Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
I'm eally close to finishing a projected Daemonhunters army list and have been comparing their Knights with Tyranids, Space Marines, Chaos and Eldar~
Which comes to my question, how well do GK armies do well in tournaments?
Asking for suggestions without knowing what you're planning on doing is like asking a blind man what color shirt matches your eyes.
Myslef I have not heard of any Pure GK army ever winning a tournament. We can do well if we remember to play are strengths . We will always be out numbered and out gunned, no big deal. But some of the compositions of the other armies will make it hard.
Why use science and education when ignorance and superstition will work just as well.
I may have to look into this. My feelings are that they'll excell against ork and tyranids as their basic shots ignore their saves, but they could easily suffer against tank heavy opponents. Keep me informed, seeing as i want to kick ass with my Daemonhunter army ><
the water warrior lists have gained much success and reputation.
i am thinking this would qualify as an 'all GK' army. seeing as how they use BC, PAGK and GKLR's only..... two people have wont tournaments with the water warrior list varient to date that are known about.
hope this helps.
I imagine it would be up to how good the player was.
Some people underestimate GK's, some people fear them.
If you play the slow game with them, you can do well.
I personally play with the =][= as well as Gk's, but I won my last tournament (be it conflict though) I use the GK for what they are, an elite unit of infantry killers that I protect and strike with when the time is right.
I had one unit of GK clean a 750point noise marine army pretty much on its own (though it could never have done it without the =][=.)
Much must be risked in war.
Blood Angel Stormraven Conversion Work In Progress.
Well, first off, my first time playing my 1500 point list was Saturday in a RTT. I was, at the end of a day, 2 wins and 1 loss. The one loss was due to not being able to shoot, or roll an armour save at all. And my opponent blew up/killed 581 points on the first turn. (Lucky shots, and it's eldar...fast tanks. Pulse Lance=Owns Raiders. Path Finders+1 & 2's for armour saves=own GK..)\
But seriously, it did really well, winning 66.66666% of the time.
At the end of the day, you're still only as tough as a marine, but you're outnumbered by them almost 2:1. Since so many people play MEQs (marine equivalents - T4, 3+ save) many lists will have "hate" against MEQs. You'll die easily to these lists.
To counteract this problem, you need to use enfilade fire and defilade positions VERY WELL. I'm a fan of a symmetrical army - My 750pt force is B/C + PsyC, 8x PAGK, 7xPAGK and 2 AssC dreadnoughts. The B/C joins the smaller squad and each is suppored by a dreadnought. I keep my forces close by and use terrain to my advantage. Escalation usually means an instant loss.
Oh, and nothing sucks more than losing 2 GKs to a plasma pistol
what am I, the pope?
but still, dont expect to win right away with grey knights. it is a hard army to play. it takes time to learn how to manage ur dudes!
A list that wins in one player's hands does not mean that you can win with it. List-building is an important part of playing 40K competitively, but a list does not a competent general nor a winning army make. There really is a tactical component to this game -- that's the game itself, of course -- outside of the strategy of building a list.
FWIW, a poster on the 40Konline web forum by the name of Massaen won the 2005 Australian GT with his "mechanized" DH list. Supposedly, he used 3 land raiders at 1500 pts.
ninjabackhand: point and click, again, really? even after i give you an military term "shock tactic" you still call it point and click.
RIP Warhammer 40,000: 21 Sep 1998 - 24 May 2014