Remembering who we are

[HERO]

Ho ho ho, someone found my article!

 

I play Space Wolves too you know, and I play them in the manner they're meant to be played: With axe in hand.

 

If I wanted to play all shooty and wimpy like, I'd borrow my friend's Tau army.

 

HERO seems to be mistaking Space Wolves with Khorne Berzerkers.

 

No.. but once in a while your Long Fang should grasp his old axe and remember what it feels like. That's all I'm trying to say in the article.

 

Like it or not Wolf brothers, Space Wolves are now one of the greatest internet archetypes as cheesers and spammers, despite the better efforts of other Wolf Lords on this board.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

So what kinds of lists would Hero and the Right Honourable Wolf Lord Kieran put forwards at 1500pts?

[Yogi]

As someone already said. People don't like losing.

 

I always suspected that GW and the playtesters play the way it should be fluff wise, which makes all those interesting choices weaker then the unforseen unfluffly/lame/spam choices which I think they don't test.

 

The other thing is that stupid things work in the fluff, but not in the game.

 

But if you take sagas and don't try an achieve the oath associated with them, then you probably should consider yourself a codex marine.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

As someone already said. People don't like losing.

 

I always suspected that GW and the playtesters play the way it should be fluff wise, which makes all those interesting choices weaker then the unforseen unfluffly/lame/spam choices which I think they don't test.

 

The other thing is that stupid things work in the fluff, but not in the game.

 

But if you take sagas and don't try an achieve the oath associated with them, then you probably should consider yourself a codex marine.

 

I'm not so sure Yogi.

Andy Chambers repeatedly pwned Jervis Johnson, and his lists were better than JJ's. He was also a better general and had better concentration, but it is not like GW are naive to people who use their common sense about building a powerful list.

 

Chambers, Pete Haines and Phil Kelly all spring to mind as guys who actually were "competitive" players, with the usual ideas on powerful combos. If GW was full of Jervis Johnsons, then perhaps the "Oh we didn't realise you would take good lists, why aren't you bringing those poor units?" would hold water.

Even JJ, during the explanation time, would say "this unit is terrible" or some such, from time to time.

 

Fluffy should be competitive. There is a gap between competitive and romantic players, and by making rules that actually support fluffy play, both groups can play one another and BOTH enjoy the game at the same time, even for different reasons. You can't make someone who wants a story play hard, and you can't make someone who wants to play hard get into telling a story.

GW will continue to leak players to PP if they continue on this path. Giving that they are under the lash of shareholders, that makes no sense for them. If they were small and devoted to us, sure "we don't want you to play 40K hard" might work. But they are a proper company now....

 

+++

 

I and a few others actually consider C:SW and C:CSM to have elements in it that Marines should have. Marines play something like a Tau force - wimpy in combat, shoot lots and they even have a special rule called cowardice, or something like that :lol:

Sure the Captain and Hammernators slap a few things around, but basically, they play like Tau. Now I love Tau and have them, but the way Marines are portrayed in the fluff is not how they act on the table.

Setting 'not fighter' characters to i4 was a big whoopsy, though Wolves are inflicted with that too.

 

Basically, CSM and Greys are what Tacticals should be, even if you keep the option of a heavy weapon. As Tacticals are both iconic and compulsory, them player like a Sisters of Battle squad really shows a missed goal.

 

C:BA is widely seen as better than C:SM, yet people 'counts as' with C:SW even though C:BA is a cleaner swap - why? I don't think it is just the ease of which Wolves are played with, but the way they fight. Their Codex captures how Marines should fight, in the eyes of many. I think people would even use C:CSM for their Marines, if the points were set right.

[Yogi]

@wilhelm I base my opinion off the fact that rules for things without a model (and no real intention of making said model) are often quite good. TWC for example. IMO that is because the playtesters didn't proxy an army of them. There are a few examples like that.

 

Fluff being the strongest list is the holy grail. If they really playtested all sorts of variations, I think they would of got it right once. But they never have IMO. Proper competitive is always some lame variation of the list. If this is done on purpose then well that's even more lame.

 

I agree though that it would be nice if marines in general were less tau like. The space wolf codex is my favourite codex rules wise. Alot of cool and fun choices in there. Razorback and TWC not included..

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

So what kinds of lists would Hero and the Right Honourable Wolf Lord Kieran put forwards at 1500pts?

 

well, 1500 is smaller than i usually play, but here goes (beware of the onslaught of acronyoms coming!):

 

WL on TWM, with a FB, BoR, MB, WTT, WTN, SotB, RA and 1 FW.

 

9 GHs in Rhino with EA, with MG, PS, MotW, Wolf Standard.

9 GHs in Rhino with EA, with MG, PS, MotW, Wolf Standard.

8 BC in Rhino with EA, PF and Flamer

3 WGPL with PF and Combi-Plas, one in each squad

 

3 TWC, all SS, 1 TH

 

6 LF, 3 LasC, 2 H.B.

 

rings in at 1499. it is smaller than what i usually run, so doesnt have the Rune Priest or WG in TDA.

 

WLK

[Karack Blackstone]

My two cents:

 

Plazor spam seems way too common on the internet.

I know one other SW player that frequents the LGS (GW) and at another LGS, there's a few people that favor TWC and wound allocation.

 

Space Wolves are basically power armor cavemen in my mind, with viking thrown in for fun. What works is what keeps you alive; martial skill, steel-blade intent and will, great senses and the grit to bear your wounds and keep fighting. "It's just a flesh wound" comes to mind. (Making an armor save does not mean no injury, just that it's not enough to bring the SW Brother down.)

 

ML spam I can adjust on, since I have 50 to 60 points to play with on my now final list. So if need be, I can change things up.

 

Overall, I don't consider myself cheesy, although others might. My list is 4K pts, one FOC, and rather expensive on all units, save my Typhoons in FA support. I have three Plazorbacks, as it were, for my LF's. 4 Rhinos for my GH's.

 

I don't expect "play what comes with what you have" is going to be well received: I can post my list if it is requested, or make a post in the SW Army List section and go from there.

 

I would like to play my list with the option of having four weapon types per LF pack, with all five being used at once between the following at any given time:

 

- ML x 5

- HB x 5

- LC x 5

- PC x 5

 

That means at any given time I can go 15 ML's, 15 PC's, 15 LC's, or 15 HB's. Being able to select weapons per game on LF's only may not be the most fair all-comers list approach; however, going all ML's would be the best all around approach in my list.

 

I suppose the question is, do I go 2LC, 3ML instead on each pack.

[commander alexander]

Oh, I think this is past ridiculous. Are you going to tell everyone now that if their army isn't painted blue-grey, or grey-grey it's not a Space Wolves army? Good lord it's the same difference, opinion. Let everyone play the way they like.

[Marshal Wilhelm]

So what kinds of lists would Hero and the Right Honourable Wolf Lord Kieran put forwards at 1500pts?

 

well, 1500 is smaller than i usually play, but here goes (beware of the onslaught of acronyoms coming!):

 

WL on TWM, with a FB, BoR, MB, WTT, WTN, SotB, RA and 1 FW.

 

9 GHs in Rhino with EA, with MG, PS, MotW, Wolf Standard.

9 GHs in Rhino with EA, with MG, PS, MotW, Wolf Standard.

8 BC in Rhino with EA, PF and Flamer

3 WGPL with PF and Combi-Plas, one in each squad

 

3 TWC, all SS, 1 TH

 

6 LF, 3 LasC, 2 H.B.

 

rings in at 1499. it is smaller than what i usually run, so doesnt have the Rune Priest or WG in TDA.

 

WLK

 

Mmm, interesting. You are lacking the Missile Fangs and Rune Priest, which I thought were mandatory choices :P

Big hero, not not shooty, sounds like a Saga being told. ^_^

 

You don't like Missile Fangs, because others bring them in abundance, or some other reason?

[Lord Ragnarok]

manner they're meant to be played:

This is dangerous. I for one, Don't think that "axe in hand" is the way or only way sw's are meant to be played. In the previous dex they really catered to the CQB aspect of battle. Good not great at close combat. very good not great a short range shooting (special, WG special, two plasma pistols for less cost than now). This is versus the str8 on rush of a berserker army who could best us in combat straight on but couldn't hope to fight us in that 12 inch bubble.

 

I don't see in the codex a rule where you have to play an army a certain way. For those who think that wolves have to play a certain way the best way to prove your point is not to force it on others by demanding they change their actions but just keep playing your way and beating their socks off (think lilttlbitz). If it is too tough, then so bet it. THAT's the wolfy way. Play your way and don't complain about it.

 

Also remind yourself that people are in this hobby for many different reasons which will not always coincide with your own.

I do understand wanting to play with certain people you enjoy (I will not suffer derogatory,distasteful or cheating players no matter how wolfy/fluffy/nicely painted army they have).

 

Many folks are just competitive and care much less about the fluff. As folks complain about them...GW will correct it and they will move on to the next strongest dex.

[eyeslikethunder]

I and a few others actually consider C:SW and C:CSM to have elements in it that Marines should have. Marines play something like a Tau force - wimpy in combat, shoot lots and they even have a special rule called cowardice, or something like that ^_^

Sure the Captain and Hammernators slap a few things around, but basically, they play like Tau. Now I love Tau and have them, but the way Marines are portrayed in the fluff is not how they act on the table.

Setting 'not fighter' characters to i4 was a big whoopsy, though Wolves are inflicted with that too.

 

Basically, CSM and Greys are what Tacticals should be, even if you keep the option of a heavy weapon. As Tacticals are both iconic and compulsory, them player like a Sisters of Battle squad really shows a missed goal.

 

C:BA is widely seen as better than C:SM, yet people 'counts as' with C:SW even though C:BA is a cleaner swap - why? I don't think it is just the ease of which Wolves are played with, but the way they fight. Their Codex captures how Marines should fight, in the eyes of many. I think people would even use C:CSM for their Marines, if the points were set right.

 

 

I have felt this for a long time. Marines are meant to be your Navy seals, SAS, Special forces etc troops doing surgical strikes. It was the reason i loved the drop pod armies of 4th ed they played like i expected marines to play (Especially the wolves and templar versions). Leading deadly strikes straight into the midde of the enemy not sitting back and shooting from long range. or marching across the board like i'm figthing some american civil war or Napoleonic battle. 5eds version where i drop on the board and no one is there because they are all in reserve just feels wrong. I want flyers, black hawk helicoper style stuff

 

Part of the problem is for marines is that they have fallen behind in the close combat arms race. In third ed they were sort of good and you saw lots of marines charging as part the rhino rush. While this was abused it felt right and fitted the fluff. But as the editions have gone on what is considered good in combat has gone up. But marine stats have remained the same. Most the elite assault squads like honour guard and the like(hammernators are the exception and highly undervalued) just are not worth it

 

Even in 3rd Shooty marine lists were good but as time as gone along they have moved more and more the way to go.

 

The Style, Strengths and points of the army list should make you want to play fluffy.

 

 

On the sagas most of them are easy to fulfil and almost fulfil themselves most the time

the only one i think ive seen abused is the saga of the hunter to give long fangs stealth.

 

I do think Hero slightly has fallen for our Propaganda that we are mindeless savages charging foward axe in hand. The defining factor of the space wolves in our modern fluff is we are willing to do what if takes to win.

 

I remember taking a land speeder and drop pods to tournament and being marked down because space wolves dont fly! Thankfully the new codex says the wolves use land speeders in large packs and seem to love using them.

[dswanick]

well, 1500 is smaller than i usually play, but here goes (beware of the onslaught of acronyoms coming!):

 

WL on TWM, with a FB, BoR, MB, WTT, WTN, SotB, RA and 1 FW.

 

9 GHs in Rhino with EA, with MG, PS, MotW, Wolf Standard.

9 GHs in Rhino with EA, with MG, PS, MotW, Wolf Standard.

8 BC in Rhino with EA, PF and Flamer

3 WGPL with PF and Combi-Plas, one in each squad

 

3 TWC, all SS, 1 TH

 

6 LF, 3 LasC, 2 H.B.

 

rings in at 1499. it is smaller than what i usually run, so doesnt have the Rune Priest or WG in TDA.

 

WLK

WLK, I'd like to make a point about this whole thread by using your sample 1500pt list. So please don't take my devil's advocate post as an attack. :)

 

So what we have here are three cookie-cutter identical transports taxiing three cookie-cutter identical vet.sarges leading two cookie-cutter identical troops units and one odd-man-out points filler unit. A cheese-filled mini-deathstar unit lead by a single cheese-filled "hero". First, why would a Wolf Lord be leading such a small unit? Shouldn't a properly fluffy list have a WGBL in command of so few troops? A Wolf Lord should be leading a larger force of his company. Second, Space Wolves should be led by heroes - note the use of the plural. Any 1500pt Space Marine force of 3 squads can be led by a single task force commander - Space Wolves get up to 4 HQ choices for a reason. Wolf Guard Pack Leaders are supposed to be the "in-between" stage of more than a pack member and less than a full fledged IC hero - but Space Wolves heroes are supposed to be colorful and uniquely characterful. Shouldn't each one be equipped a little differently? Spamming the same squad size for both Grey Hunters is hardly true to the fluff of Space Wolves where the pack maintains the same members throughout the life of the pack, never receiving reinforcements. I've actually been told that it's "un-Wolfy" to have two packs of Grey Hunters the same size and should field a pack of 9, a pack of 8, a pack of 7, and a pack of 6 to "represent that over time the packs will slowly dwindle to attrition". Also, I think your Long Fangs have gotten a little too old - they are mixing weapons in a single squad that really have different methodologies to their deployment. The Lascannons want to be deployed back in a vantage point where they have lots of line of sight to target enemy vehicles. Heavy Bolters should be deployed closer to the front line where they can be brought to bear against enemy personnel. Mixing dissimilar ranges and roles like this is not very wise on the part of these "wise, long-in-the-fang" warriors.

 

So, enough of my cross-section of complaints about your list. On to my point about the original purpose of this thread - picking apart someone else's list based on one's own view of "fluffy" is a waste of time. HERO makes some claims about other people's lists based on his perceptions and his opinions of what constitutes a "proper" "Wolfy" Space Wolf army list. He is, of course, entitled to his opinion - just as we all are. But I don't think we are entitled to trash other players legal, valid choices because of our opinions. If that were the case, I would be trashing every Space Wolf player who fielded Thunderwolf Cavalry because I think it was more fluffy for a Space Wolf army to have a limited number of normally unavailable tanks because they were named in honor of the Space Wolf Primarch. I really dislike the Wolf Lord, riding the RhinosoWolf mount, bearing the Mark of the Wolfen, and a Saga of the Wolfy Wolf, a FrostyWolf weapon, and Wolf Tails and Teeth leading a unit of Rhinosowolves with a Mark of the Wolf, armed with Wolf Shields, WolfGuns, and Wolfy Wolf-Wolf pets... (Can you tell that I think the whole idea of Thunderwolves is teen-angst driven fanboi-ism?).

 

But that's not how it works. So long as the list is valid and legal acording to the codex - then we each make our own choices of how to play with our toy soldiers. And saying one refuses to play against someone elses's toy soldiers because they don't build their list the way one feels it should be built is simply sand-box bigotry of the "I'm taking my toys and going home" variety.

[Kami]

Some good points by dswanick.

I especially think that wolf lists can be spiced up by different grey hunters packs, without losing much strength. I see playing people either with the 10 man GH packs, the 9+1WG, 8+1WG+1 IC, or 5+1WG builds, which means they all are successful. But instead of taking all of the same type, why not mixing them?

Is it really that it isn't competitive or is it just the laziness to take the same?

I definately have to try this and i'm sure the fluff part will be liked in my gaming group (and more so by myself). What's your take on why it is rare to see really different hunter packs? Or is it just something that hasn't been considered yet and we should try out?

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

@Willie: I usually win my games according to if i fulfill my saga, regardless of the actual outcome. i have given up tactical advantages to take the chance when they arise. the reason for this is that i can win or lose games and who cares, but if i am not happy with my character and the story i made for him i dont feel like playing. when he gets killed i swear vengeance, when he fulfilles his saga i cheer loudly. ( i can be a bit much to play against at times)

the missile fangs i think are too played out IMO. i also love the image of the heavy bolter mowing down targets while spears of energy rip through tanks...it looks very cool in my head.

I believe that rune priests are required in most games of 40k, but not for his casting ability. i need to shut down the swarm lords, mephistons, flying dreads, mary sue grey knights and their ilk. without his defensive abilities i might as well hand my opponent the game and go grab a bite to eat. psychic powers are now easily available to almot every army out there, and the abilities they bring to the table are strong. i need the ability to counter that. that all said, this is a 1.5k list and certain things didnt make the cut. he was one of them (i usually play 1850-2000 at the min.)

 

@dswanick: (to start off, i hate when people start off any arguement saying they are just the devil's advocate...to me it now says i am being argumentative for the sake of it. oh well.)

on the list: as i noted above, i usually play bigger games meaning more stuff. this includes a DPing unit of GH+Wolf Guard, maybe a unit of GH on foot to defend the LF.

sadly, the small points meant i had to limit my options. On the cookie cutting troops, there isnt alot i can do with only 2 troops choice, other that swap the gear around. which happens with the 3rd and 4th packs. they usually tote a plasma gun and a flamer.

the lord does stick out, especially in a small game. insert another mention of my bigger games, and also arent the Wolves about bringing big heroes to a fight? being outnumbered and outgunned, but thumbing your nose at the enemy and fighting with honor...the whole idea behind the Last Samurai, 300, Seven Samurai, 13th Warrior. the image of that small wolf force led by a single hero is awesome, to me. but if you like, i cna say the battle i am playing it part of a larger battle and i am solely focusing on this part for the battle. around us, off table, a apoc fight is going on.

on the TWC, i have alot of experience in using them, and learned this: they die to heavy bolter fire worse than guardsmen. they are powerful, yes, and take a bit of effort to kill. but i rarely find they are worth the 270pts it takes to field them. there is simply too much plasma, melta, lascannon and other such weapons that can wipe out the entire unit in a single shooting phase. people who cry cheese at TWC amuse me, as its really obvious they dont field them often. they are the very definition of glass cannons to me. the Hammernaughts and Death Company can hit harder for cheaper.

 

it might be a waste of time to pick apart people's list, but this is the internet. that is what it exists for (along with porn). people are going to comment, and when asked what they find fluffly or not, might even have the insane notion to respond. crazy right? because from this pointless discussions people can often find/steal/think of new ideas that will motivate them, and is that kinda the point of this?

 

WLK

[Lord Ragnarok]

But if you take sagas and don't try an achieve the oath associated with them, then you probably should consider yourself a codex marine.

 

I always thought that was a lame piece in the codex. Hamstringing players in an environment where the objectives are not the same. either penalize the oath breaker game wise or allow them to benefit game wise. Otherwise it may be ignored in very competitive contests.

[red_starrise]

Ok, I've been playing the Sons of Russ since 2nd Ed off & on & my army has evolved in that course. I've just started it up again for 5th Ed but I like to think I play fluff friendly.

 

My 1750

 

Wolf Lord - terminator armor, wolf claw

Rune Priest - chooser of the slain, living lightning, jaws of the world wolf

 

4 Man Wolf Guard retinue - terminator armor (all), 2 combi-plasma, wolf claw, chainfist, drop pod

 

Wolf Scouts - meltagun

WGPL for scouts - power fist, combi-melta, melta bombs

 

Dreadnought - assault cannon, dccw

 

2 grey hunter packs, 8 man, mark of wulfen, wolf banner, power weapon, plasma in one, melta in the other. WGPL for plasma - combi-plasma, thunder hammer, WGPL for melta - combi-melta, power fist.

Both packs are in rhinos.

 

Blood Claws - 10 w/ no bells & whistles

 

1 6 wolf pack of long fangs - 3 ML, 2 LC, WGPL - terminator armor, storm shield, cyclone

1 5 wolf pack of long fangs - 2 PC, 2 HB

 

Whirlwind

 

The Wolf Lord rides w/ his retinue & drops into the thick of things to help own center field & provide that extra push when the assault begins in earnest. The Rune Priest rides along w/ the 2 GH packs to setup a firepower element in the middle ground while the fangs & whirlwind sit back & either hunt infantry or tanks depending on the field. The dread & blood claws job is to rush in & prey upon the weak that are cut off from the rest of the enemy force or hit the enemy in a counter-charge. The scouts do what they do best, skulk around & eat enemy armor or devastators.

 

So, is this an unfluffy list? As this is pretty how I've played overall since 3rd Ed when the rhino rush got nerfed.

[Hfran Morkai]

manner they're meant to be played:

This is dangerous. I for one, Don't think that "axe in hand" is the way or only way sw's are meant to be played. In the previous dex they really catered to the CQB aspect of battle. Good not great at close combat. very good not great a short range shooting (special, WG special, two plasma pistols for less cost than now). This is versus the str8 on rush of a berserker army who could best us in combat straight on but couldn't hope to fight us in that 12 inch bubble.

 

I don't see in the codex a rule where you have to play an army a certain way. For those who think that wolves have to play a certain way the best way to prove your point is not to force it on others by demanding they change their actions but just keep playing your way and beating their socks off (think lilttlbitz). If it is too tough, then so bet it. THAT's the wolfy way. Play your way and don't complain about it.

 

Also remind yourself that people are in this hobby for many different reasons which will not always coincide with your own.

I do understand wanting to play with certain people you enjoy (I will not suffer derogatory,distasteful or cheating players no matter how wolfy/fluffy/nicely painted army they have).

 

Many folks are just competitive and care much less about the fluff. As folks complain about them...GW will correct it and they will move on to the next strongest dex.

 

This is why you are a Wolf Lord Rags, another great post!

[Levitas]

Ho ho ho, someone found my article!

 

I play Space Wolves too you know, and I play them in the manner they're meant to be played: With axe in hand.

 

If I wanted to play all shooty and wimpy like, I'd borrow my friend's Tau army.

 

Yeah, that would be me. :)

 

I actually enjoyed your article, and while I didnt agree with everything (hence getting opinions in the Fang) I did find it thought provoking. As we can see, space wolf players are a diverse bunch and play the game in different ways. With rocket, axe and sharp tongue.

 

I personally have been running long fang spam and razorbacks since my list found that inevitable route there from my original and playful build. Evolved through game after game and several builds with no help from the interwebs what so ever. Some may get ideas from the net, others may just forge their own way, either way it is a popular build as it works and a lot of players get pulled there. But your article did get me thinking as i've become pretty bored with that build as i'm sure have many opponents. Its been over exposed and used to death by a popluar codex. Either by true wolf players or 'counts as'.

 

I've been tinkering with other units in the dex, trying to find hidden gems of combinations away from the obvious paths involving rockets and razors. For that reason the article is a good thing, and while long fangs spam works and is fluffy, its good to play around with other builds. Retaining the same power or even exceeding it but using untried combinations of units. I am in search of the new black...or rather gray.

 

While long fang and razorbacks are effective, there may well be more than one way to crack and egg with a frostblade.

[hendrik]

this whole discussion made me just think of one thing; it's impossible to represent the fluff on the tabletop. if you want a truely lfluffy list i sugest you do a search on the internet to find the original movie marines stats and base yourself upon those. maybe then you can represent the awesomeness of a space wolf but even then...

 

but seriously guys, offcourse a space wolf still needs to have an axe or sword, maybe even a knife in his hand. but remember he's got 2 hands, and it's up to every wolf lord himself to decide wether that second hand should hold a boltpistol, bolter or lascannon...

[Wulfebane]

That means at any given time I can go 15 ML's, 15 PC's, 15 LC's, or 15 HB's. Being able to select weapons per game on LF's only may not be the most fair all-comers list approach;

 

This isn't an FPS. Not yet anyway.

 

I really dislike the Wolf Lord, riding the RhinosoWolf mount, bearing the Mark of the Wolfen, and a Saga of the Wolfy Wolf, a FrostyWolf weapon, and Wolf Tails and Teeth leading a unit of Rhinosowolves with a Mark of the Wolf, armed with Wolf Shields, WolfGuns, and Wolfy Wolf-Wolf pets...

 

Frostblade weapon. Not wolf. Same goes for shields and guns. If all you see is "wolfy-wolf" then you've bought into the propaganda too.

 

Part of the problem is for marines is that they have fallen behind in the close combat arms race.

 

Good.

 

Look, I like a good brawl as much as the next 'Claw, but we're not Orks. We wear suits of armor and wield a boltgun that has survived "implemented design and mechanical improvements" for thousands of years. It's considered a near-perfect tool for a war across galaxies. Yeah, sure.. we have axes (oh yeah, and swords, hammers, knives, chainswords, wolfclaws, etc etc) and we know how to use them. But an axe isn't going to find itself buried in the skull of an enemy from a 100 yards away (unless you're Arjac).

 

The problem is the scale of the wars we fight. It's more practical to bombard a planet from orbit. Excluding that, it's more practical to bombard them from stationary cannons and heavy turret guns. Excluding that, it's more practical to shoot a gun from a distance than to close in, getting picked off one by one as you claw your way to the enemy front lines, just to have an excuse to use your "trusty axe". A true Space Wolf knows the value of a gun versus close combat. They know not to leave themselves out in the open. Doesn't mean that when the enemy is close enough to spit on, they aren't gunna go for the charge, knowing they're better in a scrap... but they DO know how to wait for that moment.

[Loki-LaughingDeath]

We know when to use the appropriate tools which is why we are one of the few armies that has a troop choice that can go either way.... we know when to light the Christmas tree and when to engage the enemy more closely.

 

There is a difference between what is written in the stories and what the game designers interpreted. We have what we have to work with.

[crucial]

In my humble opinion, the following quote sums up the problem here:

 

Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with true SWs using Long Fangs. Space wolves aren't mindless close combat berserkers of Chaos...

 

Wolves are not mindless berserkers of Chaos? Either are the actual berserkers of Chaos lol.

 

As a World Eater player (SW are my main army though) I can wholeheartedly say the thought of Khorne Berserkers being 'mindless close combat berserkers' is silly. But theres the problem... others views of different armys are probably not going to be 100% correct. I have around 3500+ of (almost) fully painted space wolves and i don't own a single TWC, Razorback or missile launcher wielding Long Fang (seriously!) so I find Heros comment rather silly.

 

Also, although i detest the mere idea of wound allocation rules-lawyering, it still is sadly part of the current game we play and i hardly think the blame can be placed solely on the Wolves. What about Orks and Grey Knights?

[HERO]

I don't see in the codex a rule where you have to play an army a certain way. For those who think that wolves have to play a certain way the best way to prove your point is not to force it on others by demanding they change their actions but just keep playing your way and beating their socks off (think lilttlbitz). If it is too tough, then so bet it. THAT's the wolfy way. Play your way and don't complain about it.

 

The fact remains that regardless of how most of you play (without spamming Razorfang), the internet community of Warhammer players see Space Wolves as shooting pansies or Thunderwolf wound allocators. If you read the codex, and I'm being extremely bold with this statement, there's a lot more mention of beating people's faces in close combat then there is shooting them to death. The design of the army is close range and getting in the thick of it. That's why we have counter-assaulting Grey Hunters as the backbone of our army.

 

But yes, you're right. Play the army however which way you want to play it, but I'll tell you right now that our lineage and honor has been besmirched forever by Razorfang spammers.

[hendrik]

If you read the codex, and I'm being extremely bold with this statement, there's a lot more mention of beating people's faces in close combat then there is shooting them to death.

that's only logical,no? i mean what sounds better? "hey i just mowed down a carnifex with my bolter, man you should have seen his head after i emptied my clip on him!" or"did you see that irlin? nrth just took on that canfifex armed only with his combatknife and managed to take the monster down! all on his own!"

[Captain Idaho]

This isn't a dig at anyone particular, it's generic comments.

 

I think people are trying to argue against the intention of the article. The cold facts are SW players have become those players everyone dislikes playing against because their list is built in such a manner it just isn't fun to oppose. It's like those Veteran Vendetta Imperial Guard armies no-one likes to play against.

 

Forget about the notion of what you should or shouldn't be taking in your army. If you built your new SW army with 12 to 18 Long Fangs, Thunder Wolves and minimised Grey Hunter squads or added them to your list, then you need to realise the list you built is there for just for winning without a thought to originality or even the back ground material. And Space Wolves players are often fierce in their defence of their Chapter in the stories so they do care about the fluff usually.

 

Sure we all want to win, but does that mean you need to go for the easiest option? Same with Marines; take the Vulkan weblist or build your own list?

 

There are arguments that the competetion for various choices in the SW Codex don't live up to the usual SW netlist of Long Fangs, TWs and min-maxed Grey Hunters, but that doesn't mean other choices are poor. There are people here who have shown decent table top sucess with armies that aren't the usual net lists.