++Space Wolves Units by Tier++

[Valerian]

Gang,

 

I've created a little Tier Listing of our Space Wolves units as an additional resource for The Fang.  This was vetted with a few other competitive Space Wolves players, as well as a couple other competitive players that do not play Space Wolves, but who have played games against them in 8e.  

 

This Tier List can be used in conjunction with the Buying Guide, to help inform new and existing players on where to focus their resources.

 

You will notice that I only included a handful of available Forgeworld models; there are way too many options to evaluate, when you open it up to everything that FW offers to Marines, but there were a few notable standout Dreadnought options that I wanted to include.

I also didn't not include any of the Characters.  When you start to list out all of the different ways you can field them, it gets a little unwieldy (for example:  Wolf Lord, Wolf Lord in Phobos Armor, Wolf Lord with Jump Pack, Wolf Lord on Thunderwolf, Wolf Lord in Terminator Armor, etc., etc.).  Although we can certainly discuss the Top Tier character options within this thread.

 

 

 

Hope this is helpful,

 

Val

[Iain_Stormeyes]

Before I ask any questions, I just want to confirm this ranking is for ITC right?  Just so we are all evaluating based on the same mission pack.

 

Given that, why rank Eliminators as Tier 1?  I understand they are good character killers, but I didn't Wolves had a problem killing characters.  Or has the meta shifted heavily to hero-hammer with lots of buffing characters behind a mob of chaff?  

 

Can you explain why Venerable Dreads are tier 2 and Thunderwolf Cavalry are tier 3?  I would personally rate the higher mobility and multiple bodes of the TWC as being more valuable for only ~40 points, but I would like to hear how you decided on their ranking.

 

Sorry if my questions are stupid, I live in a pretty dead-meta region even before the virus went ballistic, so I don't usually see the most recent developments.

[Valerian]

Yeah, no problem.  It's not just for ITC though, these broad placements would be just as valid for pick-up games at the FLGS, or beer and pretzel games in your basement.  Those probably aren't as competitive, but folks still want to build strong teams with their investment in time, money, and effort in building up a force to use.

 

Eliminators do several things for your Space Wolves army to earn that rating.  One of them, certainly, is their ability to snipe out the various buffing support Characters on the field.  However, they also add the extremely valuable ability to damage units that are completely out of LOS.  This allows you to target units that would otherwise be invulnerable to your attacks (e.g. units hiding in "magic boxes", units sitting on objectives behind LOS blocking terrain, etc.).  Finally, they also do surprisingly well as an anti-tank unit.

 

Were you expecting Venerable Dreads to be higher, or lower?  I initially had them rated at Tier 3, but another player convinced me to elevate them a notch.

 

TWC don't get the ability to Advance and Charge in this edition, and are stuck on the ground floor with no ability to deal with models in upper floors of ruins.  They don't hit nearly as hard as they did in previous editions, so have fallen to the Tier 3 level.  For what they're intended to do (pure melee assault unit), Wulfen have them beat by miles.

[Iain_Stormeyes]

 

Were you expecting Venerable Dreads to be higher, or lower?  I initially had them rated at Tier 3, but another player convinced me to elevate them a notch.

 

TWC don't get the ability to Advance and Charge in this edition, and are stuck on the ground floor with no ability to deal with models in upper floors of ruins.  They don't hit nearly as hard as they did in previous editions, so have fallen to the Tier 3 level.  For what they're intended to do (pure melee assault unit), Wulfen have them beat by miles.

 

 

I would expect Venerables to be Tier 3.  Really all dreads except characters to be Tier 3.  Dreads aren't fast, aren't that resilient, can't go upstairs, can't advance and charge, and only really hit hard against another tank (their anti-chaff isn't that great).  They seem to suffer the same problems as TWC without any of the benefits TWC bring (speed and multiple bodies).

 

Thanks for answering!

Edited April 26, 2020 by Iain_Stormeyes

[Valerian]

 

 

Were you expecting Venerable Dreads to be higher, or lower?  I initially had them rated at Tier 3, but another player convinced me to elevate them a notch.

 

TWC don't get the ability to Advance and Charge in this edition, and are stuck on the ground floor with no ability to deal with models in upper floors of ruins.  They don't hit nearly as hard as they did in previous editions, so have fallen to the Tier 3 level.  For what they're intended to do (pure melee assault unit), Wulfen have them beat by miles.

 

 

I would expect Venerables to be Tier 3.  Really all dreads except characters to be Tier 3.  Dreads aren't fast, aren't that resilient, can't go upstairs, can't advance and charge, and only really hit hard against another tank (their anti-chaff isn't that great).  They seem to suffer the same problems as TWC without any of the benefits TWC bring (speed and multiple bodies).

 

Thanks for answering!

 

 

Ah, yeah, then fair enough.  Those were my thoughts as well, but, like I said, I let someone talk me into a higher placement.

[TiguriusX]

I am riding the terminator hype train hard and think you will see them promoted to tier 1 when more people get exposed to it

 

So many tricks and combo...so little time

[One Two Wolf]

Long fangs, best devs in the game, by a mile, tier three. Lols.

[Rune Priest Jbickb]

Long fangs, best devs in the game, by a mile, tier three. Lols.

Definitely in agreement here. Why are long fangs tier 3 and hunters tier 2.

 

I understand a hunter is 75 points for a t8 chassis but the gun is situational at best and I see very little synergy for it in a space wolves list except maybe to hide units behind as they move up.

 

Meanwhile a long fang pack has a good variety of loadout, does not need baby sitter and in my experience tends to remove a hard target before death, especially when started off the board. I'm not saying their tier 1 but tout them in tier 3 I think is incorrect.

 

But I'm open to the argument for both, and with these 2 exceptions I actually agree with the rest of it pretty good.

[Gherrick]

Notice no model in tier 1 has only a single wound. It seems the tiers are mostly based on how well a unit can survive, and as such it weights toughness and multi-wounds higher than the overall offensive strength. While long fangs are very good offensively, they will crumble under the volume of T5+ shots that are out there, where a higher toughness/mult-wound unit will take a larger investment overall to deal with.

 

I think blood claws make tier 2 simply because they make a good distraction carnifax, and are relatively cheap for their ROI (throw a powerfist on the  BCPL plus a WGPL with powerfist and now it can take on some meatier targets as well).

Edited April 27, 2020 by Gherrick

[Karhedron]

Meanwhile a long fang pack has a good variety of loadout, does not need baby sitter and in my experience tends to remove a hard target before death, especially when started off the board. I'm not saying their tier 1 but tout them in tier 3 I think is incorrect.

Agreed. They also get access to the excellent "Wolf's eye" stratagem which makes them a real threat to many targets. Full rerolls to-Wound are not particularly common in 8th edition but are pretty tasty. I would say Long Fangs are solid tier 2. If only they had access to Grav Cannons, they would be borderline tier 1.

[Karhedron]

Notice no model in tier 1 has only a single wound. It seems the tiers are mostly based on how well a unit can survive, and as such it weights toughness and multi-wounds higher than the overall offensive strength.

I am not sure this accurate. I also play Blood Angels and some players regard Death Company as a poor unit as they are basically just 1 T4 wound behind a 3+ save. However they are fast and can dish out a ton of damage if used correctly.

 

Glass cannon units can require a bit more skill to handle properly but can be just as effective as tough units if played well (sometimes moreso). Long Fangs may only be MEQs but they are usually deployed in cover and their long range means they will often be out of range of a significant portion of the enemy firepower (at least at the start of the battle). If my opponent is dedicating his long ranged weapons (normally the heavy ones) to sniping my Long Fangs, that means they are not shooting at the melee units that are rapidly bearing down on them.

 

I am not saying that Long Fangs make a good distraction Carnifex (although a Claw/Shield Wulfen Dread is pretty good) but if your opponent is seriously shooting at them then either the game is already going badly anyway or that could be a serious tactical mistake that you can exploit.

[Gherrick]

I agree long fangs are a undervalued unit in that tier list. I was trying to see what kind of pattern was used in the ranking, and that is the best one I could come up with. It's a tough call if it makes sense to put so many heavy shots into a single unit, especially if it can get offed too easily.

[Karack Blackstone]

1 - Long Fangs need Grav Cannons anyway.

2 - 6 Wounds at most, or 5 models with 10 Wounds for Hellblasters. Why wouldn't one shoot an enemy unit when anything past 1 Wound caused on up to 6 will also cause a HW to stop firing?

3 - SW's have a lot going for them now; as 1 states, Grav Cannons are needed, I guess they can see our synergy for them is so strong as to question if SW's need it.

[Valerian]

A lot to respond to here today, so I'll tackle things one at a time, and hopefully I get to it all.

 

Long fangs, best devs in the game, by a mile, tier three. Lols.

 

A couple ways to respond to this.  Yes, Long Fangs are basically like regular Space Marine Devastator Squads, but better in every way.  Here's the thing, though.  Nobody is using Devastator Squads in Space Marine lists for competitive play, either.  So, Space Wolves just have a slightly improved version of a mediocre unit.  

Now, that being said, you've got to refer back to how I describe the tiers: "Tier 3: Weaker options. Still some viability in less competitive lists, but in general can be comfortably overlooked for options in the higher tiers."

 

I still think this is completely accurate for Long Fangs - they can be comfortably overlooked for options in the higher tiers that do their job better.  We've got Character Dreadnoughts (such as Bjorn, and the Chaplain/Wolf Priest Dreadnought that can't be targeted (with few exceptions), which have a better BS, higher toughness, more wounds) which each can host Twin Lascannons.  We've got the other Forgeworld Dreadnoughts.  We've got Eliminators (BSRs do surprisingly well as anti-tank units, in a pinch), and Suppressors.  All of these are better (and more durable) than Long Fangs.

 Here is a little more elaboration on this point that I made over in the Long Fang, Unit of the Week thread that we had recently:

 

"Their purpose is to provide (long-ranged) anti-tank/vehicle/monster support, but are they really the most effective and efficient unit to do that within Space Wolves armies?  At the end of the day, you're taking 33 (missile launcher) or 35 (lascannon) points per Long Fang for a T4 1W model with a 3+ Save.  Sure, the save will be improved by staying in cover (which I'm sure they'll pretty much always be taking advantage of), but that'll be offset by the AP of whatever enemy weapons happen to be coming their way.  For example, they'll be at just 4+ (50% saves) against adversary Intercessors shooting at them from 30" away in Turn 2, when the Tactical Doctrine is active.  And, in 8e, there is no way to screen from the incoming fire, as everyone is now free to target anything they can see, outside of Characters (with some exceptions).  That many points, and that many heavy weapons clustered together into a single vulnerable unit (again, just T4, 1W, 3+ save) is going to be a juicy priority target.  Additionally, they only have 1 ablative wound (the Pack Leader), and then potentially another in the WGPL."

 

 

Notice no model in tier 1 has only a single wound. It seems the tiers are mostly based on how well a unit can survive, and as such it weights toughness and multi-wounds higher than the overall offensive strength. While long fangs are very good offensively, they will crumble under the volume of T5+ shots that are out there, where a higher toughness/mult-wound unit will take a larger investment overall to deal with.

 

 

I think blood claws make tier 2 simply because they make a good distraction carnifax, and are relatively cheap for their ROI (throw a powerfist on the  BCPL plus a WGPL with powerfist and now it can take on some meatier targets as well).

 

 

Yeah, you've pretty much nailed it here, Gherrick.  The Tier 1 units are just better, and part of what makes them better is that additional robustness that they have.  For less than twice the points for a similar Firstborn unit, you get twice the Wounds, which gives them a big leg up on efficiency, in most situations. They've got other advantages, as well (for example, Bolt Rifles and Auto Bolt Rifles are just straight up better than Bolt Guns, in every way).  

 

You're right about the Blood Claws, too.  If Reivers were better, Blood Claws might be Tier 3, like most of the other legacy infantry units, but this is one rare case where the older version of the assault/melee oriented unit is actually superior.  

[Valerian]

 

Long fangs, best devs in the game, by a mile, tier three. Lols.

Definitely in agreement here. Why are long fangs tier 3 and hunters tier 2.

 

I understand a hunter is 75 points for a t8 chassis but the gun is situational at best and I see very little synergy for it in a space wolves list except maybe to hide units behind as they move up.

 

Meanwhile a long fang pack has a good variety of loadout, does not need baby sitter and in my experience tends to remove a hard target before death, especially when started off the board. I'm not saying their tier 1 but tout them in tier 3 I think is incorrect.

 

But I'm open to the argument for both, and with these 2 exceptions I actually agree with the rest of it pretty good.

 

 

So, I've addressed the Long Fangs issue, just above, and will just speak to the Hunter real quick.  First, we've got to remember its purpose, it is a dedicated anti-aircraft weapon system, and in that role, it excels.  If you're not expecting to face a lot of aircraft (especially hard to hit flyers), then you might not want to bother with it.  But if you are, then the Hunter is an exceptionally effective unit to bring.  It's cheap as chips, but at Toughness 8 and 11 Wounds, it'll be robust enough to stick around for a while.  And, the Skyspear missile launcher is outstanding, when used against its intended target.  And, when the flyers have been dealt with, the weapon is almost as effective against regular vehicles; you don't get the +1 to hit with it against non-flyers, but you still do get to re-roll the failed hit rolls.  A 60" range, Strength 9, AP -3, dD6 weapon that re-rolls failed hits is nothing to laugh at.  

 

In fact, let's compare this against those Long Fangs that we were talking about earlier.  The Hunter with the Skyspear is 75 points.  A Long Fang with a Lascannon is 38.  If you consider just the offensive output in a vacuum, then the Long Fang (at about half the points) is a much better deal, but when you consider also the durability of each unit, the Hunter is significantly more robust, and is going to take way more effort to remove.

[Gherrick]

I just wonder if we will ever get the option for our primaris units to get access to storm shields. If we get a primaris wolf guard unit (one can hope), I hope we don't lose their ability to have each model in the unit to be individually equipped, and have a lot more options for customization. I'm still miffed that we lost our great WG bikers, as I made a fairly significant investment into them (~12 models, with different loadouts, including one for each of our priest types). Swiftclaws should not be our only option for bikes, IMO.

[Lord Blackwood]

I think its a very good tier list. 

Thank you for doing the legwork and posting it. 

I wonder where some of the named characters fall. 

[Wolf Guard Dan]

Valerian thank you for your work on these projects. This is a good list. I'm sure everyone here has their own pet unit they think deserves higher or a unit they hate that should be lower. 

 

For the characters I would maybe recommend adding special characters to the list. The generic characters are too numerous to list and much depends on the list design. But special character rankings may be helpful.

[Rune Priest Jbickb]

 

 

 

Long fangs, best devs in the game, by a mile, tier three. Lols.

Definitely in agreement here. Why are long fangs tier 3 and hunters tier 2.

 

I understand a hunter is 75 points for a t8 chassis but the gun is situational at best and I see very little synergy for it in a space wolves list except maybe to hide units behind as they move up.

 

Meanwhile a long fang pack has a good variety of loadout, does not need baby sitter and in my experience tends to remove a hard target before death, especially when started off the board. I'm not saying their tier 1 but tout them in tier 3 I think is incorrect.

 

But I'm open to the argument for both, and with these 2 exceptions I actually agree with the rest of it pretty good.

So, I've addressed the Long Fangs issue, just above, and will just speak to the Hunter real quick. First, we've got to remember its purpose, it is a dedicated anti-aircraft weapon system, and in that role, it excels. If you're not expecting to face a lot of aircraft (especially hard to hit flyers), then you might not want to bother with it. But if you are, then the Hunter is an exceptionally effective unit to bring. It's cheap as chips, but at Toughness 8 and 11 Wounds, it'll be robust enough to stick around for a while. And, the Skyspear missile launcher is outstanding, when used against its intended target. And, when the flyers have been dealt with, the weapon is almost as effective against regular vehicles; you don't get the +1 to hit with it against non-flyers, but you still do get to re-roll the failed hit rolls. A 60" range, Strength 9, AP -3, dD6 weapon that re-rolls failed hits is nothing to laugh at.

 

In fact, let's compare this against those Long Fangs that we were talking about earlier. The Hunter with the Skyspear is 75 points. A Long Fang with a Lascannon is 38. If you consider just the offensive output in a vacuum, then the Long Fang (at about half the points) is a much better deal, but when you consider also the durability of each unit, the Hunter is significantly more robust, and is going to take way more effort to remove.

So I think my core issue with the hunter is that it is, at the end of the day, 1 Lascannon. Gone are the days of a 1 hit kill on a vehicle, so we are looking at a unit that shoots once a turn, likely hits due to its bonuses, assuming it didnt have to move, or receive another negative to hit, because that hampers its hit rate considerably, and the does its average of 3.5 wounds. The odds of this killing something more considerable than a rhino in the course of the game before getting tagged in combat is pretty low. In my mind I compare this to long fangs which may only live 1 turn but they get to shoot 5 shots, have a way to ignore movement penalties so they can get into position without degrading quality and before they are killed, if they are killed, will likely put out 3-4x the damage of a turn of sky spear. In my mind it's better to get all of that damage in one turn because spreading it out over 3-4 turns does not reduce the effectiveness of your opponents army, whereas 10-14 wounds eith kills its target or reduces its effectiveness, depending on the target. The hunter may do the same average number of wounds overtime but it's not preventing your opponent from hurting back and it's not providing a sufficient enough distraction to draw fire away from the rest of your army. That's why I take issue with a teir 2 hunter,they dont actually synergize with the army which is one of your requirements for tier 2.

 

I see you arguement for a tier 3 long fang and can agree with it somewhat they are a glass cannon but I feel like the hunter is the opposite, a defensive beast with little teeth so in my mind they would be on equal tier rating for being 2 sides of the same coin. And could be easily overlooked for other options like the rest of our tanks.

Edited April 28, 2020 by Rune Priest Jbickb

[Karhedron]

I just wonder if we will ever get the option for our primaris units to get access to storm shields. If we get a primaris wolf guard unit (one can hope), I hope we don't lose their ability to have each model in the unit to be individually equipped, and have a lot more options for customization.

I have to admit that I suspect the kind of customisation we have been used to in the past will be gone. The pattern for Primaris Marines so far has been a limited subset of loadouts and almost no ability to mix loadouts within a squad. Granted we have started to see a few units with varied loadout (Captains, Eliminator Sergeants etc) but it is still from a very limited subset with no mix-n-match combos. You chose from A, B or C with no mixing.

 

Maybe that kind of customisation will appear in the Primaris line eventually but I actually suspect it wont. The reason for this is that infinite combos makes it harder for GW to balance units. If a particular loadout becomes significantly more effective in a future edition, GW is then stuck in quandary as to how to balance the points for units that can take that combo. It also provides an incentive to keep using Firstborn marines. They have access to the flexibility that Primaris do not.

[Valerian]

So I think my core issue with the hunter is that it is, at the end of the day, 1 Lascannon. Gone are the days of a 1 hit kill on a vehicle, so we are looking at a unit that shoots once a turn, likely hits due to its bonuses, assuming it didnt have to move, or receive another negative to hit, because that hampers its hit rate considerably, and the does its average of 3.5 wounds. The odds of this killing something more considerable than a rhino in the course of the game before getting tagged in combat is pretty low. In my mind I compare this to long fangs which may only live 1 turn but they get to shoot 5 shots, have a way to ignore movement penalties so they can get into position without degrading quality and before they are killed, if they are killed, will likely put out 3-4x the damage of a turn of sky spear. In my mind it's better to get all of that damage in one turn because spreading it out over 3-4 turns does not reduce the effectiveness of your opponents army, whereas 10-14 wounds eith kills its target or reduces its effectiveness, depending on the target. The hunter may do the same average number of wounds overtime but it's not preventing your opponent from hurting back and it's not providing a sufficient enough distraction to draw fire away from the rest of your army. That's why I take issue with a teir 2 hunter,they dont actually synergize with the army which is one of your requirements for tier 2.

 

I see you arguement for a tier 3 long fang and can agree with it somewhat they are a glass cannon but I feel like the hunter is the opposite, a defensive beast with little teeth so in my mind they would be on equal tier rating for being 2 sides of the same coin. And could be easily overlooked for other options like the rest of our tanks.

 

 

All, good points, but you have not accounted for the price difference here.  The Hunter is 1/3 the cost of a full Lascannon Long Fangs pack (5 LCs, the Pack Leader, and a WGPL in TDA with Storm Shield and Storm Bolter).  So, if I take 3 Hunters (getting a little closer to comparing apples to apples), now my offensive output focusing on a single enemy vehicle is getting quite a bit closer (the Long Fangs are re-rolling 1s to Hit, while the Hunters are re-rolling all failed Hit Rolls).  I haven't mathed out expected Wounds on a typical T7 vehicle here yet, but we're getting a lot closer than when it was a whole Long Fangs pack competing with a single Hunter.

 

As time goes on in the battle, the Hunters will win out.  Once you get past the two ablative wounds in the Long Fangs packs (from the two Pack Leaders), every additional wound takes a significant chunk out of the firepower of the unit.  The Hunters don't degrade until you've done 6 Wounds (against a T8 chassis), and even then the degradation isn't that significant; the weapon isn't lost, it is just a drop of a single point of BS, but the system still re-rolls all failed Hit Rolls, so not a huge impact.

 

Another consideration is in effective countering weapons.  The Hunters are going to require anti-tank weaponry to reliably deal with them.  If they're the only vehicles in your army, then opponents will happily allocate what they've got against the Hunters, but when you've also got Impulsors, Invictor Warsuits, and Dreadnoughts for them to also deal with, the Hunters are probably going to be a lot lower on the anti-tank weapons priority list.

 

The Long Fangs, however, are pretty easily countered by your typical anti-infantry weaponry.  Bolt Rifles (36" range and AP-1) from enemy Intercessor squads (or similar basic guns/rifles for the faction that you're up against) are plenty effective enough to erase a Long Fangs pack in one or two turns of shooting.

 

So, I stand by the placement of Hunters at Tier 2, while Long Fangs are at Tier 3.  However, all that being said, for my Heavy Support choices, they both lose out to the Tier 1 Eliminators, so the discussion is pretty moot.

[Valerian]

I wonder where some of the named characters fall. 

 

 

 

For the characters I would maybe recommend adding special characters to the list. The generic characters are too numerous to list and much depends on the list design. But special character rankings may be helpful.

 

Here's what I'm thinking for the named special characters.  I'll edit the Google Doc to incorporate the guys.  Good suggestion, and thanks to both of you.

 

Tier 1:  Ragnar Blackmane (Saga of the Beast Primaris version)

 

Tier 2: Bjorn the Fell-handed, Arjac Rockfist, Njal Stormcaller (in Terminator Armour), and Murderfang.

 

Tier 3: Logan Grimnar (both variants), Harald Deathwolf, Ulrik the Slayer (*)

 

Tier 4: Canis Wolfborn, Krom Dragongaze, and Lukas the Trickster

 

* Ulrik might bump up a level if/when he gets Erratad.  It's a shame they completely forgot about our most famous Wolf Priest in Saga of the Beast.

 

 

Val

[Rune Priest Jbickb]

Fair enough, I suppose your logic is sound and I'm sure I have some personal bias that I find hard to overcome as I cant think of a list I haven't brought long fangs in since I started playing in 5th.

 

The character list looks pretty solid. I feel like wolf priest and rune priest will hit tier 2 as well, though o know you are intentionally leaving things with load out decisions off the list. especially with jump pack or phobos in the RP case

[Valerian]

Yes, just addressing the named special characters, as there are so many permutations of the generic characters.

[Karack Blackstone]

Have you considered basing Generic HQ's on unit synergy, and with what?

 

Vet Int's work best with Ragnar.

 

A JRP might be best in a support role.

 

A WP w/ or w/o PF supporting a BC pack as a cheap, ready to buff model might be nice.

 

The various WL's and WGBL's with the correct kits as units already out there, might work well with one unit type, and matching weapons.

 

I guess the question is more, why should I take one HQ over another, and also, why that one, and if points and threat are taken into account and wargear is to taste, what then?