Thunderfire Cannons

[Jackelope King]

One final thing, @JK a year ago you were pimping thunderfire cannons, now you are pimping predators. Why should people believe your advice now rather than your advice then? Especially when your advice can and probably will change in about 12 months? Follow what is said on the Internet with a whole bag of salt, what seems like certainty today can be shown to be nothing more than ignorance tomorrow.

I was indeed, waaanial00. I was wrong. I'm perfectly willing to admit it. I used to love the thing, as I said above. But after five months of playing with two of 'em, and my opponents bringing better and better lists, it just wasn't cutting it. Read my analysis above. I broke down the durability problems it faces.

[DAwarrior43]

I love it when people nerd rage over things like this where it is pretty much personal choice on the unit and whether or not it has synergy in the list.

 

I personally run one in my all comers list and find it does very well. In a recent tourney I used it too pretty good effect, in the first match it was a table quarters deployment with a twist, everything was in reserves except for 1 hq and 2 troops. I walked on the TF late far away from an ork players stuff with a narrow firing lane and just pumped the air burst shells into a 30 man squad of boyz thinning them out nicely for my assault squad to mop them up. The next game it was pretty ineffective after my line was hit with a ragnar bomb. Third game it gunned down some long fangs and other misc. marines around the field before being finally killed. On a non-tourney not I consistently play against a guy who plays a pure word bearer army rhino rush. I enjoy opening up his transports and dropping 4 plates on them after disembarking.

 

All in all, there is a time and a place for TFs in lists, its just depends on how you feel about them and whether or not you can make them work. In my opinion the major downfall of the TFC is the fact that it takes a valuable HS slot. But I work around it and enjoy using it in my lists and love people's faces after a prized unit just got dismantled by my lowly TFC.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

He wants a tactica? Ok then. I posted a Techmarine Tactica (with the TFC in it) up here a while back, but it wasn't as in depth as it could have been. So, you want a Tactica on the TFC, I'll do some inventive editing to my old post.

 

 

RAINING DEATH

Thunderfire Cannon

 

W

hile field artillery does not mesh well with Astartes combat doctrine, the Thunderfire Cannon's long range, compact size, and multi-use ammunition make is an indispensible tool for bombardments and defensive operations. It is limited, however, by its lack of mobility, fragile nature, and competition for other Heavy Support slots.

 

Basic Statistics

 

The Thunderfire Cannon is a powerful but fragile artillery piece that is, in my opinion, under-utilized by most Space Marine players. It's one-man crew has all of the rules and stock wargear of a Techmarine with a servo-harness. The cannon itself counts as a vehicle with AV10 all around that is destroyed by any glancing or penetrating hit. It can fire in three different weapon profiles, detailed below.

 

 

Special Rules

 

Independent Character: The Techmarine gains this if the Cannon is destroyed.

 

Blessing of the Omnissiah: The Techmarine gains this if the Cannon is destroyed.

 

Bolster Defenses: Yes, he gets Bolster Defenses, which means that a Master of the Forge and a Thunderfire Cannon in the same army list will allow you to reinforce the cover saves of two different ruins. One will make for a decent firing spot for the cannon itself; a good use for the other would be Camo Cloaked Scouts with sniper rifles to hold an objective, but that's neither here nor there.

 

 

Wargear Options

 

The Techmarine crewman, sadly, can take no extra wargear; but he doesn't truly need any, either. With a full servo-harness, he comes with artificer armor, two servo-arms, a flamer, and a twinlinked plasma pistol in addition to his standard bolt pistol (bear in mind that he can only fire two of his three weapons in the Shooting Phase). However, the cannon has three different types of ammunition it can fire at the enemy. All Cannon rounds fire at 60" and spit out four small blast templates. Remember that this weapon is straight Heavy 4, not a barrage weapon -- so you roll for scatter for all four shots separately, not doing the little scatter-flip thing like for barrage weapons. One of the biggest benefits of the multiple blasts is that it is easily able to generate enough hits to overcome that pesky wound allocation thing, which helps when you're desperate to take that meltagun/flamer/powerfist out of a squad. They also may excellent weapons to use against swarm bases, which suffer from vulnerability to blasts. I brought my TFC to a tournament once against a Necron player who ran lots of scarab swarms. . . none of which survived past turn three. They're rare to see, I know, but the point stands.

 

 

Tactical Recommendations

 

Surface Detonation: Surface rounds slaughter Imperial Guard, Orks, Tyranid Swarms, and Eldar Guardians, and with four templates, can put enough hits that wound on 2+ on a MEQ squad to overwhelm most player's ability to roll 3+ armor saves. It is even useful to knock around light vehicles such as Rhinos and Chimaeras (if you can get a side-armor shot), although this is far from ideal. I find that this is the preferred ammo type to use in general engagement situations, as its strength value and four blasts makes it effective against 80% of potential targets (barring only AV13+ vehicles). Aside from the obvious horde targets, Surface rounds get the best mileage when fired at units that forced to clump up, like troops piling out of an APC or newly-arrived deep strikers. Light vehicle squadrons like Land Speeders, War Walkers, and Vypers can be successfully engaged, but rely on good scatter to get the central hole over their hulls, which can be an iffy proposition depending on how the unit is spread out.

 

Airburst: Airburst rounds are designed to completely nerf units that rely on cover saves, such as Eldar Guardians, Rangers/Pathfinders, Guardsmen, and Gretchin squads. They still wound on a 2+ against GEQs (Guard Equivalent) and just like a flamer are not stopped by cover saves. This makes them eminently useful for pushing units like Rangers and Gretchin off of home deployment zone objectives. It also simplifies shooting through your own units, since the enemy cannot pull cover saves for it. This is an oft-overlooked benefit of the Airburst round, and I've seen at least two players deploy their TFCs on hilltops or roofs to present a "clearer field of fire." And while negating cover saves my appear to have limited benefits, consider the mathhammer difference in shooting at, say, Camo Cloaked Scouts or Rangers, both of which improve a standard 4+ cover save to a 3+ -- that's the difference between a Space Marine and a Stormtrooper.

 

Subterranean Detonation: Subterranean rounds are the most situational of the three ammo types available. This type of round is at its best when fired at Jump Infantry and Bike squads because it forces those units to take Difficult and Dangerous Terrain tests. I used this to good effect during the 2009 'Ard Boyz Tournament at my LGS when I was able to roll decently and put wounds on a Nob Biker squad. In the subsequent movement phase, the Ork player took several more wounds which resulted in the deaths of a couple bikers and opened the door for the Nobz to get pummelled by my Dreadnoughts on the next turn. Eldar -- and, I imagine, the new Dark Eldar -- come to despise the TFC since jetbikes and jump infantry really don't like those Dangerous Terrain tests. And since Sub-T rounds don't require damage to generate the tests -- just hits -- and effect the entire squad even if only one model is hit by a template, they are excellent for use against vehicles and vehicle squadrons. Bang some Sub-T rounds against a squadron of three Leman Russes and if they move, one is likely to fail and be Immobilized. . . and Immobilized vehicles in a Squadron are automatically destroyed. Pretty damn good for a Strength 4 shot, don't you think? Another good use of these is for slowing down assault units (Thunder Hammer/Storm Shield Terminators, here's looking at you) once they have been pulled from their transports by your fast melta/lascannons/etc. Units trying to enjoy the benefits of cover while advancing also roll one less die on Difficult Terrain tests when clipped by Sub-T rounds, so units with Slow and Purposeful become much slower and less purposeful.

 

 

Major Drawbacks

 

The Cannon is fragile, counting as an AV10 vehicle that is destroyed by ANY hit. The crewman may have a 2+ save, but he is also only a single wound. Like Elites, Heavy Support choices also tend to be at a premium, so the Cannon probably needs to be an integral part of an army list from the beginning or it will lose out to its bigger, better-armored brothers. Keeping it alive appears to be a challenge at first glance -- one of its biggest drawbacks according to its sometimes vociferous detractors -- so here are some tips to help out.

 

Cover Saves Are Your Friend. The Techmarine crewing the gun gets his Bolster Defences rule for a reason; use it. Placed wisely in the sort of blown-out, broken-down building that is ubiquitous on most 40K tables, it is easy to pull a 3+ cover save for the gun which is otherwise too easy to be destroyed (even by most non-Guard small arms!).

 

The Difference Between Cover and Concealment. Cover Saves are nice, but concealment is better. During deployment, if at all possible, place the Cannon out of line of sight of enemy weapons that able to range it, like lascannons, missile launchers, and rail guns. If your opponent brought a Whirlwind, see above.

 

Threat Meter Tends to Run Low. One of the psychological benefits of the Thunderfire is its rarity; when you first bring it out of the bag/box/case/whathaveyou, you're likely to encounter raised eyebrows and confused looks. Unfamiliarity is good, since people will underestimate it and not make any concerted attempt to kill it. This attitude is likely to change after a couple of games, though. The next step here is that you need to present bigger, more important targets. Players experienced in being subjected to TFC barrages tend to try to kill it fast, but its hard to worry about a two-model artillery piece when there is a Land Raider full of Hammernators or a quartet of Rhinos plowing towards their lines at full speed.

 

 

Closing Thoughts

 

Simply put, you either love the Thunderfire Cannon or hate it. Unlike units like Assault Squads and Razorbacks, no one includes Thunderfires just because they are all around decent units. They work best in static gunline armies, which have become rare amongst 5th Edition Space Marine players due to our inability to compete in gunnery duels with the Tau and Imperial Guard. However, they do remain one of the cheapest Heavy Support options in the entire Codex and make for decent filler if you find yourself with 100 free points and nothing left to do with them.

 

Also remember that even when the Cannon is destroyed, the Techmarine is capable of independent movement and can even join squads and conduct repairs.

 

 

Take It or Leave It: Take it if you have space. They tend to be ignored, since your opponent is likely to be shooting at your bigger, more expensive models like tanks, APCs, and Dreadnoughts.

 

 

Addendum

 

I just wanted to add a quick section about drop pods here at the end. Now while I have toyed with the idea of including a TFC or two in an all-pod army, I've never actually done it, so this is all just conjecture. You've been warned.

 

The reason I thought of this is that it is one of only two Heavy Support units that can deploy via drop pod; the other being Devastators, whose weapons tend to be quite expensive and thus rarely see use. The TFC, on the other hand, is a cheap 100 points (135 with a bare pod). By comparison, a minimum Devastator Squad with comparable killing power (say, 4x missile launchers) in a pod is 185. This relatively cheap point cost gives you an option for that all-important odd number of pods. As a move-or-fire weapon, you certainly must be aware of the fact that you won't be shooting the turn you come down, so if you want the most out of your podded TFC, bring it down with the first turn wave (preferrably behind some semblance of cover to improve survivability). A benefit to this sort of deployment is that the TFC will -- not should, will, you hear me? -- be coming down in your backfield while your forward elements are dropping in at close quarters with the enemy. His attention will most likely be on the units that are front and center, so you should be able to get the necessary one turn grace period to actually start shooting it.

 

Oh, and one other thing to remember. The artillery rules are unforgiving to the weapons themselves, but the Techmarine is fairly survivable here. Only a third of incoming shots will hit him, and he does have that 2+ save to protect him. If the gun is destroyed, never forget that the Gunner is now an Independent Character with all the benefits of a servo-harness.

[Validar]

I think that you conclusion about underused unit = ignored by opponents is flawed. If I meet units I've never heard of before (especially if they read 4x blast, but easy to destroy) I'll shoot them before anything else :)

 

True about the Techmarine! Remember that a techmarine with harness himself costs 75 points AND takes up an elite slot. So essentially the thunderfire cannon is just a toy for him at 25 points (if you wanted to bring a techmarine in the first place :sweat:).

 

A not would be that your army is most likely not anywhere close to where the TFire Cannon was destroyed, so the techmarine may be unable to reach a squad he can join or a transport that can bring him to the battlefield where his flamer/plasma/harness will be useful. You can tactic your way out of this, for example by keeping your shooty dreads nearby, then he can repair something he can hide behind atleast.

[greatcrusade08]

I was going to leave this thread, but saw this tactica, and its amazing.. just one problem i see (although i may be wrong)

 

Subterranean Detonation: Subterranean rounds are the most situational of the three ammo types available. This type of round is at its best when fired at Jump Infantry and Bike squads because it forces those units to take Difficult and Dangerous Terrain tests.

 

im pretty sure JP troops dont take difficult terrain tests, if they move out of or into any terrain they have to take a dangerous test regardless, but it doesnt hamper thier movement (IIRC)

 

other than that, its perfect

[Hellios]

How many GTs has it won?

 

All I have to say on this subject is FOOL! How many times a week do you run into a GT list run by a GT top player? Are we all making lists which have to be effective against this tiny slice of the gaming fraternity? My local meta is nothing like a GT meta, I will wager that most of the people on this forum rarely turn up to their club and see top flight GT players playing their top flight GT lists. So what kind of comment was this? Other than a foolish one liner?

 

Well it used to be once or twice a week before I moved to the middle of nowehere... in which case my lists are the best ever since I've not lost a serious game since I moved... because I've played no serious games...

 

However who needs a tactica against enemies who can't play... plonk the thundefire down in the open and shoot it... you will still win... If you know what an inferior enemy will do beforehand then great... otherwise I like to assume that my enemy is of the highest quality and has fallen upon me with no mercy...

 

Otherwise tacticas go like this.... in bush with LoS to units you want to shoot... shoot units... rinse and repeat... maybe charge if you wanna.

 

So the fool is you :D

[Silber]

@Deus EX Ferrum

What I feel your tactica is missing is what to do with your Thunderfire in Dawn of War. I realize the TF isn't the only unit sharing this issue (Devastators and their respective flavours come to mind), but I think it needs to be considered especially with the TF, dependant on cover as it is.

I'd contribute myself, but I tend to avoid static units altogether and so really have no idea. That's why I noticed in the first place.

[waaanial00]

@Deus Ex Ferrum - The only thing you need to note is that the effect of subterranean rounds on bikes/jetbikes is that they cannot turbo boost afterwards (because they count as in difficult terrain during their movement turn).

 

@GC - its worth noting the difficult terrain because they can chose to walk rather than jump. Therefore you are either limiting their mobility or increasing the danger of their passage

 

@hellios - carry on trolling. Assuming that people who dont play in GTs, or without GT lists, dont know how to play is the biggest load of tosh I have yet seen written on this forum. The more you type with you ... the more you make yourself look like a fool. Judging worth on GT placing is retarded, the person who claimed victory of the latest UK GT did so by cheating his way to the top. Dont believe me? Ask Idaho who actually played him. GT placing is about playing the lists which are taken to the GT, playing locally can be more competitive because the players arent flocking to the latest rubbish being spouted on the internet.

 

If your understanding of tactics is so funadmentally limited that all you have to say is the following

 

However who needs a tactica against enemies who can't play... plonk the thundefire down in the open and shoot it... you will still win... If you know what an inferior enemy will do beforehand then great... otherwise I like to assume that my enemy is of the highest quality and has fallen upon me with no mercy...

 

Otherwise tacticas go like this.... in bush with LoS to units you want to shoot... shoot units... rinse and repeat... maybe charge if you wanna.

 

Then you have absolutely no business contributing to a tactical discussion, these things are actually read by people who want to learn things not listen to your arogance and troll like lack of wit.

[greatcrusade08]

Otherwise tacticas go like this.... in bush with LoS to units you want to shoot... shoot units... rinse and repeat... maybe charge if you wanna.

 

So the fool is you :P

 

oh Hellios such a sage..

GTs are obviously the only measure of whats competative.. what were we thinking..

 

and im totally in awe of your tactical advice... just shoot and then shoot again... brilliant.

 

if you havent anything serious to add, id suggest all your doing is stirring the pot... perhaps you should do it elsewhere?

 

@GC - its worth noting the difficult terrain because they can chose to walk rather than jump. Therefore you are either limiting their mobility or increasing the danger of their passage

 

I agree completely, ten guys rolling for ones is probably two guys dead.. making them walk is very beneficial, plus S4 shots can still cause several wounds

[Hellios]

@hellios - carry on trolling. Assuming that people who dont play in GTs, or without GT lists, dont know how to play is the biggest load of tosh I have yet seen written on this forum. The more you type with you ... the more you make yourself look like a fool. Judging worth on GT placing is retarded, the person who claimed victory of the latest UK GT did so by cheating his way to the top. Dont believe me? Ask Idaho who actually played him. GT placing is about playing the lists which are taken to the GT, playing locally can be more competitive because the players arent flocking to the latest rubbish being spouted on the internet.

 

If your understanding of tactics is so funadmentally limited that all you have to say is the following

 

However who needs a tactica against enemies who can't play... plonk the thundefire down in the open and shoot it... you will still win... If you know what an inferior enemy will do beforehand then great... otherwise I like to assume that my enemy is of the highest quality and has fallen upon me with no mercy...

 

Otherwise tacticas go like this.... in bush with LoS to units you want to shoot... shoot units... rinse and repeat... maybe charge if you wanna.

 

Then you have absolutely no business contributing to a tactical discussion, these things are actually read by people who want to learn things not listen to your arogance and troll like lack of wit.

 

 

Otherwise tacticas go like this.... in bush with LoS to units you want to shoot... shoot units... rinse and repeat... maybe charge if you wanna.

 

So the fool is you :D

 

oh Hellios such a sage..

GTs are obviously the only measure of whats competative.. what were we thinking..

 

and im totally in awe of your tactical advice... just shoot and then shoot again... brilliant.

 

if you havent anything serious to add, id suggest all your doing is stirring the pot... perhaps you should do it elsewhere?

 

 

No No no I'm not a sage... what I'm saying is not profound only obvious... I also never said GT's were the only measure but it is something I think most people are familiar with even if they haven't been to one. Ones results mean nothing unless they can be repeated... so who cares if they do X against Bob... unless bob keeps kicking ass in a GT... then we can make the assumption that bob is good... I'm not saying you have to win GTs to be good but how can we prove otherwise...

 

If someone won a GT by cheating then it would seem the fools are the ones who let him do so... whoever they may be... I'm not saying odd results don't pop up from time to time... maybe GC cheats... maybe he would never do such a thing I don't know.

 

Anyway it seems the person not listening isn't me... I never said that if you don't win GT's or you don't use GT lists you can't/don't know how to play... infact I'm pretty sure I mentioned I like to use odd units myself... but I'm not that competitive... but that isn't the same as saying I don't know how to play... As for the local environment being competitive... The local kiddies running team is competitive... and some of them will become pretty good runners I bet... but if I placed them against Mr.Bolt right now... I'm pretty sure who would win.

 

I could assume I will be racing against the kids... but I like to assume I'm racing against Mr.Bolt... SO I consider how useful will my thundefire be against Mr.Bolt... well if it is a real one and he hasn't got any armour on I guess it will slow him down at least...

[greatcrusade08]

No No no I'm not a sage... what I'm saying is not profound only obvious... I also never said GT's were the only measure but it is something I think most people are familiar with even if they haven't been to one. Ones results mean nothing unless they can be repeated... so who cares if they do X against Bob... unless bob keeps kicking ass in a GT... then we can make the assumption that bob is good... I'm not saying you have to win GTs to be good but how can we prove otherwise...

 

If someone won a GT by cheating then it would seem the fools are the ones who let him do so... whoever they may be... I'm not saying odd results don't pop up from time to time... maybe GC cheats... maybe he would never do such a thing I don't know.

 

Anyway it seems the person not listening isn't me... I never said that if you don't win GT's or you don't use GT lists you can't/don't know how to play... infact I'm pretty sure I mentioned I like to use odd units myself... but I'm not that competitive... but that isn't the same as saying I don't know how to play... As for the local environment being competitive... The local kiddies running team is competitive... and some of them will become pretty good runners I bet... but if I placed them against Mr.Bolt right now... I'm pretty sure who would win.

 

I could assume I will be racing against the kids... but I like to assume I'm racing against Mr.Bolt... SO I consider how useful will my thundefire be against Mr.Bolt... well if it is a real one and he hasn't got any armour on I guess it will slow him down at least...

 

so becuase i havent won a GT and becuase i "may" be a cheater my results shouldnt carry any weight?

but people whos experience tells them they arent very good should be listened to?

 

Can you tell me Hellios who won this years ToS at GWHQ?

 

this is suposed to be a tactical discussion about how to get the best from cannons, yet most of the comments on here seem to be of the ilk that you shouldnt use them at all.. its both highly opinionated and unconstructive.

 

back to topic, we all know the potential damage output of a t-fire, but you can make it better by bunching up your oppoennts troops.. tank shocking is a good way to get them bunched as is popping transports, im sure others will have good ideas to accomplish this.

as for defense simply put them in cover (bolstered ruins if possible) and run other units that will be more tempting for the enemy to shoot at.. use your superior range and if necessary block LOS to counter asmuch of the enemys long range firepower as possible.

if the enemy does shoot at it then they arent shooting at other threats... a few decent strenght shots will kill it, yes, but i have a unit that kills LRs on turn one, it doesnt make LRS useless..

in essence they run like dreads, one is ok two is better

[Hellios]

You have to prove what is and not what isn't... He asked why TFCs are so bad... so the question is why are they good. I'm pushing hard to find out why they are good...

 

As for peoples experiance... what experiance matters except for your own... In your case I would never tell you not to take thunderfires... I would never tell JK he should...

 

But if you think people should take TFCs... you need to make a strong arguement... I would think after all you've been through with your scouts you would understand this...

[Commander Sasha]

As a very sub-optimal player, I'd add a few points: I wonder, is there a specialist market for "Tactica for the beginners/friendly/casual market"?

Though most people on this forum are the sort of 40K players that, like serious chess players, can "think several moves ahead", and are rarely surprised or caught out by an opponent, I am a casual and inexperienced player, coming at the game from a much shallower level, and not altogether that bothered about winning; losing after a heroic or funny result is more my goal!

As such, my comments are for the dilettante players, and carry none of the weight of the srious players' above.

I am guessing that someone who posts asking for advice is at a similar level, at least for now, so may be interested in my thoughts.

 

TFCs are a multipurpose unit, with a lot of range; from an opponent's point of view, this makes it very hard to guess what I'm going to do next with it. From a good mid-backline position, I might be threatening any of your units, thus making target priority hard for you. The unsettling affect of this is worth a lot to me in itself, something that cannot be math-hammered! It won't affect an experienced gamer, but it will in my gaming circles!

 

TFCs quite often let you do something that not many Marine units do, especially against hordes: YOU get to roll a bucket of wound dice! Again, unsettling!

 

TFCs are small; if you're setting up second, or it's Dawn Of War, a rhino or 2 could actually block line-of-sight entirely, so that your opponent can't get the shot at all; when it comes to your turn, they move, clearing your shot.

[greatcrusade08]

But if you think people should take TFCs... you need to make a strong arguement... I would think after all you've been through with your scouts you would understand this...

 

you just dont get it, which is very sad, the burden of proof goes with any opinion not just the positive ones.. you can rubbish something and then claim anyone with a counter view has to provide solid proof.

JK says they didnt work for him, ive explained how they have worked for me.. the difference IMO comes with the synergy in the list.

yet i get comments like "GC could be a cheat" or my results are anomolous..

 

i had the same two years ago when i argued for scouts in competative lists.. some things never change, some people will always know best regardless of ther strenght of arguments.

as this thread is showing that same tone, ill follow my above advice and stay clear of it, ill reutrn once it regains a more constructive air

[waaanial00]

No No no I'm not a sage... what I'm saying is not profound only obvious... I also never said GT's were the only measure but it is something I think most people are familiar with even if they haven't been to one. Ones results mean nothing unless they can be repeated... so who cares if they do X against Bob... unless bob keeps kicking ass in a GT... then we can make the assumption that bob is good... I'm not saying you have to win GTs to be good but how can we prove otherwise...

 

So from this we can assume that your argument only carries weight if you have won a GT, otherwise how can we tell that you are any good? What a complete idiotic viewpoint.

 

Anyway it seems the person not listening isn't me... I never said that if you don't win GT's or you don't use GT lists you can't/don't know how to play...

 

 

Didnt say it but sure implied it enough, to the point where you completely dismissed Idaho by asking whether I had won a GT with my list. By your earlier admission this is the only currency that you are putting any stock in.

 

As for the local environment being competitive... The local kiddies running team is competitive... and some of them will become pretty good runners I bet... but if I placed them against Mr.Bolt right now... I'm pretty sure who would win.

 

I could assume I will be racing against the kids... but I like to assume I'm racing against Mr.Bolt... SO I consider how useful will my thundefire be against Mr.Bolt... well if it is a real one and he hasn't got any armour on I guess it will slow him down at least...

 

Very droll but again you are assuming that the only way to be competative is a certain way. Whats your yardstick for Mr Bolt eh? Could it be that you are coming round to assuming Mr Bolt is a GT list?

 

 

You have to prove what is and not what isn't... He asked why TFCs are so bad... so the question is why are they good. I'm pushing hard to find out why they are good...

 

Well then read everything again and really take it in this time. Only one part of his initial post is why are they bad, myself, GC and others have put up plenty of reasons why they are good. Your not pushing hard to get information, you are pushing hard to be annoying for some reason or another.

 

You and others have turned a simple request for a tactica (handily provided above) into a competitive analysis thread. This forum is riddled with them already, none which ever end in consensus. Youve been around long enough, why do you continue to push? What further information do you hope to gleam or do you just enjoy arguing.

 

Final stop I wont be coming back! I just hope that others can dig some useful stuff out of this.

[Hellios]

No No no I'm not a sage... what I'm saying is not profound only obvious... I also never said GT's were the only measure but it is something I think most people are familiar with even if they haven't been to one. Ones results mean nothing unless they can be repeated... so who cares if they do X against Bob... unless bob keeps kicking ass in a GT... then we can make the assumption that bob is good... I'm not saying you have to win GTs to be good but how can we prove otherwise...

 

So from this we can assume that your argument only carries weight if you have won a GT, otherwise how can we tell that you are any good? What a complete idiotic viewpoint.

 

I took a Thunderfire cannon... I did not do well... So obviously the Thunderfire is why I lost...

 

Show me the people who have done really well with the thunderfire... Who have rocked the big events...

 

What I might give the Thunderfire is that it is better on a 6 by 4... although I still think the Whirlwind is better. Now I'm not putting forward an arguement that the Whirlwind Is better than the thunderfire however me just saying this is just as valid as you going woop the thunderfire cannon is good I killed 50 terminators with one shot once!

 

Show me the big hard numbers... also note I didn't knock the tactica Deus Ex Ferrum... However while you like to say a bad craftsman blames his tools... a good craftsman can also be limited by the resources he has.

 

If you are only playing in a friendly environment you don't need to use all your resources or be a good craftsman and I certainly don't have a go at people who play for fun. I encourage it.

[greatcrusade08]

I took a Thunderfire cannon... I did not do well... So obviously the Thunderfire is why I lost...

an idiotic view, in a 1500 points list its 1/15th of your army and your blaming the cannon..

 

Show me the people who have done really well with the thunderfire... Who have rocked the big events...

again going back to BIG events, I have done really well the the t-fire, Wan has done really well with the t-fire.. why does this preclude us from being counted.. becuase you say so?

 

What I might give the Thunderfire is that it is better on a 6 by 4... although I still think the Whirlwind is better. Now I'm not putting forward an arguement that the Whirlwind Is better than the thunderfire however me just saying this is just as valid as you going woop the thunderfire cannon is good I killed 50 terminators with one shot once!

6x4 is the standard size for a 1500+ point battle.. doesnt speak much to your own quality as a gamer if you didnt know that...

and to your second point siply stating an opinion isnt the same as stating a fact that i have kileld 5 Dsing termies with it, not once but twice out of 4 (IIRC) times ive fired at Dsing termies.

the first time was chaos and he telpeorted to take out my t-fire, killed one but the other got him back, the second time was from across the board.. i had other units ready to strike and wanted the t-fire to soften him up but i killed them all.

 

Show me the big hard numbers...

What numbers? this is a dice/luck based game.. you can mathhammer all you want, it only tells you what might happen as opposed to what will happen

everyone here has mentioned the offensive capability of the t-fire, so why should i now provide proof of that..

are you intentionally trolling here?

 

If you are only playing in a friendly environment you don't need to use all your resources or be a good craftsman and I certainly don't have a go at people who play for fun. I encourage it.

again your making an assumption that playing at an LGS instead of a GT makes us less competative.. friendly and competition arent mutually exclusive, some of the hardest fought games ive played have been at my LGS (which btw has 3 ToS gamers).

 

so Hellios whats your experience with the t-fires?

[spartan249]

Ok then... I've just been lurking in this thread, but I see something that needs commenting on.

 

"big events" account for very little of the entire 40k population. Basing an analysis of a unit on tourney results has one prerequisite: that every unit in every codex be played in multiples multiple times to get accurate data points on performance. Quite obviously, very few people even run thunderfires in any of the larger official tourneys, and thus does not have enough data out there to successfully base an opinion on. So while you saying that Thunderfires not featuring in big tourney players' lists is slight evidence for the fact that it's not very effective, it's also good evidence that it could be very effective, but not impressive on paper.

 

The Thunderfire cannon is, in my opinion, an effective weapon when fighting enemy troops. It's a niche weapon, filling a role in the codex that is only filled by one other unit, the whirlwind. There are many other units in the heavy support section that seem "better", but they are designed for a completely different role. There's no point in trying to compare the TFC to the LR or the Vindicator because all three fill different roles.

 

Taking the TFC as opposed to the LR or Vindi is a strategic choice that has to be made carefully, as the LR and Vindi cover niches that are more likely to come up during matches, but the TFC covers niches that the other two have no chance in hell of covering.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

"big events" account for very little of the entire 40k population.

 

I was just thinking that when I saw your reply...

 

 

Do you know there is an upside to the supposed "uselessness" of the Thunderfire Cannon? For a hundred points you get a rather potent - if fragile - gun platform and a Servo-Harnessed Techmarine.

 

Now, for an opponent who is unfamiliar with the unit he might ignore it for a turn or two giving you the opportunity to get off a few choice shots before he realises his error and takes it out - potentially leaving you with a decent IC.

[breng77]

I think any strategy where you are presupposing your opponents ignorace is not a very sound strategy. That said, I see uses for the TF cannon. I have never liked them because I prefer mobility in my army and they don't fit my play style.

[Captain Juan Juarez]

I think any strategy where you are presupposing your opponents ignorace is not a very sound strategy. That said, I see uses for the TF cannon. I have never liked them because I prefer mobility in my army and they don't fit my play style.

 

It isn't actually a strategy, I'm more pointing out the advantage to what is supposed to be a disadvantageous unit.

 

It's fairly sound too; someone who has never used a certain unit is more likely to be unfamiliar with it - I'm not saying take a TFC or two and hope your opponent is an idiot (though idiot-hoping is always encouraged), I'm saying that you can get a decent IC potentially, alongside a fairly deadly weapon for 100 pts.. Can't be that bad?

[Shadowstalker Grim]

I think GT enviroments are mentioned purely because they are harsh and encourage little room for error and so we see them filled with reliable units that people put a lot of stock in. I see no reason why a TF couldn't thrive in the enviroment for a player if used appropriately.

 

But I think it is silly to use this as the basis for list building or even critically looking at a unit. The unit performs both on its own and as a cog in an army. To me the TF strikes being a potent weapon given the chance. Lets face it, if it were useless, noone would care about it in a battle, the fact it usually gets shot to pieces means that IT IS A THREAT, whether you reckon a static piece of low AV artillery is useful enough for you to include in your army is for the general to decide.

 

It can be a large target or distraction and although it fills a different role, a drop podding ironclad is usually used a distraction, just like the thunderfire could be, but the thunderfire is significantly cheaper and sits back FORCING an enemy to try and close to kill it. The fact its AV 10 shouldnt bother people, speeders have to get closer and they are AV 10 too.

 

End of the day it fills a role in the army the same as every other unit, people claim that devestators are an underpar unit and with some good reasoning, but this is not to say that they cannot do as much damage as other units given the right chance and place in a list. All units have ups and downs to them.

 

The only unit that fills a similar role to the TF is as has been said: the WW. They both have ups and downs to them, but enough of simply bashing the unit. We should be praising its upsides and indicating that it does suffer from some slight downfalls here and there. The tactica is good and I think it covers the essential bases. Nice work deus ex ferrum!

[Captain Idaho]

All I can say is if the army hasn't won a GT then that means it can't be effective then that means there are loads of other lists out there which are apparently sub-optimal. Only a single army can with a GT therefore that means the others are not good enough.

 

It's the wrong way of looking at things. Personally I found waaanial00's list to be a powerful obstacle to victory. I have also witnessed it perform well against opponents who are Throne of Skull finalists. It's possible I am lying but then it is also possible I'm not ;)

[Iron Father Ferrum]

I try, Grim. I love my TFC; thought about getting a second one!

[greatcrusade08]

I try, Grim. I love my TFC; thought about getting a second one!

 

id say go for it, two works sooooo much better than one..