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.

Depends on the gear. And once again, I was saying that because of Chapter Tactics. Preferred Enemy for a turn, or re-roll ones to hit with Boltguns, twin-linked everything for a turn, Rending 1 Heavy variation for all bolt weapons, are all Chapter Tactic boosts to shooting. For Durability, FNP 6+ everything, or adding Apothecaries to squads are both options.

Also, your secondary troop option, (Scouts,) are vastly better than our secondary troop option (Blood Claws.)

Who cares? SW players don't use Blood Claws. You only need the one super troop. Yeah, it's kinda boring, but welcome to 40k, where 65% of the units are mathematically unfieldable.

I don't know the FW chapter tactics. Do any of them actually make tacs not stink up the joint? Does any of this allow regular marines to actually out gun double plasma GH? Probably not enough to make up for how far behind in assault they are. This is not a trivial matter for meqs, since meqs don't have the firepower to keep the Wolves at bay like Taudar.

Martel732 wrote:
Who cares? SW players don't use Blood Claws. You only need the one super troop. Yeah, it's kinda boring, but welcome to 40k, where 65% of the units are mathematically unfieldable.

I don't know the FW chapter tactics. Do any of them actually make tacs not stink up the joint?

Most are pretty gravy. Some of them include:
Replace tactical sergeants with Apothecaries, for free. (But no Camo Cloaks.)
Fear, and after destroying a squad in assault gain RAGE!. Also, they can replace their Boltgun with a chainsword for free, or buy a CCW for +1 point. (So they can be Grey Hunters with Rage and Fear instead of Counter-Assault.)
All Bolt Weapons can be fired as heavy 1, Rending. (Yes, even pistols.)

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Who cares? SW players don't use Blood Claws. You only need the one super troop. Yeah, it's kinda boring, but welcome to 40k, where 65% of the units are mathematically unfieldable.

I don't know the FW chapter tactics. Do any of them actually make tacs not stink up the joint?

Most are pretty gravy. Some of them include:
Replace tactical sergeants with Apothecaries, for free. (But no Camo Cloaks.)
Fear, and after destroying a squad in assault gain RAGE!. Also, they can replace their Boltgun with a chainsword for free, or buy a CCW for +1 point. (So they can be Grey Hunters with Rage and Fear instead of Counter-Assault.)
All Bolt Weapons can be fired as heavy 1, Rending. (Yes, even pistols.)

The apothecaries just make them BA with Sanguinary Priest, but cheaper. Been there, done that, GH still win. They will live longer against shooty Xenos with AP 2/3 that don't double us out, but that's actually pretty rare. Eldar spam wounds with AP worse than 3 and Tau double us out with ion accelerators. I guess it's good against pulse rifles. Yay.

Getting Rage after winning an assault doesn't help against GH, because they won't win against GH, nor will they destroy them if they do because ATSKNF. Omg, ATSKNF actually matters in this case. Rage isn't even that good, because any jackass that spoiling assaults you turns it off. Counter attack is much, much better. Trust me, I know rage. It sucks.

Firing bolters as heavy 1 rending is great vs MCs, but lowers kills against GH more than likely. GH still win. It gives them an option that GH don't have, yes. Is it better than GH just dragging down MCs with mass attacks? I don't know.

"I have all these options that are great in specific applications" must be better than "I have exactly one option, which is generally useful." Or am I misunderstanding you?

None of these options have the built-in anti-horde/anti-assault capability of the GH just standing there being a GH. In practice, GH don't care if they are assaulted by weakened assault troops. And in 6th ed, the assault troops will be weakened. All these other chapter tactics space marines still care. SW lists don't have to bring anti-horde weapons in their builds, and for TAC lists, that's incredibly valuable and powerful.

And as I pointed out, these chapter tactics don't allow these chapters to take on the SW in an even footing. I realize that C:SM is better against Taudar, but in a head to head match up, I'm not sure if SW are not still better than C:SM.

I guess the way most SW lists are built, grav centurions would be a headache. And a rather dangerous headache at that.

Martel732 wrote:
None of these options have the built-in anti-horde/anti-assault capability of the GH just standing there being a GH. In practice, GH don't care if they are assaulted by weakened assault troops. And in 6th ed, the assault troops will be weakened. All these other chapter tactics space marines still care. SW lists don't have to bring anti-horde weapons in their builds, and for TAC lists, that's incredibly valuable and powerful.

And as I pointed out, these chapter tactics don't allow these chapters to take on the SW in an even footing. I realize that C:SM is better against Taudar, but in a head to head match up, I'm not sure if SW are not still better than C:SM.

C:SM Wins. We have better Librarians, situationally better Tacs, and better Missile Launcher devs. And, we can bring combi-weapons in a Drop Pod for cheaper with our equivalent veterans.
Space Marines have grav-weapons, better Wolf Lords, better Wolf Priests, better scouts, better Veterans overall, better bikes, flyers, Centurions, better non-missile Devs, better Terminators, better SCs, more types of vehicle (Admittedly only for AA), most of your tanks are cheaper, Thunderfire Cannons are awesome, and better Techmarines.

A few of these are from codex creep, sure. A lot of them aren't.

C:SM is better than C:SW at the moment as long as C:SM plays to its own strengths and that which 6th edition has brought to offer. However, allies, data slates, and all that other crap that is outside of the codexs changes things in favor of whomever planned ahead the most.

I still feel like this matchup is like SW vs gimped Tau or Eldar, which is what GW is forcing C:SM to play like. If you get C:SM in assault, you're going to pound them with SW. C:SM are paying points for HTH capabilities that won't swing any battles for them against SW. I suppose SW don't have too many awesome answers from White Scars grav bikers, since they will never engage you in HTH and get 4+ jink vs the mass GH plasma.

I don't think that GK are hated . But they are a sad bunch of dudes. We had a dude start GK this week , bought 3 boxs of terminators , 2 strike squads , NDK and a storm raven for a noob league. His first game was against tau , second was against grav marines using IF supplement as ally , third was my IG and then tyranids . I think the only army against which he actualy scored a point was me and the tyranid player. Against the nid player he managed a lucky 12" charge and killed a unit of 30 guants and against me he killed two five man vet squads.
I have never seen a guy as sad about money he spent on something then him

We're talking about Grey Hunters, not Grey Knights. Although I dislike them greatly, as well.

Oh my bad. I don't hate GH . I have 20 of them and a RP in my IG list .

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
None of these options have the built-in anti-horde/anti-assault capability of the GH just standing there being a GH. In practice, GH don't care if they are assaulted by weakened assault troops. And in 6th ed, the assault troops will be weakened. All these other chapter tactics space marines still care. SW lists don't have to bring anti-horde weapons in their builds, and for TAC lists, that's incredibly valuable and powerful.

And as I pointed out, these chapter tactics don't allow these chapters to take on the SW in an even footing. I realize that C:SM is better against Taudar, but in a head to head match up, I'm not sure if SW are not still better than C:SM.

C:SM Wins. We have better Librarians, situationally better Tacs, and better Missile Launcher devs. And, we can bring combi-weapons in a Drop Pod for cheaper with our equivalent veterans.
Space Marines have grav-weapons, better Wolf Lords, better Wolf Priests, better scouts, better Veterans overall, better bikes, flyers, Centurions, better non-missile Devs, better Terminators, better SCs, more types of vehicle (Admittedly only for AA), most of your tanks are cheaper, Thunderfire Cannons are awesome, and better Techmarines.

A few of these are from codex creep, sure. A lot of them aren't.

Lets see..

Better Librarians: You get divination and wolf powers, ours are cheaper though..But not as good, and don't get a 24" denial bubble for blessings.

Better Tacs: Haha no.

Better Missile Launcher Devs...Are you kidding me?

Combi-Weapons, they can do the same and in terminator armor.

Better SC: Okay yes this is a win for SM.

Better Terminators: In an edition where terminators are horrible and even assault ones aren't that good anymore.

More types of Vehicles: That aren't used cause they don't do much

Cheaper Vehicles: I think? Should be about the same for some.

Thunderfire Awesome: Yes

Tech-Marines: People use these?

Martel732 wrote:
"Stop blaming Grey Hunters for Tactical Marines being ass."

Why do GH get to not be ass for one more point? That's the whole crux of the complaints against GH. So yes, I WILL blame them.

So because they are space marines, they have to be as good or as bad as other space marines?

I'm sorry, but no. While I recognize that tactical marines and blood angels are not good troop choices, is the hate of grey hunters a result of the grey hunters being overpowered or a case of the troops they are most often compared to being underpowered and lackluster? If the former, yes a nerf is perfectly fine. If the latter, why aren't you asking for a buff?

Keep in mind that the in the event of a new codex, grey hunters won't retain their 5th edition features (free second weapon) and choices will be re-costed I honestly think that would be enough. Not to bring them on the same level of tactical marines (which are lackluster) but to update them with the codex . In fact, most of the issues with space wolves are the result of them being a 5th edition codex and haven't been updated to reflect the 6th editions rules.

I think next codex we should get our own version of the Thunderfire cannon which fires wolves.

Ogopogo wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Stop blaming Grey Hunters for Tactical Marines being ass."

Why do GH get to not be ass for one more point? That's the whole crux of the complaints against GH. So yes, I WILL blame them.

So because they are space marines, they have to be as good or as bad as other space marines?

I'm sorry, but no. While I recognize that tactical marines and blood angels are not good troop choices, is the hate of grey hunters a result of the grey hunters being overpowered or a case of the troops they are most often compared to being underpowered and lackluster? If the former, yes a nerf is perfectly fine. If the latter, why aren't you asking for a buff?

Keep in mind that the in the event of a new codex, grey hunters won't retain their 5th edition features (free second weapon) and choices will be re-costed I honestly think that would be enough. Not to bring them on the same level of tactical marines (which are lackluster) but to update them with the codex . In fact, most of the issues with space wolves are the result of them being a 5th edition codex and haven't been updated to reflect the 6th editions rules.

Because we tried a thread about buffing tactical marines, and SW players came and told us tacticals were fine. Or, at least, Anpu did. That, and all the cries of "ATSKNF is so OP!". I'd rather have appropriately costed troops that have legitimate uses and no ATSKNF than the steaming piles of whale dung that pass for C:SM troops.

Martel732 wrote:
That, and all the cries of "ATSKNF is so OP!". I'd rather have appropriately costed troops that have legitimate uses and no ATSKNF than the steaming piles of whale dung that pass for C:SM troops.

I would rather have appropriately costed troops that have legitimate uses than the steaming piles of whale dung without ATSKNF that pass for Sisters of Battle troops .

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
None of these options have the built-in anti-horde/anti-assault capability of the GH just standing there being a GH. In practice, GH don't care if they are assaulted by weakened assault troops. And in 6th ed, the assault troops will be weakened. All these other chapter tactics space marines still care. SW lists don't have to bring anti-horde weapons in their builds, and for TAC lists, that's incredibly valuable and powerful.

And as I pointed out, these chapter tactics don't allow these chapters to take on the SW in an even footing. I realize that C:SM is better against Taudar, but in a head to head match up, I'm not sure if SW are not still better than C:SM.

C:SM Wins. We have better Librarians, situationally better Tacs, and better Missile Launcher devs. And, we can bring combi-weapons in a Drop Pod for cheaper with our equivalent veterans.
Space Marines have grav-weapons, better Wolf Lords, better Wolf Priests, better scouts, better Veterans overall, better bikes, flyers, Centurions, better non-missile Devs, better Terminators, better SCs, more types of vehicle (Admittedly only for AA), most of your tanks are cheaper, Thunderfire Cannons are awesome, and better Techmarines.

A few of these are from codex creep, sure. A lot of them aren't.

Lets see..

Better Librarians: You get divination and wolf powers, ours are cheaper though..But not as good, and don't get a 24" denial bubble for blessings.

Better Tacs: Haha no.

Better Missile Launcher Devs...Are you kidding me?

Combi-Weapons, they can do the same and in terminator armor.

Better SC: Okay yes this is a win for SM.

Better Terminators: In an edition where terminators are horrible and even assault ones aren't that good anymore.

More types of Vehicles: That aren't used cause they don't do much

Cheaper Vehicles: I think? Should be about the same for some.

Thunderfire Awesome: Yes

Tech-Marines: People use these?

You misunderstand, I perhaps wasn't clear enough. When I said 'We' I meant SW units.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
That, and all the cries of "ATSKNF is so OP!". I'd rather have appropriately costed troops that have legitimate uses and no ATSKNF than the steaming piles of whale dung that pass for C:SM troops.

I would rather have appropriately costed troops that have legitimate uses than the steaming piles of whale dung without ATSKNF that pass for Sisters of Battle troops .

Sisters of Battle definitely have their problems as well. I never once have claimed that Sisters have it good. Because I know they are a bit like marine -1. Although they still give up fewer pts when they fail a 3+ save vs a scatterlaser. When you have to play marines like Orks, cheaper is almost always better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
None of these options have the built-in anti-horde/anti-assault capability of the GH just standing there being a GH. In practice, GH don't care if they are assaulted by weakened assault troops. And in 6th ed, the assault troops will be weakened. All these other chapter tactics space marines still care. SW lists don't have to bring anti-horde weapons in their builds, and for TAC lists, that's incredibly valuable and powerful.

And as I pointed out, these chapter tactics don't allow these chapters to take on the SW in an even footing. I realize that C:SM is better against Taudar, but in a head to head match up, I'm not sure if SW are not still better than C:SM.

C:SM Wins. We have better Librarians, situationally better Tacs, and better Missile Launcher devs. And, we can bring combi-weapons in a Drop Pod for cheaper with our equivalent veterans.
Space Marines have grav-weapons, better Wolf Lords, better Wolf Priests, better scouts, better Veterans overall, better bikes, flyers, Centurions, better non-missile Devs, better Terminators, better SCs, more types of vehicle (Admittedly only for AA), most of your tanks are cheaper, Thunderfire Cannons are awesome, and better Techmarines.

A few of these are from codex creep, sure. A lot of them aren't.

Lets see..

Better Librarians: You get divination and wolf powers, ours are cheaper though..But not as good, and don't get a 24" denial bubble for blessings.

Better Tacs: Haha no.

Better Missile Launcher Devs...Are you kidding me?

Combi-Weapons, they can do the same and in terminator armor.

Better SC: Okay yes this is a win for SM.

Better Terminators: In an edition where terminators are horrible and even assault ones aren't that good anymore.

More types of Vehicles: That aren't used cause they don't do much

Cheaper Vehicles: I think? Should be about the same for some.

Thunderfire Awesome: Yes

Tech-Marines: People use these?

You misunderstand, I perhaps wasn't clear enough. When I said 'We' I meant SW units.

As I said, SW players don't use the stuff that is worse. I'm not blaming them for that. I'm blaming GW.

Martel732 wrote:
As I said, SW players don't use the stuff that is worse. I'm not blaming them for that. I'm blaming GW.

Amen, GW please give us some damn choices in the next book? I'd like to use something other than 2x Rune Priest + 6x Grey Hunters + 3x Long Fangs.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
As I said, SW players don't use the stuff that is worse. I'm not blaming them for that. I'm blaming GW.

Amen, GW please give us some damn choices in the next book? I'd like to use something other than 2x Rune Priest + 6x Grey Hunters + 3x Long Fangs.

That is totally on you.

I personally only have 25 grey hunters in my army, 1 rune priest, and one long fang squad. Everything else is vindicators, Bloodclaws or terminator squad, dreadnaught, and some land speeders. I have a winning record over against some very stiff competition. The army has been great fun and I've never once had anyone complain of cheese. Even back in 5th edition.

You just have to play to the strength of your army, something I've learned to do regardless of what units I bring.


I also have some bad news for all you haters out there. When the codex gets redone, its not going to get any better for you. This is all my opinion, but I've watched GW for over 15 years. They make unit stats to move plastic models and seeing as how the Wolf pack box is used to make Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, Scouts, and Wolf Guard, regardless of what happens to those individual units I expect a few of them are going to be a titch overpowered. After all GW isn't going to nerf four units and risk loosing the model sales for those units. In fact it would be to their benifit to make at least two of those units even more attractive than they are now.

Then there is a second option. They introduce a new troop choice. Its a new unit, thus requires a new box of plastic men. We all know that GW likes to overpower their new models to promote sales of the new box. So yeah, they nerf GH, BC, Scouts, or WG but now you have the SW version of the riptide to deal with.

I guess you can continue to be happy, after all you still get to vent your hate, just in a slightly different direction. GW is all about the new shiny after all.

I guess I'll continue to hate then, and laugh when bad things happen to SW units. Your point?

 Jayden63 wrote:

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
As I said, SW players don't use the stuff that is worse. I'm not blaming them for that. I'm blaming GW.

Amen, GW please give us some damn choices in the next book? I'd like to use something other than 2x Rune Priest + 6x Grey Hunters + 3x Long Fangs.

That is totally on you.

I personally only have 25 grey hunters in my army, 1 rune priest, and one long fang squad. Everything else is vindicators, Bloodclaws or terminator squad, dreadnaught, and some land speeders. I have a winning record over against some very stiff competition. The army has been great fun and I've never once had anyone complain of cheese. Even back in 5th edition.

You just have to play to the strength of your army, something I've learned to do regardless of what units I bring.


I also have some bad news for all you haters out there. When the codex gets redone, its not going to get any better for you. This is all my opinion, but I've watched GW for over 15 years. They make unit stats to move plastic models and seeing as how the Wolf pack box is used to make Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, Scouts, and Wolf Guard, regardless of what happens to those individual units I expect a few of them are going to be a titch overpowered. After all GW isn't going to nerf four units and risk loosing the model sales for those units. In fact it would be to their benifit to make at least two of those units even more attractive than they are now.

Then there is a second option. They introduce a new troop choice. Its a new unit, thus requires a new box of plastic men. We all know that GW likes to overpower their new models to promote sales of the new box. So yeah, they nerf GH, BC, Scouts, or WG but now you have the SW version of the riptide to deal with.

I guess you can continue to be happy, after all you still get to vent your hate, just in a slightly different direction. GW is all about the new shiny after all.

To be fair I can't even argue that. GW just.... is odd. They release new models without good rules quite frequently and some of their greatest units are units that arguably are the most odd units ever. Example, make the transports op which is something most vet eldar likely have a few of lying around anyways. Still, you are correct that there will likely be something else that is really good (although GW might make SW in general bad it would take a lot of work)

 Jayden63 wrote:
They make unit stats to move plastic models […] We all know that GW likes to overpower their new models to promote sales of the new box.[…]GW is all about the new shiny after all.

Haha, no.Gw do not do that. They rather use some kind of a lottery system.

So this is 4 pages of people correctly pointing out that Tactical Marines/Chaos Marines suck and therefor Grey Hunters should too?

No. This is not a solution.

You see Tactical Marines or Chaos Space Marine squads SO RARELY in C:SM or C:CSM lists that they may as well not be there. Outside of Scouting Tacs in Rhinos with the OP White Scars tactics, Drop Pod Sallies and Bolter Banner Dark Angels, Marine infantry is literally appalling in 6th Edition. It is the one great failing of GW that C:SM failed to make the posterboys of the entire universe worth using.

Bikes/Scouts/Chaos Cultists are what you will *mostly* see in lists from people who actually want a good chance of winning games against other competent players.

If you nerf Grey Hunters, may I ask what the go to choice is for Space Wolf players? Blood Claws? Really? Really....

I totally agree UNITS of Grey Hunters are too cheap. Bring the overall cost up a bit. Either make them 16pts a model and remain EXACTLY as they are, or make them pay for the second special weapon. Basically the same thing. Although paying for a second Plasmagun incurs a higher cost.

Marines in foot in power armour are underperforming in 6th edition. There are too many high strength twin linked shots in the game currently to make a 3+ save worth 14pts on a model.

Grey Hunters are where Tac Marines should be. They've had Counter Attack (or the equivalent) for 4 editions now. It's not going anywhere. They've had 2 Special Weapons since the metal box came out in the 90s. That's not changing. 16pts per model I would happily swallow. As long as we got the equivalent price drop on upgrades like Storm Shields, Bikes and the like.

People are still upset about grey hunters almost 5 years after 5th ed SW release? (oct 2009 release)

 ivangterrace wrote:
People are still upset about grey hunters almost 5 years after 5th ed SW release? (oct 2009 release)

Upset that Tactical Marines still suck 5 years later

Yup. As long as people keep using them, we always have fresh reminders.

AlexRae wrote:

I totally agree UNITS of Grey Hunters are too cheap. Bring the overall cost up a bit. Either make them 16pts a model and remain EXACTLY as they are, or make them pay for the second special weapon. Basically the same thing. Although paying for a second Plasmagun incurs a higher cost.

The second free weapon is a feature of fifth edition, where space marines would also get a free missile launcher or (I forget the other choice). I fully expect that rule to be tossed out come a new codex. Same sort of thing with the physic protection on the Rune Priests, where it is so much better than the current editions' physic defenses, which used to be more like the rune priests' in previous editions.

My prediction is that when Space Wolves are brought into line with 6th edition a lot of these problems will go away. That said, Grey Hunters will be better than Tactical Squads. They have to be because, as already said, Space Wolves don't have anything else.

Let's say that Rune Priests, Grey Hunters, and Long Fangs are nerfed hard. What else in the Codex is even worth putting on the table? Thunder Wolves are fun, but they're expensive for their capabilities. Blood Claws are fun, but virtually unplayable without at least a Wolf Guard. Skyclaws? Puh-lease. Swiftclaws are expensive inferior bikers. Being unable to assault after entering the table Wolf Scouts are pretty hard done by too. Wolf Guard are cool, but they are easy to make expensive and they still die like 3+ and 2+ units.

Basically the reason people play the Rune/Grey/Long armies is because that's about the only thing that works in the Space Wolf Codex (perhaps a bit of hyperbole there).

Counter attacks problems arise from the fact that when it was originally given to Space Wolves it just meant that every model in the unit could move into combat after being charged. When everyone else got that ability they changed it to gaining an attack after a successful leadership test. A 20 attack Grey Hunter unit is good, but not game breaking. A 30 attack Grey Hunter unit is probably too good.