Kirb your enthusiasm!

WEBSITE HOSTED AT: www.3plusplus.net

"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him


Monday, May 9, 2011

Armies in 5th: Grey Knights Part 2: Nemesis Force Weapons



This is sort of a loaded post as the combat aspect of the Grey Knight army book has been discussed to death. It's been pounded into people that Grey Knights are not an actual combat army but rather a shooting focused army. However, Grey Knights do have combat ability thanks to their Nemesis Weapons combined with their Marine statlines. Whilst this combination doesn't make them a good combat army due to their points cost (excepting Death Cult Assassins) and bog standard MEQ statline (so you pay more but die the same! rocking), how to use combat and the Nemesis weapons available to Grey Knights is obviously needed to get maximum efficiency out of your Grey Knights army.

All Grey Knight based models come standard with a Nemesis Force Sword which gives every squad the ability to ignore armor saves in combat and have the potential to instant death any target without Eternal Warrior. Add in every squad having Hammerhand which takes the Grey Knights to strength 5 and the Grey Knights have some obvious combat ability. What is important to remember with this ability however is it is secondary to the shooting aspect of most Grey Knight armies. What this ability really needs to be utilised as is back-up to the Grey Knight shooting and used to finish off squads or as a counter-attack method.


This is exemplified by the different Nemesis Weapons (i.e. Halberds), psychic powers (i.e. Quicksilver and Might) and certain units such as Purifiers, Grey Knight Terminators and Paladins (cheap halberds and multiple attacks). The combination of these gives a Grey Knight general multiple options and effective units with which to counter offensive units and have as assault options. Whilst they may not be counted amongst the best assault units, by having effective units which are capable of finishing off squads and striking before your opponent allows the army to effectively operate as a shooting force and finish off the opponent in combat.

This is an important part of how Grey Knights operate on the battlefield. Having a lot of psycannnons and stormbolters allows for a very effective shooting force at 24". Since they are assault based weapons the Grey Knight force is able to move and shoot and delay combat for as long as possible but there is a limit on how long you can keep the bulk of your force away from multiple assault units. By having Nemesis weapons and the solid Marine statline assault units breaking into the Grey Knight army aren't a death sentence (unlike say Tau). Whilst their combat isn't really point efficient (they still die like Marines damnit!) it does have some punch. This allows the Grey Knight army to effectively counter attack an opponent, finish off smaller squads in combat and preserve their army structure for as long as possible.

This also allows them to be more aggressive against certain armies. Although Grey Knights don't like being in combat against units which are designed to be in combat, they are obviously better than your other shooting armies or basic units such as Tactical Marines, Fire Warriors, Guardsmen, etc. Against forces which are shooting based this gives the Grey Knight player more options in being able to deal with units in combat and play more aggressively against lists which have more firepower. It is important to remember in these situations Grey Knights still die like Marines in combat (has this been repeated enough yet) but due to their Nemesis weapons and MEQ statline, Grey Knights will out-combat some armies or unit combinations.

Ultimately Grey Knights are a shooting force but they do have some ability in combat. They have a good basic statline but pay more for their equipment such as Nemesis Force Weapons, storm bolters and the psychic power Hammerhand. This increase in points makes them much better at shooting whilst remaining mobile compared to their Marine counterparts and whilst there is an increase in combat potential, they are much more effective as a mobile shooting force. This combat potential however adds an extra dimension to the Grey Knight army in being able to launch effective counter-assaults and better other shooting or generalist units in combat. This highlights the secondary role of combat in a Grey Knights army compared to shooting but to gain maximum potential from the army, the Grey Knight combat ability must be remembered and used accordingly.

Comments (31)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
A question has been bugging me since the release of the GK codex: Nemesis Halberds being 2-handed weapons, do they strike at Strength+2 (like, say, Big Choppas do) as per BRB, or are they limited to striking at Strength (and why)?

As you point it out, GK combat has been discuss aplenty, bu this post nicely sums it up. I'm sure its real value will appear in the future once the GK fad has been replaced by a newer codex (prays for necrons...).
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
All that two handed weapon means is that you can't gain +1A if your striking with it. Big Choppas get +2S becuase thats their specific rules, like halberds getting +2I.
The good thing about GKs is that they are versatile. If your GKs face a unit that outshoots them, then they can do well enough in combat. If they face a unit that outCCs them, then they are better off keeping tabs on the range and shooting it down.

The bad part of GKs - and what most people on their hype dont realize - is that they are *expensive*

The improvement GKs have in melee compared to marines is marginal - most things that kill marines in CC will also kill GKs in CC. The improvement GKs have over marines in shooting is very big - most things that kill marines in a short ranged firefight will not be able to best GKs in short ranged shooting.
:( You don't consider the impact of losing your nemesis force sword. PA GKs have no opportunity cost by upgrading to halberds but gain +2 initiative. GKTs/Pladins however lose their +1 to Inv save (CC only). Yes this doesn't seem a great deal, but the major criticism of GKs has been their survivability in CC, so the opportunity cost of NFS - > NFH is that much greater. 4++ out of CC is easy in 5th Ed. 4++ - > 5++ in CC is a significant drop when talking about 'combat units'. For purifiers, I would say halberds are a near auto-upgrade. On TDA-based models however, I think one should think twice before making that upgrade.

Thoughts?
21 replies · active 727 weeks ago
I think your right here. It becomes less of an upgrade and more of an option for high points cost models. For example, at 2 points per purifier with no loss its a damn good upgrade as it lets them kill those that would kill them by striking first. At the other end of the scale there's GMs, who realy want that 3++ in combat and the +2I isn't as important as they'll be hit back regardless.
I hadn't thought of GMs, but yeah, it's just as important for them. I think we're all aware how important 3++ is. ;)
Cue Sir_Prometheus posting about mixing weapons for maximum wound allocation. And he's right, really; in a small squad, with a mix of weapons not only can you save models with wound allocations, but you can put power weapon hits on 4++ models while still having a few I6 attacks to potentially take out that big scary IC and/or reduce incoming damage. Not the best of both worlds, but some of each. Needless to say, wound allocation is particularly important on Paladins.

IMO the bigger the unit, and the more attacks it has, then the more beneficial high I becomes, and the less beneficial varied weapons become because the unit becomes harder to torrent. A 10-man Terminator units with halberds and a banner will throw a LOT of high-I power weapon attacks; enough to significantly cut down incoming wounds and completely deter smaller melee squads that run the risk of getting entirely cut down before they get to swing.
"Needless to say, wound allocation is particularly important on Paladins."

This is the most important part. Wound allocation is not a massive issue with 1W models, but it does help. In a unit of 1W models I wouldn't cut efficieny/effectiveness to make a completely unique unit. With Paladins however, I would be happy to go that extra length to do this. Especially in small units.

This is also important when considering tactica against such units...

If you have a unit of 5 IG Vets with 3 meltaguns and 2 lasguns at a unit of 2-4 unique paladins, do you shoot the lasguns? I wouldn't. For each wound over the number in the unit means your opponent can double up those insta-kill wounds.

Larger units do benefit from the I6 I agree and the fact that they remain I6 even when assaulted is exceptional (unlike furious charge for example). I would however state that this is most potent for Purifiers/GKTs/Palas. Models with 1 base attack are unlikely to do much even at ini6 and the cost of halberds for Strike Squads and Interceptor Squads is absurd. These considerations are made when equipping BT assault terminators.... each pair of lightning claws I take over TH/SS means I can attempt to prevent more attacks coming my way. The opportunity cost however is the loss of a 3++ and the fact that furious charge is not activated when assaulted.
I actually would like to disagree with wound allocation not being a big deal on 1 W models.

To steal some math and a quote from another post:

2/2/1 Sword/Halber/Hammer. https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AnFuN-yY....

Check out the bottom of "random notes" tab.

If 5 identical Terminators take 30 woundsP(Survival of at least one) =0.38355298530994

If 5 distinct Terminators take 30 woundsP(Any one survives) = 0.33489797668038
Average survivors = 1.67448988340192

What that's saying, is if you take 30 wounds (whoo, that's a lot, but of course this what they think of, 1/6*30=5 dead terminators) on 5 identical terminators, there is a 38.3% chance that at least 1 terminator survives statistically (because, of course, never do you fail exactly 1/6 of your saves)

But, if you have 5 unique equipped terminators, each has a 33.4% to survive it's 5 assigned wounds. That means you will have 1.67 terminators alive, on avg.

1.67 alive instead of 0.383 alive on average, due to things like 2 failed saves being assigned to the 1 halberd, non-sergeant termie and the like, instead of killing 2 like-equipped termies. That is a 436% increase in survivability, even with single wound termies.
...if you take 30 wounds from one volley of shots or round of close combat.

The real "general" survivability increase is likely to be significantly less, because you're likely to take wounds cumulatively over several volley and you must allocate the wounds from each set individually, and you're not likely to take 30 wounds from a single unit, especially from shooting. In fact if you never take more than 5 wounds from any set of attacks, it's actually not going to do much of anything for you. Anything over 5, though, and it's going to help you.

It's still worth doing, it's just not going to give you 4x the survivability in general. :)
ugh, I could calculate the limit-->N on it but I don't wanna.

Yes, anytime there is only 1 wound per model or less, there is no benefit.

Anytime the wounds get to 2 or more per model, I think the benefit pretty rapidly approaches that which was described. This is a pretty common situation, I feel.

Ask someone who is willing to spend more brain space on it. Bottom line: The benefit is larger than you would intuitively think.
That is good to know. MathMan has shown that 30 really is the ideal situation for your point, but even somewhere along that line, assuming more than a few hits, unique models are going to keep them alive.

Nice.
Aww.....

Actually wound allocation is important, but the more important reason is that a 10 man squad simply won't usually kill all of an opposing 10 man squad, whatever it is, and thus you get some power weapon/fist attacks back. If you get some back, you want swords, or even a staff, to fend that off.

I think 2 are good fro small squads, 4 for 10-mans, because these are ablative, you will still lose some, and you want the squad to be good for more than one combat.

I've also started strongly consider falchions for big squads, but's only if they're +2 attacks post-FAQ (+2 is current RAW, I feel).
The thing is, we're talking about a 10-man unit of Terminators armed with storm bolters and a pair of psycannons, and supported by units with the same kind of firepower. It's quite likely that incoming units are going to be short a few members before close combat occurs. In fact, if you're attacking a squad of 10 MEQs, a single volley of shooting from those Termies will usually kill enough that you're extremely likely to wipe them out on the subsequent charge with just the 7 halberds, power fist and all.

It all depends. The halberds are better versus Vanguard vets and other power weapon toting elites; the swords will help more against giant Ork units that come at you with a power klaw hidden in a 20+ man mob.
Keep in mind, a 10 man unit of GKT is already twice the points of their typical opposition. So, perhaps the fairest comparison is 5 GKT vs 10 MEQs. Myself, I can't think of the last time I actually fielded 10 GKT (though I may field 10 paladins).

Bottom line, a sorta typical unit is 10 men, the last wound of which has 2-3 power weapons of various effectiveness. If whatever X of GKT you have can wipe that out then great, get all Halberds, I just don't think that is the typical situation.

I've justified that assumption on Mathammer, but really it comes from personal experience. First turn wipe-outs before CR are rare, thus all Halberds doesn't make sense.
Terminators are survivable enough against most units (things with no PWs) that i don't think they really need the halberds unless they are facing some sort of high I power weapon wielding unit, but since you shouldn't really be in combat with those types of units anyway, i'd probably stick with mostly swords and a hammer, and only take the halberds in order to turn on the force weapons early, but that is only helpful against units with multi-wound models, so it may not even be worth it then.
Against things with no PWs, you're 100% better off with halberds every time, because then the swords' 4++ save is completely useless...
You're actually assuming 2 conditions:

1) No power weapons.

2) that they are either initiative 4 or 5. If they're initiative 6, then it matters 1/6th as much (the number of return attacks you would presumably lose).

I think you'll find that that is actually an exceedingly narrow set of conditions. Almost all units that are 4 or 5 Initiative would have power weapons.
Well, the point he was trying to make was that swords were better against things with no PWs. I was just pointing out that swords aren't useful against things with no PWs.

Halberds are more likely to be useful against non-PW armed units, and I think they're more common than you think, even at I 4-5. Mind you, Terminators are typically going to slaughter said things in assault regardless of weaponry so the point might be a little academic.
True enough and this has been discussed a fair amount in the comments, don't you read :P. Prometheus likes 2/2/1 sword/halberd/hammer for GKT/Paladins but I prefer 4/1 halberds/hammers as they really aren't going to be an offensive unit. In large squads I would probably run banner/5/2/2 halberd/sword/hammer which gives you a couple guys to fob off invuls against but you're still getting 15-20 I6 attacks which is enough to finish off most weakened units.
In unrelated news, BBC is running their Melbourne tournament late in June.
And what happened to this dislike function?
One thing to consider: if you kill the enemy before they strike, you don't need to be making saves. Seems obvious, but easy to overlook.
It did happen all the time with my furious charging assault terminators... until the invent of Grey Knights and their swanky halberds...

*mutters to self in corner*
You need some Hammernators in there :)
Antebellum's avatar

Antebellum · 726 weeks ago

I would have liked this article to go more into depth of issues such as these. When to take swords vs halberds vs falchions vs staves
A niggling point that bothered me when reading this article: You keep repeating that GKs die like Marines, which is true on a "stats" level i.e. something that hits marines on 3s and kills marines on 3s will do the same to GKs BUT you haven't mentioned at all is the fact that over several rounds of combat (or even during the first one if the GKs are higher I than their opponent) the GKs will take many less casualties than their equivalent points of Marines.

A totally Vanilla Tactical squad fighting 20 Guardsmen, for example. Tacs strike first, and lets assume they have the charge. So 10 pistol shots which kills about 2 Guardsmen. 18 left. 20 CC attacks kill about 5 Guard, leaving 13 men to strike back.

Compare vanilla GKs who do the same. 20 SB shots kills about 5 Guard, followed by 20 CC attacks that kill about 12 Guardsmen with Hammerhand. Even without Hammerhand they kill 8, leaving 7 to strike back. The difference isn't how much they win combat by, but how many fewer attacks they take in return, and therefore less casualties. A full Halberd squad exemplifies this even more, because they also get to strike before a lot of dedicated CC units such as FC Marines like Zerkers/BA/Eldar, instead of just before Guard/Tau etc. A pure Halberd squad will almost wipe out a Scorpion squad before they can strike, whereas normal marines have to eat 30 attacks before doing so.

They even get an advantage when striking after their opponents, because the additional casualties caused by ignoring armour (a third more kills vs 5+, half again more kills vs 4+, and triple the kills vs 3+ etc) will affect the future rounds of combat.

Less attackers striking = less wounds taken = living longer. You are correct in that any given opponent will need the same dice rolls to kill a GK as a Marine when he strikes, and in that respect they are equally fragile, but you have to take into account that there will be less models to attack the GKs than there would be to attack the Marines in the first place.
3 replies · active 727 weeks ago
I agree. GK really earn their 20/40 pts per model quite well. GKT won't beat TH/SS termies in a stratight CC fight. But GKT have teh full shooting of a shooty vanilla squad, and will definitely beat TH/SS if allowed to shoot them first.

Same thing with GKSS vs say.....Grey Hunters. The SW are much cheaper, of course, but the GKSS still compare quite favorably pt for pt.

The real answer is that GK are neither shooting nor CC but are meant to do both against most opponents. Anytime they get to shoot,shoot, assault (or be assaulted) they will generally perform quite well against any other unit you care to match them with on a similar point cost.

The caveat, and the challenge, of course, is that it can sometimes be quite hard to utilize both your shooting and your CC against certain opponents. But if you can, it's pretty much win.
Absolutely correct and I assumed people would know this but it's good to point it out. I'll do a full post on it perhaps so everyone notices it but well written.
Friggin' Kirby, man....good stuff 'round here lately. Really good stuff.
Rock on!
IronAvenger's avatar

IronAvenger · 726 weeks ago

The best argument I have for halberds is all the metal guys with halberds from the last 'Dex. I can see the point of having a sword or something in there. I know all the stuff here is more about optimal but with a limited budget, I have to start with what I own 1st (i.e. 30 PAGK w/ hlbrd.)

Post a new comment

Comments by

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...