Will Grey Knights be fixed by the March FAQ?

[Waking Dreamer]

Just to add what Kallas just said, what makes GK 'feel' elite is that they have some of the best baseline weapons for any troops that give them incredible adaptability from Storm Bolters and Nemesis Weapons. Like Pyscannons have their issues, but they are in theory just +1STR Assault Cannon. And if you like at them and compare them to various Assault Cannon Chassis, the units that can take them are paying equivalent points. Even if they replace your Force Weapons on PA Chassis...when folks start shooting take out the heavy weapons first. 

 

Pyscannons are not meant to kill heavy armor, in the past they could because rending rules. They are meant to kill medium armor units like Greater Daemons who low Armor/Invulnerable Save, High Toughness and Wound Count. Your Stormbolters are excellent anti-chaff weaponry. GK's have the issue (honestly shared by Admech), they are a firefight style list (effective range is 8-15), and little dedicated anti-heavy armor easily (and reasonable accessible). Pyscannons while do a damage on what I noted, often tickle and maybe proc a wound or two (or just bringing enemy behold a threshold). If they are to the armies primary anti-tank, they need either, A) More Shots

B) Alternative Modes (ala Plasma)

C) AP

I think doing Rapid 3 and when shooting units with (monster or vehicle) keyword does d3 damage.

If they were to tweak the Psycannon to what it was more like in the 7E stats, I would say a better translation to 8E would be:

 

24" S7 AP-2 D2 Abilities: On a To Wound roll of a 6, profile changes to AP-4 D3.

 

A bit more like our 7E Rending.

[Schlitzaf]

Assault Cannons also lost Rending and gained no equivalent, so Pyscannons which atleast sense 5th (I forget if also true in Daemonhunters) being Assault Cannons with Alternate Modes and +1 Strength, lost rending by extension.

 

Guess what I am trying to say is that the Pyscannon needs to be decouple from being an alternative styled Assault Cannon, and then its points cost need to recalibrated. Sense it’s currently calibrated and costed as being as an Assault Cannon.

 

@Ward Ward was good for making inter Codex balance. As in; there will be no one choice > all choices, Kelly Codexes instead tend to have one super Unit > All (Long Fangs and Grey Hunters Classic example). Codex Balance across multiple factions less so.

[Chronos Darkhelmet]

Assault Cannons also lost Rending and gained no equivalent, so Pyscannons which atleast sense 5th (I forget if also true in Daemonhunters) being Assault Cannons with Alternate Modes and +1 Strength, lost rending by extension.

 

Guess what I am trying to say is that the Pyscannon needs to be decouple from being an alternative styled Assault Cannon, and then its points cost need to recalibrated. Sense it’s currently calibrated and costed as being as an Assault Cannon.

 

@Ward Ward was good for making inter Codex balance. As in; there will be no one choice > all choices, Kelly Codexes instead tend to have one super Unit > All (Long Fangs and Grey Hunters Classic example). Codex Balance across multiple factions less so.

Know what? It'd suffice to bring them back in line with 7th Ed. by using the new definition of Rapid Fire (so that RF 2 is approximately equal to deprecated Salvo 2/4) and they'd be at least decent for what they'd do and cost ;)

[Schlitzaf]

It should be rapid 3 in that case imho

[Danarc]

Psycannon RF3 sounds amazing, but in this case psylencer will be round kicked out of the game instantaneously. 

[Chronos Darkhelmet]

Well, approximately it's RF 2 that matches old Salvo 2/4, not RF 3 :P

 

Note that already this way we'd be able to bring 4 cannon shots in range without BS penalties thanks to DS ;)

[4ndroid]

make terminators and paladins T5 S5 

 

and fix the smite rites of banishment 

 

also let tanks shoot during fire phase if they are in Close Combat, but only target enemies 1" 

[Danarc]

make terminators and paladins T5 S5 

this would be amazing, but should affect every termy in the game. And what about Custodes?

 

and fix the smite rites of banishment 

with new rule? some rumours say that baby smite will remain the same and will not be affected by new rule

 

also let tanks shoot during fire phase if they are in Close Combat, but only target enemies 1" 

are you kidding me? allowing tank shoot also in cc is crazy from the coherency point of view and absurd as rule since tank are enough good (someone says leman russ?)

I can't agree with these ideas.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Awesome =/= Perfect.

 

The rule in the GK 5th edition codex weren't perfect either.

 

They were very good, the best this faction has ever seen.

 

But not perfect.

 

Heck i even say 'the crunch wasnt perfect' above...

 

Yeah, but people also said that "he should write all Codexes", despite him having demonstrated clear proof that if he doesn't like your army, he'll make them suck completely because he can't be bothered putting effort in, and if he thinks the background supports it, he'll make the army blatantly OP.

 

Waitaminute... he's back at GW, right? The Eldar book is blatantly OP... Damnit Ward! :p

[Gentlemanloser]

Kelly wrote all the previous OP Eldar dexes. The flying circus in 4th... ugh.

 

We'll never get s5 t5. That's the Custards elite-ness.

 

Also Super Heavies get to fire some guns when enemies are within 1". So there's some precedence.

[Lord_Caerolion]

Maybe they should change the Grey Knights to having a "pistol" firing mode for their guns, given they're forearm mounted?

[Gentlemanloser]

We used to have True Grit. And it still exists in 8th.

 

We also used to be fearless. /sigh

[Lord_Caerolion]

Grey Knights should definitely get Fearless back. I just really wish they didn't get Storm Bolters, but rather something along the lines of "Stormbolter with Psybolt Ammo", which can be fired either as a Stormbolter with +1S, -1AP, or Pistol 2 12" with the same stats. Make their guns actually useful, even the "basic" ones.

[Waking Dreamer]

Grey Knights should definitely get Fearless back. I just really wish they didn't get Storm Bolters, but rather something along the lines of "Stormbolter with Psybolt Ammo", which can be fired either as a Stormbolter with +1S, -1AP, or Pistol 2 12" with the same stats. Make their guns actually useful, even the "basic" ones.

 

Is the current stormbolter not useful? I thought it was a welcome change to Rapid Fire 2, giving just ONE of our basic infantry models 4 shots after deepstriking?

 

With the core changes of Wounding and Toughness it also gave our stormbolters the potential to wound T8 models (though obviously not an ideal target), which was MUCH better than their 7E "uselessness" against such targets. Psybolt ammo is a desired upgrade which at the moment can be only be used in the form of CPs (which would be better at half the cost).

[Lord_Caerolion]

Are they useful? Kinda, I guess? They're better than plain bolters, that's for sure, but the Grey Knights need something a bit better. We're told over and over how amazing their wargear is, how every bolt shell they use is ritually forged, prayed over by blinded priests for 100 days, inimical to Daemon-kind, all the usual "these are mystic Holy Weapons" schtick, which doesn't really match with "they're just storm bolters". They at least need something to give a benefit from being forearm-mounted, although to be fair the Sanguinary Guard guns are Assault 2 as well.

[Capt. Mytre]

 

Grey Knights should definitely get Fearless back. I just really wish they didn't get Storm Bolters, but rather something along the lines of "Stormbolter with Psybolt Ammo", which can be fired either as a Stormbolter with +1S, -1AP, or Pistol 2 12" with the same stats. Make their guns actually useful, even the "basic" ones.

 

Is the current stormbolter not useful? I thought it was a welcome change to Rapid Fire 2, giving just ONE of our basic infantry models 4 shots after deepstriking?

 

With the core changes of Wounding and Toughness it also gave our stormbolters the potential to wound T8 models (though obviously not an ideal target), which was MUCH better than their 7E "uselessness" against such targets. Psybolt ammo is a desired upgrade which at the moment can be only be used in the form of CPs (which would be better at half the cost).

 

 

They are almost perfect. They are a great chaff clearer and with psybolt ammunition, you can almost kill 9 SM in cover with a 10 man squad on average. Some changes I'd make that aren't directly tied to the SB statline would be to Reduce Psybolt ammunition to 1cp and to give us a cheap re-roll aura's that other armies get.

 

The actual issue is that we don't have the specail weapons that fit a roll. What it should be is:

 

SB: GEQ

Psilencer: MEQ/TEQ

Psycannon: Monster/Vehicles 

 

Something like this:

 

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -4 2D3 dmg

Heavy Psycannon:

Assault 4 24” S9 AP -4 2D3 dmg

Psilencer:

Assault 6 24” S4 AP -2 1 dmg NOTE: Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

Gatling Psilencer:

Assault 12 24” S5 AP -2 2 dmg NOTE: Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

[Waking Dreamer]

 

They are almost perfect. They are a great chaff clearer and with psybolt ammunition, you can almost kill 9 SM in cover with a 10 man squad on average. Some changes I'd make that aren't directly tied to the SB statline would be to Reduce Psybolt ammunition to 1cp and to give us a cheap re-roll aura's that other armies get.

 

The actual issue is that we don't have the specail weapons that fit a roll. What it should be is:

 

SB: GEQ

Psilencer: MEQ/TEQ

Psycannon: Monster/Vehicles 

 

 

Something like this:

 

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -4 2D3 dmg

Heavy Psycannon:

Assault 4 24” S9 AP -4 2D3 dmg

Psilencer:

Assault 6 24” S4 AP -2 1 dmg NOTE: Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

Gatling Psilencer:

Assault 12 24” S5 AP -2 2 dmg NOTE: Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

 

 

I support the idea of distinct roles for our GK special weapons, but with those suggested profiles would they remain at current costs or be different?

 

Just comparing the Heavy Psycannon to say the Lascannon (the standard ranged anti-tank), except for range and equal strength it's definitely better in every other way, just for an extra 5 points? I mean it has the potential of doing 24 dmg compared to a Lascannon's 6 or even a TwinLascannon's 12 dmg (that costs 50 points).

[Capt. Mytre]

 

 

They are almost perfect. They are a great chaff clearer and with psybolt ammunition, you can almost kill 9 SM in cover with a 10 man squad on average. Some changes I'd make that aren't directly tied to the SB statline would be to Reduce Psybolt ammunition to 1cp and to give us a cheap re-roll aura's that other armies get.

 

The actual issue is that we don't have the specail weapons that fit a roll. What it should be is:

 

SB: GEQ

Psilencer: MEQ/TEQ

Psycannon: Monster/Vehicles 

 

 

Something like this:

 

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -4 2D3 dmg

Heavy Psycannon:

Assault 4 24” S9 AP -4 2D3 dmg

Psilencer:

Assault 6 24” S4 AP -2 1 dmg NOTE: Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

Gatling Psilencer:

Assault 12 24” S5 AP -2 2 dmg NOTE: Invulnerable saves cannot be taken against this weapon.

 

 

I support the idea of distinct roles for our GK special weapons, but with those suggested profiles would they remain at current costs or be different?

 

Just comparing the Heavy Psycannon to say the Lascannon (the standard ranged anti-tank), except for range and equal strength it's definitely better in every other way, just for an extra 5 points? I mean it has the potential of doing 24 dmg compared to a Lascannon's 6 or even a TwinLascannon's 12 dmg (that costs 50 points).

 

 

Costs would be rebalanced, and they are just a general idea. You also have to consider the platform it's on, and how readily they to bring to bear. However, comparing it to the las-talon (Heavy 2D3 36" S9 AP -3 D3 dmg), a similar stat line to that would be better.

 

Something like this:

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -4 D3 dmg

Heavy Psycannon:

Assault 4 24” S9 AP -4 D3 dmg

 

Also, "Psychic Onslaught" strat wouldn't exist any more, or would provide another buff (+1 hit for example).

[Kallas]

I like those weapon profiles, Capt. Mytre, although the AP-4 is a touch extreme.

 

I think something like:

Psycannon

Assault 2 / 24" / S7 / AP-3 / D3

 - S8 seems quite high, particularly for an Assault weapon (S8/AP-4 is basically a Multi-Melta, but with lower actual Damage). Could possibly also go to Rapid Fire 2? That'd give it great MEQ/TEQ smashing capacity up close, while still useful for throwing extra damage on heavier things at range.

 

Heavy Psycannon

Assault 4 / 24" / S8 or 9 / AP-3 / D3 (if S9) or D6 (if S8) dmg

 - S9 should definitely be considered, as GK don't have wide access to the usual Marine anti-tank weapons, though with a high volume of Assault shots, S9 could be too much (I think playtesting would probably find a sweet spot). Could also possibly up the actual Damage to D6 (definitely, IMO, if the S were to drop to 8).

 

Your suggested profiles for the Psilencer and Gatling Psilencer both seem pretty reasonable to me.

[Capt. Mytre]

I like those weapon profiles, Capt. Mytre, although the AP-4 is a touch extreme.

 

I think something like:

Psycannon

Assault 2 / 24" / S7 / AP-3 / D3

 - S8 seems quite high, particularly for an Assault weapon (S8/AP-4 is basically a Multi-Melta, but with lower actual Damage). Could possibly also go to Rapid Fire 2? That'd give it great MEQ/TEQ smashing capacity up close, while still useful for throwing extra damage on heavier things at range.

 

Heavy Psycannon

Assault 4 / 24" / S8 or 9 / AP-3 / D3 (if S9) or D6 (if S8) dmg

 - S9 should definitely be considered, as GK don't have wide access to the usual Marine anti-tank weapons, though with a high volume of Assault shots, S9 could be too much (I think playtesting would probably find a sweet spot). Could also possibly up the actual Damage to D6 (definitely, IMO, if the S were to drop to 8).

 

Your suggested profiles for the Psilencer and Gatling Psilencer both seem pretty reasonable to me.

 

I think it comes down to how people see it, and the points cost. For me, it would be similar to heavy anti-tank weaponry (las cannon/multimelta), not a special weapon, and would be priced appropriately (roughly 25 points).

 

The following assumes I have everything correct math-wise:

 

So, interestingly enough, your suggestion is more powerful than mine.

 

Verse a LR (T8 2+ Sv). Average wounds at RF range would be 3.78 (1.89 with two shots), mine would be 1.91 and from a stationary lascannon, 1.03. Chance to get a wounding shot is basically the same between the two of ours (47.3% vs 47.8%).

 

Verse a rhino (T7 3+ Sv), it's even more powerful. Average wounds at RF range would be 5.82 (2.91 with two shots). Mine would be 2.76, a lascannon would do 1.30. Chance to get a wounding shot is 72.8% vs 69.1%

 

More shots are insanely powerful, and would also make the weapon too good verse heavy infantry. I'd nerf my version by 1 AP, and would give a nice .5 increase in average wounds over las cannons vs a LR, which is made up for with the short range, lack of re-roll auras and base platform costs.

 

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -3 D3 dmg

Heavy Psycannon:

Assault 4 24” S9 AP -3 D3 dmg

[Kallas]

I think it comes down to how people see it, and the points cost. For me, it would be similar to heavy anti-tank weaponry (las cannon/multimelta), not a special weapon, and would be priced appropriately (roughly 25 points).

Yeah, 20/30 seems approximately reasonable.

 

The following assumes I have everything correct math-wise:

 

So, interestingly enough, your suggestion is more powerful than mine.

 

Verse a LR (T8 2+ Sv). Average wounds at RF range would be 3.78 (1.89 with two shots), mine would be 1.91 and from a stationary lascannon, 1.03. Chance to get a wounding shot is basically the same between the two of ours (47.3% vs 47.8%).

 

Verse a rhino (T7 3+ Sv), it's even more powerful. Average wounds at RF range would be 5.82 (2.91 with two shots). Mine would be 2.76, a lascannon would do 1.30. Chance to get a wounding shot is 72.8% vs 69.1%

I believe your math is slightly off (or: you misread my profile suggestion/I'm misunderstanding which profile you're using/there is some modifier or reroll I'm not seeing! :P )

 

vs LR (T8/2+)

Your S9/-4/d3D PC:

Aslt2: 2*0.66*0.66*0.84*avg2 = 1.46 damage

 

My S8/-3/d6D PC:

Aslt2: 2*0.66*0.5*0.66*avg3.5 = 1.52/ RF2, 3.05

 

My S9/-3/d3D PC:

Aslt2: 2*0.66*0.66*0.84*avg2 = 1.15

 

Below/latest suggestions:

Psy S8/-3/d3D:

Aslt2: 2*0.66*0.5*0.66*avg2 = 0.87

 

Heavy Psy S8/-3/d3D:

Aslt4: 2*0.66*0.66*0.66*avg2 = 2.3

 

Most powerful would be the Rapid Fire/d6, so yeah, I'd agree that's too much! Your updated ones both seem to be pretty solid.

 

I might suggest some kind of "6+ to wound causes an extra Mortal Wound" mind of rule, just to give them some random extra bite considering that they're some of the GK's primarily AT and d3D guns aren't particularly amazing in that role. *Shrug* I just don't like d3D as primary AT, haha! Could possibly go for a flat Damage stat? 2 or 3? (A Heavy Psy with 3D would do 3.45 to an LR on average; 4.4 to a Russ and Rhino-chassis, so powerful, probably too much so! 2D would be 2.3/2.93 - more reasonable from a statistically point of view, less swingy than d3D and still a higher damage max than the standard Psycannon, so maybe 2D?)

 

More shots are insanely powerful, and would also make the weapon too good verse heavy infantry. I'd nerf my version by 1 AP, and would give a nice .5 increase in average wounds over las cannons vs a LR, which is made up for with the short range, lack of re-roll auras and base platform costs.

Yeah, you're right that that kind of statline with Rapid Fire would be too much. I think to get RF it'd need to drop in power, which would somewhat negate the point!

 

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -3 D3 dmg

 

Heavy Psycannon:

Assault 4 24” S9 AP -3 D3 dmg

As I said above, these look solid. I think a flat 2D on the Heavy Psycannon could be good: it'd have a higher max damage than the Psycannon and not rely on dice for damage (which is always nice!). Statistically 2D doesn't look like it would be too powerful either

[Schlitzaf]

You realize that Pyscannons Cannons are already priced as heavy right? As I keep saying, Pyscannons are priced and point as Assault Cannons, which are heavy. They reason they are 12-14 Points on Strikes is because Nemesis Weapons are priced at 6ish Points.

 

In any case, AP -4 a no. It should AP -1 or -2 if it has volume of shots or AP -3 if it has single high damage shots. AP -4 Weapons are either close range or vehicle mounted

[Gentlemanloser]

Or you're Eldar and roll a 6.

[Capt. Mytre]

 

*Snip*

 

 

Yeah, my error was I left the stat in for a chance for a single shot to wound, but with the right calculations it still shows that it's fine.

 

Not a fan of mortal wounds, they are too prolific in 40k already - however as a form of additional wounds they can be ok, and allows you to make a weapon deal 2.5 damage.

 

For example,

 

Psycannon:

Assault 2 24” S8 AP -3 2 dmg

Note: For each unsaved wound against an enemy model, roll a D6. On a 4+, the model takes an additional mortal wound.

 

 

You realize that Pyscannons Cannons are already priced as heavy right? As I keep saying, Pyscannons are priced and point as Assault Cannons, which are heavy. They reason they are 12-14 Points on Strikes is because Nemesis Weapons are priced at 6ish Points.

 

In any case, AP -4 a no. It should AP -1 or -2 if it has volume of shots or AP -3 if it has single high damage shots. AP -4 Weapons are either close range or vehicle mounted

 

Did you fail to read anything Kallas and I wrote?

 

You can keep saying whatever you want, it doesn't make psycannons good. Psilencers are statistically better verse almost anything with multiple wounds, and they are :cuss as well. If they were correct, you would see people running psycannons everywhere they could. Hell, people don't even run psilencers, they just get lascannon platforms.

 

As for cost, "priced as heavy" is meaningless. Heavy weapons cost between 10 and 27, and have vastly different effects. Note that we are suggesting an increase of the cost to ~25 points, so according to you, would be priced at 31 points, which makes them more expensive than any space marine deployable heavy weapon.

 

We agreed on AP -3, and have the stats to back it up - but even at AP -4, it isn't an amazing increase in average wounds. Also, multimelta have 24" range, so does the psycannon, but the psycannon isn't "close range" and the multimelta is?

[Schlitzaf]

I never once said Pyscannons are good. I simply said they are not overcosted and pointed as Assault Cannons. Multi-Meltas have only 1 Shot and effective range is 12”. And multi-shot Weapons are neither high strength and high AP. You can get one or the other.

 

Or be an Autocannon/Missile Launcher. Having AP -3 or -4 on high strength (above 6) and high shot (above 2) doesn’t happen. The exception is the Deathwatch Frag Cannon. Deathwatch don’t have good melee unlike you nor do they have innately Deep Strike. Or they are mounted on tanks.

 

Math or not, that is simply a basic design of 8th Edition for Imperial based factions. Your one who keeps saying sky is falling, which I never denied, I simply stated, the claim Pyscannon is overpriced, is wrong. And said the issue with the Pyscannon is that is an Assault Cannon, when the army needs a Lascannon.

 

Looking at the autocannon be a better target than the Lascannon, because Autocannon is more comparable to Pyscannon rolewise