Dreadnaught Vs Dreadknight

[Seizeman]

You can't just throw away random opinions without doing the math. Dreadnought shooting does actually MORE damage than the dreadknight's, and that's just with the storm bolter to keep it cheap. The difference is even bigger if you compare damage per point.

 

A dreadknight without ranged weapons is just useless. It's not efficient at killing absolutely anything. It kills less than 2 space marines or half a rhino in a single turn, supposing he's not wounded. There's no point in having a very resilient unit when the opponent does not need to kill it. If you want a durable threat, Paladins are point for point both more durable and more threatening than the dreadknight.

 

The main point of the dreadnought is it's cost. He's just powerful enough and though enough to justify its points. Because of it's damage, it's hard for opponents to ignore, and because of it's cost, it is ok if it dies. And no, 20 points for a smite is not good enough. That's why the doomglaive is viable, because it costs the same as a space marine one with equivalent gear but has smite and a power basically for free. Regular grey knight dreadnoughts are just not worth in any situation. If you want shooty ones, just pick a space marine one and save the 20 points.

[Reclusiarch Darius]

You can't just throw away random opinions without doing the math. Dreadnought shooting does actually MORE damage than the dreadknight's, and that's just with the storm bolter to keep it cheap. The difference is even bigger if you compare damage per point.

 

Maybe against infantry, but that's not why you're bringing either unit. Dreadnoughts and Dreadknights are for killing enemy big stuff ie their counterparts. 

A dreadknight without ranged weapons is just useless. It's not efficient at killing absolutely anything. It kills less than 2 space marines or half a rhino in a single turn, supposing he's not wounded. There's no point in having a very resilient unit when the opponent does not need to kill it. If you want a durable threat, Paladins are point for point both more durable and more threatening than the dreadknight.

 

No its actually quite efficient. Paying 30pts for maybe 3 heavy psycannon hits a turn is pretty steep, and often does nothing. The loss of Rending has really pulled it down in my eyes, as is the stupid -1 to hit when moving. I've run DK's without guns in 8th, they still chuck out a Smite, and I use Strategem re-roll to get charges to happen off a Teleport Strike or 'Gate'.

Paladins are only outputting bolter fire (again, why would you take heavy weapons on them when you go down to 4+ to hit), so its really about the melee. 3x Paladins is 165, same as a stock DK. I'd say they're relatively as expensive as each other, with Paladins being better at killing infantry. DK's do better single target damage against tougher stuff, because of their S10 or S12 attacks. So yet again, one isn't automatically better than the other, they're situationally better against certain things (DK's can get bogged down really easily, I'm probably not gonna take them against horde armies for that reason). 

The main point of the dreadnought is it's cost. He's just powerful enough and though enough to justify its points. Because of it's damage, it's hard for opponents to ignore, and because of it's cost, it is ok if it dies. And no, 20 points for a smite is not good enough. That's why the doomglaive is viable, because it costs the same as a space marine one with equivalent gear but has smite and a power basically for free. Regular grey knight dreadnoughts are just not worth in any situation. If you want shooty ones, just pick a space marine one and save the 20 points.

 

You forget that Smite ignores all saves and is done prior to shooting, so its basically another shooting phase for us. It's easily worth 20 points, especially because you also get a deny roll thrown in as well. 

 

Doomglaive is nice, he's just not automatically better than all other options. You're forgetting he's still slow and needs a delivery method (either 'Gate' or a Raven, which are separate factors). I'm gonna be taking one in my lists, but he's not replacing my ranged Venerables or my DK's. 

 

My Venerables have been performing quite well so far, and if I took vanilla Dreads they wouldn't benefit from the GM re-roll aura. Hitting on 2's re-rolling 1's is pretty good. Plus they chuck out a 24" Smite with a BC standing by as well. Even a 12" Smite isn't bad, if you're getting attacked up close. 

[Seizeman]

The paladins are better than the dreadknight at killing everything. Just the paragon with a hammer does almost as much damage as the dreadknight, add to that 4 attacks for every other paladin and they do significant more damage agains every target. Agains light targets the difference becomes ridiculous. And that's only counting the melee dmg.

 

And upgrading shooty dreads to be grey knights is awful. They are not going to be close to a reroll aura or a BC 99% of the time, nor they will be close enough to cast stime. It's just a waste of points. Of course, on melee/versatile ones it would be worth it, but the doomglaive is strictly better that those, so no point in arguing in this case.

[Diesinthewarp]

After 6 games with a NDK against loads of armies/units. I found the unit outperformed anything I expected (after reading this thread ) as long as you get it into a fight (used double fists) he smashed MC, power units and tanks.

I will give the negative ones something to feed on though...the shooting was not great. The psilencer did better than both the other options and only when shooting weaker units.

 

Opinion isn't fact so get playing them on the tabletop and see what you think. I don't think it's all doom and gloom. Dreadnought s were good on all the tables but I had a few other players say how beastly my NDK was against them.

[Seizeman]

You just were lucky with the ndks. With fists doing 1d3 wounds, you average 3.6 wounds against a T7 vehicle. He straight up looses against every close combat MC or vehicle. Anecdote isn't fact either, numbers are.

[Diesinthewarp]

You've shown in alot of threads you only care about maths, which is fine. I was just sharing my opinion on my experience playing with them and even said dreadnoughts were good.

 

You can go back to doing sums now and I'll go back to rolling dice.

Edited July 2, 2017 by Diesinthewarp

[Waking Dreamer]

After 6 games with a NDK against loads of armies/units. I found the unit outperformed anything I expected (after reading this thread ) as long as you get it into a fight (used double fists) he smashed MC, power units and tanks.

I will give the negative ones something to feed on though...the shooting was not great. The psilencer did better than both the other options and only when shooting weaker units.

 

Opinion isn't fact so get playing them on the tabletop and see what you think. I don't think it's all doom and gloom. Dreadnought s were good on all the tables but I had a few other players say how beastly my NDK was against them.

How many NDKs did you have in your army / per battle? Did you feel there was a sweet spot in how many NDKs was a good amount per army size?

 

EDIT: Reading it again, it seems like you were only using the one NDK right? In the other thread you said the games consisted of 500-2000 points. Did you use the NDK in games smaller than 2K points?

Edited July 2, 2017 by Waking Dreamer

[Seizeman]

You've shown in alot of threads you only care about maths, which is fine. I was just sharing my opinion on my experience playing with them and even said dreadnoughts were good.

 

You can go back to doing sums now and I'll go back to rolling dice.

 

You've shown that you only care about spreading misinformation and resort to personal attacks when your arguments do not hold.

 

Go back to making up unrealistic scenarios and I'll go back to constructive criticism.

[Diesinthewarp]

 

You've shown in alot of threads you only care about maths, which is fine. I was just sharing my opinion on my experience playing with them and even said dreadnoughts were good.

You can go back to doing sums now and I'll go back to rolling dice.

 

 

You've shown that you only care about spreading misinformation and resort to personal attacks when your arguments do not hold.

 

Go back to making up unrealistic scenarios and I'll go back to constructive criticism.

Ok you've reacted really badly. I meant you like maths and I'd agree statistics is relevant. I also never disagreed with you.

You are Spanish and so it might be a language thing basically I said we won't agree, so I'll do my thing you do yours. It's a forum to discuss a game and was talking about first hand experience of playing a game and you are talking statistical. I can agree with you r maths and still go back to playing with a NDK because the games went well.

 

You want to get salty about it and take offence, cool. You misunderstood my post though.

 

 

 

 

After 6 games with a NDK against loads of armies/units. I found the unit outperformed anything I expected (after reading this thread ) as long as you get it into a fight (used double fists) he smashed MC, power units and tanks.I will give the negative ones something to feed on though...the shooting was not great. The psilencer did better than both the other options and only when shooting weaker units.Opinion isn't fact so get playing them on the tabletop and see what you think. I don't think it's all doom and gloom. Dreadnought s were good on all the tables but I had a few other players say how beastly my NDK was against them.

How many NDKs did you have in your army / per battle? Did you feel there was a sweet spot in how many NDKs was a good amount per army size?EDIT: Reading it again, it seems like you were only using the one NDK right? In the other thread you said the games consisted of 500-2000 points. Did you use the NDK in games smaller than 2K points?

I ran one but I wish I had 2. Don't know about sweet spot because haven't done any real testing, it took alot of fire people focused it and it still got it's value anecdotally speaking.

 

It's shooting though was average and I do think (as mentioned in the other thread) if you need long range monster killers you might go 2 dreadnought with twin LC (saw plenty of those playing) as I think NDK only does well in CC from my limited experience.

 

As before though if you are the model already play some games and see what you think

[Valerian]

++Knock off the back and forth, and get back to discussing the topic at hand.++

[Beams]

You just were lucky with the ndks. With fists doing 1d3 wounds, you average 3.6 wounds against a T7 vehicle. He straight up looses against every close combat MC or vehicle. Anecdote isn't fact either, numbers are.

Anecdote, however, gives more color and meaning to the math.

 

Also, averages are kinda pants without distribution.

 

If I have three weapons with the same damage profile:

STR 8 AP -4 DAM 2d6

STR 8 AP -4 DAM 7

STR 8 AP -4 DAM 1 on odds 13 on evens

 

Which one would you pick? They are all average '7', but have wildly different distributions.

 

All three would hit and wound on the same value, so we can ignore it.

 

Then we get into the average. They all deal the same average damage.

 

But they are all different. One has a bell curve of damage, making average rolls most likely, but a small chance of really low or really high. The middle one is super consistent: it always deal average damage, and the the last one is all or nothing.

 

So, in order to really compare Dreadnoughts and Dreadknights, I'd like to see the dreadknights distribution curve vs the dreadnoughts curve, and then a analysis of their durability, plus the movement differences, and including the fact that you can only Gate of Infinity one unit, making it a limited option.

Then I'd compare them to all the different units you are likely to face them, and then a comparison of the "optimal" matchups and determine whether or not there is, in fact, a 'better' option or whether or not they are suited for different tasks.

 

I'm likely to believe the anectodtal stories, since personal preference should go a long way in which unit you choose, especially if they are close in power level.

[Seizeman]

I don't see exactly what point are you trying to make, as there's nothing similar to what you suggested. Their weapons are the same, except the dread hits on 2+ (unless it has fists, wich is 1d3 vs 1d6 so no point there either), so tell me how distribution is relevant. In the case you are quoting, it is as low variance as you can find in this game. It is extremely unlikely the NDK does significant damage unless it rolls really high. Also, in this case low variance is a negative so it only adds to my point.

 

Making decisions based on anecdotal evidence is fallacious and should be avoided if one wants to reach any valid conclusion. How much damage a NDK (or a dread) does is not a matter of opinion, is a matter of fact. You can have an opinion about his tactical posibilities, about his worthiness, about whos prettier, not about how much damage it does.

 

The rest of the points you make have already been adressed on this post.

[Adeptus]

The point he's trying to make is that saying "Oh, Dreadnoughts always outperform NDKs" is pretty meaningless if you can't be bothered crunching the numbers to show us the whole picture.

[Gentlemanloser]

But Seize has...

 

That's his point.

[Muaddib]

I have no dreadnoughts in m'y collection and bought(?) two dreadknights few months/weeks ago. So I play them, in 1000, 1500 and 2000pts games. Just had my tenth game today in my local HC.

 

I find that they offer many tacticals possibilities with the teleporter and the Gate and only the most experienced players are really able to ignore them or deal with them efficiently.

They deal much pressure on enemies lines,they're hard to kill (always had at least one alive at the end of my fifth turn, often both). I don't know if I could do the same with dreadnoughts but dks worth consideration in all but the most competitives environments imo.

 

I have tried them with heavy incinerator at first but I'm now convinced to use psylencer instead. Like some kind of heavy stormbolters. And I'm most definitely going to keep using them as long as my local meta aload me to do so (meaning no tournament and no "6 stormravens" lists around :). I have torched one of those down with my heavy incinerator though...).

And I dream of the possibility for GKs stormraven to carry them along with dreadnoughts in the arriving codex

[Waking Dreamer]

The codex next month can improve the ndk's capabilities as well, since people have suggested to GW they could use some improvements. I'm thinking the possibility of the Sanctuary power to boosts its survivability, maybe even WS 2+.