Sort of but they lack the ranged shooting (the LF's area of expertise) and that leaves them sort of flat in the list. They can be armed with melta guns, plasma guns or flamers in the codex. I'm a bit stumped about what to do with them without replacing units with LFs.

1 special weapon per squad isn't worth representing in Epic.

Just make 'em cheap. And maybe compulsory as a core formation.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Dobbsy: You seem to be focused on fixing instead of designing. I completely understand that, as everyone wants to respond to (and eliminate) criticism. But I think staying on that path will end up with a balanced list that may not (and, imho, probably won't) be reflective of Space Wolves' overall style.

For example, adding MWFF to Grey Hunters makes them a FF/support formation. Sure, from a pure mechanics perspective that's generally more "useful and interesting" than the current stats, but it's a radical change to the flavor and feel of the unit. FF specialists with little desire to get into CC is a great formation role, but is it what you want Grey Hunters to be? I'm not a SW fan, but I don't think it is.

I'd really caution against making an already good cheap assault unit even better, especially at FF which is by far the more powerful of the 2 combat modes. Assaulting isn't really the area in which the Grey Hunters fall down anyway, it's the lack of even a single shot as standard. The only other army off the top of my head that has a core unit without a ranged shot are the Elyssians and their drop co's (Eldar Guardians don't count, as they can take support weapons as standard) and they struggle too, even with shooting upgrades (though that's mostly due to teleporting BMs).
I don't really have any suggestions re. the Grey Hunters - they're a good T'hawk load out, but Fenrisian Wolves are cheaper and better, or SkyClaws are the same price but as good with a better move at the cost of 2+int and only 1 hero. As it is people will take them because they have to, due to the list design, but I wouldn't if that limitation wasn't there.

Ok, I'll scrap the MW idea then.

How much cheaper would you recommend E&C? I'm bumping the Fenrisian Wolves up to 200 as per the suggestion a while back, if I drop the GH back to 200, would they be more usable to you matt? Same points with better sustainability (better armour, C&C etc) and you can add razorbacks to boost them up.

Neal - given that the SW list is predominantly assault oriented, the GHs sort of fall into a void. They're not Tacticals for shooting and as matt says there's a number of unit types that can do it better in assault, so they are mid-ling.

Or should I just leave it as it is and just deal with the fact people won't likely take them other than the 1 they have to?

One strength you could give Grey Hunters is numbers, in allowing them larger formations than any other in the list.
That would allow them to take casualties and keep fighting, unlike other formations.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

pretty much as you said Dobbsy, it's not that the GHs are so poo it's more that other fms in the list are so much better. Using the FW as an example - even at the same points 12 CC4+ with infiltrate are always going to be better than 6 CC3+, even with a tick better armour.
The feeling I get is that some units need toning down (FW, LF as you've done) as much some need toning up (GH), it's not one or the other.

Ok so reducing the FW to 1x 4+ CC attack for 150 points will tone them down somewhat. This leaves the GH the same but a better looking option in terms of sustainability.

Hena, or anyone for that matter - On formation sizes for marines what is generally considered too large in terms of ATSKNF? E&Cs suggestion of having a larger GH formation has me wondering whether I can give the option of an upgrade of 2 more GHs to the formation(so up to 8 plus 4 trans), making the formation larger and able to fill a TH outright. The problem is the size gets a little larger as base and any additions you add (razorbacks in particular) makes it a very large force.

Toning down the CC abilities of the Fenrisian Wolves is justified. They have the same CC-profile (+1 A) as Tactical Space Marine unit in Wh40k but you should take into account that in Epic the CC-value takes into account the Flamer, Meltagun or Plasmagun the Tactical unit has.

So Fenrisian Wolves should have either CC4+ or CC5+EA+1 at maximum.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

So am I to assume I have developed the first list in history to actually pass muster in it's second instance?

Given the number of times the list has been d/l surely someone other than Mattthemuppet has played some games? If there aren't any batreps, is there any feedback by any chance? The list can't be that good can it?

Dobbsy

I have the 2.1 draft copy. If that is the latest one, let me provide you with my points (therfore IMO) for your units as they are on the datafaxes I am looking at.

I am not going to go into the 'why' and 'because', all I will state is that if I am wrong on any of the points, it should be by only 25 points in either direction:

Grey Hunters: 225 points (this is a tough one as could also be 250 points)
Bloodclaw Pack: 200 points (they should be cheaper than you Grey Hunters, not the same points)
Skyclaw Assault Pack: 250 points
Swiftclaw Bike Pack: (guessing that they should be 35cm move) - 225 points

Fenrisian Wolf Pack: 300 points

That's all I was looking at.

The Fenrisian wolf pack is greatly undercosted. The rest as you can see are almost in the same 'ball park".

Hope this helps

Cheers dude.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

the fenrisian wolves are going to be hard to cost - they can't garrison (I think, as they've a 20cm move), they simply die if fire fighted, save and init aren't great and they can't be transported (so no killer thunderhawk assaults for them). So they'll have to slog it across the board, get shot to pieces on the way and then have to get lucky with strategy to be able to get an assault in before being slaughtered in fire fight by pretty much anything. I would compare them to genestealers and I think that's a good starting point for abilities and cost.

Thanks for commenting FB as I'm still keen to get other opinions on 2.1 however before any changes are made - if anything, just to see if there's any cross-referenced views from different people or not etc.

Yeah a number of adjustments will be made in 2.2 and a toning down of Fenris wolves is coming as mentioned in one of the above posts. Mattthemuppet has it in one basically, and the new costing will reflect these points.

On the issue of the Bloodclaws etc they'll get a couple of points changes in the next version as a couple of folks have mentioned the points differences too, so thanks for re-confirming it. With initiative 2+ and some of their stats being adjusted in comparison (e.g reduced FF on some) with their Codex brethren they aren't as "solid".

Grey Hunters are a definite Bugbear so far I'm hoping my new take on them for 2.2 will make them more useful and, more importantly, used.

Thanks for the feedback mate.

Problem is they have a 50 point character added to the formation.

The wolves themselves are 225 to 250 points for the formation. It is the character that takes them to the next level of cost.

150 points for 6 Fenrisian Wolves is far too cheap IMO, regardless of whether they have FF or not. The 40cm charge with +1A and 6 units bumps the points up significantly. They are better than 'foot slogging' Assault marines in effectiveness. If they were LV, then they would be comparable. So as you can see, the points are 'out' on these guys.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I think the latest idea of Dobbsy is to lose the character (but allow character upgrades) and lose the +1EA, with them at 150pts. That's what I was basing my comments on. Though, again comparing to 'stealers, for 200pts you get a garrisoning, scout, infiltrate fm with 12 (13?) 4+ CC attacks with the same range and with inspiring, though with a poorer save and no ATSKNF plus thoroughly poo SR. Also, don't forget how debilitating it can be to have no FF value. In 1 of my 2 games with them at 2.1 stats, they got massacred in a firefight - wiped out to a doggy, without causing a single casualty in the whole game.