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.

no idea

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
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.

SM players are not asking for everything good in the SW codex to be

nerfed hard

.
We're asking for this thing called balance (insert rainbow and sparkles here)
We don't see why GH are better than ever other MEQ troop and also completely deny assault armies when Tacs suck balls. We don't want them to be nerfed and be bad, we want them to be on par with that, in 6th edition, every other MEQ codex has been burdened with.
We also want people to stop pretending that GH are fine. They're not. Maybe they're fine when you drop them into ridiculous situations that any gak head would be able to avoid, but, given a normal game the guy on the other end (so long as they're not playing C:Waveserpent or C:Riptide) is pretty much scuppered.

In terms of Wolf Guard in comparison to Vanguard Veterans.. Please, V Vets are far more useless than Wolf Guard, at least you get to stick your guys in termy armour and then put them in OP troop choices, ours just die.

Balancing GHs to be as bad as Tac marines will see Space Wolves left on shelves accruing dust, or being played as Codex Ultramarines.

Power Armoured infantry are ineffective. But making Grey Hunters crap too isn't gonna solve anything

AlexRae wrote:
Balancing GHs to be as bad as Tac marines will see Space Wolves left on shelves accruing dust, or being played as Codex Ultramarines.

Power Armoured infantry are ineffective. But making Grey Hunters crap too isn't gonna solve anything

Just like how it was the opposite in 5th edition, where everyone jumped on the SW train.

So as I've ignored the past few pages, can someone explain to me why they think it's a better idea to make Grey Hunters as terrible as Tactical Marines, rather than making Tactical Marines as good as Grey Hunters?

 BlaxicanX wrote:
So as I've ignored the past few pages, can someone explain to me why they think it's a better idea to make Grey Hunters as terrible as Tactical Marines, rather than making Tactical Marines as good as Grey Hunters?

Probably because aside from BA, all the other MEQ's aren't getting an update?

Short of 7th edition dropping, there's really nothing one can do to make them better.

 BrotherOfBone wrote:
don't want them to be nerfed and be bad, we want them to be on par with that, in 6th edition, every other MEQ codex has been burdened with.

So, you don't want them to be bad, yet you want them to be bad as most other tactical marines are. You're contradicting yourself there.

i think this topic is pretty stupid when you think about it. comparing the worst unit in the whole SM codex to one of the best in the space wolf books just doesn't make any sense. if i was to compare grey hunters to an sm unit it would be bike marines. One other issue that people dont seem to take into account is that SW drop pods are capacity 10 and thus cant take the extra leaership/combi weapon if they want the free special weapon which keeps them very balanced.(though 12 slot drop pods would be AMAZING for wolves if they stay the same)

Comparable units:

Bikes in white scars
5 bikes 2x grav guns and an attack bike for 190 points

vs

grey hunters (same price)
10x 2 melta
and a drop pod

I dont know but if you ask an competitive player what unit has the most functionality 9 out of 10 times the bikes come out on top. They have t5, hit and run, 4+ jink save, and are a super mobile scoring unit that can take down the strongest of enemy heavily armored units and vehicles to boot.

Now im not saying that grey hunters are bad but if I saw any of the nerfs that people are recommending I for one would never pick them over bikers. (kind of why bikes are so popular in the new sm book) I dont know but this community always wants to take away the viability of units because they dont pair up to X thing and then months later complain why no one ever takes said unit. I mean even with how "OP" the greyhunter is I havent seen or heard of wolves being used for anything more than runic weapon allies>.>.

Bikes aren't scoring by default. That's not a valid comparison.

Martel732 wrote:
Bikes aren't scoring by default. That's not a valid comparison.

And this is the reason that 70% of units in the books are useless and never used. I dont know a single competitive sm list that doesn't use bikes I wouldn't blame the players but instead blame GW for putting tactical marines in such a bad place that they cant be used. I feel similarly for chaos marines as well and this just shows the weakness of GW balancing. (tacs should have been 10ish each)

The issue is not, are Grey Hunters balanced against Tactical Marines? No, most certainly Grey Hunters are much better, but the question is rather, are Space Wolves balanced against Space Marines? The answer again is "no", Space Marines are a much better army.

Space Marines have greater flexibility, greater variety, and greater ability against a wider range of foes. Space Wolves have Rune Priests, Grey Hunters, and Long Fangs, with maybe a few Wolf Guard mixed in. When they work sure they mulch assault armies but this is sixth edition, how many assault armies are there?

Against the real armies of sixth edition Space Wolves fold up and die just as quickly as any other army wearing power armour.