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 run a MC/Mech hybrid and my WLs tend to live almost the entire game. This is the list that I took to the RT at the Origins convention last year and took fist place.

It uses Eldrad and a council in a WS, the Avvy, gaurdian squads (both vairents) in 3WS, and 2 WLs w/BL+EML.

The WLs can maintain cover saves by walking behind WSs (on the shortest stand so they can still shoot over them), and don't care about wraithsight because of the Walrlock in the WS. This forces my opponent choose between firing at scoring ML+Shurican WSs, a Fortuned Avvy running at them, a Council in a WS flying at them, or WLs that have a cover save.

Usually, my opponents priority for AT fire is Council's WS>Avvy>Scoring WS>WL....sometimes the scoring WS have a greater priority to die than the Avatar depending on the opponents army and the mission;however, against everyone I have faced, the WLs are ALWAYS the lowest priority for AT fire...which lets them fire their AT weapons at will, as well as act as a counter assault unit for my shooty guardians.

So yes, in the right setup, WLs are nigh unkillable...mostly because they are still T8 3 wound models, cannot be shaken/stunned, have a cover save, and are the lowest priority for AT weapons. However, if you build a list that makes them a high priority, then they die fast.

@Alerian:

Minor note: T8, no such thing as T10 in 'normal' 40K...thank Nurgle lol.
Target Saturation is Target Saturation, and a wonderful thing it is.

It should be mentioned that Eldar and wraithlord don't synergize well either...

You can;t use your wraithlord to bail out squads stuck in combat that don;t want to be in combat...

Why? because they are fearless... So if you kill 8 guardians you will likely win combat and the wraithlord now has to take a bunch of saves.

Note: Multi charging a chump squad and a wraithlord at the same time is usually how I spike them quickly.

@ Sact
Yeah, my bad on toughness, I was thinking STR for a sec...lol I'll fix it in my original post

@deFlo
No offense, but you are wrong.

WLs work great in the right Eldar list and synergize well. Putting a WL next to a Guardian's WS works as a counter assault unit. if anyone tries to get too close to the WS, the WL can assault them so the WS can live, with it's precious cargo. Or, if the WS is destroyed in an assualt, the WL can counter assault said unit, so the guardians can flee on foot, and not be assaulted next turn. Those are just 2 uses for a WL near your troops, but there are many others....Eldar players are creative...mostly because we have to be

Also, once you have included an Avvy as a line breaker, you already have fearless units, so throwing in a couple of WLs to help counterassult doesn't hurt a bit..you just have to know how and when to use them. If you end up with 2 WLs, the Avvy, and a council in the same place....nothing that gets close will live.

Your idea about having a hybrid army is nice, but not particularly effective.

You are bringing 3 tanks to the field (some of the least cost effective 'shields' in the game) and sacrificing their strong suits, to benefit a lacking unit. WL should be able to cope w/o forcing the rest of the army to suit it's needs. Hybrid lists generally do poorly, and support units that need an entire army to work around their weakness, should not be treated as if they are special in some way.

If I were to have a list w/ 10 Missile launchers, I would just shoot your tanks, it isn't like THEY have a cover save. A ninja-lord, is 100 points flat, same as a basic WS. I would worry a lot more about what is inside those tanks, over the rather sub-par offensive damage a WL can put out.

WL are not good counter-assault units in any way. They have no FoF, no invulnerable, and only 3 wounds. They only get 3 attacks @ WS4, making them rather impotent against infantry. You can take on heavy infantry like Nobs and such, but they are bound to do an awful lot more damage in return. Ini4 just doesn't cut it for most counter-assault duties, you need to be able to stop damage from being inflicted to the squad you are protecting, before they get hit in the nuts again. Harlies are fantastic example of counter-assault units, as are Scorpions, and Shining spears (which actually have a pretty specific role).

WL are great at attacking tanks, if they can actually manage to catch them, which is really quite hard.

Wrexasaur wrote:Your idea about having a hybrid army is nice, but not particularly effective.

Well, all of my RT wins including the Origins Game Fair RT last year would disagree with you.

Also, it is 4 WS, not 3. So, 4 WS, 1 Avvy, 2 WLs. And yes...the tanks going forward DO have a cover save...hello Flat out. The whole idea is to get you to shoot at my tanks.. I already said that...thay way you just unload the council for me, so they can continue running at you alongside the avatar, while my WLs are left alone to blast your tanks...you did EXACTLY what I want my opponent to do, as I already mentioned in my post....

It is not a weakness....it is hybrid for a reason. 2/3 missions force you to guard a home objective of some type. Leaving WLs at home with Guardians safely tucked in a WS, and all the units having longe range guns is quite a firebase...with 2 weapon platforms that cannot be stunned and that can counter assault anything that gets near. Remember, the WLs always stay together...2 WLs together are vastly better than a lone WL. Meanwhile you still have vehicles, the council, and the avvy going forward.

Until you have seen my list actually play, or better yet play against it, I think you should tone down the rhetoric that it is ineffective, as history is against you. Everyone laughed at my list at Origins last year...then died horribly to it...that is part of the charm of a solid hybrid list in a good generals hands...you opponent rarely sees it and has little practice trying to beat it....EVERYONE sees Mechdar and is ready for it.

So how are your Wraith Lords getting a cover save if their shields are turboboosting 12" away from them?

The main problem right now with building a WL heavy army is... this is a bad time to be putting MCs in your army.

With a brand new tyranid codex most armies will at least be considering how to tweak things in order to kill MCs. Expect most lists to add a few more hard hitting weapons, a few more snipers, or a few more power fists. There are going to be a LOT more MCs roaming the tables now.

One of the reasons that WLs have done well the last couple years is that plopping down three WLs overstresses many armies. Especially since three WLs can fit into a fairly low point game. And not only in terms of killing power, its not too easy to play against three WLs the first few times one runs into that sort of list.

But the new Tyranid codex is going to make life harder for the WL heavy eldar lists.

Sliggoth

Alerian wrote:

Wrexasaur wrote:Your idea about having a hybrid army is nice, but not particularly effective.

Well, all of my RT wins including the Origins Game Fair RT last year would disagree with you.

Also, it is 4 WS, not 3. So, 4 WS, 1 Avvy, 2 WLs. And yes...the tanks going forward DO have a cover save...hello Flat out. The whole idea is to get you to shoot at my tanks.. I already said that...thay way you just unload the council for me, so they can continue running at you alongside the avatar, while my WLs are left alone to blast your tanks...you did EXACTLY what I want my opponent to do, as I already mentioned in my post....

It is not a weakness....it is hybrid for a reason. 2/3 missions force you to guard a home objective of some type. Leaving WLs at home with Guardians safely tucked in a WS, and all the units having longe range guns is quite a firebase...with 2 weapon platforms that cannot be stunned and that can counter assault anything that gets near. Remember, the WLs always stay together...2 WLs together are vastly better than a lone WL. Meanwhile you still have vehicles, the council, and the avvy going forward.

Until you have seen my list actually play, or better yet play against it, I think you should tone down the rhetoric that it is ineffective, as history is against you. Everyone laughed at my list at Origins last year...then died horribly to it...that is part of the charm of a solid hybrid list in a good generals hands...you opponent rarely sees it and has little practice trying to beat it....EVERYONE sees Mechdar and is ready for it.

So how in the world do your wave serpents manage to get cover saves from all the massed missile fire when they are barely moving so they can provide cover for the wraith lords?

Why wouldn't your opponent just blow your 'cover' right out of the sky?

Alerian wrote:Until you have seen my list actually play, or better yet play against it, I think you should tone down the rhetoric that it is ineffective, as history is against you. Everyone laughed at my list at Origins last year...then died horribly to it...that is part of the charm of a solid hybrid list in a good generals hands...you opponent rarely sees it and has little practice trying to beat it....EVERYONE sees Mechdar and is ready for it.

Rhetoric?

I know what type of list you are talking about, and I have actually played it, and done a considerable amount of studying over it's strengths/weaknesses. It is not an effective way of playing Eldar, your WS are forced to be right in front of your WL to provide cover. Sorry, your WS cannot get a cover save while providing one to your WL, that much is just common sense.

Your Avatar will be running as much as the dice will allow him, but more than far enough to stray out of range of being fortuned. Your tanks either move 6", in unison with your WL, or your WL will not get cover.

I have certainly seen interesting hybrid lists, but your concept is not one worth pursuing. I call it the broken turtle, because it doesn't do anything besides plink shots off all game, while getting torn into pieces in turn. It is great that you did well with that style, but I really don't know why your opponents had such a hard time against it. So many armies bring close to a dozen AV weapons to most games, that I can only imagine that you were lucky enough to face rather tame forces. Lootas would absolutely love to see those WS just sitting in front of the WL. 5 rounds of shooting? Yes please!

Not sure if this is what he does, but: dance the waveserpents so that they get cover saves for moving fast and still give the WL cover. Move the serpent1 from in front of WL1 out to about 6" in front of WL2. Then move the serpent3 that was sitting in front of WL3 to a spot about 6" in front of WL1. Then move the serpent2 from in front of WL2 to about 6" in front of WL1. Then move all the WL into their new cover, 6" ahead. Or if one has trouble with estimating measurements, then just estimate the first move and move WL1 ahead next. Either way, the whole set of 3 WL and 3 serpents have moved up 6" and all have cover. This would allow the WL to move and fire...if one is going to run the WL then one would need to use the estimate maethod and place the serpents about 10" in front of the WL and hope for a run roll of 3-4".

This does give everything a cover save while moving up, while its not using the serpents speed to hit a flank it still is using the serpents speed to create cover. Not a tactic I would like to use but it might work.



Sliggoth

But that largely negates the 'SMF' save by giving your opponent roughly 3x as many turns to shoot at them before they get into an effective range to dump their payload...

There is no effective way to use the WS as shields, it really isn't a complicated problem.

4 WS can EASILY give 2 FP cover saves, while moving 12 inches, and all tanks can give themselves saves through SMF. WS are also better at shooting than WL, though they can only take one large gun. There is very little reason that giving cover saves through tanks, would make any sense at all for WL.

Pro-tip:

Take Scorpions in a WS, outflank it along with Warwalkers, and PF. Hope all come in on the same side (, good luck getting those rolls), flip the WS sideways, giving the WWs, and PF cover. Shoot scary stuff with the WWs. Alternatively, you could infiltrate everything, but that can get even messier than outflanking. If there is a nice patch of cover for the PF to hide in after your tank moves on to bigger and better things, then it can work out just fine. I wouldn't recommend tying up the WS as a shield for longer than one turn. Add Eldrad in, and you can actually do some pretty fancy maneuvering.

Not that it has anything to do with WL...

I didnt say it was a tactic I would like to use, but it could certainly be used for a turn or two to get the WL across the field. Personally I either take WL in a more elfzilla list, or usually dont take WL at all.

It certainly wouldnt be an appropriate tactic against many armies, but in a few cases it might make a lot of sense. A set up where getting the WL 1-2 turns of cover to cross the field, or against a force that fields a lot of snipers. Or if your opponent has decided to reserve most of his army, why NOT do it since there wont be much to shoot at anyway? And there would be no reason to stay wedded to the idea. Provide cover for one turn as you reposition your forces, then hit hard with the mech forces and the WL pile in the following turn.

Eldar have alot of flexibility, dont overlook a potential idea just because it may be useful only occasionally.


Sliggoth

WS can move flat out and criss-cross the table to give WL's cover behind. Also you do not need the WL's to be one inch behind the WS to receive cover. I have seen plenty of mech deployments which bunch up their units in a group. The WS would only have to block LOS from the group to the WL's behind.

I find WL's valuable. They don't stop shooting from one shot like so many ar 12 tanks do. They also can tarpit units that come close and can be effective counter charge elements when equiped with swords and run in groups of 2 or more. Every situation is different. I don't suppose they would be great to run into a 30-man termagaunt squad, that's what double hand flamers are for, they are good for running into Plague marines, TWC, Nob bikers, etc... Will they kill the whole unit? maybe, especially if combat resolution is on there side, but they will seriously damage the unit and reduce it's effective fighting strength enough for the rest of the army to easily defeat it. All for about 130pts per WL. Not a bad deal.

Sliggoth wrote:Eldar have alot of flexibility, dont overlook a potential idea just because it may be useful only occasionally.

This tactic makes them inherently INFLEXIBLE. You are tying two units together, that by their very nature are not supportive of each other. You are going to end up with a rather standard mechdar army, with WL tacked on. WW are far superior to WL in this situation, they can benefit enormously from guide, and they can be escorted through scouting, by a tank of scorpions to give them a turn of cover. WL will walk on the board, and hold your army back the entire game if you try to protect them. I really have no idea what the actual strength of a tactic like this could be. You sacrifice mobility, with your very pricey tanks, for... well, not very much in return. Maybe the WL shrug off a few shots, maybe I just annihilate your troops and call it a day.

DarthDiggler wrote:WS can move flat out and criss-cross the table to give WL's cover behind. Also you do not need the WL's to be one inch behind the WS to receive cover. I have seen plenty of mech deployments which bunch up their units in a group. The WS would only have to block LOS from the group to the WL's behind.

If you were to face down a static gunline (which are exceedingly rare to actually come across anymore), that would make perfect sense. Since you are likely to find that most armies can easily overcome TLOS, by simply moving their vehicles, a WL really does need to be right behind that tank to actually make use of it as a shield. I also want to note, again, that I would not care about the WL, and your WS would simply be putting themselves in a disadvantageous position, for the sole reason of countering a mild flaw within WL units. Don't want to take damage with your WL? I suggest not even fielding them, they are AT sponges by their very nature, but it would be awfully nice if they could have a 5++ save to boot... unfortunately they do not.

That aside, you will also find that you are going to have a really hard time shooting rhinos when you are a foot behind a WS, and the Rhino is in front of the WS. This is pretty simple stuff, you only need to know what the general sizes of the models involved. What I mean by simple, is that the simplest solution is often the best. In this case, it would be to avoid trying to be competitive, with a poorly thought out list.

I won't drag this on any longer, but the tactic in question, is inefficient, ineffective, and super fidgety. Eldar need as little complication possible. You don't need to turn your army into an advanced geometry problem, just to make an interesting army. There are plenty of alternative style lists out there, I would suggest looking into them if you are trying to play semi-competitively.

Fluffy wise... sure, the 'Eldar-that-hide-poorly' Craftworld.

Wrexasaur wrote:
If you were to face down a static gunline (which are exceedingly rare to actually come across anymore), that would make perfect sense. Since you are likely to find that most armies can easily overcome TLOS, by simply moving their vehicles, a WL really does need to be right behind that tank to actually make use of it as a shield.

Interesting. You must be playing a different version of 40k where the 18 long fangs with 15 missile launchers can move and fire inside their rhino's. My bad. The fact of the matter is the Wraithlord is a fine heavy support unit for the Eldar. It is not unbeatable and it doesn't suck. For it's points, I would say it is as good as any other Eldar heavy choice. In the end whether or not you include 1-3 WL's will be subject to your list and your playstyle. Those who think mech Eldar are the be-all-end-all of Eldar lists will boo-hoo the WL to no end. Those who think foot eldar are a viable and good eldar list, along with mech, will like the WL.

First off....only the 2 WS that move forward (sometimes 3) gain the flat out cover save.

The 1-2 WS that "stay home" with a scoring unit inside and provide cover to warithlords, move just enough to not be hit if someone outflanks/amubsh into CC with them. they have no cover save... Why? Because only and idiot would target them over the nasty units that just went flat out.

Now, if you are honestly going to shoot my WSs that sit back and give cover saves to my WLs, instead of the 2-3 coming forward, with a Seer Council embarked plus a running Avatar, then by all means, shoot away.

It is about prioirty...do you want to kill the WSs with nasty contents coming for your line, or the running Avatar, or the WLs with a 4+ cover save, or the easy targets with a few guardians inside sitting clear across the table. Please, I beg you, ignore the Council and other WSs coming forward... I like auto wins

No? You actaully want to kill the units coming at you? You want to stop the Seer Council and the Avatar before they makes mince meat out of your line? Then my WLs are content to be a firebase and kill your tanks from afar.

Again, I am not saying that WLs are the end-all-be-all for Eldar. My point is that ins a good list, with a competent general, they are indeed a very viable unit choice. You just have to make sure that your opponest has much worse things to worry about, so that they can do their job.

Again, I am not saying that WLs are the end-all-be-all for Eldar. My point is that ins a good list, with a competent general, they are indeed a very viable unit choice. You just have to make sure that your opponest has much worse things to worry about, so that they can do their job.

All I have been saying is that using WS as shield is not an effective use of such a unit. If I am shooting at your offensive WS anyways, what exactly is the point of holding half of your army back? Would it be smarter to shoot at the WL while ALL of your tanks charge me? I simply don't follow what you're trying to say.

WL are fun units, I usually run at least two in my lists. They simply have the down-side of being bad at gaining suitable cover, without becoming a detriment to your army. In your example, I would only have to shoot at two tanks, which happen to hold the most expensive part of your army. After dealing with them, you could send the next wave and continue to lose units. WL will be able to effectively deal with large tanks (due to the BL, and the tanks size), but smaller transports will be blocked from view. You are effectively giving your opponent a cover save, when your cover save will be useless because they won't be shooting at your WL.

DarthDiggler wrote:

Wrexasaur wrote:
If you were to face down a static gunline (which are exceedingly rare to actually come across anymore), that would make perfect sense. Since you are likely to find that most armies can easily overcome TLOS, by simply moving their vehicles, a WL really does need to be right behind that tank to actually make use of it as a shield.

Interesting. You must be playing a different version of 40k where the 18 long fangs with 15 missile launchers can move and fire inside their rhino's. My bad. The fact of the matter is the Wraithlord is a fine heavy support unit for the Eldar. It is not unbeatable and it doesn't suck. For it's points, I would say it is as good as any other Eldar heavy choice. In the end whether or not you include 1-3 WL's will be subject to your list and your playstyle. Those who think mech Eldar are the be-all-end-all of Eldar lists will boo-hoo the WL to no end. Those who think foot eldar are a viable and good eldar list, along with mech, will like the WL.

I underlined the important part for you. Not only do many players use rhinos to place their heavy weapon squads, many armies have other vehicles that also shoot. If you decide to keep 1/2 of your tanks huddled in the corner, while the other 1/2 goes on a kamikaze mission, don't be surprised if it does not end well. There is exactly one time where it makes sense to stick a WL behind a WS, and that is during deployment. If your opponent is shooting first, you might even try to use your rather cheap WL wounds, to protect your rather expensive tanks. I am specifically talking about shielding here, as such I mentioned that WW do generally get a lot more mileage out of WS shields.

WL are tough enough to take quite a bit of firepower thrown at them, most things will have a decently hard time punching through it's T8. WWs on the other hand, are extremely fragile, and could really make use of that cover for the first turn. Losing two WL to pretty much any army on turn one, is highly improbable. 10 S8-9 weapons, of any type, will not completely wipe two WL in one round, unless you are really unlucky.10 S8-9 weapons, can easily take out 3 WL over the course of a 5 round game though. That is pretty much what the WL are there for though, to draw firepower that would otherwise be used elsewhere. Giving a WL a cover save would be awesome, if it didn't cost you an effective 100 points.

@Wrex
Obviously the strategy I listed is turn 1-2...after that the Council (and possibly the Avatar) should be knee deep into my opponents line, and he will have to deal with them ripping though is army, and not worrying about the second wave of my force, which I held back for late game objective grabbing. You obviously don't get it, which I am glad, because neither do most of my opponents until it is too late, so I am done trying to explain it to you.

@OP
It works... I have won several tourneys with it. You just have to know how to play it. It is great to win games with units that no one expects to shine...that is part of the fun in this game. Far too many people bring cookie cutter lists/units. Take the time to learn how to use WLs right and you will find them to be effective; however, poor usage will get them killed and you will be a sad Eldar.

Wraithlords are like all units, you just need to use them properly.

Yeah,i useing just give my havocs las cannons or reapers,that can easily take down a wraithlord.

Than I can easily say, oh, well here is a Leman Russ Executioner with Plasma Sponsons, bye bye havocs.

Really? We gonna sit here all day and say, "Well this can kill this." "Oh yeah? This can kill this!"

One camp wants to talk about WLs and their viability - the other why they're not worth it. One list is talking about working cover saves into the army specifically for WL's. Well, if the list is so sure they're not going to get shot at, why ensure they have a cover save?

I think the majority feels that WL's are nice, but there are better choices out there. I am certainly not one to tell someone how to play their list - I'm not buying your models and I'm not paying your way into the tournament. Play whatever you want. However, I am one to give an opinion when it is asked, which is what has happened here.

Are Wraithlords "unstoppable killing machines?" No. Not at all - they have their weaknesses just like any other unit.

Are Wraithlords completely useless? No. Not at all - they have their strengths just like any other unit.

It's all about the list and the general playing them. If the person has a list built around their WL's, then so be it. I have some surprise lists myself that I like to pull out: Asurmen and Eldrad with a unit of Avengers turbo-boosting with a unit of Dragons on their flank, both Wave Serpents Fortuned. A whole throng of people might tell me that it's a bad list and that it won't work - but I've seen it work. It works really well, actually. It's the same thing here. The above poster (Alerian?) swears up and down that his list works. And it might. Others might find a better way to spend that 100-140 points.

Me, I prefer Reapers, especially with an Exarch with Crack Shot. 12 shots, Str. 5 AP3. 10 of them hit on 3's, the other 2 hit on 2's. And the Exarch's shots get to reroll to-wound and ignore cover. From 48" away? Yes please. Goodbye snipers, ork bikers, or anything with 3+ armor that is trying to take advantage of cover.

Let me put this into perspective w/o any talk of lists or personal preferences. If people want to talk about how easy it is to kill WLs, then we need to look at the math, and compare it to the only other "durable" heavy choices available to the Eldar.

Since the WL is T8, ANY hit that would cause a single wound on a WL, would also cause either a glance or pen on ANY Eldar tank, barring STR 5 shots.

If a STR 6 shot would wound a WL (6s required), then it would glance a Prism/Falcon. At the bare minimum the tank is not shooting this round; the WL still is.

If a STR 7 shot would wound a WL (5+ required), then it would either glance a Prism on a 5 or Pen on a 6. Now there is a greater chance of real dmg to the tank, while the WL still only loses one wound...and the tank still cannot fire, in addtion to possible other issues.

If a Str 8 shot would wound a WL (4+ required), then it would glance a Prism on 4, and pen on 5+....even worse news for the Prism, while the WL still only loses one wound.

Str 9 and 10 are far worse against a Prism/Falcon as they only need a 3 or 2 to glance and a 4 or 3 to pen, while again the WL only loses one wound.


Now, before anyone mentions longfangs again, or any other unit that has multiple longe range AT shots, remember that any unit that can burn down a WL in a single turn (causing 3 unsaved wounds) would also be putting at least 3 glances or pens on a Prism or Falcon...so talking aobut such units negating the WL are pointless, because they negate tanks just as easy as WLs.

Yes, the Prism and Falcon can both tank shock (24" tank shocks are a HUGE advantage), and the Falcon can also transport troops, yet another advantage. However, as an AT shooting platform, both tanks pale in comparison to the WL, because ANY shot that could wound a WL (again barring S5 weapons) WILL silence the guns on the tanks.

Simply put the WL can take far more firepower than either tank, while maintaining the ability to fire.

If you want a sturdy longe range gun platform that can fire every turn, you will be hard pressed to find a better choice than the WL; the math doesnt lie. However, if you want the ability to tank shock and manuever, you would be better off with a Prism/Falcon. Both types of heavies are good choices, depending on what you need them to do.

That really puts everything into perspective, that's true maths doesn't lie, that just means that it is some target priority (no not the 4th ed. rule) for the enemy of the Eldar.
What would you choose, quite possibly bring down a heavy grav tank, or slightly hurt a wraithlord?.

Well, the math does lie, a little bit. You didn't take into account saves. Cover saves for these tanks are very important - and, I would say, are a large part of the metagame for them. If you shake my Prism/Falcon, that means I can't shoot. Well, I can still burst 24" next turn rather than just sitting there. Even if I burst 19", I still get a 4" cover save. Now, the next round of shooting may simply bounce off completely while the WL loses another wound.

However, your point is still valid. I would just rather take a Falcon with Holo-Fields and Spirit Stones with a Bright Lance, a Pulse Laser and Shuriken Cannon (Guided) with a bit of troop/fire dragon payload in it than I would a WL with one less weapon, travelling more slowly with very little chance of a save and the rare time or two where he's out of range of a Farseer/Warlock and shuts down. I won't say that I've never used them - one of my WL's helped my brother place first in a team tournament for General (while losing best overall ), but I don't really use them unless I have 140 points lying around and I'm not quite sure what to do with it.

I dind't mention turboboosting saves, because if you boost, you don't shoot; the WL still does. WL is an unstunnable/unshakeable AT firepower unit (and BS4 to boot) that you can build a strong firebase around; the tanks are not.

Instead, the tanks are about maneuverability and speed, with a loss of firepower in order to either gain flat out saves or utilize longe range tank shocks.

Yes, the tanks can go flat out and become very hard to destroy, but every turn they do that, the WLs could be firing at enemy tanks, turning them into slag. Then again, a WL will never transport troops or tank shock anyone off an objective

Depending on your list and purpose for your heavies, there are reasons to take either tanks or WLs. That was my point.

One of the problems with the "you can't stun a wraithlord" idea is that it's pretty damned easy to kill a WL in one turn.

A single vendetta has an OK chance to do it.

Yup, and a Vendetta that slows down long enough to put three Twin-Linked Lascannons and two Heavy Bolters on a Wraithlord has made itself vulnerable.

Speaking of, what is the "OK chance"?

3 shots with Lascannons at 4+ to hit re-rolled, and 3+ to wound is 2.25 wounds.

6 shots with Heavy Bolters at 4+ to hit, 6 to wound, and 2- to fail saves is 0.51 wounds.

Together that's 2.76 wounds, which is pretty decent considering that the Wraithlord only has W3.