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.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Well, it's been proven here, the test of absolute warhammer skill comes in taking 10 man marine troop squads in drop pods, if you win the game you have the skills proof positive. So take that as a challenge marine players, because its been said you can't win any game ever with even one squad of them in your list. Take the marine iron man challenge. The more squads the take, and still win the more you can proclaim yourself king of the world !...of warhammer world !
That said, I hope people do realize some can see and know whats better or worse in the game but actually like the softer units because we " gasp " actually like the fluff of the overall game. I know, that's wrong think, but there it is. I think if I ever just played this game hyper competitive that would be the day I stop playing as the lists would be beyond boring.
That isn't what the topic is. What you're thinking of is "How would fluff dictate a Grey Hunter squad be equipped". This thread is asking how you would generally equip them, to which the answer is, unsurprisingly, "why use them?"
Not exactly difficult to grasp, especially with how bad the balance is currently.
Considering this is in general and the question was, how would you generally equip them, I did answer that. If people don't like the answer that's all on them. Honestly the gnashing of teeth and screeching of " They Bad ! " is pretty funny to read. It's like the idea someone would use a bad unit is beyond even understanding on a basic level, or that someone might equip them in a way not considered to be as utter trash. Reminds me of when I started dark eldar and ran wyches and it infuriated someone I knew, every time I ran them as he felt they were so bad as to be beneath contempt.
A question was asked, and it was answered, not every answer needs to be the group think of what is the best but sometimes it might be what is best for the one responding. Some players actually like their armies even if the balance is bad.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Well, it's been proven here, the test of absolute warhammer skill comes in taking 10 man marine troop squads in drop pods, if you win the game you have the skills proof positive. So take that as a challenge marine players, because its been said you can't win any game ever with even one squad of them in your list. Take the marine iron man challenge. The more squads the take, and still win the more you can proclaim yourself king of the world !...of warhammer world !
That said, I hope people do realize some can see and know whats better or worse in the game but actually like the softer units because we " gasp " actually like the fluff of the overall game. I know, that's wrong think, but there it is. I think if I ever just played this game hyper competitive that would be the day I stop playing as the lists would be beyond boring.
That isn't what the topic is. What you're thinking of is "How would fluff dictate a Grey Hunter squad be equipped". This thread is asking how you would generally equip them, to which the answer is, unsurprisingly, "why use them?"
Not exactly difficult to grasp, especially with how bad the balance is currently.
Nor is the topic "How do you use Grey Hunters in a WAAC Competitive Meta" It was a generic how to use question - where the proper answer would cover all bases. Not exactly difficult to grasp, but has surprisingly turned out to be so. There have been a number of people taking offense to the idea Fluffy 10 man + transport is "wrong" and a number who have said they're too bad to do anything else. They are obviously not from the same gaming groups with the same priorities. Too bad nobody pointed this sort of thing out earlier.
AngryAngel80 wrote: Well, it's been proven here, the test of absolute warhammer skill comes in taking 10 man marine troop squads in drop pods, if you win the game you have the skills proof positive. So take that as a challenge marine players, because its been said you can't win any game ever with even one squad of them in your list. Take the marine iron man challenge. The more squads the take, and still win the more you can proclaim yourself king of the world !...of warhammer world !
That said, I hope people do realize some can see and know whats better or worse in the game but actually like the softer units because we " gasp " actually like the fluff of the overall game. I know, that's wrong think, but there it is. I think if I ever just played this game hyper competitive that would be the day I stop playing as the lists would be beyond boring.
You probably have loaded dice, not skill. It would probably take xheating to win with that.
wow someone admits to winning a game with a list and you accuse them of being a cheater? you're a class act dude.
It's alright, he's just still in pain from all the trouncing of his blood angels at the hands of the mean guardsmen, so lashing out is a normal part of the recovery process. I guess he just can't win with a drop pod and max troop squad in his marine list. Not everyone can handle the iron marine strike, we call it steel rain.
In fairness Space Wolves don't have access to scouts so tat does make a 5 may grey hunter squad the best budget choice for troops for a space wolf player. Sure Blood claws are cheaper (I think) but Grey Hunters might actually kill something before being killed
The do, but not as troops, not? Which is part of the problem with the new 2HQ/3Troop 5CP base detachment all but assigning CP on model count not points And I think Blood Claws and Grey Hunters are the same base price. Space Wolves are kind of jacked around even more by the change than normal Space Marines - but less so than DA -Wing armies. 3 Min cost Troop units to get to the "good" units are both understandable in a world run by the Loyal 32, and a sorry state of affairs for the game.
In fairness Space Wolves don't have access to scouts so tat does make a 5 may grey hunter squad the best budget choice for troops for a space wolf player. Sure Blood claws are cheaper (I think) but Grey Hunters might actually kill something before being killed
The do, but not as troops, not? Which is part of the problem with the new 2HQ/3Troop 5CP base detachment all but assigning CP on model count not points And I think Blood Claws and Grey Hunters are the same base price. Space Wolves are kind of jacked around even more by the change than normal Space Marines - but less so than DA -Wing armies. 3 Min cost Troop units to get to the "good" units are both understandable in a world run by the Loyal 32, and a sorry state of affairs for the game.
right I was specificly refering to them as troops. that said, if you belive that primaris will be out right REPLACING old Marines it seems GW has reckongized the "scout problem" and is moving to correct it,
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
You do realise suggesting this "iron marine" challenge for a NEW player is a bad thing, right? He doesn't have own experience to figure out what's good yet. First games are the most memorable, and being tabled out miserable because "oh, but but max squads in pods are fluffy" is harmful for someone, who just test the water.
I had seen own examples of players being turned off that way. One guy was adviced to buy a couple SWSC, because cavalry is a cheap way to fill 1000pts army. Then he figured out how bad it is on the table, and that he has to spend his money to actually buy the army from the scratch again, so he just sold out his army and quit.
Old veterans are used to imbalance and could play for the sake of game, new players are expecting the game, where they are able to win. There is little to none fluff in tabletop. Want the fluff? Play tabletop roleplay game. You have dark heresy, or d20, or savage, even shadow run core rules works awesome for the setting.
In tabletop there are two players directly against each other, and using flamers on aircraft, putting marins in aura Powerball etc have very little with fluff.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 07:21:13
right I was specificly refering to them as troops. that said, if you belive that primaris will be out right REPLACING old Marines it seems GW has reckongized the "scout problem" and is moving to correct it,
At least they think they are. They're really just making it worse. Assuming you believe the Primaris will be outright replacing Old Marines (Including Scouts with Phobos Infiltrators and Eliminators). Getting rid of "cheaper" troops choices to be used in the CP generation core detachment just exacerbates the "scout problem" which is actually the CP per FOCC (Force Org Chart Choice) problem They well and truly punish non-generic armies. The -Wings, the Wind/Wild Riders, White Scars, etc. It's not a scout problem, its a tying CP to Detachments problem. It's a sticking to the unified cost/value scale problem they keep screwing up. Objective Securing is model count, even though we buy them with points/Power Level. CP are more accurately generated on model count than points/power level as well. I don't know what they thought CP was going to be, but whatever it was, it isn't that. CP, even more than the HQ/Warlord model is the personification of the player as a general on the tabletop. Between things like personalizing an army during list creation with special detachments, or combo-tricks with stratagems, they're how the player gets to inject themselves into the battle. The worst constructed most unfluffy smallest 500 point list ever should be able to generate X Command Points - with X being some minimum number to use a CP or so every turn on average. When you get to 2,000 points you should have a few but not many more - potentially enough more to delve into the specialist detachments but not so many if you didn't you'd be throwing CP away on a whim - The game isn't fewer game turns with fewer reroll chances because you're playing 500 points. In fact, the reroll becomes more important/relevant/effective/game changing/pick your adjective at 500 points.
At 500 Points of Guard I've got the loyal 32, 2 basilisks that get an extra 1AP on 6's to wound, (8CP -1 for Sepecialist = 7/2 per use = 3.5 uses) 1 of which can fire twice on 3 of my 6 turns, and about a hundred points of something just to rub some salt in the wounds... Masters of Ordnance to be able to use Catachan's and still have a reroll 1's, plus several turns of Orbital Bombardment maybe? I get to fire 2D6, reroll one, pick the best number of S9 AP -3 shots 5 times per two turns. I'll have 6 shots about 40% of the time - 84% of the time the first die won't be a 6, 84% of THAT time the second won't be a 6, 84% of THAT time the one I reroll STILL won't be a six. .84*.84*.84 is about 59% leaving about 40% of the time, one of the three rolls will be a six. Assume the rest of the time you average 3, 40% of 6 shots, and 60% of 3 shots, is 4.2 shots per firing, 2.47 hits, 2.0 and change wound rolls, 1.74 of which make it past a 6+ armor save (So the number is higher with my 6's going to negate armor entirely) - meaning 1.74 wounding hits per firing and 1.25 firings per turn and its 2.18 wounding hits that deal D3 (i.e. average 2 wounds) on the two wound Veteran Intercessor that likely has four CP at best (3 for Battle Forged plus 1 for a cheapie detachment, spending 1 to become an Indomitus Crusade detachment, and 1 to become Veteran Intercessors, and 2 left to use Rapid Fire, changing their Bolt Rifle to Rapid Fire 2... twice.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/07/27 08:38:24
keep in mind when I say thge scout problem, I mean the issue with scouts, which should be the rarer special forces supplement for marines, being the primary troop choice of most marine lists. this is, for marines, a bit of a problem in that it's a disconnect. move to intercessors and infiltrators and you have your basic line troops, and the more expensive special forces infiltrators which can be used as specialty screeners.
I mean obviously it'd be nice if tac marines where just cheap eneugh to be seen as compeitive with scouts, but I think the 4+ armor save makes that hard, so.. yeah, hence intercessors and infiltrators.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Infiltrators actually could be a nice boost for a SW. I am looking forward to buy them when they will be released as separate kit.
Scouts as troop has two advantages over other troop choices: they are cheap, they provide some board control t1. Infiltrators will give sw at least one if this.
Infiltrators are also Troop Slot, and are fairly duplicative of scouts as special forces that sneak behind enemy lines. Don't get me wrong, Infiltrators solve a lot of the issues Scouts created - The idea that a fully trained Space Marine forgets how to sneak across the no-man's land like he did as a Scout.. yeesh.
Moving the Sniper role to the Eliminators is also a nice touch, but they need a higher ROF as well - even assuming they expand the Eliminator squad enough. I'd rather have 10 scout snipers than 6 Eliminators. (even 7 on equal-ish points)
Silver144 wrote: You do realise suggesting this "iron marine" challenge for a NEW player is a bad thing, right? He doesn't have own experience to figure out what's good yet. First games are the most memorable, and being tabled out miserable because "oh, but but max squads in pods are fluffy" is harmful for someone, who just test the water.
I had seen own examples of players being turned off that way. One guy was adviced to buy a couple SWSC, because cavalry is a cheap way to fill 1000pts army. Then he figured out how bad it is on the table, and that he has to spend his money to actually buy the army from the scratch again, so he just sold out his army and quit.
Old veterans are used to imbalance and could play for the sake of game, new players are expecting the game, where they are able to win. There is little to none fluff in tabletop. Want the fluff? Play tabletop roleplay game. You have dark heresy, or d20, or savage, even shadow run core rules works awesome for the setting.
In tabletop there are two players directly against each other, and using flamers on aircraft, putting marins in aura Powerball etc have very little with fluff.
You do realize that you're the one who suggested it with all of your whining?
The sound advice he's received is to learn his meta and go from there. You shouting "MEGA TOURNAMENTS ONLY !!!!1!!!1!!!" doesn't help him until he finds out that his meta actually plays that way. There are plenty of people here who have won with 10 man marine squads against stronger net lists, and if he's not playing against armies packed full of knights, then he can learn to use full sized squads successfully.
Silver144 wrote: You do realise suggesting this "iron marine" challenge for a NEW player is a bad thing, right? He doesn't have own experience to figure out what's good yet. First games are the most memorable, and being tabled out miserable because "oh, but but max squads in pods are fluffy" is harmful for someone, who just test the water.
I had seen own examples of players being turned off that way. One guy was adviced to buy a couple SWSC, because cavalry is a cheap way to fill 1000pts army. Then he figured out how bad it is on the table, and that he has to spend his money to actually buy the army from the scratch again, so he just sold out his army and quit.
Old veterans are used to imbalance and could play for the sake of game, new players are expecting the game, where they are able to win. There is little to none fluff in tabletop. Want the fluff? Play tabletop roleplay game. You have dark heresy, or d20, or savage, even shadow run core rules works awesome for the setting.
In tabletop there are two players directly against each other, and using flamers on aircraft, putting marins in aura Powerball etc have very little with fluff.
You do realize that you're the one who suggested it with all of your whining?
The sound advice he's received is to learn his meta and go from there. You shouting "MEGA TOURNAMENTS ONLY !!!!1!!!1!!!" doesn't help him until he finds out that his meta actually plays that way. There are plenty of people here who have won with 10 man marine squads against stronger net lists, and if he's not playing against armies packed full of knights, then he can learn to use full sized squads successfully.
Now be a gentleman and quote at least one my message where I did give him a "mega tournament only" suggestion. I am waiting.
Silver144 wrote: You do realise suggesting this "iron marine" challenge for a NEW player is a bad thing, right? He doesn't have own experience to figure out what's good yet. First games are the most memorable, and being tabled out miserable because "oh, but but max squads in pods are fluffy" is harmful for someone, who just test the water.
I had seen own examples of players being turned off that way. One guy was adviced to buy a couple SWSC, because cavalry is a cheap way to fill 1000pts army. Then he figured out how bad it is on the table, and that he has to spend his money to actually buy the army from the scratch again, so he just sold out his army and quit.
Old veterans are used to imbalance and could play for the sake of game, new players are expecting the game, where they are able to win. There is little to none fluff in tabletop. Want the fluff? Play tabletop roleplay game. You have dark heresy, or d20, or savage, even shadow run core rules works awesome for the setting.
In tabletop there are two players directly against each other, and using flamers on aircraft, putting marins in aura Powerball etc have very little with fluff.
You do realize that you're the one who suggested it with all of your whining?
The sound advice he's received is to learn his meta and go from there. You shouting "MEGA TOURNAMENTS ONLY !!!!1!!!1!!!" doesn't help him until he finds out that his meta actually plays that way. There are plenty of people here who have won with 10 man marine squads against stronger net lists, and if he's not playing against armies packed full of knights, then he can learn to use full sized squads successfully.
Now be a gentleman and quote at least one my message where I did give him a "mega tournament only" suggestion. I am waiting.
Here you go
Just no.
Taking GH is already handicap to your list, taking 10 man unit is outright shoot in your leg. Taking droppod for them is insane level of absurd.
No, there is no fluff in 8ed, not for marine.
Silver144 wrote: Ok, where do you see a "mega tournament only" here?
Or do you truly believe 5 man squad with plasma and axe on a leader I suggested on the previous post is "mega tournament only"?
I think what people are saying is that your comments of "you can never with a game with 10 man squads in a transport" is not a general statement, and does not apply to all games of 40k. Your comments especially seem to imply a highly competitive bent.
The OP might be asking this in regards to the competitive scene, or maybe they're more curious about what the fluff might say. This is why Breton made the most sensible comment out of the two of you, encouraging the OP to find out what their meta was like and what kind of games they wanted to play.
And for what it's worth, I've had success taking a 3x10 Tactical Squad list. Can't remember the exact list, but it was something like 3x10 Tacts, Terminators, Devastators, Calgar, a Lieutenant and I *think* Sternguard? Won pretty well against a Death Guard list.
Silver144 wrote: Ok, where do you see a "mega tournament only" here?
Or do you truly believe 5 man squad with plasma and axe on a leader I suggested on the previous post is "mega tournament only"?
I think what people are saying is that your comments of "you can never with a game with 10 man squads in a transport" is not a general statement, and does not apply to all games of 40k. Your comments especially seem to imply a highly competitive bent.
The OP might be asking this in regards to the competitive scene, or maybe they're more curious about what the fluff might say. This is why Breton made the most sensible comment out of the two of you, encouraging the OP to find out what their meta was like and what kind of games they wanted to play.
And for what it's worth, I've had success taking a 3x10 Tactical Squad list. Can't remember the exact list, but it was something like 3x10 Tacts, Terminators, Devastators, Calgar, a Lieutenant and I *think* Sternguard? Won pretty well against a Death Guard list.
People overestimate how "bad" troops are, especially when they're Objective Securing somewhere around half of the ways to score points today. Me personally I'd never take a 3x10 Tac list. Not out of a power grab or anything, I just want one of everything so I mix in a lot of squads Tac, Intercessor, Infiltrator, Scout.... That works pretty well too.
I prefer to have mono-troop lists where I can - so my Ultramarines 2nd is Tacticals, my Ultramarines 5th is Intercessors, my homebrew Chapter's 3rd is Intercessors, and my homebrew's 10th is Infiltrators, but I see your point.
Silver144 wrote: Ok, where do you see a "mega tournament only" here?
Or do you truly believe 5 man squad with plasma and axe on a leader I suggested on the previous post is "mega tournament only"?
I think what people are saying is that your comments of "you can never with a game with 10 man squads in a transport" is not a general statement, and does not apply to all games of 40k. Your comments especially seem to imply a highly competitive bent.
The OP might be asking this in regards to the competitive scene, or maybe they're more curious about what the fluff might say. This is why Breton made the most sensible comment out of the two of you, encouraging the OP to find out what their meta was like and what kind of games they wanted to play.
And for what it's worth, I've had success taking a 3x10 Tactical Squad list. Can't remember the exact list, but it was something like 3x10 Tacts, Terminators, Devastators, Calgar, a Lieutenant and I *think* Sternguard? Won pretty well against a Death Guard list.
People overestimate how "bad" troops are, especially when they're Objective Securing somewhere around half of the ways to score points today. Me personally I'd never take a 3x10 Tac list. Not out of a power grab or anything, I just want one of everything so I mix in a lot of squads Tac, Intercessor, Infiltrator, Scout.... That works pretty well too.
Nah, there's actually some good troops. Grey Hunters and Tactical Marines are not (Grey Hunters less so, of course).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Silver144 wrote: Infiltrators actually could be a nice boost for a SW. I am looking forward to buy them when they will be released as separate kit.
Scouts as troop has two advantages over other troop choices: they are cheap, they provide some board control t1. Infiltrators will give sw at least one if this.
I'm more annoyed with the inconsistency that Wolf Scouts are supposed to be Vets but lack Vet stats.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/27 16:03:29
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
I would pass on Grey Hunters for Intercessors. The latter are actually quite good, the former don't really have any selling points.
That's said, I usually do run a good number of Grey Hunters, and I either run them as 5+Plas outflanking or bare bones min size.
I'd consider blood claws too for line infantry. They're pretty stabby.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/07/28 01:17:52
Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades!
Silver144 wrote: You do realise suggesting this "iron marine" challenge for a NEW player is a bad thing, right? He doesn't have own experience to figure out what's good yet. First games are the most memorable, and being tabled out miserable because "oh, but but max squads in pods are fluffy" is harmful for someone, who just test the water.
I had seen own examples of players being turned off that way. One guy was adviced to buy a couple SWSC, because cavalry is a cheap way to fill 1000pts army. Then he figured out how bad it is on the table, and that he has to spend his money to actually buy the army from the scratch again, so he just sold out his army and quit.
Old veterans are used to imbalance and could play for the sake of game, new players are expecting the game, where they are able to win. There is little to none fluff in tabletop. Want the fluff? Play tabletop roleplay game. You have dark heresy, or d20, or savage, even shadow run core rules works awesome for the setting.
In tabletop there are two players directly against each other, and using flamers on aircraft, putting marins in aura Powerball etc have very little with fluff.
My standard line to new players is this " You're going to lose a lot before you ever win, make peace with that now and always look to how you can improve and you will before you know it win more than you lose. "
If a new player is so soft shell that some loss out the gate turns them off from the game, they weren't really ever going to last. If all you play a game for is to win, you probably won't play it much in the long run as there is always a better player or a more un balanced list, especially in warhammer. So no, I don't think its a poor idea at all to bring up taking a challenge, it's only through challenge and struggle we grow. A better player will come out of not taking the easy path off the bat but accepting some struggle for the higher gain. I didn't lie and say it was a strong list, I said it was a worse choice it's simply the choice I take. So you can teach your noobs the way you want, I would rather a new player stand the test of time as opposed to spoon feed him into the meta without learning what it is first hand and playing it out to decide what he'd rather, sometimes they surprise you and themselves.
Silver144 wrote: Ok, where do you see a "mega tournament only" here?
Or do you truly believe 5 man squad with plasma and axe on a leader I suggested on the previous post is "mega tournament only"?
It's the competitive build for people who play highly competitive games. Not that people who don't stick to 5 man only seem to have much problems with practice.
So, yeah. When you push net-lists like you are, you're pushing tournament builds.
Misfittoy wrote: I am new to 40k and was wondering what weapon options people used for their squads.
Hmm. Looks like I'm late to this debate. And how I like to run my GH will surely cause a stroke in somebody around here.... But you asked.
I have 3 squads of GH in my SW army.
Squad #1 (sitting on my work table atm as I'm adding details accrued during their last few games - battle honors, kill stripes, etc) consists of:
1 WG - Power armor, bolt pistol, power/frost axe (wich depends upon the edition of the moment)
Power sword/plasma pistol
Power fist/plasma pistol
Flamer
Bolter
Bolter
Bolter
And a drop pod
Squad 2 is similar, but has a Meltagun. Squad 3 has a plasma gun.
*My Wolfguard are not permanent attachments. I have about a dozen made up in various combos & plug them into squads on a game to game basis. Just so happened that Bolt pistol/axe guy was attached during the game this pack finished off a Lord of Change. And so he gets a kill stripe along with the squad.
*Drop pods - Yes. I'm thoroughly annoyed with the current Deep Strike rules. But my Wolves have been a 100% drop pod based army since 2e (using those awful Armorcast pod models) and I'm not changing that now. Eventually the rules will shift again to my favor.
You dare use drop pods ?! You'll never win a game ever and everyone will laugh at you !!
In case it's hard to read there is heavy sarcasm and I kid, sounds like some sweet squads and my wolves aren't total podded but I have a few so their current state is awful and I really do hope they come back around to be useful soonish once more.
AngryAngel80 wrote: You dare use drop pods ?! You'll never win a game ever and everyone will laugh at you !!
In case it's hard to read there is heavy sarcasm and I kid, sounds like some sweet squads and my wolves aren't total podded but I have a few so their current state is awful and I really do hope they come back around to be useful soonish once more.
I've got three pods built, a fouth on the sprue, and would really like to get it built and painted to get it in the hole in the battlefoam tray. I suspect of all the Transports that could transition to Primaris as is, the Drop Pod is the most likely. It's iconically Space Marine, and they're already replacing Land Raiders with Repulsors. Of course, Pods were already ridiculously small for what they were supposed to contain so who knows for sure.
While I'll agree that pushing the it isn't the most powerful option ever line, don't even think of taking it line is extreme, I do think it's important to be honest with new players about the current state of units.
40k isn't a video game were you can just swap out options with no loss of money or hobby time. I can see a new player being frustrated if they bought three boxes of GH and DPs only to learn that they just dropped 100s of dollars on units that right now are kinda in the dog house.
40k isn't a video game were you can just swap out options with no loss of money or hobby time. I can see a new player being frustrated if they bought three boxes of GH and DPs only to learn that they just dropped 100s of dollars on units that right now are kinda in the dog house.
Bingo. Outside of needing certain bitz, encouraging new players to make bad purchases makes you a bad person.
CaptainStabby wrote: If Tyberos falls and needs to catch himself it's because the ground needed killing.
jy2 wrote: BTW, I can't wait to run Double-D-thirsters! Man, just thinking about it gets me Khorney.
vipoid wrote: Indeed - what sort of bastard would want to use their codex?
MarsNZ wrote: ITT: SoB players upset that they're receiving the same condescending treatment that they've doled out in every CSM thread ever.
Misfittoy wrote: I am new to 40k and was wondering what weapon options people used for their squads.
Hmm. Looks like I'm late to this debate. And how I like to run my GH will surely cause a stroke in somebody around here.... But you asked.
I have 3 squads of GH in my SW army.
Squad #1 (sitting on my work table atm as I'm adding details accrued during their last few games - battle honors, kill stripes, etc) consists of:
1 WG - Power armor, bolt pistol, power/frost axe (wich depends upon the edition of the moment)
Power sword/plasma pistol
Power fist/plasma pistol
Flamer
Bolter
Bolter
Bolter
And a drop pod
Squad 2 is similar, but has a Meltagun. Squad 3 has a plasma gun.
*My Wolfguard are not permanent attachments. I have about a dozen made up in various combos & plug them into squads on a game to game basis. Just so happened that Bolt pistol/axe guy was attached during the game this pack finished off a Lord of Change. And so he gets a kill stripe along with the squad.
*Drop pods - Yes. I'm thoroughly annoyed with the current Deep Strike rules. But my Wolves have been a 100% drop pod based army since 2e (using those awful Armorcast pod models) and I'm not changing that now. Eventually the rules will shift again to my favor.
I am interested in your format, I like the idea of have one of each of the types of specials, was wondering about the Power Fist/ Plasma Pistol, and the Power Sword/Plasma Pistol. Do you run them on your Pack Leader?
Automatically Appended Next Post: I have to say I had an issue when I first started of having a mouth bigger than my eyes, I bought the burning of Prospero for the Mk 3 armor and then an older than I thought battlebox of standard marines, a chaplain, a dreadnought, land speeder and a land raider. I agree I rushed in a little to fast with picking up packs, thus looking more at Grey Hunters. I had read that they were better than the Blood Claws is that thought out dated now?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2019/07/28 22:13:56
40k isn't a video game were you can just swap out options with no loss of money or hobby time. I can see a new player being frustrated if they bought three boxes of GH and DPs only to learn that they just dropped 100s of dollars on units that right now are kinda in the dog house.
Bingo. Outside of needing certain bitz, encouraging new players to make bad purchases makes you a bad person.
Which is why the OP was told it would be best to learn his meta...
If his meta isn't super competitive, Grey Hunters aren't a bad purchase.
