10 wolf guard termies, why doesnt every army take some?

[skeletoro]

Well the idea for them is to control centre board, get peoples attention and let my GH packs get into plasma range a little less unscathed.

Let's say you succeed and get the attention of your opponent and they decide to shoot against your TDA WG instead of your grey hunters. What has this really accomplished? With the notable exception of AP 3, TDA WG are, if anything, a little less durable than grey hunters, for the points cost. If you can convince your opponent to direct their AP3 firepower against your WG TDA instead of using it against your grey hunters, well, well done - you've obtained a significant tactical advantage. However, perhaps there are exceptions but I can't help but think that if your opponent chooses to do this, they're an idiot.

 

So I really don't think using WG TDA as a fire magnet vs. shooting attacks is a particularly sensible plan, barring corner-case exceptions (E.g. you are charging a unit with AP3 - put your TDA models at the front of the pack!). It really seems to me that by doing yourself, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot (or choosing to "block" an incoming rick with your groin).

 

Now, *melee* is quite a different story entirely. As you said, AP3 is super common in melee. I think it's very worth it to try and mix armour saves where possible in melee units so you can differentially assign wounds to your units. AP2? Send it to your storm shield + power axe model (16 points of damage conceded, rather than 22 on a normal TDA WG). AP3? Direct it to your normal TDA WG (5.5 points of damage conceded, vs. 8 on the storm shield model or 28 on the power armour & axe model). AP4+? TDA WG again (5.5 vs 8 vs 8.5, respectively, but note that grey hunters only cede 5 points!!). YOU generally get to make these calls in melee.

[Brom MKIV]

What it boils down to for me is why would anyone want to take bare tactical terminators?

The main appeal for tactical terminators is their sheer resilience as relentless heavy and special weapons platforms. 10 terminators full of combis and twin cyclones or asscans is damn hard to silence and more importantly is a threat to EVERYTHING. The unit takes centerfield and lays waste while advancing/withdrawing and fighting or shooting off would be assaulters, the same cannot be said of any mech or dev squad. Its this unique set of skills and flexibility that is the main attraction of terminators. Ya power weapons are nice but put that same 10 man squad up against orks for example and we'll see stormbolters and power weapons are just not sufficient.

Bolter fire is the most abundant form of shooting available in the meq world, as it should be, and its great but trading stormbolter shots with plasma shots is not something terminators want to be doing. Ever. Yet without heavy/special weapons for ranged superiority they will be faced with a losing proposition pt for pt against even common troops.

[Squark]

What it boils down to for me is why would anyone want to take bare tactical terminators?

The main appeal for tactical terminators is their sheer resilience as relentless heavy and special weapons platforms. 10 terminators full of combis and twin cyclones or asscans is damn hard to silence and more importantly is a threat to EVERYTHING. The unit takes centerfield and lays waste while advancing/withdrawing and fighting or shooting off would be assaulters, the same cannot be said of any mech or dev squad. Its this unique set of skills and flexibility that is the main attraction of terminators. Ya power weapons are nice but put that same 10 man squad up against orks for example and we'll see stormbolters and power weapons are just not sufficient.

Bolter fire is the most abundant form of shooting available in the meq world, as it should be, and its great but trading stormbolter shots with plasma shots is not something terminators want to be doing. Ever. Yet without heavy/special weapons for ranged superiority they will be faced with a losing proposition pt for pt against even common troops.

I have to agree. Storm bolters are nice, yes, but terminators are pretty much always twice the price of a tactical squad (Or Strike Knights, or Grey Hunters) per model, and the mathhammer shows they're really only much more durable against AP 3, especially if there's cover involved. So you get the same shooting at 24" and half the shooting at 12", for a drop in durability, and your access to special weapons is more expensive (For vanilla terminators and Space Wolf terminators, anyway. Dunno about Grey Knights and psycannons). So, the Melee weapon is the deciding factor here (Sans upgrades to combi-weapons for Wolf Guard Termies, that is. But then you're paying more points, and reducing your midrange shooting potential). For Codex Marines, you get about the same number of attacks, but it's with a power fist. For Space Wolves, you're actually getting less attacks because our troops carry 2 close combat weapons, but you have power weapons. Is this worth the deficiency in close range shooting, less versatile special weapons, and loss in point per point durability? I honestly don't know. But I will say that the metagame currently heavily favors shooting, so there's that.

 

Now, assault termies are a whole 'nother kettle of worms, but Space Wolves don't have them, and trying to make wolf guard terminators into assault terminators isn't a great idea. Probably the closes you can get to matching codex assault terminators is a mix of Power axe+Storm Shield and Wolf Claw+Powerfist terminators, but you're paying 40 more points for 5 of them than C:SM and 25-30 points more than Blood Angels (Dark Angels have a new codex inbound in a month or so, so I'm not going to bother talking about Deathwing terminators).

 

As Pack leaders, I think Space Wolf terminators work well since you're generally only paying 5 points for the 2+/5++ save on the Wolf Guard Pack leader after you factor in the cost of wargear you probably would have bought anyway. But in packs? I'm not so sure.

[skeletoro]

Hmm, on the other hand...

 

A unit of 10 WG with 2 CML in the service of a wolf priest might be an interesting proposition.

 

It seems the standard outflanking unit I hear about on B&C these days is a grey hunter squad. But wolf guard do have an advantage here: You can outflank a more powerful contingent with the purchase of a single Saga of the Hunter wolf priest. Of course, it'll mean you have a lot riding on that reserves roll. But that aside... outflanking and preferred enemy for a 400 point unit for the same price you'd have to pay for a 200 point unit... seems kinda tasty.

 

Hmm, how common is it for outflankers to find enemies within 24"? 12? 6? Normally I'd lean towards combi weapons, but with an outflanking unit, I'm reconsidering the virtues of storm bolters. Something like this:

 

2 TDA, CML, SB, PAx

8 TDA, SB, PAx

Wolf priest, SB, SotH

503 pts

 

I'd consider switching out for combi-plas though. And maybe picking up a chain fist. That would cost up to another 55 points though!

[Wolf Guard Dan]

I am going to try this tomorrow vs some orks. Unfortunately I cannot go bare-bones without him allowing me to proxy. I only have PF & WC modeled.

[irwit]

Well the idea for them is to control centre board, get peoples attention and let my GH packs get into plasma range a little less unscathed.

Let's say you succeed and get the attention of your opponent and they decide to shoot against your TDA WG instead of your grey hunters. What has this really accomplished? With the notable exception of AP 3, TDA WG are, if anything, a little less durable than grey hunters, for the points cost. If you can convince your opponent to direct their AP3 firepower against your WG TDA instead of using it against your grey hunters, well, well done - you've obtained a significant tactical advantage. However, perhaps there are exceptions but I can't help but think that if your opponent chooses to do this, they're an idiot.

 

So I really don't think using WG TDA as a fire magnet vs. shooting attacks is a particularly sensible plan, barring corner-case exceptions (E.g. you are charging a unit with AP3 - put your TDA models at the front of the pack!). It really seems to me that by doing yourself, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot (or choosing to "block" an incoming rick with your groin).

 

Now, *melee* is quite a different story entirely. As you said, AP3 is super common in melee. I think it's very worth it to try and mix armour saves where possible in melee units so you can differentially assign wounds to your units. AP2? Send it to your storm shield + power axe model (16 points of damage conceded, rather than 22 on a normal TDA WG). AP3? Direct it to your normal TDA WG (5.5 points of damage conceded, vs. 8 on the storm shield model or 28 on the power armour & axe model). AP4+? TDA WG again (5.5 vs 8 vs 8.5, respectively, but note that grey hunters only cede 5 points!!). YOU generally get to make these calls in melee.

 

I don't think anyone is going to shoot ap3 at tda over PA but most shooting isn't ap3. Its bolter type shots. So 2+ is twice as survivable vs Ap4 or worse.

 

I like the idea of TDA WG leading GH packs. Any major downsides to this? 33 points for a 2+ shield at the front of your GHs with a storm bolter and power weapon for good measure. Also be good for challenges vs any power sword wielding threats.

 

Also I do think the cyclones are worth the upgrade as this gives you a great walking firebase and you are still cheaper than standard load out 10 TDA from any other chapter but you alos have counter attack and 4 krak missiles!

 

Finally you could always have a unit of 8 or so but still have 2 cyclones and have 2 other guys buff the GH packs. Another advanatge over other codexes

[Squark]

Well the idea for them is to control centre board, get peoples attention and let my GH packs get into plasma range a little less unscathed.

Let's say you succeed and get the attention of your opponent and they decide to shoot against your TDA WG instead of your grey hunters. What has this really accomplished? With the notable exception of AP 3, TDA WG are, if anything, a little less durable than grey hunters, for the points cost. If you can convince your opponent to direct their AP3 firepower against your WG TDA instead of using it against your grey hunters, well, well done - you've obtained a significant tactical advantage. However, perhaps there are exceptions but I can't help but think that if your opponent chooses to do this, they're an idiot.

 

So I really don't think using WG TDA as a fire magnet vs. shooting attacks is a particularly sensible plan, barring corner-case exceptions (E.g. you are charging a unit with AP3 - put your TDA models at the front of the pack!). It really seems to me that by doing yourself, you'd be shooting yourself in the foot (or choosing to "block" an incoming rick with your groin).

 

Now, *melee* is quite a different story entirely. As you said, AP3 is super common in melee. I think it's very worth it to try and mix armour saves where possible in melee units so you can differentially assign wounds to your units. AP2? Send it to your storm shield + power axe model (16 points of damage conceded, rather than 22 on a normal TDA WG). AP3? Direct it to your normal TDA WG (5.5 points of damage conceded, vs. 8 on the storm shield model or 28 on the power armour & axe model). AP4+? TDA WG again (5.5 vs 8 vs 8.5, respectively, but note that grey hunters only cede 5 points!!). YOU generally get to make these calls in melee.

 

I don't think anyone is going to shoot ap3 at tda over PA but most shooting isn't ap3. Its bolter type shots. So 2+ is twice as survivable vs Ap4 or worse.

 

I like the idea of TDA WG leading GH packs. Any major downsides to this? 33 points for a 2+ shield at the front of your GHs with a storm bolter and power weapon for good measure. Also be good for challenges vs any power sword wielding threats.

 

Also I do think the cyclones are worth the upgrade as this gives you a great walking firebase and you are still cheaper than standard load out 10 TDA from any other chapter but you alos have counter attack and 4 krak missiles!

 

Finally you could always have a unit of 8 or so but still have 2 cyclones and have 2 other guys buff the GH packs. Another advanatge over other codexes

 

Bare bones Plasma hunters squad: 16 points

Vanilla Wolf Guard Terminators: 33 points

 

Yes, a 2+ save is twice as survivable against ap 4+; But it's More than twice as expensive, so you're actually less survivable point per point, and the Grey Hunters are better at shooting in most cases, and they score. By extension, the wolf Guard in TDA is not actually a good idea to stick in the front of your troops; Sure, it may seem like a good idea, and if you've made an offering to Tzeentch in regards to your dice, it will work, but if not, you're actually losing points on the model when you look at the math. They're more useful as a cheap upgrade to the wolf guard pack leader you already should have stuck in the pack in the first place.

 

On counter attack: Who the hell charges terminators? The only things that are going to be charging your wolf guard terminators are things that won't care about counter attack.

 

And yeah, Cyclone Missile launchers are nice. But they're also expensive. For the price of 1 cyclone missile launcher wolf guard, you can have 2 Missile Fangs.

[skeletoro]

And yeah, Cyclone Missile launchers are nice. But they're also expensive. For the price of 1 cyclone missile launcher wolf guard, you can have 2 Missile Fangs.

 

Yeah, I agree with this sentiment. They are VERY nice, but they're actually a little more pricey than those two long fangs (63 vs 10)!

 

Of course, there are a few other differences that count as their favour, such as the extra SB shots and a power weapon, as well as the fact that they're on a relentless model, and can position themselves behind their pack mates to boost their survivability further. And if you're buffing those termies with, for instance, prescience or preferred enemy, it is kinda nice that you can apply a single buff to such a large source of fire! On the other hand, they don't have split fire (are you sure you'll always want to shoot your missiles at the same target as the rest of the squad?) and also don't get to shoot if they're stuck in melee, which seems prone to happen.

[dswanick]

And yeah, Cyclone Missile launchers are nice. But they're also expensive. For the price of 1 cyclone missile launcher wolf guard, you can have 2 Missile Fangs.

 

Yeah, I agree with this sentiment. They are VERY nice, but they're actually a little more pricey than those two long fangs (63 vs 10)!

Actually :

2 Long Fangs w/ Missile Launchers (55pts)

4 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 1 / 9 / 3+ - 2 Heavy 1 Missile shots, 2 CCW attacks

 

1 TDA Wolf Guard w/ Cyclone (63pts)

4 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 2 / 9 / 2+(5++) - 1 Heavy 2 Missile shots, 1 Assault 2 Stormbolter shots, 2 PW attacks

 

So for 8 more points you get

- far more weak AP survivability and strong AP survivability at the expense of 1 wound.

- the same number of Missile shots, plus a Stormbolter shot.

- the same number of CC attacks, but in the case of the TDAWG they are AP3 or better.

- the only other thing you lose is the possibility of splitting the two Missile shots at different targets.

[irwit]

BUt those 2 cyclone shots are mobile and have 8 other TDA wounds before they will start to drop. Lfs have very few ablative wounds.

[skeletoro]

And yeah, Cyclone Missile launchers are nice. But they're also expensive. For the price of 1 cyclone missile launcher wolf guard, you can have 2 Missile Fangs.

 

Yeah, I agree with this sentiment. They are VERY nice, but they're actually a little more pricey than those two long fangs (63 vs 10)!

Actually :

2 Long Fangs w/ Missile Launchers (55pts)

4 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 1 / 9 / 3+ - 2 Heavy 1 Missile shots, 2 CCW attacks

 

1 TDA Wolf Guard w/ Cyclone (63pts)

4 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 2 / 9 / 2+(5++) - 1 Heavy 2 Missile shots, 1 Assault 2 Stormbolter shots, 2 PW attacks

 

So for 8 more points you get

- far more weak AP survivability and strong AP survivability at the expense of 1 wound.

- the same number of Missile shots, plus a Stormbolter shot.

- the same number of CC attacks, but in the case of the TDAWG they are AP3 or better.

- the only other thing you lose is the possibility of splitting the two Missile shots at different targets.

 

Dunno why I said 63 vs 10 but I'm also not sure why you said 63 vs 55. It's 50, right? (15+10)*2? Unless you're including the pack leader, in which case it's 63 vs 56, but I am not sure that would be an appropriate comparison.

 

Against AP 2 and AP 4+, the WG is less durable than the LFs, taking into account the extra wound. But the WG unit will obviously have more ablative wounds. And as I said before, the inability to split fire in a unit of 10 wolf guard is going to be an issue. If you're planning on charging that turn, for example, you can only shoot the unit you're planning on charging! I get the feeling that while long fangs are often used as anti-tank, WG CMLs are often going to be used against infantry, simply because that's what the rest of the unit wants to shoot at.

[dswanick]

And yeah, Cyclone Missile launchers are nice. But they're also expensive. For the price of 1 cyclone missile launcher wolf guard, you can have 2 Missile Fangs.

 

Yeah, I agree with this sentiment. They are VERY nice, but they're actually a little more pricey than those two long fangs (63 vs 10)!

Actually :

2 Long Fangs w/ Missile Launchers (55 50pts)

4 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 1 / 9 / 3+ - 2 Heavy 1 Missile shots, 2 CCW attacks

 

1 TDA Wolf Guard w/ Cyclone (63pts)

4 / 4 / 4 / 4 / 1 / 4 / 2 / 9 / 2+(5++) - 1 Heavy 2 Missile shots, 1 Assault 2 Stormbolter shots, 2 PW attacks

 

So for 8 13 more points you get

- far more weak AP survivability and strong AP survivability at the expense of 1 wound.

- the same number of Missile shots, plus a Stormbolter shot.

- the same number of CC attacks, but in the case of the TDAWG they are AP3 or better.

- the only other thing you lose is the possibility of splitting the two Missile shots at different targets.

- Relentless

 

Dunno why I said 63 vs 10 but I'm also not sure why you said 63 vs 55. It's 50, right? (15+10)*2? Unless you're including the pack leader, in which case it's 63 vs 56, but I am not sure that would be an appropriate comparison.

Correct. 50pts, so 63pts vs 50pts = 13pt spread.

Against AP 2 and AP 4+, the WG is less durable than the LFs, taking into account the extra wound. But the WG unit will obviously have more ablative wounds. And as I said before, the inability to split fire in a unit of 10 wolf guard is going to be an issue. If you're planning on charging that turn, for example, you can only shoot the unit you're planning on charging! I get the feeling that while long fangs are often used as anti-tank, WG CMLs are often going to be used against infantry, simply because that's what the rest of the unit wants to shoot at.

Incorrect.

Against AP4+ one Wolf Guard is as durable as two Long Fangs.

- 2W / Save3+ = 6 Wounds to kill

- 1W / Save2+ = 6 Wounds to kill

Against AP3 one Wolf Guard is far more durable than two Long Fangs.

- 2W / No save = 2 Wounds to kill

- 1 W / Save2+ = 6 Wounds to kill

Against AP1 & AP2 one Wolf Guard is nearly as durable as two Long Fangs.

- 2W / No save = 2 Wounds to kill

- 1 W / Save5++ = 1.5 Wounds to kill

And actually, I think the primary use for CML is on a TDAWG is as a Pack Leader for a Long Fang pack.

[Squark]

I admit the comparison isn't a perfect one, but my point was that a CML is a huge chunk of points on a unit that's already less cost effective in most regards than Grey Hunters.

 

Also, I'm going to have to disagree about the AP 2/AP 1 durability of Long Fangs vs. Terminators- What Long Fang isn't in cover, and that puts the durability squarely in favor of Long Fangs.

 

From a more practical statement, Long Fangs come cheaply at 140 for 5 Missile Launchers- 28 points a missile launcher, counting the cost of the squad leader. To get even one Cyclone Missile Launcher, you need to get 5 Wolf Guard already, and for 2, 10. Now, granted, Pack Leaders are an important investment anyway, but I think most of us will agree a lone CML is a horrible idea. So, if you're not sticking the Cyclone Missile Launcher (or Assault Cannon) in an existing pack you have to buy several Wolf Guard Terminators to guard them, and as I've said before, Wolf Guard Terminators are not actually that great.

 

 

Also, Long Fangs and Wolf Guard Terminators perform very different roles- Wolf Guard Terminators are in the thick of things, being much more exposed, and are much more likely to be in rapid fire range, while Long Fangs lurk on the back of the battlefield in cover. So the comparison is not just a matter of numbers- Wolf Guard Terminators are doing a very different job from Long Fangs. Frankly, Wolf Guard Terminators to Grey hunters is a lot better comparison.

[eyeslikethunder]

I make 2 LF w /ML 50pts (2x15 2x10)

 

but if you like buffing(RP powers) a LF unit adding a Cyclone term leader can be handy extra firepower multiplier

[Wolf Guard Dan]

Keep in mind that the TDAWG w/ cyclone has to be in a unit of terminators not with long fangs to be relevant to this topic. Although I agree, the utility of putting him with long fangs is nice too.

 

Update on my game today. 2000pts SW vs Orks. I used 10 TDAWG w/ 2 power maul, 4 WC, 4 PF. They did very well. They helped control the board. Insta-deaths nobs squad in combat & finished off their weakened boss. Their 20 storm bolter shots a turn was nice. They glanced some buggies and trukks to death. They also overwatched to prevent a boyz squad from charging. They helped control the center of the board and acted as a wall to get through to get to my power armor units.

 

I understand that the idea is to keep them minimal, and I would have but I didnt want to proxy weapons. I thought this was very balanced unit. I would have brought 3 mauls and 3 WC instead tho.

 

If my enemy didn't have to come to me, it may have been a different story.

 

Game ended 15-3 (Purge the alien). Those 3 kill-points he got were from my dreadnought in a drop pod scattering off the board and being destroyed for first blood.

[skeletoro]

Incorrect.

Did you miss the place where I said "taking into account the extra wound? :S A model with 1.5 or 2 times the survivability but >2 times the cost is less survivable per point spent. That's what I was saying.

 

Yes, TDA models are six times more durable (unadjusted for cost) versus AP3. Which is useful in melee when you have mixed save WG units and some control over wound allocation. But vs shooting you don't have much control. Putting your WGPL out the front of your Long Fangs might deter a rational opponent from shooting their krak missiles at that unit, so might be worth it. On the other hand, a rational opponent is likely to respond by sending 1 or 2 lascannon shots in first. A lascannon wound will lose you 42 points worth of CML WG, but only 25 points worth of ML LF.

[dswanick]

Putting your WGPL out the front of your Long Fangs might deter a rational opponent from shooting their krak missiles at that unit, so might be worth it. On the other hand, a rational opponent is likely to respond by sending 1 or 2 lascannon shots in first. A lascannon wound will lose you 42 points worth of CML WG, but only 25 points worth of ML LF.

Unless you Look Out, Sir! the Lascannon shot onto the cheaper Long Fang...

But , as mentioned above, that's straying kinda far from the purpose of this thread.

[skeletoro]

Putting your WGPL out the front of your Long Fangs might deter a rational opponent from shooting their krak missiles at that unit, so might be worth it. On the other hand, a rational opponent is likely to respond by sending 1 or 2 lascannon shots in first. A lascannon wound will lose you 42 points worth of CML WG, but only 25 points worth of ML LF.

Unless you Look Out, Sir! the Lascannon shot onto the cheaper Long Fang...

But , as mentioned above, that's straying kinda far from the purpose of this thread.

 

True. With a 4+, statistically, that splits the difference (so you'd be losing ~33 ish). Which is looking a bit better. But yeah.

[irwit]

Hi all

 

I think this thread so far has been really useful with some great info. So I think I may now be leaning towards smaller units of WG TDA but definately using WG TDA as pack leaders for my grey hunters. I figure 28pts with PW or 33pts with PW, SB and a 2+ 5++, it is definately worth it. Also challenges for anything coming at me without a AP2 is brilliant.

 

Id also still like a unit of TDA WG on their own so Id like to get 10 minus the pack leaders so be left witha unit of 6 or so. 2 cyclones in there and use these guys in some grey hunters to help control centre board.

 

Also Im wondering. Is it worth foot slogging to get 10 GHs with 2 plasmas and a WG TDA, or 8 GHs, 1 plasma + pod + TDA WG?

[Russ Brother 92]

I pretty much always run a footslogging list (3 GH packs - 10 man - w/ 2 Plasma, PW, Standard and TDAWGPL) - it survives most of the game if not the whole game - although I do miss the speed/manouverability of rhinos/razors...

[irwit]

So would you not be tempted to drop a couple of Grey Hunters and get a pod for them instead?

[Russ Brother 92]

I've been playing around with a 3 Pod force, backed up by 3 units of LFs and TDAWGs but I go for full 10man GH packs with 2 specials, I'd rather they do the one job really well than two jobs mediocre.

[Brom MKIV]

Also Im wondering. Is it worth foot slogging to get 10 GHs with 2 plasmas and a WG TDA, or 8 GHs, 1 plasma + pod + TDA WG?

This type of unit is always worthwhile for us. Terminator wgpl's are usually just amazing. That being said I think there is definitely a point of diminishing returns, not just because of mobility issues but also because of their large footprint and deployment. This is why I run a hybrid list of 3 podded packs, 3 razorbacks and a more static firebase of both long fangs and vindicators. Speaking of vindis, these things absolutely punish footslogging forces.

[irwit]

I've been playing around with a 3 Pod force, backed up by 3 units of LFs and TDAWGs but I go for full 10man GH packs with 2 specials, I'd rather they do the one job really well than two jobs mediocre.

So what would you say is the job they do well vs the 2 mediocre jobs they do with an a tdawgpl?

[Russ Brother 92]

I'd say the job they do well would be dropping down onto an objective OR your opponents backline and take out any heavy support troopers - the extra special weapons is useful if you want to take out as many men before you get shot next turn.

 

On the otherhand TDAWG are deffo a force multiplier - brilliant when used for challenges or taking the save for regular guys against AP3 shots :lol: