Yep got it in one Matt.

Type Speed Armour CC FF
Infantry 20cm 5+ 4+ -

Weapons Range Firepower Notes
Claws and Fangs (base contact) Assault Weapon -

Notes: Infiltrator


... is what I'm looking at possibly at 125 points given they are lesser value than assault marines.

I must have missed something in these pages, but are the Swiftclaws Bike Pack supposed to have a 15cm move? Codex SM have a 35cm move, and the SW attack bike is 35cm, while Codex is 30...

Nah its definitely a typo if it says 15cm move Most likely i copy and pasted from the Blood Claws data sheet

I do not know what you are going for here but a unit of 6 marines with ATSKNF is very good whether they shoot or not.

I would caution against such cheap formations for Marine asrmies. All you are doing is encouraging 'spam'. If you want (as a random example) 8 formations of Grey Hunters and 8 formations of Wolves for your army (16 activations to really hurt a 9 activation opponent), then I think the list is going in the wrong direction.

I usually aim for about 12 - 14 as a max for any lists I work on. Exceptions would be more for horde armies which Space Wolves are not. The fact that current 'official lists' have spam is not a good thing to work from either.

So in closing, keep up the work Dobbsy and please take on my advise - make this unit spacial and not just a point addition. If you want them to hit hard, leave them as they are and price them accordingly. Get about 4-8 games under your belt with this formation as they sit without an auto character at 250 points and see how you go. The fact that they have been killed outright in one game due to FF is not evidence that they are weak. Matt is a good player, yet all players have lapses of judgement and losing one formation should not be the be-all and end-all of a decision. What did the opponent lose strategically to take out that unit and how lucky were they?

My view: put them to 4+ armour, keep the stats, remove the 'auto' character, and place them at 250 points for playtests.

That's it from me. Got other projects, but I am sure I will be back to assist with future morphings of this list.

Cheers......

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

Heh, good to hear. It happens to all of us.

Now, I'm not an expert in making armies, or even playing. But what about dropping it to a unit of 4 for 150, or keeping the current price, and making them an upgrade to one of the faster formations instead of an independent unit?

I've been giving some more thought to the Grey Hunters formation as people have asked "why would you take them?"
So I've thought about this structure as a solution. It's definitely not your normal marine style formation but that only makes me like it more. I know some probably won't like it but I hope some will.

My design note for them is

Each Grey Hunters pack may include a number of the same or different unit types within the base size of the formation. Firstly to show, in a somewhat ad-hoc way, the transition between Blood Claws, Grey Hunters and Long Fangs over the years; secondly, to give the Grey Hunters a more useful tactical role and, lastly (and more specifically) give the army list a much different feel to that of a Codex Astartes Chapter.

Anyway here is my proposal:

4 Grey Hunter units and transport 150 points

plus at least one of the following options:

2 or 4 Grey Hunters units and transport: + 75 or + 150 points
2 or 4 Blood Claws units and transport: + 60 points or + 120 points
2 or 4 Sky Claws units: + 75 points or + 150 points
2 Long Fangs units and transport: + 150 points
1 or 2 Wolf Guard Terminator units: + 75 points each

To me at least this will give some flexibility with the formation and you can fill up a Thunderhawk with the troop types you want as most of the SW infantry are based on 6 units.

Here's a couple more changes I've thought about....

To address the theory of the Long Fang spam problem

I'm looking at adding the line (You may not have more Alpha packs of any one type in your army than Grey Hunters packs) in the Alpha packs selection box in the army list.

This then means, for example, if you choose to purchase only one Grey Hunter pack you may only purchase a maximum of 1 Long Fang pack, 1 Wolf Guard Terminator pack and 1 Wolf Scout pack in your army. Buy 2 Grey Hunters and the maximum rises accordingly etc..

Increased upgrades proposal

Skyclaws and Blood Claws can get +2 units of each type so you can fill a Thunderhawk with the maximum number of 8 units if you prefer.

This also ties in with the adjustment for the Grey Hunters I mentioned in the previous post. The "ad-hoc" Grey Hunters formation idea means you aren't left with empty slots in your Thunderhawk (or forced to take a Dreadnought to fill it if you prefer not to) with a full 8 Grey Hunters or mix and match a little with Blood claws or Skyclaws or small attachments of Long Fangs and to give the GHs formation a little tactical flexibility as mentioned.

These two adjustments to unit numbers seem - to me at least - to make the list a little more play friendly in terms of list building. Mainly to give Space Wolves players the ability to fill Thunderhawks up properly as a Codex list can - only in a Space Wolves kind of way.

Any thoughts, criticisms or witticisms? Always keen to hear them.

Cheers all!

Seems very Space Wolfy to me I like the concept.

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

I think you're running the risk of becoming very min-max-ish like this. You're also now mixing Unblooded units into other formations, so you need to clarify how that works.

Mostly, though, I think you're still focused on finding mechanical solutions and I would recommend first nailing down exactly how you want the army to work. There are WAY too many things that can potentially work from a mechanical standpoint. Narrowing it down based on a defined concept will be a huge help.

Neal it's not min-maxish because you still have to take 6 units as a base so there's no minimum about it. That's why you need to pick at least one option to add to the base 4 Grey Hunters. You just get the option of your base formation and can then add things in for flexibility. The Grey Hunters are the most flexible formation in the list.

On the Unblooded being mixed, I'm told that formations have initiative not units so they get the 1+. In terms of the countercharge portion of the rule I can go either way really. I'm open to either have them still countercharge and stay in coherency etc (this could simply require an adjustment saying Claw formations suffer from this not formations containing Clawsetc) or come under the Grey Hunters' watchful eyes and be more controlled Blood Claws etc.(they are wiser Claws and verging on Grey Hunters or whatever...) Whatever the consensus is, really. Personally, how would you see it working? What changes would you prefer to see?

In terms of how the army works, it's very clear to me it's mainly engagement focussed - like all marine armies. It's just got a different way of going about it (the list build), with less focus on teleporting terminators. So when you say "I'm focussed on finding mechanical solutions" you're part right as to me the list build is paramount to how the Wolves look and play. But they're not a massive departure from how all marine lists work as the unit types do almost the same thing that all Codex lists do, they just have slightly different roles within the Marine ethos.

Anyway, I hope this sort of clears up where mind my is at. Are there any positives in the design you like?

You can get anything from 6 units to 25 in the formation. You can load it up with cheap CC units to pack into air assault, or expensive ground units with ranged firepower and/or FF. That allows min-max and it keeps you from being able to price it appropriately for any less than optimal role.

For example, you want an air assault? Cheap Bloodclaws are the obvious answer - less expensive, throw them in first so they are the first casualties and their reduced value in follow on actions is probably irrelevant because they are dead. That means they have to be priced based on that optimal use. They should be within a fraction of the value of normal Grey Hunters in that situation because they are just as good. However, they are notably worse if you take them as a ground unit. Ergo, the optimized Grey Hunter air assault is basically pre-defined - Grey Hunters, Blood Claws and fill in the last two slots with whatever the player's personal preference is.

There are other de facto requirements as well. For example, f you want a Hunter on a GH formation, you have to take another ranged upgrade or it will be suppressed too easily.

It actually only allows a few, optimized formation compositions. That's only the appearance of flexibility.

Also, the wide range of potential options means that it's possible you will miss some super-combo. I don't think it's especially likely but it is tempting fate. And, again, if something like that is identified, it then becomes The Way to field Grey Hunters.


I don't really have a strong preference. I'm okay with it working as you described. My only point was that the rule is written with an unspoken assumption that formations are all-Unblooded. It just needs clarification if that's not the case.


This might all be because I haven't played the list, but what is the SW "way of going about it"? What are the "slightly different roles"? That's the part I don't get. I'm not saying you don't have a concept for all that. I'm just not understanding it from the army list.

The list seems to have a divide in the forces. Either they are berzerker CC troops or "stand and deliver" fire support. You're either using normal SM Fire support just like always or you're throwing them into CC. That's not a problem in itself but I have a hard time picturing how they would work like they are typically portrayed in the background - a solid wave of viciousness swamping the enemy via sheer aggression.

From another angle, with cheap core units (all the Blood Claws variants) it looks like you are leaning towards a horde army. Again, not a problem, and it fits in with a wave of troops but I don't have the sense of SW armies typically consisting of a majority Blood Claws.

And, of course, between those two things it seems like it would be very effective to have a bunch of Long Fangs and veteran Whirlwind crews throwing the youngsters into the breach while they sit back and lob shots at the enemy from a safe distance.

While I understand in theory how a flexible Grey Hunter formation could bridge the gap of a close support role or how it could provide a Grey Hunter backbone to the Blood Claws or how it might result in more GH formations in general, I don't think that it's going to do any of those in practice.

===

While I'm not big on special rules, what if you changed the "No Matter The Odds" rule, which would seem to encourage taking on large formations single-handedly, to something that encouraged the SW formations to stay close together to emphasize their sense of aggressively overrunning the enemy? Teamwork and pack mentality and such. That could take all kinds of forms, so it would take some brainstorming and experimentation.

Given SM formations can pack up to 15-17 units in one formation already are they determined as min-max? I've really tried to keep the SW list as parallel to the Codex list as possible while maintaining the SW feel. It seems I've missed the 25 units capability so I can tone that down somewhat.


Price is always open to change, so no problem there. It's what a test list is for, right?


That's more a concern for player choice though. I can't possibly take into account every single player's army builds. All I can do is give them options to do as they see fit.


So then pretty much the same as the Codex Marine list...? Whether one or more combos is "optimized" isn't, and can't be, my complete concern as that's totally out of my hands when a player builds his army. My use of the word flexibility is more aimed at player choice to do whatever they want to do in whatever role they wish, not that they pick the most optimized design for their formation.


Well that's why this is still an experimental list right? All I'm trying to do is take into account what folks have already said and give people different designs to iron out the kinks.


Yeah will definitely clarify if people like this design. So far you and BL are the only folks seemingly interested in commenting so I have little to go on


"Slightly different" i.e that although Grey Hunters essentially fulfil a Tactical role they lack the long range shooting of Tacs and that's where the Long Fangs step up and fulfil both the Devastator/Tactical long range infantry shooting - ergo, both infantry types are similar to Codex but fufil those two roles slightly differently to the codex marines.


Sorry Neal this confuses me - can't a list have all sorts of options? Some are berzerker CC some are FF/shooty. I don't see an issue with division of forces as all marines have this already ala Tac/Dev/Scout/CC/FF. In terms of how they work, they're a CC/FF with a small amount of shooty - they're primarily aimed at up-close fighting. Even the scouts are more CC than their codex counterparts, for example.


Typical is not defined in the SW list as all Great companies function with a different focus on all of unit types. At present this list essentially lets you field any Great Company you want. e.g. Harald Deathwolf fields a large number of Fenris Wolves in his Great Company and Engir Krakendoom's Great Company favours Swiftclaws and Skyclaws in greater number. It's one of my intentions to make this a focus of the list to let those SW fans of a particular Great company field a close as possible representation.


Well SW doctrine usually has eager blood/sky/swift claws as a spearhead backed up by heavier troops as the sledgehammer blow in close. The thing retarding your scenario is that Long Fangs will be limited by the "only as many as Grey Hunters" so you will be reducing the numbers of LF to a certain extent.


That's what I'm here to try to find out. Care to test the list at all Neal? I'm always looking for playtesters.

===

Actually "No Matter the Odds" is gone from the list. Unblooded and to a lesser degree Long in the Tooth(a datafax rule) are the only special rules that the SW have right now. NMtO was from the original 2.0 list.

Dobbsy: This is a variant list. It's not supposed to be generalist. It's the Space Wolves operating with their preferred method of warfare. It's "all space wolves, all the time" and should epitomize their style. It is good to have a few options for play style, but all options should be characteristic of the chapter.

"Generalist with some tweaks" is not really defined enough to work with. There's no need for a variant list if that's all you want. Use your Space Wolves minis and throw a lot of assault and fast attack options into a Codex army and you've got a faux-Space-Wolves generalist list for "they can do all the normal Space Marine stuff, too."

==

I'm pressed for time today. I'll try to get back with more commentary.

Hey Dobbsy hows everything in the land down under You are doing well I hope.

I'll be unpacking my minis soon and will give your list a go straight away as my Epic-A minis are very high on the 'unpack me first' list, just after underwear lol

At first read and study of the list I have to agree with Neal, it seems to be just a variation of the Codex Astartes lists. This doesn't strike me as the way the Space Wolves are put together. It should be the exact opposite as the Space Wolves break all the rules, all the time, (everywhere except in overall size of the entire chapter and even there they push the limit).

Just my opinion thrown off the cuff but how about this as a starting point to let you see what I mean (Remember this is off the cuff ok so not to harsh a reply)

Great Company
You may field any number of Great Companies
6xGrey Hunters plus transports
Upgrades
Heroes, Venerable Dreadnought, Hunter, Dreadnoughts, Predators, Vindicators, Blood Claws, Long Fangs, Wolf Scouts, Sniper, Grey Hunter

(3xBloodclaws plus transport for 100 points)
(2xLong Fangs plus transport for 150 points)
(2xWolf Scouts plus transport for 125points)
(up to 2xSniper upgrades for +25 points each)
(3xGrey Hunters plus transport for 125 points)

Move the Blood Claw Pack, Sky Claw Pack and the Swift Claw Pack to the Alpha Packs

I'd also be tempted to change the Alpha Packs and Support Packs to One PAck for each two Great Companies taken to push the list even further toward being based around the Great Companies

Cheers

Dobbsy:

It's not about being different than Codex. The Codex comparison is an analogy, not a direct comparison. The list is substantially different than the Codex in several ways, but it shares the "generalist" feel with the Codex.

I believe that you do have a vision for the list. I'd say first step is to define that and communicate it. I know you've said things like "assault oriented" and "heavy on CC" but that's pretty vague. Go for something more specific and related to how it feels in play (an aggressive, durable, close combat infantry force) and feel free to include specific elements you want or don't want (Blood claws are valued and should not end up as sacrificial units/formations but Fenrisian Wolves are like police dogs that are supposed to take a bullet instead of the person).

Once you have the concept down, focus on what the list needs to have to make it play that way on the board. What elements are needed? Out of those, elements, how do you best make them fit that style.

==

For example, you need support fire for assault troops. Prepping with BMs is a necessity. Good ranged fire damage and/or some FF support is helpful as well. Lots of stuff can work for that - everything from Whirlwinds to Long Fangs, so the question is what you prefer to emphasize.

If you want the "Grey Wave" aggressively sweeping across the battlefield, then you need to include things that are good for close support and discourage things that are "stand back and shoot" in nature. In looking at the tradeoffs and how to do that...

Short range fire support (30cm or less) will keep the support units close to the front line and help make the force move aggressively.

Good FF is going to provide additional assault power, but if it's too good, FF becomes a primary attack instead of CC.

Strong ranged fire will mean the support units are going to shoot/support and not initiate assaults or even just "stand and deliver" and not move forward aggressively. Weaker ranged fire and stronger FF means that the fire support units might find it advantageous to Engage sometimes.

Support will need to be able to move with the assault elements but infantry-based assault won't move that fast once they make contact.


So... to keep your fire support close to the front lines for a "Grey Wave" effect, you would want fire support elements with moderate range, moderate firepower, decent FF and decent speed. You don't, however, want so much support that you lose the assault flavor.

To me, that looks like you want the shorter ranged armor support with either small formations (so they don't just try to "stand and deliver") or attached to the infantry, especially units that are best under 30cm like Vindicators or Pred Destructors.

It's also something to keep in mind when designing new units. Would it be feasible, for instance, to have Long Fangs have a 30cm range, or for them to have increased firepower under 30cm (a Missile Luancher/Heavy Bolter combo or something) so there is incentive to get them up close? Is there a SW-specific Pred pattern that would make for good close support, e.g. 30cm main weapon and bolter sponsons?


An example of something you might want to avoid, because it doesn't seem like the style you're looking for for Blood Claws or for the force overall, would be massed Blood Claw Attack Bikes. They would function great as a support formation, but they are fire/support and not an engaging force, like Speeders in the Codex list. OTOH, if you have just 1-2 of them in a formation I think that fits better. It helps the formation function close to the enemy and supports the overall assault ability of the force but using the formation to initiate assault can often be a superior tactic.

===

Similarly, if you want an infantry-based CC force that is going to have some serious implications.

You'll need to have plenty of ground support to keep them moving as fast as possible or they just won't reach CC. Front-running with attached armor to soak AT hits might help you keep troops loaded prior to assault, giving them 35cm charge to base contact instead of 15cm. A few spare transport slots will help as well. That's a lot of important factors when it comes time to look at formation composition.

Deepstrike options, like air assaults, are more valuable. That's doubly true if the primary CC troops end up relatively cheap (as they have). That means restrictions and/or price increases.

==

If you're looking at special rules, they should be something that encourages the fighting styles you want. Just to give some spitball examples...

Pack Instincts - A formation in position to support an assault is allowed a countercharge move. This would need lots of thinking through but if it worked it would allow more support/FF and possibly disrupt the enemy or even allow the support formation to be "drawn in" and participate as part of the assault. Importantly, it is only useful for formations in close proximity to each other so it promotes that.

Or...

Overrun - A SW formation making a consolidation move may move 10cm as long as at least one SW unit ends within 15cm of an enemy unit. This would be a cheap Hit and Run but it only helps if the army is acting aggressively in something resembling the Eldar rolling assault. Formations would have to remain close to take advantage of it for follow-on assaults. Again, lots of thought experiment and testing would be required but you get the idea.

===

I hope that's not too rambling. The core of it is:

1) Get the flavor/feel you want nailed down as specifically as possible.
2) Make the list so that happens on the board in play.