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'm looking to add some artillary to my SM army, its going to be a WW or TFC.

What would you go for and why?
TIA

ids1984 wrote:
I'm looking to add some artillary to my SM army, its going to be a WW or TFC.

What would you go for and why?
TIA

The Thunderfire cannon is always my go to option. It has longer range and higher ST (6 for MEQs, 5 for an ignore cover shot) and the heavy 4 small blast lets it put out a torrent of wounds, especially when you catch someone clumped up. If the gun is destroyed, the techmarine also provides good general support with his twin-linked plasma pistol and flamer.

The whirlwind has higher AP and causes pinning but for only 15 points more the thunderfire just adds too much.

Barrage has some nice tricks it can pull, and is rare in our army. Whirlwinds are not that expensive, and are good vs. troops on the ground or in cover.

But for just a few points more you get the TFC. Multiple fire modes, multiple hits, and all the perks of a techmarine. It's a lot of bang, for not a lot of points.

TFC is better as an all-round weapon, Whirlwinds can be decent but the TFC has far more uses against more armies.

What if the WW goes down to 65 points like DA's WW?

THUNDERFIRE CANNON!!!

 Tyberos the Red Wake wrote:
What if the WW goes down to 65 points like DA's WW?

It's not so much the price of the WW, but the opportunity cost of NOT taking one of the other HS picks. In this case, the TFC. What the WW does is give you the equivalent of a heavy bolter and/or flamer, under the pie plate, across the table, with barrage wound allocation. It's really only useful against hordes on foot, either in the open, or skulking in the trees. And that makes it a mono-tasker. It does one thing, albeit fairly well and reasonably priced.

But if we compare it to it's peers, we see that they can do a lot more.

A Dakka pred, with the AC/HB, can put 8 shots into a target. It needs to hit, but doesn't scatter. So it can still shave models off of hordes, plus has the option to shoot at flyers or focus on single targets (like monsters) The S7 on the AC also lets it take shots at light vehicles with some success. AV 13 front armor helps keep it alive. While currently the same price, it's going up, if we assume DA pricing, by 10 points.

The TFC is more expensive, so we should expect it to be better. Whether 4 small blasts is going to equal one large one is dependent on a lot of things (like unit spacing and the mood of your scatter die) The fact that you are getting 4 shots will let you get multiple hits on single targets. It has higher S, but lower AP then the WW. And then there is the tremor shell. All you need to do is hit the target, and they are making terrain tests. This will slow them down, and give you more time to shoot. You also get the techmarine with the harness, a 75 point value. His bolster ruin will make the cannon harder to kill, and/or help some scouts get a 2+ cover save. The 60" range might be irrelevant on most tables, but it's there.

The TFC can boost the defense of other units, hamper the abilities of your foes, and blow chunks out of things. The WW just kills troops. As long as the TFC exists, at any reasonable price, you need to ask yourself "Why am I not taking this for my horde killing needs" It's not that the WW is bad, or even overcosted. But the TFC is all that, and a bag of chips. Find the points, upgrade.

TFC if you're playing regular marines, hard to kill, bolsters a ruin, and is great against infantry.

WW only if you're using DAs, they can field them for dirt-cheap.

 phoenix darkus wrote:
TFC if you're playing regular marines, hard to kill, bolsters a ruin, and is great against infantry.

WW only if you're using DAs, they can field them for dirt-cheap.

I have been taking 2 WWs in my lists and they have been great, especially against tau. They are not for killing though, sometimes they do get a couples wounds in but they tend to do more damage to the opponents psyche. Barrage is nice because you can hide them really well and still fire every turn. They are great for harrasment. TFC is awesome too but as a DA player I dont have one in my list. I am considering adding a something like a Motf with a conversion beamer, some sniper scouts, and a TFC and maybe an ironclad to my army as allies though because it seems cool. not that great but cool.

Thunderfire cannons all day

I love whirlwinds and still say TFC. I really wish I could take it for my wolves.

Honestly... TFC.

1) per MRB Artillery units always use the toughness of the gun(7) when being shot at... superb mitigation on wounds right there.

2) Artillery gunners are not required to be behind the gun, so if your feeling feisty and not facing alot of AP2 shooting, put the guy out front and meatsheild after you fail a save or two on the cannon.

Thunderfire Cannons seem really more solid, to me. Barrages are big in 40K now though. I did a bit on that actually a little bit ago: http://www.40kunorthodoxy.blogspot.com/2013/05/blasts-blasts-and-more-blasts.html

I think the synergy plays are more in favor of the Cannon. In particular the tremor shells.