Every time a new Codex or preview arrives...

[Commissar K.]

 

 

The majority of players don't play soup, and don't play in tournaments. My worry is that GW is balancing the game for this small subset of players by listening to a group of TOs.

 

Id they don't play soups or tournaments then why is the majority of players who note this as being an issue within this topic concerned at all? 

GW seems to balance this game with soups in mind as the strongest contender. This means that further limitations a player puts on himself are their choices and lead to chosen tactical handicaps. For me this is fine but the moment the Imperium or Chaos mixes remain an option the only way to balance is with this mix in mind.

 

 

[Commissar K.]

 

 

 

You clearly haven't been reading the issues people have been posting here then. Our issue isn't soup. Our issue is that the codex is blatantly bad compared to others. Our issue is that the internal balance is horrible. The issue is, why pick GK when you can pick other options that won't leave you with a handicap? We have one unit that is worthy of soup, that's a GMNDK - that leaves an entire codex of sub-par trash.

 

 

GK are that bad - they are monobuild: deepstrike + try and get a charge off. With that in mind, any player with any sense can counter your army just by screening with cheap units. I've never lost to a GK player, and to do so would take effort on my part to actively make bad decisions.

 

I have read the issues people have been posting. They feel and see that their list doesn't work when they restrict themselves to Codex Grey Knights alone. While again the whole design of 8th still allows you to mix thus will have to thake this into consideration for all balancing purposes. Yes Malefic Lords get cost increased with CA, not because the book they belong to is that strong but because all Chaos lists have acces to it, wether they are generated purely (otherwise) from a single Codex or Index is irrelevant.

 

The point you seem to be missing, highlighted in my post you quoted is that you should pick Grey Knigths as "Daemonhunters" not as Astra Militarum hunters or Xenos hunters. For the simple reason that their narrative is completely based on this and this narrative is the starting point of design.

 

In reality Grey Knights are as bad as you badly handicap yourself. I also cannot expect World Eaters to function as competitive as other factions if I exclude myself from other books, Index, Imperial Armour or otherwise. There seems to be a very clear intend of making soup lists not only a possibility but actually a great plan. If anything GK are better designed as they used to be from a narrative perspective. This isn't M. Ward's design of Grey Knights being the best of the best against everything, nor was that ever their narrative purpose.

 

 

[Gentlemanloser]

I'd advise you to reread the daemonhunter codex. For the many pages of narrative reasons the GK would fight all the other races.

 

Not just daemons.

 

GK are truely powerful.

 

When you use the best units the rest of the Imperium has to offer and only bring GMNDKs from the GK codex.

 

But then is it really a GK army?

 

How do you quantify what a soup army is, apart from soup.

 

As for mentioning IA is also advise you to check the FAQ that dissalows GK access to all the marine FW units.

 

As we're not a <chapter> that can be replaced.

 

But IA does contain arguably our second best unit. The Doomglaive. Which is a fantastic Dreadnought.

 

Edit and yes the GK design was they were the best of the best.

 

Based on emperors gene seed, with unlimited access to *the best* wargear the entire imperium could make.

 

Better than normal marines, with the absolute best wargear.

 

If that doesn't satisfy best of the best i don't know what does...

[Holier Than Thou]

 

You clearly haven't been reading the issues people have been posting here then. Our issue isn't soup. Our issue is that the codex is blatantly bad compared to others. Our issue is that the internal balance is horrible. The issue is, why pick GK when you can pick other options that won't leave you with a handicap? We have one unit that is worthy of soup, that's a GMNDK - that leaves an entire codex of sub-par trash.

 

 

GK are that bad - they are monobuild: deepstrike + try and get a charge off. With that in mind, any player with any sense can counter your army just by screening with cheap units. I've never lost to a GK player, and to do so would take effort on my part to actively make bad decisions.

 

I have read the issues people have been posting. They feel and see that their list doesn't work when they restrict themselves to Codex Grey Knights alone. While again the whole design of 8th still allows you to mix thus will have to thake this into consideration for all balancing purposes. Yes Malefic Lords get cost increased with CA, not because the book they belong to is that strong but because all Chaos lists have acces to it, wether they are generated purely (otherwise) from a single Codex or Index is irrelevant.

The point you seem to be missing, highlighted in my post you quoted is that you should pick Grey Knigths as "Daemonhunters" not as Astra Militarum hunters or Xenos hunters. For the simple reason that their narrative is completely based on this and this narrative is the starting point of design.

In reality Grey Knights are as bad as you badly handicap yourself. I also cannot expect World Eaters to function as competitive as other factions if I exclude myself from other books, Index, Imperial Armour or otherwise. There seems to be a very clear intend of making soup lists not only a possibility but actually a great plan. If anything GK are better designed as they used to be from a narrative perspective. This isn't M. Ward's design of Grey Knights being the best of the best against everything, nor was that ever their narrative purpose.

The point is, Grey Knights have been released as a standalone Codex. What we are complaining about is that, as a Codex, Grey Knights are far weaker than all the other Codices (with the possible exception of Ad Mech). Nothing to do with soup and mixing this with that. As a standalone army, Grey Knights do not come close to any other standalone army. That is the problem. Regardless whether GW want 8th to be about soup, all Codices should be equal in relative power to each other, this is not the case hence why we are complaining.

[Gentlemanloser]

Daemonhunters are not restricted to only fighting Chaos (note not even daemons here. Chaos as a whole...). There are all manner of foes and situations throughout the galaxy that can merit the hammer of the Daemonhunters being brought to bear. The following pages give you some *narrative* hooks for your games of Warhammer 40,000, and allow you to play any opponent, regardless of what army they possess. These plot hooks are by no means exhaustive, and you can invent all manner of reasons for the Daemonhunters to be fighting.

64 examples given.

 

I also like 'an inquistor has sent them to do x, to further the inquisitors personal goals' and 'the chapters prognosticators have forseen the brotherhood must fight x at y'.

[Schlitzaf]

Just to build on that certain armies and codexes do have flaws or weaker than other codexes. C:SM is widely regarded as weaker than C: Chaos Marines (I blame Chaos Marine Cultists). And my Black Templars vs a World Eater List, highlights the disparity of those two armies. However even within that disparity showcases how Imperium/Chaos are different and only further shown once we start souping. The Crusader Squads v Berzerkers lose the melee fight. However what I have instead is cheaper Marines (effectively 12 point Points) vs 19 Point Zerkers. My squad is only Tactical Equivalant that can Heavy/Special/Special at 5 Man. Allowing me easier to leverage a Battlelion or two. The Crusaders also are leveragable as Hordes. Zerkers can and will wreck my Crusaders given the chance in close combat. Both our armies at this stage are similar. I can however shift more readily to firefight role than the World Eater.

 

Our soups further highlight this. I add AM and he adds Khorne Daemons. In both cases to bulk up numbers and fill holes in our respective armies. The Eater have limited deployment options. However by saving 200-300 Points for summoning he can fill gaps and respond to my deep strikes. Otherwise the Bloodletters, Juggernauts, Thristers etc, represent a mix of frontal assault that is cheap and prevent my reserves. My Vostroyans in contrast while are bringing in reserves like Scions and Ponies, are a sedentary Force. Lascannons, Heavy Bolters and Plasmaguns. Before this my Templars slightly skewed for melee with Horde Elements, my Castallen rerolling 1 to wounds on shooting and assault allows me to shift and play firefight-Melee. The World Eaters are far more heavily skewed to melee and a slightly more elite force with their Exalted being rerolling all wounds only in close and there other special rules.

 

The addition of soup elements while both Horde and open deployment options. Highlight the melee v Jack of All disparity the two lists have before souping. In many ways that even highlights the original forces. Which while vital in the main lists are less salient. Finally we add the third soup. R&H vs Deathriders and Rattling. R&H are their for cheap artillery and backfield. They contrast with my Vostroyans earlier whom provide the anchor for my Templars. R&H are meant to soften my hordes and forces, as well act as chaff against my army. This ties his army firmly into the aggressor role. My detachment, brings me additional set of deployment and snipers.

 

Snipers in many ways defensive more than offensive. An offensive list will clear units out quickly leaving characters open to murder. A defensive list is more spread out and cannot bring its firepower to clear a position quickly. My number of reserve units mean I start with nearly half my army not on the board. Rattlings also act as Puesdo Scout Marines to push the enemy back. Before these additions both WE and BT lack heavy firepower, True horde, and deployment variety. Our soups quickly remedied these situations but at the same time highlighted the fundamental differences.

 

What I am trying to get at here, individual Codex Power level varies heavily. But soup’ing can provide a way so that you can still play and not be stuck with a weak Codex. While you may lose parts of your army (diluting your main force strength, taking fewer deep striker so you can include an AM Battlelion/Brigade). Whatever your main force in many ways adding allies highlights and is expected. And you cannot expect to play pure and be competitive (T1) with soup as that means your Codex is better than the entirely of the Imperium. That isn’t the same as not being viable. A pure list can have strengths and have competitive games with soup. But if it is better than soup it implies to be better than every other army contained in a soup.

[Commissar K.]

I'd advise you to reread the daemonhunter codex. For the many pages of narrative reasons the GK would fight all the other races.

 

Not just daemons.

 

GK are truely powerful.

 

When you use the best units the rest of the Imperium has to offer and only bring GMNDKs from the GK codex.

 

But then is it really a GK army?

 

How do you quantify what a soup army is, apart from soup.

 

As for mentioning IA is also advise you to check the FAQ that dissalows GK access to all the marine FW units.

 

As we're not a <chapter> that can be replaced.

 

But IA does contain arguably our second best unit. The Doomglaive. Which is a fantastic Dreadnought.

 

Edit and yes the GK design was they were the best of the best.

 

Based on emperors gene seed, with unlimited access to *the best* wargear the entire imperium could make.

 

Better than normal marines, with the absolute best wargear.

 

If that doesn't satisfy best of the best i don't know what does...

This is assuming M. Ward's fanboyism as an absolute truth. The fact of the matter is, well stated in Daemonhunters that they are Daemonhunters, specialized to thake on Chaos. Doing so with a wide variance of troups as numbers of Grey Knights are not only small but an extreme rarity within the Imperium to be capble to only function as a sole chapter. 

Better put every Champer Militant is a soup, a mix of everything. Trying to force yourself to do otherwise, as is shown by results is enforcing a handicap upon yourself. When compairing the competitive viability of armies understand that you are (for whatever reason) compairing multiple codexes to one. 

 

GK are unique in that they are a supreme tool of Space Marines against Chaos, because of that they most certainly exceed the power of a regular Space Marine and because of this are another rarity amongst rarities. Narrative has covered that in order to make up for this lack in number several AM forces are deployed alongside GK. So with that set narrative I can only say that for the competitive approach of your games this will prove more effective overall. Likewise I like to use either Cultists or Daemons with my CSM armies. If my intend is to create a competitive build and the area allows the use of multiple codex I will not exclusively use one codex.

 

A very similar subject has been brought up in the CSM sub-forum recently too. SM can do melee really well, just less so if you (for whatever reason) limit yourself to just Codex SM.

[Commissar K.]

 

The point is, Grey Knights have been released as a standalone Codex. What we are complaining about is that, as a Codex, Grey Knights are far weaker than all the other Codices (with the possible exception of Ad Mech). Nothing to do with soup and mixing this with that. As a standalone army, Grey Knights do not come close to any other standalone army. That is the problem. Regardless whether GW want 8th to be about soup, all Codices should be equal in relative power to each other, this is not the case hence why we are complaining.

 

They have also been released in an overlapping Index. The simple truth is that soup-lists are what currently dominate the competitive scene. 

Any army using one single codex will come out weaker as an army using codex, index and imperial armour. As a result in a tournament most army lists are not using entries of one Codex but multiple books.

 

The point is nobody at the competitive top is playing standalone armies, assuming you mean that a standalone army means the army is composed out of entries only found in one Codex.

 

All Codices will not be equal in relative power because they have acces to each other. BA owns DA in melee, DA owns BA in ranged combat. If you want to win a tournament, combine the two because you can without (m)any downsides.

[Gentlemanloser]

Yeah Daemonhunters is old.

 

It's fluff like a gkgm being an inquisitor was retconned. Just like the deathwing being native Americans and losing thier homeworld.

 

Your view of the current GK is outdated.

 

The GK are and alwayd have been a fully fledged space marine chapter.

 

As autonomous and effective as every other marine chapter.

 

And no were not small. We're a full chapter size. Back in the day we used to be much larger. But as a full chapter were currently larger than quite a few understrength chapters...

[Capt. Mytre]

 

 

 

 

You clearly haven't been reading the issues people have been posting here then. Our issue isn't soup. Our issue is that the codex is blatantly bad compared to others. Our issue is that the internal balance is horrible. The issue is, why pick GK when you can pick other options that won't leave you with a handicap? We have one unit that is worthy of soup, that's a GMNDK - that leaves an entire codex of sub-par trash.

 

 

GK are that bad - they are monobuild: deepstrike + try and get a charge off. With that in mind, any player with any sense can counter your army just by screening with cheap units. I've never lost to a GK player, and to do so would take effort on my part to actively make bad decisions.

 

I have read the issues people have been posting. They feel and see that their list doesn't work when they restrict themselves to Codex Grey Knights alone. While again the whole design of 8th still allows you to mix thus will have to thake this into consideration for all balancing purposes. Yes Malefic Lords get cost increased with CA, not because the book they belong to is that strong but because all Chaos lists have acces to it, wether they are generated purely (otherwise) from a single Codex or Index is irrelevant.

 

The point you seem to be missing, highlighted in my post you quoted is that you should pick Grey Knigths as "Daemonhunters" not as Astra Militarum hunters or Xenos hunters. For the simple reason that their narrative is completely based on this and this narrative is the starting point of design.

 

In reality Grey Knights are as bad as you badly handicap yourself. I also cannot expect World Eaters to function as competitive as other factions if I exclude myself from other books, Index, Imperial Armour or otherwise. There seems to be a very clear intend of making soup lists not only a possibility but actually a great plan. If anything GK are better designed as they used to be from a narrative perspective. This isn't M. Ward's design of Grey Knights being the best of the best against everything, nor was that ever their narrative purpose.

 

 

 

 

No, you haven't. You didn't even counter the issues that I mentioned, you just went off on your "soup list solves everything" garbage. Shocking internal balance (which is inexcusable on GW's part, it isn't hard to make each unit type have its own role) and poor external balance. I'm not asking for a codex that is Matt Ward level, you're the one assuming that's what everyone wants. If you actually read what people want, you would know that. We're just asking for a nicely balanced, fluffy codex.

 

You didn't even talk about how there's only one unit worth taking in the entire GK arsenal in a soup list, with everything else being found elsewhere with superior rules. This is the sticking point - why play with any GK models at all when I can get things that do it better elsewhere? That's how bad GK are right now.

 

GK can have fluffy rules that allow them to be both competitive options against demons and other factions, and while you might think this isn't possible, they are not mutually exclusive.

 

Your argument boils down to "Don't play just GK, mix in other :cuss", but that's where you show how ignorant you are. Let me kind of wreck your entire argument, how many tournament players are using any GK models at all? All I've seen is GMNDK's when conscripts were OP. Also, if GK were a powerful option, you would see them in many Imperium list. You see them in very few.

 

Finally, you know why you didn't counter any of my points and just keep repeating your "soup list" tangent? It's because it's blatantly clear that you don't play GK.

[Gentlemanloser]

Or know the old and current fluff...

 

Read V's stickied post. It's very useful.

[Schlitzaf]

First Dreadknights are the cream or best of your Units. Your Strike Squads are acceptable. With the ability to deep strike, double tap off Storm Bolters and have two attacks. That shouldn’t be discounted and shouldn’t be underrated. At 21 attacks 14 hit > 7 wound or 14 damage in combat and on deep strike 40 Bolters, 26 hit and 13 wounds is a backfield marine dead. Or more likely

 

A murdered squad of Gaurdsman. Grey Knights are excellent and chaff clearing then being able to press their advantage. It’s not even a question of you not having good Units. Strike Squads are solid Troops. Your other units might be lacking, but in the troop department you are not.

 

With Astral Aim, a mid field purgation Squad is excellent vs light armor. You have good Units. And you have excellent chaff clearing, something marine armies in general lack

[Gentlemanloser]

Raptors have better with lias dsing some sterguard. Or even strike from the shadows aggressors.

 

Hellblasters are better at killing everything that isn't T3 chaff, so just about most units in the game.

 

Plus marines can cheaply get reroll 1s to wound which is something we simply can't get.

 

And 40 SB shots can't even kill a marine unit in cover.

 

Let's give us reroll 1s to hit.

 

40 shots. 32 hit. 16 wounds. 3 marines dead.

 

Even out of cover is only 5.3.

 

10 strikes will on average kill a marine combat squad out of cover. Or scouts.

 

Strikes are a great jack of all trades unit. But are outclassed by specialists.

 

And purgation squads aren't that much better and trade the jack of all trades role by losing thier cc weapons.

 

Not really a great trade off...

 

 

Edit. And your entire point is that out of the whole codex there is one good unit and another acceptable unit.

 

Solid praise for the army right there...

 

 

The are a few other stand out units. Draigo, Voldus, Hammer Apothecaries and Doomglaives should all get a mention.

 

But again that's not the main issue. The issue is the wealth of units that are little more than copy pastes of other in codex units but worse.

 

And the horrid internal balance.

[Capt. Mytre]

First Dreadknights are the cream or best of your Units. Your Strike Squads are acceptable. With the ability to deep strike, double tap off Storm Bolters and have two attacks. That shouldn’t be discounted and shouldn’t be underrated. At 21 attacks 14 hit > 7 wound or 14 damage in combat and on deep strike 40 Bolters, 26 hit and 13 wounds is a backfield marine dead. Or more likely

 

A murdered squad of Gaurdsman. Grey Knights are excellent and chaff clearing then being able to press their advantage. It’s not even a question of you not having good Units. Strike Squads are solid Troops. Your other units might be lacking, but in the troop department you are not.

 

With Astral Aim, a mid field purgation Squad is excellent vs light armor. You have good Units. And you have excellent chaff clearing, something marine armies in general lack

 

Another one that doesn't read what we're asking. We know strikes are ok. No ones asking for them to be buffed. We aren't asking for buffs for units that are good. We want fixes for units that have either have massive overlap in their combat role (Terminators/Paladins, GMNDK/NDK, etc) or have no reason to bring (Purifiers/Librarians/Techmarines etc).

 

Regarding your strikes, a 10 man squad can kill 4 marines out in the open. Put them in cover, and now just 2 will die on average. You now have a Strike squad sitting out in the open, ready to be shot at next turn. Assaulting is incredibly unlikely from DS, ~27% chance. If the enemy is in the second floor of ruins, it's almost impossible.

 

Regarding purgation squads, you're vastly overestimating how good they are. Astral Aim is an unreliable once per turn buff, so this is limited to a single five man squad. Also, given the short range of all our weapons, it's highly likely that they will have had to move, meaning they hit on 4+. So you have 24 shots come out of this squad, hitting on 4's (12), wounding on 5's (4), saved on 3+(1 failed) = 2 damage on average. "Excellent vs light armour". Just to illustrate the best case scenario, not moving (so hit on 3+) and using an expensive stratagem results in a massive 8 damage on average. Wow. What power.

[Schlitzaf]

So....? 8 damage.....wait for it. That is a dead light armors. Devies do 4 > 2.66 hits > 1.76 wounds > 1.45 post save. So 6 Damage. So yes 8 damage, and the ability to fight in close. So now then.

 

But that vs heavy not light. GEQ

24 > 16/12 > 11/8 > 7/5

15 > 10 > 6.66 > 3.33

 

On average scenerio your double the damage put out by Devastators vs Light Armor. Last I checked Daemons are made of GEQ in which the Purgators outshine Devestator. (110 vs 113). At the cost of a 5 Power.

 

How about we sit and try this again. You have a couple valid UU. You know how viable units C:SM has? Based on tournaments I can count them on one hand maybe both hands if you wanna stretch it.

[Capt. Mytre]

So....? 8 damage.....wait for it. That is a dead light armors. Devies do 4 > 2.66 hits > 1.76 wounds > 1.45 post save. So 6 Damage. So yes 8 damage, and the ability to fight in close. So now then.

 

But that vs heavy not light. GEQ

24 > 16/12 > 11/8 > 7/5

15 > 10 > 6.66 > 3.33

 

On average scenerio your double the damage put out by Devastators vs Light Armor. Last I checked Daemons are made of GEQ in which the Purgators outshine Devestator. (110 vs 113). At the cost of a 5 Power.

 

How about we sit and try this again. You have a couple valid UU. You know how viable units C:SM has? Based on tournaments I can count them on one hand maybe both hands if you wanna stretch it.

 

You're showing your ignorance. The 8 damage requires you to be within 24", not move, either have line of sight or get Astral Aim off and use a 2cp strat. There's also no difference between a Purgation squad and a Dev squad in "fight in close", which I can only assume you mean is melee combat. Purgation squads don't have melee weapons if they have psilencers, aside from the SL. You're also comparing an unbuffed squad of devs verse a fully buffed squad of Purgs. Hardly a fair comparison.

 

Light armoured means lightly armoured vehicles. If you're talking about armour saves, say that.

 

It's funny that you now complain about how many viable units C:SM have - of all boards to whine on, you choose GK. Kind of ironic that you guys came and told us the answer to all our issues is to just play soup.

 

So you know what? Stop whining. Play Chaos Soup. Your problem solved.

 

See how stupid that sounds? That's exactly how you two sound, except you both also don't know anything about GK which makes it even more inane.

[Schlitzaf]

I’m not whining. I’m simply saying you complaining only having 3-5 Units top teir comp viable is ridiculous because that is true for most armies

[Gentlemanloser]

Missing the point again.

 

How many of those other armies have multiple units that are never played because they are worse cut and paste of other units?

 

We're not taking about cherry picking the most efficient top 5 units from a dex (reapers for eldar. Although they have a tonne of other well perfurming units). But we have many entries that are simply ignored.

 

Not not as efficient/potent as other choices.

 

But left on the shelf never looked at.

[Capt. Mytre]

I’m not whining. I’m simply saying you complaining only having 3-5 Units top teir comp viable is ridiculous because that is true for most armies

 

Well then, you've failing to understand what this entire thread and others like it are about then. We aren't asking for everything to be top tier (and at best it's currently one unit that is top tier, the GMNDK, it's rare to see anything else GK in a tournament list).

 

At this point it feels like I'm going in circles. Please read the issues we have, and what we want done. It's tough getting through to you when you don't even know what we want, but you keep saying "play soup" like it could actually fix these issues (it cannot).

[Reclusiarch Darius]

Hey guys can we get back on topic a bit more? 

 

For people who don't play the GK army, its pretty galling to hear 'lol just play Imperial soup xD!!!'. Same for the other nonsensical red herrings like 'yeah but several editions ago things were maybe different'. I played 3rd edition Daemonhunters, that list was atrocious, Allies and all. It had awesome flavour with all the Inquisitional warbands, funky wargear etc. But it was not a good army book. Not a good comparison to make.

 

This thread isn't to discuss Marines or any other army either. Whatever bad internal balance exists in those books is frankly not the issue at hand. We're discussing why GK need some reworking. I fully agree with the assertion that GK have to step outside their own army book to get better options. That's exactly the problem. Why should we have to? If you start down that road, eventually you realise the only worthwhile unit is GMDK's, and at that point you're not playing GK anymore. Which brings us full circle.

 

If people wish to complain about other armies internal balance, I suggest they bring that up on the relevant forum. We're a GK forum.

 

I'm gonna let things continue here for a bit longer maybe, but I strongly feel if you have worthwhile suggestions (not useless ideas like 'eh just ally stuff'), go to the stickied thread we're using to collate ideas. I would like this thread to continue as a more open discussion, but if we keep going off topic I'll close it down.

[Commissar K.]

 

 

No, you haven't. You didn't even counter the issues that I mentioned, you just went off on your "soup list solves everything" garbage. Shocking internal balance (which is inexcusable on GW's part, it isn't hard to make each unit type have its own role) and poor external balance. I'm not asking for a codex that is Matt Ward level, you're the one assuming that's what everyone wants. If you actually read what people want, you would know that. We're just asking for a nicely balanced, fluffy codex.

 

You didn't even talk about how there's only one unit worth taking in the entire GK arsenal in a soup list, with everything else being found elsewhere with superior rules. This is the sticking point - why play with any GK models at all when I can get things that do it better elsewhere? That's how bad GK are right now.

 

GK can have fluffy rules that allow them to be both competitive options against demons and other factions, and while you might think this isn't possible, they are not mutually exclusive.

 

Your argument boils down to "Don't play just GK, mix in other ", but that's where you show how ignorant you are. Let me kind of wreck your entire argument, how many tournament players are using any GK models at all? All I've seen is GMNDK's when conscripts were OP. Also, if GK were a powerful option, you would see them in many Imperium list. You see them in very few.

 

Finally, you know why you didn't counter any of my points and just keep repeating your "soup list" tangent? It's because it's blatantly clear that you don't play GK.

 

There is no point to counter because it again seems very clear your missing the point of 8th edition's design. The moment you allow for mixes (anywhere) is the moment you have to balance a game around that factor. That is what competitive 8th is. Not a single competitive top tier list is using a single Codex to archieve said top tier status. Not willing to understand this is a choice. Not willing to mix means you are enforcing a handicap upon yourself. It's akin to stating, I don't want any Vehicles in my army and then complain an army doesn't work without Vehicles.

 

If you want me to cover how you can play Grey Knights competitively you've allready got my awnser. Don't solely limit yourself to one Codex, nobody does this at a competitive level. 

 

There are currently 4 competitive top 3 showings of Grey Knights at ITC and GT. Those who made a showing again are using multiple Imperial Codeci to construct an army. 

 

What I play is absoltely irrelevant to the whole point you seem to be missing. Multiple posters within this topic at it. The competitive top armies are using Codex, Index and Imperial Armour for lists construction. Choosing to not do this means you are limiting yourself. This is your choice in 8th. 

 

 

Hey guys can we get back on topic a bit more? 

 

For people who don't play the GK army, its pretty galling to hear 'lol just play Imperial soup xD!!!'. Same for the other nonsensical red herrings like 'yeah but several editions ago things were maybe different'. I played 3rd edition Daemonhunters, that list was atrocious, Allies and all. It had awesome flavour with all the Inquisitional warbands, funky wargear etc. But it was not a good army book. Not a good comparison to make.

 

This thread isn't to discuss Marines or any other army either. Whatever bad internal balance exists in those books is frankly not the issue at hand. We're discussing why GK need some reworking. I fully agree with the assertion that GK have to step outside their own army book to get better options. That's exactly the problem. Why should we have to? If you start down that road, eventually you realise the only worthwhile unit is GMDK's, and at that point you're not playing GK anymore. Which brings us full circle.

 

If people wish to complain about other armies internal balance, I suggest they bring that up on the relevant forum. We're a GK forum.

 

I'm gonna let things continue here for a bit longer maybe, but I strongly feel if you have worthwhile suggestions (not useless ideas like 'eh just ally stuff'), go to the stickied thread we're using to collate ideas. I would like this thread to continue as a more open discussion, but if we keep going off topic I'll close it down.

If you think that this boils down to 'lol play Imperial soup' you are not even bothering to read into the mentioned points. I see players mentioning that they are not as competitive as X or Y while X or Y are not using armies that are solely made up by one Codex either.

 

If all you want to reach with this topic is to have Grey Knigths in 8th rewritten by M. Ward again it's easier to mail GW this then to act as if the options arn't available. 

 

To the question why should be mix the awnser is simple, because every top AM, CSM and SM list is doing this aswell. Enforcing a handicap upon yourself by wanting one Codex to cover all is something that simply will not happen in 8th. It didn't happen for AM, CSM or SM either.

Not a single army is capable of exclusively using one Legion/Chapter/World to obtain the most potent combo's. 

 

You are most certainly still playing Grey Knights if you blend in other choices. If you do not want to use book X or Y in this edition it's your choice to not maximize the competitive advantages that are available to you. 

 

Edit: As before my intention is only to give an objective perspective of what's going on competitively. Anyone is free to play whatever they want. Understand that in this edition due to the many mixes available mixing is always the best choice. It applies for everyone. Currently there are basically two ways to be competitive with a Grey Knights army (or CSM or AM  or SM for that matter)

1. Play locally in a non-competitive setting and agree upon non-mixed armies.

2. Play in a competitive setting and understand that most will combine the strongest assests of multiple different books into one army. 

 

To me it seems very clear that there is a wish for mono-Chapters or mono-Legions to do it all. This however can only return from a design perspective if armies would actually be limited to that but they are not, so enforcing further limitations upon your own army is your choice. 

 

[Holier Than Thou]

 

No, you haven't. You didn't even counter the issues that I mentioned, you just went off on your "soup list solves everything" garbage. Shocking internal balance (which is inexcusable on GW's part, it isn't hard to make each unit type have its own role) and poor external balance. I'm not asking for a codex that is Matt Ward level, you're the one assuming that's what everyone wants. If you actually read what people want, you would know that. We're just asking for a nicely balanced, fluffy codex.

 

 

You didn't even talk about how there's only one unit worth taking in the entire GK arsenal in a soup list, with everything else being found elsewhere with superior rules. This is the sticking point - why play with any GK models at all when I can get things that do it better elsewhere? That's how bad GK are right now.

 

GK can have fluffy rules that allow them to be both competitive options against demons and other factions, and while you might think this isn't possible, they are not mutually exclusive.

 

Your argument boils down to "Don't play just GK, mix in other :cuss", but that's where you show how ignorant you are. Let me kind of wreck your entire argument, how many tournament players are using any GK models at all? All I've seen is GMNDK's when conscripts were OP. Also, if GK were a powerful option, you would see them in many Imperium list. You see them in very few.

 

Finally, you know why you didn't counter any of my points and just keep repeating your "soup list" tangent? It's because it's blatantly clear that you don't play GK.

 

There is no point to counter because it again seems very clear your missing the point of 8th edition's design. The moment you allow for mixes (anywhere) is the moment you have to balance a game around that factor. That is what competitive 8th is. Not a single competitive top tier list is using a single Codex to archieve said top tier status. Not willing to understand this is a choice. Not willing to mix means you are enforcing a handicap upon yourself. It's akin to stating, I don't want any Vehicles in my army and then complain an army doesn't work without Vehicles.

If you want me to cover how you can play Grey Knights competitively you've allready got my awnser. Don't solely limit yourself to one Codex, nobody does this at a competitive level. 

There are currently 4 competitive top 3 showings of Grey Knights at ITC and GT. Those who made a showing again are using multiple Imperial Codeci to construct an army. 

What I play is absoltely irrelevant to the whole point you seem to be missing. Multiple posters within this topic at it. The competitive top armies are using Codex, Index and Imperial Armour for lists construction. Choosing to not do this means you are limiting yourself. This is your choice in 8th. 

 

 

Hey guys can we get back on topic a bit more? 

 

For people who don't play the GK army, its pretty galling to hear 'lol just play Imperial soup xD!!!'. Same for the other nonsensical red herrings like 'yeah but several editions ago things were maybe different'. I played 3rd edition Daemonhunters, that list was atrocious, Allies and all. It had awesome flavour with all the Inquisitional warbands, funky wargear etc. But it was not a good army book. Not a good comparison to make.

 

This thread isn't to discuss Marines or any other army either. Whatever bad internal balance exists in those books is frankly not the issue at hand. We're discussing why GK need some reworking. I fully agree with the assertion that GK have to step outside their own army book to get better options. That's exactly the problem. Why should we have to? If you start down that road, eventually you realise the only worthwhile unit is GMDK's, and at that point you're not playing GK anymore. Which brings us full circle.

 

If people wish to complain about other armies internal balance, I suggest they bring that up on the relevant forum. We're a GK forum.

 

I'm gonna let things continue here for a bit longer maybe, but I strongly feel if you have worthwhile suggestions (not useless ideas like 'eh just ally stuff'), go to the stickied thread we're using to collate ideas. I would like this thread to continue as a more open discussion, but if we keep going off topic I'll close it down.

 

If you think that this boils down to 'lol play Imperial soup' you are not even bothering to read into the mentioned points. I see players mentioning that they are not as competitive as X or Y while X or Y are not using armies that are solely made up by one Codex either.

If all you want to reach with this topic is to have Grey Knigths in 8th rewritten by M. Ward again it's easier to mail GW this then to act as if the options arn't available. 

To the question why should be mix the awnser is simple, because every top AM, CSM and SM list is doing this aswell. Enforcing a handicap upon yourself by wanting one Codex to cover all is something that simply will not happen in 8th. It didn't happen for AM, CSM or SM either.

Not a single army is capable of exclusively using one Legion/Chapter/World to obtain the most potent combo's. 

You are most certainly still playing Grey Knights if you blend in other choices. If you do not want to use book X or Y in this edition it's your choice to not maximize the competitive advantages that are available to you. 

Edit: As before my intention is only to give an objective perspective of what's going on competitively. Anyone is free to play whatever they want. Understand that in this edition due to the many mixes available mixing is always the best choice. It applies for everyone. Currently there are basically two ways to be competitive with a Grey Knights army (or CSM or AM  or SM for that matter)

1. Play locally in a non-competitive setting and agree upon non-mixed armies.

2. Play in a competitive setting and understand that most will combine the strongest assests of multiple different books into one army. 

To me it seems very clear that there is a wish for mono-Chapters or mono-Legions to do it all. This however can only return from a design perspective if armies would actually be limited to that but they are not, so enforcing further limitations upon your own army is your choice. 

It's a ridiculous argument to say it's ok for one Codex (GK) to be bad because you can mix it with other things. Each Codex should be of similar power to each other Codex. Yes, mixing them will give stronger results but Codex against Codex should be an even battle.

[Gentlemanloser]

How do you decide if a soup army is a grey knight army?

 

Number of units? Number of points spent? Warlord?

 

All flawed.

 

The moment you decide to use the imperial keyword for your army it is no longer a grey knight army.

 

But an imperial one.

 

An imperial army has nothing, nothing to do with a great knight army. Nothing.

 

Oh and nids do just fine with a single codex. As do Eldar.

[Commissar K.]

It's a ridiculous argument to say it's ok for one Codex (GK) to be bad because you can mix it with other things. Each Codex should be of similar power to each other Codex. Yes, mixing them will give stronger results but Codex against Codex should be an even battle.

What is ridiculous is the assumption this is a codex vs codex game.

 

Good luck with the lamentation.

[Gentlemanloser]

That's a silly arguement when codexes are sold individually and GW hasn't released codex: imperials.

 

You really have no arguement, don't play gk, don't know our current fluff nor our old history.

 

It will be sad for RD to have to lock this thread.