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.

Hi,

I am thinking about using Thunderwolf Cavalry in my army. Are they worth using?
They are 100% assault unit and the 6th edition seems to favoru shooting.

Best regards,

I don´t field them often but usually they are doing pretty good although they are quite expensive...
But imo they are more or less the best dedicated assault unit the Imperium has to offer, especially in combination with a Wolflord on a thunderwolf because they are fast, resilient and they are extra fluffy (lame pun intended). I equip my like that: Lord on Thunderwolf, Saga of the Bear, TH/SS + 3x Thunderwolf Cavalry (2x SS, 1 TH). If that unit is not enough to take something mean down its not meant to be taken down at all

Miniwargaming had a recent battle with them and they destroyed some nids in close combat. It made me want to have space wolves just to run them.

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.

Im a little surprised i dont see them more in allied detachments.

One sick grey hunter squad and a lord/wolf combo synergises well with... anything. A little on the expensive side though...

They're played often at my store by multiple folks and everyone except one guy puts SS's on everyone. That one guy who doesn't losses all the time.

Run 2x Wolflords with PF, SS, Rune Armor, Mount, ans 3x naked cavalry. Season lords with wolf tooth necklaces, fenrisian wolves(so you can assault.up ruins), and sagas as points allow. Look out sir gives you some ability to control incoming wounds. It will often eat an entire army's worth of firepower and still keep going.

While its nice to have I don't think the shield is absolutely needed. Also if you don't have it you can have some sort of ranged option. on the cavalry that is your choice on the lord

Pretty much no reason to ever forgo taking some 3-man units. Against some armies they wont always perform, but it forces the enemy to deal with your fast melee units or get locked. Even 3 man units will rip apart squads, especially crons, eldar, or tau who are all 3 at the top of the tree now.

The days of TW cav deathstars are done. Too expensive for too many counters. MSU is where its at. Even 1-2 TW cav are effective, meaning the enemy has to effective overkill the squad to make sure that one cav left doesnt go and overrun a full 10 man guard squad or wreck that vehicle.

Truth. Waveserpents die fast when they get assaulted.

I think every wolf player should take them unless they're going for pods or something.

Even with pods they work well, as careful use of the pods can actually give the TWC cover/hide them completely for a turn or two until they are ready to get into combat. The two pair rather well, actually.

Anyone tried running 5 thundercav with just a fist in 6th? Only 275pts, 5 S10 Ap2 attacks and 24 S5 rending attacks, fairly good survivability with T5 and 10 wounds and good mobility. MSU thundercav is probably better if you run wolves, but as allies, the unit seems like a fairly good deal.

This seems like it would be a little overkill, as 3 would roll over most units in assault, so you're in essence spending 100 points on ablative wounds. On the whole, you'd be better off spending that on a RP or some LF.

That said, it would be guaranteed to beat almost anything in assault, and could have enough attacks to multi-assault without too much hassle, which should be easy with the massive unit footprint. But I'd definitely get a SS or two, you need to protect your investment.

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.

It is also important to look at upgrades. Sure, TWolves CAN get a 3++; they just have to pay a hefty 30 points per model for it. The power fist is also a nice addition, but again, 25 points. Adding a 2+ save character can really help tank some wounds, but a kitted out TWolf Lord is coming in around 200 points at the cheapest. Wraiths can add a whip coil or two at 10 points per. They can also add a Dlord with a 2+ save and MSS for much less than a Wolf Lord.

Finally, one has to factor in the meta. At big events, I'm seeing lots of Eldar, Tau, Daemons, and Crons. Drakes are also in full force as allies. What most of these lists have in common is the ability to out-class MEQ and units like TWolf cav. Eldar, Tau, and Crons will bury TWolves with a mass of strength 6/7 shots. Daemons outclass TWolves in assault. Drakes aren't incredibly bad for 2W, T5 models, but they can still be a pain, especially in twos and threes.

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.

 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.

It is also important to look at upgrades. Sure, TWolves CAN get a 3++; they just have to pay a hefty 30 points per model for it. The power fist is also a nice addition, but again, 25 points. Adding a 2+ save character can really help tank some wounds, but a kitted out TWolf Lord is coming in around 200 points at the cheapest. Wraiths can add a whip coil or two at 10 points per. They can also add a Dlord with a 2+ save and MSS for much less than a Wolf Lord.

Finally, one has to factor in the meta. At big events, I'm seeing lots of Eldar, Tau, Daemons, and Crons. Drakes are also in full force as allies. What most of these lists have in common is the ability to out-class MEQ and units like TWolf cav. Eldar, Tau, and Crons will bury TWolves with a mass of strength 6/7 shots. Daemons outclass TWolves in assault. Drakes aren't incredibly bad for 2W, T5 models, but they can still be a pain, especially in twos and threes.

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.

Everytime this subject comes up, which is A LOT...I say just about everything you just said...I even use the same point of reference (Wraiths)....and well, I can tell you what's next. Now you're going to get a lot of anecdotal stories about how awesome TWC are.

Just be ready.

Unfortunately, they're horribly overcosted for what they bring to the table. I still bring mine from time to time, because they're fun...but they are definitely not a good unit for competitive play. 25 + points per wound, in a world of mass STR5 + fire just isn't cutting it. They're actually more survivable per point without Storm Shields, but that's a lost argument on their true believers too.

I wish my nids had a mc that could move up the board with similar speed and assault in. I guess trygon deep striking in just is good as they dont see it coming, you just have to waite the turn for the assault.

Everytime this subject comes up, which is A LOT...I say just about everything you just said...I even use the same point of reference (Wraiths)....and well, I can tell you what's next. Now you're going to get a lot of anecdotal stories about how awesome TWC are.

Just be ready.

Unfortunately, they're horribly overcosted for what they bring to the table. I still bring mine from time to time, because they're fun...but they are definitely not a good unit for competitive play. 25 + points per wound, in a world of mass STR5 + fire just isn't cutting it. They're actually more survivable per point without Storm Shields, but that's a lost argument on their true believers too.

I am always ready for anecdotal stories in which people claim crappy units are good

In all seriousness, TWC aren't THAT bad. They are just too overcosted to be considered competitive. I could see 1-2 solo TWC with a fist. I could also see a TWC Lord with some Fenresians. If paired with a hard core drop list, they may be able to survive due to being low on the target priority totem pole.

TWC are undoubtedly fun though. Everyone likes crazy close combat cavalry units. It is just important to know the very strict limitations they have.

 JGrand wrote:

Everytime this subject comes up, which is A LOT...I say just about everything you just said...I even use the same point of reference (Wraiths)....and well, I can tell you what's next. Now you're going to get a lot of anecdotal stories about how awesome TWC are.

Just be ready.

Unfortunately, they're horribly overcosted for what they bring to the table. I still bring mine from time to time, because they're fun...but they are definitely not a good unit for competitive play. 25 + points per wound, in a world of mass STR5 + fire just isn't cutting it. They're actually more survivable per point without Storm Shields, but that's a lost argument on their true believers too.

I am always ready for anecdotal stories in which people claim crappy units are good

In all seriousness, TWC aren't THAT bad. They are just too overcosted to be considered competitive. I could see 1-2 solo TWC with a fist. I could also see a TWC Lord with some Fenresians. If paired with a hard core drop list, they may be able to survive due to being low on the target priority totem pole.

TWC are undoubtedly fun though. Everyone likes crazy close combat cavalry units. It is just important to know the very strict limitations they have.

I agree on this: TWC are good but they're too much of an investment to consider unless playing at very light points levels.

If TWC were 35 points each, or 50 with storm shields, they'd be decent. As it is, they're bad, like most hammer-style assault units in what are otherwise shooty armies.

You can't put enough of them into your army to weather the storm of fire they'll take, and the storm shields are generally a complete waste when you're going to lose so many of them to Serpent Shields, missile pods, and massed small arms fire.

Or they die to Manticore fire.

TWC's value is not in what it can kill, but in what it might kill. You put 2 kitted out lords in a 3 man cavalry unit and it will run about 650ish points. But you can almost be assured that every other unit in your list will be ignored as the TWC go screaming across the board. My cavalry rarely make their points back, and if you measure their worth purely by what they kill you'll never see their value. When you throw down a TWC unit, you are spending points on a quite durable fire sink. You can get away with fielding other more fragile units by virtue of their presence (Razorbacks, and longfangs come to mind) or you can put damaging units in an otherwise vulnerable position (drop podded grey hunters present some rather interesting target priority choices for your opponent as they have to decide to kill the melta/plasma toting marines, or let a tooled up deathstar into your lines unscathed) On top of this they counter some otherwise hard to deal with units with relative ease, S10 Fists will smack open a LR with relative ease. Very few close combat units can stand up to Wolves as well. Not to mention that the calvary star can dig its way out of nearly any tarpit your opponent can offer.

Use the threat that they Cavalry provide to control what your opponent will be shooting at. Then abuse it by throwing units into devastating positions that force your opponent into heads I win, tails you lose scenarios.

 Thaylen wrote:
TWC's value is not in what it can kill, but in what it might kill. You put 2 kitted out lords in a 3 man cavalry unit and it will run about 650ish points. But you can almost be assured that every other unit in your list will be ignored as the TWC go screaming across the board. My cavalry rarely make their points back, and if you measure their worth purely by what they kill you'll never see their value. When you throw down a TWC unit, you are spending points on a quite durable fire sink. You can get away with fielding other more fragile units by virtue of their presence (Razorbacks, and longfangs come to mind) or you can put damaging units in an otherwise vulnerable position (drop podded grey hunters present some rather interesting target priority choices for your opponent as they have to decide to kill the melta/plasma toting marines, or let a tooled up deathstar into your lines unscathed) On top of this they counter some otherwise hard to deal with units with relative ease, S10 Fists will smack open a LR with relative ease. Very few close combat units can stand up to Wolves as well. Not to mention that the calvary star can dig its way out of nearly any tarpit your opponent can offer.

Use the threat that they Cavalry provide to control what your opponent will be shooting at. Then abuse it by throwing units into devastating positions that force your opponent into heads I win, tails you lose scenarios.

But TWC aren't durable, that's their problem. A base TWC is 50 points. A base GH is 15. Let's ignore upgrades, and pretend that a TWC is only 3x the cost of a GH (just to make my math easier, this actually benefits the TWC, which makes this more sad).

It takes 24 pulse rifle shots to kill a TWC (assuming no marker lights). Thats 8 Fire Warriors at 15 inches in a standard Tau build. The same 24 shots kills 2.6 Grey Hunters…using my 3:1 ratio, no upgrade ratio (again, a favorable method for TWC), Grey Hunters are more durable.

If we switch to bolters at BS4, they're exactly the same level of durability (27 shots to kill one TWC or 3 GHs)

If we switch to Serpeant Shields (ignoring the other weapons on the WS for ease of math), it's actually way worse for TWC, as eight shots (always twin linked) will kill a TWC, and will also kill two GHs (exact same wounding ratio because of STR 7). Thus, the TWC again, is less durable.

A Thunderlord with Runic, SS, Power Fist (and no Sagas) is 220 points. Or 14.6 Grey Hunters (we will round DOWN to 14, again to help the Thunderlord). It takes 72 Pulse Rifle Shots to kill him, which sounds like a lot, but if you've ever played against Tournament Tau, that's only a third of his infantry shooting. The same number of Pulse Rifle shots kills 8 Grey Hunters, making the Thunderlord SIGNIFIGANTLY less durable than Grey Hunters.

anonymou5 wrote:

 Thaylen wrote:
TWC's value is not in what it can kill, but in what it might kill. You put 2 kitted out lords in a 3 man cavalry unit and it will run about 650ish points. But you can almost be assured that every other unit in your list will be ignored as the TWC go screaming across the board. My cavalry rarely make their points back, and if you measure their worth purely by what they kill you'll never see their value. When you throw down a TWC unit, you are spending points on a quite durable fire sink. You can get away with fielding other more fragile units by virtue of their presence (Razorbacks, and longfangs come to mind) or you can put damaging units in an otherwise vulnerable position (drop podded grey hunters present some rather interesting target priority choices for your opponent as they have to decide to kill the melta/plasma toting marines, or let a tooled up deathstar into your lines unscathed) On top of this they counter some otherwise hard to deal with units with relative ease, S10 Fists will smack open a LR with relative ease. Very few close combat units can stand up to Wolves as well. Not to mention that the calvary star can dig its way out of nearly any tarpit your opponent can offer.

Use the threat that they Cavalry provide to control what your opponent will be shooting at. Then abuse it by throwing units into devastating positions that force your opponent into heads I win, tails you lose scenarios.

But TWC aren't durable, that's their problem. A base TWC is 50 points. A base GH is 15. Let's ignore upgrades, and pretend that a TWC is only 3x the cost of a GH (just to make my math easier, this actually benefits the TWC, which makes this more sad).

It takes 24 pulse rifle shots to kill a TWC (assuming no marker lights). Thats 8 Fire Warriors at 15 inches in a standard Tau build. The same 24 shots kills 2.6 Grey Hunters…using my 3:1 ratio, no upgrade ratio (again, a favorable method for TWC), Grey Hunters are more durable.

If we switch to bolters at BS4, they're exactly the same level of durability (27 shots to kill one TWC or 3 GHs)

If we switch to Serpeant Shields (ignoring the other weapons on the WS for ease of math), it's actually way worse for TWC, as eight shots (always twin linked) will kill a TWC, and will also kill two GHs (exact same wounding ratio because of STR 7). Thus, the TWC again, is less durable.

A Thunderlord with Runic, SS, Power Fist (and no Sagas) is 220 points. Or 14.6 Grey Hunters (we will round DOWN to 14, again to help the Thunderlord). It takes 72 Pulse Rifle Shots to kill him, which sounds like a lot, but if you've ever played against Tournament Tau, that's only a third of his infantry shooting. The same number of Pulse Rifle shots kills 8 Grey Hunters, making the Thunderlord SIGNIFIGANTLY less durable than Grey Hunters.

You make interesting points, but what about the fact that thunderwolf cavalry are capable of presenting a credible assault threat from well outside rapidfire range. You cover 12" in just your movement phase, and can re-roll charge dice of your choice (this should make 6-7 charges fairly reliable). Outside of rapidfire ranges, finding the amount of shots needed to kill even a single thunderworf is by your own math 24 fire warriors or 216 points just to kill a single 50point model. Inside rapidfire range you still have to spend 72pts to get that kill. Were going to call the ethereal a freebie points wise (playing tau myself their cheap and I take them for the LD10 bubble, everything else is just bonus).

By your own math to kill 2x thunderlords and 3x naked cavalry you will need 216 pulse shots. To kill the thunderwolf unit with pulse fire you will need about 1728points of firewarriors to kill one 600ish point unit. Truth be told some firewarriors might get to double tap, some won't so this hypothetical unit will still occupy somewhere closer to 1500ish points of firepower.

In the interest of fairness my own loadout should be presented.
My own loadout is a bit more kitted out that the barebones units we've discussed here. I run the following:

1x Lord with PF/SS/Runic/Mount/Necklace/Talisman/Saga of the Bear/2x Fenrisian Wolves
1x Lord with PF/SS/Runic/Mount/Necklace/Saga of Warrior Born/2x Fenrisian Wolves
3x Thunderwolf Cavalry with Meltabombs for 2k Points

The balace of the list that the deathstar resides in consists of 40 greyhunters in pods, a TLFlamer/Flamer dred in a pod and a rune priest on a bike.

The whole unit clocks in at 735 Points. For similar points your could field 3x grey hunter squads tooled up and in drop pods.

Using the wolf squad in tandem with grey hunters presents target overload for the enemy anti-infantry band. TWC may not be as durable as grey hunters point for point, but last I checked grey hunters don't smack around landraiders, demon princes and deathstars with equal ease.

1x Lord with PF/SS/Runic/Mount/Necklace/Talisman/Saga of the Bear/2x Fenrisian Wolves
1x Lord with PF/SS/Runic/Mount/Necklace/Saga of Warrior Born/2x Fenrisian Wolves
3x Thunderwolf Cavalry with Meltabombs for 2k Points

The balace of the list that the deathstar resides in consists of 40 greyhunters in pods, a TLFlamer/Flamer dred in a pod and a rune priest on a bike.

The whole unit clocks in at 735 Points. For similar points your could field 3x grey hunter squads tooled up and in drop pods.

I can definitely see the potential of using TWC in tandem with an aggressive drop pod list. However, you mention:

By your own math to kill 2x thunderlords and 3x naked cavalry you will need 216 pulse shots. To kill the thunderwolf unit with pulse fire you will need about 1728points of firewarriors to kill one 600ish point unit. Truth be told some firewarriors might get to double tap, some won't so this hypothetical unit will still occupy somewhere closer to 1500ish points of firepower.

At 1850 points, if I get a chance to kill a 735 point unit in one turn, I am really, really, really happy. It doesn't really matter what else happens on my turn--I have functionally killed 40% of my opponent's list.

Now, we can debate the actual ability to do this all we want. It is hard to conceptualize the game in a vacuum. Suffice it to say, the combination of Markerlights with the rest of what competitive Tau lists are bringing can really hurt TWC. The same can be said about Eldar. Daemons--particularly the FMC mashes you typically see--aren't going to be too fun as well. High initiative, high weapon skill, smashing at st 10 attacks aren't good for TWC. Relying on a 3++ will only get you so far. This doesn't even factor in nasty tricks, such as throwing a Grimiored Fateweaver into that 735 point unit and saying bye-bye for the rest of the game.

Again, TWC aren't the worst choice that a player can ever take, but it is hard to recommend them. The game has shifted drastically since their creation. I'd argue that their heyday was very short lived as well. I know a really good player who took them to Nova in 5th edition and regretted it heavily. There is just so much that can go wrong on such an expensive (and not particularly durable) unit.

 Thaylen wrote:

anonymou5 wrote:

 Thaylen wrote:
TWC's value is not in what it can kill, but in what it might kill. You put 2 kitted out lords in a 3 man cavalry unit and it will run about 650ish points. But you can almost be assured that every other unit in your list will be ignored as the TWC go screaming across the board. My cavalry rarely make their points back, and if you measure their worth purely by what they kill you'll never see their value. When you throw down a TWC unit, you are spending points on a quite durable fire sink. You can get away with fielding other more fragile units by virtue of their presence (Razorbacks, and longfangs come to mind) or you can put damaging units in an otherwise vulnerable position (drop podded grey hunters present some rather interesting target priority choices for your opponent as they have to decide to kill the melta/plasma toting marines, or let a tooled up deathstar into your lines unscathed) On top of this they counter some otherwise hard to deal with units with relative ease, S10 Fists will smack open a LR with relative ease. Very few close combat units can stand up to Wolves as well. Not to mention that the calvary star can dig its way out of nearly any tarpit your opponent can offer.

Use the threat that they Cavalry provide to control what your opponent will be shooting at. Then abuse it by throwing units into devastating positions that force your opponent into heads I win, tails you lose scenarios.

But TWC aren't durable, that's their problem. A base TWC is 50 points. A base GH is 15. Let's ignore upgrades, and pretend that a TWC is only 3x the cost of a GH (just to make my math easier, this actually benefits the TWC, which makes this more sad).

It takes 24 pulse rifle shots to kill a TWC (assuming no marker lights). Thats 8 Fire Warriors at 15 inches in a standard Tau build. The same 24 shots kills 2.6 Grey Hunters…using my 3:1 ratio, no upgrade ratio (again, a favorable method for TWC), Grey Hunters are more durable.

If we switch to bolters at BS4, they're exactly the same level of durability (27 shots to kill one TWC or 3 GHs)

If we switch to Serpeant Shields (ignoring the other weapons on the WS for ease of math), it's actually way worse for TWC, as eight shots (always twin linked) will kill a TWC, and will also kill two GHs (exact same wounding ratio because of STR 7). Thus, the TWC again, is less durable.

A Thunderlord with Runic, SS, Power Fist (and no Sagas) is 220 points. Or 14.6 Grey Hunters (we will round DOWN to 14, again to help the Thunderlord). It takes 72 Pulse Rifle Shots to kill him, which sounds like a lot, but if you've ever played against Tournament Tau, that's only a third of his infantry shooting. The same number of Pulse Rifle shots kills 8 Grey Hunters, making the Thunderlord SIGNIFIGANTLY less durable than Grey Hunters.

You make interesting points, but what about the fact that thunderwolf cavalry are capable of presenting a credible assault threat from well outside rapidfire range. You cover 12" in just your movement phase, and can re-roll charge dice of your choice (this should make 6-7 charges fairly reliable). Outside of rapidfire ranges, finding the amount of shots needed to kill even a single thunderworf is by your own math 24 fire warriors or 216 points just to kill a single 50point model. Inside rapidfire range you still have to spend 72pts to get that kill. Were going to call the ethereal a freebie points wise (playing tau myself their cheap and I take them for the LD10 bubble, everything else is just bonus).

By your own math to kill 2x thunderlords and 3x naked cavalry you will need 216 pulse shots. To kill the thunderwolf unit with pulse fire you will need about 1728points of firewarriors to kill one 600ish point unit. Truth be told some firewarriors might get to double tap, some won't so this hypothetical unit will still occupy somewhere closer to 1500ish points of firepower.

In the interest of fairness my own loadout should be presented.
My own loadout is a bit more kitted out that the barebones units we've discussed here. I run the following:

1x Lord with PF/SS/Runic/Mount/Necklace/Talisman/Saga of the Bear/2x Fenrisian Wolves
1x Lord with PF/SS/Runic/Mount/Necklace/Saga of Warrior Born/2x Fenrisian Wolves
3x Thunderwolf Cavalry with Meltabombs for 2k Points

The balace of the list that the deathstar resides in consists of 40 greyhunters in pods, a TLFlamer/Flamer dred in a pod and a rune priest on a bike.

The whole unit clocks in at 735 Points. For similar points your could field 3x grey hunter squads tooled up and in drop pods.

Using the wolf squad in tandem with grey hunters presents target overload for the enemy anti-infantry band. TWC may not be as durable as grey hunters point for point, but last I checked grey hunters don't smack around landraiders, demon princes and deathstars with equal ease.

Honestly, if I'm playing Tau and I can realistically kill a 735 point unit in one turn, with 1500 points of fire, I take that option every time. You just made the case against TWC right there. Haha.

I think if you're going to run them, you'd be much better off throwing the two Thunderlords into a pack of Fenrisian Wolves and just using them as ablative wounds to get the Thunderlords into combat. The TWC are just wasted points on the ride in, because you've obviously not going to let your Thunderlords die....someone is going to have to.

Grey Hunters can melta gun Land Raiders. They can plasma gun death stars. They don't have to present a 12 inch assault threat, because they can shoot as they walk in, and present the bodies to eat casualties. Then they can assault too, they're not bad at it. Interestingly enough, one TWC kills 2 Fire Warriors on the charge (6 attacks, str 5, rending), and 3 Grey Hunters (9 attacks, str 4) kill....wait for it, 2 Fire Warriors on the charge. Grey Hunters actually kill more fire warriors per point if they pop their standard.

Interestingly, what legitimate Deathstar is your Thunderwolf unit killing? Screamerstar is just going to avoid you and shoot you to death from angles that don't go through your 2+ Seer Council will just eat all your attacks off the shadow field, hit and run out, and continue doing what it wants to do. Farsun Bomb will just shoot you to death. Paladins, well, force weapons on multi wound models? Even a Wraithstar, at half the cost, is going to be serious trouble because of MSS (although a winnable fight).

And I dare you to take your Wolfstar against one of my Daemon Princes. The way I stack buffs, my money is on the Prince. And if I don't get the buffs I need, I'll just vector strike you while going on to doing what I do. And VS is random, odds are I kill the regular guys.

They just don't do enough for their high cost.

Most of those death stars you mention involve using psychic powers to beat the thunderlords. Only the Farsight bomb and wraiths sound decent. My list does involve a rune priest. But we get too deep in what if at that point.

My point with the mathematical analysis was that no sane list has 1500pts of firewarrors in it. I can field Thunderstar and expect my opponent to spend at least two turns concentrating on it.

From Wraithstar: a serious counter here. My tactic would be to keep the lords away from the MSS guy (he will make me sit one of my guys down with a challenge). But this fight is winnable, but not favorable.

Farsight bomb: a serious threat that the wolves can't answer directly. This one comes down to simply trying to get to the rest of his army before the bomb shows up. A tau list short the points of a reserved bomb will struggle to kill a thunderstar.

Vs a DP, I assume iron arm? You still only have 4 wounds and a 5++. With buffs this can be an even fight, but if you stay in the air killing maybe a wolf a turn, you aren't on the ground murdering my grey hunters.

Screamer and seer councils are the most durable things in the game. I'd be more surprised to hear of any thing that could eat one. Rune weapons however, are the best answer in 40k right now. And grimore requires a 3+ roll.

Paladins don't like S10 Ap 2 any better than I care for force weapons. I think a pally star actually threatens the thunerstar more with their shooting.

Thunderlords trump prettly much all walkers and nobs. Are favored vs khorne lord on a bikr with spawn. And can challenge a beastpack.

The other advantage TWC have over a lot of deathstars is mobility. As such, you get to pick and choose your battles. In other words, as with any other unit, don't go head to head with something that can beat it, pick on the weak stuff you can stomp in a turn or two and keep moving. And the odds are that in most games, you're not likely to see deathstars anyway.

 Thaylen wrote:
Most of those death stars you mention involve using psychic powers to beat the thunderlords. Only the Farsight bomb and wraiths sound decent. My list does involve a rune priest. But we get too deep in what if at that point.

My point with the mathematical analysis was that no sane list has 1500pts of firewarrors in it. I can field Thunderstar and expect my opponent to spend at least two turns concentrating on it.

From Wraithstar: a serious counter here. My tactic would be to keep the lords away from the MSS guy (he will make me sit one of my guys down with a challenge). But this fight is winnable, but not favorable.

Farsight bomb: a serious threat that the wolves can't answer directly. This one comes down to simply trying to get to the rest of his army before the bomb shows up. A tau list short the points of a reserved bomb will struggle to kill a thunderstar.

Vs a DP, I assume iron arm? You still only have 4 wounds and a 5++. With buffs this can be an even fight, but if you stay in the air killing maybe a wolf a turn, you aren't on the ground murdering my grey hunters.

Screamer and seer councils are the most durable things in the game. I'd be more surprised to hear of any thing that could eat one. Rune weapons however, are the best answer in 40k right now. And grimore requires a 3+ roll.

Paladins don't like S10 Ap 2 any better than I care for force weapons. I think a pally star actually threatens the thunerstar more with their shooting.

Thunderlords trump prettly much all walkers and nobs. Are favored vs khorne lord on a bikr with spawn. And can challenge a beastpack.

Most good Tau lists have their troops slots maxed out (although I think Kroot do the job better than FWs, I have played against a very, very good maxed out Fire Warrior list at ATC, he placed 22nd overall I believe)

I'm not disputing the value of Rune Priests, they're obviously amongst the best HQs in the game right now. And really, my hypothesis of throwing a DP into your Thunderlords is kind of pointless, because of the existence of Priests. In reality I would almost certainly fly past a Wolfstar (yes, Vector Striking it en route), and shoot at Grey Hunters. But when I say "buffed Prince," I mean a lot more than Iron Arm. I chain buff my DPs before they go fight scary targets. Yesterday I threw a DP into a block of Paladins (and actually won). First is Grimoire (which is 8/9 success, when running Fateweaver). Then Iron Arm. Then Invisibility. Then I enfeebled the Paladins (took two tries, silly DtW). I also double Hallucinated the Paladins, hoping to get the "can't fight" result.

In a real game scenario though, that's a waste of my resources. I can probably kill Thunderwolves with Daemonettes, but that's what Daemonettes are for; so that's not really a knock on TWC. (10 Daemonettes with Prescience will kill 2 TWC on the charge at I5)

You realize a Wraithsar with 'standard" DLord is only 390 points? (assuming two whipcoils). A beastpack ranges, of course, but the Baron with 5 Beast Masters, 6 Khymera, and 6 Razorwings is only 327 points? "Mini" stars of similar danger to a Wolf Star, but much more reasonable points cost.

I agree STR10 Powerfists will do a number on Paladins, assuming you get a chance to strike. Draigo will challenge out one ThunderLord, your regular TWC will all die before I1, the Warding Stave will tank the other Thunderlord, then the Nemesis Hammers kill everyone but the guy in the challenge, who will tarpit Draigo for a while.

Anyway, Thunderlords aren't really the problem. They're only slightly overcosted, you'd get the same killing power out of two Thunderlords attached to 15 Fenrisian Wolves, but TONs more durability. It's TWC themselves who are vastly overcosted

Edit: A good Farsun bomb isn't in reserve. It starts on the table, and either jumps around with Gate of Infinity, or using Shadowsuns 3D6 assault move (depending on how its built). It's killing things from T1.

And a Khorne Lord with Blind Fury Axe on Juggerlord and Sigil with 5 Spawn is 290 pts. A Nurgle Lord on Bike with PF/LC/Sigil with 5 Nurgle Spawn is 345 points. Those units work because of how cheap they are relative to how killy.

I agree I think I may have got gotten a bit more caught up in touting wolf lords. I'll have to look into seeing about using fenrisian wolves as a delivery system instead.

get them when you have 1250 points and another at 1850

I am sure that is has been argued a few times here., but they provide a highly-mobile death star. As they are extremely versatile (anti - infantry, anti - tank, anti - MM). And reasonably resilient with 3++ and T5

I ran them as allies with Guard and rather enjoyed them chasing down riptides.