Mobile firepower: Invader ATV vs Landspeeder Tornado

[Karhedron]

I was thinking of adding some more mobile firepower to my Space Wolves and I have a couple of Landspeeders in my pile of shame. This led me to try and compare them to the new Invader ATVs. Specifically, the MM/AC Tornado comes in at exactly the same points and the MM ATV so I decided to see how they compare.

 

Firepower: Both pack a multimelta for tank busting but the Tornado gets 6 S6 AP-1 shots from the Assault Cannon whereas the Invader gets 6 S4 Ap0 shots from the Twin ABR. The ABR has a an extra 6" of range but overall I would rate the Tornado as having the advantage.

 

Mobility: The ATV has a 14" move and a 6" Advance. The Tornado has a 16" move, a 6" Advance and FLY. Clear advantage to the Tornado.

 

Durability. This one is a bit harder. The Invader has 8 Wounds at T5 while the Tornado as 6 Wounds at T6. Is it better to have more wounds or higher toughness? I think the Tornado will be a bit more durable against small-arms fire (S3, S5 and S6) while the Invader will be better against proper anti-tank weapons. Overall I would say this is probably a draw.

 

There is not much difference in terms of keywords and stratagem support. The Invader has access to THP but you are likely to have plenty of units competing for this strat. Overall it seems to me that the Tornado has the significant edge over the Invader for the same points. Does anyone else have a different view?

[Jaipii]

How about Storm Speeder Thunderstrike/Hammerstrike?  I know, I know. They should cost more like 100pts/model or a little more and be Core to be competitive, but I enjoy the look of the model and the Thunderstrike has been nice backfield camper + Behind Enemy Lines/ Engage on all fronts scoring unit.

[Karhedron]

The trouble with the Hammerstrike is that for 25 points more, I can buy a pair of Tornadoes which have more firepower, more wounds and don't degrade. Thunderstrike is in an odd place. Quite expensive for relatively few shots although it is BS2+.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, Jaipii said:

How about Storm Speeder Thunderstrike/Hammerstrike?  I know, I know. They should cost more like 100pts/model or a little more and be Core to be competitive, but I enjoy the look of the model and the Thunderstrike has been nice backfield camper + Behind Enemy Lines/ Engage on all fronts scoring unit.

I love the look of the stormspeeders too, and really hope the give them a solid price drop soon. 
thunderstrike with its 2+ BS is pretty great.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, Karhedron said:

The trouble with the Hammerstrike is that for 25 points more, I can buy a pair of Tornadoes which have more firepower, more wounds and don't degrade. Thunderstrike is in an odd place. Quite expensive for relatively few shots although it is BS2+.

Minimum 5 shots, maximum 7 if I’m not mistaken. That’s not an insignificant number if AT shots. Not a lot, but nothing to sneeze at, especially with something like an 84% chance of hitting.

[Malakithe]

The Storm Speeders need a good points drop for sure but they really need the degrading profile removed to make them actually useable

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

The main reason to run the ATV is rule of cool. While you can make an argument that its stats are more durable, in practice having the fly rule makes the speeder more reliable. Being able to hide behind obscuring terrain, and then casually fly over it is a lot easier than moving the ATV around the edges of said terrain and relying on that toughness to get into position. Which also factors into the firepower discussion, because it's just a lot easier to get that multi-melta into range (and half-range for the bonus damage).

 

I don't mind them being conservative with the newer kits, but I don't understand how those two units can cost the same amount of points. 

 

On 11/11/2022 at 9:44 AM, Malakithe said:

The Storm Speeders need a good points drop for sure but they really need the degrading profile removed to make them actually useable

 

I think they need to get rid of degrading profiles in general. In my opinion they don't add enough to the game to be worth the headache, and they make balancing units tougher because some of a unit's wounds have diminishing returns.  They struggle enough assigning points values as is, they should make it simpler.

[Karhedron]

On 11/12/2022 at 3:39 PM, Jorin Helm-splitter said:

I think they need to get rid of degrading profiles in general. In my opinion they don't add enough to the game to be worth the headache, and they make balancing units tougher because some of a unit's wounds have diminishing returns.  They struggle enough assigning points values as is, they should make it simpler.

 

I can understand degrading profiles to some extent. They are necessary to balance vehicles against squads of infantry who's performance gets weaker as more squad members are killed.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

8 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

I can understand degrading profiles to some extent. They are necessary to balance vehicles against squads of infantry who's performance gets weaker as more squad members are killed.

But for a lot of squads it’s almost an all or nothing thing in a turn any way, and depending on the squad the amount of degradation from loss can be pretty small. Guard for example. The loss of a guardsman with a lasgun does very little to degrade the squad’s ability. Even losing 3 guardsmen does little to degrade a squad’s effectiveness.

 

and when vehicles with degrading profiles are so rarely used something big needs to change

Edited November 15, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Bouargh]

I would support the LandSpeeder selection for 2 reasons mainly:

1. FLY rule. On tables full of scenery being able to fly over rather than truning around is a very important advantage. For me it is what makes the difference

2. They are in your pile of Shame*, so you already paid for them... why invest again?

 

opcionally  a third one: Footprint, I think the ATV use more space than the speeder and as such is not in the most favoured situation for distance measuring when explodes, is under cover or not, run on scenery...

 

* my own had some 5 Speeders there waiting for more than 10 years until I built them during lock down...

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I would use these points for more Eradicators.

[Karhedron]

8 hours ago, BLACK BLΠFLY said:

I would use these points for more Eradicators.

 

I have some Eradticators and I do love them but I am looking for something a little more mobile.

 

[Xenith]

On 11/10/2022 at 3:07 PM, Karhedron said:

Firepower: The ABR has a an extra 6" of range but overall I would rate the Tornado as having the advantage.

 

Durability. This one is a bit harder. The Invader has 8 Wounds at T5 while the Tornado as 6 Wounds at T6. Is it better to have more wounds or higher toughness? I think the Tornado will be a bit more durable against small-arms fire (S3, S5 and S6) while the Invader will be better against proper anti-tank weapons. Overall I would say this is probably a draw.

 

ABR is only 24" range right, so clear advantage assault cannon. T6 is only an advantage when being shot by S5/6 weapons, otherwise S4 wounds both on a 5+ and S7+ wounds both on a 3+, so more wounds has the advantage. Don't forget that the Invader can also benefit from Transhuman, though both can benefit frm skilled riders which is arguably better. 

 

Invader can also benefit from a Narthecium and Combat restoratives, however you then need a slow priest. Maybe healing balms on a biker chaplain for wolves? Personally I'd lean toward the speeders. I'd generally rather bring attack bikes over 2 ATV's, however attack bikes v speeders is a harder choice. 

[TheNewman]

Lemme put it this way: the Landspeeder and the ATV are really closely balanced for their points, it really boils down to 1) which one Space Wolves have better strat support for and 2) whether you want to spend the money or not. 

 

Keen Senses and Bestial Nature will work on the ATVs and not the Speeders, you have nothing that works on the Speeders but not the bikes, but you already own the speeders and that's worth something.

[ValourousHeart]

I have some stats from my current Crusade with both Tornados and Invaders that might help.

 

I keep track of games played, games survived, and number of units destroyed at range and in melee for each of the units in my crusade roster.  The Tornados are run in squadrons of 3. so survival is my opponent did less than 18 wounds to the unit.  Most games they are beat up but almost always still kicking on the last turn. The Invaders are also run in squadrons of 3, so survival is my opponent did less than 24 wounds to the unit.  It is rare that I lose more than one Invader during a game, but the list with Invaders is a lot different than the one with the Tornados, more on that at the end.

 

All of the units destroyed by these 3 units were destroyed with Ranged weapons.

 

Tornado Squadron 1 - MM, 2 HB, 3 AC

Games Played - 6

Games Survived - 5

Units Destroyed - 8

 

Tornado Squadron 2 - MM, 2 HB, 3 AC

Games Played - 6

Games Survived - 3

Units Destroyed - 4

 

Invader Squadron - 2 MM, 1 Gatling

Games Played - 11

Games Survived - 9

Units Destroyed - 13

 

Most of the games with my Tornados are with this list:  Talonmaster, 6 Tornados, 3 Typhoons.

Most of the games with my Invaders are with this list:  Bike Chaplin, 6 Outriders, 3 Invaders, 10 RWBK.

 

My LGS usually limits games to 1000 points, but occasionally I get to run a 2000 point game and field both lists together.  The Tornado list usually puts the tornados at the front of my formation which means they tend to get a lot more attention from my opponents.  The Invader list usually keeps the Invaders behind the other bikes who are charging most often.  When I run both lists together my regular opponents still tend to target the Tornados more.

Edited December 9, 2022 by ValourousHeart