It seems like it's taken forever for the Dark Eldar second wave to emerge. And although we're still waiting for our plastic Thunder Wolf Cavalry, plus whatever else could be in a Space Wolves second wave, I really do wish there were more competitive armies to play against right now.Don't get me wrong, Space Wolves are far from being kings of the castle. Imperial Guard, Blood Angels, Daemons and Grey Knights are still battling for the top spots at all of the tournaments. Vanilla Marines do alright and occasionally you'll see a token Ork battle wagon army or two.
I guess what I'm saying is that there aren't enough competitive armies right now. Hence why so many people seem to bitch, moan, cry and generally throw their toys out of the pram when it comes to Space Wolves.
We haven't really faced Dark Eldar properly yet. People are STILL figuring them out, despite a Baron led Hellions army doing fairly well at the recent UK 40K GT.
Meanwhile the Orks aren't quite as good as when they first swamped our tabletops in a tide of green for 5th edition. This is a real shame, because everybody loves Orks. Admit it, you do too!
Tau, Eldar, Chaos Marines and Necrons are all waiting for new Codicies in order to become worthwhile again. So right now only half of the armies in the game are really viable in a competitive environment.
I Feel For The Other Players
Because it's horrible getting butchered every game, or battling your very best and all you can get is a Draw. I've been there back when I used to play Tau Empire. Every new Codex seemed to make my army that bit weaker until, eventually, they just got overrun and couldn't put up much of a fight.
It's a really tough situation to be in. Do you carry on for who knows how many years? Do you sell up and start something new? Do you collect another army on the side?
No wonder people complain that other armies are overpowered. Because their armies are out of date and underpowered.
I Feel Sorry For Me
Because I like to play a good game against a variety of armies. I'm sick of fighting Imperial Guard and Chaos Daemons. That's gonna change soon thanks to Grey Knights, but for once in a while I'd like to face Eldar, Tau or Chaos Marines -especially if they're Thousand Sons of course.
6th Edition
Already? Well, there's rumours/musings/random tat that's been floating about on the net for a while about this.
But honestly, what could GW improve? Personally, I love 5th edition. Every single thing about it. All they need to do is get all the Codex books done and the whole thing will work just fine.
Just don't let Matt Ward write any of the background.
22 comments:
May 11, 2011 at 2:48 PM
i agree, with all your comments. Its taking far too long for codexes to be released, and Thunder Wolves as well.
May 11, 2011 at 2:51 PM
At the uk gt 4th and 5th didn't have the baron just lots of venoms. Alot of people said they weren't gonna convert them they were waiting for the models to come out.
May 11, 2011 at 3:14 PM
Yea, I feel your pain Adam. Spent nearly 3 months playing 40k at the local shop at my college JUST to break the stereotype that Space Wolves are unkillable. Somewhere around 15-20 games with my best friend, just for the chance to get a game with an army other than DE
May 11, 2011 at 4:13 PM
This would be the 3rd Dark Eldar wave. Beastmasters was number two. But my poor, innocent Wolves still haven't even had a second wave. :sniff:
In my area, which is an admittedly strange area, Dark Eldar are one of the most played armies, since they're not just a charge forward and kill army, they actually require some finesse.
May 11, 2011 at 5:50 PM
*Chapter Master Ignus Domus of the Iron Flames* If you can just charge over the table with your wolves, then you need better opponents. I certanly cant do that in my club, and i would be bored to suicidal levels if i could ;)
May 11, 2011 at 8:44 PM
Sounds like you just need to change where you play your games at. In my area we have the following armies showing up consistently and with multiple players playing them:
Tau, Chaos Space, Dark Eldar, Blood Angels, Grey Knights and Space Wolves.
If I go to one of the GW stores as opposed to my independent retailer I can play against Orks, Eldar, Space Marines, Tau, Blood Angels, Space Wolves and Grey Knights.
What I am getting at is each and every store will have a different demographic. Sure there is always going to be the standard armies you see at every store but there will be a variety of armies that you normal don't see at your store. Get out there and try some where new.
May 11, 2011 at 10:22 PM
Right there with ya. I played the Tau, and still do, but while I wait for a new codex, I've picked up the Black Templar, just because I just couldn;t do much with my Tau army! (I faced one Deathwing army and, in 5 turns, only managed to kill 2 terminators and 3 ravenwing bikers, while getting tabled myself. That was the day my Tau semi-retired)
May 12, 2011 at 2:50 AM
Adam, You really need to get out more. I dont know who you play but its obvious they suck if your thinking that way. Now dont get me wrong Our wolves are top notch but I disagree with you on that they arent any more competitive armies..I play on Vassal & although Its not exactly the 40k you might be used to but I see ALOT of very competitive lists & the last 2 armies that have been released since ours are more competitive then the rest & even give me a fight. but unless your list have no flavor & all your doing is long fang/las-plas razor spamming the same old comp in your venue then DONT feel sorry for the others feel sorry for yourself.
May 12, 2011 at 4:09 AM
Taubeast:
You have impeccable taste! Templars and Tau are the armies of Champions! ;)
We have some good tactics and such on the *Bolter and Chainsword* for Templars and if your Tau need some rehydrating, check out 3++ and Tau of War, and Darkseer's http://warhammer-tau-army.blogspot.com/
May 12, 2011 at 4:16 AM
I have to confess a lack of love for horror things, most of them are just daft, gruesome or weird.
But those Talos/Cronos things are amazing!
I wonder what Wraithlord and/or Warsphinx hybrids we'll see....
May 12, 2011 at 4:22 AM
As a newbie I must admit that every other army seems a very daunting prospect to take on.
Still, over here (Belgium) there are quite a lot of different armies to play against.
At last week's tournament there were about 3/4 armies of each race present, with the exception of tau, chaos marines & daemons (1 army each).
Unfortunately I only encountered DA, Nilla Marines and a fellow Wolf player. Even so, each and every army was completely different.
Take the Space Wolves, for instance: I played a rhino-list, a friend played a Raider list with a couple of Twolves & Lonewolves and the guy I faced in battle a mix of everything.
Perhaps making lists with non-standard troops (bloodclaws anyone?) might help to get a little more the competitive feel back?
May 12, 2011 at 11:21 AM
Dark Elder get their !third! wave in 7 Months, while other armies wait years for their second.
This is embarrassing.
My Fantasy Warriors of Chaos wait since Oct 2008. Nearly half the armybook has no model or they are 3+ editions old...
May 12, 2011 at 12:46 PM
@Marshal Wilhelm,
Thanks for the advice! You might have actually seen me on B&C, my username is JohnnyC. I went with that because Taubeast just didn't feel right, since I go to B&C for Black Templar advice. lol
May 12, 2011 at 2:59 PM
I'm not too worried about 6th to be honest, I think the main changes will be a nerf to firing points, new wound allocation rules, and more base missions. They do need to start ramping up thier release schedule a bit though, cause the fourth edition books are struggling, that said part of the problem is that when new players ask for advice the first thing hear is not to start nids, eldar, tau, or necrons, and to run chaos or nilla marines and that needs to change.
May 12, 2011 at 4:10 PM
A fine article Adam. I agree with most of it, but I have a dual personality issue: I tone down my armies for uncompetitive types, and I juice it up for the top tier you just mentioned. I agree it would be nice to have a more level playing field...
Further to that: NO 6th edition! Please?! And let's see some Thunderwolf Calvary GW!!!
May 13, 2011 at 1:02 PM
Could not help but notice you forgot to mention witch hunters among armies waiting for a new codex. We technically still exist...
May 13, 2011 at 2:17 PM
Aww poor space wolves. I'm still waiting for my tervigon, Tyrannofex, harpy and spore pod.
I set my tyranids aside for now and have been working on mastering Blood Angels. And while I'm playing BA and waiting to play nids again, I'm building a Tau army.
May 13, 2011 at 5:47 PM
I dunno I have to say do get a sense of hypocrisy with this article. Whilst yes the fault is partly (ok mainly) GWs in failing to ever have an edition with a range of equally balanced codices. But at the same time time it is down to the players' choices. This blog, which I am very appreciative of and is a consistently interesting read, is nevertheless an avid proponent of the very dull spamming lists which make space wolves little fun for people to play against.
Again and again when reading tacticas on here its the same mantra- carbon copy grey hunter squads with banners and meltaguns in rhinos, maxed out long fangs with missile launchers, wolf guard with combi-melta and powerfist, bare rune priest etc etc. Is it effective and optimised? yes. Is it particularly fun to have such ubiquitous lists all over the place? no.
I'm going to a tournament next weekend and I wanted to test the (Eldar) list I'm taking so my brother took a fairly standard tournament style SW list (with lots of proxies because I don't possess any ML longs fangs let alone 15.) And yes it wasn't particularly fun to play against. 15 rockets a turn that you know are undercosted sending your skimmers tumbling from the skies and scoring, shooty, choppy grey hunter packs that you also know are undercosted whilst you have your 30 point bright lances as long range anti-tank and 8 point guardians makes you realise the codices aren't balanced
Now obviously a big part of this is the fact that because units within the SW codex are not costed correctly, there are choices (like the ones listed above) which are simply far more cost effective than others. But that doesn't mean you can't take them ever. If necessary house rules any issues. When I play my brother we make hunters 17 points each and drop the cost of some wargear like frost axes on Wolf Guard to make them a viable alternative.
So basically whilst I agree with the essence of this article, I still feel its partly the responsibility of the player to make the game balanced- try taking a non-optimised, 'thinking outside the box' list- you might well have more fun than you do with a cookie cutter netlist...
May 14, 2011 at 12:21 PM
Well just to point out Space Wolves did get a second wave. That is why we have a Bjorn model now.
May 14, 2011 at 12:27 PM
Tau aren't necessarily uncompetitive, just one-dimentional. They have one build which works wonders at smaller point values 1000-1500 due to Rail Weaponry and JSJ.
When you start increasing the points values they even out. Tau can and will outshoot you, and using Kroot Shields, can keep you out of charge range for longer.
As for "very dull spamming lists", the reason we take the ever-feared 7-9 GH is because they're good, Blood Claws are not. Redundancy and repetition creates strong lists. Why take one melta squad when it might get shot dead. How do we fix this? Why, we take two of course, maybe even three. Then we get long fangs. They're good, I'll take two squads of them aswell. It results in lists performing consistently. Reduce chance, maximise efficiency.
Then we get the argument for undercosted. Compared to what? We know that the older edition codexes are incorrectly costed, but the newer codexes are priced accordingly. If the rest of the codices were brought into line, there wouldn't be as much of a problem.
This took ages to type, as I don't want to stir the pot, merely say that alot of people have the wrong outlook on things.
May 15, 2011 at 8:56 PM
I have to concur with the Wolf's Lunch.
So, you take only one melta squad, instead of 2-3. Well, what happens when the other guy brought one land raider full of assaulty goodness, and in the name of variety you brought one meltagun squad that your opponent makes a point of nuking. Is it that fun for you to get thrashed by another 'non-optimised' list because you rejected the soundly-built net-list?
Is the player supposed to pay $300-600 an army AND take the onus to make sure the game is balanced?
I like the universe, but I fully identify with the frustration felt because of the pace of releases and the like.
May 16, 2011 at 5:45 AM
Wolf's Lunch, I don't really understand your point- I'm perfectly aware why people take spam lists. If there are codex options which are undercosted and so noticeably better i.e more cost effective than the other options in that codex (or in other codices for that matter) then yes it doesn't require much intellect to work out that spamming said units will give you an advantage. That is what 'The Internet' has worked out and repeats until it has become dogma.
My point is that you don't HAVE to follow this unthinking approach. The game is about more than winning with the most optimised list possible. If these options which you think are requisites for a good list were priced appropriately then they would not be such no brainers. If grey hunters were 17 pts/model, wolf banners 15, plasma pistols 10, plasma guns the same cost as meltas, power weapon and power fist options for basic grey hunters slightly reduced in points
(and here we get to the issue of why GW is willing to break the 'multiples of 5 points' rule for some things, like stormbolters but not for example give grey hunters 12 point power weapons etc)
then you might have more varied grey hunter squads and hell if Blood claws were 14 points/model then maybe people would take them. If missile launchers for long fangs were 15pts then you might see more of the other heavy weapons for once...
And I can't really believe your claim that Grey Hunters aren't undercosted. Compare them to pretty much any troops choice you like in the game and they come out on top. Obviously its harder to compare with far cheaper units like IG infantry or Orks (although we all know what equal points of grey hunters will do to an ork mob) but look say at a 12 point Dire Avenger: -1 sv, -1 S, -1 T, no atsknf, a slightly better gun, no grenades, no weapon options, no cheap transport or a 16 point Tactical marine: combat tactics instead of counterattack, -1 A, more expensive sergeant, fewer weapons options, or 15 point chaos marines- who are pretty similar to grey hunters with +1 LD (but of course no ATSKNF which is better) a considerably more expensive sergeant, no counter attack, more expensive and fewer weapon options- nothing to compare to the utility of a wolf standard/ MoTW.
At then end of the day I guess what I'm saying is- all GW publications are imperfect, feel free to tinker with them yourself to make a more balanced enjoyable experience for friendly games and even in a more competitive environment it can still be more enjoyable to take a more interesting, unique list that isn't optimised spam.
If all you want to do is win at all costs, then fine I would recommend following the consensus internet opinion- some units ARE more equal than others.
But there is more to the game than that...
Post a Comment