Compiled info on Space Wolves Codex

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.

**ph34r**

Fetterkey wrote:
ph34r wrote:I would always take grey hunters over tac marines unless I had vulkan.

Vulkan tacs are worse than standard tacs, sooooo...

Unfortunately I can't take grey hunters with vulkan. If I could I would. I consider "had vulkan" synonymous with "play codex space marines rather than SW"

**Kingsley**

Vulkan is overrated and far from mandatory.

**ph34r**

Oh, of course nothing is mandatory. Then again overrated is the best insult...

**Kingsley**

ph34r wrote:Oh, of course nothing is mandatory. Then again overrated is the best insult...

In old Codices there were mandatory or quasi-mandatory options (Close Order Drill for IG). Those days, by and large, are gone.

**Nurglitch**

That's a good thing though. The only real problem are the legacy attitudes left over from the bad-old days of 3rd and 4th edition. Man, if you thought the wailing and gnashing of teeth is bad these days, things were much worse back then!

The more I read and think about this codex, the more I'm impressed with the production of a well-balanced and characterful Codex, despite the hot Wolves-on-Wolves action.

**ubermosher**

radiohazard wrote:BC's suck now, WS: 3 really hurts them and they are just not worth it.

As opposed to when? They've always had WS3. Of course losing those extra fists hurts. But I'm thinking the best way to use a squad of BC's is to run 15, with MotW, maybe a special or two depending on points available, adding a Wolf Priest, and throw them in a LRC. Yeah, it's a ton of points, but driving deep into the opponent's area and launching 60+ rerollable attacks against a horde/mob or a multi-unit assault is harsh, and will tactically put your opponent on the defensive. Never underestimate the power of seizing the initiative (tactically, not in the game rule sense).

Based on how my regular opponents play, a couple of transport-popping Long Fang squads doing their job followed-up by a charge described above will wreck havoc... at least until they adjust.

Anyway, with the last codex, if I wasn't drop-podding my SW's, I'd run BC's in a LRC as a character delivery system, and it always did well.

**Nurglitch**

Hey, thought just occurred to me for a neat dick-move with a Psycker Battle Squad: use it to reduce the Leadership of Space Wolf units that you plan on charging. Then they will likely fail their Counter-Attack leadership test.

**radiohazard**

Nurglitch wrote:Hey, thought just occurred to me for a neat dick-move with a Psycker Battle Squad: use it to reduce the Leadership of Space Wolf units that you plan on charging. Then they will likely fail their Counter-Attack leadership test.

Is that IG???

**ubermosher**

If your IG is developing tactics to assault my SW army... Let's just say I'm a very happy SW player.

**Lowinor**

warboss wrote:acute senses = combat squads in real world value

I just have to comment on this, because there's a problem in trying to equivocate the two powers for comparing Tactical Squads to Grey Hunters.

See, for one, Combat Squads is very good.

On the other hand, Acute Senses is worthless.

So the comparison doesn't quite hold up.

So what exactly does Acute Senses do for Grey Hunters? Let's see, it triggers when Night Fighting is in play. Which is, if we use the standard rules, it happens one third of the time for the first turn.

Night Fighting says you can't shoot at targets greater than 2d6 x 3" away. Acute Senses says you get to reroll that.

Now, let's look at a GH squad. No heavy weapons, 1-2 special weapons (which, so far, have been almost exclusively supposed as Meltaguns, with the odd Flamer), on marines built for assault. If, on that first turn in 1/3rd of games, they're going to try to shoot something, unless they stand still to shoot their bolters at 24" (as no one yet has even mentioned putting a Plasma Gun on GH, and that's before we even talk about a moderately assaulty squad with no heavy weapons standing still in the first place...), all of their weapons are 12" range. Hell, the single most acclaimed feature of the squad is dual Meltaguns, 12" ranged weapons. On 2d6 x 3", that's a 4 to get maximum range.

So, Acute Senses comes into play...

- In one third of games
- In only the first turn of those games
- If they roll a 2 or 3 on 2d6

If I assume that a particular GH squad is within 12" of a target to shoot on the first turn of a game half the time, and I play one game a week, I'd use Acute Senses on average once every sixteen months.

Combat Squads, however, is one of the few abilities that gives you actual list design options at deployment time, and lets you split off the heavy and special weapons in your Tactical Squads. Not going to get into it as much as Acute Senses, but as a SM player, it's a very, very good ability.

Really, as both a SM and SW player, GH and Tacs aren't particularly unbalanced; if I wasn't forced as a SM player to buy the sergeant upgrades, Tacs would be better, as it is, I think they're within 5-10 points costs per squad of being equivalent.

**radiohazard**

ubermosher wrote:If your IG is developing tactics to assault my SW army... Let's just say I'm a very happy SW player.

As will I.

I can't think of many armies that are better than SW in CC. Orks can match them, but only through strength in numbers.

BTW:

I'm not a fan of Combat Squads and never will be. I've played in a lot of tourneys and have never seen a single combat squad except when seeing a Sternguard squad split after a drop pod assault. They just cannot take the amount of hits that a full 10 man squad can take.

I agree with the statements on Acute Senses, only the Long Fangs would really use it.

I think the reason why I prefer GH to Tac Squads is that the GH play like 3rd Ed CSM squads, which was my favourite army in that edition and served me very well through 3 GTs. Counter Attack was definately my friend way back then.

**Nurglitch**

What else would Rough Riders do? Stand back and shoot you with their Battle Cannons? The point is that there's a way to negate the Space Wolves' advantage of Counter-Attack. Naturally this would come after destroying all the Space Wolf vehicles with artillery, and pinning down the Space Wolves themselves for leisurely consumption.

I mean, has anyone else noticed the distinct lack of Fearless in this codex? You have Logan Grimnar or a Wolf Priest conferring Fearless onto a squad they join, and the army going Fearless if Bjorn the Fell-Handed buys it, but beyond that they're hurtin'.

**Kingsley**

Fearless is a bad rule.

**radiohazard**

Fetterkey wrote:Fearless is a bad rule.

QFT.

**Nurglitch**

It's certainly more situational than it used to be. One thing it does and it does well is render a unit immune to pinning. I don't think Space Wolves can afford to be pinned down, given the cost per unit.

**Kingsley**

I'd still rather have ATSKNF+Combat Tactics, or even Stubborn.

**MinMax**

Nurglitch wrote:I mean, has anyone else noticed the distinct lack of Fearless in this codex? You have Logan Grimnar or a Wolf Priest conferring Fearless onto a squad they join, and the army going Fearless if Bjorn the Fell-Handed buys it, but beyond that they're hurtin'.

Stubborn + ATSKNF is better than Fearless.

**radiohazard**

MinMax wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:I mean, has anyone else noticed the distinct lack of Fearless in this codex? You have Logan Grimnar or a Wolf Priest conferring Fearless onto a squad they join, and the army going Fearless if Bjorn the Fell-Handed buys it, but beyond that they're hurtin'.

Stubborn + ATSKNF is better than Fearless.

Off the top of my head, I'm trying to think what in the SW codex has or gives Stubborn.

**Nurglitch**

I think it depends on the troops. Being able to get way from Assault Terminator and Dreadnoughts and whatnot is great for Tactical Space Marines, but not so great for Assault Marines that need to get into combat rather than out of it.

Berzerkers don't have to worry about their transport being blown up and them being pinned in the wreckage, for example.

And They Shall Know No Fear can be handled: if a unit breaks, then you chase them with a fast unit within 6". Likewise it doesn't prevent a unit from being pinned, which is a good way to hold a unit in place for more shooting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
radiohazard:

According to the list you posted, it's Logan Grimnar and that Wolfguard with the hammer-throw.

**radiohazard**

Nurglitch wrote:I think it depends on the troops. Being able to get way from Assault Terminator and Dreadnoughts and whatnot is great for Tactical Space Marines, but not so great for Assault Marines that need to get into combat rather than out of it.

Berzerkers don't have to worry about their transport being blown up and them being pinned in the wreckage, for example.

And They Shall Know No Fear can be handled: if a unit breaks, then you chase them with a fast unit within 6". Likewise it doesn't prevent a unit from being pinned, which is a good way to hold a unit in place for more shooting.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
radiohazard:

According to the list you posted, it's Logan Grimnar and that Wolfguard with the hammer-throw.

As I said...

Off the top of my head.

**MinMax**

radiohazard wrote:Off the top of my head, I'm trying to think what in the SW codex has or gives Stubborn.

Almost everything has Stubborn.

**Nurglitch**

MinMax:

Can you cite examples?

**radiohazard**

MinMax wrote:
radiohazard wrote:Off the top of my head, I'm trying to think what in the SW codex has or gives Stubborn.

Almost everything has Stubborn.

I don't have that info.

And after reading my OP, Nurglitch is correct.

**MinMax**

Nurglitch wrote:MinMax:

Can you cite examples?

I might be mistaken, but I've been told that almost every Space Wolf model has Stubborn - Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, Long Fangs...

Everything except Fenrisian Wolves, or models with Fearless.

**radiohazard**

MinMax wrote:
Nurglitch wrote:MinMax:

Can you cite examples?

I might be mistaken, but I've been told that almost every Space Wolf model has Stubborn - Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, Long Fangs...

Everything except Fenrisian Wolves, or models with Fearless.

Not in any of the SW Codex i've seen mate.

**warboss**

Nurglitch wrote:The WS3 really lets them down, despite the added potential of Berserk Charge. Let's suppose that a unit of 10 Blood Claws attacked a unit of 30 Orks. The Blood Claws would get 40 attacks, but only 20 would hit on average, and 10 wound, 2 saves, for 8 dead Orks. 10 Assault Marines would only get 30 attacks, 15 hits, 8 wounds, 1 save, for 7 dead Orks. But...

22 Orks attacking back against Blood Claws would hit on 3+. Supposing Slugga Boyz, you'd have 66 attacks, 44 would hit, 15 wounds, 10 saves, and five dead Blood Claws.

23 Orks attacking back against Assault Marines would hit on 4+. Supposing Slugga Boyz again, you'd have 66 attacks, 33 would hit, 11 wounds, 7 saves, and four dead Assault Marines.

7:4 rather than 8:5 is in favour of Assault Marines, since they would sustain less casualties.

The Blood Claws (Sky Claws, etc) would be especially boned when it comes to engaging dedicated assault troops. I think I've already shown where a pack of Blood Claws would be destroyed by Lucius, on average, if they charged him.

while i agree that the blood claws would indeed take more casualties, your math is possibly skewed (but i'm not sure in which direction). are the 10 assault marines the same cost pointswise as the 10 blood claws? i haven't seen that part of the codex myself but i believe someone mentioned that skyclaws are cheaper than assault marines. if so, then you have to actually add compare equal points value squads which means you'll have to add in another skyclaw or two depending on their discount as well as factor in the extra attack for the assault vet sergeant. also, in order to be fair, you'd have to calculate in the casualties the orks would get from the assault marines FIRING their pistols since they would in all probability do this prior to charging (and that's also something the blood claws can't do due to their special rule). point for point, the assault marines may indeed be a better choice but your example doesn't show that when examined a bit closer. i'd do this myself but i don't have access to the codex and looked mainly at GH and WG when i did this weekend.

**ph34r**

Sky claws are 18 points each if I remember correctly.

**sourclams**

Well, let's look for an actually realistic scenario: 15 Blood Claws in a LRC. I say this because nobody -- nobody, folks -- is going to have "balanced" squads of footslogging blood claws. BCs are a shock and awe weapon much like a Death Strike missile; always have been, always will be, and even more so now that GH cost the same amount. The ONLY reason to take BCs compared to the all-around better GH is to get 60 attacks piling out of a LRC.

15 BCs versus Orks: 60 attacks, 30 hits, 15 wounds. That's 12 dead Boyz and a wounded Nob. Then the Boyz swing back, and kill off 4 BCs. The Nob kills another 2. So Orks lose by 7 and we'll say 5 more die to Fearless, putting them at 12 in the squad. BCs attack again killing 3. WHOA WTF 3??? Yeah, 3. Then nine Orks swing back and kill 2, and the Nob kills 2 more. Blood Claws just lost combat.

Moral of the story: BCs don't have staying power. What made them good before was that they were four points cheaper than a GH and could take three powerfists with 12 powerfist attacks. Now they don't have fists (well, one, whoopiee) and cost the same amount as the guys with bolters and specials who aren't WS4 or too slowed to shoot. Unless you're pairing them with Ragnar, just take Grey Hunters.

**The Unending**

Just out of curiousity is it viable to use BC as a meat shield for your GH. I've got an army list in mind that may or may not follow that philosophy

**sourclams**

Well... why?

If they're not charging, they're not making use of the only thing that makes them even worth considering: +2 attacks.

As a meat shield, they're probably going to be getting attacked, not attacking. And if they're getting attacked, then they're just WS3 GH. Waste of points. Unless you're creating a 750 point uber assault Crusader squad Ragnar bomb, just stick with GH as shooting platforms, assault units, rhino squads, or anything else.

Quite simply, Blood Claws needed to stay 3-4 points cheaper than GH to be worthwhile. At equal point values, without the 3 cheap special close combat weapon options, they're just not worth it anymore except for specific builds meant to maximize their use.