Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've seen quite a few Wolf Lords using this setup recently:

Wolf Lord: [240]: Thunderwolf Mount, TH/SS, Saga of the Warrior born

However for less points I have to wonder if this:

Wolf Lord: [220]: Runic Armor, Thunder Hammer, Belt of Russ, Thunderwolf

Isn't better against everything but Ork hidden PK's and TH/SS Termies.

I personally like to get twin wolf claws, BOR adn saga of the warrior born and watch him with a grey hunter squad get nine attacks turn three.

I will likely move up to going with the Thunderwolf setup. I just don't have anything modeled up for that. I am enjoying the heck out of the TH/SS combo. Saga of the Warrior Born seems like it will be nice. I used Saga of the Bear because I wasn't really thinking that deeply about it when I took it. (What? I can have Eternal Warrior? Sweet! - Thought of new rule replacing the ability to think logically.)

The second Lord is significantly worse.

Wolf lords in general seem not worth the points. Why take that first wolf lord when for 35 points more you could have Logan? Wolf lords are just too expensive imo, doubly so for Wolf Guard Battle leaders.

Comparing the two lords versus a basic SM tactical squad;

Sergeant with P. Fist, and PP, and 9 Marines with a Melta

Build 1 versus Marine shooting:
-0.278 wounds from the Melta and PP
-1 Wound from bolters
Wounds Lost: 1.278

Build 2 versus Marine shoting:
-0.417 wounds from the Melta and PP
-0.5 Wounds from bolters
Wounds Lost: 0.917

Build 1 versus Marine assault:
-0.278 wounds from the Melta and PP
-0.5 wounds from bolt pistols
-1.5 wounds from cc weapons
-0.417 from the P. Fist
Wounds Lost: 2.694

Build 2 versus Marine assault:
-0.278 wounds from the Melta and PP
-0.25 wounds from bolt pistols
-0.75 wounds from cc weapons
-0.625 from the P. Fist
Wounds Lost: 1.903

Against anything not full equipped with power weapons build 2 takes less wounds. And for 5 more points my build could have a Storm Shield as well.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

If assaulted Lord 1 will have a 77.8% chance of having taken a wound before ever entering CC. Then taking another wound and a half from melee. Lord 1's swings deal back 2.22 wounds. The Lord takes back 0.417 wounds from the P. Fist. On average you would win about half of the time and they would usually stay until next round.

[2.22 to 1.917 (2.695 wounds dealt total)] - [Lord has a 69.5% chance of dying here]

Next round they swing for 0.778 wounds and Lord 1 swings back for another 3.33 wounds, the P.Fist does 0.278 wounds. Lord dies in this turn nearly every time.

[3.33 to 1.056 (3.751 wounds dealt total)]

Lord 1 killed 5.55 regular marines. This is a trade of 240 points for 88.8 points.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

Lord 2 takes 0.528 a wounds on average from shooting, so 50/50 chance to come in with full wounds. Marines swing for 0.75 wounds, the Lord Swings for 2.22 wounds. The P.Fist goes for 0.625 wounds. Lord 2 wins by a wound on average.

[2.22 to 1.375 (1.903 wounds dealt total)] - [Lord has a 9.7% chance of still having 2 wounds]

Marines swing for 0.5 wounds, lord swings for 2.22, fist for 0.417. Lord wins by 1 wound again. He will die here 82% of the time.

[2.22 to 0.917 (2.82 wounds dealt total)]

Marines swing for 0.5 wounds, lord swings for 2.22, fist for 0.417. Lord dies.

[2.22 to 0.917 (3.373 wounds dealt total)]

Lord does 106.56 points worth of damage to his 220 points.

Lord 1 does 37% of his value back, Lord 2 does 48.4% of his value back. This assumes that Lord 1 survives his second round, in some cases he will gain back only 14.8% of his value and SotWB is wasted.

This proves that against things your lord should be charging (usually with some support) build 2 is better. Though it shows it in the worst possible case, when charging lord one will kill a bit more and increase his odds of making it to round 2 become higher giving him a 77.8% chance to get 7 attacks in round two and earn back 44.4% of his value. Though on average Lord 2 still does better as he has a chance of lasting another turn if he gets the charge and off the charge he will earn back 52.5% of his value if he still only makes it to round 3 and earns back 70.9% if he makes it to turn 4. He even has a 44% chance to wipe the squad, and earn back 90.9% of his value.

This also depends on what rules interpretation you play with. If you play that the +1 Toughness from a Thunderwolf Mount counts for Instant Death, the second is much more viable; if not, the first is overwhelmingly superior.

I really don't understand why people insist on the ss/th combo on wolf lords. Seriously, you got an I5 character that your making it swing last.

Why not go with...

Lord, TW mount, frost blade, belt of russ. 195 pts.

And call it good. S6, I5, T5, A6(7 on the charge). Sure the guy is only 3+/4++ but seriously. If something is targeting him anyway, it will probably ignore normal armor. Give the saga of bear if your really worried about ID (depends on how your playing the +1 T from the wolf). But I'd guess that with 3 wounds, a 4+ inv save is all your going to need.

Because giving a Lord 'TH/SS, TWC' is like making him a MC. He hits hard, 12" charge, good toughness, Great STR, great Invulnerable save.

Lord-Loss wrote:Because giving a Lord 'TH/SS, TWC' is like making him a MC. He hits hard, 12" charge, good toughness, Great STR, great Invulnerable save.

And as Norade showed, a Wolf Lord monsterious creature never makes his points back because he just takes too much damage before swinging. The frost blade guy punks 4 marines before they even get to swing. Having the other guy loose 4 attacks goes a long way to keeping your guy alive.

Also seriously, you can ignore shooting damage from the other marines. No wolf lord on a thunder wolf will be caught dead without a few frensian wolves to eat bullets or marching behind some sort of armor as he gets across the field, and with 6+D6+12 movement, there is no way the other marines will charge him.

Yeah, that math is making me think that Frost Weapons are the way to go on mounted wold lords. I honestly didn't expect the numbers to be so poor for him versus even a basic tac squad. Maybe later I'll show the effectiveness of a Frost Blade, Artificer Armor, BoR Lord versus a Frost Blade, and TH/SS Lord.

If you give the Frost Blade, Thunder Wolf mounted Wolf Lord the Saga of the Warrior Born, he can wipe out a whole tac squad in two turns of HTH.

Thats perfect for making sure he gets to almost always move on your turn.


Seriously, if you want thunderhammers. Thats what terminators, TWC, and even the odd Wolf Guard are for. You give it to guys that have other guys around to act as bullet/melee catchers and then let the big hammer swing. I5 is just too damn important against so many other things that giving it up (and in the process getting your lord killed before he swings) just seems foolish to me. HQs and ICs that naturally go slow or last, are all T6 and have lots of wounds. Its because they are designed that way. No amount of wargear will get a WL into an equivalent MC category and be as cost effective as MCs that are specifically designed that way.