I do so love being left out of all the new stuff...

[Capt. Mytre]

 

*snip*

 

1. It's not balanced therefore it cannot have more balanced variants. Nice logic.

 

2. If you play matched play (which is what the vast majority play), psychic focus is a core rule. Everyone discusses rules assuming it's in effect.

 

3. Easy, increase points and increase power level to compensate. Make them toughness five. Give them a 6" move. Give them all 2+ BS/WS. There is tons of room to work with, and that's not even touching on any special rules they could have.

 

4. ... and finally, if you think GK are middle tier army that has fluffy rules, then there's no hope of a proper discussion.

Edited November 2, 2017 by Capt. Mytre

[Adeptus]

 

*snip*

 

1. It's not balanced therefore it cannot have more balanced variants. Nice logic.

 

2. If you play matched play (which is what the vast majority play), psychic focus is a core rule. Everyone discusses rules assuming it's in effect.

 

3. Easy, increase points and increase power level to compensate. Make them toughness five. Give them a 6" move. Give them all 2+ BS/WS. There is tons of room to work with, and that's not even touching on any special rules they could have.

 

4. ... and finally, if you think GK are middle tier army that has fluffy rules, then there's no hope of a proper discussion.

 

With the attitude you're dishing out, I think hope of a proper discussion was a foregone conclusion.

[Waking Dreamer]

I really don't understand, why GK doesn't have Predators, Vindicators and other SM stuff. We even got planes this edition. Whats wrong with other vehicles? And we really need some type of psylas or psymelta. I mean, fluffwise GK face daemon enignes during incursions. How they supposed to deal with them? They need some anti-armor gun to take them out. Or do they rely only on good old hammer?

Well fluffwise we would rely on the Psycannon which can be decent at anti-armour with Psychic Onslaught.

 

It just need to be cheaper at 1CP per use. That way you could reliably have 3-4 rounds of shooting per game.

[Danarc]

We need something that is a more than decent anti armour without any CP. It is impossible having a reliable antitank at this moment. 

There are two possibilities. The first one is giving us a different anti tank. The second one is change the psycannon profile, making him 24" Heavy4 St8 AP-2 D2 (at least) for about 30 points (Hiperios missile launcher is 72" Heavy 2d3 St8 Ap-2 D-D3 for 30 points).

[Kuellet]

hope psycannon rending back..

[Danarc]

hope psycannon rending back..

how? There is no more rending rule and a poor AP-3 on 6s is absolutely not enough to make psycannon decent.

[Kuellet]

 

hope psycannon rending back..

how? There is no more rending rule and a poor AP-3 on 6s is absolutely not enough to make psycannon decent.

 

some weapon still have rending rule like shuriken sries or genestealer rending claw

[Corvus Fortis]

If Psycannon gets AP-3 or -4 on a roll of 6+, Psycannon Purgators suddenly become much more scary. Stil good only against heavy infantry. No weapon with AP-1 and D1 could be called AV weapon. 

[Danarc]

 

 

hope psycannon rending back..

how? There is no more rending rule and a poor AP-3 on 6s is absolutely not enough to make psycannon decent.

 

some weapon still have rending rule like shuriken sries or genestealer rending claw

 

Yes I considered it in my previously reply.

 

If Psycannon gets AP-3 or -4 on a roll of 6+, Psycannon Purgators suddenly become much more scary. Stil good only against heavy infantry. No weapon with AP-1 and D1 could be called AV weapon. 

Ap-3 on 6+ doesn't make psycannon AV. It'ss too poor. one wound every 6 in a 4 shots cannon that hit at 3+ (4+ if moved). 4 purgators put 16 shots, hit 10,66, wound at 4+ (5+ on a Land Raider and similar) for 5,33 or 3,55 wounds. results: 1 wound with Ap-3. How this could solve our problem?

[Waking Dreamer]

 

 

 

hope psycannon rending back..

 

how? There is no more rending rule and a poor AP-3 on 6s is absolutely not enough to make psycannon decent.

some weapon still have rending rule like shuriken sries or genestealer rending claw

Yes I considered it in my previously reply.

 

If Psycannon gets AP-3 or -4 on a roll of 6+, Psycannon Purgators suddenly become much more scary. Stil good only against heavy infantry. No weapon with AP-1 and D1 could be called AV weapon.

 

Ap-3 on 6+ doesn't make psycannon AV. It'ss too poor. one wound every 6 in a 4 shots cannon that hit at 3+ (4+ if moved). 4 purgators put 16 shots, hit 10,66, wound at 4+ (5+ on a Land Raider and similar) for 5,33 or 3,55 wounds. results: 1 wound with Ap-3. How this could solve our problem?

Rending rules for other weapons are resolved at ap-4/-6 on a wound of roll of 6+.

[Waking Dreamer]

Though many people have already suggested that the psycannon needs to be immediately changed to damage 2 as standard - like the heavy psycannon.  No reason for them to have the different damage output per shot. Especially since currently, the infantry psilencer is better against everything else than the psycnannon except for maybe T8 units - but even then the increase in effectiveness doesn't match the increase in points. 

 

However, in the end I would rather put all the psycannons I have modelled on my existing GK units to "effective" work...rather than bringing in Predators in allied detachments, or even painting Predators silver if GW was to make them available to us. If that requires a major overhaul to things like heavy/psycannon profile...thumbs up to that before anything else. 

 

tldr: Improve what is uniquely GK to make our GK army better...than begging to have what other SM already get. Why?

1. Keeps GKs fluffy.

2. Keeps GKs unique.

3. Keeps GKs effective.

[Gentlemanloser]

Why not both?

[Waking Dreamer]

Why not both?

 

Because even in hope we need to check ourselves to what GWs could "feasibly" do for our GKs, otherwise you're prepetually disappointed with no change in sight.

 

But if you really want change to actually happen - people need to present GW with mathhammer on our units / wargear compared to other more logical / effective units of other armies. Give them empirical evidence on their feedback options of GK performance compared to other armies in regards to points cost and effectiveness.

 

Actually, one thing someone could highlight to them is that there was only ONE GK player in their first official 8E GW GT. They should know the results - how could a supposed fully realised Codex army not have more Tournament presence in an Edition where 80% of the armies dont even have their codex yet....hmm... 

Edited November 3, 2017 by Waking Dreamer

[Gentlemanloser]

Becuase character based culexes soup lists are so much more powerful?

 

I donno. Tournament rules, limited number of detachments, all that jazz can skew results.

 

And why should we need to provide such feedback anyway. GW playtested 8th for ages. More extensively than ever before.

 

Or so they say...

 

 

Edit. I don't think it's unfeasible to both buff psycannons and provide access to predators.

 

They're both simple and easy to do.

 

Hell GW have gifted all other chapters all the primaris units. For nothing.

 

They even let those without codexes to use space marine datasheets. They've told the bangels is ok to use codex space marine terminator squads instead of thier index versions.

 

Adding GK to that list is probably the easiest thing they can do...

Edited November 3, 2017 by Gentlemanloser

[Capt. Mytre]

Becuase character based culexes soup lists are so much more powerful?

 

I donno. Tournament rules, limited number of detachments, all that jazz can skew results.

 

And why should we need to provide such feedback anyway. GW playtested 8th for ages. More extensively than ever before.

 

Or so they say...

 

 

Edit. I don't think it's unfeasible to both buff psycannons and provide access to predators.

 

They're both simple and easy to do.

 

Hell GW have gifted all other chapters all the primaris units. For nothing.

 

They even let those without codexes to use space marine datasheets. They've told the bangels is ok to use codex space marine terminator squads instead of thier index versions.

 

Adding GK to that list is probably the easiest thing they can do...

 

GW didn't test for as long as they say they did, or they got monkeys to do the testing. You don't end up with double cost TL plasma cannons for GK because it's "balanced". Numerous FAQ's required on release to answer simple questions that should have been self evident. A near copy-paste GK codex. etc.

 

Heavy weapons should be reworked and not require CP to be any good. We have SB for hoards. Psilencers should be anti-TEQ/MEQ. Psycannons should be anti armour + high toughness models. Our weapons should be more powerful than comparable SM tech (if they weren't, GK would just use regular heavy weapons) + we have half the range that they do, leaving us more vulnerable to enemy fire and being charged.

 

Psilencers: 24" 6 shots S5 AP -2 Dmg 2 - alternatively, 0 AP but deals 2 mortal wounds on 6+ to wound.

 

Psycannons: 24" 2 shots S8 AP -4 Dmg D6 - alternatively, two modes Blast: 4 shots S7 AP -2 D3 dmg or Focused: 1 shot Str13 AP -4 2D3 dmg

 

Heavy flamers should be useable from DS - give them 12" range, no one uses them any more since they are way overcosted and you can only use it in your second turn (so you get more out of shooting twice with a psycannon/psilencer)

[Waking Dreamer]

If people dont care for change then dont provide statistically supported feedback to official GW reps. 

 

Its not like the people who actually CAN make improvements to the GK codex are paid to read every single post here...

[Capt. Mytre]

If people dont care for change then dont provide statistically supported feedback to official GW reps. 

 

Its not like the people who actually CAN make improvements to the GK codex are paid to read every single post here...

 

They already know the statistics. They don't pull numbers out of a hat and say that's what we get.

 

They know that the vast majority of our shooting is S4 AP0 meaning we can't remove a marine 5 man squad from cover with 40 shots (takes ~100 SB shots to kill a 5 man squad). They know we have less than a 30% chance to make the charge from DS. They know we can't deal with high toughness/armour units from range. They know our best anti tank weapon is a toss up between a single shot hurricane bolters dealing D3 damage or a nerfed autocannon.

 

They know all this. They just don't care/are totally incompetent in regards to balance.

[Danarc]

 

They know all this. They just don't care/are totally incompetent in regards to balance.

 

THIS.

 

However, your suggested profile are really NUTELLA, I will be happy even with less power HW, like:

 

Psilencers: 24" 6 shots S5 AP -1 Dmg 1 - maybe with 1 mortal wounds on 6+ to wound.

 

Psycannons: 24" 2 shots S8 AP -4 Dmg 2 - alternatively, two modes Blast: 4 shots S7 AP -2 D2 dmg or Focused: 1 shot Str13 AP -4 1D6 dmg

[Capt. Mytre]

 

 

They know all this. They just don't care/are totally incompetent in regards to balance.

 

THIS.

 

However, your suggested profile are really NUTELLA, I will be happy even with less power HW, like:

 

Psilencers: 24" 6 shots S5 AP -1 Dmg 1 - maybe with 1 mortal wounds on 6+ to wound.

 

Psycannons: 24" 2 shots S8 AP -4 Dmg 2 - alternatively, two modes Blast: 4 shots S7 AP -2 D2 dmg or Focused: 1 shot Str13 AP -4 1D6 dmg

 

 

The points would be adjusted to balance them.

 

TBH, if you actually made them fluffy, it would be more like:

 

Psilencer: 24" range, 6 shots S5 -4 AP D3

 

Psycannon: 24" range, 3D3 shots S6 AP -2  D1 - Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

Edited November 4, 2017 by Capt. Mytre

[Zombs]

So as the situation is right now, we can't be competitive without allies imo. Are there any confirmed rumors for changes in the december update?

[Gentlemanloser]

Yeah. Everyone gets objective secured and the new missions have a modified die roll for first turn.

 

Those who deployed first get a +1.

 

;)

 

Nothing confirmed for us though.

[Capt. Mytre]

Yeah. Everyone gets objective secured and the new missions have a modified die roll for first turn.

 

Those who deployed first get a +1.

 

 

Nothing confirmed for us though.

 

At best, we will get a points adjustment. Hoping to see a heavy decrease in points across the board.

 

Ideally we'd have a rework of heavy weapons, points and additional special rules. Fix units like Purifiers, Crowe and Terminators. Make Paladins more than just Terminators v2.0. At least 2 attacks base for all GK units so that falchions aren't the go to weapon of choice. No form of FNP so mortal wounds (such as normal smites) deal far more damage to us than any other army. Maybe give all GK 6+ FNP, with Paladins having a 5+ (Psyker Resolve or some ) - the Apoth doesn't need any more buffs.

 

We're we need the most help is defining of our close combat abilities. ~27% to make it into CC from DS, which is basically our only option to take out high toughness and/or high armour isn't good enough. Other armies can shoot from range with far reduced risk, they don't have to stand in the open after a failed charge. Look at other armies that have a high focus on CC (and even ones that don't), they have great movement + warlord traits + multiple special rules that benefit charging + army traits that buff charging + Strats. We have DS + warlord trait, for an army that defaults every unit to having a powerful CC weapon.

 

To make matters worse, imagine a failed charge with terminators. Almost all enemy units have better movement, so you are looking at the next turn a minimum 9-11" charge the following turn. How are GK meant to take out tanks like the Primaris Repulsor, with a minimum 11" charge first turn? Shoot it with psilencers? It's sad that our best anti tank is a Str 4 AP 0 weapon. Assuming my math is correct, it "only" takes 216 psilencer shots to kill a 16W T8 3+ model. 490 for a 18W T8 2+ model (LR).

Edited November 6, 2017 by Capt. Mytre

[jeffersonian000]

The problem with the GK build is that it’s still balanced around The Shrouding, which GK haven’t had since early 5th. GK were originally balanced around not being reliably targetable outside 20”, which allowed to maximize their assault weapons until close combat was a better option. 5e codex changed that by dropping it but not replacing it or rebalancing to not include it. 6e didn’t fix it. Now in 8e we still are balanced around not being shot at when there are no rules to prevent us from being shot at.

 

The reason is that the game was refocused around tall, line of site blocking terrain cluttered tables. Unfortunately, the player base never got the hint. So we have armies like the GK that are specifically denied resources such as gap closing and reliable invul saves because they are “balanced” around hiding in a game that does not have hiding. The 5e-7e fix was Alpha Strike, but that’s gone/inefficient in 8e. The “Shunt Punch” build is still good, just not competitive on planet bowling ball. Which leave Rhino/Razor Rush and/or Stormraven-wing mixed with unfluffy Dreads, all at the expense of narrative infantry driven GK armies we actually want to play.

 

So, yeah. GW needs to rebalance the points per model for GKs to reflect the current game, not 3e.

 

SJ

[Gentlemanloser]

It's somewhat of a smack in the face to see all the codexes after us getting multiple generous points reductions.

 

And all we got were increases.

[Danarc]

It's somewhat of a smack in the face to see all the codexes after us getting multiple generous points reductions.

 

And all we got were increases.

also all previous codex before us hd the same reductions.