Request: Thunderwolf Cav Tactica

[jon23516]

So I've converted up a 5-man squad of Thunderwolf Cavalry along with 15 Fen. wolves. Now I want to use them in a game to best effect.

 

I would think that despite S5, rending and access to fists and hammers, it would be better if enemy tanks/transports could be popped and let the T-Cav assault the squishy infantry instead of having to break open the transport themselves.

 

Fen wolves screen T-Cav as meat shields...

 

Only used these models in 1 game, blew open enemy Rhino with ease, and then was alpha striked by enemy army in the following turn. Oops.

 

Any thoughts and advice?

 

T-Cav + Landspeeders working in together... but get's crowded as both Fast Attack.

 

Thanks,

Jon

[Grey Mage]

Hit enemy units that are big enough to be decimated but to large to be destroyed... like any good CC unit, you want to remove the threat of the enemy unit, while using them as a shield during their controllers shooting phase to prevent taking casusalties.

 

When thats not possible, try to assault, and then consolidate, in such a manner as to get as much solid terrain/immobile vehicles/wrecks between you and the enemy as possible.

 

And yes, use something else to pop the transport, then let them eat whatever is inside.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

My success rate with TWC is hit or miss, but here is a bit of what i have learned:

---my TWC either hit like a brick to the gonads or a wet tissue. the trick i have used o prepare for this is to thrown them at units that already have been depleted, or is min sized (like those made to hold objectives) so while they might not kill everything near them, they'll lower the amount of attacks returning at them

---i rarelt ever deploy my TWC in a mission. I usually put them in reserves to avoid nasty shooting and bad placement. While this means i might not get them to later in the game, they can plug a whole in my line, clear enemy off my objectives, or with a 6in move, fleet, and then 12in assault, can get stuck in on ongoing combats or be there to assault 2nd or 3rd infantry waves.

---I wouldnt go a 5 TWC size, preferably 2-3 to keep points low, and spread them out. takes up 2 FA choices, but also means if i lose one to enemy shooting its not a large point investment gone, and i have enough for vengeance.

 

all i can think of atm, will post more if i think of it.

 

WLK

[Chodjinn]

I think when I get my TWC built up and used, they will get supported by a couple of multimelta speeders or a DP dread with MM/CCW. They definitely need some support.

[Valerian]

---i rarelt ever deploy my TWC in a mission. I usually put them in reserves to avoid nasty shooting and bad placement. While this means i might not get them to later in the game, they can plug a whole in my line, clear enemy off my objectives, or with a 6in move, fleet, and then 12in assault, can get stuck in on ongoing combats or be there to assault 2nd or 3rd infantry waves.

 

WLK

 

I like this point of keeping them in Reserves, WLK.

 

V

[Gentlemanloser]

Add a WL (or WGBL if yo ca't spare the points) to a TWC squad.

 

This has the benefit of proping up their low Ld (you'll be lucky if your oponent doesn't target pinning weapons at your TWC), adding a few more ablative wounds in a couple of FW, and giving you a extremely potent killing machine shielded by the durability of the TWC.

[Chodjinn]

Add a WL (or WGBL if yo ca't spare the points) to a TWC squad.

 

This has the benefit of proping up their low Ld (you'll be lucky if your oponent doesn't target pinning weapons at your TWC), adding a few more ablative wounds in a couple of FW, and giving you a extremely potent killing machine shielded by the durability of the TWC.

 

 

I partially agree with this. However, I don't think a WGBL is worth the points any more, for xx amount more, a Wolf Lord gets extra WS, Attack, Wound and better leadership. And i'm going to completely do a 180 on my opinion of Canis from when I originally read the codex.

 

I think that taking Canis over a tooled up WL is a better option. There are several reasons for this;

 

Equip a WL with the same wargear as Canis, and they're more expensive, only benefitting from a higher WS (which is kinda useless anyway with a WTN).

 

Running a TWC with Canis and a fenrisian wolf meat shield grants them higher leadership, which will be beneficial when their numbers start getting low.

 

 

The wolf lord can obviously take a wider range of wargear, runic armour and all that, but then things start getting silly expensive (250+) which IMO is way to much for a non-special IC. Alternatively, you could use a very cheap WL by not upgrading his weapons (rending :D or giving him anything fancy.

 

 

I also think TWC don't need shooty weapons, if you want tank busting give them melta bombs or a PF/TH. If you need more oomph, use a cheap WL with TH etc. If you need fire support, a 2-3 land speeders would be good, they're the same cost as a single TWM anyway in standard guise, and adding one or two MM isn't expensive.

 

Alternatively, or additionally, add in an Iron priest on TWM with 4 cyberwolves - yes he can't be attached, but he can run along side/behind, and those 12 S4 Cyber attacks will definitely help things, plus the monster/tank-killer TH.

 

You could run an Iron Priest and cheapo WGBL rather than go for Canis or expensive WL option if points are tight (that would be the only reason I'd take a WGBL on TWM).

[TiguriusX]

Generally accepted decision on Canis + Wolves is that they can be taken as troops for the purpose of FOC but they can't claim objectives

[Chodjinn]

thanks, will modify my post

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

---i rarelt ever deploy my TWC in a mission. I usually put them in reserves to avoid nasty shooting and bad placement. While this means i might not get them to later in the game, they can plug a whole in my line, clear enemy off my objectives, or with a 6in move, fleet, and then 12in assault, can get stuck in on ongoing combats or be there to assault 2nd or 3rd infantry waves.

 

WLK

 

I like this point of keeping them in Reserves, WLK.

 

V

 

Yea, i learned this the hard way. no way to get more depressed then playing against mech guard fielding nothing but the plasma tanks and demolisher cannons...

 

And i also have a tooled up WL accompany the unit, for while he can get up to 295 points, the fenris wolves can absorb early shooting attacks, and i can use the TWC as an expensive delivery unit to insure his survival.

it also helps because when i need multiple units dead, i can detach from the TWC and then hit two targets. Neither the WL or the TWC should break the enemy in one round, which is good. i want to break the enemy during HIS round, the continue the slaughter in my turn.

 

WLK

[Valerian]

I think that taking Canis over a tooled up WL is a better option. There are several reasons for this;

 

Except, however, Canis doesn't have an Invulnerable Save, which is particularly important for an Independent Character. Sure, he is fairly potent on the offense, however he fights his close combat attacks on his own and would be particularly vulnerable to any special close combat weapons. Although Wolf Lords/Battle Leaders will be more expensive when properly equipped, at least they can buy one or two things to avoid this particular vulnerability.

 

V

[Athalus]

Canis is worth it if you sport F-wolves, and attach him to a large group of TWC with some SS.

 

Also, should you go with just 1-2 SS, or put an SS on each TWC?

 

I just make my own WGBL on a mount, or WL (in higher pt games) so I can get a SS on my WL with Saga of the warrior born to make up for the lost attack. Nevertheless, Canis is still an absolute beast.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

i havent used Canis yet, and wont because:

---the model is ass ugly

---he has no invul save

---a WL can do more damage (more expensive yes, but worth it imo)

 

but the units of TWC i run are (at the moment, i have 4 more in the works):

--- 2 TWC, one with SS and WC, 1 normal. this comes out to 150 for the two

---then the attached WL with TW mount, FB, BoR, MB, RA, WTN, SoWB. its rediculous how many attacks i can get with him. just saturday i had to confirm a mdel can have more than 10 attacks for my opponent (he can, just not on his base profile. the SoWB dont go on base profil so ARRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOOOOO!)

 

WLK

[Athalus]

Yeah, the Canis model is hideous, and no invul blows.

 

Your lord load out is almost identical to mine, I just have a hard time deciding if BoR or SS is better, and either way you have to go with SoWB, because with so many attacks already it just becomes insane. With that extra movement its really, really easy to abuse the crap out of it.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

Yeah, the Canis model is hideous, and no invul blows.

 

Your lord load out is almost identical to mine, I just have a hard time deciding if BoR or SS is better, and either way you have to go with SoWB, because with so many attacks already it just becomes insane. With that extra movement its really, really easy to abuse the crap out of it.

 

well the SS in the TWC absorb the scary stuff (S10 weapons and such) leaving the WL's BoR to abosorb the lower S low AP weapons. and when the WL goes off on his own, sometimes the dice love me, sometimes they hate me, either way, the extra attacks never hurt.

 

WLK

[TiguriusX]

Yeah, the Canis model is hideous, and no invul blows.

 

Your lord load out is almost identical to mine, I just have a hard time deciding if BoR or SS is better, and either way you have to go with SoWB, because with so many attacks already it just becomes insane. With that extra movement its really, really easy to abuse the crap out of it.

 

 

If you aren't using 2 weapons I would use the SS intead of the BOR...especially if you aren't using Bear Saga.

 

As for Canis he is an IC and can be singled out...very very risky

[Wildfire]

Thing is, Canis has T5. A normal WL would have T4(5) with a TWM. I'm really up in the air about which I'd prefer, a invuln or the ability to take a single wound from S8/9 weapons.

[Jarl Kjaran Coldheart]

Thing is, Canis has T5. A normal WL would have T4(5) with a TWM. I'm really up in the air about which I'd prefer, a invuln or the ability to take a single wound from S8/9 weapons.

 

that is actually highly debated by some, by using Canis as a example (being true t5), i know some places (including my LGS) say that WL on TW also have T5, rather than T4(5).

 

WLK

[Wildfire]

Thing is, Canis has T5. A normal WL would have T4(5) with a TWM. I'm really up in the air about which I'd prefer, a invuln or the ability to take a single wound from S8/9 weapons.

 

that is actually highly debated by some, by using Canis as a example (being true t5), i know some places (including my LGS) say that WL on TW also have T5, rather than T4(5).

 

WLK

 

Sounds like RAI to me. Anything that uses another unit as an example of "how they meant it to be" is RAI.

[Grey Mage]

Thing is, Canis has T5. A normal WL would have T4(5) with a TWM. I'm really up in the air about which I'd prefer, a invuln or the ability to take a single wound from S8/9 weapons.

 

that is actually highly debated by some, by using Canis as a example (being true t5), i know some places (including my LGS) say that WL on TW also have T5, rather than T4(5).

 

WLK

 

Sounds like RAI to me. Anything that uses another unit as an example of "how they meant it to be" is RAI.

*shrugs* There is precident for it, just not alot- C:Daemons has alot, but it matters little since none of them are subject to instant death.

 

Id say the best example however is the Necron Lord with Destroyer Body upgrade, wich says "He moves as if mounted on a jetbike and gets +1 Toughness. As a result he can't be instantly killed by weapons with Strength 10."

 

While C:SW says: "... has the unit tpe of cavalry, adds +1 Strength, +1 Toughness, and +1 attack to his profile,..."

 

That I believe is the strongest example of another unit gaining an upgrade that both changes its unit type and stats and not using parenthetical toughness values. I may be wrong though... its been a while since I looked.

[Wildfire]

I reiterate: taking another unit's rule and applying it is RAI, not RAW.

[Grey Mage]

I reiterate: taking another unit's rule and applying it is RAI, not RAW.

Well GWs RAW doesnt addequately cover this scenario, and the following quote shows why:

 

WH40K Rulebook, pg. 26

Some models can gain improvements to their Tougness by using wargear items like bikes, Chaos Marks, etc. When it comes to instant death such bonuses do not count (ie, riding a bike wont save you from being obliterated by a lascannon blast!). In these cases two values will be shown for the Toughness characteristic of the model, one of wich is in brackets. Uses the lowest value for working out instant death.

 

No value is shown, let alone two values.

 

On top of that, the Entry for bikes specificly notes this as being the case on pg. 53 under the heading "additional protection". Beasts and Cavalry on the other hand make no mention of changing characteristic values, nor does it reference us to pg. 26.

 

There is only one model in the whole army who has both a Profile and a TWM- and that is Canis Wolfborn who simply has T 5. Yet even that is muddled, as he doesnt simply have a TWM, he has "Fangir", wich while described as a Thunderwolf is not specificly the wargear item "Thunderwolf Mount".

 

So while Im not arguing either way *Im simply going to wait for FAQ on this one* I am saying that its an obvious grey area.

[Wildfire]

I don't really see any grey area.

Some models can gain improvements to their Tougness by using wargear items like bikes, Chaos Marks, etc.

That seems pretty straightforward. A model gains toughness by using wargear. Bam.

 

I'm not saying I don't see where you're comming from. I wouldn't be surprised if it is FAQed that the toughness provides defense from instant-death. It certainly seems that they intended it that way, from the statlines of the TWC and Canis. However, until that FAQ, I don't see that there's a RAW grey area. Just a RAI justification, which I won't use.

[Grey Mage]

I don't really see any grey area.

Some models can gain improvements to their Tougness by using wargear items like bikes, Chaos Marks, etc.

That seems pretty straightforward. A model gains toughness by using wargear. Bam.

 

I'm not saying I don't see where you're comming from. I wouldn't be surprised if it is FAQed that the toughness provides defense from instant-death. It certainly seems that they intended it that way, from the statlines of the TWC and Canis. However, until that FAQ, I don't see that there's a RAW grey area. Just a RAI justification, which I won't use.

The grey area is, in many minds, that there is no profile for it, and there should be, and it should show two stats in the T value area or one, as appropriate. That there are other units out there that do not follow pg. 26 puts doubt on the subject, especially with Codex overrulling BRB as standard.

[Wildfire]

The grey area is, in many minds, that there is no profile for it, and there should be, and it should show two stats in the T value area or one, as appropriate. That there are other units out there that do not follow pg. 26 puts doubt on the subject, especially with Codex overrulling BRB as standard.

 

The fact that there isn't a profile is what forces you to use existing rules. Existing rules are that they do not count the bonus T vs. instant death.

 

Out of curiosity, do you also say there is a grey area for characters on bikes? There's not Rune Priest on a bike statline (for instance).