Holier Than Thou Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 What do you think? Brought in line with the other Codices? Token gesture? Further handicapped? I think it will be a combination of the second two. They will probably do something like increase the points of NDKGMs and Apothcaries by 20 points then decrease the cost of Purifiers by a single point. I would love them to prove me wrong and get all the factions with Codices in the same ballpark (or at least in the same neighbourhood) but I just can't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holier Than Thou Posted February 10, 2018 Author Share Posted February 10, 2018 Nope. But do you think they will stay as bad as they are or will they somehow get worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soder Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 I don’t think there will be any point cost changes. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/12/15/the-future-of-faqs-and-chapter-approved-dec-15gw-homepage-post-2/ March update will only include a larger FAQ and any rule changes for balance. If they stick to what they had originally said Chapter Approved is where the point changes will occur. If we were to rank all of the released codexes so far in order from “best” to “worst” GKs are definitely last, I don’t think anyone can argue with that. Does anyone think they could name a worse off codex? I really hope something semi drastic is done to fix that. That being said I’m not gonna hold my breath! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Mytre Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 What do you think? Brought in line with the other Codices? Token gesture? Further handicapped? I think it will be a combination of the second two. They will probably do something like increase the points of NDKGMs and Apothcaries by 20 points then decrease the cost of Purifiers by a single point. I would love them to prove me wrong and get all the factions with Codices in the same ballpark (or at least in the same neighbourhood) but I just can't see it. Our next chance is when Imperial Agents comes along, we might get some fixes then, otherwise, CA it is. I don’t think there will be any point cost changes. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/12/15/the-future-of-faqs-and-chapter-approved-dec-15gw-homepage-post-2/ March update will only include a larger FAQ and any rule changes for balance. If they stick to what they had originally said Chapter Approved is where the point changes will occur. If we were to rank all of the released codexes so far in order from “best” to “worst” GKs are definitely last, I don’t think anyone can argue with that. Does anyone think they could name a worse off codex? I really hope something semi drastic is done to fix that. That being said I’m not gonna hold my breath! Ha, you haven't done enough reading then! I've been told to just play better with my GK, that they aren't that bad. Of course, anyone that's said that also doesn't actually play GK. Hell, there was that thread that got deleted not long ago that was just people from other parts of the forum showing up here, proclaiming that GK were fine and/or play soup lists with no GK elements - as if they solves any of the issues we have. There's a whole lot of ignorance out there, especially for an army that doesn't see much play like GK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holier Than Thou Posted February 10, 2018 Author Share Posted February 10, 2018 I don’t think there will be any point cost changes. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2017/12/15/the-future-of-faqs-and-chapter-approved-dec-15gw-homepage-post-2/ March update will only include a larger FAQ and any rule changes for balance. If they stick to what they had originally said Chapter Approved is where the point changes will occur. If we were to rank all of the released codexes so far in order from “best” to “worst” GKs are definitely last, I don’t think anyone can argue with that. Does anyone think they could name a worse off codex? I really hope something semi drastic is done to fix that. That being said I’m not gonna hold my breath! Although my example used points, I just meant I expect them to do something along the lines of make our decent stuff much worse and make a negligible improvement to something else that doesn't actually make any difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beams Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 I'm pretty sure that thread was deleted because people were being pretty mean. Grey Knights aren't terrible, just have some over costed units. A little bit of love, and they'll be pretty powerful. Hell, a soup list with GK and 350-500 pts of Guard will go a long way to fix GK major weaknesses. Ranged antitank (lascannons) and low command points (brigade + Regen), which should allow you to use HEED multiple times and deal with tanks. If terminators/paladins we're just a bit cheaper, and Psycannons a little better, than they'd be in a great place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 10, 2018 Share Posted February 10, 2018 I'm seconding Cap. I've been told GK are one of the most powerful codexes in 8th. With a straight face. Every unit is a psyker and they all smite. We won't get any rule changes. Neither better not worse. Actually scratch that. The prognosticators have spoken to me. My prediction is our only in death will be upped to 2cp. Luke every other version of it. Happy March! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Tyler Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 That topic was closed because whatever constructive potential it had, and it had plenty, was long gone and it had turned into a cesspool. And that's just where this topic looks to be headed. You can prevent that, though, by remaining constructive and courteous. The issues to discuss, then, are ways that the upcoming FAQ might fix the Grey Knights and the impact of the current beta rules might have on the Grey Knights. The first provides the limitations of what might be done, whereas the second is far more subjective, but provides the potential to discuss either variations of the beta rules to mitigate potential impacts on the Grey Knights and/or additional FAQ elements for the Grey Knights (and similarly affected armies) that might mitigate undue negative impacts. So let's avoid the ad hominem garbage and do our best to make this a productive discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gentlemanloser Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 In all seriousness, unless anyone here had contacts at GW how can we possibly know what March will fix? There's been no leaks yet. And anything else is wishlisting. Which we've been doing in numerous threads every since the codex was released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soder Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 I’ve read everything! Personally I don’t want to be told to take allies as a fix. I bought GKs to play GKs. The end. Shouldn’t mean if I wanna be competitive I need to take allies. Every codex should be designed to be competitive on its own. GML said it best at one point IIRC, “when is a GK army not a GK army?” My answer would have been: “when it’s imperial soup” but I didn’t want to add more fuel to the fire at that time! Lol. The problem I’m finding is that yes there’s a bunch of things that need to be addressed but everything can’t/isn’t going to be addressed. That being said, something as simple as reducing the cost of stratagems or giving us some sort of way to get back CPs would actually go a long way to give us (and all elite armies) that slight boost they need. I think if they reduced the cost of all stratagems for every elite army and maybe increased the cost of stratagems for armies that can easily generate CPs it might help balance things. But I’m not a game designer. I will remain hopeful that something good will come out of the March update. Look at all the posts popping up about balancing the game. We don’t even have all the codexes out yet and people are already talking about how to balance 8th edition! And rightly so. I think they rushed and released 8th edition way too fast without actually playtesting enough. Hopefully GW is aware of this and they are taking this update seriously. There’s also something else I wanted to say but forgot about. What classifies a GK army? What makes us special? 1. Good vs daemons (meh, I actually haven’t ever played against daemons before but from what I gather from previous posts were not that amazing against them right now.) 2. Entire army of psykers (too bad you can only attempt to manifest 1 of each psychic power per turn and we only have 6 of them! And now will maybe be further affected by the smite beta rule limiting our psychic phase even more.) 3. Deep strike (matched play rule limits this as well) 4. Elite army (custodes now take this, looks like we now know who they were saving all those “elitist” rules for) GW needs to figure out what GKs are supposed to be and actually allow us to be that. Ok thanks for reading, sorry for rant! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Mytre Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 I’ve read everything! Personally I don’t want to be told to take allies as a fix. I bought GKs to play GKs. The end. Shouldn’t mean if I wanna be competitive I need to take allies. Every codex should be designed to be competitive on its own. GML said it best at one point IIRC, “when is a GK army not a GK army?” My answer would have been: “when it’s imperial soup” but I didn’t want to add more fuel to the fire at that time! Lol. The problem I’m finding is that yes there’s a bunch of things that need to be addressed but everything can’t/isn’t going to be addressed. That being said, something as simple as reducing the cost of stratagems or giving us some sort of way to get back CPs would actually go a long way to give us (and all elite armies) that slight boost they need. I think if they reduced the cost of all stratagems for every elite army and maybe increased the cost of stratagems for armies that can easily generate CPs it might help balance things. But I’m not a game designer. I will remain hopeful that something good will come out of the March update. Look at all the posts popping up about balancing the game. We don’t even have all the codexes out yet and people are already talking about how to balance 8th edition! And rightly so. I think they rushed and released 8th edition way too fast without actually playtesting enough. Hopefully GW is aware of this and they are taking this update seriously. There’s also something else I wanted to say but forgot about. What classifies a GK army? What makes us special? 1. Good vs daemons (meh, I actually haven’t ever played against daemons before but from what I gather from previous posts were not that amazing against them right now.) 2. Entire army of psykers (too bad you can only attempt to manifest 1 of each psychic power per turn and we only have 6 of them! And now will maybe be further affected by the smite beta rule limiting our psychic phase even more.) 3. Deep strike (matched play rule limits this as well) 4. Elite army (custodes now take this, looks like we now know who they were saving all those “elitist” rules for) GW needs to figure out what GKs are supposed to be and actually allow us to be that. Ok thanks for reading, sorry for rant! GW screwed the chance 8th edition gave them for a new system. The whole rule system is clunky and full of errors, check other game systems for how a rule set should be written. While I love the whole keyword aspect, they then fail to follow through with it and use them, instead using the units name. The whole points cost for wargear being unified is also stupid, resulting in domino effect balance changes, ie, nerf TL AssCans due to razorbacks, which also nerfs anything else that has it, such as LR crusaders, which aren't even good in the first place. They are creating codexes one at a time in a staggered release, a great way to have massively fluctuation power levels between codexes. They still paywall all their rules, as well as their rules updates, meaning this "living ruleset" is still slow as hell to update as well as being a massive pain in the ass to have all the updated rules available - example, for a SM army, you need: BRB, Index, Codex, Chapter Approved + 4 or more PDF's printed out. It has only been six months, and the rule set is as bloated as the end of 7th edition was. In regards to what GK identify as: 1. It's super specific. GK shouldn't be only good verse demons. No other army is only good against one specific army. Combine this with the fact GW is unimaginative when it comes to rules, and you have boring :cuss like "reroll to wound against DEMON units". It's so uninspired. What GK should be is balanced against demons via rules that also allow them to be balanced against other armies. Scrap all our demon specific rules. All of them. Then add general rules that are anti-demon, while also being applicable to any other army. Example rule: NEMESIS weapons apply a -1 to enemy invulnerable saves. TA-DA, a rule that works well against demons but also works against pretty much any other army. 2. Psychic Focus needs to be changed to allow the psychic phase to scale with the size of a game. The -1 to cast result after the first cast is one method. Another is allowing powers to be attempted again for each 1000 points a game is (ie, a 2k game has three casts) 3. Deepstike restriction is fine, but it significantly hampers us - this needs to be considered when balancing GK. 4. Elite army - GK has increased output but no increase in survivability, this results in glass cannon issues. Custards are basically what I think Paladins should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninjoe42 Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Don't think we'll see any changes, its meant to correct rule issues and we just don't have any. Balance issues sure, but our rules are pretty clear. I know we still feel underpowered, but dang if Strike Squads still dont feel incredible compared to other army troop choices! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holier Than Thou Posted February 11, 2018 Author Share Posted February 11, 2018 Don't think we'll see any changes, its meant to correct rule issues and we just don't have any. Balance issues sure, but our rules are pretty clear. I know we still feel underpowered, but dang if Strike Squads still dont feel incredible compared to other army troop choices! The Warhammer Community article about the FAQ system said they would address over-powered and under-represented units. An argument could be made that the majority of our units are under-represented, so we should see lots of changes. I'm just worried they'll think our ok units are over-powered because they're in most lists, even though that's only because everything else is so bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Mytre Posted February 11, 2018 Share Posted February 11, 2018 Don't think we'll see any changes, its meant to correct rule issues and we just don't have any. Balance issues sure, but our rules are pretty clear. I know we still feel underpowered, but dang if Strike Squads still dont feel incredible compared to other army troop choices! The Warhammer Community article about the FAQ system said they would address over-powered and under-represented units. An argument could be made that the majority of our units are under-represented, so we should see lots of changes. I'm just worried they'll think our ok units are over-powered because they're in most lists, even though that's only because everything else is so bad. The thing is, I doubt I'd be happy with anything they do. They can't do a lot of changes without invalidating the whole codex, so they will be limited to points changes, maybe adjustments to special weapon stat lines. The codex itself is bland, and so many units lack any personality or share it with another unit. A big disappointment for me is how cool the codex could have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamtro Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 I would be happy with an adjustment to the special weapon costs, and Psycannon profile. So far I am still enjoying my GK but also have not solely been playing them as I have other armies and projects too :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartali Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 I don't think GK will see any significant changes until they redo the GK line with Primaris sized minis. Loved to be proved wrong though. Re The March FAQ. GW have mostly addressed issues seen during tournament play so far, and the March FAQ will mostly deal with stuff that came up during LVO et al. Again, loved to be proved wrong but that seems to be the direction GW are headed at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ninjoe42 Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 A 2 damage psycannon would just be SO sweet. But then would it be stepping on Psilencers toes too much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamtro Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 A 2 damage psycannon would just be SO sweet. But then would it be stepping on Psilencers toes too much? Just make it D3 damage, drop the points cost on PA guys by 4, and on TDA by 5. The psilencer on TDA by 2 points too. Then they both have a place, because the psilencer is cheaper and has more shots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvus Fortis Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 I still hope that GW was just to busy with new releases to pay attention to GK problems. If at least a couple of major problems won't be fixed in March, I really give up on them. 2d on psycannon will fix it even without points drop, because Purgation squad with stratagem will give 16 8 AP-2 d2 shots per turn which is scary for any vehicle or heavy infantry. There is no reason to keep Rites of Banishment with 1 damage now, since new beta rules fixes the problem of spamming. Besides, mortal wounds is our only way to deal with high toughness/save targets out of close combat. And Librarius discipline for our Librarians is a great addition (if TS got Dark Hereticus why Gk cannot have librarius?). And at least psybolt ammo and psychic onslaught must go to 1 CP. Current CP system based on detachments is plain broken. Factions with cheap hq\troops are always winners. I think, it has to be based on game size and detachments you already have, for example, for 1000 pts partol or battalion with one of the following: outrider, vanguard, spearhead. For 2000 pts 1-2 Battalions with 2 of the following... or 1 of the following with Flyer wing, etc. At least, it will stop cheap detachment spam for CP. But after Daemonic Incursion my hopes a slight. There must be a GK-hater in rule team to give daemons such stratagem. And he will never allow GK to be fixed! Only handicap even futher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skarn Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 We will be fixed the moment GW releases GK primaris. This dex is a stop gap to that. My guess they will do a kit alongside an agent codex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beams Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 A 2 damage psycannon would just be SO sweet. But then would it be stepping on Psilencers toes too much? Just make it D3 damage, drop the points cost on PA guys by 4, and on TDA by 5. The psilencer on TDA by 2 points too. Then they both have a place, because the psilencer is cheaper and has more shots? Strikes are one of the best troop in the game. You can't drop them by 4. That means that they'd be 17 pts vs a tacticals 13, and would get psychic, stormbolter (generally a 2pt upgrade), deepstrike and Nemesis force falchions for just 4 pts total. They'd easily become the best of the troops, and would be omnipresent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holier Than Thou Posted February 12, 2018 Author Share Posted February 12, 2018 I think he means drop the cost of Psycannons on Power Armoured GKs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Mytre Posted February 12, 2018 Share Posted February 12, 2018 A 2 damage psycannon would just be SO sweet. But then would it be stepping on Psilencers toes too much? Just make it D3 damage, drop the points cost on PA guys by 4, and on TDA by 5. The psilencer on TDA by 2 points too. Then they both have a place, because the psilencer is cheaper and has more shots? They need each to be a specific roll filler. One should be a GEQ/MEQ killer, the other a TEQ and vehicle/monster killer. Both should become assault weapons given the GK playstyle and their 24" limited range. Heavy flamers need to be changed game wide to be 10" range. Hand flamer/flamer 8", heavy flamer 10", flamestorm cannons etc 12". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCastigator Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 I'm seconding Cap. I've been told GK are one of the most powerful codexes in 8th. With a straight face. They are powerful to the uninitiated, but we are initiated, aren’t we. Dreadknights are easily the best unit, which makes them seem ripe for adjustment. I would say that custodes make me think that is unlikely, because of how good the bikes and vexila are. I that now... The list for GK corrections is to long, but they do play well in soup, which no one wants to hear. I think the short answer is to give them access to more phychic powers and more bonuses similar to thousand sons — Plus 6 inches and toddler smite would help a lot. The long answer is rewriting purifiers, terminators, librarians, tweaking chaplains, pugators, and bro cap, and bro champ. That seems like a tall order. GK should be closer to custodes than space marines. Who knows if that will happen, I rather doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.