Grey Knight 9th Edition Codex Rumors?

[TheMostGood]

I think the problem with things like this is most people look specifically at statlines and point costs and make assumptions off of that alone. "I get this and that at this point cost, and compared to this here, this is better." etc

It's much harder to consider opportunity cost and figure out what might be good / bad just at a quick glance. 

 

Like one pretty large buff that I saw was that every PA unit in the codex got deepstrike rules. So every model except techmarines, servitors, and standard SM vehicles can deepstrike. This gives you incredible flexibility at the deployment phase. On top of the fact that we have some abilities now that let us redeploy after it's all said and done. 

 

Or like how some players are figuring out things like a Librarian MW nuker that can do like 7-15 MWs, and that's just ONE guy. You can still cast with other models too. 

 

Or like how people say that paladins are useless now. I see a unit that can ignore AP-2 weapons while under Tides of Shadow and Armored Resilience. Not having to really rely on any character buffs to make them as strong as they are. 

 

You have to look at opportunity costs and how things fit within a particular list. You can usually find a place for most things. It won't ALWAYS fit the list you're building but part of the fun and skill is learning what you can do with what you have. 

 

Like looking at Richard's list that he took against that TS player. It's all PA units. 

But he didn't take them because they're all PA units and thus "the best point cost for their statline". 

He took them because they can all deepstrike / are very mobile and they can score objectives for him while also being a solid MW battery. Also that fact that one terminator squad equals two strikes. Two strikes can capture two objectives or get things like Line Breaker and Attack on All Fronts (or whatever it's called). 

 

Not that terminators are worse statwise, it's just that they don't factor into his list strategy. 

 

But by the same token, you wouldn't try to send two squads of strikes to deepstrike and attempt to charge an enemy line either. They'd probably get :cussed if they don't make it. A squad of terminators or paladins could get that job done better. 

 

Opportunity costs. Right tools for the job.

 

None of that is easily seen with quick glances at a codex not released. It's even harder to spot if you're not looking at every detail and asking why and how can I apply this / what could this be used for. 

[Archadeus]

Exactly that's why there's no point at looking at things from face value and overreacting. The entire codex is built around synergies and we have a serious number of tools to pick from. I'm currently working on 2 lists that are built around terminators. One revolves around bricks of terminators and an apothecary in a preservers detachment for a mid board control list. The other is a exactor msu terms interceptor alpha strike list. Both will probably add a precient detachment for the cp and extra character. One way or another there's a way to make them work.

[Sweetcurse]

Sure but it’s an undeniable fact that strikes are simply better than terminators. The difference in cost upends the argument. Terminators are NOT twice as good as strikes as the points would suggest. For internal balance strikes should be costlier and terms cheaper if they have such similar stats.

[Sweetcurse]

Smite. Edited August 11, 2021 by Sweetcurse

[Archadeus]

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

[Sweetcurse]

You’re a bit full of yourself. Maybe be polite and stop being such an a** Edited August 11, 2021 by Sweetcurse

[Sweetcurse]

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

How is it not the point if that’s exactly what the posts above are discussing? PAGK vs Terms. Doesn’t take much reading comprehension to see the disparity between them and that speaks badly of the codex. Finding broken combos doesn’t mean it’s a good codex? Since when is having a few OP combos mean the codex is fine? That is just begging for nerfs later anyway. Of course we can make the crap work and find strong builds, no ones is denying that, but there are issues here that need to be addressed to make a better codex.

Edited August 11, 2021 by Sweetcurse

[Biscuittzz]

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

 

It very much is the point. Strikes are from what we can see on paper and in the limited battle reports a superior option to terminators. To use your own logic, every offensive buff goes further on strikes.

[Archadeus]

Right because we're the ones who make the codexes? It's plain and simple, we don't know jack until we've playtested everything that's the only fact about this codex. Edited August 11, 2021 by Archadeus

[Axilleas]

I, for one, am looking forward to how many different builds I can come up with using the scroll of exigence to just troll my opponents.

[Icosiel]

I'm running a battalion of Terminators once I get my hands on the Codex this weekend. I'll be playing against my brother (the foul Exalted Sorcerer) on Saturday, and hopefully have a battle report up Sunday! I know Terminators aren't in the best spot, but I am so excited to run them with 3 wounds. You have no idea.

[Archadeus]

I'm running a battalion of Terminators once I get my hands on the Codex this weekend. I'll be playing against my brother (the foul Exalted Sorcerer) on Saturday, and hopefully have a battle report up Sunday! I know Terminators aren't in the best spot, but I am so excited to run them with 3 wounds. You have no idea.

 Im right there with you! Ive been waiting for 3 wound terminators too long to be discouraged because their counterpart is more effiecient on paper. What brotherhood are you thinking? 

[redmapa]

I wanted to start GK with this codex and Im getting a bunch of them to build, now on paper Paladins are probably not that good but do you guys think there's value in running one or two 3 man squads of them? A single Demonhammer with Ethereal Castigation and Hammerhand to give them teeth but mostly to keep them at the back to do actions, perhaps close to a character with Gate of Infinity to push them forward. At 165 they arent that expensive and can be easily hidden and given buffs, the way I see them is a more mobile Bladeguard Vets.

[Icosiel]

 

I'm running a battalion of Terminators once I get my hands on the Codex this weekend. I'll be playing against my brother (the foul Exalted Sorcerer) on Saturday, and hopefully have a battle report up Sunday! I know Terminators aren't in the best spot, but I am so excited to run them with 3 wounds. You have no idea.

 Im right there with you! Ive been waiting for 3 wound terminators too long to be discouraged because their counterpart is more effiecient on paper. What brotherhood are you thinking? 

 

 

The Exactors! I've always said my boys are the 7th Brotherhood, so I think I will stick with that. We'll see how it goes. Their strat looks spicy.

 

I love Terminators. And yeah, the Strikes are significantly more efficient, but I'm going to be bringing 60 wounds of Terminator bodies to this game, and I bet that's going to be really tough to deal with.

Edited August 11, 2021 by Icosiel

[Grimlock]

 

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

How is it not the point if that’s exactly what the posts above are discussing? PAGK vs Terms. Doesn’t take much reading comprehension to see the disparity between them and that speaks badly of the codex. Finding broken combos doesn’t mean it’s a good codex? Since when is having a few OP combos mean the codex is fine? That is just begging for nerfs later anyway. Of course we can make the crap work and find strong builds, no ones is denying that, but there are issues here that need to be addressed to make a better codex.

So what do you think the points should be? Regular space marine terminators are 38 points if I remember right with 2 attacks 3 on the charge and a power fist that is -1 to hit and a storm bolter. So for 4 points more you get a smite and or a re-roll to damage 3 attacks, and a flat 2 damage -2 +2 str weapon. I think that is pretty fair, and that is just the stat lines no buffs ect.

 

Strike marines are 22 points eh maybe a little cheap but they are on a space marine stat line and considered vets. SM vets are around 19 points, with similar stats and 2 attacks base 3 on the charge adding lightning claws or a chain sword will bump that up to 3 base 4 on the charge. So for 4 points we pay for a teleport and psychic power. Yeah maybe bump them to 23 point. Have to see them in action first.

 

But looking for a nerf before the book is even out and just listening to people on the internet is probably the wrong way to go about coming to a conclusion.

Edited August 11, 2021 by Grimlock

[Sweetcurse]

 

 

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

How is it not the point if that’s exactly what the posts above are discussing? PAGK vs Terms. Doesn’t take much reading comprehension to see the disparity between them and that speaks badly of the codex. Finding broken combos doesn’t mean it’s a good codex? Since when is having a few OP combos mean the codex is fine? That is just begging for nerfs later anyway. Of course we can make the crap work and find strong builds, no ones is denying that, but there are issues here that need to be addressed to make a better codex.

So what do you think the points should be? Regular space marine terminators are 38 points if I remember right with 2 attacks 3 on the charge and a power fist that is -1 to hit and a storm bolter. So for 4 points more you get a smite and or a re-roll to damage 3 attacks, and a flat 2 damage -2 +2 str weapon. I think that is pretty fair, and that is just the stat lines no buffs ect.

 

Strike marines are 22 points eh maybe a little cheap but they are on a space marine stat line and considered vets. SM vets are around 19 points, with similar stats and 2 attacks base 3 on the charge adding lightning claws or a chain sword will bump that up to 3 base 4 on the charge. So for 4 points we pay for a teleport and psychic power. Yeah maybe bump them to 23 point. Have to see them in action first.

 

But looking for a nerf before the book is even out and just listening to people on the internet is probably the wrong way to go about coming to a conclusion.

See now, THIS is the way to debate. Great points and great way to see how difficult is to find the right balance. I’d argue that GW isn’t pointing things comparing across codexes so SM terms shouldn’t be a factor but well hard not to. Having said that, I’d venture that SM terms are grossly over coated themselves and that’s another problem. How to reconcile this disparity with strikes? Who knows. It’s hard to balance strikes and terms because unlike other marines they are ad to ally the SAME dude with a different suit or armor. My personal take is that terminators across the board should be 1/3 more expensive than the corresponding codex vet. I think they are about that much better but not twice as good. So, if an SM vet is 19 then terms maybe 27-30 tops. If strikes are 22 then GK terms 33-35? That seems balanced to me.

[TheMostGood]

Sure but it’s an undeniable fact that strikes are simply better than terminators. The difference in cost upends the argument. Terminators are NOT twice as good as strikes as the points would suggest. For internal balance strikes should be costlier and terms cheaper if they have such similar stats.

It wholly depends on the application you are going for. 

 

How come my Strike Squad (6man with a Heavy Psycanon) only did 2 damage to this tank (T7 / 3+) but my Dreadnought (with multi melta) that I also deepstruck did 5 damage to the tank. They're both the same point cost roughly. 

 

I guess that means that Dreadnoughts are simply better than Strikes. 

 

Or maybe for the purposes of tank busting, I should leave it to the units most geared for it?

 

That's the point that's being made. You can't say, "X model does this better than Y model, therefore it's better in general."

 

If you've looked at a unit and found absolutely no way you can make it work or function in ANY context the game could provide, then you might be on to something. But I can tell you that most people have not gone that route. 

 

First thing that I looked at with Terminators and Paladins was this is a unit that I would sit on an objective if I needed something durable and tanky to hold it. This is a unit I'd want to soak up fire power or be able to withstand firepower. 

 

And that's exactly what they do. Terminators and Paladins will tank more damage than PA can (point for point) when you look at just their statline and also when you factor in the rest of the codex. That's the tradeoff. It's always been like that.

[Skywrath]

I think my brotherhood of choice will be Rapiers with a combination of Prescient. Then if I want to capitalise on psychic/MW output I could replace one of those with Wardmakers - some interesting ideas spring to mind there. Edited August 11, 2021 by Skywrath

[Archadeus]

 

 

 

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

How is it not the point if that’s exactly what the posts above are discussing? PAGK vs Terms. Doesn’t take much reading comprehension to see the disparity between them and that speaks badly of the codex. Finding broken combos doesn’t mean it’s a good codex? Since when is having a few OP combos mean the codex is fine? That is just begging for nerfs later anyway. Of course we can make the crap work and find strong builds, no ones is denying that, but there are issues here that need to be addressed to make a better codex.

So what do you think the points should be? Regular space marine terminators are 38 points if I remember right with 2 attacks 3 on the charge and a power fist that is -1 to hit and a storm bolter. So for 4 points more you get a smite and or a re-roll to damage 3 attacks, and a flat 2 damage -2 +2 str weapon. I think that is pretty fair, and that is just the stat lines no buffs ect.

 

Strike marines are 22 points eh maybe a little cheap but they are on a space marine stat line and considered vets. SM vets are around 19 points, with similar stats and 2 attacks base 3 on the charge adding lightning claws or a chain sword will bump that up to 3 base 4 on the charge. So for 4 points we pay for a teleport and psychic power. Yeah maybe bump them to 23 point. Have to see them in action first.

 

But looking for a nerf before the book is even out and just listening to people on the internet is probably the wrong way to go about coming to a conclusion.

See now, THIS is the way to debate. Great points and great way to see how difficult is to find the right balance. I’d argue that GW isn’t pointing things comparing across codexes so SM terms shouldn’t be a factor but well hard not to. Having said that, I’d venture that SM terms are grossly over coated themselves and that’s another problem. How to reconcile this disparity with strikes? Who knows. It’s hard to balance strikes and terms because unlike other marines they are ad to ally the SAME dude with a different suit or armor. My personal take is that terminators across the board should be 1/3 more expensive than the corresponding codex vet. I think they are about that much better but not twice as good. So, if an SM vet is 19 then terms maybe 27-30 tops. If strikes are 22 then GK terms 33-35? That seems balanced to me.

 

 

Interesting point, but seeing as Grey knights have a much different structure, using the same ratio for every codex goes against your original argument about comparing across codexes. Also both units are vets and troops at the same time, so you have to take into account that our terminators also get obsec, along with psychic powers. I think that terminators should have stayed at 38 pts  because they got an extra wound and attack, but lost out on all their key strats( We'll consider transhuman lost via cost) and shooting dominance. Its hard to say though because now they are surrounded by a 9th edition codex and have one of our best powers, not to mention an actual smite. But like i was saying, theres no point getting caught up in the balance of something you cant change.

[Archadeus]

I think my brotherhood of choice will be Rapiers with a combination of Prescient. Then if I want to capitalise on psychic/MW output I could replace one of those with Wardmakers - some interesting ideas spring to mind there.

Interesting, What makes you gravitate towards Wardmakers? it has good utility but i cant figure out how id build around it, or use the strategem since my character blob will all be holding hands most of the time anyways.

[Grimlock]

 

 

 

Sure but that's already been said 50 times and it's not the point. Every defensive buff goes further on terminators, if I can find out what works with them best than find a way to mix them with strikes it may be a more consistent build than pagk everywhere. No one knows until they have tried it.

How is it not the point if that’s exactly what the posts above are discussing? PAGK vs Terms. Doesn’t take much reading comprehension to see the disparity between them and that speaks badly of the codex. Finding broken combos doesn’t mean it’s a good codex? Since when is having a few OP combos mean the codex is fine? That is just begging for nerfs later anyway. Of course we can make the crap work and find strong builds, no ones is denying that, but there are issues here that need to be addressed to make a better codex.

So what do you think the points should be? Regular space marine terminators are 38 points if I remember right with 2 attacks 3 on the charge and a power fist that is -1 to hit and a storm bolter. So for 4 points more you get a smite and or a re-roll to damage 3 attacks, and a flat 2 damage -2 +2 str weapon. I think that is pretty fair, and that is just the stat lines no buffs ect.

 

Strike marines are 22 points eh maybe a little cheap but they are on a space marine stat line and considered vets. SM vets are around 19 points, with similar stats and 2 attacks base 3 on the charge adding lightning claws or a chain sword will bump that up to 3 base 4 on the charge. So for 4 points we pay for a teleport and psychic power. Yeah maybe bump them to 23 point. Have to see them in action first.

 

But looking for a nerf before the book is even out and just listening to people on the internet is probably the wrong way to go about coming to a conclusion.

See now, THIS is the way to debate. Great points and great way to see how difficult is to find the right balance. I’d argue that GW isn’t pointing things comparing across codexes so SM terms shouldn’t be a factor but well hard not to. Having said that, I’d venture that SM terms are grossly over coated themselves and that’s another problem. How to reconcile this disparity with strikes? Who knows. It’s hard to balance strikes and terms because unlike other marines they are ad to ally the SAME dude with a different suit or armor. My personal take is that terminators across the board should be 1/3 more expensive than the corresponding codex vet. I think they are about that much better but not twice as good. So, if an SM vet is 19 then terms maybe 27-30 tops. If strikes are 22 then GK terms 33-35? That seems balanced to me.

I would not disagree with that, I’d think that would be fair balance. The only issue that I would see is that GW has said publicly that they use SM’s as their base line now how that involves the GKs one could only assume that the points we are seeing are based on a veteran marine with additional points for psychic and special close combat weapons albeit I would argue that they are not as powerful as the d3 but that is a discussion for later.

 

Points wise for terminators vs strikes hmm I wish I knew the formula that they use for figuring this out then I could give a better answer. Right now all I really can do is crunch number for regular marines and compare them to GK. What i don’t understand and will have to see what the codex says are the paladins and there points. They jump 5 points and what I have seen does not represent the points cost increase. If SM terminators were 30 points or so and ours were 42 yes I would be jumping up and down, but for 4 points I’m not seeing that as an issue. I do agree with you that the points don’t make sense between terminators and strikes or tac marines and terminators. But through both books it appears that GW is putting a high cost on an invulnerable save and a 2+ save.

[Sweetcurse]

Yeah. And back in 6th and 7th 5+ invulnerable was amazing. Now unless you buff it to 4++ then it doesn’t come into play often. AP 4 is out there but not THAT much to make the 5+ invul expensive IMO.

Yes my point of not wanting to cross reference dexes is contrary to my argument but I needed to bring it up for reference. I stand by the assertion that SM terms are grossly overcosted and thus making US overcosted even more.

 

GW has started to move away front at cross referencing in Sigmar but it may be a while to hit 40K.

Edited August 12, 2021 by Sweetcurse

[Brother Lunkhead]

=][=

 

In spite of my previous caution, a few fraters persist in impolite exchanges. It would be a shame to shut this conversation down due to the actions of a few, but that's where we are headed.

 

THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING

 

=][=

[WAR]

I'm running a battalion of Terminators once I get my hands on the Codex this weekend. I'll be playing against my brother (the foul Exalted Sorcerer) on Saturday, and hopefully have a battle report up Sunday! I know Terminators aren't in the best spot, but I am so excited to run them with 3 wounds. You have no idea.

 

But you always run terminator troops.   I look forward the next Battle report. 

[Grimlock]

Yeah. And back in 6th and 7th 5+ invulnerable was amazing. Now unless you buff it to 4++ then it doesn’t come into play often. AP 4 is out there but not THAT much to make the 5+ invul expensive IMO.

Yes my point of not wanting to cross reference dexes is contrary to my argument but I needed to bring it up for reference. I stand by the assertion that SM terms are grossly overcosted and thus making US overcosted even more.

 

GW has started to move away front at cross referencing in Sigmar but it may be a while to hit 40K.

Yep I agree the 5++ is not what it use to be. As for the the cross referencing of books, my point to that was that GW has stated that they use the SM as a baseline, so I was assuming that is where the points come from, but who knows. LOL they could just have a guy in an office saying, “yeah that looks about right” LOL. I think we might know more after our first FAQ it won’t surprise me if there are some point changes.

 

But good talk bud! If I can help you with some lists let me know I’ve been around awhile! Maybe too long! Hahaha.