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 just wrote a short article about why long fangs seem to be the no-brainer choice of the Space Wolve heavy slots. You can find it here: Gone to Ground.

If you have any additional comments, criticisms, or compliments, please feel free to post them on my blog. Thanks!

I'm pretty sure we all know how chee- I mean good Long Fangs are by now, we don't need more people spamming them.

We all know!

You don't need to tell us!

They are just good every way you look at them their only real weakness is that only six of them to a squad.

It's pretty obvious that they're good even just from a first glance.

Melissia wrote:It's pretty obvious that they're good even just from a first glance.

And yet somehow the same designers input cannot seem to get Devestators right...

Jack

Or maybe it was Long Fangs they screwed up on and made them too good

Indeed, a middle ground spot would be more desirable, must have units are never the goal.

Jack

Long Fangs are over-rated.

They need a surviving Pack Leader who isn't shooting, and multiple targets to take advantage of Fire Control.

Being such a small unit means that each unsaved wound is going to lose the unit either a Heavy Weapon or the Pack Leader and thus Fire Control. Sometimes the torrent of fire they absorb will determine that for you.

Finally, they have to exchange their Bolt Pistol for a Heavy Weapon, so they're the worst Space Wolves at Counter-Attack. In fact they're pretty vulnerable to Walkers, Monstrous Creatures, and even Independent Characters. I stand bewildered and puzzled as to why the presence of Long Fangs does not tee off a builded up Mawlocs on gaming tables.

Conversely Devastators keep their Bolt Pistols so they can shoot on the move, and suffer no reduction in the efficacy of Combat Tactics, and gain more benefits because they have more Heavy Weapons than any other Space Marine squad.

Having spare 16pt Space Marines to catch bullets makes it harder for an enemy unit to reduce their firepower output by a significant amount, and Combat Squads not only allows a Devastator squad to become two units each capable of engaging a unit, but also become two units each requiring a separate unit to engage it.

And that's discounting the Signum.

If you think Long Fangs are cheap, then add to their cost 50pts, because that's the difference between them and a Land Raider, and you're better off with a Land Raider.

I dunno, 140 for five missile launchers is a good deal in my book.

Personally I could care less about splitting fire, I want the reliability that goes with putting enough fire on target far more often, so the pack leader is my throw away choice.

Jack

Wow you folks know how to show a gamer a good time.

Nurglitch. Are we bitter about long fangs? They are a great unit and surpass Vanilla Marines because you can buy a bare minimum and still fire at multiple targets. For devastators, you have to purchase 10 marine just to split up the heavy weapons and shoot at two targets. And pistols? Do you use your devstators' pistols often? How are they a better option? Also, 6 long fangs with missile launchers is 140pt, a land raider is base 250pt. That is a 110pt savings twice as many high strength shots. I think that is great. If my benchmark truly is to out perform against a landraider, it only takes 3 lascannons to do so, as they will hit 1.98 times per round statistically versus the LR's 1.76, all for the price of 135pt. If I want to add in another to bring the squad up to 5 models, I can do that making it even more reliable and outperforming against the LR lascannons by a 2.64 to 1.76 hits per turn margin, all for 175pt. So, the way I see it, they truly do outperform against the tank selections.

Now are they THE uber unit? No, but it stands to reason that they outshine every other heavy slot in the space Wolf codex for the reasons I wrote about. I wasn't even mentioning a intercodex evaluation, so really the devastators are irrelevant. Long fangs just happen to be a great choice that I think a smart player will note and use regularly.

P.S. This is my 13th post, Nurglitch, let's be friends. I thought all Skaven like the number 13.

You're no friend of mine. Implying that I think Long Fangs over-rated because I'm bitter about them is a stupid thing to do.

I would prefer a Vindicator over Long Fangs... not that the Vindi is loads better but it's way more fun.

Hmmm...

They do "outshine every other heavy slot in the space Wolf codex" but that may just be because of the fact that Space Wolves don't have many good HS choices.

@purplefood. I have always loved the idea of vindicators, but man I can never get them to work for me. Either they get shaken/stun locked or I scatter poorly. They have never worked for me. I have used them both with Black Templars and Vanilla Marines and decided to go tank free with my Wolves' heavy slots. I have had a fair amount of success with predators in my Black Templar armies, but predators are a much stronger choice in the Black Templar codex.

I disagree that they outshine every other HS choice. Long fangs are only really useful for bringing missiles. They are good in that they provide a great complement to GHs short range AT (meltas) with long range S8 Ap 3 fire. They struggle against heavy armor and are poor in CC. Predators are cheaper for HB/AC and can pack superior long range AP for less (sponsons). Adding PCs on them is expensive and dangerous, LCs very expensive, MMs fairly short range for the lack of mobility, etc.

Plasma is very dangerous to them, whereas to a pred/vindi/LR it is not. Meltas are, obviously, much more dangerous to the vehicles.

Another alternative is to take a 3 man squad and stick them in a rhino as a pillbox. Very cheap for the firepower, but also fragile KPs.

Zao- run more rhinos to shield the vindi. Have the vindi fire between or drive out and fire. BAs have nasty vindicators!

I don't get it. Before the last codex, Long Fangs were considered wasted points. I still took them, but I know people questioned my choice on that. Now you can get 1 more guy and all of a sudden they're the golden child of HS? I can't remember the old cost, but is the new cost really that much lower that it's that big of a difference?

streamdragon wrote:I don't get it. Before the last codex, Long Fangs were considered wasted points. I still took them, but I know people questioned my choice on that. Now you can get 1 more guy and all of a sudden they're the golden child of HS? I can't remember the old cost, but is the new cost really that much lower that it's that big of a difference?

1) Cover is better in 5th, so troops are more viable.
2) Cheaper than previous. 5 missile launchers that fire at two targets for 140 just can't be beat.
3) Other HS slots in SW can be replaced in by other slots, LF can't. (Lascannons/HB can be gotten on RB. LR can be transports, etc.)

The synergy with the rest of the SW codex is what really makes the LF shine. 420 points for a firebase on equal footing as most shooting armies can field, and 1580 points left over for whatever else you want, but primarily short range specialists.

Devs in vanilla or BA codices are more or less standalone units with few options, and the cost of those options make them different but not necessarily better. By comparison LFs can pair with Logan for Relentless or Tank Hunter and Living Lightning rune priests so you actually have ICs/HQs that complement and work with the unit-- unusual in Marine lists--and Terminator WGPL with cyclones add longevity and counterassault plus 20% more firepower.

When I spend more points on a SM/BA Dev squad, I feel like I'm spending more points; the unit's role is unchanged, its firepower is largely unchanged, it's no more or less mobile, I just have more bodies to carry 4 guns. When I spend more points on a LF squad, through unit attachments or ICs, I feel like I'm investing more points; what I spend will broaden their capability or their role, making them better in their primary or give a new dynamic to their secondary (WGPL with Wolf Claw and Cyclones, for example; firepower, counterassault, and longevity all in one).

That, to me, is what makes LF the only foot Marine heavy weapon squad to seriously consider taking.

streamdragon wrote:I don't get it. Before the last codex, Long Fangs were considered wasted points. I still took them, but I know people questioned my choice on that. Now you can get 1 more guy and all of a sudden they're the golden child of HS? I can't remember the old cost, but is the new cost really that much lower that it's that big of a difference?

Yup, back in the 3rd edition codex they were 18 points per Long Fang, 36 for the pack leader, plus the expensive cost of the weapons. They were not cost effective in the least and while I had a unit painted up, they were hardly ever used in my usual army. Actually, back in 3rd edition I used a Predator Annhilator as my main heavy choice.

In the 5th edition codex, GW realized that they were horribly over priced and somehow made them a no-brainer in just about every SW army... As for the argument with the Long Fangs that you only get 6 models including the pack leader so once they take casualities you lose your heavy weapons, well that's true. However, you can always pay 18 points and attach a Wolf Guard to the unit just to absorb an additional wound.

For the record, once a Dev squad takes a wound you lose either your signum or a heavy weapon as well; you have the option to buy more bodies, but a 4 weapon, 6 Marine Dev squad is going to cost 166 pts versus a 5 weapon, 6 Marine LF squad at 140. To have a 4 weapon, 7 Marine Dev squad you pay 182 but LF with WGPL is still only 158.

You can see how the math starts to break down. 6 (or 7)Marines with more guns for fewer points than 6 (or 7)Marines with less guns still seems to favor the Long Fangs. Okay, I lose a guy, I lose a gun; I've still got the same amount or more guns than the Devs.

Synergies with Devastators:

+Techmarine/Thunderfire Cannon = +1 Cover save
+Librarian = Force Dome, Null Zone, Gate of Infinity

Those extra bodies provide more than just wounds. They provide extra bodies for claiming cover and the ability to use the advantages of Combat Tactics. The additional Bolters and Bolt Pistols provide more than marginal improvements in anti-infantry fire.

Incidentally this is why Blood Angel Devastators pay less for their Heavy Weapons: Because without Combat Tactics they fail for most of the reasons that sourclams identifies.

Long fangs are fun and all, but I prefe vindis for shock value- more people shoot at it, adn that blast is NICE.

Nurglitch does have a point though. You can't win withj ust long fangs, win with synergy. Devastators do have that advantage, and split fire is nice but only if you have that useless sarge. I usually take a rune priest with to have that extra protection and shooting.

Nurglitch wrote:Long Fangs are over-rated.

They need a surviving Pack Leader who isn't shooting, and multiple targets to take advantage of Fire Control.

Being such a small unit means that each unsaved wound is going to lose the unit either a Heavy Weapon or the Pack Leader and thus Fire Control. Sometimes the torrent of fire they absorb will determine that for you.

Finally, they have to exchange their Bolt Pistol for a Heavy Weapon, so they're the worst Space Wolves at Counter-Attack. In fact they're pretty vulnerable to Walkers, Monstrous Creatures, and even Independent Characters. I stand bewildered and puzzled as to why the presence of Long Fangs does not tee off a builded up Mawlocs on gaming tables.

Conversely Devastators keep their Bolt Pistols so they can shoot on the move, and suffer no reduction in the efficacy of Combat Tactics, and gain more benefits because they have more Heavy Weapons than any other Space Marine squad.

Having spare 16pt Space Marines to catch bullets makes it harder for an enemy unit to reduce their firepower output by a significant amount, and Combat Squads not only allows a Devastator squad to become two units each capable of engaging a unit, but also become two units each requiring a separate unit to engage it.

And that's discounting the Signum.

If you think Long Fangs are cheap, then add to their cost 50pts, because that's the difference between them and a Land Raider, and you're better off with a Land Raider.

First off, pure MLs or a mix of lascannons/MLs are the only long fang compositions worth taking. Long range, high strength and low AP shots are the way to go.

Fire control is not that big of a deal, really, it isn't. 5 long range shots max are not worth splitting up, and thats at max, not the MSU I suggested. If you are lucky, you can kill two vehicles. Fire control is also nice for finishing off that odd, lone model, but thats where its usefulness ends.

Turns out you lose models in 40k that might not want to lose, true story. If someone is shooting at your long fangs with long range weapons, that means they aren't shooting your TWC, grey hunters, deathstar unit, ect. It just means more of your models get to assault things and assault things faster.

They lose their bolt pistols, who cares? I hope you aren't allowing your long fangs to get assaulted in the first place. Mawlocs? Really? Not that many people play them and I'm gonna get cover saves from the template if it hits (I hope you aren't thinking people put their long fangs out in the open.)

Who cares if devastators can shoot some S4 shots at 12 inches? If your enemies are that close, you have other things that can deal with them, unless you are losing. Also, are you talking BA or C:SM devs?

A full unit with MLs = 140. A land raider is at the cheapest 240, math? Land raiders and devastators fill different roles, why are you trying to compare them?

Nurglitch wrote:Synergies with Devastators:

+Librarian = Force Dome, Null Zone, Gate of Infinity

Your librarian is completely wasted if he's giving an invul save to a unit that should be in cover.

Your Dev squad is wasted if it's spending the fight teleporting around.

Your points are wasted if you're investing in mass plas- or lascannons on Devastators, and your librarian is wasted if you're trying to force Terminators to reroll invul saves from your frag missiles.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:Nurglitch does have a point though. You can't win withj ust long fangs, win with synergy. Devastators do have that advantage, and split fire is nice but only if you have that useless sarge. I usually take a rune priest with to have that extra protection and shooting.

I'd love to see how Devastators exhibit more synergy in Marine lists than Long Fangs do in SW lists.

ivangterrace:

I don't think it was strictly necessary to repeat my entire post in one quote. Additionally I would be interested to see you justify limiting the options of Long Fangs to Missile Launcher and Lascannons instead of just asserting the notion.

Speaking of random assertions, did you know that sometimes in 40k people can shoot at one unit without wasting their fire on another unit? Some people play with as much as 25% of the board covered in terrain! True story...

As for not allowing Long Fangs to be assaulted, I had forgot that one could simply reach a gentleman's agreement with one's opponent to the effect that it would be bad sportsmanship if they didn't permit the Long Fangs to continue to operate unimpeded.

As for cover saves, the Long Fangs are going to take more armour saves than cover saves. They're infantry, why waste anti-vehicle fire on them? If they do take cover saves, they're going to be taking them on Cv4+ because Iron Priests can't fortify terrain, so they're going to suffer 17% more casualties than if they had an armour save. Either way you only need to cause six.

Hey, speaking of math, and by math I take it you mean "arithmetic", guess what a Devastator Squad can expect from 6 Bolters? At 24" that's 6 shots, 4 hits, 2 wounds, or 0.66 expected unsaved wounds on Space Marines, and at 12" that's 1.22 expected unsaved wounds on Space Marines. Four Krak Missiles from a Devastator Squad on a Long Fangs Squad would cause 2.22 expected unsaved wounds, by comparison.

Five Krak Missiles from a Long Fangs Squad would cause 2.77 expected unsaved wounds on the Devastators. So apparently those five extra Bolters are worth more than one extra Missile Launcher in a duel situation.

Notice something here? A full Devastator Squad in a Missile duel with Long Fangs can expect to kill ~3 Long Fangs a turn while the Long Fangs can expect the same. Except that after absorbing the first turn of fire the Long Fangs would see a 60% loss in firepower whereas the Devastators would suffer 11% or 22% loss in firepower (if they were in 24" or 12" range, respectively).

The Long Fangs are only 60% of the cost of a Devastator Squad and it shows when the other player notices you bought your Heavy Support from the bargain basement rather than spending points on something with survivability (like a Land Raider...).

Now a Land Raider can also split fire, has better accuracy on 3/4 Heavy Weapons, can move and fire, can transport troops, has AV14, so complete immunity to S7- weapons, and so on for only a few more points.

Similarly a Predator or Vindicator is also less vulnerable, either either a similar load of Lascannons, or a weapon that's better than a Lascannon within 24", and more mobile.

As for Whirlwinds, well, there we're getting into Rock-Scissors-Paper territory.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
sourclams:

Au contraire. The Librarian cannot be completely wasted if he centres his Psychic Hood on the Devastators, uses Force Dome to preserve them in the face of weapons that ignore the cover they're camping in, or to help them survive the onslaught of power-weapon armed enemies, and the Gate of Infinity can put them in position without wasting their Bolters and Bolt Pistol shots since a run will unclench them from their Deep Strike vulnerability to blast and template weapons.

However, I think it's an interesting notion you have there that if you aren't firing a Heavy Weapon every turn that you're somehow wasting it. It's a notion I share to some extent, for surely it is the case that Long Fangs in combat are being put at comparative disadvantage to Long Fangs that can shoot. But I'm also inclined to think of shots in terms of quality and target selection: Sometimes you'll benefit from forgoing shooting to move into a position for a better shot.

Nurglitch wrote:
Notice something here? A full Devastator Squad in a Missile duel with Long Fangs can expect

to be 90 more points?

@ sourclams- SM librarians have more protective powers, and null zone, then SW psykers, who are more agressive (though we do have tempests wrath). Any of the psyker and heavy squad MEQ combos work very well, except maybe the older codices.

DarknessEternal:

Yup, and how much is that 90pts? It's 64%. So for a 64% increase in cost, they don't see the 60% loss of firepower that the Long Fangs see after 3 casualties, and the 100% loss of firepower that comes with 6 casualties. That extra cost comes with a commensurate benefit.

The problem with Long Fangs is that they are the most cost effective infantry based heavy weapons unit in the game, with more guns than contemporaries at noticeably lower cost with more flexibility in determining how that firepower is used, providing excellent fire support to an army of undercosted and highly effective, very flexible troops that are nightmares in CC and no worse in close range firefights than their counterparts elsewhere.

Are they unbeatable? Gods no. Are they noticeably undercosted? *Yes*. They'd be about right if they could only take 4 weapons and not split fire. As is, 5 weapons with split fire capability is something they should be paying a lot more for. They'd still be considered completely viable as they are now if they were 175pts.

Vaktathi:

Conversely they're a glass hammer in an army of specialized units.