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.

 JGrand wrote:
I'd disagree with the optimism here. Thunderwolf Cav just aren't points efficient enough to use in a competitive setting. I think the best comparison we can level is a unit of Wraiths.Thunder Cav have advantages in toughness (solid), attacks (decent), initiative (meh), and assault movement (this is a big one). Wraiths have better leadership (can be big), strength (nice versus many targets), and of course, save (which is undoubtedly, the BIG difference between the two). Of course, we have to compare them on a point to point basis.

Four base Thunderwolf Cavalry members cost 200 points. Six base Wraiths cost 210. Some of the aforementioned advantages of the TWolves--toughness, attacks, and even initiative are not as glaring in a point to point comparison. The six Wraiths have 18 base attacks at strength 6, the four TWolves have 20 at strength 5. The Wraiths have 12 T4 wounds with the all important 3++. The TWolves have 8 T5 wounds with a mere 3+ armor save. It is also important to factor in leadership. Those Wraiths are fearless. TWolves are LD8. ATSKNF is helpful in this area, but falling back 3d6 is pretty rough, especially for a unit that wants to be in assault as quickly as possible.

Are you suggesting that the better course of action is to ally in wraiths? If so, you've forgotten to factor in the HQ and troop tax (which, for crons is not that high and would give you an awesome ally!).

If you aren't then I really don't get the point of the comparing them to wraiths. The OP can't take wraiths other than as allies so if he wants a dedicated fast assault unit the comparison should be against whatever fits that alternative. Not entirely across the SW codex, but wouldn't that be Swiftclaws or Lone Wolves? How do TWC stack against them?

 JGrand wrote:

While the aren't the worst unit in the game by a longshot, I just cannot advocate taking TWC to a competitive setting. I just don't see the consistent potential in return for the large point investment. I could maybe see a solo TWC or two with a fist, but I'd probably take a Lone Wolf or two instead.

So you can, but think the lone wolves are better.

Are you suggesting that the better course of action is to ally in wraiths? If so, you've forgotten to factor in the HQ and troop tax (which, for crons is not that high and would give you an awesome ally!).

If you aren't then I really don't get the point of the comparing them to wraiths. The OP can't take wraiths other than as allies so if he wants a dedicated fast assault unit the comparison should be against whatever fits that alternative. Not entirely across the SW codex, but wouldn't that be Swiftclaws or Lone Wolves? How do TWC stack against them?

I compare them to Wraiths because it highlights their inefficiency. I understand that SW and Crons are desperate allies, and as such, you won't see that combo much. At the same time, you do run into Wraiths a good amount on the battlefield. My point is, you have to play to the strengths of your army. For example, you hardly ever see Razorbacks in competitive games. That is because Night Scythes are so much better. While individual marine armies may not choose to or be able to ally well with Crons, you cannot ignore the ubiquitous nature of the Night Scythe as an opponent. It makes no sense to heavily invest in a unit (Razors/TWC) when there is an army that is doing literally the exact same thing, just for far less points. When you go head to head with these lists, you just end up running a worse version of what they are doing.

SW (and all armies in general) have to play to what they do well. Rushing forward with cavalry isn't what SW do well.

 JGrand wrote:

Are you suggesting that the better course of action is to ally in wraiths? If so, you've forgotten to factor in the HQ and troop tax (which, for crons is not that high and would give you an awesome ally!).

If you aren't then I really don't get the point of the comparing them to wraiths. The OP can't take wraiths other than as allies so if he wants a dedicated fast assault unit the comparison should be against whatever fits that alternative. Not entirely across the SW codex, but wouldn't that be Swiftclaws or Lone Wolves? How do TWC stack against them?

I compare them to Wraiths because it highlights their inefficiency. I understand that SW and Crons are desperate allies, and as such, you won't see that combo much. At the same time, you do run into Wraiths a good amount on the battlefield. My point is, you have to play to the strengths of your army. For example, you hardly ever see Razorbacks in competitive games. That is because Night Scythes are so much better. While individual marine armies may not choose to or be able to ally well with Crons, you cannot ignore the ubiquitous nature of the Night Scythe as an opponent. It makes no sense to heavily invest in a unit (Razors/TWC) when there is an army that is doing literally the exact same thing, just for far less points. When you go head to head with these lists, you just end up running a worse version of what they are doing.

SW (and all armies in general) have to play to what they do well. Rushing forward with cavalry isn't what SW do well.

I can see the point, but that seems a bit limiting unless the OP is only playing against wraiths. Couple of other things, you can double out wraiths which is harder to do against TWC and wraith attacks only rend on 6's - whereas you can give TWC low(er) AP CC attacks.

Part of the reason I'm asking is that using TWC to support a drop pod heavy army appeals to me (as does the idea of having wolf lords with packs of wolves) so a comparison to alternatives to TWC (fast, assaulty units) would be helpful.

I can see the point, but that seems a bit limiting unless the OP is only playing against wraiths. Couple of other things, you can double out wraiths which is harder to do against TWC and wraith attacks only rend on 6's - whereas you can give TWC low(er) AP CC attacks.

It isn't though. As Anonymou5 has shown, there are plenty of similar deathstar units that are far better than TWC. It isn't only Wraiths that can be used as a comparison.

Here's a way to look at it. In 5th edition, I saw plenty of people starting up Dark Eldar after playing Marines. In these player's lists, I'd see squads of 10 Dark Eldar Warriors that were taking a heavy weapon, a special weapon, a character upgrade, and a close combat weapon upgrade for that character. What these players were doing was trying to make Dark Eldar into Marines. The problem is, when you try to make a specialist army too general, you pay for it. Conversely, generalist armies (read: Marines), often have a hard time becoming too specialist due to point costs.

Thunder Wolf Cav are a great example of this principle in action. They are costed too high in comparison to the fast moving deathstars that other lists are able to bring. While they may have some good qualities that have been mentioned here, they are also really, really expensive. Remember, 6 Wraiths with 2 whip coils and a kitted Dlord costs 390 points. 5 TWC with a storm shield and powerfist 305 already. Adding a Wolf Lord (pretty essential) is going to come in at another 200+ points. The Wraith unit is way better at doing the same thing for far less. The same can be said of things like beastpacks.

Part of the reason I'm asking is that using TWC to support a drop pod heavy army appeals to me (as does the idea of having wolf lords with packs of wolves) so a comparison to alternatives to TWC (fast, assaulty units) would be helpful.

There really aren't alternatives for MEQ armies. You just have to accept the fact that you are running a unit that isn't really cost efficient in competitive games. Again, they aren't terrible. They are just too many points. At the same time, I could see running 2 kitted Lords each with a big pack of Fenrisian Wolves in conjunction with a drop pod heavy list.

Taking something like:
TWC Lord with SS, Fist, Runic Armor
TWC Lord with SS, TH, Runic Armor
2x15 Fenrisian Wolves
2 Rune Priests, 1 with Chooser

is a 900 point core. If you can cram 7-9 drop pods in with this, I'd imagine it could work.

 JGrand wrote:

I can see the point, but that seems a bit limiting unless the OP is only playing against wraiths. Couple of other things, you can double out wraiths which is harder to do against TWC and wraith attacks only rend on 6's - whereas you can give TWC low(er) AP CC attacks.

It isn't though. As Anonymou5 has shown, there are plenty of similar deathstar units that are far better than TWC. It isn't only Wraiths that can be used as a comparison.

Here's a way to look at it. In 5th edition, I saw plenty of people starting up Dark Eldar after playing Marines. In these player's lists, I'd see squads of 10 Dark Eldar Warriors that were taking a heavy weapon, a special weapon, a character upgrade, and a close combat weapon upgrade for that character. What these players were doing was trying to make Dark Eldar into Marines. The problem is, when you try to make a specialist army too general, you pay for it. Conversely, generalist armies (read: Marines), often have a hard time becoming too specialist due to point costs.

Thunder Wolf Cav are a great example of this principle in action. They are costed too high in comparison to the fast moving deathstars that other lists are able to bring. While they may have some good qualities that have been mentioned here, they are also really, really expensive. Remember, 6 Wraiths with 2 whip coils and a kitted Dlord costs 390 points. 5 TWC with a storm shield and powerfist 305 already. Adding a Wolf Lord (pretty essential) is going to come in at another 200+ points. The Wraith unit is way better at doing the same thing for far less. The same can be said of things like beastpacks.

Ok, I see where you are coming from more clearly now. Essentially then, the strengths of the wolves are in the GH with rune priests, so a list with TWC is effectively losing more than it gains. From a list perspective, makes sense.

The real question then is whether the "surprise" or tactics of having the TWC compensate - I guess that is the problem with these types of threads because "YMMV" depending on opponent, playstyle etc.

What about having single TWC to provide distraction rather than Lone wolves? I suppose again it's cheaper to take and kit lone wolves, but TWC are a lot faster.

 JGrand wrote:

Part of the reason I'm asking is that using TWC to support a drop pod heavy army appeals to me (as does the idea of having wolf lords with packs of wolves) so a comparison to alternatives to TWC (fast, assaulty units) would be helpful.

There really aren't alternatives for MEQ armies. You just have to accept the fact that you are running a unit that isn't really cost efficient in competitive games. Again, they aren't terrible. They are just too many points. At the same time, I could see running 2 kitted Lords each with a big pack of Fenrisian Wolves in conjunction with a drop pod heavy list.

Taking something like:
TWC Lord with SS, Fist, Runic Armor
TWC Lord with SS, TH, Runic Armor
2x15 Fenrisian Wolves
2 Rune Priests, 1 with Chooser

is a 900 point core. If you can cram 7-9 drop pods in with this, I'd imagine it could work.

Awesome, thanks!

Ok, I see where you are coming from more clearly now. Essentially then, the strengths of the wolves are in the GH with rune priests, so a list with TWC is effectively losing more than it gains. From a list perspective, makes sense.

The real question then is whether the "surprise" or tactics of having the TWC compensate - I guess that is the problem with these types of threads because "YMMV" depending on opponent, playstyle etc.

Absolutely. YMMV is a good way to put it. I don't really account for surprise, because lots of good players won't ever be surprised. At best, you are hoping to throw off target priority a little by adding some wrinkles that aren't see as often.

What about having single TWC to provide distraction rather than Lone wolves? I suppose again it's cheaper to take and kit lone wolves, but TWC are a lot faster.

Sure, it could work. It depends on the list. I have seen Lone Wolves running next to IG blobs as a bail out character. In an more aggressive list, TWC may be better.

I was thinking of adding in Canis w/2 fenrisian wolves, 2x 5 fenrisian wolf packs, and 3x thunder wolves with 3x storm shields and a thunder hammer. Im sure this is not competitive but for 555 points I think it'll make a good harrassment unit to add to my grey knights army. It's a legal all wolf ally for my GK's. Sounds like fun to me.

I've only had success running them in two units of three with a fist in each. I use them as counterassaukt units and keep them hidden until they need to respond to something. It's been fairly effective, but any true threat such as a daemon prince or anything with power and especially force weapons can't be handled. Purifiers with halberds? Yeah, I don't think so.

And running 3d6 is REALLY bad with leadership 8 they can't afford to lose combat. Especially as a backfield counterassault unit they are liable to run off the board.

Now I pretty much spam grey Hunters and rune priests in drop pods supported by long Fangs. It's boring and the game has started to pass them by.

However, I do like the idea of a couple of wolf lords surrounded by Fenrisian Wolves causing havoc. Definitely going to try it out.

bigginhouse wrote:
They are very good I believe I've used them before and they are very capable of doing damage still even in 6th. because of the new jink save and the fact they have skilled rider you can easily get a decent cover save which saves on having shields. i have mine as a 5 man squad with 3 base troops, 1 with a plasma pistol and 1 with a thunder hammer. they are very durable and mobile.

They have a jink save, and skilled rider?

 tankboy145 wrote:

bigginhouse wrote:
They are very good I believe I've used them before and they are very capable of doing damage still even in 6th. because of the new jink save and the fact they have skilled rider you can easily get a decent cover save which saves on having shields. i have mine as a 5 man squad with 3 base troops, 1 with a plasma pistol and 1 with a thunder hammer. they are very durable and mobile.

They have a jink save, and skilled rider?

Ya, um... is he somehow talking about Ravenwing...?

That was my though because last i recall they didnt. I would use them so much more if they did.