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.

I've never really looked into the SW and they seem VERY powerful. Why is this?

Their base troops are noticeably undercosted and have tremendous utility. Their devastators can bring 5x missile launchers and a leader, and split fire for only 140 points. They have arguably the best counter-charge unit in 40k. Rune Priests are also very undercosted and have exceptional utility.

Basically, Space Wolves have an answer for just about anything you can throw at them. It's not that they're really overpowered at any one thing- it's that they're about a 8.5/10 at EVERYTHING.

Their troops get a ton of very cheap equipment options, like free meltaguns for grey hunters, half priced missile launchers for devastators, etc.

Plus they get a ton of special rules for absolutely no cost. Heightened senses for rerolling night fight, countercharge which means they are never at a tactical disadvantage for charging. Which means they suffer no penalty for sitting there rapid firing instead of charging..

Wolves are not "so good". Its just that two armies that they constantly get compared to are not so good.

SW are no better than IG, BA, GK, DE, and Necrons

However, since they are marines they get compared to Vanilla marines which any of the above mention codexs make the vanilla book a little weak. They also get compared to the Chaos codex because they too are marines and even have the same load out as their troops. But the Chaos codex is gak in most other areas so again, SW seem overly powerful.

And that is just the way it is. SW and all codexs that came after them (excluding Nids, sorry bugs but its the truth) have benefited from the massive codex creep that IG presented.

I agree it seems every codex after the newest IG the armies have been severely pumped up.The only player I have right now is SW and I'm BA so... me charging him is a double ended sword. Except for FNP when/if we do larger battles. We're supposed to play this weekend with a 500 point match.

Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon choice, but have a close combat weapon and a couple of abilities.

Rune Priests are expensive, but extremely awesome.

Long Fangs.... well long fangs are a little OP.

All of the above and their scouts are stronger than others' scouts.

Emerett wrote:Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon choice, but have a close combat weapon and a couple of abilities.

Rune Priests are expensive, but extremely awesome.

Long Fangs.... well long fangs are a little OP.

Long fangs are not overpowered. The missile launcher doesn't magically become AP1 in their hands. They are however undercosted. If the MLs were 16 points or so each there wouldn't be quite as much a call of OP.

And when compared to some of the other HS in the game they really don't put out any more hurt than any others.

Jayden63 wrote:

Emerett wrote:Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon choice, but have a close combat weapon and a couple of abilities.

Rune Priests are expensive, but extremely awesome.

Long Fangs.... well long fangs are a little OP.

Long fangs are not overpowered. The missile launcher doesn't magically become AP1 in their hands. They are however undercosted. If the MLs were 16 points or so each there wouldn't be quite as much a call of OP.

And when compared to some of the other HS in the game they really don't put out any more hurt than any others.

And as well all know the ability to split fire means nothing

Jayden63 wrote:

Emerett wrote:Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon choice, but have a close combat weapon and a couple of abilities.

Rune Priests are expensive, but extremely awesome.

Long Fangs.... well long fangs are a little OP.

Long fangs are not overpowered. The missile launcher doesn't magically become AP1 in their hands. They are however undercosted. If the MLs were 16 points or so each there wouldn't be quite as much a call of OP.

And when compared to some of the other HS in the game they really don't put out any more hurt than any others.

Undercosted, is the equivalent to OP.

Jayden63 wrote:Wolves are not "so good". Its just that two armies that they constantly get compared to are not so good.

SW are no better than IG, BA, GK, DE, and Necrons

However, since they are marines they get compared to Vanilla marines which any of the above mention codexs make the vanilla book a little weak. They also get compared to the Chaos codex because they too are marines and even have the same load out as their troops. But the Chaos codex is gak in most other areas so again, SW seem overly powerful.

And that is just the way it is. SW and all codexs that came after them (excluding Nids, sorry bugs but its the truth) have benefited from the massive codex creep that IG presented.

Exceedingly well put! You win!

Zakiriel wrote:Zakiriel
2012/03/06 15:24:13     Subject: Re:Why Are Space Wolves so "good?"
All of the above and their scouts are stronger than others' scouts.

SW scouts are also elites, not troops....

Was that sarcasm? Because splitting fire does wonders against AV 11 mechspam.


Anyway, to the OP: BA & SW are very well-suited against each other. Neither army will consistently table the other, and both scale down to 500 points very nicely. Just be sure to take advantage of FNP and your fast vehicles in order to give you an edge.

Grey Hunter advantages:
- cheap upgrades including meltaguns, power toy/fist & wolf standards among the best options.
- 'free' additional special weapon when at 10 strong.
- rhino or razorback dedicated transport.
- come with bolter, bolt pistol, grenades, atsknf like all other loyalist marines, plus added extras like a ccw, counter-attack, acute senses and the like.
- a point cheaper than a tactical marine

Grey Hunter disadvantages:
- lose combat tactics/chapter tactics. (the latter can be utterly huge when you consider you don't get army-wide twin-linked meltas or 'fleeting' hammernators!)
- do not have 'combat squads' rule.
- cannot take a heavy weapon.
- must pay through the nose for a sergeant equivalent & use-up an Elites slot to do so!
- adding a wolf guard pack leader means you can't take 2x special weapons in a rhino since you'll have 11 guys in the squad.

Pretty damn even on the trade-off really. Sure, Grey Hunters are much better in an agressive playstyle, but they lack the full tactical utility of all other basic marine squads, and they won't get perks like FnP + furious charge bubbles or twin-linked meltaguns/flamers and such.



The idea that Long Fangs are OP is even funnier... Sure, a dev squad equivalent, that focuses almost all your long-ranged big guns into a tiny squad with 0 ablative wounds!

By turn 2, you should have something in range to open-up on them. Otherwise, perhaps it's time to look into all those deep striking squads that are the death of small units like Long Fangs. Hell, I've done-in a missilefange squad with all of 5 Pink Horrors! The unit is made of glass and can't take the punishment like even vanilla devies can!
I mean, if you can deal with the BA's FnP devastators for example, why can't you deal with a much squisher version of the same thing?!


SW's power lists are good and make them a top contender, but I honestly find IG, BA's and especially GK's to be far worse and much more of a rock/papper/scissors match-up than wolves.

Sasori wrote:

Jayden63 wrote:

Emerett wrote:Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon choice, but have a close combat weapon and a couple of abilities.

Rune Priests are expensive, but extremely awesome.

Long Fangs.... well long fangs are a little OP.

Long fangs are not overpowered. The missile launcher doesn't magically become AP1 in their hands. They are however undercosted. If the MLs were 16 points or so each there wouldn't be quite as much a call of OP.

And when compared to some of the other HS in the game they really don't put out any more hurt than any others.

Undercosted, is the equivalent to OP.

maybe it's plaitting hairs, but there is a difference, although often it's moot.

Overpowered simply means the effect is too powerful such that it can unbalance a game. Undercosted just means that it is cheap enough that it will give a distinct advantage. For example, I often argue that Mephiston is overpowered. That doesn't mean that if his already-inflated price tag was higher he wouldn't still be overpowered. The fact is that a single model has a list of abilities that reads like a fanboy's wishlist. Price, while ubiquitous, isn't a factor into the claim that I'm making.

Whereas to say that ML Long Fangs are undercosted is exactly correct. They are not so powerful such that they can unbalance a game; however they ought to cost 5 or 6 points more per model.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Experiment 626 wrote:Grey Hunter advantages:
- cheap upgrades including meltaguns, power toy/fist & wolf standards among the best options.
- 'free' additional special weapon when at 10 strong.
- rhino or razorback dedicated transport.
- come with bolter, bolt pistol, grenades, atsknf like all other loyalist marines, plus added extras like a ccw, counter-attack, acute senses and the like.
- a point cheaper than a tactical marine

Grey Hunter disadvantages:
- lose combat tactics/chapter tactics. (the latter can be utterly huge when you consider you don't get army-wide twin-linked meltas or 'fleeting' hammernators!)
- do not have 'combat squads' rule.
- cannot take a heavy weapon.
- must pay through the nose for a sergeant equivalent & use-up an Elites slot to do so!
- adding a wolf guard pack leader means you can't take 2x special weapons in a rhino since you'll have 11 guys in the squad.

Pretty damn even on the trade-off really. Sure, Grey Hunters are much better in an agressive playstyle, but they lack the full tactical utility of all other basic marine squads, and they won't get perks like FnP + furious charge bubbles or twin-linked meltaguns/flamers and such.



The idea that Long Fangs are OP is even funnier... Sure, a dev squad equivalent, that focuses almost all your long-ranged big guns into a tiny squad with 0 ablative wounds!

By turn 2, you should have something in range to open-up on them. Otherwise, perhaps it's time to look into all those deep striking squads that are the death of small units like Long Fangs. Hell, I've done-in a missilefange squad with all of 5 Pink Horrors! The unit is made of glass and can't take the punishment like even vanilla devies can!
I mean, if you can deal with the BA's FnP devastators for example, why can't you deal with a much squisher version of the same thing?!


SW's power lists are good and make them a top contender, but I honestly find IG, BA's and especially GK's to be far worse and much more of a rock/papper/scissors match-up than wolves.

While I agree with you on almost all of this, you left you the Mark of the Wulfen, which is insanely powerful for its pricetag. And Long Fangs do have one ablative wound per unit: the squad leader.

azazel the cat wrote:

Sasori wrote:

Jayden63 wrote:

Emerett wrote:Grey Hunters get no heavy weapon choice, but have a close combat weapon and a couple of abilities.

Rune Priests are expensive, but extremely awesome.

Long Fangs.... well long fangs are a little OP.

Long fangs are not overpowered. The missile launcher doesn't magically become AP1 in their hands. They are however undercosted. If the MLs were 16 points or so each there wouldn't be quite as much a call of OP.

And when compared to some of the other HS in the game they really don't put out any more hurt than any others.

Undercosted, is the equivalent to OP.

maybe it's plaitting hairs, but there is a difference, although often it's moot.

Overpowered simply means the effect is too powerful such that it can unbalance a game. Undercosted just means that it is cheap enough that it will give a distinct advantage. For example, I often argue that Mephiston is overpowered. That doesn't mean that if his already-inflated price tag was higher he wouldn't still be overpowered. The fact is that a single model has a list of abilities that reads like a fanboy's wishlist. Price, while ubiquitous, isn't a factor into the claim that I'm making.

Whereas to say that ML Long Fangs are undercosted is exactly correct. They are not so powerful such that they can unbalance a game; however they ought to cost 5 or 6 points more per model.

When I see the term "Overpowered" I imagine it as it's too good for it's points value.

I see where you are coming from though. The only thing I can think off the top of my head, that's considered "Op" that a price increase wouldn't fix, would be fortitude.

I thought that the internet proclaimed space wolves passé since grey knights were released.

azazel the cat wrote:
maybe it's plaitting hairs, but there is a difference, although often it's moot.

Overpowered simply means the effect is too powerful such that it can unbalance a game. Undercosted just means that it is cheap enough that it will give a distinct advantage. For example, I often argue that Mephiston is overpowered. That doesn't mean that if his already-inflated price tag was higher he wouldn't still be overpowered. The fact is that a single model has a list of abilities that reads like a fanboy's wishlist. Price, while ubiquitous, isn't a factor into the claim that I'm making.

Whereas to say that ML Long Fangs are undercosted is exactly correct. They are not so powerful such that they can unbalance a game; however they ought to cost 5 or 6 points more per model.

I always figured the cheapness of the Long Fang weapons was also a 'discount' because the wolves don't get those 5 wound heavy weapons that all other marines get with their combat squad abilities... I mean, that's what really made the min/maxing of the 4th ed 'dexes so powerfull - the ability to take 2-3 squads of what was basically a 3 wound heavy weapon + 3 wound special weapon.

Sure wolves can do similar with their GH meltaguns, but there's more safty in all other loyalits' ability to take 5 wound weapons that can safely stay 24"-36" away from most of their enemies!

azazel the cat wrote:While I agree with you on almost all of this, you left you the Mark of the Wulfen, which is insanely powerful for its pricetag. And Long Fangs do have one ablative wound per unit: the squad leader.

The attacks though from the mark are super random, so while sure, you could have an A7 monster, it's just as likely you'll end up with an A2 dud! Rending is a perk, but again, it's too random to be relied upon especially when you need it! And don't forget, the mark means he loses all his weapons - including his bolter!
I guess the main reason for taking the mark would be to increase the wound-allocation shinanigans, but really, for the cost you could simply add in another Grey Hunter instead!

As for the squad leader being an ablative wound? Sure, it saves a heavy weapon, but it removes the split fire ability at the same time, greatly reducing the damage potential of the squad! Again, people bemoan this as an OP ability, yet every other marine army does the same thing, only better because of combat squads! More pts, sure. But you can't kill 2 squads nearly as easily as you can kill 1 silly puppy!

The squad leader isn't exactly expenable considering that as soon as he's gone so is the squad's ability to split fire.

Jayden63 wrote:Wolves are not "so good". Its just that two armies that they constantly get compared to are not so good.

SW are no better than IG, BA, GK, DE, and Necrons

However, since they are marines they get compared to Vanilla marines which any of the above mention codexs make the vanilla book a little weak. They also get compared to the Chaos codex because they too are marines and even have the same load out as their troops. But the Chaos codex is gak in most other areas so again, SW seem overly powerful.

And that is just the way it is. SW and all codexs that came after them (excluding Nids, sorry bugs but its the truth) have benefited from the massive codex creep that IG presented.

So when do the rest of us get our codex creep? Why was there codex creep in the first place?

"Don't get upset about gameplay imbalance, it's just codex creep" is not a satisfactory promise. If anything, it's an indication of a systemic problem on the game design front. What if I don't want to play out of any of those codices? Is this going to be a problem in the next edition, with each subsequent release, to where the balance is going to be upset over and over again as they release new codices?

I still don't understand why they are releasing codices where troops are being released with more than 3 special rules, and HQ units are coming with at least 6 special rules apiece. Is it not time to reign some of this in?

azazel the cat wrote:Was that sarcasm? Because splitting fire does wonders against AV 11 mechspam.
.

Yes.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Pretty damn even on the trade-off really. Sure, Grey Hunters are much better in an agressive playstyle, but they lack the full tactical utility of all other basic marine squads, and they won't get perks like FnP + furious charge bubbles or twin-linked meltaguns/flamers and such.

Silliest statement in the thread!

Commisar Wolfie wrote:
The squad leader isn't exactly expenable considering that as soon as he's gone so is the squad's ability to split fire.

Be that as it may, he's always the first one to go, and the squad doesn't lose any missiles as a result.

TedNugent wrote:
So when do the rest of us get our codex creep? Why was there codex creep in the first place?

There was (is) codex creep because every writer wants their creation to be popular. It's just like back in the 90s, when every new writer for X-Men comics would create a new character that was overly powerful, until eventually half of the mutants in Marvel have all been members of the X-Men at some point.

From a more corporate standpoint; I'm sure writers get more work if they are responsible for a codex that surges in popularity (translation: sales) after they write it.

azazel the cat wrote:
There was (is) codex creep because every writer wants their creation to be popular. It's just like back in the 90s, when every new writer for X-Men comics would create a new character that was overly powerful, until eventually half of the mutants in Marvel have all been members of the X-Men at some point.

From a more corporate standpoint; I'm sure writers get more work if they are responsible for a codex that surges in popularity (translation: sales) after they write it.

Not to belabor this analogy, but Spiderman, Wolverine, and Batman have been some of the most enduring superheroes in literally the history of comic books. What do the three of those characters have in common? They're well written, and they're underpowered relative to the universe they inhabit.

TedNugent wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:
There was (is) codex creep because every writer wants their creation to be popular. It's just like back in the 90s, when every new writer for X-Men comics would create a new character that was overly powerful, until eventually half of the mutants in Marvel have all been members of the X-Men at some point.

From a more corporate standpoint; I'm sure writers get more work if they are responsible for a codex that surges in popularity (translation: sales) after they write it.

Not to belabor this analogy, but Spiderman, Wolverine, and Batman have been some of the most enduring superheroes in literally the history of comic books. What do the three of those characters have in common? They're well written, and they're underpowered relative to the universe they inhabit.

not to just play Devil's Advocate, but Spiderman is super-strong, sticks to walls and has precognition. Batman has all of the money. All of it, and therefore infinite resources. And Wolverine is immortal.

No, underpowered is the guy that gets J. Jonah Jameson's coffee.

TedNugent wrote:

azazel the cat wrote:
There was (is) codex creep because every writer wants their creation to be popular. It's just like back in the 90s, when every new writer for X-Men comics would create a new character that was overly powerful, until eventually half of the mutants in Marvel have all been members of the X-Men at some point.

From a more corporate standpoint; I'm sure writers get more work if they are responsible for a codex that surges in popularity (translation: sales) after they write it.

Not to belabor this analogy, but Spiderman, Wolverine, and Batman have been some of the most enduring superheroes in literally the history of comic books. What do the three of those characters have in common? They're well written, and they're underpowered relative to the universe they inhabit.

Well written?? When was wolverine well written?? lol People liked spiderman because he was really pretty strong and had things the average person could identify with. Batman has a similar appeal like IG and interesting villains based on different psychosis. Wolverine was a horrible character from the get go. His super power is a crappy attitude and not dying. He's a horrid character and would appeal to people like the new op army appeals to power gamers and waac players.

Space wolves are popular cause people like the fluff and that it's also a strong army.

azazel the cat wrote:
not to just play Devil's Advocate, but Spiderman is super-strong, sticks to walls and has precognition. Batman has all of the money. All of it, and therefore infinite resources. And Wolverine is immortal.

No, underpowered is the guy that gets J. Jonah Jameson's coffee.

That's fine if you want to play Devil's Advocate.

Spiderman is super-strong, but he can't throw planets. In fact, he can get tossed around by the Rhino and beat up by Venom. He can "stick to walls," seriously? Okay, it's kind of cool, but it's not exactly earthshattering. My whole point was, yes, even though he is superpowered, he isn't like, say, Juggernaut, who can toss a passenger bus across a football field, or Galactus, who LITERALLY EATS fething PLANETS. Yes, Wolverine lives for a really long time due to his super healing powers, but he can't destroy an entire alien race like The Hulk. Yes, Batman....um....has a lot of money, but he cannot fly 20 times around the earth in a split second and punch the moon off its orbit like Superman.

The whole point is that these heroes are compelling, hence their popularity. Yes, they have superpowers, but that's not the point. The point is that they are well written. That's why they're popular. That's why Stan Lee is one of the greatest authors of comic books, it's because he actually creates compelling characters that have to triumph over adversity. It's not just "oh, darnit, kryptonite again. derp."

So, it goes like this. I show you three superheroes who don't have to rely on power creep to get attention. That demonstrates that even if superpowers are operative in part for their popularity, the aren't the sole element in what makes them commercially successful.

Plus, the two most recent Marvel comic book characters made into movies were Daredevil, who is literally a blind guy with very acute senses trained through sensory deprivation, and Captain America, a guy who was given a "Super strength serum" that heightened him to the maximum level of non-mutant human physical fitness. Oh, and Iron Man, a guy who wears a special combat suit.

So what is the point of talking about comic book characters when what I should be talking about is toy soldiers in a tabletop game? Well, I'll tell you. If the analogy carries, that means that an author could make a race of -compelling- characters that facilitate dynamic and interesting on-table combat, and people would buy it because it's fun to play. There's a thought.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Grey Hunter disadvantages:
1- lose combat tactics/chapter tactics. (the latter can be utterly huge when you consider you don't get army-wide twin-linked meltas or 'fleeting' hammernators!)
2- do not have 'combat squads' rule.
3- cannot take a heavy weapon.
4- must pay through the nose for a sergeant equivalent & use-up an Elites slot to do so!
5- adding a wolf guard pack leader means you can't take 2x special weapons in a rhino since you'll have 11 guys in the squad.

Just some nuance:


1- A relatively small loss, unless you build your army thinking of eventual doubles match-ups.
2- Point granted, though you can still take other units in the Dex to combat squad if you need to spread your guys around.
3- A bit of a moot point, as the unit is very geared toward being mobile and assault-ready. In addition, they are backed up by arguably the best heavy-weapons unit in the game.
4- Sargeants are pricey across the board for MeQ's, and Grey Hunters actually save points in their regular models to pay for their sergeant. Also, said sergeant can have some amazing gear!
5- Againt, point granted.

I'd say Grey Hunters could be 1 or even 2 points a piece pricier and people would still love the frak out of them.

Because their codex is stupidly overpowered that it's unbalanced, that's why.

Tadashi wrote:Because their codex is stupidly overpowered that it's unbalanced, that's why.

Congratulations!

You win the prize for being the first person in this thread to give a sweeping generalization as your opinion, and then fail to deliver a single fact or example to back it up!

I cannot wait to hear your acceptance speech.

azazel the cat wrote:

Tadashi wrote:Because their codex is stupidly overpowered that it's unbalanced, that's why.

Congratulations!

You win the prize for being the first person in this thread to give a sweeping generalization as your opinion, and then fail to deliver a single fact or example to back it up!

I cannot wait to hear your acceptance speech.

JOTWW...it is enough.