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.

Every SW list I see these days seems to be built in the following manner:

Start with a Rune Priest or two.

Add several GH squads.

ML Long Fangs to taste.

Add a dash of TWC and Thunderlord if you're so inclined.

It seems like half their codex doesn't get touched, and everyone pretty much ends up playing more or less the same list with wargear variations. Is that an issue, or am I missing all of the wild and crazy builds somehow?

It's either that or Loganwing armies. I personally use a combination of Loganwing terminators and missile launcher Long Fangs. The results have been rather one sided as I haven't lost a game in quite some time.

Seaward wrote:Every SW list I see these days seems to be built in the following manner:

Start with a Rune Priest or two.

Add several GH squads.

ML Long Fangs to taste.

Add a dash of TWC and Thunderlord if you're so inclined.

It seems like half their codex doesn't get touched, and everyone pretty much ends up playing more or less the same list with wargear variations. Is that an issue, or am I missing all of the wild and crazy builds somehow?

And thats bad how?

It seems like there are certain optimal builds for each Codex, and people are using them. My buddies and I like to have more fun than just winning, so are just fielding what seems fluffy for our small games.

SW are not bland. They seem to be because there are strong builds and weak builds, just like every single army.

The problem comes because you only ever see the strong builds.

I would highly beg to differ about Space Wolves being bland.

Ever played Chaos Marines?

^ This. (aimed at Gwar, got ninja'ed by Shadowbrand)

On a non-friendly enviroment expect me to come with lots of Grey Hunters and make a melta-fest on the board.

If the game's just for fun I'd toy around with Blood Claw packs with Wolf Priest or even Canis Wolfborn (and no, Canis doesn't means wolf, so call him Wolf Wolfborn is more stupid than funny ^^)

Dark wrote:^ This. (aimed at Gwar, got ninja'ed by Shadowbrand)

On a non-friendly enviroment expect me to come with lots of Grey Hunters and make a melta-fest on the board.

If the game's just for fun I'd toy around with Blood Claw packs with Wolf Priest or even Canis Wolfborn (and no, Canis doesn't means wolf, so call him Wolf Wolfborn is more stupid than funny ^^)

Calling him Wolf Wolfborn is easier than calling him Genus That Includes Wolves, Dogs, and Jackals Wolfborn.

I use 6, 5-man Grey hunter Squads all in Razor backs(Half the Squads have Plasma, other half have melta; and Half the Backs have HB, other half have Ass-cannons)

With a Wolf Lord, WGBL, 4 Wolf Guard(attached to GH squads), A Dakka pred, and a Lone Wolf.

They are all Close fire-support/Counter-assault Gods(there is a thunder Hammer for every Squad except that which is led by the WGBL; Every Squad has a MotW, as does the WGBL+Lone Wolf, Every Squad has a Powerfist hidden in it)

Space Wolves aren't bland, the people playing them are though. It's the blinkered list-first people that gravitate towards the easiest lists to use and declare them the 'strong lists', and away from the lists that require strategic thoughts and declare them the 'weak lists'. This happens with every army, although it seems to be disappearing as 4th edition becomes an ever tenuous memory, people get a hang of the 5th edition rules, and people are noticing that you can't just plunk a netlist down and expect to win with it.

Seaward wrote:

Dark wrote:^ This. (aimed at Gwar, got ninja'ed by Shadowbrand)

On a non-friendly enviroment expect me to come with lots of Grey Hunters and make a melta-fest on the board.

If the game's just for fun I'd toy around with Blood Claw packs with Wolf Priest or even Canis Wolfborn (and no, Canis doesn't means wolf, so call him Wolf Wolfborn is more stupid than funny ^^)

Calling him Wolf Wolfborn is easier than calling him Genus That Includes Wolves, Dogs, and Jackals Wolfborn.

Easier doesn't equals funny, which was my point :p

Nurglitch wrote:Space Wolves aren't bland, the people playing them are though. It's the blinkered list-first people that gravitate towards the easiest lists to use and declare them the 'strong lists', and away from the lists that require strategic thoughts and declare them the 'weak lists'. This happens with every army, although it seems to be disappearing as 4th edition becomes an ever tenuous memory, people get a hang of the 5th edition rules, and people are noticing that you can't just plunk a netlist down and expect to win with it.

But then how can anyone other than someone who has put time and effort into their armylist win a game? . . . =p

I swear half the time I just pick a bunch of models that look cool, and/or make sense . . . and then try and make some kind of competitive list out of them. Obviously not tournament lists, but fun lists. For tournaments I generally put some effort into actually thinking about what is the best stuff to use =p

Oshova

Oshova:

List-building is nice, but the real skill comes from know what to do with the assets you have on the board, particularly if they aren't the assets you want. It drives me nuts on the Tactics board when people just suggest units and configurations of units without offering suggestions for what to do with the unit, basically turning a Tactics post into an Army List post.

Nurglitch wrote:Space Wolves aren't bland, the people playing them are though. It's the blinkered list-first people that gravitate towards the easiest lists to use and declare them the 'strong lists', and away from the lists that require strategic thoughts and declare them the 'weak lists'. This happens with every army, although it seems to be disappearing as 4th edition becomes an ever tenuous memory, people get a hang of the 5th edition rules, and people are noticing that you can't just plunk a netlist down and expect to win with it.

I'm not so sure. If you want an assault unit, I don't know why you'd ever take anything but TWC; ML Long Fangs simply seem too good to pass up; etc. The one variation that was pointed out was the Loganwing, but that's really all I can think of.

Dark wrote:
Easier doesn't equals funny, which was my point :p

Of course it's funny. It's a great example of how over-the-top pants-on-head stupid the naming conventions for characters, wargear, etc. are in the SW codex. Wolf Wolfborn rides a Thunderwolf. He's accompanied by two wolves. He uses two wolf claws. He has a wolf tail necklace and a wolftooth talisman. He shouts about the Wolftime and has Saga of the Wolfkin. We did all this is in the Canis thread. It's just dumb.

True there Nurglitch. I meant to make it clearer that was a part of my lst building. But I'd completely forgotten to mention the in-battle tactical thinking that goes on as well. As obviously you have to face each race, and each different build of each race differently. Whether majorly different or just slightly different. This is why experience makes those GT Champs different from the rest.

Oshova

Seaward:

Consider terrain. It's come up elsewhere, but people don't seem to play with enough terrain, particularly line of sight blocking terrain. I must say though people are noticing that Long Fangs, for example, are particularly static: they don't even have the Bolters and Bolt Pistols that Devastators get and they don't have Combat Tactics. Thunder Wolf Cavalry are, to put a fine point on it, a large basket of eggs like Nob Bikers: I think they're only popular because people persist in ignoring the utility of Pinning weapons. Grey Hunters are understandable: Blood Claws lack both their flexibility and ability.

Nurglitch wrote:Seaward:

Thunder Wolf Cavalry are, to put a fine point on it, a large basket of eggs like Nob Bikers: I think they're only popular because people persist in ignoring the utility of Pinning weapons.

Are they, though? They're honestly not that expensive; running them in groups of three with a TH and a Storm Shield or two isn't that expensive, and they're quite durable. I think their killing potential is a little overestimated, but it's hard to argue with their toughness and mobility. I just don't see another SW assault unit that comes anywhere close. Assault Terminators are definitely better killers, but they require transport, and they're more expensive to begin with, so the list becomes much more focused around them, whereas TWC can be plugged in just about anywhere.

Seaward:

By my count three Thunderwolf Cavalry models with a Thunder Hammer and two Storm Shields would weigh in very close to a Land Raider. That would be six T5 Sv3+/Iv3+ wounds, without the organic Cv4+ or Feel No Pain that Nob Bikers get, Ld8, and so on. They're going to go down to massed firepower. You'll get four more wounds per squad for both Swiftclaws and Skyclaws, at an equivalent cost for Swiftclaws and 60pts less for Skyclaws. Swiftclaws can also shoot, and Skyclaws are more mobile.

Nurglitch wrote:Seaward:

By my count three Thunderwolf Cavalry models with a Thunder Hammer and two Storm Shields would weigh in very close to a Land Raider. That would be six T5 Sv3+/Iv3+ wounds, without the organic Cv4+ or Feel No Pain that Nob Bikers get, Ld8, and so on. They're going to go down to massed firepower. You'll get four more wounds per squad for both Swiftclaws and Skyclaws, at an equivalent cost for Swiftclaws and 60pts less for Skyclaws. Swiftclaws can also shoot, and Skyclaws are more mobile.

Naked Skyclaws, perhaps. Skyclaws also can't play wound allocation games; they take a wound, a model goes, and they'll drop just as easily to massed firepower. Everything eventually dies to massed firepower.

Also, how do you figure that jump infantry are more mobile than fleet cavalry?

Playing wound allocations games doesn't really work if all you have are six wounds, and that Iv3+ isn't going to help if the incoming fire is AP4+.

Jump Infantry can go over obstacles, while Cavalry is stuck going through them.

Nurglitch wrote:Playing wound allocations games doesn't really work if all you have are six wounds, and that Iv3+ isn't going to help if the incoming fire is AP4+.

Sure it does. And that AP4+ fire is going to get to hit them exactly once before they're in combat in most cases, given their potential 24" charge range. A Tac squad Rapid Firing on them statistically throws 1.11 wounds on them a turn; four Tac squads could actually cause them to lose a model. And if someone chooses to ToF a 240 point unit with everything they've got, I'd call that a win even if every last model in it dies. It's not a huge point investment, and it takes a lot of shooting to bring down.

Jump Infantry can go over obstacles, while Cavalry is stuck going through them.

True, but I'd say Fleet makes up for it.

Don't get me wrong; I think TWC are an immensely stupid concept, no matter how good their statline is, and I'd love to see a workable Skyclaw list, as I've always been fond of jump packers. I just don't think it's viable with Space Wolves, as the Skyclaws really do need a Wolf Priest to make them effective, and by the time you add on that extra 125, you're starting to look at a bad return on investment.

Seaward:

Actually at minimum you'd only need to cause four hits to the squad to remove a model, since there's only three. One model takes two hits and luck willing could fail both saves. The whole 'complex-unit' thing tends to throw a bit of a curve into the usual stats since low AP hits can be allocated to the Iv3+ models, but wrapping any number of hits higher than 3 around the unit is going to make them lose models.

While they may be able to get a first turn charge against infiltrators or stuff that moved up in its own player turn 1, consider how combat works in 5th edition. The Thunderwolf Cavalry mauls a Combat Squad or an Infantry Squad, or a mob of Gretchin, and then gets shot point blank by the rest of the gong show. That's if no Space Marines make it out of the combat alive and shoot at them. That's if they aren't pinned, bogged down by terrain, or simply shot up by the units with massed firepower.

At least Terminators will have the Sv2+ going for them.

That's just tournament armies. Most tournament armies are boring, repetitive, and seldom fun to fight. I played against a Razorback/small GH squad/Thunderwolf lord/long fang spam list and it really wasn't fun to play against.

My Space Wolf armies usually have a good core of Grey Hunters, some Wolf Guard Terminators, and either a lord in Terminator armor or on a Thunderwolf, just because I own the Canis Wolfborn model. There's a lot of stuff in there to make a characterful army, and a lot of really good units. People just gravitate towards the same 4 choices time and again when they want to cheese the system and just win games.

Ork Lootas > TWC

I don't see why people the=ink TWC are so invincible with the shields. Yes it stops ap 1&2, but being T5, its probably better to forgo attempting to ID the models with 1 shot melta guns and just bury them with massed fire.

They're yet another 90% identical SPESS MUHREENS chapter, of course they're bland. Only amazing thing about the entire codex is the fact that it IS a codex. Outside of ludicrous Wolfy McWolfenstein VonLupus Canid The Third (wolf) fluff there's nothing in the army that couldn't have been portrayed in the 'vanilla' marine codex plus two or three pages of specific rules and a few new weapons.

SumYungGui wrote:They're yet another 90% identical SPESS MUHREENS chapter, of course they're bland. Only amazing thing about the entire codex is the fact that it IS a codex. Outside of ludicrous Wolfy McWolfenstein VonLupus Canid The Third (wolf) fluff there's nothing in the army that couldn't have been portrayed in the 'vanilla' marine codex plus two or three pages of specific rules and a few new weapons.

Lolwhut?

Apart from, ya know, all the new weapons, sagas, units etc etc.

If anything BA should have been tacked onto the SM codex, but they felt bad as they had never had a full codex before.

What is so bland about space Vikings with a touch of non-twilight(damn thee twilight!) Lycanthrope?

I think both BA, and SW's force org, armament, and unique units are enough to have their own codex. DA now that should be rolled into SM. Would be very easy to make a couple special characters than would encompass all their rules.

Not really. Ravenwing Squadrons, with the combined Bike and Land Speeder models are unique. Same with Deathwing Terminators being both Fearless and able to mix weapons. Then there's Rites of Battle on the Captains, although they lost that in the Blood Angels codex, which is a pity.

Nurglitch wrote:Not really. Ravenwing Squadrons, with the combined Bike and Land Speeder models are unique. Same with Deathwing Terminators being both Fearless and able to mix weapons. Then there's Rites of Battle on the Captains, although they lost that in the Blood Angels codex, which is a pity.

Providing the fluff, rules and pictures of both Ravenwing and Deathwing could have been done in about 5 pages in Codex:SM. I bought the DA codex thinking they might get something cool, but they didn't.