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 can't decide which is better.

Thunderfire:
+60" range
+3 fire modes
+techmarine
-its artillery
-cant barrage
-more expensive
-ITS ARTILLERY

Whirlwind:
+its a vehicle (move and shoot)
+can shoot without LOS
+cheaper
+has some upgrade options
-its armor sucks
-no techmarine
-can't hide in ruins

The one other thing I didn't include is the large pie plate against the 4 small blasts. Which one do you guys see as better? I honestly can't decide, so I didn't include either as a plus or minus.

Thunderfire cannon any day of the week. 4 smaller shots > 1 large shot.

There's more to indirect fire than shooting without LoS. Indrect fire also:
-Allows you to shoot more than 36" in night fight
-Counts the shot as coming from the center of the blast, so can sometimes ignore cover with the AP4 shot
-Hits side armor on vehicles (great against chimeras)
-Causes a pin check at -1

Also I don't think "it's armor sucks" is a valid point when comparing it to an AR10 gun, and it can hide in ruins just fine.

Flavius Infernus wrote:There's more to indirect fire than shooting without LoS. Indrect fire also:
-Allows you to shoot more than 36" in night fight
-Counts the shot as coming from the center of the blast, so can sometimes ignore cover with the AP4 shot
-Hits side armor on vehicles (great against chimeras)
-Causes a pin check at -1

Also I don't think "it's armor sucks" is a valid point when comparing it to an AR10 gun, and it can hide in ruins just fine.

Correct on all points except the pinning test caused by barrage wounds is NOT at -1. Barrage is still very handy to have for all the reasons you listed though.

The pinning test is at -1 because the Whirlwind Launcher is Ordnance. Incidentally that means that it's going to be rolling two dice and picking the highest for penetration.

Even against assumed side armor 10, 5+2d6 pick highest isn't great. You'd might be better off shooting 4 str 6 blasts at it from the thunderfire.

It's 11/36 to penetrate, 9/36 to glance. S6 straight up would be 12/36 to penetrate, and 6/36 to glance, if you could angle the shot for the sides without a cover save. Four shots can make up for that if you can set up one on each flank for the crossfire.

The advantage of the Whirlwind over the Thunderfire is that when firing at a parking lot the interior vehicles won't get absurd cover saves from their buddies.

Also, more mobile, more resistant to S4 weapons, and the whole Barrage thing.

The Thunderfire has the Techmarine though, and he can provide an indirect benefit to other Space Marine Infantry.

What I meant by "its armor sucks" is in comparison to other vehicles.
And when I said "can't hide in ruins" it is a little too large to effectively hide in ruins, especially in comparison to the thunderfire. The thunderfire can be effectively parked inside a ruin for the entire game, getting the cover save, and it could be bolstered by the techmarine for a 4+

Whirlwind is more defensive, and Thunderfire is more offensive. You can put a lot more hurt out with the 4x small blasts str 6 then one large blast. Thunderfire is really easy to kill though.

Nurglitch wrote:The pinning test is at -1 because the Whirlwind Launcher is Ordnance. Incidentally that means that it's going to be rolling two dice and picking the highest for penetration.

That may be but his list was for indirect fire only, which isn't inherently ordnance. The whirlwind is ordnance and therefore the pinning is at -1, but if someone goes just from flavius' list then we'd have IG players causing -1 pinning tests with mortars.

Yeah, people make mistakes. It happens.

Well hopefully people will read the rules for themselves and not take my word for it. I did mean indirect fire for whirlwinds specifically, just didn't say that.

Something else worth mentioning is that Whirlwinds take better to being reserved.

PraetorDave wrote:And when I said "can't hide in ruins" it is a little too large to effectively hide in ruins, especially in comparison to the thunderfire. The thunderfire can be effectively parked inside a ruin for the entire game, getting the cover save, and it could be bolstered by the techmarine for a 4+

Indirect fire, my friend. Why hide in cover for a 4+ save when you can hide behind it for a "haha, can't shoot me" save?

The downside to indirect fire that no one has mentioned, yet: Firing with no LOS means a full 2d6" scatter. Fine against parking lots, but fickle dice can leave a crater-strewn board full of fresh and shiny enemies. You don't have to park the WW out of sight, but if you think you may want to do so, you have to weigh the somewhat gimped/randomized shooting with the added survivability. TFC doesn't have this problem when placed in ruins, but it ALWAYS needs LOS. Decisions, decisions...

Thunderfire has more use as it can switch mode of shooting each turn. You need to kill orks in cover: Check. need to deny FNP to DE: Check. Slow vehicles down: check. The only downside is there is a good chance of killing the TFC if it gets glanced.

TFC is better. More shots. Better ammunition choices. More Powerful ammunition. A techmarine that can bolster defenses. The benefits of a TFC outweigh the benefits of a Whirlwind. I wrote a few short articles on Space Marine heavy support choices on the blog in my signature if you are looking for a more in depth discussion of the two units.

don't take either. both are geared for swarms and swarms alone, not having a greater place in a true all-comers list.

Want templates? grab vindicators.

Brother-Thunder wrote:don't take either. both are geared for swarms and swarms alone, not having a greater place in a true all-comers list.

Want templates? grab vindicators.

Obviously, but the topic is a comparison between TFC and WW. He didn't ask if TFC, WW, or Vindicators were better.

Both are excellent against lightly armored infantry, and sub par against vehicles. There are some rare cases where they will both perform ok against AV10, but as a general rule a rifleman dread or some krak missiles work better against vehicles so the debate on vehicles is which sucks least against vehicles.

The main debate shouldn't be which sucks more against vehicles, the debate should be which rocks face better against light infantry. The answer is simple, it's the TFC, but it's more expensive and more fragile so it defiantly should kill light infantry better. The whirlwind's ability to deny light infantry cover saves by indirect fire is dwarfed by the TFC's ability to deny cover saves from anything. The techmarine's ability to give the +1 cover save to a piece of terrain can make up for the TFC being fragile if the TFC is in the terrain that gives it a 3+ cover save.

All of that leads up to 1 final question: Is the increased cost of the TFC worth upgrading a whirlwind to a TFC?

The 1 final answer is: Depends....

It all depends on what the plan is for the fortified terrain. If the marine player can make good use of it then the cost difference between the TFC and whirlwind has been payed off, if not then it's wasted points.

TFC mess with bikers like nobodies business man. Can't even count the number of times I've watched a TFC mess up a squad of bikers at my local store when watching the vanilla marines playing someone.

OverwatchCNC wrote:

Brother-Thunder wrote:don't take either. both are geared for swarms and swarms alone, not having a greater place in a true all-comers list.

Want templates? grab vindicators.

Obviously, but the topic is a comparison between TFC and WW. He didn't ask if TFC, WW, or Vindicators were better.

In a vacuum both do lots of wounds to hoards. The whirlwind trades fire power for mobility vs the thunder fire. Whirlwind has indirect fire while TFC has huge range. Both die if anything looks at it, are extremely vulnerable out flankers and very poor vs most things your army will be threatened by ie MC's, transports, heavy tanks. Both require you to baby sit them and build your list around their glaring weaknesses. The TFC can bolster ruins which is nice if you take scout snipers or devastators (neither are generally worth it) and if the TFC dies you get a tech marine (which will probably be too far away to effect the out come of the game and will get one shotted by a lascannon/melta gun the second he leaves cover to help the rest of your army for this you pay extra points over the whirlwind for a unit that you want to "half die" to get all of its utility so you can justify the extra points spend.

So for that last part im gona go with the whirlwind because its cheaper, has better armor, can indirect fire and can move and fire so it can move with your army instead of force your army to protect it. Its also a much lower priority target since it does average damage people won't be hell bent on killing it like the TFC so it will likely last longer if the rest of your list is threatening enough.

Out of a vacuum the dakka pred cost the same points as the whirlwind, does about the same wounds to competent infantry that spread out, can also threaten light tanks, elite infantry, MC's and transports and you can screen your other units with its beefy front armor instead of the other way around with the whirlwind. Both the TFC and whirlwind are good against infantry while every FOC in codex space marine can be made to be good against infantry plus several other things which means if you take them you need to lower your anti infantry elsewhere in your list and pump up the anti-tank/MC which means your enemy can more easily do target priority because its more obvious what is the biggest threat to his army and forces you to really think about how your going to protect your big damage deals which can force you into a defensive position vs an offensive position if your opponent is smart.

thehod wrote:Thunderfire has more use as it can switch mode of shooting each turn. You need to kill orks in cover: Check. need to deny FNP to DE: Check. Slow vehicles down: check. The only downside is there is a good chance of killing the TFC if it gets glanced.

That's an automatic chance of it being destroyed if it's so much as glanced....................... You don't even roll on the damage table, it's just destroyed by any glancing/penetrating hit.

I will say that one thing a whirlwind does better is counterbattery fire against chimera-chassis guard artillery that's trying to hide behind other vehicles.

A str5 indirect shot on the side armor of 10 rolling 2 dice and picking the highest and potentially ignoring cover is probably better than 4 shots that are trying to glance the front armor of 12 and allowing cover saves.

But that's a very specific case.

don_mondo wrote:

thehod wrote:Thunderfire has more use as it can switch mode of shooting each turn. You need to kill orks in cover: Check. need to deny FNP to DE: Check. Slow vehicles down: check. The only downside is there is a good chance of killing the TFC if it gets glanced.

That's an automatic chance of it being destroyed if it's so much as glanced....................... You don't even roll on the damage table, it's just destroyed by any glancing/penetrating hit.

Provided it fails it's cover save which is often a 3+, that's better odds than the average melta pen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

N1nj4Br34dm4n wrote:TFC mess with bikers like nobodies business man. Can't even count the number of times I've watched a TFC mess up a squad of bikers at my local store when watching the vanilla marines playing someone.

The absolute best use of either choice is a tfc against any type of biker, jetbike, or jump infantry. Doa ba lists, vanilla biker armies, nob bikers, tau crisis suits, the list goes on but they all get wrecked by a tfc. Its most brutal against assault bikers like nob bikers as it forces dangerous terrain tests in both the movement and shooting phase.

Most opponents don't have bikes or jump infantry these days, or light infantry either, but a single 100 point unit to wreck either of them isn't a big loss to the force org.

schadenfreude wrote:

Provided it fails it's cover save which is often a 3+, that's better odds than the average melta pen.

Which it almost certainly will since any balanced list will take multiple shots at it till it dies which wont take long as the first 3+ cover you fail almost certainly means good by TFC hello useless techmarine. Were essentially talking about the ability to force one 3+ save and one glance if an army cant do that they have some serious issues. And don't use the argument "If hes shooting at my TFC hes not shooting at the rest of my list." He wont have to waste that many shots killing it and will quickly use the rest of his shots to focus on the rest of your list unless he is heavy mech then he will ignore it and focus exclusively on the rest of your list with almost no draw back (oh no difficult terrain check or str6 templates my tanks are all dead). Also, its pretty expensive for a one shot suicide unit.

The difference between them is: TFC is more straight forward simply blast the best squad possible and cause the most damage quickly as you will most likely be racing with your opponent to kill as much as you possibly can while he fires something at it each turn (provided his squads are in danger of it) in hopes to stop its onslaught.

the Whilrwind is a more survivable and mobile tank but it doesn't deal the damage the TFC does each turn so you trade some firepower for survivability and you also save on point cost as the WW is cheaper.

however thats a basic over view. I would say it all depends on the overall strategy the unit fills or the possible tactics that it may be used in. both units are not a heavy loss; point wise. one is a heavy punch and the other is more of an annoyance that you either dedicate fire towards or simply try to ignore.

I feel either way you get exactly what you want, either your opponent wastes fire towards it or he ignores it and suffer from it each turn (hopefully in the WW case) the thunder cannon is almost guaranteed to kill something each turn troop/unite wise.


I personally don't get why people think you have to build your army to take one of these as a choice. or that its only good for swarm armies. EVERY army has troops and these options are good at killing them all. it doesn't mean you're hellbent on killing 1000 troops and you MUST shoot it at armor saving 5+ troops because space marines are some how immune to it. stop acting like this is only for swarm. they have the ability to kill light armored tanks and any troop choice any army can possibly take.

hell the TFC is fantastic for eating terminators. whats the rule of the IG? throw enough flashlights at them and they have to fail sooner or later! TFC does this perfectly for a 100pt single model.


I personally like the TFC more =D

I have concluded that you should take both. I've noted that when a player that relies on cover starts recieving out of LOS shots, his personal psychology changes and he is much more apt to displace.

M.

cromwest wrote:

schadenfreude wrote:

Provided it fails it's cover save which is often a 3+, that's better odds than the average melta pen.

Which it almost certainly will since any balanced list will take multiple shots at it till it dies which wont take long as the first 3+ cover you fail almost certainly means good by TFC hello useless techmarine. Were essentially talking about the ability to force one 3+ save and one glance if an army cant do that they have some serious issues. And don't use the argument "If hes shooting at my TFC hes not shooting at the rest of my list." He wont have to waste that many shots killing it and will quickly use the rest of his shots to focus on the rest of your list unless he is heavy mech then he will ignore it and focus exclusively on the rest of your list with almost no draw back (oh no difficult terrain check or str6 templates my tanks are all dead). Also, its pretty expensive for a one shot suicide unit.

Actually that is a valid arguement if the target being shot is absorbing enough fire for its point value. A tfc in 3+ cover is actually more durable than a razorback, land speeder typhoon, or basilisk that is out in the open. Its a 100 point fire support unit, and it performs well defensively for its point value, and a good chunk of it's point value is the fortified terrain that the marine player probably placed an objective in along with cammo cloak scouts.

schadenfreude wrote:

don_mondo wrote:

thehod wrote:Thunderfire has more use as it can switch mode of shooting each turn. You need to kill orks in cover: Check. need to deny FNP to DE: Check. Slow vehicles down: check. The only downside is there is a good chance of killing the TFC if it gets glanced.

That's an automatic chance of it being destroyed if it's so much as glanced....................... You don't even roll on the damage table, it's just destroyed by any glancing/penetrating hit.

Provided it fails it's cover save which is often a 3+, that's better odds than the average melta pen.

Hehe, but I play IG, so it will either be rerolling any successful cover saves (Fire on My Target) or not getting any at all (Colossus, ignores cover). I just happen to have the rock to it's scissors. To me, a Whirlwind that can hide completely out of LOS and still fire shots that ignore cover or hit the sides of my AV 10 (side) vehicles. Yeah, I consider it to be a larger threat. So it is situational, and we're all going to answer based on our situation.

Thunderfire much better!