GK Termis Why bother with Paladins or Strikes?

[casb1965]

You like the minis? Use them as some other Marine, with better rules.

I've been doing it for years. My GK have been run at least once using every Imperial Marine Codex.

(I honestly don't get the "winning isn't everything" argument. It's not. In cooperative storytelling role-playing games. But in a *wargame* where the ending condition of the game is win/lose, then well, yes it *is* everything. Not playing to win? Why are you playing a competitive win/lose wargame in the first place? You'd be better suited to displaying your minis, or using them as figures for a cooperative storytelling role-playing game instead)

There's a difference between playing to win and playing to win at all costs.

I play to win but in the context of a friendly atmosphere at my local club not as a meta-gamer at competitions.

[Raktra]

You like the minis? Use them as some other Marine, with better rules.

I've been doing it for years. My GK have been run at least once using every Imperial Marine Codex.

(I honestly don't get the "winning isn't everything" argument. It's not. In cooperative storytelling role-playing games. But in a *wargame* where the ending condition of the game is win/lose, then well, yes it *is* everything. Not playing to win? Why are you playing a competitive win/lose wargame in the first place? You'd be better suited to displaying your minis, or using them as figures for a cooperative storytelling role-playing game instead)

There's a difference between playing to win and playing to win at all costs.

I play to win but in the context of a friendly atmosphere at my local club not as a meta-gamer at competitions.

This. My best games, minus two, have been losses.

[Gentlemanloser]

Had you been *trying* to lose those two games?

 

(Fun and enjoyment are subjective, and I totally agree do not have to revolve around wining)

 

 

 

There's a difference between playing to win and playing to win at all costs.

 

Only if you *really* want to define 'all costs', and don't accept that most mature folk won't be douche's, but will be playing to win a match of 40k. ;)

 

There isn't a single mission in the game, that's doesn't have a 'victory' condition. ;)

 

Heck, I'd have less fun if my opponent wasn't actually trying to win the game.  It wouldn't be a match.  They'd just be pushing their mini's around, and might just as well be displaying them.

 

I want to match wits and wiles with my opponent.

 

Whether I win or lose!

 

(Although losing for almost the entire duration of the old Daemonhunter Codex was no fun. :(  I do need some wins! :P )

[Raktra]

Hah, nah, I'm just the opposite of competitive nowadays. I burned it out of myself during 5th/whilst playing Warmachine.

[THE PORTCULLIS]

I'm not win at all cost by any stretch but I always put out a list I expect to win with. That way, should my opponent win, they know they've actually achieved something.

 

I play fair though. I point out things that hinder me to my cost because winning because your oponent forgot to move his Hammerhead etc is hollow.

 

Therefore in list building and in answer to the thread question I have to be objective and point out terminators are by far the best choice in the codex. However, I still will be using strikes on occasion to mix up what I'm doing so my opponents cannot predict my lists.

[IndigoJack]

IMO, the most "competitive" GK lists are going to be those that min/max, and for that, strikes are really the better option.

[Faithwing]

I tend to agree with Indigo. Terminators are sweet, but Dreadknights are the sweetest. Troops tax is the only barrier to sweetest Dreadknight. Strikes are the candidate who guarantee lower taxes (vote), so Strikes by a landslide.

 

Them terminators are cool now though.

 

Not so sure about Paladins. I wish they would have kept their single model minimum squad size, it was neat. Sorta disappoint, actually.

[Gentlemanloser]

Most of the time though, the 50 odd points you save are not going to grant you an Extra NDK.

 

So just upgrade the less than useful strikes with it to GKT.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

That's what I've found when writing lists. Termies are a viable threat to most things, they draw AP2 off DK's, and they can survive the vagaries of Deep Strike a lot better (DT tests mean nothing to them, Relentless means so long as they're within 24" they can still shoot something). 

[Adeptus]

Re: Playing to Win.

 

Firstly, I'd argue that calling 40K a competitive wargame is being very generous. It takes a lot of compromise and mutual agreement from both players to make this old girl run smoothly, and that's simply not conducive to a really competitive environment.

 

Secondly, we all play to win. Even the most fluffy-based, "I'm-a-painter-not-a-gamer" non-competitive gamer still tries to win his games. But some of us handicap ourselves by taking units we know aren't optimal, because we really like the models, or because they fit our theme, or just because we've only got a limited model selection. That doesn't mean we don't want to win, it just means we prefer to win under certain conditions. Anyone can play the game on easy mode...

 

And to be a bit more on-topic, Strikes are dead in the water for me. I always preferred Terminators, but since they got cheaper, Strikes got more expensive, and they lost the ability to move-and-fire Psycannon effectively, it's a no-brainer.

[Faithwing]

I like Strikes. Terminators are better.

 

I wasn't necessarily speaking from my own perspective. 1 Dreadknight is fine for my lists. Even if I get topdecked, it's usually by tough luck, or an easy mode list that anyone can win with.

 

I wish "doing your own thing" and playing suboptimal units in an effort to test yourself was the meta.

 

Would be an obnoxiously bad ass game.

[Deamon Wolf]

I think Paladins need a boost as 22 points for +1 w and WS is over priced

[Captain Coolpants]

I'm not entirely sure that 55pts is actually overpriced. He basically has the same stats as a vanilla librarian, but in terminator armour.

 

It's just why bother taking them when we can have kitted up terminators for the same price and less.

[Gentlemanloser]

I've mentioned this in other threads, with the old codex Paladin were actually a better deal than terminators if you were taking multiples of 10. With the reduction in cost gkt got, not only did it throw out the internal balance with strikes, it also ruined the relationship with Paladin as well. Paladin aren't really worth using at all now. Gkt are always the better choice.

[Adeptus]

When you say it like that, '22 points for +1 WS and +1 Wound' it becomes pretty obvious. Paladins are sadly, over-priced rubbish.

[Zembar]

I think Paladins need a boost as 22 points for +1 w and WS is over priced

 

You do get two more things for those points:

1. Apothecary for an additional 20 points(true FnP is nice),
2. Twice as many special weapons.

I still don't think it's worth it, but it's something.

[Rurik the blessed]

 

I think Paladins need a boost as 22 points for +1 w and WS is over priced

 

You do get two more things for those points:

1. Apothecary for an additional 20 points(true FnP is nice),
2. Twice as many special weapons.

I still don't think it's worth it, but it's something.

 

 

 

Paladins are awesome.

 

22 pts means 11pts less to take another Termi for an extra wound total.. and you have the same two heavy weapons option.

Let's face this... The new GK codex push our strategy to one simple ability... Deep Strike... so... having just 5 models in a unit with the power of 10 (and cheaper), is really useful. Most of time you will scatter a lot, with the imminent danger of falling into dangerous terrain or enemy units. 

 

Here comes the answer for the question... why bother with paladins or strikes?.... Strikes will fill our troop mandatory slot. and Paladins do the same as Terminators for cheaper.

[Zembar]

Paladins are awesome.

 

22 pts means 11pts less to take another Termi for an extra wound total.. and you have the same two heavy weapons option.

Let's face this... The new GK codex push our strategy to one simple ability... Deep Strike... so... having just 5 models in a unit with the power of 10 (and cheaper), is really useful. Most of time you will scatter a lot, with the imminent danger of falling into dangerous terrain or enemy units. 

 

Here comes the answer for the question... why bother with paladins or strikes?.... Strikes will fill our troop mandatory slot. and Paladins do the same as Terminators for cheaper.

 

You forget the bit where 5 paladins don't get nearly as many attacks as 10 terminators. There's five more storm bolters and five more force weapons in the mix. "Power" is not just number of wounds and special weapons.

[Captain Coolpants]

Plus you can just combat squad the terminators squad... So you're more likely to successfully deepstrike because you have the double the odds. And if you misshap with paladins,, you've lost loads of points, or if your paladins get intercepted by a pie plate from a riptide, or any pie plate for that matter, the extra wounds mean nothing because you inta die.

Paladins are NOT overpriced when you consider what they actually are. But terminators are more efficient and cost effective.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

The final nail in the coffin for Paladins is any S8 wound that gets through their save pops them. Given Knights, Riptides, Wraithknights etc are very much part of the meta-game, you're unlikely to get much use out of the extra wound (the WS5 rarely matters). 

[Rurik the blessed]

 

Paladins are awesome.

 

22 pts means 11pts less to take another Termi for an extra wound total.. and you have the same two heavy weapons option.

Let's face this... The new GK codex push our strategy to one simple ability... Deep Strike... so... having just 5 models in a unit with the power of 10 (and cheaper), is really useful. Most of time you will scatter a lot, with the imminent danger of falling into dangerous terrain or enemy units. 

 

Here comes the answer for the question... why bother with paladins or strikes?.... Strikes will fill our troop mandatory slot. and Paladins do the same as Terminators for cheaper.

 

You forget the bit where 5 paladins don't get nearly as many attacks as 10 terminators. There's five more storm bolters and five more force weapons in the mix. "Power" is not just number of wounds and special weapons.

 

 

You're right... for the extra attacks you have the Brotherhood Banner 

That's not only gives them +1A but any IC in the unit too.

And don't forget WS5, what is a 3+ to hit most times.

[Gentlemanloser]

 

 

You forget the bit where 5 paladins don't get nearly as many attacks as 10 terminators. There's five more storm bolters and five more force weapons in the mix. "Power" is not just number of wounds and special weapons.

 

You used to get more...

 

(This is why I said Multiples of 10 above, doesn't really work if you're just buying 5 GKT)

 

The points you saved from purchasing 5 Paladin instead of 10 GKT could get you a 5 man PA squad, with another Psycannon.

 

Almost the same CC attacks, but with more shooting attacks.

 

You can't do that now.

 

GKT x10, Psycannon x2 = 450.

 

Paladin x5, Psycannon x2 = 315

Strike x 5, Psycannon = 110

 

In the above situation the GK gave you 20 CC attacks, 16 Stormbolters, 8 Psycannon shots.

The Paladin+Strikes (who are 25 points cheaper) give you 16 CC attacks, 14 Stormbolters, 12 Psycannon shots.

 

You also have 5 extra wounds in total (although 10 are subject to ID).

 

 

Now, while the Paladin cost 315, the GKT only cost 400 (They got cheaper plus the Psycannon decreased by 5 points each).  The 85 saved pints can no longer buy you an additional squad, especially as a 5 man Strike Squad (with Psycannon) has gone up to 125 points...

[Brom MKIV]

I would actually consider paladins if 80 pt terminator inquisitors didn't exist.

 

Having used all terminator armies for years I always hated wasting precious stormbolter shots to target a tank with just the heavy weapon. Paladins are the cheapest relentless platform for 2 psycannons which to me is valuable, until you factor in the inquisitor. He brings 3 wounds for a total of 8, ndh, psycan, and access to skulls and divination. Just to much value over the pallies and for less cost.

 

I imagine paladins will shine against armies where S8+ is rare because for me too that is the real deal breaker. 

[Purifying Tempest]

 

That's not only gives them +1A but any IC in the unit too.

And don't forget WS5, what is a 3+ to hit most times.

 

 

Bro Banner aside... WS5 only matters against units you should be dominating in close combat anyways.  For the paladins point cost they should be trying to engage the worst of what your opponent has.  If you wanted to kill WS4 Power Armored squads... you can use literally any unit in our codex to do that, why pay ridiculous prices for paladins, or even Terminators?

 

I've played eldar, and I know how I would handle paladins, and it is the exact same way I'd handle terminators: AP2 (which oddly usually has STR 8 or higher).  So loading up on paladins (and then doubling the blunder by putting in strikes to offset the cost) just makes any filthy xeno player a lot happier, as now their Riptides, Hornets, Lances, etc all have targets with high point saturation.  BTW: I'd be saving all my bladestorm weapons for your Power Armor guys.

 

A big thing I do not like about Terminators for GKs is getting them to the fight.  Deep Strike turn 1 is great, but in order to be effective, it needs to be done in mass.  And honestly, I'd be more worried about what dropped with the Terminators more than just the Terminators themselves.  Foot terminators are slow and plodding, and are overpriced for what they do at range.  Sure those psycannons would hurt, but if you cannot close to melee range, you are paying a whole lot for 8 psycannon shots with some stormbolters mixed in.

 

My argument takes nothing away from players wanting competitive vs fluff play, as if you want to play a list of all Paladins and Terminators, that is every bit your right.  But this thread at least appeared to be about comparing 3 units, which means fluff kinda went out the window pretty early on.

 

Paladins are elites, they are expensive, and their options really just soak more points from you.  They are far better in close combat than they are at range.  You pay for that close combat proficiency, so if you cannot get there, you've automatically wasted points.  If you pay for a way to get them around (landraider, Draigo), you've spent EVEN more points (closing in on what, 500-600?), which should be performing at deathstar levels, but never will come close to meeting those expectations.

 

Terminators are troops.  They fulfill our mandatory requirement for NSF, they also have deep strike and staying power once they are joined to the fray.  They again fare much better in close combat than they do at range.  Do not believe Landraiders have Deep Strike, so if they arrive via DS... getting around the board becomes an immediate problem.  They also suffer from the close combat tax in an edition that does not favor close combat.  If you wish to get them around the board, again Landraiders and Draigo are your options, and again bloat the point costs for what you're getting.  While they do have staying power via their terminator armor, it is important to give your opponent higher priority targets (aka: Dreadknights) so that they do not focus the worst of their weaponry on the terminators.

 

Strikes are cheapy troops.  They're still good in close combat with Hammerhand and AP3 weapons that can be instant death if needed.  So when it comes to the close combat tax, they are actually the least penalized, as they only have 1 attack base.  I don't think building an assault marine list is going to yield many favorable results, but being able to hold your ground in an assault (or even being threatening enough in close combat to deter your opponent from assaulting) is still pretty important.  They are far less proficient with the specialty weapons than the Paladins or Terminators, minus the incinerator.  They have access to far cheaper transports, but the vehicles are not exactly durable anyways.

 

Troops vs elites ONLY matters when talking about CAD vs NSF.  In NSF the tag designator is only important for the 1 required troop.  Since they lose Objective Secured, being a troop has no benefit in NSF.  In a CAD, being a troop is better than being an Elite, so I think all things considered, Terminators and Strikes would have an edge on Paladins.

 

I think in just about any case, Paladins are going to be lagging behind both the troops.  Their cost is too prohibitive in a system that doesn't favor where they really shine: close combat.  Terminators and Strikes are really a toss up, because there are plenty of good arguments on both sides.  Terminators aren't a WHOLE lot more expensive, they have better armor and an invul, so they can actually go out into the field and fight in the open... they also make much better use of the psycannon, which gives them more threatening power at a further range as they advance.  Strikes are obviously frailer, but they are also cheaper.  If you just want to be done with your troop requirement for as little hurt as possible and don't expect the slot to pull their point cost weight, a min strike squad is a good deal for that player.

 

I also think if you're running terminators as troops and find yourself over 50ish points and don't want to cut the units that are going to carry your army, the first cut you're going to make is downgrading them to strikes.  Overall, they're a pretty even match.

[Adeptus]

Paladins are NOT overpriced when you consider what they actually are. But terminators are more efficient and cost effective.

 

They were well priced in 5th edition when you could spread their wounds around. They were overpriced in 6th, 7th, and are still overpriced in 8th. At 45 points per model they'd be about right, now.