Jump to content

Welcome to The Bolter and Chainsword
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Goonhammer's competitive ranking

Grey Knights Tactica Army Lists Imperium Chaos Xenos

  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1
Reskin

Reskin

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 443 posts
  • Location:Aboard a Battle Barge

Goonhammer dropped an article the other day. It can be found here.

 

For those of you who don't know, Goonhammer is a 40k site dedicated to mainly the competitive side of things.

Their writers are ITC and GT tournament participants. So they know how to play the upmost competitive styles.

 

Anyway, They ranked GK pretty low. It was an interesting read, without sounding arrogant, it didn't tell me much I didn't already know or come to the conclusion myself.

We also struggle with first turn, like I've mentioned in another thread of mine.

 

But for those of you looking to understand the "general" meta or power ranking of armies and wanting to find out how GK match up. Take a read, you'll learn something.

 

One thing that was a sad take away for me, is that Daemon's currently are top of the top tier along with Harliquins. Is saddens me to great extent knowing that even with all the Daemons lists around, no one is bothering to take GK's against them. Everyone else seems to be at dealing with Daemons better then the Daemon Hunters themselves... so It kind of explains a lot.


Z4m877V.jpg


#2
Skywrath

Skywrath

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 1,314 posts
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Faction: Grey Knights, Adeptus Custodes

Not surprised to be honest. Many of the things they said I agree with, and I have had the unfortunate experience of.. experiencing? (there has to be a better term that that). That being said it seems like the way to go with competitive Grey Knight lists is to cram as much PL as you can and focus squarely on paladins + GMNDKS. Many of the lists I have under 110 PL seem to fall flat on the face, with ones above 110 holding their own. I found that we need to survive turn 1-2 after which we ramp up on points pretty quickly. Combine that with my previous assertion that we needed threats to protect the paladins + GMNDK's, and we are starting to see the picture here. Likewise, I also suspect the only reason they didn't put us in trash tier is because the demons are dominating the meta as they said - however, I doubt that fact very much. 

 

Going forward, I'll re-say what the majority of you said, and personally take the time to curse at GW for not taking 5m to update our wounds or to write a 6 word sentence updating our wounds. That being said, what this list shows is that psilencers are the new meta, as well an eggs in one basket style lists (which admittedly, is what my lists were doing anyway). It also doesn't help us that abhor the witch completely screws us over and our chances of winning, hopefully the SANCTIC ASTARTES keyword is a fix to that rule, as I suspect it could be. Then there are the statistics - 27% winrate if we go second. Yikes. I knew our chances of winning if we went second weren't good, but not that low - but it makes sense. Without sanctuary, gates, armored going off first, we are playing 8th edition marines in a meta where everything does more than one damage with a lot of shots. While I think that convergence style lists could net us a victory, it is worth looking into escalation style lists. Marines can soak up a lot of damage, but not when it comes to mortal wounds, and that is something we can do like no other army. Perhaps we might see lists with three librarians capitalising on empyric channelling and unleashing purge soul/vortex of doom shenanigans, with purifiers included? Of course, we still have the problem of our marines being too brittle, and the options to carry them being not the most viable in a competitive scenario, so then we would have to dynamic insert a lot of things. Which then brings me to the last point - even with all this, what really kills us, is how fast we burn CP. Combine all those drawbacks together, and I think that about explains a lot of things to us. What strategems would you like to see get discounted?

 

With regards to his list there a few things I would change - redistribute inner fire to the apothecary, give an instance of First into the Fray to another character, such as a GMNDK, maybe drop the servitors and replace the apothecary with a paladin ancient. 


Edited by Skywrath, 28 November 2020 - 02:13 PM.

7DtmK1a.pnge2ZWJbt.pngt44uaS0.pngIJKynoL.pngtFMKXdu.pngAhRNilX.png

#3
Reskin

Reskin

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 443 posts
  • Location:Aboard a Battle Barge

Not sure he's too focused on shooting and tide of convergence. At least not the entire time, maybe turn1 or turn2. From what it looks likes, 2 patrol lists allow for maximum characters and minimum :cuss troops. (I say that in regards to normal SM troops) Our troops are just bad for the simple fact we don't have 3 wounds and 2 wounds on strikes respectively, like you mentioned Skywrath.

 

So you can see that the 2 large paladin bombs are predominantly to get the 3wound terminators. And it makes sense. The list actually reminds me of 5th/6th edition for me. Paladins were the original 2wound terminators from 5th edition. (Praise the Emperor for 5th edition GK's) I'm holding my glorious 5th edition codex as I write this. And you could assign wounds to different models in your unit. Not like today's rules.

 

Anyway, I digress. Pack the list with characters and the toughest units you can. In this case, 3W paladins, who should be 4-5wound a piece but you know... GW and their flaws...

 

Going 1st is crucial, we really need to take away some of the ALPHA strikes to mitigate out losses in the following turns. And to get those buffs rolling, sanc, resilience, etc. etc. like you mentioned Sky, and like I mentioned previously in a thread.

 

It's truly a sad time for us, Oh how the mighty have fallen and we're obviously paying for the sins of Matt Ward. We're been paying for them since 6th edition. And even more so since Custodes arrived, freakin golden boys. 


Z4m877V.jpg


#4
Prot

Prot

    ++ EQUES AEDITUUS ++

  • ++ MODERATI ++
  • 15,622 posts

Just my opinion but I don't take much from that article. I've won handedly, and repeatedly with what they call 'trash' tier. It's really mostly about knowing how your army functions in 9th and with our world situation I'm going to put it out there that the playing field isn't seeing all the best players at work.

 

Daemons are phenomenal at the primary. It only takes you a couple of games to undertand you flood the field with obsec, and stop flanking, deep strike, and block out reserves. Mix in a few nearly unkillable HQ's and you are well on your way to forcing your opponent to do something drastic to have a chance. 

 

Again, just me, but what we're seeing right now is a lot of armies playing without codexes so it's lopsided right now.


  • Gnomeo, Waking Dreamer, Corvus Fortis and 1 other like this

Click to see....
gallery_2760_14273_30255.jpg
Instagram: @Prot40k


#5
Reskin

Reskin

    +FRATER DOMUS+

  • + FRATER DOMUS +
  • 443 posts
  • Location:Aboard a Battle Barge
I totally agree Prot. A lot of armies are either lagging behind because of no updates. Or vice versa, no new update has left them in a weird place for the new rules.

Harlequins -6” range rule is so freakin OP it’s not even funny. Combined that with their speed and able to react to anything. They have absolutely no problem going second.
  • Prot likes this

Z4m877V.jpg






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Grey Knights, Tactica, Army Lists, Imperium, Chaos, Xenos

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users