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.

Hello again fellow dakka dakka members, I have been bugged lately with the amount of flak given to me over my beloved space wolves army for the fact that the rules are apparently poorly written/broken/OP/etc which is a bit disheartening because I have been playing space wolves since the last codex came out. I love the lore, the backstory, the books and the entire ideal of "in the 41st mellenium, there can still be heros". I love being able to play a human army that sets itself out from the rest as a group that still fights for what is right and not just because some high lord decrees it. Unfortunately however, it seems as though in recent times that the space wolves, and indeed many other armies have taken on a new feature. Cheese, and lots of it. Long fang spams, logan wing, dragio wing, necron flying circuses. The works really. It just seems such a shame that armies are now getting flak because of a new codex. Something that costantly happens to me. "Broken wolves" and "Logan's cheaters" is what I hear under the grumble of some gamer's breath when I agree to a game against them.

It just annoys me to know that I am labled as someone who got the army to play the broken rules and WIN CONSTANTLY as it seems to be even though that isn't the case at all. I know the rules of the new codex are quite frankly bad, and I know I won't see a codex change for my beloved wolves for a long time to come. I am a fluff player however. I only ever played a cheese list once which was logan wing with nijal and hammers/axes/Heavy flamers for a 1000 points and even said to the other player (who was a competive dark eldar army) that I would probably loose. It was only then afterwards I found out that logan wing was one of the big "CHEESE" deals in 40k. To which I dropped the list and went back to my older ways of realistically written army lists.

When the new codex for space wolves was released I was instantly going for it. Thinking that it was a new day dawning when I would be able to choose new options. Of course I had the usual ups and downs when flicking through it. It wasn't until a few weeks afterwards that it started. The flak against the codex.

My question is, to greyknights players, blood angles, necrons, Imperial guard (Which I am also very fond of), and any others. How do you feel about this when your army becomes "the" hated army of the month or years to come even. How do you deal with this? What are your feelings towards the codex writers when this happens?

If you don't want to be labelled a cheese player, and if it actually matters what people think about you to that degree, then don't spam the cheesy units in the army - don't take more than 2 units of Long Fangs, don't run more than 1 Rune Priest and don't take Thunderwolves at all (I'd say don't take 4+ units of Grey Hunters... but Blood Claws kind of suck, no getting around it). Alternatively, take some of the fluffier, but less-seen units available: a non-Thunderwolf Lord, Wolf Priests, Sky/Swift-claws, etc.

In the end, the way you play can determine how people see your army as well. Just be a nice, non-WAAC guy and make sure you're not running an over the top cheese list and you should be fine.

I don't play the cheesy lists.

My necron army is modeled after an awakening tomb world, with a ctan shard causing earth quakes while crypteks tags units with tremorstaves and spiders lead swarms of scarabs popping up from the ground. My IG list is a skitarii detachment with techpriests fielding deathstrike missiles and upgeared foot veterans. My wolves is multiple small melée units with no razorbacks or long fangs.

Prove to people you're not an OP army, and you're not. A lovingly painted or even modeled force with a non- optimised list should silence any whining. Put flayed ones on the table. Send in a screaming detachment of skyclaws, eager to prove their worth and gain glory. Send off the enemy commander with a perfectly placed shot by a ratling.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just avoid the fallacy of the sobbing necron player who says "Why does everyone hate me, I never asked for this!" while taking out a half dozen scythes.

What is weird for me though is that in order to play friendly in warhammer 40k you have to limit yourself from choosing certain units on the account that they are OP. To quote myself in the logan wing, I did loose and I wasn't even playing it properly as the maxium Meta lists are. What with combi weapons left right and centre on everything with drop pods.

I do have a unit of thunderwolves for the simple thing that I love the models, I sometimes do play a thunderwolf lord with wolf guard riding wolves as a sort of Theodin's charge senario but your telling me that they are also cheese units? I am also a bit annoyed at the fact of how much flak the rune priests get for what I can see is an OP ability. 24" denial on 4's... gee that isn't going to piss off anyone. And yet again it is a unit that I love for the fluff. The fact that quite a few of the units I like for fluff (I love nearly all the units including bloodclaws with their ws3 chainsword attacks, bless them for trying...) are infact cheesey is just annoying. But the fact that you might be labled as a cheese player for taking it in an otherwise fluffy army is annoying. It's bad enough space wolves are under the stigma of MEQ.

Logan-wing isn't one of the cheesier lists, you should be fine running that. Thunderwolves are typically seen as cheese, yes.

Ultimately though, play how you want to. I wouldn't worry too much if someone thinks your army's cheap, just make sure you ensure that both you and your opponent have fun and that's all that should really matter.

I merly ignore such folks, let them whine all they want. Play what YOU like and not what some snotty person who cant handle a loss, as for myself I play IG and have been granted this particulary titel many times, but I hardly care. Any list can be beaten as long as you ar a somewhat sane person.

But spam is no fun though, I rarely include more than two LRBT and vets are seldome seen in my army, I prefer to run lists that makes the game a enjoebal experiencde and not just a dice rolling excersise.

Sounds like youre doing things fine, you can't please everyone. While it's perfectly understandable to feel frustrated playing against powerful codices, especially when yours is lacking, but there's not a realistic way to avoid it. Let say, for example, my Tyranids go from UP to OP with their new Codex. Would I drop Tyranids? Hell no. Would some people complain? Yep. What could I do about it? Don't run a spammy WAAC list. Would some people still complain? Yep.

The thing I'm curious about is at what point will armies like SW and IG no longer seem OP? Once Tau and Eldar codices are released (hopefully improved) most of the armies will be newer than IG or SW, if they're not already.

When the new C:SM or Eldar arrives, or possibly when the new Dark Angels codex comes out

Gather their tears of hatred in a goblet and drink deep of their impotent sorrow.

Really, people getting pissed at armies in general is stupid. Necrons, in a balanced sense, are not OP. Taking half dozen of one unit is. Spam in general is really what's cheesy. If your list can be described as "nothing but a deathstar of-" or "-spam", then as mr. Foxworthy might put it, you might be TFG.

You love the units for the units though. I'm certainly not going to get pissy about a lovingly painted group of thunderwolves taken because that's the arny's fluff, or a rune priest leading the wolves. It's when people bring as much Jaws as possible, or long fang razorback spam all over the place that I might decline to play.

I know your pain... Ive an orks list that is only bikes. 3 squads of 7 normal bikers, and 2 squads of 5 nob bikes, with warboss and wazdakka...

I didnt even think it'd be overpowered at all, coz when i came up with it i was new once again to 40k...

But now playing my friends, the SM player will always complain how OP orks are, and the CSM player will make 'assassination squads' to instant kill my nob bikers. In 1v1v1, it pretty much ends up 2v1 :/

Just don't play cheesy lists. If people still complain, tell them to piss off.

Dragonzord wrote:
I know your pain... Ive an orks list that is only bikes. 3 squads of 7 normal bikers, and 2 squads of 5 nob bikes, with warboss and wazdakka...

I didnt even think it'd be overpowered at all, coz when i came up with it i was new once again to 40k...

But now playing my friends, the SM player will always complain how OP orks are, and the CSM player will make 'assassination squads' to instant kill my nob bikers. In 1v1v1, it pretty much ends up 2v1 :/

Your not even playing anywhere close to an OP army, and for the Ork codex, that is a fairly weak list (not a bad one, just a lot of armies can hit you hard, then what is left cannot pull out a win)

@the OP

People do not like Space Wolves because they have the best of all worlds in a lot of departments, if you do not take advantage of those units you should be fine

Example:

Scary Wolves that make people not want to play;

Wolf Lord on Thunder Wolf

Jaws/Lightning runepriests x 2-3

5 Grey hunters in razorback x 4

2 units of Thunder Wolves

2 units of Long Fangs with Missiles

Space Wolves that I would be fine with (I can't answer for others)

1x rune priest with Jaws/living lightning

Ulrik the Slayer with a Wolf Guard Retinue

Wolf Lord on Thunderwolf with a Thunderwolf retinue

A few units of Grey Hunters

A unit or 2 of Long Fangs


Space Wolf players have a lot of good units, spamming them is not flavourful, not fun for others, and just generally makes the game less enjoyable. A Space Wolves list should have a lot of variety, not a copy paste strategy where the player says "My Long Fangs and Grey Hunters might not do exactly what I want them too, so I will bring 3x the number of them, because I can, and then it is guaranteed to work!"

Space Wolves are not over powered, they are slightly undercosted, and many units are VERY overused.

DONUTSREVENGED wrote:What is weird for me though is that in order to play friendly in warhammer 40k you have to limit yourself from choosing certain units on the account that they are OP.

Yup, you either need different units in your list or different opponents on the other side of the table. 40k is a social game. Either you conform to the norms, or you will be endlessly pressured to conform to the norms. The only other way to avoid peer pressure is to change who your peers are.

 Lokas wrote:
Gather their tears of hatred in a goblet and drink deep of their impotent sorrow.

This sounds like the best option given so far.

Really, don't worry about them. If you are someone who enjoys playing for Fluff reasons than you should be fine..even when using SW. However just realize that your army does get a lot that some less fortunate armies don't. If I play a Black Tide list with my Templars, I should realistically never beat a foot oriented SW list. They can have more marines (15 points instead of my 16), they get free weapons at 10 marines (I do not) and they all have Counter Attack. That means you outnumber me, out shoot me, and almost match my melee output EVEN if I get the charge off. I put a small bit of blame on the SW codex (as Vanilla marines cannot do this to my BT army) and a small bit of blame on the BT codex. However, I always will play SW players and I won't back down, as it's a dice game and the chance for victory is there (just slim compared to other match ups). If you are friendly and not playing a spammy list, than I think you will be fine.

 Lord Magnus wrote:

Dragonzord wrote:
I know your pain... Ive an orks list that is only bikes. 3 squads of 7 normal bikers, and 2 squads of 5 nob bikes, with warboss and wazdakka...

I didnt even think it'd be overpowered at all, coz when i came up with it i was new once again to 40k...

But now playing my friends, the SM player will always complain how OP orks are, and the CSM player will make 'assassination squads' to instant kill my nob bikers. In 1v1v1, it pretty much ends up 2v1 :/

Your not even playing anywhere close to an OP army, and for the Ork codex, that is a fairly weak list (not a bad one, just a lot of armies can hit you hard, then what is left cannot pull out a win)

I agree totally, i knew it wouldnt be very competitive when i made the list, just somethin fun... But keeps getting called OP coz ive not lost yet :/

I've even swapped out the normal bikers, and just replaced it with 60 boyz... and again, more 'overpowered ork' claims..

I don't really care for the bickering.

The Necron codex is nowhere near as broken as the GK codex. Can you make stupidly slowed lists? Yes, you certainly can. Flyerspam is overpowered and needs to be nerfed as soon as possible.

I, however, still play my Necron phalanx. Modified of course, with two supporting Ghost Arks. It might not be as effective as flyerspam, but it's a well-balanced all-comers list that works really well, even at tournaments.

The thing is that the Necron codex works so well because it has so many effective synergies. A normal unit of Necron Warriors? Won't do much. Supported by Ghost Arks and parts of the court to give them a better WBB save and melee defense? It suddenly becomes a viable unit.

A single Doomsday Ark? 175 points for a immobile piece of artillery that's open-topped? Hardly worth it. The same thing twin-linked? Puts some serious hurt out.

The Necron codex, for the most part, isn't a GK codex where everyone gets strong abilities / options at a way too low price. Necrons require its player to actually think about a good army composition, possible synergies, positioning etc.

Sure, there are WAAC a*******. Ignore them, don't play them. You decide who you play against. And at a tournament, speak to them. Ask them why they decided to build such a list, try to have a talk with them. If they should really turn out to be TFGs...ruin their game. Make it as least fun as possible, force them to play an unenjoyable game. Do not surrender, keep playing, carefully, slowly thinking what you're gonna do with those two remaining models...you get it.

A lot of butthurt comes from people that are still stuck to 5th tactics...vehicle spam, parking lots etc. Necrons perfectly counter those guys and I absolutely love to see them being so angry at me blowing their vehicles up left and right. Makes my day everytime...

Play the list you want. Your money, your hobby. No one needs to say anything or complain. Any list can be beaten so long as you don't play it WAAC. I don't even see the point in having an entire thread about this..?

Dragonzord wrote:

 Lord Magnus wrote:

Dragonzord wrote:
I know your pain... Ive an orks list that is only bikes. 3 squads of 7 normal bikers, and 2 squads of 5 nob bikes, with warboss and wazdakka...

I didnt even think it'd be overpowered at all, coz when i came up with it i was new once again to 40k...

But now playing my friends, the SM player will always complain how OP orks are, and the CSM player will make 'assassination squads' to instant kill my nob bikers. In 1v1v1, it pretty much ends up 2v1 :/

Your not even playing anywhere close to an OP army, and for the Ork codex, that is a fairly weak list (not a bad one, just a lot of armies can hit you hard, then what is left cannot pull out a win)

I agree totally, i knew it wouldnt be very competitive when i made the list, just somethin fun... But keeps getting called OP coz ive not lost yet :/

I've even swapped out the normal bikers, and just replaced it with 60 boyz... and again, more 'overpowered ork' claims..

I wish my 70 boys were enough to even kind of good without vehicles..

I get this too and its annoying i've always played spacewolves through each edition since 2nd i bought my first led minatures in 1996 and am still going strong with them now in plastic.

Apparently i was meant to know 16 years ago that in 5th and 6th they'd be "broken".

Its not like i even run meta lists i vary my lists quite alot, just the other week i took scouts for the first time since i came back into the hoby last year just to try outflank in 6th.

 Lokas wrote:
Gather their tears of hatred in a goblet and drink deep of their impotent sorrow.

This. Tell your opponents to stop whining, and play whatever army you feel like playing. Spam all you want, spam lists are just as fluffy as any other list.

Space Wolves are not over powered, they are slightly undercosted,

you realy think that the RP was slightliy undercosted in 5th or 6th ed ?

On the being OP stuff. Well good dex even when bad build[what for SW is realy hard to do] still can be carried just because of superior rules . One two squads are suppose to do the same , but one has both superior rules and costs less , then it doesnt matter if someone goes mad and puts a plasma and a melta in to the same squad.list will still work better then those out of bad dex.

Only thing I know is that codex or army books that GW called balanced or balancing were boring to play , weak and got outdated ultra fast . The overpowered ones on the other hand were good for years . Choice of picking one of the two is simple or at least should be , if it wasnt for people lieing to noobs about the whole "play with what you want" or "cool models are good" etc . And I understand those new guys . I mean If I spent so much money and an army and it would be crap , then I would hate the dudes with good armies too and I would be doing everything to either depower the good armies or make the games as bad for them as it is for me . normal human reaction .

If you're opponents are bitching about your army and its NOT cause you act like an donkey-cave when you play, start finding some new people to play with. Being TFG has nothing to do with your army, it has everything to do with your attitude when you play. I've seen plenty of people bring noncompetitive fluffy lists that are whiny dicks throughout the whole game, and I've likewise seen plenty of draigowing, nob bikers, etc players who are nothing but friendly and courteous.

 Sigvatr wrote:


Sure, there are WAAC a*******. Ignore them, don't play them. You decide who you play against. And at a tournament, speak to them. Ask them why they decided to build such a list, try to have a talk with them. If they should really turn out to be TFGs...ruin their game. Make it as least fun as possible, force them to play an unenjoyable game. Do not surrender, keep playing, carefully, slowly thinking what you're gonna do with those two remaining models...you get it.

What?

I'm a tournament player and if you approach me with a "Why aren't you fluffy?" You question, I'm going to be super puzzled. And then you go on to promote being a totally ***bag to your opponent including slow play, which is generally illegal in tournaments. Go behave at an invitational like that and see how far you get.

I play Wolves. In my tourney list, you'll see Rune Priests, Grey Hunters, and all the long fangs. I have always taken Lone Wolves, too. I have my own take on how I play and I started playing 40k in a group that was being your A Game or go home. Now I'm in area where that isn't the case... But I get folks like you who complain, so I bring fluffy, fun lists and then get hosed by competitive list... Lolwat.

The best units in the Codex are also the ones that are the most Wolfy.

I so play Necrons and Daemons. I like building smash lists and it's kind of annoying that I get scorned for enjoying a game the way I want to play it. I hobby and read the books, too. I enjoyed the video games. I love the fiction a lot. If you approach me and want a soft battle, okay, but if plop down a series of optimized units and call it soft, I'd be mad.

Label dudes like me WAAC, but I want a hard game. Bring the worst and ill fight it and adapt my list to stay both allcomers and still blast you away. It's what I like.

The thing is that you have to play what you like, what calls to you and what you feel is fun...because that's what this is after all, a hobby where we have fun. You're going to find that people will find things to get upset about no matter what, especially if they're losing.

I play Nids, Dark Eldar and Eldar. Guess which one gets the LEAST amount of gak? The Dark Eldar. Why? Because they see the armorless troops, the open topped vehicles and think they're easy to defeat. By comparrison I field my Nids and people start bitching..

Ask anyone else and they'll tell you that Nids are laughable right now and that DE are one of the top choices to play.

I didn't pick them for the ability to beat people, I picked them because I love the story and the look.

Other thing is, that if you're good with what you got or you're just good tactically, it doesn't matter what you field or what they field, you'll be able to think around the corners.

Haters are gonna hate...as they say

So long as your playing a space wolf list that isn't maxed on longfangs, jaws spam, or any of their other common tricks, you shouldn't be hated on.

If you are, however, then suck it up or pack up.

Makumba wrote:

Space Wolves are not over powered, they are slightly undercosted,

you realy think that the RP was slightliy undercosted in 5th or 6th ed ?

On the being OP stuff. Well good dex even when bad build[what for SW is realy hard to do] still can be carried just because of superior rules . One two squads are suppose to do the same , but one has both superior rules and costs less , then it doesnt matter if someone goes mad and puts a plasma and a melta in to the same squad.list will still work better then those out of bad dex.

This
I sometimes find now that no matter what list I throw out it is very easy to win most of the time. I don't know if it is just because I am good at strategy on the fly or not but I could come up with lists that would seemingly make a TFG's head explode and still scrape some sort of win most of the time. I hate winning, I mean it is nice when you win when effort is put in and you actually achieve your goals and push through but when you always win all the time i find I don't learn anything. Loosing is how we learn. I dunno if it is me... Perhaps it is my three friends that I usually play games with on every saterday. They have a tau army allied to blood angles, tyranids and greyknights/ necrons. I mean they don't exactly run bad lists from what I could see from their codexs, in fact the tyranid player is a bit mock TFG sometimes with the way he constructs lists. But every time we play a game it usually ends up with me winning... I mean the grey knights player even did draigo wing and purifier armies to try and beat the space wolves and still somehow lost which didn't make sense as I only have one squad of long fangs and a Bjorn walker as long ranged weaponry. It just makes me feel like every time I win that I am pushing my friends away or getting them pissed off. I mean that is why I started guard and ran an infantry guard army that was a bit better in terms of win/loss. But I long to play space wolves. Perhaps someone here could suggest a list to me for wolf and guard allies? Or a wolf list that is fun for both sides?

Heh. I've played GK since they were Daemonhunters. The hate that suddenly sprang up after the new codex is kind of disturbing, really. I mean, it's a toy soldiers game, for feths sake.

The one friend of my who was most obnoxious about it was largely quieted when I offered him my codex and army for a game, and I opted to play Nids, which was another army I have laying around that I play once in a blue moon for fun. In case you don't know, it's largely considered horrible, especially in 5th edition (which is when we had this match)...

When he was down to nothing but Coteaz and a henchman squad hiding in a ruin protected by camping a land raider inside the bottom floor, I heard less complaining afterwards.