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.

Thor4hmmer... Not really.
1. Doable, but not really effective. 2 Special Weapons are nothing to write home about, and as you said Rhinos are now pretty fragile. Maybe better than 6th, but still sucky.
2. Technically yes, but you first pay a 35 point model tax and then 20 points for the armor. For 55 points, you'd damn well better be more powerful in CC. Oh, unless they brought a Force Axe. Which is all most players ever bring.
3.Why does this matter? Unless someone wants 4 HQs and only 2-3 troops, and also reeeally wants that bonus for having a FOC. With the lackluster HQ options out there, this doesn't seem to matter in the slightest.
4. Everyone gets this, though. That's like saying 'Your infantry can run in the shooting phase.' It's nice, but not an advantage or a buff, just a thing that exists.
5. Woo! Now a ML2 Psyker only costs 35 points more for taking it from the Space Wolf codex!
6. Missile Launchers are sucky anti-vehicle, Space Marines get Lascannons for cheaper... Yeahnope. Being scoring still isn't an advantage either.
7. I... Guess? They're not bad, but for 3 with one PF and SS, you're looking at over 200 points for what amounts to a really tiny wrecking ball. Any army that can kill a Carnifex or a Riptide or a Wraithknight can kill these guys without sweating, and everyone brings that stuff nowadays. They're mediocre at best.
8. But not as good as a cheaper build on a Chapter Master. And for 280 points, he'd better be.
9. Fair enough.
10. Technically true, but then you lose Objective Secured and your Warlord Trait re-roll. Which makes your HQ-Spam ability pointless.
On your closing comment: Why does everyone say that Grey Hunters are so badass in combat? Yes, they're much better than Tactical Marines. But, the 'Ideal' damage output (30 WS4 S4 attacks) is equivalent to what you get from 8 charging Ork Boys... You know, 48 points of models. They're good in Close Combat, but not great. An average of 4 dead MEQ or 8 dead GEQ really isn't much to write home about.

I'm not sure why it's a suprise that an army 2 editions out of take is getting a little long in the tooth (or fang? ) I'm sure space wolves will get a new codex soonish. proably within 6 months. I mean let's face it, after orks, SWs and BAs are the two armies most in need of a new codex. Grey Knights and Necrons are still from what I know in a reasonably good spot

gausus wrote:
At the end of the 6th the only usable units were:
- Grey Hunters (drop pod, standard)
- Lone Wolf (TDA, CF, SS)
- Wolf Guard with Combi Plasma and Wolf priest

No we are a bit screwed

Define useable.

Because a lot of my lists included:

Bloodclaws
skyclaws
fenrisian wolves
land raiders
drop pods
rune priests
wolf priests
thunderwolves
dreadnaughts
wolf lords

And I had a lot of interesting and enjoyable games

Yeap. In friendly games almost any unit is useable. I often play - 4 Wolf Lords, TWC, some fenrisians and 2 squads of GH in Razorback (for scoring). That was a lot of fun.

But SW units are nowhere near being competitive And that is the issue here

By 'Useable' I am of course referring to competetive play. Units which stack up to the best available optioms and aren't immediately shredded to confetti. I'm not asking for Taudar, I just don't want an army of Flash Gitz...

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Prescience is a lot harder to get now.

????
Do you mean Cast?

By get, I meant get onto your Long Fangs. Cast works a lot better and is more clear, shoulda said cast. Oh well.
We once had about a 11/12th chance of casting the power with a stock Rune Priest. Now, assuming that you roll a 6 for number of Warp Charges and pump them all into the spell, (Which is ideal circumstances,) you still have less odds to use the power. (Can someone help me out on the math here? It feels like it should be about a 2/3rds chance of casting the power successfully, somewhere between 60-80%, but that's just an estimate. My math gets hazy somewhere between calculating the odds of getting 4+s on 7 dice and calculating for DTW.)
Under less-than-ideal circumstances, you're at maybe a 50/50 chance of casting the power. If your enemy has lots of Psykers (For example, a Daemon army), then your chances of getting the power off round down to almost nil. Psychic support is no longer a reliable way to boost Long Fangs into useability.

Well I normaly run a Single Level 2 Rune Priest with Preisance.
That is a d6+2 Warp Charges, that gives me a 80+ Chance of having at least 4+ Dice to work with. Even with 3 Dice I still have a chance of getting the power off.

Wasn't there a pure space wolf player in the top 16 in one of the last grand tournaments? I'm sure there are decent builds out there.

 Anpu42 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:
Prescience is a lot harder to get now.

????
Do you mean Cast?

By get, I meant get onto your Long Fangs. Cast works a lot better and is more clear, shoulda said cast. Oh well.
We once had about a 11/12th chance of casting the power with a stock Rune Priest. Now, assuming that you roll a 6 for number of Warp Charges and pump them all into the spell, (Which is ideal circumstances,) you still have less odds to use the power. (Can someone help me out on the math here? It feels like it should be about a 2/3rds chance of casting the power successfully, somewhere between 60-80%, but that's just an estimate. My math gets hazy somewhere between calculating the odds of getting 4+s on 7 dice and calculating for DTW.)
Under less-than-ideal circumstances, you're at maybe a 50/50 chance of casting the power. If your enemy has lots of Psykers (For example, a Daemon army), then your chances of getting the power off round down to almost nil. Psychic support is no longer a reliable way to boost Long Fangs into useability.

Well I normaly run a Single Level 2 Rune Priest with Preisance.
That is a d6+2 Warp Charges, that gives me a 80+ Chance of having at least 4+ Dice to work with. Even with 3 Dice I still have a chance of getting the power off.

Which isn't bad. You're still fethed by comparison, what with a much higher chance of perils and, of course, a far less likely chance of casting sucessfully.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:
1) Grey Hunters in Rhino Bunkers parking on Objectives. Firing two Plasma or Melta guns out the top hatch - Its almost like its 5th edition again, except your rhino's die easier.

Which is worst than a free ML and flamer.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

2) Runic Armor on Rune Priests makes them better in close combat against librarians.

They also cost almost twice as much, and why would they have their librarians in CC, we have to do it because our CC lords are grossly overpriced to the point of not being fieldable, that is not true for other marine codexes.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

3) You still get 4 HQ in a Combined Arms Detachment.

You could get 10 for all that matters, other bros choices are better and i would take them over our every time.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

4) Grey Hunter Drop Pods are now scoring (and Objective Secured in battleforged)

Granted that is a MARGINAL bonus over marines.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

5) Mastery level 2 psyker got FAQ'd to be cheaper.

1 lvl 2 runepriest costs 2 lvl 1 librarians, you tell me which would you choose?. Also a lvl 2 librarian is still cheaper than a lvl 1 runepriest.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

6) Longfangs in the back field are now scoring and their heavy weapons are more important if more vehicles are back on the field.

Problem is missile launchers are marginally cheaper for us now, while lass is actually more expensive.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

7) Thunderwolf Cav are still strong

TWC are still weak, they have been weak since they were introduced in 5th edition.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

8) Kitted out Wolf Lord is better than most special characters.

Ours may be.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

10) Benefit from super relaxed uber Battle Bro's Allies chart. You can now take Storm Ravens as alies and put your wolf guard in it.

Or you can put better specialist in there from its own codex.

Th0rh4mm3r wrote:

Overall in 7th,, Spacewolves favor an agressive play style, and are strong in close combat against everything except a dedicated close combat squad.

Hide in the rhino on the objective until the rhino pops, then hop out and accept the charge.

Either you hid or you play aggressive. SW are not an aggressive army, they are not well suited for on your face combat, they are a mid range army, you are supposed to weaken your enemy and pick them off either through rapid fire or charging. If you run into your enemy fire, you are likely to get shot down and picked off by his specialist.

I do find it funny that a month ago everyone was calling Grey hunters OP becouse of the Bolt Pistol/CCW/Counter Attack combo and now there are a lot now calling them junk.

 Anpu42 wrote:
I do find it funny that a month ago everyone was calling Grey hunters OP becouse of the Bolt Pistol/CCW/Counter Attack combo and now there are a lot now calling them junk.

People complain because they are better than Tacticals. I've been convinced for an edition that they were mediocre.

Everyone wasn't calling them OP. They were just the least bad of the bolter-armed MEQ options. With the return of the Rhino heavy-weapon bunker, GH lost ground to BA, DA, and Codex Tacticals.

Now Grey Hunters are really the only non-bad thing in the book. Our Fast Attack choices can't shoot, or are Thunderwolves. Our Heavy Support are either overpriced or have Missile Launchers which don't get it done when you need an AP of 1 or 2 to blow up a vehicle. Our HQ choices are all similarly overpriced.

DaddyWarcrimes wrote:
Everyone wasn't calling them OP. They were just the least bad of the bolter-armed MEQ options. With the return of the Rhino heavy-weapon bunker, GH lost ground to BA, DA, and Codex Tacticals.

Now Grey Hunters are really the only non-bad thing in the book. Our Fast Attack choices can't shoot, or are Thunderwolves. Our Heavy Support are either overpriced or have Missile Launchers which don't get it done when you need an AP of 1 or 2 to blow up a vehicle. Our HQ choices are all similarly overpriced.

Try looking up my "Why all the Grey Hunter Hate?" Thread I created.

Yes on all points, but that is mostly becouse we have not our Coxed up Dated yet.
I have not gotten to try them in 7th yet, but they did well in 6th so I think we will do ok.

DOOMONYOU wrote:

gausus wrote:
At the end of the 6th the only usable units were:
- Grey Hunters (drop pod, standard)
- Lone Wolf (TDA, CF, SS)
- Wolf Guard with Combi Plasma and Wolf priest

No we are a bit screwed

Define useable.

Because a lot of my lists included:

Bloodclaws
skyclaws
fenrisian wolves
land raiders
drop pods
rune priests
wolf priests
thunderwolves
dreadnaughts
wolf lords

And I had a lot of interesting and enjoyable games

Agreed, I use the same units more or less in almost all my games. And so far I have won more games than I have lost, and it has been very, very enjoyebal to say the least

Waaaghpower wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
I do find it funny that a month ago everyone was calling Grey hunters OP becouse of the Bolt Pistol/CCW/Counter Attack combo and now there are a lot now calling them junk.

People complain because they are better than Tacticals. I've been convinced for an edition that they were mediocre.

That's because Space Wolf players are weighing in now, not other Marine players.

 Anpu42 wrote:
I do find it funny that a month ago everyone was calling Grey hunters OP becouse of the Bolt Pistol/CCW/Counter Attack combo and now there are a lot now calling them junk.

They are arguably the best stock troop choice for marine codexes (likely now displaced by bikes). Having said that, 2 units, simply can not carry an overpriced codex. Its the same situation Eldar were before current codex, there are a couple viable untis, but that is it.

Specially so this edition, what would you rather have, a unit of gray hunters or a cheaper more mobile white scars bikes?.

gausus wrote:
Hi,

With the new FAQ we have lost our powers, and the null bubble. What do You think - where the Wolves stand with the 7th?

Just played the following list. Stomped every opponent (5 to date). Full disclosure: I don't play Space Marines and I borrowed the army from a guy who basically paints but doesn't play. He hasn't won a game with it in an ice age. Ergo he's selling the army.

2 units 5 Thunder cav (just two shields added to the squads each, nothing else)
15 wolves. Because wolves. its in the name.
3 Grey Hunter Squads (Flamer + meltas) in Pods.
RunePriest level 2
WolfPriest (Wolfkin upgrad3e and nothing else)
Battle Leader on Thundercav mount(Hammer and shield)
Venerable Dreadnought w/ Assault Cannon in a pod

Thats it.

So as far as i can tell, Space Wolves are in good shape. This army literally paid for no upgrades other than 5 shields, a hammer, and level 2 on the Psyker. Everything else was "stock"

Opponents were:
Iyanden (Sword and Board Deathstar)
MechSpam Eldar
Mechspam Eldar with Tau allies
Astra Militarum (Balanced force)
Chaos Space Marines (pretty mech'd up)

 Jancoran wrote:

gausus wrote:
Hi,

With the new FAQ we have lost our powers, and the null bubble. What do You think - where the Wolves stand with the 7th?

Just played the following list. Stomped every opponent (5 to date). Full disclosure: I don't play Space Marines and I borrowed the army from a guy who basically paints but doesn't play. He hasn't won a game with it in an ice age. Ergo he's selling the army.

2 units 5 Thunder cav (just two shields added to the squads each, nothing else)
15 wolves. Because wolves. its in the name.
3 Grey Hunter Squads (Flamer + meltas) in Pods.
RunePriest level 2
WolfPriest (Wolfkin upgrad3e and nothing else)
Battle Leader on Thundercav mount(Hammer and shield)
Venerable Dreadnought w/ Assault Cannon in a pod

Thats it.

So as far as i can tell, Space Wolves are in good shape. This army literally paid for no upgrades other than 5 shields, a hammer, and level 2 on the Psyker. Everything else was "stock"

Opponents were:
Iyanden (Sword and Board Deathstar)
MechSpam Eldar
Mechspam Eldar with Tau allies
Astra Militarum (Balanced force)
Chaos Space Marines (pretty mech'd up)

Then your opponents are terrible players. That list is, um... Pretty awful? For 30 points more your Wolf Guard Battle Leader gets a huge buff into a Wolf Lord. Flamers don't work well with Meltas. You aren't taking advantage of S10 potential on your wolves. Your 2 HQs have no good choices to join.(Unless one of your GH squads has less than 10 men, but you said that they had 2 specials. Either yoyr list is wrong, you've been slowing down your wolves, or you've been leaving them in the open.) A single dread is ridiculously easy pickings for anti-tank shots.
What's your plan for flyers? Or tanks? Your TWC can cause some damage if they get into assault, but since they're the only genuine threat on the board that will be targetted with high strength weapons, they're toast.
I'm assuming this was like a 1500 or 1850 list? Somewhere in between?

As a fluffy list against other non-competetive, fun armies, and run by a skilled player, that list could win, sure. But against any actual tournament-level (Or even semi-competetive,) army, you're immensely screwed. Heck, I could beat it with several other Space Wolf lists, or Sisters of Battle, or Orks... All of my armies, really.
Anecdotal evidence to support a codex as powerful only works if you test it against powerful enemies. Otherwise it's utterly pointless.

“Then you Oppents must be Horable Players.”
How I hate that line!

You know there are some of us out there that play “Fluffy Non-Competive” Armies out there. My self when building a list I have a core that I always play and the look and see what on my shelf I have not played in a while or just in the mood to play. I believe that if more people played that way the game would be better.

Well anyways this is my Core:

Space Wolves Roster


Most every lis is build of of this. If I have Space Marine Allies, I use Codex: Space Marine Land Speeders.

Overall this is a solid build to start with, at I feel so.
I expect Anti-Air, time to Allie with Maries or Guard for AAA.
I expect a Horde army oddly enough more Grey Hunters.
I expect Armor more Long Fangs [usually with a Rune Priest], Grey Hunters with Melta Guns and all of them in Pods.
I want to just have a fun battle out come the Wolf Priest, Blood Claws and Lone Wolves.

AlexRae wrote:
Jaws was fine. It just took all of the facade of umpteem re-rollable 2+ dice that Tau Riptides make and just brought it all down to one roll instead.

5th Ed SW book towards the end of 6th had 3 maybe 4 usable units in it.

Now it has 2 maybe 3. RIP in peace Rune Priest. 100pts for 1 roll on Divination. Awesome stuff!

Roll on the new book hopefully before Christmas.

Faq said that Master of Runes upgrade (lvl 2) was reduced to 25pts
I'm still taking rune-priests, half for fun, half because they still arent trash.
125 points essential for two rolls on Div and Prescience- not too bad. I know there's better easily, but still its not too bad IMO

Anpu: If you had read my full post and comprehended it, you'd realize that:
A. I used the word 'Terrible' and didn't misspell it.
B. I specifically said that I was talking about tournament or at least semi competetive play, and that in fluffy, non-competetive games where lists have no power in mind then it's irrelevant.

Waaaghpower wrote:
Anpu: If you had read my full post and comprehended it, you'd realize that:
A. I used the word 'Terrible' and didn't misspell it.
B. I specifically said that I was talking about tournament or at least semi competetive play, and that in fluffy, non-competetive games where lists have no power in mind then it's irrelevant.

It was not targeted at you, it is just that after all of these year that is one of my Buttons.
The onlt one that gets me going more is Mathhammer.
I loath Mathhammer
I love Mathhammer + Playtesting.

So I am sorry if mt Button made me see Red.

xxvaderxx wrote:

stuff

A lvl 2 generic marine is better then a lvl 2 rune priest? Sheesh.
stats are identical.
That is where it ends.

A lvl 2 rune priest has a 3+ dtw against lvl 1, 4+ against higher. (Libby is 4+ at best)
Rune priests can also get artificer (runic) armor that gives an additional 5++ even if you dont deny.
Rune priests grant their unit counter attack.
Edit: Rune priests get assault bonuses with sagas.
Rune priests wound daemons on a 2+
You can take up to FOUR of them per force org.

The libby has an iron hood.
The libby has chapter tactics. (Woo?)

Waaaghpower wrote:


Then your opponents are terrible players. That list is, um... Pretty awful? For 30 points more your Wolf Guard Battle Leader gets a huge buff into a Wolf Lord. Flamers don't work well with Meltas. You aren't taking advantage of S10 potential on your wolves. Your 2 HQs have no good choices to join.(Unless one of your GH squads has less than 10 men, but you said that they had 2 specials. Either yoyr list is wrong, you've been slowing down your wolves, or you've been leaving them in the open.) A single dread is ridiculously easy pickings for anti-tank shots.
What's your plan for flyers? Or tanks? Your TWC can cause some damage if they get into assault, but since they're the only genuine threat on the board that will be targetted with high strength weapons, they're toast.
I'm assuming this was like a 1500 or 1850 list? Somewhere in between?

As a fluffy list against other non-competetive, fun armies, and run by a skilled player, that list could win, sure. But against any actual tournament-level (Or even semi-competetive,) army, you're immensely screwed. Heck, I could beat it with several other Space Wolf lists, or Sisters of Battle, or Orks... All of my armies, really.
Anecdotal evidence to support a codex as powerful only works if you test it against powerful enemies. Otherwise it's utterly pointless.

The anecdotal card. I love it.

Anyways. I am not an officionado of Space Wolves. He was a Wolf Lord it seems.

and this was a list made to be an examplar of the Quintessential wolf list, and it still beat "Anecdotal" ass.

So despite his "poor" list, and my total lack of experience USING such a list... I'd say I did okay. Wouldn't you? If we get a chance to play, I'll show you what "anecdotal" feels like. Lol.

 Jancoran wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:


Then your opponents are terrible players. That list is, um... Pretty awful? For 30 points more your Wolf Guard Battle Leader gets a huge buff into a Wolf Lord. Flamers don't work well with Meltas. You aren't taking advantage of S10 potential on your wolves. Your 2 HQs have no good choices to join.(Unless one of your GH squads has less than 10 men, but you said that they had 2 specials. Either yoyr list is wrong, you've been slowing down your wolves, or you've been leaving them in the open.) A single dread is ridiculously easy pickings for anti-tank shots.
What's your plan for flyers? Or tanks? Your TWC can cause some damage if they get into assault, but since they're the only genuine threat on the board that will be targetted with high strength weapons, they're toast.
I'm assuming this was like a 1500 or 1850 list? Somewhere in between?

As a fluffy list against other non-competetive, fun armies, and run by a skilled player, that list could win, sure. But against any actual tournament-level (Or even semi-competetive,) army, you're immensely screwed. Heck, I could beat it with several other Space Wolf lists, or Sisters of Battle, or Orks... All of my armies, really.
Anecdotal evidence to support a codex as powerful only works if you test it against powerful enemies. Otherwise it's utterly pointless.

The anecdotal card. I love it.

Anyways. I am not an officionado of Space Wolves. He was a Wolf Lord it seems.

and this was a list made to be an examplar of the Quintessential wolf list, and it still beat "Anecdotal" ass.

So despite his "poor" list, and my total lack of experience USING such a list... I'd say I did okay. Wouldn't you? If we get a chance to play, I'll show you what "anecdotal" feels like. Lol.

So you're a good tactician. Hooray. Unfortunately, we can't measure who's the better player by bragging with quotation marks on the internet, and forum rules ban the comparison of genital size.

Your use of the word 'Anecdotal' confuses me, though. First you bring it up as though to say my argument is invalid for pointing out the limited scope of yours. (Just because you know how someone is arguing doesn't make them wrong, by the way.) But your second and third uses, albiet sarcastic (Or in quotes, at any rate), impliea that you are saying that an anecdote refers to the power of your list... Or... something? I'm not entirely sure of how you're attempting to use the word, though I'm certain it's incorrect. Mind shedding some light on your intended meaning? And why you chose to use the word 'Anecdote' other than the fact that I had used it when refuting your argument?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 sfshilo wrote:

xxvaderxx wrote:

stuff

A lvl 2 generic marine is better then a lvl 2 rune priest? Sheesh.
stats are identical.
That is where it ends.

A lvl 2 rune priest has a 3+ dtw against lvl 1, 4+ against higher. (Libby is 4+ at best)
Rune priests can also get artificer (runic) armor that gives an additional 5++ even if you dont deny.
Rune priests grant their unit counter attack.
Edit: Rune priests get assault bonuses with sagas.
Rune priests wound daemons on a 2+
You can take up to FOUR of them per force org.

The libby has an iron hood.
The libby has chapter tactics. (Woo?)

As opposed to separate lists, I'm just taking all of the Rune Priest's listed 'Advantages' and comparing them to the equivalent.
Rune Priests have slightly better DTW on one unit, but Librarians improve every unit within 12", which is a major advantage.
Librarians have access to Chapter Relics, including one set of Artificer armor. Expensive? Yes, but still cheaper than a Rune Priest in Artificer. (And better, too.) Or he can just buy Terminator Armor unless on a bike.
Yes they give Counter Attack, though Chapter Tactics are an even trade for that.
Okay, sure, Saga of the Warrior Born might help. Is it worth 25 points, though, on a model with 3 attacks? And when Librarians can get Chapter Relics to match these buffs for a similar cost?
Pretty cool, fair enough. 2+ to wound can be helpful... Though most enemies that it's really great against will kill him before he can strike, anyways. Still a definite advantage.
Big freaking whoop to bring four. Are you going to bring four with only three Troops choices? Because otherwise you could bring four without using any special Force Org. rules. Kinda not a helpful buff anymore.

The Rune Priest is, at best, marginally better. By no chance in the Warp is he 35 points better.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:
The anecdotal card. I love it.

It's hardly a "card", anecdotal evidence is damned near worthless unless you properly qualify it. If you're trying to argue that SW aren't a pile of poo, saying you took a bad SW army and beat some people is completely and utterly meaningless..

It's not a card, it's reality.

Waaaghpower wrote:

So you're a good tactician. Hooray. Unfortunately, we can't measure who's the better player by bragging with quotation marks on the internet, and forum rules ban the comparison of genital size.

Your use of the word 'Anecdotal' confuses me, though. First you bring it up as though to say my argument is invalid for pointing out the limited scope of yours. (Just because you know how someone is arguing doesn't make them wrong, by the way.) But your second and third uses, albiet sarcastic (Or in quotes, at any rate), impliea that you are saying that an anecdote refers to the power of your list... Or... something? I'm not entirely sure of how you're attempting to use the word, though I'm certain it's incorrect. Mind shedding some light on your intended meaning? And why you chose to use the word 'Anecdote' other than the fact that I had used it when refuting your argument?
.

I used it correctly. Read it again.

Refuting my argument requires something more than saying "Anecdotal" and then dropping the mic, walking away.

So. Heres the skinny. The thread is about whether Space Wolves are okay in 7th. I say they are. i say so because that question is an opinion question. I explained my opinion by pointing out that someone without any experience with PLAYING Space Wolves can pick them up, play them and win, not just against one person but against multiple people in a tournament. So it isn't JUST an opinion that they are in fact fine in 7th. It's also proven experience.


If you think you can beat me, beat me 3 out of five, prove it. But until you DO, I suppose your boast that your armies could beat me despite my "anecdotal" evidence is as absurd as using the word in the first place. If I beat your armies into the ground are you going to claim its because YOU'RE a bad General? Oh I doubt that you will. Will you blame the dice? Not if you're worth your salt you wont. So at the end of the day, what more proof do you need for an OPINION than victory? None. Victory REQUIRES no explanation. Failure allows none. It's that simple.

So if someone wants to ask for opinions on the viability of Space Wolves, here's my answer: they're just fine. Keep playing them.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jancoran wrote:
The anecdotal card. I love it.

It's hardly a "card", anecdotal evidence is damned near worthless unless you properly qualify it. If you're trying to argue that SW aren't a pile of poo, saying you took a bad SW army and beat some people is completely and utterly meaningless..

It's not a card, it's reality.

Nope. just a card, friend. Just a word. We aren't offering opinions based on inexperience, now are we? No. We're basing them on EXperience. Every poster on Dakkadakka "knows" what they "know" through that filter.

So the word should be banned. If you have a thought, express it. Don't fall back on trite one liners. I'll agreee with you if YOU say that YOU can't win with them. My mind bends to the possible. And I say it's no great feat to win with them. If you're good, they will work fine. if you're not good, then what did you expect?

"Space Wolves are good, I beat armies!" is somehow not anecdotal.

"Your list is not a competitive one because X, Y, Z" is somehow anecdotal.



"Makes perfect sense!"

I've got an idea that should make Space Wolves more fun. : D

Forget optimizing your list.

Forget worrying about which unit can kick which enemy unit's butt.

Put together an army that you envision actually seeing on a WH40k battlefield (or a microcosm of it, since WH40k battles often have casualties in the thousands to millions). Give it some lore, a reason for having everything in the list.

WH40k isn't a game that people play because the rules are good, fair, or balanced, because they're not. Accept it, embrace the lore and make an army you'll have fun envisioning fighting the enemy. Put on some Sabaton songs that go with your vision of your army, to further fuel the creation.

 Jancoran wrote:
Nope. just a card, friend. Just a word. We aren't offering opinions based on inexperience, now are we? No. We're basing them on EXperience. Every poster on Dakkadakka "knows" what they "know" through that filter.

So the word should be banned. If you have a thought, express it. Don't fall back on trite one liners. I'll agreee with you if YOU say that YOU can't win with them. My mind bends to the possible. And I say it's no great feat to win with them. If you're good, they will work fine. if you're not good, then what did you expect?

Yes... it's a word... a word that means something, so instead of having to type out all of that something, we use the word which means the same thing.

I could say: I disagree that your evidence is a reliable measure of the effectiveness of the Space Wolves codex, we lack sufficient information to judge the validity of your argument, we do not know the specific circumstances at play (opponents' skill. opponents' armies, terrain set up, dice rolls, etc) and we do not even know if you're telling the truth. It is simply your personal account, thus an unreliable measure of anything we are discussing.

Wow, that was long winded now wasn't it? Alternatively, I can use "THE WORD!!!"

I could say: Your evidence is anecdotal.

Which means the same damned thing.

anecdotal

adjective
(of an account) not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research.

And I say it's no great feat to win with them

And that depends entirely on the circumstances and the opponents. No one is saying you can't win with them, you can win with any army, you can take THE* worst unit from any given army and win with it... depending on your opponent, terrain, luck and so forth. What you can do in your specific gaming group, while it may be interesting and I don't discourage the use of anecdotes, is trivial to the actual argument at hand.

Are you going to tell me I'm not allowed to use the word "trivial" now?

But really, if we're going to start banning words/phrases, they should be silly things like WAAC and TFG that are poorly defined labels, not well defined dictionary words like "anecdotal".

*****Assuming that unit is physically capable of winning some of the objectives of course, lol.