| Are grotesques really that bad? | |
|
+35Sandy Death Skyboard surfer tlronin craigyy Tony Spectacular bklooste Archon Farath Mure rotforge Crazy_Ivan Vasara Skulnbonz Mushkilla doomseer11b False Son Brom darthken239 Jehoel facelessabsalom DominicJ Kinnay wanderingblade Patzerwv Shadows Revenge Count Adhemar Timatron Evil Space Elves Cavalier Seshiru Siticus the Ancient mug7703 sgb69 Darklight Azdrubael Bouree777 that 9uy 39 posters |
|
Author | Message |
---|
that 9uy Hellion
Posts : 33 Join date : 2013-02-02
| Subject: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 04:36 | |
| online i see alot about how grotesques are terrible. and i will admit they are expensive. but their stats make them look like they could do some work if used right. so are they really as bad as people say they are?
| |
|
| |
Bouree777 Slave
Posts : 11 Join date : 2013-02-12 Location : Chicago
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 05:13 | |
| With a Rakarth buff they seems to hit a little harder, but in my opinion, they suffer the same response as when I look at Ogryns. A lot of things in the dex can do what they do for cheaper, points and monies! But all this is quite sad to me, because I think the models are fantastic | |
|
| |
Azdrubael Incubi
Posts : 1857 Join date : 2011-11-16 Location : Russia
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 06:01 | |
| Mandrakes are terrible. Grotesques are good, but very expensive. | |
|
| |
Darklight Sybarite
Posts : 384 Join date : 2011-05-27 Location : Stavanger
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 06:11 | |
| Azdrubael is correct, Grotesques problems are that tehy are in a slot with Trueborns, and even Incubis are a bit better. Its the options in the slot that makes them less usefull | |
|
| |
sgb69 Kabalite Warrior
Posts : 186 Join date : 2013-03-02 Location : Redwood Curtain
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 06:35 | |
| The main problem I've had with them is that Grey Knights exist and tend to wipe the 3 to 4 grot squad in melee before a Grot can swing. Force weapons and all that. | |
|
| |
mug7703 Sybarite
Posts : 409 Join date : 2012-09-19 Location : Brighton
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 07:35 | |
| For their points, they should have EW. | |
|
| |
Siticus the Ancient Wych
Posts : 936 Join date : 2011-09-10 Location : Riga, Latvia
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 09:20 | |
| I use them as a big brick to toss at the IG fortifications. It is a massive ball of hurt that darts into the most heavily fortified part of the enemy deployment, stays as near as possible and explodes there. Coupled with Urien and Lelith, it is a unit that can't really be ignored (and neither can its point cost!). I sometimes use them as an Archon delively system as well, for the times when I absolutely, positively want my tricked-out Archon in the enemy lines, racking up pain tokens and stealing souls. It's their always average T5, that makes them worth it for me, because they can soak up some punishment from a large part of the table, allowing the rest of the army (like, say, same ol' Trueborn) to move up relatively unmolested. | |
|
| |
Seshiru Sybarite
Posts : 408 Join date : 2012-07-03
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon Mar 18 2013, 14:30 | |
| Grots are quite nice and you don't have to go crazy with them either. In this edition cover saves are huge, look at the lame Harlie star people like to run, rush some grots with a liquifier and a hamey with a liquifier and most likely you'll turn that Death Star to goo. Grey knights with force weapons kill all of our units, but their storm bolters are nasty to most of our units to, but grots have some defense there | |
|
| |
that 9uy Hellion
Posts : 33 Join date : 2013-02-02
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Tue Mar 19 2013, 05:48 | |
| i love trueborn as much as the next guy, but i was intrigued by the amount of umph grots seemed to have and figured i might pop them out of a wwp with some wracks and engines just to see what happened lol. | |
|
| |
Cavalier Wych
Posts : 586 Join date : 2013-01-19 Location : North Carolina
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Tue Mar 19 2013, 11:24 | |
| If you guys have seen Skari's most recent video battle reports (if you haven't check em out skaredcast youtube) he shreds with Urien+ Grotesques. They have the toughness and wounds to deal with overwatch, and tons of small arms fire should they lose their transport. I really like them. He's used them against all manner of opponents in friendly games/local tourneys and they looked pretty ferocious to me. | |
|
| |
Evil Space Elves Haemonculus Ancient
Posts : 3717 Join date : 2011-07-13 Location : Santa Cruz, ca
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Tue Mar 19 2013, 14:59 | |
| I've had a ton of success taking them in the last ten or so games that I've played. They tend to make their points back every game while drawing a ton of fire from my other fragile troops' transports. They truly are a fun unit to use! I dropped my Ravagers for these games(replaced by Taloi) and haven't looked back | |
|
| |
Timatron Sybarite
Posts : 443 Join date : 2013-03-12 Location : Brighton
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Tue Mar 19 2013, 23:41 | |
| Grotesques are awesome, especially with an Aberration wielding the Scissorhands, whack them with Urien and they rock. So different from anything else in the codex and they have such fantastic background too. I have a list I use called Rakarth's Rampage, posted on the Army list section of this very forum, and yes Skari does own with his coven list.
| |
|
| |
Count Adhemar Dark Lord of Granbretan
Posts : 7610 Join date : 2012-04-26 Location : London
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Wed Mar 20 2013, 09:12 | |
| - Timatron wrote:
- Grotesques are awesome, especially with an Aberration wielding the Scissorhands, whack them with Urien and they rock.
Personally I prefer the Flesh Gauntlet but either is pretty damn good. | |
|
| |
Shadows Revenge Hierarch of Tactica
Posts : 2587 Join date : 2011-08-10 Location : Bmore
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Wed Mar 20 2013, 14:01 | |
| @Adhemar why a flesh gauntlet??? your already S6 with FC (or urien upgrade) so you already ID most guard/eldar ICs... and I would suspect the extra attack is better against most MEQ. The only way I can see it being better is a challenge soaker from ICs for some combat archon... but normally you want them in the challenge to kill that IC quickly before he does damage...
really I feel its semantics tbh... but I would think that extra attack would normally be the better option. Atleast that is how I already ran mine... | |
|
| |
Count Adhemar Dark Lord of Granbretan
Posts : 7610 Join date : 2012-04-26 Location : London
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Wed Mar 20 2013, 14:06 | |
| Maybe it's because I play against Wraiths and Paladins a lot but that ID is golden for me and worth more than an extra attack. | |
|
| |
Timatron Sybarite
Posts : 443 Join date : 2013-03-12 Location : Brighton
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Thu Mar 21 2013, 00:45 | |
| Wraiths and Paladins deserve everything they get! Horrible things! I reckon the Flesh Gauntlet is an awesome tool for such a job. It really comes down to the points cost for me, but I'm generally stingy when it comes to upgrade characters wargear. I modeled my Aberration with the Ichor injector hand from the Talos, with the syringe cut off and more 'bobbly bits'. It looks suitable to be representative of quite a few of the special weapons so may try the old Fleshgauntlet sometime.
| |
|
| |
Patzerwv Slave
Posts : 21 Join date : 2012-08-16
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 04:22 | |
| When my opponents see a 10 man squad of grotesques trudging across the table they tend to pour every shot they can into them. Urine is great to absorb a few blows and I like to keep Baron with them for a little cover and the PGL. With all of those shots bringing them down slowly I still (90% of the time) am able to get them into an assault and at least tie up a unit by the end of my 3rd turn. This pretty much means I just had 2 free turns of splinter cannon death and lancing to unleash. At the same time, when the grot pack is nearer to my shooting units very rarely do those pods come anywhere near them. An extra turn to shoot without harassment is premium to me. I plan to start toying with running an empty raider or two for cover in front. That should really spice things up . | |
|
| |
wanderingblade Kabalite Warrior
Posts : 225 Join date : 2013-01-15
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 06:14 | |
| - Bouree777 wrote:
- With a Rakarth buff they seems to hit a little harder, but in my opinion, they suffer the same response as when I look at Ogryns. A lot of things in the dex can do what they do for cheaper, points and monies! But all this is quite sad to me, because I think the models are fantastic
I'm curious - what else do you think does the same job? I've yet to use them, but I can see the logic and appeal in a unit that is genuinely tough enough to just tank small arms fire, that you can just chuck at the opposition lines safe in the knowledge it will usually take a very disproportionate amount of firepower to stop them being a threat - particularly if riding with a very powerful character. And I don't really see anything else in the codex that can do that, except maybe an appropriately kitted out Beastmaster squad. | |
|
| |
Kinnay Wych
Posts : 626 Join date : 2011-06-06 Location : Hamburg, Germany
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 08:15 | |
| - Patzerwv wrote:
- Urine is great to absorb a few blows
Gotta love this Typo. | |
|
| |
DominicJ Wych
Posts : 662 Join date : 2013-01-23
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 08:45 | |
| Regardng models / cost I fluff mine as pit beasts from the wych arenas. So I have, "Handlers", who are Deldar the haemonculi messed with so they can work in the pits and pit beasts, who are currently Tyranid Warriors with big guns (liquifiers) and shortly adding some Ravenors, and, after that, who knows. | |
|
| |
Evil Space Elves Haemonculus Ancient
Posts : 3717 Join date : 2011-07-13 Location : Santa Cruz, ca
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 08:46 | |
| | |
|
| |
Patzerwv Slave
Posts : 21 Join date : 2012-08-16
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 11:14 | |
| - Kinnay wrote:
- Patzerwv wrote:
- Urine is great to absorb a few blows
Gotta love this Typo. Best part is that I always call him that. Nothing beats the look on my opponents face when I mention something like that in the same sentence with a liquifier to the face. | |
|
| |
facelessabsalom Wych
Posts : 661 Join date : 2012-11-17 Location : Freefall
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 11:34 | |
| - Patzerwv wrote:
- Kinnay wrote:
- Patzerwv wrote:
- Urine is great to absorb a few blows
Gotta love this Typo. Best part is that I always call him that. Nothing beats the look on my opponents face when I mention something like that in the same sentence with a liquifier to the face.
lol! | |
|
| |
Jehoel Kabalite Warrior
Posts : 150 Join date : 2011-07-04 Location : Denmark
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Mon May 06 2013, 16:27 | |
| Having only recently converted myself into owning 4 grotesques I have only been able to field them once. I fielded 4 with a liquifier and an aberation with a scissorhand. They were followed by a haemonculus with a venom blade in a raider. My opponent was my old tau nemesis. I am reallly satisfied about how they performed. He was unprepared for them and they added a new aspect to my army that was difficult for him to adapt to. Their transport was quickly shot down. They then when to ground in the newly arrived crater. This (along with some lucky rolls on my part) made them withstand the barrage from his entire army. The following turn was like a kid in a candystore, and it was difficult to choose who I wanted to erradicate with all those S 6 attacks. They managed to down 2 hammerheads and a unit of pathfinders and they soaked up a great amount of firepower which meant a longer life for the rest of the army. I usually loose big time to this guy and his tau. But this time it was a draw, and I owe a lot of that success to the grotesques. I will definatly give them another go next time. | |
|
| |
darthken239 Kabalite Warrior
Posts : 170 Join date : 2013-04-17
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? Tue May 07 2013, 14:38 | |
| yes the continued power struggle for that elite choice CC spot in the kabal its a trade off which way to go most times
my grots have performed extremely well. the lack of CC ap weapons is more than made up for by the amount of punishment they can take both from shooting and close combat. and heaven help any light vehicle that gets to close to them | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Are grotesques really that bad? | |
| |
|
| |
| Are grotesques really that bad? | |
|