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.

To be rather honest I sometimes wish that all loyalist marines (bar GK whom honestly I feel fit more as a supplement admittedly) were rolled into a single codex. Then again I'm just a bitter old Chaos Space Marine that grumbles at the number of loyalist codices whilst having a codex that just keeps on saying hey look at the legions and then promptly screaming but no no legions just warbands of everybody being a friend making it impossible to really represent anything. And then grumbling at chapter tactics.

Then again, I look at how they destroyed Iron Hand fluff and the rolling of BT and couldn't help but feel terrible for armies that experience that removing things is never the answer!

If Grey Hunters *really* need a nerf, I'd accept a return to the "True Grit" days... but that's not the "original codex" or what they "originally had". You're talking about 3rd edition.... nothing original about that. We hated it and burnt the books to make sure they were dead.

2nd edition SW heralded the Terminator assault/cyclone spam of entire units. If anything I'd burn that outright, and third edition is generally what heralded the current status of the editions.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Problem is that would just mean someone would plop down a wolf guard into the squad and easily fix that issue right up, considering that since it takes 15 models to get a second ranged weapon it'd just prioritize having a WG in it. Thus meaning the leadership issue isn't a problem, and the squad itself gets a strong buff as a result, since the WG would simply beat the penalty, keep headstrong under control and generally just be a better choice.

I'd still prefer a lower cost to a WS upgrade.

That wouldn't really bother me (that taking a Wolf Guard would be an auto-take on Blood Claws). It still wouldn't make BC an auto-take over GH, it'd just mean GH are what you take if you want to shoot and counter attack, Blood Claws are what you take when you want to charge in and punch things up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 karlosovic wrote:
Also, in the interest of balance, -1 Ld isn't worth much of a points drop since you'd never field Blood Claws without a champ/hero anyway, to prevent reckless
-1 WS just means they take more wounds... doesn't do too much to realistically reduce their damage output as they'd probably be hitting on 4+ anyway.
If GH are +1 pt from normal marines, BC should be -1. Maybe GH should be +2 and BC -1 (GH *are* pretty good)

I think with a True Grit rule GH would be worth the same as regular marines. At the moment it's the combination of counter attack AND having the CCW/pistol/bolter that makes them worth more than regular marines, as it's really better than any of the Chapter Tactics. Something like True Grit and no counter attack (since they'd no longer get +1 attack on the charge, I assume they wouldn't get +1 on the counter attack either) it'd be on par with Chapter tactics.

Giving them True Grit would admittedly be a bit awkward now, given all Marines have bolt pistols, where it used to be "can use bolters as a CCW", now it'd have to be something along the lines of "all GH carry a CCW, however due to the difficulty of carrying a big gun, a small gun AND a chainsword/axe/giant knife, they don't gain +1 attack when charging".

You could still let other troops have counter attack, just make it so GH don't get it because they are carrying too many weapons, lol. I dunno, seems a bit awkward and a bit orkish.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I will admit I don’t see why Grey Hunters are so powerful compared to normal Marines, but I admit I may be Bias. We have two Special Rules that Space Marines do not have access two and one piece of equipment.
>Combat Knife: +1 Attack and we cost more
>Counter-Attack: To me looks like any other Combat Tactics in power Level.
>Acute Senses: Useless 90% of the Time

That's a pretty big difference. 3 attacks vs 1 attack when you get charged, I think if any SM player were given that option for only 1pt, they'd take it in a heartbeat.

This. In isolation, an extra CCW is probably fairly priced at 1 PPM. When you add in Counter-Attack, you have a unit with two Special Weapons that has as many attacks when charged as dedicated assault Marines (including, but not limited to, Assault Marines) have on the charge. If a 10-man Tactical Squad gets charged, they get 10 attacks (11 with Vet Sergeant that no one takes anymore). If 10 Grey Hunters get charged, they most likely get 30 attacks. That's 300% of the damage output of Tactical Marines for 1 PPM.

True Grit makes much more sense. It discourages enemies from charging without making Grey Hunters better than both Crusader Squads and Tactical Squads at the same time for 1 PPM.

With Blood Claws I don’t think they need a lot, but I would like to see the following.
1] Price Difference: if this means More Expensive Grey Hunter or Cheaper Blood Claws so be it, give us a reason to take Blood Claws other than fluffy reasons.
2] One Specialist Weapon (Ranged or Melee) per 5 Models, this would also go for Skyclaws and Swiftclaws
3] Change Lukas: Make him a Character, Independent Character as a separate HQ Choice that can only join “Blood Claws Units”, Change his points…something.
4] Allow Wolf Guard Pack Leaders to join Skyclaws.

I'd be happy enough to see BC not getting ranged special weapons and limited melee special weapons. They're new recruits, they shouldn't be carrying around awesome and rare weaponry. GH and Long Fangs should be the ones cruising with the special weaponry.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd be happy enough to see BC not getting ranged special weapons and limited melee special weapons. They're new recruits, they shouldn't be carrying around awesome and rare weaponry. GH and Long Fangs should be the ones cruising with the special weaponry.

I could go for that if I could take a Spcialist Melee Weapon per 5 models, mabye make MotW a "Specialist Melee Weapon"

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.)

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.)

Similar to the Eldar Shuriken Catapults...That would work.
The onlt thing with the "Gets Got" bit is it would only encurage the Wolf Priest Attached to avoid such. Not that I have an ussie with that.

Because I need even more rending to make my CSM useless in both combat and shooting...

Well lets see taking some earlier suggestions.

Pack Size: 5-15 Models
Wargear:• Power Armor
• Boll Pistol
• Chainsword
• Frag grenades
• Krak grenades
Special Rules:
• And They Shall Know No Fear
• Berserk Charge [+2 Attacks when Making an Assault. All Rolls on Wounding of 6 become AP2, this does not affect Special Melee Weapons]
• Acute Senses
• Head Strong
Options:
• For every 5 Models One model may take a Special Melee Weapon or Mark of the Wolfen.
• Any Model may replace thier Bolt Pistol with a War Shield [5++ Save] for x points

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.

Also when I said "limited melee special weapons", I meant more like "1 special melee weapon per squad". It seems logical to me that BC would be given less power weapons than GH, as less of them have proved themselves worthy of carrying one.

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.

You obviously have to balance the cost of them and make them cheaper, they already need to be made cheaper. I didn't suggest a price simply because I think it's hard to figure out what something is worth without a bit of play testing (which is probably why GW can never figure out what anything should be worth, lol).

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.

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.

Also when I said "limited melee special weapons", I meant more like "1 special melee weapon per squad". It seems logical to me that BC would be given less power weapons than GH, as less of them have proved themselves worthy of carrying one.

15 guys have 60 attacks on the charge. As such your roll of 1 rule idea would mean the enemy gets to hit (not swing, but hit) them 10 times. Yeah, no blood claws would be taken ever again.

In my opinion, I don't want BC to be worse than they are now, just make them effective for their points (whatever they may be) and give them a different battlefield roll that can't be duplicated by Grey Hunters. Thats how you get units to show up. Remove the extra special CCW weapon and MOTW from Grey Hunter squads and give it all to the Blood Claws. Make Grey Hunters the walk and shoot guys with a powerful counter charge. Let them have 3 attacks each on a successful counter charge, but only 2 attacks each when charging. And then give the blood claws their 4 attacks on charging with some extra special CCW weapons but only 2 attacks on a successful counter charge with limited shooting special weapons.

Now you have your objective holders in Grey Hunters and your go forth and smash them in the face unit in blood claws. Two units whos jobs really can't be duplicated by the other.

Waaaghpower wrote:
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.

Sorry, I didn't think it was such a heinous sin to not mention what points I think they'd be worth, I was just spitballing what I think would suit the unit, which is lots of attacks, a chance of hurting themselves and no rending Maybe 12 or 13 I'd think. Once you give GH True Grit, BC will be worth more within the army.


Rending just makes little sense to me... are we trying to say that a chainsword is less effective at tearing armour than a dude who has slightly mutated hands? Genestealers and such have rending claws because their claws are specifically built for tearing armour, from memory wasn't the fluff that they can tear terminator armour with their bare claws? They are bioengineered to tear armour. Even as someone who collects SW, I never liked the idea of SW having rending attacks in close combat. I rolled my eyes at the rules for Wulfen when they were first released, lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jayden63 wrote:
15 guys have 60 attacks on the charge. As such your roll of 1 rule idea would mean the enemy gets to hit (not swing, but hit) them 10 times. Yeah, no blood claws would be taken ever again.

So change it to "they get hit with a S3 attack". That means they would get hit 10 times, wounded about 3 and on average lose 1 model on the charge. Sounds fine to me.

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.)

Ok, scratch that idea then if no one likes it, but please don't give them rending, lol. I'd sooner see MotW lose rending than BC gaining it.

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.)

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

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.

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

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.

That was why I suggested that BC become Ws4, but people didn't like that idea, lol. If BC were Ws4 and GH got True Grit (so basically had 2 attacks regardless of whether they charge or not) that would mean...

BC are equal to GH in a drawn out fight.
BC are twice as good as GH on the charge.
BC are 50% better than GH when they get charged (because with counter attack they'd have +1 attack while GH don't).

GH should be better all rounders than BC, but IMO I would like to see them being equal in a drawn out close combat and BC having the edge in the 1st round of combat.

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.

True Grit was the rule GH had when their 3rd edition Codex came out. Back then you only had a bolter and CCW, not a bolter, bolt pistol and CCW.

So Grey Hunters had a rule basically saying they can use the Bolter as a pistol in close combat, which let them get the +1 attack for having a bolter and CCW, BUT, because the bolter is unwieldy, they wouldn't get +1 attack on the charge.

It basically meant GH always had 2 attacks, regardless of whether they charged, got charged or were fighting a drawn out combat.

What I (and some other people) are proposing is going back to True Grit, so GH keep their CCW to get +1 attack, but don't gain +1 attack on the charge or +1 attack from counter attack anymore.

This would bring them make them more like regular Tac Marines with a slight edge in combat, where as now they're like Tac Marines with a huge edge in combat.

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.

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.

 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.