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.

The models we already have are mostly dope. Maybe a couple of our special characters, and all types of Blood Claw could use some help. Other than that, asking for anything more than genuine AA is just asking to be overpowered.

 Psienesis wrote:
A Penance Crusade for the dog's job they made of the mop-up of the First War of Armageddon.

Also, a clear statement on how many Space Wolves there are, roughly... and if it's more than 2K or so, an explanation of how they get that many with only 1 lightly-populated planet to recruit from.

I always saw it like this: Sure, it's only one planet, but it's a planet of badasses. It's like, you can only recruit from one ancient city from thousands of years ago... but that city is Sparta. The low population is counteracted by the fact that everyone on the planet is already halfway to Marine power.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Psy-Titan wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
Mostly, I want Thunderwolf Cavalry and Canis to just disappear. As in, they don't exist and never did.

yes. the models, fluff and the rules suck. they should go away.

Hey! I love TWC!
The fluff might be a bit silly, (okay, really silly,) but I like the models and rules.

Screw fearless, give 'em fear!
Their base points seem fine to me, but their upgrades are the kicker. Take the storm shields down 5 or 10 points, higher leadership, and I5 for the love of god. We're on a frikkin' wolf the size of a truck and Marines still hit at the same time? Really?

Martel732 wrote:

Col. Dash wrote:
My only request is to get rid of the f'ing stupid wolf cavalry. This is 40k, they have no business in space and the whole idea is like something a 5 year old concocted while touring Disney.

Exalted. Marines riding wolves are more duable than most marine tanks. Makes sense to me.

Exactly how are they more durable? I'm confused here. 2 T5 3+ wounds versus, say, a Rhino. (Note that the Rhino is the cheaper one in the equation.)
Lasguns: The Rhino is completely impervious, so the Thunderwolf Cavalry take more damage.
Boltguns: The Rhino is impervious on front and side armor, so the Thunderwolf Cavalry take more damage.
Sternguard Veteran Boltguns: Same as above, except the Thunderwolves are far worse off.
Heavy Bolters: Now we can finally hurt the Rhino. Assuming 3 hits, we'll cause half a hull point on the Rhino. Assuming three hits on Thunderwolves, you've got .5 wounds. Considering that Thunderwolves have one less 'Wound' than Rhinos, the Thunderwolves are worse off.
Baleflamers: Each Baleflamer shot has a 1/3 chance of wounding a Rhino, and a 1/36 5/6chance of killing it. Against a single Thunderwolf, (Though in real life you would get more than one hit,) it causes a wound 2/3rds of the time. Thunderwolves are worse off.
Against Autocannons: Assuming 2 hits against a Rhino, you'll usually cause 1 'Wound', and you have a 1/6 chance of killing it outright. Against Thunderwolves, you'll get about 2/3rds of a wound. Rhinos are worse off.
Against Meltaguns: As long as you're within Melta range, you'll blow up a Rhino about 4/10ths of the time, and cause a wound nearly all the time. Against Thunderwolves, you'll cause a wound 5/6ths of the time, but no instant death. Rhinos are worse off.
Against Lascannons: A wound on Rhinos 5/6ths of the time, and about 1/4 of the time you'll kill it outright. Against Thunderwolves, a wound 5/6ths of the time.
Lastly, against Orbital Bombardment: A wound on Rhinos all the time, instant death 1/3rd of the time. Against Thunderwolves, instant death 5/6ths of the time. Thunderwolves are worse off.

I'm not taking Cover into account, but Cover usually helps Rhinos a lot more than Thunderwolves, or else completely equally. (With the exception of S5 AP3).
And, this is assuming you take the cheapest tank in the Marine codex. That's for 15 points *less* than a Thunderwolf. Sure, the Thunderwolf could buy a 3+ Invuln, but then you could buy two and a half Rhinos for that cost. Or, you could compare it to most other Marine tanks, who will traditionally have more armor, making them even *harder* to kill.





As for the topic of Grey Hunters being better than MEQs: The reason they're better is because of their equipment, not their training. As far as 'Chapter Tactics' go, Counter-Assault and Acute Senses are our bit. That's fair. It's because we get two special weapons (Making our drop pods that much better, since we won't be taking Snap Shots to use them) and because we get a CCW at +1 ppm that make us more effective.

Martel732 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

Col. Dash wrote:
My only request is to get rid of the f'ing stupid wolf cavalry. This is 40k, they have no business in space and the whole idea is like something a 5 year old concocted while touring Disney.

Exalted. Marines riding wolves are more duable than most marine tanks. Makes sense to me.

Exactly how are they more durable? I'm confused here. 2 T5 3+ wounds versus, say, a Rhino. (Note that the Rhino is the cheaper one in the equation.)
Lasguns: The Rhino is completely impervious, so the Thunderwolf Cavalry take more damage.
Boltguns: The Rhino is impervious on front and side armor, so the Thunderwolf Cavalry take more damage.
Sternguard Veteran Boltguns: Same as above, except the Thunderwolves are far worse off.
Heavy Bolters: Now we can finally hurt the Rhino. Assuming 3 hits, we'll cause half a hull point on the Rhino. Assuming three hits on Thunderwolves, you've got .5 wounds. Considering that Thunderwolves have one less 'Wound' than Rhinos, the Thunderwolves are worse off.
Baleflamers: Each Baleflamer shot has a 1/3 chance of wounding a Rhino, and a 1/36 5/6chance of killing it. Against a single Thunderwolf, (Though in real life you would get more than one hit,) it causes a wound 2/3rds of the time. Thunderwolves are worse off.
Against Autocannons: Assuming 2 hits against a Rhino, you'll usually cause 1 'Wound', and you have a 1/6 chance of killing it outright. Against Thunderwolves, you'll get about 2/3rds of a wound. Rhinos are worse off.
Against Meltaguns: As long as you're within Melta range, you'll blow up a Rhino about 4/10ths of the time, and cause a wound nearly all the time. Against Thunderwolves, you'll cause a wound 5/6ths of the time, but no instant death. Rhinos are worse off.
Against Lascannons: A wound on Rhinos 5/6ths of the time, and about 1/4 of the time you'll kill it outright. Against Thunderwolves, a wound 5/6ths of the time.
Lastly, against Orbital Bombardment: A wound on Rhinos all the time, instant death 1/3rd of the time. Against Thunderwolves, instant death 5/6ths of the time. Thunderwolves are worse off.

I'm not taking Cover into account, but Cover usually helps Rhinos a lot more than Thunderwolves, or else completely equally. (With the exception of S5 AP3).
And, this is assuming you take the cheapest tank in the Marine codex. That's for 15 points *less* than a Thunderwolf. Sure, the Thunderwolf could buy a 3+ Invuln, but then you could buy two and a half Rhinos for that cost. Or, you could compare it to most other Marine tanks, who will traditionally have more armor, making them even *harder* to kill.





As for the topic of Grey Hunters being better than MEQs: The reason they're better is because of their equipment, not their training. As far as 'Chapter Tactics' go, Counter-Assault and Acute Senses are our bit. That's fair. It's because we get two special weapons (Making our drop pods that much better, since we won't be taking Snap Shots to use them) and because we get a CCW at +1 ppm that make us more effective.

You forgot scatter lasers, serpent shields, and missile pod broadsides. Go outside the crappy Imperial heavy weapon sandbox. Basically, it's the "swiss army gun" in 6th ed that makes marine tanks basically tissue paper.

Yes, GH are not the fail that are tactical squads. Your reasons are spot on, and summarized it in two sentences. Good job.

Fine, how's this:
Against low strength and good AP, Thunderwolves perform worse. Against high strength and bad AP, Rhinos perform worse. If you're complaining that anti-light-tank weapons are good against light tanks, then I don't know what to tell you, but in the broad spectrum of things, Thunderwolves are vulnerable to a lot more weapons and attacks than even cheap tanks are. Besides, there are a lot more boltguns/Pulse Rifles/gauss blasters/Shootas/devourer rifles than there are missile launchers, death rays, missile pods, and Rokkits.

Martel732 wrote:
I guess my complaint is that anti-light-tank weapons are too ubiquitous in Xeno codices. Because anti-light-tank weapons also rock against meqs because they wound on 2+. And S7 is literally a disaster against bikers.

Fair enough. I don't think there's a single Ork List that doesn't bring a ton of Lootas to the field, an Eldar list that doesn't spam Wave Serpents, etc.

Martel732 wrote:
No one needs low AP shooting anymore if they can just spam S6/7 and force marines to die to failed saves. This has the side effect of melting every rhino hull in one or two turns.

Coincidentally, Grey Hunters have a pretty good way to get around this, considering how great they are at Drop Pod spam. You can't shoot someone who isn't on the field... And 24 Boltguns + 6 Special Weapons in your backfield on Turn One can really hurt.

Martel732 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
No one needs low AP shooting anymore if they can just spam S6/7 and force marines to die to failed saves. This has the side effect of melting every rhino hull in one or two turns.

Coincidentally, Grey Hunters have a pretty good way to get around this, considering how great they are at Drop Pod spam. You can't shoot someone who isn't on the field... And 24 Boltguns + 6 Special Weapons in your backfield on Turn One can really hurt.

Well, sorta. But with Tau, you've got EWO and with Eldar, they assault you with the immortal seer council and the Wave Serpents just run away and keep shooting the next turn. Drop pods have to do crippling damage on the alpha strike or they are usually dead in the water.

That's true. But you really get an alpha strike and a beta strike: 30 guys on turn one, 20-30 more on turn two. You can realistically get 6 squads of drop pod Grey Hunters, a Rune Priest, an Aegis Line with anti-air, and 5 Missile Launchers in a 1500 point game. That's a lot of early-game hurt that your opponent can't do much about.

Kavik_Whitescar wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Jayden63 wrote:
As they are right now, they are -1 in shooting. No Thunderfires, limited typhoon landspeeders, no sternguard, no grav guns, no Centurion devastators. no flyers of any kind with any sort of guns what so ever.

And I'll be honest. I really dont want any of those things when the codex gets redone either.

Ok ok, I'll admit, having more typhoon landspeeders wouldn't be a bad thing.

You can take the Stormraven/Stormtalon dataslate, why does every SW keep ignoring this? You can take the exact same flyers as SM.

I'm not ignoring it, I just have no intrest in those models in particular as of right now, I dont know why most of the people here havent yet realized that they have access to em :/

Really? What book is that in, if you don't mind my asking. (My LGS bans Forge World rules, unfortunately, so that might be why I haven't heard it...)

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Kavik_Whitescar wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

 Jayden63 wrote:
As they are right now, they are -1 in shooting. No Thunderfires, limited typhoon landspeeders, no sternguard, no grav guns, no Centurion devastators. no flyers of any kind with any sort of guns what so ever.

And I'll be honest. I really dont want any of those things when the codex gets redone either.

Ok ok, I'll admit, having more typhoon landspeeders wouldn't be a bad thing.

You can take the Stormraven/Stormtalon dataslate, why does every SW keep ignoring this? You can take the exact same flyers as SM.

I'm not ignoring it, I just have no intrest in those models in particular as of right now, I dont know why most of the people here havent yet realized that they have access to em :/

Really? What book is that in, if you don't mind my asking. (My LGS bans Forge World rules, unfortunately, so that might be why I haven't heard it...)

http://www.blacklibrary.com/games-workshop-digital-editions/Dataslate-Adeptus-Astartes-Storm-Wing.html

Here ya go.

If storm talons could escort drop pods I might consider taking one for my dread.

Even normal storm talons can't escort Drop pods.

However it still means you can take flyers, even DA mostly take the dataslate over their own flyers.

Well... That's something, I guess...
I mean, we still can't ride anyone inside the tanks, they're just SM vehicles that we can add to our army for free... At that point, I might as well ally in SM completely to get cheap scouts, Tigurius, and Sternguard Veterans as well as a Storm Raven and a Storm Talon.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Well... That's something, I guess...
I mean, we still can't ride anyone inside the tanks, they're just SM vehicles that we can add to our army for free... At that point, I might as well ally in SM completely to get cheap scouts, Tigurius, and Sternguard Veterans as well as a Storm Raven and a Storm Talon.

Why? Tigurius is taken for Divination, which you can take up to four slots worth if you need that, and you get better anti-psyker capabilities to deal with Daemons and Eldar.
Scouts, you have better troops then that.

Sternguard, sure.

If you really want to take all that for flyers, sure why not.

For 15 points over a ML2 Rune Priest you get ML3 and a much better chance at achieving the power you want. If I'm taking Rune Priests they will be cheap as heck because they're generally not worth upgrading. With Tiguries you get a great chance at adding Ignores Cover, giving a 4+ invuln, forcing rerolls of saves, etc. as well as Prescience.

As for Scouts... We've got better alpha strike troops, but if you want cheap backline objective holders, scouts win by a country mile. Grey Hunters are fantastic, but to use them right you're incesting 150-200 points per squad. 70 points for an equipped scout squad is cheap, has good durability (+1 to cover saves,) and can be useful in shooting, though they aren't great.

Some kind of weaker rending on BCs would be cool. They're described as throwing themselves at hopeless enemies in hopes of getting a lucky shot, taking undue risk to hurt enemies they have no right to be challenging. Maybe a close combat version of Gets Hot to counteract? (They'll get more opportunities to hit, but leave themselves open if they fail.)

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Some kind of weaker rending on BCs would be cool. They're described as throwing themselves at hopeless enemies in hopes of getting a lucky shot, taking undue risk to hurt enemies they have no right to be challenging. Maybe a close combat version of Gets Hot to counteract? (They'll get more opportunities to hit, but leave themselves open if they fail.)

I don't really like the idea of rending. To be honest I never really liked the idea that MotW granted rending either, it makes little to no sense. Leave the rending claws to the Tyranids.

However you gave me another idea. How about BC are Ws4, +2 attacks on charge, but if they roll a 1 to hit on the charge, the attack fails and they suffer 1 hit at the strength of the opponent they are fighting.

This would be kind of similar to the 2nd edition rules, where BC lost the "parry" rule (which was conferred by sword type weapons) when they were charging to represent that they were too disordered to actually parry any enemy attacks.

So, against WS4+ opponents (IE nearly every unit who they can hurt but still hurt them back) they get worse, and against WS3 opponents they hit on one better, but still can hurt themselves?
Your idea of trading a weaker Gets Hot in exchange for +1 WS is way too unbalanced, and would really just make them even worse for their cost than they already are.

Without a price, ir's kind of moot then. If they were 6ppm, they'd be incredibly awesome even with your suggested rules. At maybe 10 or 11, they'd be playable, but not all that immensely strong. (They still lack ranged power, and your suggestion was still a big nerf to an already bad unit.) At their current cost, they'd be simply horrendous.

12-13 ppm is still bad. Nerfing Grey Hunters doesn't make it good, it just means you have less options.
CURRENT Blood Claws would be worth it at 12 or 13ppm. You're proposing a nerf that does not help them in any way, shape, or form.
(As a sidenote, I don't fancy any rule which makes me roll two or three more handfuls of dice during the assault phase.)

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Ok, scratch that idea then if no one likes it, but please don't give them rending, lol.

I never proposed giving them rending. I proposed giving them a *weaker* rending. (Someone else said AP2 on a to-wound roll of 6, though I would have been happy with just an 'Always wounds on 5+' or something. In exchange, they'd get the psuedo-gets hot, to represent the group exposing themselves to hurt otherwise impervious targets.)

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Well "gets hot" is significantly worse than what I was suggesting and would kill 1 in 5 blood claws on average on the charge.

So maybe it is a S4 or S3 hit then. The overall point was to increase their damage output, rather than just making them so cheap there's no reason not to take them.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Personally I'm happy enough with their damage output. 4 S4 attacks per model isn't bad.

Not bad... But not any better than what Grey Hunters get, for the same price. And that's 4 attacks, then 2 attacks until the combat is over. (And unless you spend 250 points to buy them a Land Raider, you pronably won't be getting that charge.) Purely on damage output, Orks outperform them. (Orks are WS4.) Grey Hunters lose one attack, but gain 1 WS, 1 LD, and a huge amount of shooting capabilities that put them far above Blood Claws. Throw in the Wolf Standard, and Grey Hunters do better than Blood Claws at the same job, while also performing other jobs well.

Also: If a squad of 15 Blood Claws in their current state *get the charge* on a unit of 10 Grey Hunters who have a Wolf Standard, both squads will cause about 5 wounds. This is despite the Blood Claws getting the charge (Advantage to them) and outnumbering their enemy by 5 models, while doing what Blood Claws do best. In ideal situations, Blood Claws are barely equal to Grey Hunters. Meanwhile, if we did the same comparidon in the shooting phase... Not so flattering.

What is 'True Grit' I've heard people throwing it around, but I don't know what it does.

But, as far as I can tell you're just recommending we nerf Grey Hunters. But that won't do anything to help Blood Claws.
If a sickly man is standing next to a fitness instructor, kicking the fitness instructor in the balls won't heal the sickly man.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a sidenote: If BCs were WS4, they'd cause 5 wounds and only take 4 in the scenario above. Meaning that, despite having 5 more men and the charge, they still only cause a fraction more damage.

Well, that would really, really suck seeing as about 9/10thd of my Grey Hunters are built with a Bolt Pistol.
Model-wise, though, that's just a kick in the teeth to Grey Hunters' combat ability. It's rare that combat lasts more than a turn or two, so that would decrease their damage output by a third in close combat... It would also nullify Counter-attack, which means that GH would be worse than Tactical Marines, seeing as they're a point more per model, their only benefit from 'Chapter Tactics' is acute senses, and they can't combat squad.

But. I am still confused about how screwing with Grey Hunters does anything to improve Blood Claws.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Well, that would really, really suck seeing as about 9/10thd of my Grey Hunters are built with a Bolt Pistol.
Model-wise, though, that's just a kick in the teeth to Grey Hunters' combat ability. It's rare that combat lasts more than a turn or two, so that would decrease their damage output by a third in close combat... It would also nullify Counter-attack, which means that GH would be worse than Tactical Marines, seeing as they're a point more per model, their only benefit from 'Chapter Tactics' is acute senses, and they can't combat squad.

But. I am still confused about how screwing with Grey Hunters does anything to improve Blood Claws.

It doesn't nullify Counter-attack as they'd still get the +1 attack on it. BC would be better on the charge, and GH on the defensive.

BC still needs a points cost decrease.

Wait, so you can get the +1 attack as though you charged, just not +1 attack on the charge? I'm unsure I understand how this rule works.

So what you're saying is, in an edition where every single other army got their troops improved, had their price lowered, or both, our troops should get nerfed or have a price hike. A price hike which would render them worthless, (So that the precious Blood Claws will see play time), because 3+ armor T4 Boltguns are never going to be worth 16-17 points, or else a nerf which takes a big chunk out of our close combat ability, making us equal (or worse) than codex marines, for a point more.
Just to be clear.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
So what you're saying is, in an edition where every single other army got their troops improved, had their price lowered, or both, our troops should get nerfed or have a price hike. A price hike which would render them worthless, (So that the precious Blood Claws will see play time), because 3+ armor T4 Boltguns are never going to be worth 16-17 points, or else a nerf which takes a big chunk out of our close combat ability, making us equal (or worse) than codex marines, for a point more.
Just to be clear.

That's how SM felt during 5th edition when they were 16 and SW got 15. GH were actually worth it back when they were 17 points, they just gained more power and actually got cheaper.

Also we are discussing that BC gets a price reduction (Nobody is actually calling them higher)

True grit only prevented the +1 on an actual charge, so you'd get 2 attacks on the charge. Simple enough.

But when SM were 16 and Grey Hunters were 15, that was just Codex Creep. The same thing that has dropped the cost of gants consistently, taken Space Marines down to 14ppm, and generally nade each codex tougher than the last.

But you want to reverse the Codex creep, instead throwing Grey Hunters backwards one edition. Instead of being newer, and therefore having a slight edge, you want to make Grey Hunters worse in some way or another, in spite of the update being intended to do just the opposite of that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
So what you're saying is, in an edition where every single other army got their troops improved, had their price lowered, or both, our troops should get nerfed or have a price hike. A price hike which would render them worthless, (So that the precious Blood Claws will see play time), because 3+ armor T4 Boltguns are never going to be worth 16-17 points, or else a nerf which takes a big chunk out of our close combat ability, making us equal (or worse) than codex marines, for a point more.
Just to be clear.

They are currently too powerful for their points. Either make them more expensive or make them worse. 2 attacks all the time would make them about equal to tac marines (they'd essentially be tac marines with a chapter tactic that errs on the side of CC). They wouldn't be worse than codex marines, that's just being dramatic, lol. Keeping them the way they are makes them better than Tac Marines by more than just 1pt, so yeah, I'd say 16pts.

I don't really know the relevance of whether other armies have had their troops change from 5th -> 6th (FWIW, not all armies got better and cheaper anyway).

If you were to keep the rules as they are now, I'd make BC 13pts, maaaaaybe 12pts. GH would be 16pts or maaaaaaybe 17pts.

I'm still unsure what makes Grey Hunters so much better than codex marines. (Keep in mind, once you include Forge World, there's a chapter who gets Apothecaries in all their squads for free, and another chapter that can get a CCW on every model for... 1 PPM. Just like Grey Hunters.)
What Grey Hunters get as our Chapter Tactics is mandatory CCWs for 1 point each, and counter-attack. Meanwhile, we don't get veterans or even captains wothout paying a hefty premium. (And, if we want 2 special weapons, denying the Grey Hunters a transport.) We can't combat squad. We have no grav-weaponry, and we don't get heavy weapons.

I understand that Grey Hunters were better than 5th edition marines, but how are we any better in this edition?

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Codices don't always have to become more powerful than their predecessor, lol. SW aren't underpowered now, they don't need to be made more powerful.

I never said we had to be stronger. I'm just wondering why there's a clamor to make us weaker when we're already just a mid-level codex.

Except you still haven't explained what makes Grey Hunters so vastly powerful, appealing, and better. Compared to, say, a bunch of Rending boltguns with scout and stealth on the first turn, or FNP on every squad in your army, or Fear and the aforementioned extra optional CCW for 1 Point (And rage after killing an enemy.)

I simply can't believe that Grey Hunters are any better than Tactical marines, once you consider the slight point difference and the many things Grey Hunters don't have.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'll agree that Rune Priests are good, if only because of the 4+ psychic bubble. Make it 5+ or a 12" bubble, and it'd be more fair.
But, compared to the Marine version, everything else in our HQ section is worse. Our chaplains our worse. Our chapter masters are worse. Our Captains are worse. We've got no special characters worth taking.
In Elites, our Techmarines are worse. Our Dreadnaughts are worse. Our scouts are too different to reasonably compare, but generally to expensive to do anything useful.
Our bikes are worse. Our assault marines are worse. We don't have Thunderfire Cannons, Centurions, Grav-Weaponry, Fliers, or AA.
We have three units in the entire codex which stand out as good. An expensive librarian with Divination and psychic defense, Tactical Marines with decent (But not phenominal) special rules, and slightly cheaper Devestators.

Why on earth do you keep calling Space Wolves better?

Forge World chapters. There's like a dozen of them. Look it up.

And I'm not saying that Space Wolves want, need, or deserve everything in the Marine codex. I am saying, though, that we do NOT need any kind of debuff. We are generally worse than Vanilla marines in almost every way. We've got two units who are a marked improvement, (Rune Priests and Long Fangs), and one unit who is arguably better in some circumstances. Then there are a handful of equal/different models (Fenrisians and TWC have no real comparisons, for example, our Scouts are too different to compare, Wolf Guard can be effective in certain rare applications, and the vehicles we get are identical.) Pretty much everything else is worse.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
What Grey Hunters get as our Chapter Tactics is mandatory CCWs for 1 point each, and counter-attack. Meanwhile, we don't get veterans or even captains wothout paying a hefty premium. (And, if we want 2 special weapons, denying the Grey Hunters a transport.) We can't combat squad. We have no grav-weaponry, and we don't get heavy weapons.

I understand that Grey Hunters were better than 5th edition marines, but how are we any better in this edition?

IMO counter attack and CCW is worth more than 1pt. I think if most Marine players were told they can get a CCW without losing the bolter and also get counter attack for +1pt, they'd jump at the opportunity and it'd be an auto-take.

The Veteran Sergeant is +10pts, a barebones WG is 18pts, so only +3pts. The WG can also have more extra equipment and cheaper extra equipment than a vet.

Yep, if you want to be in a Rhino AND have a WG you lose the free special weapon. But it was a free special weapon. It'd be more fair to say "if the squad numbers more than 9 models, it may take 2 special weapons", rather than just getting a free one.

Except the 'Counter attack and CCW' are our chapter tactics. We don't get any of the several options I've listed multiple times that you apparently somehow missed. Yes, it's a useful bonus that is worth more than one point. But we don't get it for one point, we lose accesss to chapter tactics, combat squads, and heavy weapons.
And yeah, Chapter Tactics are usually as useful as Counter Attack,+1CCW, and 1 point.

 StarTrotter wrote:
Ah, well to be rather honest I don't know as much about Forge World chapters. I'm a chaos player at heart and so I simply hold hatred for the sheer number of chapters that SM has. It feeds my daemons that then destroy my friend who plays SW and constantly taunts my Tzeentchian army that he's going to sick his wolves on me and deny everything I have on a 4+ .

Also losing acess to HW isn't bad. And you forget to mention gaining free Specials.

Well yes, a model specifically built to be anti-psyker and anti-Daemon is going to be good against a psyker-heavy daemon list.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

I'm still unsure what makes Grey Hunters so much better than codex marines. (Keep in mind, once you include Forge World, there's a chapter who gets Apothecaries in all their squads for free, and another chapter that can get a CCW on every model for... 1 PPM. Just like Grey Hunters.)

The Red Scorpions (Aka the Apothecaries) only get it in Tactical Squads, but they gain the penalty of never going to ground and no camo. (For the ENTIRE ARMY.)

The Carcharodons Gain Fear (worthless), gain the ability to swap a bolter out for CCW, or +1 for CCW/BP. But they have no special rules beyond Fear (as said, worthless), and gain rage only AFTER they kill an INFANTRY squad in an assault (or forced to fall back).

They also are at Desperate Allies for any Imperium based ally, and cannot ally anything else.

They do not have Double Special Weapon, nor the variety of special gear GH get, nor Counter Attack.

Comparing them is still pretty bad compared to GH and SW.

And you're telling me that FREE FNP on all your Tactical squads isn't fantastic?
Why is fear 'Worthless'? I've won more than a couple games because of a failed leadership test.

I'm also not arguing that Grey Hunters are any worse than these guys, just that we aren't getting our bonuses for free when soneone else gets nothing.
And, for the mpth time, we gain special gear and a second special weapon, but lose a ton of stuff too: Heavy weapons, grav weapons, squad veterans unless we give up our vehicles or special weapons, combat squads, etc.

Fear doesn't make you immune to fear.
Anyways, I've gone back and forth for a couple pages now, and since little headway has been made either way I think I'll call it. It's not like the opinions of a handful of dudes (or girls) on the internet will actually affect the codex...

 StarTrotter wrote:
No! One cannot simply leave the eternal war! That is heresy! Although I am curious still as to what exactly SW will end up with. I have a bad feeling it will be something very Fenrisian wolf-like.

I've beard rumors that they're shifting the emphasis to encompass the space half as much as the wolf half. So we'll have Wolf Spacers fighting alongside Canis Spaceborn of the Astral Wolves with a Wolftail Starpendant and a Space Claw and riding on a thunderSpace.