9th edition implications for the GK

[Corvus Fortis]

Nothing particulary interesting in the FAQ. They either clarify rules for the new edition wordings, like our interceptors ignore terrain rule, or Look Out sir and engagement range, or remove bonuses which allowed units to ignore heavy. Interesting addition - most rules which were giving -1 to-hit now give +1 to save. 

 

EDIT: Big FAQ 2018 is still online, so we still have exception from psychic focus smite rules. Infinite smites were not FAQed either.

Edited July 13, 2020 by Corvus Fortis

[Holier Than Thou]

I can’t see anything that would stop us getting-1 to hit from being in Tide of Shadows?

[Corvus Fortis]

I can’t see anything that would stop us getting-1 to hit from being in Tide of Shadows?

 

 

Nothing. It just won't stack with other similar abilities anymore. Alaitoc and Stygies are left with -1 to-hit abilities too.

[Seizeman]

The good think is we can get -1 to hit and +1 to saves just by being behind dense cover, without actually being on it, or -2 to hit (to counter a potential +1) and +1 to saves if we are actually within cover.

 

By the way, astral aim now ignores dense, light, heavy and havy cover, and, of course, obscuring.

[Corvus Fortis]

What realy concerns me at this point is that I am not sure if FAQ2018 could still be applied to us. It is still online, but it referes to the matched play rule, which doesn't exist anymore. And no special exceptions for us in rulebook. RAW, we are the same as other factions. And this would be the largest hit so far. 

[Skywrath]

With regards to Terminators, we might actually see them see play. I managed to squeeze 10 of them on top of the default 20 paladin bomb archetype. This is for 2000 points, and with the new points changes outlined in the other thread. List as follows..

 

Librarian 105 - Stave

Brother-Captain 115 - Halberd

GMNDK 180 -  Psycannon (Dreadfist or Greatsword both equal cost, doesn't matter). 

 

Terminator Squad of 5 = 175 1 Hammer, 1 Psycannon

Terminator Squad of 5 = 175 1 Hammer, 1 Psycannon

 

Paladin Squad of 10 = 475, 2 Hammers, 2 Staves, 2 Psycannons 

Paladin Squad of 10 = 475, 2 Hammers, 2 Staves, 2 Psycannons

 

Apothecary = 80 - Halberd

Apothecary = 80 - Halberd

 

30, 20, 40, 20, 20, 25 (Weapon costs on top of core units) 

 

Point cost - 1995.

 

OK, before people bring up the question of why I'm tinkering around with terminators, it's more of a proof of concept that they can be fielded. For those math-hammer heads that will claim "Oh but for the points you are paying they aren't worth it" - save it. I think we actually will be seeing terminators played instead of strikes for two reasons:

 

A. They will hold their own better against primaris marines. Not saying primaris marines are the bane of our existence, but they hold up better than 1W strikes. Not to mention, they have a 5+ invuln save (improved by warding staves).

 

B. More strategems to sustain terminators rather than strikes. 

 

Now that precursor is out of the way, thoughts?

Edited July 14, 2020 by Skywrath

[Corvus Fortis]

First of all, regardless of the detachment, your list is invalid. Not enough troops for battalion, too many HQ choices for any other detachment.

 

 "Oh but for the points you are paying they aren't worth it" - save it.

 

 

But why should we? Point cost is essential at defining whether unit is good or not. Titanic units are the best example - no matter how good are the stats, their cost won't justify taking them. 

 

A. They will hold their own better against primaris marines. Not saying primaris marines are the bane of our existence, but they hold up better than 1W strikes. Not to mention, they have a 5+ invuln save (improved by warding staves).

 

 

This statement is confusing, because you do state yourself that primaris marines are not a problem and yet use it as an argument. And more important question - which primaris units? There are many different primaris units with different weapon profiles. Helblasters, for example, wouldn't care how many wounds do you have, each failed save will remove a model. And 5+ is not that good to rely on that. Strikes are better survive high damage, low shots, terminators are viсe versa. So I don't see how this could be an advantage for terminators over strikes. And staves are only good in close combat and I cannot even remember Primaris units with lots of AP-3 in close combat. Maybe, intercessor sergeants or agressors. But I just won't bother. 

 

 

B. More strategems to sustain terminators rather than strikes. 

 

 

The only unique stratagems to sustain terminators are Fury of the Proven and Redoubtable Defence. And you will be using both on your paladins, because they are more important and more efficient. 

 

In short, we won't be seeing terminators more than we did before. Point increase doesn't help here at all, because we have fewer place for paladins and paladins is what make us competitve army. 

B. More strategems to sustain terminators rather than strikes. 

[Valerian]

What realy concerns me at this point is that I am not sure if FAQ2018 could still be applied to us. It is still online, but it referes to the matched play rule, which doesn't exist anymore. And no special exceptions for us in rulebook. RAW, we are the same as other factions. And this would be the largest hit so far.

The only reason that FAQ is still up is that we’re technically still operating in 8th edition for another week or so.

[Skywrath]

In response to Corvus Fortis,

 

Well in that case that's simple - drop the 2nd apothecary, and the GMNDK, with the same loadout. Should be enough now.

 

Because, sometimes details aren't important, the idea is. I think I achieved (even with that slight modification) what I was after. A list where terminators have a spot instead of strikes, under 2000 points. 

 

How is it confusing? 2W units are better than 1W units. Having more wounds, more stratagems, an invuln save is better than having none of that. Really don't understand what's hard to grasp. Your own argument makes my point for me - imagine a scenario where hellblasters were targeting strike units - no amount of saving will help them if they were focused.

 

If they were targeting the terminators then they would have said chance with an invuln save. Seeing how at least 1 of each will be running a warding stave, than invuln is now a 4+.

 

I didn't bother filling that little detail in, because halberds/swords/staves are now no additional cost, and frankly not even worth mentioning because most of the time you would have at least 1 stave in your squad. Pretty sure you, or the other person mentioned that before. Also seeing how terminators are meant for melee combat, you would want to add a stave by your own logic.

 

Perhaps so, but as the rounds whittle down, there will be more options and more CP to be spent, especially when paladins are going to die. Having more terminators as a backup as a psuedo bomb is a better idea than having strikes who will be blown like the wind into next year if they get focused.

 

Because of the above, I think terminators will be seeing play. I included 20 paladins, and 10 terminators - why wouldn't you want to have more durable bodies to hold the ground better? 

Edited July 14, 2020 by Skywrath

[Seizeman]

You get twice the number of strikes than terminators, for the same price, so why would you compare 5 terminators to 5 strikes? The correct comparison is 5 terminators to 10 strikes, so the terminators don't have more wounds, they have the same amount. In practice, the strikes have more wounds, because terminators take double damage from multidamage weapons. 

 

In the hellblaster example, specifically, strikes require 62% more shots to be killed, compared to terminators, so they are more durable. By the way, do you even know what a nemesis stave does? It only works in close combat. Also, why do you think terminators can use staves and strikes don't?

 

Of course, the strikes are spread between two squads, so that makes them even harder to kill, due to overkilling and the practical impossibility of charging both units at the same time, making them a lot better at holding objectives.

 

So, what makes terminators hold better against primaris? Is it their inferior durability or the inferior damage output?

 

Also, that list is not under 2000 points, it's 2045 points, assuming you take double dreadfist (which DOESN'T cost the same as a sword). Also, you won't have more options or CP to spend on those terminators, simply because you don't have enough troops to properly fill detachments and you will start with fewer CP to begin with.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Brother Tyler
Unnecessarily rude comments removed.

[Skywrath]

Edit: I said what needed to be said. Original text removed. Edited July 14, 2020 by Brother Tyler
And if you hadn't removed it, the mods would have removed it as completely unacceptable.

[Waking Dreamer]

Do you think people will have issues if you run units like Twin-autocannon / Doomglaive dreads in 9Ed for pickup games? I also converted a GK librarian with a SS, and since Librarians have valuable HQ roles now, for casual games what are the chances that would upset some people?

[Skywrath]

Probably. Both are legends units apparently, as well as the Librarian with a Storm-shield. I believe the librarian was refereed in the index (correct me if I am wrong). Unless your gaming group/LGWS explicitly allows both, then probably not in your best interests. 

[Holier Than Thou]

Do you think people will have issues if you run units like Twin-autocannon / Doomglaive dreads in 9Ed for pickup games? I also converted a GK librarian with a SS, and since Librarians have valuable HQ roles now, for casual games what are the chances that would upset some people?

Neither option is game-breakingly powerful. I think you’d be fine, as long as the person isn’t a douche.

[Seizeman]

The storm shield librarian is actually gamebreaking and quite frustrating to play against, so I would advise against playing him in a casual game, particularly when there's no legal way to use him, so you would be 100% houseruling it.

 

Twin autocannon dreadnoughts, while not recommended for competitive play (like all other legends options); are still legal models, and there's no reason to not use them unless a tournament specifically disallows them, particularly when they are unbalanced units, and not in a good  way, so noone should complain about them in a casual setting, because you are just nerfing your army by taking them.

 

Of course, you should still be able to use the models even if you decide to give them different weapons than those they are modelled with, specially in casual games,.

[Skywrath]

As expected we didn't even get mentioned in the new codexes on the webpage .. sad days. 

Edited July 25, 2020 by Skywrath

[Valerian]

"The one exception to this is the Grey Knights, whose wargear, tactics and units diverge most significantly from the Codex Astartes.  The noble warriors of Titan keep their own codex."

[Skywrath]

Where was that stated? When I checked on the webpage that wasn't there.

[Valerian]

Where was that stated? When I checked on the webpage that wasn't there.

 

Down at the very bottom.  Before you get to the "More to Explore" links to other articles.

[Skywrath]

Ah, thanks brother.

[Brother Tyler]

As expected we didn't even get mentioned in the new codexes on the webpage .. sad days.

Not at all. Today's article was primarily focused on Codex: Space Marines and Codex: Necrons. Since the Grey Knights aren't being consolidated into Codex: Space Marines (they can't, after all), there's no need to mention them beyond the fact that they won't be consolidated.

 

The codices for the Astra Militarum, Adepta Sororitas, Adeptus Custodes, Orks, Tyranids, etc. weren't mentioned either, but that omission doesn't in any way imply anything bad for those factions. There's nothing to be sad about.

[Skywrath]

Thanks for the perspective, Brother, I'll look at it from that viewpoint :)

[Corvus Fortis]

If they are going for further unification of codexes, I would like to see Daemon Hunters/Ordo Malleus instead.

[Holier Than Thou]

If they are going for further unification of codexes, I would like to see Daemon Hunters/Ordo Malleus instead.

Agreed. But with Deathwatch being rolled into the Marine Codex and Sisters having “just” Sisters (and some Ecclesiastical units) in theirs, I doubt we’ll see it.

 

Would have been great to see Codex: Ordo Malleus with GKs and Inquisition, Codex: Ordo Hereticus with Sisters and Inquisition and Codex: Ordo Xenos with Deathwatch and Inquisition with them all having the appropriate “Ordo” Keyword so that Inquisitors could feel part of the army instead of being a tagged on entry.

Edited July 26, 2020 by Holier Than Thou

[Skywrath]

What baffles me even more is that we aren't rolled in with the new CSM. Sure we have different war-gear, but we are still Space Marines at the end of the day. Unless they retcon that with 9th and our creation process is akin to the Custodes, except cheaper, they should have included us in. This hurts even more now that I'm going to have to buy two books - one for my DA, and one for the GK. I wouldn't be surprised if we are rolled in with the Inquisition factions such as the Sisters and Custodes. 

 

Is the app worth getting, and has it given us any hints about the GK in 9th?