Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Grey hunters have to pay 2 pts for CCW's. (DISLIKE). IMHO it should be 1 point but OK.

CSMs pay 2 points for their CCWs. as such the 2 point price seems right to me, agree or disagree with it, GW's actually being CONSISTANT for once

BrianDavion wrote:

Grey hunters have to pay 2 pts for CCW's. (DISLIKE). IMHO it should be 1 point but OK.

CSMs pay 2 points for their CCWs. as such the 2 point price seems right to me, agree or disagree with it, GW's actually being CONSISTANT for once

The problem is people expecting an OP codex like Eldar. When they get a balanced one they complain. It doesn't make sense to me.

I have mixed feelings about it. I can finally use Ulrik, a model I've had since 3rd and always wanted to use but could never find a reason to. Our rune priest got cheaper and got access to the olf SW powers without losing the old ones. However, a lot of stuff got removed or nerfed. The old psychic powers aren't what they used to be. I HATE that sagas are now warlord traits that you have to roll for. Did we really need more things that used to be a strategy to build a list around changed to a random D6 table? 9th edition is going to be both players putting their models on the table and making pew pew sounds, then having a roll off to see who won.

 Random Dude wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Grey hunters have to pay 2 pts for CCW's. (DISLIKE). IMHO it should be 1 point but OK.

CSMs pay 2 points for their CCWs. as such the 2 point price seems right to me, agree or disagree with it, GW's actually being CONSISTANT for once

The problem is people expecting an OP codex like Eldar. When they get a balanced one they complain. It doesn't make sense to me.

I mean, in all fairness, if one thing is OP and everything else, even the new stuff, is nowhere near as OP, there's going to be complaining. But the fact that the codex is balanced is a good thing.

 Random Dude wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Grey hunters have to pay 2 pts for CCW's. (DISLIKE). IMHO it should be 1 point but OK.

CSMs pay 2 points for their CCWs. as such the 2 point price seems right to me, agree or disagree with it, GW's actually being CONSISTANT for once

The problem is people expecting an OP codex like Eldar. When they get a balanced one they complain. It doesn't make sense to me.

To me, if people on Dakka complain about an underpowered codex, chance are really high that it's a good and balanced codex.

GW is not consistent with their points values. Points values being equal does not make the item equal worth. A 15 pt plasma gun on a guardsmen is of less value than one on a space marine. A CCW to a Chaos Marine means different to than then a SM, so on, so forth.

Having each chapter's marines be the same, boring, bland 14 ppm Marine and then unequally giving them special rules doesn't hold up well. Let alone the discussion of the T4, 3+ save body being arguable worthless in 6E and 7E than previous editions where medium strength, high volume shooting is the name of the game. When most weapons of S6-S7 wound you on 2s regardless of T3 or T4, it's usually better to go for more bodies (or greater wounds per point) than less bodies, but higher save.

But that would mean GW applies any rational game design. Which they don't.

That flying sled is so fething funny.

I say try playing games with the things you think are bad and see what happens. I was convinced that Mephiston is terrible now without a bunch of points added (which I am not willing to do) and was going to try something else. I was convinced to try him and we played 2 maelstrom games. He is better now than he used to be because your opponent will be coming towards you all the time. The game isn't about killing so much as it is about what objectives you can claim each turn. It may seem disappointing now but I think it's because the game has gone away from the old strategies and tournament mindset to what it is now.

If you are only wanting to play under the old way (kill points, set end of game objectives, and tourney friendly min/max lists) then this will certainly be disappointing. I for one wish my friend hadn't sold his Wolves last year so we could try this new book out.

 Paradigm wrote:
I'm not at all disappointed. We got cost drops on anything that needed it, the new units are very cool, the changes to GH are neither unexpected nor unwarranted, and to say they've been reduced to 'just' tactical marines is not true at all.

The codex seems to be balanced internally and externally, it fixes a lot of issues and doesn't change how the army plays. what more can you ask?

This. The list of things that disappoint me are very short. Njal got nerfed hard and Ragnar's not much better, Wolf Scouts got a WTF nerf and the lost wargear makes me sad. However, basically everything else about the book is amazing, including little things like getting rid of the worst aspects of the fluff on characters like Canis Wolfborn (haven't checked to see if this is a trend throughout though).

Oh and is it just me, or is there a MAJOR typo on the Wolf Priest, restricting Oath of War to just him? That needs to be FAQ'd immediately.

 Thorgrim Bloodcrow wrote:
I love it, the second I glanced through it all kinds of ideas started sparking up in my mind.

Before, I never cared for the bikes, jump packs, Iron Priests and Blood Claws and now I want to field units of all of them.

This. SOOOOO this! The book has opened up a ton of options, and it makes me VERY happy as someone who was sick of how you were shoehorned into writing a SW list way back in 5th ed!

Hoboy. Didnt take long for these threads to start did it?

Too fast - there wasn't a huge amount of strategy in the old sagas anyway. Buy beat stick lord, buy EW saga. Done.

Andillus - isn't oath of war the preferred enemy granting rule? If so check out the rules on PE - only one model needs it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Too fast - there wasn't a huge amount of strategy in the old sagas anyway. Buy beat stick lord, buy EW saga. Done.
.

For some, maybe, but Warrior Born, Majesty and Hunter all gave out cool rules that are now gone. If there's a major loss in the codex, its this.

Used an 1850 list today against SM allied with guard. I took rune priest TDA, Ulrik, 3 GH squads with 2 meltas, rhino, pod, LRC, 6 WG TDA, missile long fangs and a stormfang. He took tac squads, melta bikers, dev centurions, predators, las/missile dread, 2 taurox, some lascannon squads and a vendetta. We played purge the alien. He had 1 hull point left on the vendetta, everything else was dead, wrecked or blown up. I still had 15 GH, ulrik, rune priest, 1 term, 4 long fangs, LRC and stormfang left at the end of the game. The new psychic powers did really well for me. Ulrik was a monster in CC and made his unit tear through everything it faced. The stormfang killed his centurion squad in 1 turn and then took 2 hull points off the vendetta the next turn. The WG didn't do much but they soaked up 2 rounds of fire from grav cannons which meant those weren't shooting at my advancing GH. I'm not sure how I would've fared against Tau or eldar but I was happy with the way the list performed. The points I saved from my list with the old codex point values gave me a free Ulrik. This week I'm going to try out some of the relics and see if they're worth the points.

Every single time a new codex comes out people complain. After a few games though everyone seems happy. Same happened with orks

 Grugknuckle wrote:
All right - so I was super excited about getting my new codex. I've been waiting for SW's to be updated to 7th ed to hopefully be viable again. And I have to say that I'm really very pleased that many of the confusing or potentially problematic rules / wargear / psychic powers have been brought into line with the standard rules. At least they seem to be at first glance. However, it also seems like most things have been heavily nerfed. Now granted, some units really needed to be - Grey Hunters were underpriced for what they could do. But in applying the nerf, they've reduced Space Wolves (troops specifically) to be more or less much vanilla space marines. In exchange for that, SW players get

New stuff
1) the privilege of an $81 flying metal box. (stormwolf looks pretty good, but it's still 220 points).
2) Bjorn the Fell-Handed and Murderfang may be viable now. We'll see.
3) Logan Grimnar on a chariot. (srsly? WTF?)

Lots of wargear choice for troops vanished. Like;
- Mark of the Wulfen. This is probably fine, but it costs us versatility and flavor. It also means I've got 5 useless miniatures now.
- Wolf Totem is gone. No more re-rolls in the assault phase, and another 5 of my mini's are no longer wysisyg.
- Grey hunters have to pay 2 pts for CCW's. (DISLIKE). IMHO it should be 1 point but OK.

There's other stuff too. Anyway - Is it just me? Am I crazy to be disappointed, or am I missing something?

DISCUSS

Ultimately, looking over the book, most of what was lost was stuff that could have been expected to have been lost, we're talking individual wargear options that existed as they did for only one codex iteration, the exact type of thing that gets switched up every time a book gets redone.

Mostly, it looks like they brought the overly-cheap units in line with their equivalents, cleaned up the Wolf Guard unit splitting mess by just making them unit upgrades as they should have been all along, and are heavily emphasizing the actually truly unique SW stuff (TWC's, new flyers, characters, etc) rather than the variations between otherwise similar standard SM units (e.g. Tacs vs Grey Hunters). While I'm not a huge fan of many of the SW unique units (e.g. TWC's are amongst the most absurd concepts in the game to me, the new flyer looks atrocious, etc), this route makes more sense to my mind to emphasize the differences against other SM armies rather than trying to make otherwise equivalent units slightly different just for differences sake.

Ultimately this book has a lot of character (if you're into SW's silly take on vikings) and a lot of strengths and few weaknesses, I can't find a single objectively bad unit the like of say IG Rough Riders or something that got unnecessarily mega-nerfed like the Hydra or that's just way too awkward to be consistently effective like say Scions/Stormtroopers. Most of the "nerfs" were largely to bring stuff in line with their equivalents in other books.

It's definitely an army that can be very capable on a table, but won't be the "Marines+1" that the previous book was for so long. It's a very balanced book overall that's got a lot of capabilities and tricks, but won't function the same way the old book did. I think you'll see a lot of TWC-heavy armies (they got *real* cheap for T5 W2 12" move models with an absurd number of rending attacks) just as you see many SM biker armies for some of the same reasons (lots of mobility and damage mitigation), along with lots of characters and flyers, but the Grey Hunter+Longfang "Battle Company+1" armies we saw back in 5th will be less of a thing.

 TheKbob wrote:
GW is not consistent with their points values. Points values being equal does not make the item equal worth. A 15 pt plasma gun on a guardsmen is of less value than one on a space marine. A CCW to a Chaos Marine means different to than then a SM, so on, so forth.

In this case however, the CCW's being 2pts for GH's and being 2pts for CSM's is pretty consistent. You're talking about a whole other level of meta-game design here, while the CCW in question is on units with identical statlines and wargear serving the same battlefield purpose.

If anything, the GH's are getting it cheap, the CCW is even more worth it with Counterattack than on the CSM's.

Having each chapter's marines be the same, boring, bland 14 ppm Marine and then unequally giving them special rules doesn't hold up well.

Yet that's exactly what GW has largely always done to differentiate marines, either give them X or Y special rule instead of Z special or B wargear instead of A wargear or C wargear.

Let alone the discussion of the T4, 3+ save body being arguable worthless in 6E and 7E than previous editions where medium strength, high volume shooting is the name of the game. When most weapons of S6-S7 wound you on 2s regardless of T3 or T4, it's usually better to go for more bodies (or greater wounds per point) than less bodies, but higher save.

Sorry, you're not going to get 9pt space marines...T4 is still very much worth it over T3. The difference between T3 and T4 is hugely felt with infantry arms and CC, which are still big components to this game, and those S6/7 weapons will ID multi-wound T3 models but not T4 units. That T difference is a huge reason why you don't see many Tempestus Scion armies roaming about.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Too fast - there wasn't a huge amount of strategy in the old sagas anyway. Buy beat stick lord, buy EW saga. Done.

Andillus - isn't oath of war the preferred enemy granting rule? If so check out the rules on PE - only one model needs it.

I dunno, my character/monster fighting Wolf Lord is pretty much done now because of the loss of EW access... time to turn him into a heavy infantry killer I guess. :/

And I didn't realize that preferred enemy confers to the whole unit if one has it, that's good to know! I was worried that I was going to have to wait for a proper FAQ... Hopefully 8th ed doesn't screw this up and leave us with useless Wolf Priests!

Rules mean nothing to me at this point but I'm hugly disappointed because it was a chance for GW to take what Dan Abnett did to the wolves when he presented them as the Vulka Fenryka.

They COULD have made them vikings with a deep and rich culture.
They COULD have made them quite serious with that little bit of tongue in cheek humour showing in places.
They COULD have brought in the darker implications of the fault in their Geenseed.

Insitead we got MURDERFANG and his MURDERCLAWS.


Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Rules mean nothing to me at this point but I'm hugly disappointed because it was a chance for GW to take what Dan Abnett did to the wolves when he presented them as the Vulka Fenryka.

They COULD have made them vikings with a deep and rich culture.
They COULD have made them quite serious with that little bit of tongue in cheek humour showing in places.
They COULD have brought in the darker implications of the fault in their Geenseed.

Insitead we got MURDERFANG and his MURDERCLAWS.


Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

12 year olds are GW's main client base.

 jonolikespie wrote:
Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

Honestly I wonder if they took out wolf standards, talismans, necklaces, wulfen, etc because they were trying to tone down the "wolf" aspect. IMHO, they seem to actually have cut back on the wolf aspect somewhat, although that's not to say that they're still not a silly army.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

Honestly I wonder if they took out wolf standards, talismans, necklaces, wulfen, etc because they were trying to tone down the "wolf" aspect. IMHO, they seem to actually have cut back on the wolf aspect somewhat, although that's not to say that they're still not a silly army.

Space Wolves had the opportunity for greatness with so many Norse myths to draw from, but GW ruined them. Wolves with Wolf Claws riding Wolf Chariots pulled by Wolves.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

Honestly I wonder if they took out wolf standards, talismans, necklaces, wulfen, etc because they were trying to tone down the "wolf" aspect. IMHO, they seem to actually have cut back on the wolf aspect somewhat, although that's not to say that they're still not a silly army.

Unfortunately it doesn't appear so, the Wolf Standard still exists, Wolf claws are still a thing, Lukas is still the "Jackalwolf", and they just gave introduced the Harald Deathwolf (as a new unit not just background), the Stormwolf, the Wulfenstone, and the Fangsword of the Icewolf as well. Although interestingly the Lord of the Wolfkin is no longer Canis Wolfborn but Harald Deathwolf.

Wolf.




On a similar topic, the naming conventions and thematic elements as a whole remain atrocious, Murderfacefang with his Murderclaws, Frost blades and frost guns, etc. It's all still there. There's even a sleigh now!

40KNobz11 wrote:
Every single time a new codex comes out people complain. After a few games though everyone seems happy. Same happened with orks

Ork players are happy? BAO results reflect otherwise.

 Byte wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Every single time a new codex comes out people complain. After a few games though everyone seems happy. Same happened with orks

Ork players are happy? BAO results reflect otherwise.

I'm happy with the new Ork codex. Also, BAO uses a very unique mission system that doesn't reflect the overall meta.

 Random Dude wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Rules mean nothing to me at this point but I'm hugly disappointed because it was a chance for GW to take what Dan Abnett did to the wolves when he presented them as the Vulka Fenryka.

They COULD have made them vikings with a deep and rich culture.
They COULD have made them quite serious with that little bit of tongue in cheek humour showing in places.
They COULD have brought in the darker implications of the fault in their Geenseed.

Insitead we got MURDERFANG and his MURDERCLAWS.


Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

12 year olds are GW's main client base.

Actually there is no way to know that, they don't do market research.

 Anpu42 wrote:

I would also like to know:
>Why everyone thinks just because MotW is gone they have useless models. Was there something added to the Codex that told us all we cant use them any more? Is there a reason they cant just be used for really neat models or your Wolf Guard Pack Leader?
>The same goes for the loss of the Wolf Standard. I really liked the old one, but the new one is Good. All of those others carrying one make great candidates for Wolf Guard Pack Leaders, just add bling if they did not have that already.

Well I'll say this...I modeled all of my grey hunters with chainswords because back when I built them, chainswords were just CCW's and every grey hunter had one. NOW I have to pay 2 points a piece extra just to be WYSIWYG. I'm REALLY unhappy about this.
Same for MOTW. I modeled them to look - well they don't look like a space marine.

Also...It's nice that Long Fangs can have Flakk missiles now, but wow they got expensive.
No wolf totem? That sucks. All of the relics are pretty lame except the wulfen stone - but 40 pts? No thanks.

Not really pleased with the psychic powers being exactly the same only not as good.

Wolf Scouts are even more useless now.

I think skyclaws and bikes got cheaper, but I don't own any.

I think Logan Grimnar's chariot's rules are stupid good. (Never takes penetrating hits, 4+ invulvnerable save AND it does 4 extra S5 attacks in CC. wow.) But I'm just really turned off by ANY chariot in WH40K. Seriously - space marines should ride chariots, it's just comical.

BrianDavion wrote:

Grey hunters have to pay 2 pts for CCW's. (DISLIKE). IMHO it should be 1 point but OK.

CSMs pay 2 points for their CCWs. as such the 2 point price seems right to me, agree or disagree with it, GW's actually being CONSISTANT for once

Consistent? Pah... Runic Armour the same as artificer armour, same points cost yes but the Mary Sue's erm I mean Space Wolves get a 6++ thrown in

 jonolikespie wrote:

 Random Dude wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Rules mean nothing to me at this point but I'm hugly disappointed because it was a chance for GW to take what Dan Abnett did to the wolves when he presented them as the Vulka Fenryka.

They COULD have made them vikings with a deep and rich culture.
They COULD have made them quite serious with that little bit of tongue in cheek humour showing in places.
They COULD have brought in the darker implications of the fault in their Geenseed.

Insitead we got MURDERFANG and his MURDERCLAWS.


Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

12 year olds are GW's main client base.

Actually there is no way to know that, they don't do market research.

There are these things called jokes...

 Paradigm wrote:

 liquidjoshi wrote:
Not a SW player, but I am interested in people's reactions to:
Murder* (fluff aside - is it a good unit? Worth it's points? Etc.)
The magic Grimbus (Again, goofy model aside, how well does it work in the game?)

I think Murderfang looks good on paper, for 170 points with a pod he could be a neat enough Ironclad equivalent, but specialising in anti infantry rather than AT (he can get an obscene number of attacks). I don't get the issue with his fluff either.

I may grabLogan further down the line just because the model looks great, I haven't given it much thought in game terms though. I don't like the trend of making characters LOW though.

I'm going to hold off judging the dreadnoughts. Like you said, they look good on paper BUT dreadnoughts - generally - aren't that good unless you spam them. At most, SW's can take 4 dreadnoughts (3 elite + Bjorn) but then you can't have wolf guard.

I don't think that the codex is bad. I'm just pissed that my models - 50 pro-painted GH's which took me a year and a half to buy, build and paint - and now they've all got chainswords I've got to pay extra points for. I added it up and I can't really field a 10 man GH squad for under 200 points. =(

There's not a snowballs chance that I'm going to build more either.

 Random Dude wrote:

 Byte wrote:

40KNobz11 wrote:
Every single time a new codex comes out people complain. After a few games though everyone seems happy. Same happened with orks

Ork players are happy? BAO results reflect otherwise.

I'm happy with the new Ork codex. Also, BAO uses a very unique mission system that doesn't reflect the overall meta.

BAO is still a pretty good tournament with pretty good players and orks weren't kicking teeth in there. I love my orks, but that codex still hasn't given me anything but a hard fought victory, pulling gak out of my ass on turn 6. The day after the Ork codex dropped, my army wasn't better in any way and I am still trying out different builds, finally getting a core down I like, but my Space Wolf buddy, has owed the codex for 10 minutes and already improved his list just by tweaking things based on new cost and loadouts, that's a big difference between a meh codex and a good codex.

To me that one little difference, makes me feel like this is a pretty decent codex drop. The army didn't get worse, it probably got better. Now, do I expect SW to be kicking teeth in? I think some TWC builds will be nice, but, I've always felt they were a lesser played army just because you have to like the fluff and be willing to paint all those wolf pelts. People will play some games and figure things out, but there certainly isn't anything in the book I see that will make SM players who like tourneys drop their White Scars or Melta Drop pod army or grav centurions for a SW army. Not like in 5th when OPness caused all the bandwagoneers, but I think there is nothing stopping SW from competing. I can't say the same about Orks right now. I want to, and lord knows I will keep on keepin' on, but we are starting a new escalation campaign next week and the SW I am scheduled to fight at 500pts just got better.....I was really hoping he'd get nerfed...not gonna lie.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 jonolikespie wrote:
Basically the whole thing felt like it could have been done seriously and been amazing, instead we got more of the cartoony 12 year old 'vikings' and even more heavily reliant of wolf iconography.

Honestly I wonder if they took out wolf standards, talismans, necklaces, wulfen, etc because they were trying to tone down the "wolf" aspect. IMHO, they seem to actually have cut back on the wolf aspect somewhat, although that's not to say that they're still not a silly army.

Toned down the wolf aspect? Which is more obnoxious ; dudes wearing wolf pelts, tails and talismans? Or Logan Grimnar riding a chariot pulled by wolves in the 41st millenium?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheKbob wrote:
Everything I've seen makes what I liked about the Wolves codex bad or worse. The special characters all got taken down another notch and made derpy. Grey Hunters are now just Grey Marines (BORING) and I get the special privilege to buy a unique flyer that really doesn't do much more than a Storm Raven. It all feels more "extreme vanilla" version of Wolves and selling you the flavor back later in supplement, the story of all the books since December to Remember 2013.

Direction of the game is still garbage, long story short. 5th, anyone?

This is exactly the way I feel. Grey Hunters used to be the best troop choice in the game - so we knew they would get nerfed. But they're just space marines with counter attack now, yet cost more. I know people will say, "wait a minute, they're only 14 pts per model now, they used to be 15!" and that's true. However, this is what you used to get....

Old Codex:
10 Grey Hunters (w/ bolter, bolt pistol and CCW)
2 Plasmaguns
MOTW
Wolf Totem
185 points

New Codex
10 Grey Hunters (w/ bolter, bolt pistol and CCW)
2 Plasmaguns
190 pts

See what I mean? The new GH's cost more and do less. You could argue that the codex got better because of the new stuff (Stormwolf etc) and that's true - that stuff IS better. But our core troops got hit hard with the nerf stick and THAT means I need to build a whole new army up from scratch to remain competitive. Deep down I knew GW was going to make me buy new models. But now that I've seen it I'm sad. I don't want to drop another $1000.