken as part of a battle forged list? But again, I must admit I don't know these rules as well as I should.

[lt051]

I think you're thinking of formations. This would override the foc listed in the brb if chosen, so you wouldn't get it's command benefits (objective secured)

[IndigoJack]

 

I'm not sure this new formation is worth losing Objective secured. The rules are nice but in my opinion do not justify losing the regular formation rules. Objective secured terminators are just too awesome.

I might have missed something but if we're talking about the nemesis strike force detachment, why would we loose objective secured if we use it? I thought it's a detachment that can be taken as part of a battle forged list? But again, I must admit I don't know these rules as well as I should.

 

Objective Secured is a benefit of the Combined Arms Detachment (otherwise known as the "normal" FOC), so any troops from it gain objective secured.

 

Personally, I think objective secured is a bit overrated. Of the 20 or so games I've played since 7th was released, I've yet to win/lose a game due to objective secured.

[mcpolle]

You couldd also ally with SW and buy a drop pod for your Purifiers:-)

[ChaoticEric]

 

 

I'm not sure this new formation is worth losing Objective secured. The rules are nice but in my opinion do not justify losing the regular formation rules. Objective secured terminators are just too awesome.

I might have missed something but if we're talking about the nemesis strike force detachment, why would we loose objective secured if we use it? I thought it's a detachment that can be taken as part of a battle forged list? But again, I must admit I don't know these rules as well as I should.

Objective Secured is a benefit of the Combined Arms Detachment (otherwise known as the "normal" FOC), so any troops from it gain objective secured.Personally, I think objective secured is a bit overrated. Of the 20 or so games I've played since 7th was released, I've yet to win/lose a game due to objective secured.

Thanks for the clarification, I thought OS came with being battle forged and not with the detachment :)

 

On that note, if Inquisition-entries are taken out of our codex now, what happens if I want to run GK as my main detachment (combined arms) and ally with an Inquisitor and retinue. There are no troop choices in the Inquisition codex so it can't follow the allied FOC in the combined arms detachment (min. one HQ and one troop) but it follows the allied detachment in the Inquisition codex (min. one HQ). Do I have to run it as an unbound army or can I keep objective secured for my main detachment?

[HiveFleetKelari]

 

 

 

I'm not sure this new formation is worth losing Objective secured. The rules are nice but in my opinion do not justify losing the regular formation rules. Objective secured terminators are just too awesome.

I might have missed something but if we're talking about the nemesis strike force detachment, why would we loose objective secured if we use it? I thought it's a detachment that can be taken as part of a battle forged list? But again, I must admit I don't know these rules as well as I should.

Objective Secured is a benefit of the Combined Arms Detachment (otherwise known as the "normal" FOC), so any troops from it gain objective secured.Personally, I think objective secured is a bit overrated. Of the 20 or so games I've played since 7th was released, I've yet to win/lose a game due to objective secured.

Thanks for the clarification, I thought OS came with being battle forged and not with the detachment :)

On that note, if Inquisition-entries are taken out of our codex now, what happens if I want to run GK as my main detachment (combined arms) and ally with an Inquisitor and retinue. There are no troop choices in the Inquisition codex so it can't follow the allied FOC in the combined arms detachment (min. one HQ and one troop) but it follows the allied detachment in the Inquisition codex (min. one HQ). Do I have to run it as an unbound army or can I keep objective secured for my main detachment?

Codex: Inquisition has a specific Inquisitorial Detachment that consists of 1-2 HQ, and 0-3 Elites (warbands) that can be taken regardless of any Allied Detachments.