Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental

 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Thu Dec 23, 2021 11:39 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 3:43 pm
Posts: 1387
Location: Devon, UK
Planeswalker25 wrote:
So a couple of my opponents asked me to try and clarify how Teleport Homers are intended to work. They were concerned it seemed a little too powerful, being able to teleport in formations after the strategy phase and in the middle of the turn with rerolls for blast markers.

Hmm. This is the first time I’ve looked at the list, but my first question is ‘Where are the units with the Teleport Homers?’.

If this rule is simply applied to all Teleporting units in the army, without needing to have an actual unit in the right place with a Homer, that’s not an army I want to play against.

I played against the experimental Dark Angels list several times and the noticeably less powerful Teleport rules in that list were already borderline.

For comparison:

Teleport Homer

Teleporting models may re-roll Teleport Mishap 1:s if their base is within 15cm of an unbroken unit with the "Teleport Homer" special rule.

Coordinated Teleport

Formations that exclusively consists of models with Teleport may be set up in a space ship if such has been bought. From there, they can either teleport normally, or they may choose to perform a Coordinated Teleport during the activation of the space ship.

A Coordinated Teleport functions like an ordinary Teleport except that all models in the formation must be placed so that they benefit from the Teleport Homer special rule. If they are unable to benefit from Teleport Homer, they cannot carry out a Coordinated Teleport but must wait and teleport normally in later turns. Coordinated Teleports happen after Barrage, Planetfall and Deathwind have been resolved. All Coordinated Teleports counts as taking place simultaneously, not one after the other.

_________________
The Wargaming Trader
NetEA Death Guard Army Champion


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 5:29 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:48 am
Posts: 934
Location: NJ, USA
Planeswalker25 wrote:
This is my first post on the forums and I just want to point out some observations I've made during my games with Grey Knights 2.1. Firstly big thanks for everyone who has put work into the list! I'm pretty new to Epic Armageddon but I hope to be able to get the Grey Knights approved. So a couple of my opponents asked me to try and clarify how Teleport Homers are intended to work. They were concerned it seemed a little too powerful, being able to teleport in formations after the strategy phase and in the middle of the turn with rerolls for blast markers. I've been using two formations of Terminators, bringing in my Strike Cruiser turn one, winning the strategy roll, then proceeding to obliterate my opponent's BTS formation with the teleport homering termies in my first two activations. Is this working as intended? I think GK pay an extra 25 points for a formation of terminators compared to codex astartes, is that to take into account teleport homers?


Welcome to the part PW! Don't apologize for a long post, glad there's some interest in the list.

Teleport Homer is a better version of teleport. To compensate for the smaller formations in the list and draw on the GK's fluff combat tactics of inserting directly to combat, we've played around with giving them an upgraded teleport option. The 25 pt increase over the base list is to capture the cost of the character being included.

It could be me reading this wrong, but my impression is that you're taking three activations at the start of the turn: 1 - strike cruiser; 2 - first termie formation; 3 - second termie formation. If that's the case, that could be part of the reason you're opponent's are overwhelmed. If I read that wrong, I apologize! A strike cruiser and two formations of terminators performing a combined assault into a BTS will kill a lot, but it's also worth considering that's a third of your army that just activated. Like Norto added, scout screens, overwatch, and even intentionally intermingling formations can offer strong defensive tactics against that drop that needs to come in on the declared turn.

Planeswalker25 wrote:
Another comment my opponents made is that the Strike Squad formation is under costed. You're paying 300 points for marines with FF 3+, Invulnerable Save, and a built in Brother-Captain. Compare this to Tactical marines who cost 275 points, FF 4+, no invuln, and have to pay 50 points to add a character. Mind our Brother-Captain doesn't have a Macro Weapon attack, but still.


The built in characters were part of the "theme" of the list to try and capture the feel of elite cadres fighting together, even by marine standards. Part of that came with trying to balance points to keep the formations viable. Part of the trade off here is the shorting shorting range of the strike marines. The shorter range is prevalent throughout the army. The strike squads are also a required core formation for the list, where tactical marines are an optional take.

Planeswalker25 wrote:
Also I hope we can add a Chaplain character upgrade to Grey Knights! They are my favourite unit from 40k, and though the GK Librarian provides Inspiring you could have a Chaplain as a cheaper 25 point character (to take into account the Power Weapon macro weapon attack). Or make them a free alternative to a Brother-Captain.


We're not going to have the chaplain as a separate character. That was played around with a few versions ago, but to try and give the GK list its own distinct play style and feel, I ultimately made the choice to combine the characters. The additional 25pts for Inspiring was almost too easy of an upgrade. The current increase of 50pts for the character upgrade makes it a much more conscious decision and has larger list building impacts.


I'd be curious to see what list you've been using and what lists you've been playing against! That always helps to put concerns or questions into context and helps to see if a list is wildly over or underperforming. I'm happy to consider all of it. I know I've certainly seen lists or units on paper that looked one way, but then in practice ended up being more manageable. From our playtests against Necrons, Guard, Knights, Eldar, and Astartes, I've found them to be a force that hits hard with an alpha strike, but has trouble sticking around because of their small expensive infantry formations. I'd probably grade them slightly below average since they're a bit of a win big/lose big army that at the moment leans toward being a one trick pony.

I'm working up some additions for next year that I'm planning on rolling out in January to allow selection from two more Inquisition guard units: Leman Russ platoons and Hellhound platoons. I'm hoping that'll help capture the feel that the GKs were usually supporting mere mortals on the field of battle and at the same time, open up new viable list options and increase unit variety.

_________________
Grey Knights AC: viewtopic.php?f=130&t=33750

Tau AC: viewforum.php?

Net EA Chair

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 5:38 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:48 am
Posts: 934
Location: NJ, USA
IJW Wartrader wrote:
If this rule is simply applied to all Teleporting units in the army, without needing to have an actual unit in the right place with a Homer, that’s not an army I want to play against.


That is how the rule currently works. Through play testing different versions against different lists, it definitely creates a strong alpha strike. Like I commented above, there's definite ways to defend against it. Ultimately, I think the largest balance has been that its hard for small expensive formations to stick around. There have been games where the strike goes great, but by the end the GKs are scattered because formations break under weight of fire and supported engagement.

I'd encourage you to try the list! It's still being ironed out, but feedback has been positive. I think the new inclusions will make the list more interesting as well, offering something unique with more viable selections.

_________________
Grey Knights AC: viewtopic.php?f=130&t=33750

Tau AC: viewforum.php?

Net EA Chair

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Thu Dec 30, 2021 6:55 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:38 pm
Posts: 1668
Location: Chattanooga, TN, USA
I was one of Planeswalker25s opponents that he is referring to. We had a good game over TTS.

I was thinking about the game we played a few days later, and I realized that I could have used my scouts (I had one formation of Saim Hann scout bikes) to shield one of my other formations from the teleport attack, so maybe I judged that a bit too harshly. In my defense, it had been a while since I'd played. But then again, he would have simply targeted some other, nearly equally valuable formation instead. Scout screens are effective, but you can't screen every valuable formation.

Teleport homers give 3 benefits over and above 'normal' teleporting: the ability to teleport in the middle of a turn, the ability to re-roll 1s for generating BMs during teleport, and the ability to show up anywhere on the table and immediately assault. At least that is how we played it. I think, maybe, they should lose the 're-roll 1s for BMs' ability. It honestly just adds insult to injury, and it engendered some ill feelings on my part.

As for the Strike formation, I think it is a bit underpriced. If your argument is that having the unit cost less than a normal [tactical formation + captain] because it has 30cm AP5/AT5 guns instead of 45cm AP5/AT6 guns, then I strongly disagree with than argument.

I'd argue that the Strike units having FF3+ more than offsets a -15cm range on their shooting attack. And that's not the only benefit that the Strike Marines get: invulnerable saves, better AT to-hit value, and a captain upgrade, all for 25 points less than a normal Tactical formation with the same captain upgrade. I think 350 or 375 would be a more fair cost for the formation.

Finally, the dread knight seemed a bit fast to me. Should it really be the same speed as a rhino? I think a 25cm move would give it some tactical downside that it currently lacks. I might even suggest 20cm move, but with the infiltrator ability added, but that's just me trying to get all knights to act like cavalry.

On a less complain-y and more pedantic note, which formations can take razorback upgrades? I see the upgrade in the upgrade list, but don't see any formations that can take them. Did I miss it?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2022 2:15 am 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:48 am
Posts: 934
Location: NJ, USA
Will have a new version out by this weekend. I've taken into consideration some of the issues raised, oversights, and language clarifications.

_________________
Grey Knights AC: viewtopic.php?f=130&t=33750

Tau AC: viewforum.php?

Net EA Chair

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Wed May 25, 2022 2:07 pm 
Hybrid
Hybrid
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 2:48 am
Posts: 934
Location: NJ, USA
Updated list posted. Tried to address some of the concerns voiced about special rules and point costs and clarified list upgrades.

_________________
Grey Knights AC: viewtopic.php?f=130&t=33750

Tau AC: viewforum.php?

Net EA Chair

The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Wed May 25, 2022 8:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:42 am
Posts: 191
I like the flexibility in the list structure, looking forward to playing the list different ways. The teleport/self planet fall rule sounds intriguing!

_________________
"Live off the land. Go to find war. Kill wot comes close. The old ways are best." - Grodd, Ork Snakebite Runtherd


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2022 5:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:24 pm
Posts: 9563
Location: Manalapan, FL
Quote:
Using The Army List
The following army list allows you to field an army based on the Grey Knights or one of their successor chapters using their preferred operational methods

pedantic note: they don't have successors; They're just Chapter 666 and that's that

Quote:
SPECIAL RULE – Into the Maw of the Beast
Grey Knight battle doctrine frequently requires rapid insertion into the heart of battle where the fighting is the thickest to subdue a demon incursion. Because of this experience combined with their access to greater technology over the standard Adeptus Astartes chapter, units with Teleport may choose to enter the battlefield using Self-Planetfall (see Self-Planetfall). Announce the choice at the beginning of the game and plot accordingly per the rules of Self-Planetfall.

Is this at deployment or list building time this is determined? I assume deployment (similar to how Transport works with marines in that they can determine if they're podding or taking transport at deployment aka Superior Tactics)

Quote:
Grey Knights formations come in five types. The first is the Core Formation. Each Core Formation unlocks one Elite Formation and two Grey Knight Support Formations and two Inquisition Support Formations.

I'd suggest that it's two GK Support or Inquisition support, not both (for at total of 4). Better yet, just combine both categories for simplicity.

Quote:
Land Raider Redeemer
2x Flamestorm Cannons
TL Psycannon
Frag Launchers

Land Raider Crusader
2x Hurricane
Bolters
TL Psycannon
Frag Launchers


These need to be renamed GK Land Raider Redeemer/Crusader as they have customized stats.
edit: So does the Storm Raven.

Quote:
Thunderhawk Transporter
2x Twin Psycannon

No need for psycannons (and thus a named variant) because the weapon's the same as the base approved version. Just use the base stats. 'Rose by any other name' favor text is generally frowned up in modern list dev.

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Re: Ordo Malleus - Grey Knights 2.0(2018) Developmental
PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2022 10:19 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2022 7:48 am
Posts: 1
Cheers everybody :)

first of all ... big thanks for making this GK-List.
It reminds me of my first touch with WH40K back in the days of the Codex Deamonhunters!

I'm still more a rookie in the world of Epic but i made quite a lot games in the past weeks an i had the opportunity to play some games with a experienced tournament player here in my region to get more used to the game itself.

But after all my matches i hade some ... questions or ideas and i would be nice if you could answer them:

1. The gib thing of playing Grey Knights was always the ability to have Termis in the Standard-section. I think the only other chapter which is able to field them in Standard were Dark Angels if you use the Deathwing. Why not making them Core? The "normal" Adeptus Astartes- List on the Epic Net Website allows this aswell.

2. Why not making TL Psi-Cannon = Heavy Psi-Cannon = 4+/4+?
For Example: Dreadgnought Heavy Psi = 4+/4+ /// Razorback (which should have TL Psi Cannon in my opinion :)) and Knight have 4+/5+

3. Why not giving the Knight a 4+ Armor Save with Reinforced Armor? I mean in WH40k it's a beefed up Termi (mor or less^^). In my last matched... to be honest it was better for me to have a 3+ armor because of Eldar an their lance ability but overall i think a 4+ save with reinforec armor would be fit better to him.

Now comes a little bit whish thinking ... :D

4. Would it not be more usable if you put the Paladin upgrade to the Terminator Formation?
Fluff wise it seems okay ... but to get them into play you first have to pay 75p for the Grand Master and on top of that you have to pay another 50p for the upgrade.... So the whole formation becomes a more viable target.

5. Grand Master in a Nemesis-Dreadknight? :D

Greetings from germany
FaBa


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net