Problems with Devastators and Thundefire Cannons?

[RampageRabbit]

Preface! I'm a new player and I've been slowly buying and building up my Marines forces but unfortunately I haven't gotten to play all that many really serious games in my area and because of that I lack the experience many of you have on what works and what doesn't.

I was going through my codex again this week between finals and class and all that and I kept thinking about how cool Thunderfire Cannons and Devastators sounded. I like the idea behind troops or artillery just shelling enemy troops and providing long range fire support and I love shooty units so I was contemplating working them into my list somehow, but I never see either of these in SM lists posted on either BoLS or DakkaDakka and I was wondering why.


What makes them subpar or not optimal? Is it that they have to completely be immobile to work and therefore have to hope that they can have a good view of the battlefield the entire game, which is unlikely? Is it that they're just too easy to kill? Not enough firepower? I'd really like to know, so I can refrain from buying semi-expensive models/kits that I'll never use.

[Melissia]

I like the idea behind troops or artillery just shelling enemy troops and providing long range fire support and I love shooty units so I was contemplating working them into my list somehow, but I never see either of these in SM lists posted on either BoLS or DakkaDakka and I was wondering why.

Because most people who like that stuff play the army suited better for it-- Imperial Guard.

The two aren't BAD, no. They just are kinda the odd units out, so to speak. Thunderfire Cannons are actually quite damned good against hordes.

[RampageRabbit]

Touché

[Melissia]

Well as I said, Thunderfire Cannons are actually quite good. They just don't suit most peoples' playstyles when they play Marines.

[RampageRabbit]

See, not that I know much about this game at all but looking at their stats I couldn't see how they would be bad, except for the reasons I listed above and with ranges of like (I forget) 36" I can't imagine not being able to hit something on a board that was 6x4'. Plus the idea of forcing a Difficult Terrain test on something sounds cool. But what do I know? I need to get some experience under my belt.

[Lord Azaghul]

Part of the reason is competativeness with in the slot.
Devestators are waaayyy to expensive for what you get out of them. I was thinking about running a 10man squad, but its well over 200pts, not to mention that unless you want lots of missle launchers, getting say 4 plasma cannons or 4 lascannons is going to be hard to come by and rather pricey on the $$ side of things.

Thunderfire cannons are very good against horde armies, but for the most part I'd rather have a whirlwind, or a preditor, or a land raider, not to mention points are hard to come by in the SM codex, so anything that's not 'multipurpose' has a hard time rising to the top of the list.

[catalyst2]

I use a Thunderfire cannon very frequently and when it works, it works very well. However, it's vulnerbale - as an AV10 (almost always immobile) vehicle, it is destoyed very easily esecially since ANY glancing or penetrating hit destroys it.

That said, I also take it for the Techmarine - if I've got ruins on the board he can fortify them and make it into a 3+ cover save. Given that I almost always take sniper scouts with camo cloaks, this means I've got 2+ cover saves for those scouts if I put them into the ruins.

Another plus can be that, once the Thunderfire is destoyed, the techmarine can wander off and go repair tanks like usual.

Devastators? Just what Lord Azaghul said. I have considered taking two rhinos and combat squadding a 10-man, 4 lascanon squad into the two so we can scoot and shoot a little more but it's still way too expensive. I might as well take 2 twin-linked lascannon razorbacks and be done with it!

[murrburger]

My problem with them are as follows:

Devastators: Expensive weapons, having lanes of fire blocked (causing you to lose turns of shooting. One way or another), being largely static in a mobile army, not scoring units... I could go on.

Thunderfire Cannon: Building that godawful 70 CAD paperweight. What a piece of trash.

[Image]

My understanding is that several t.fire cannons could be pretty devastating.

For devastators, they're just too expensive to be worthwhile.

[Judge]

There's normally no reason for more than 5 marines in a Devastator squad (6 for Space Wovles). Blood Angels with 4 rockets and a sergeant for example would be 130 points. Against 'Nids, you will want these.

Pick and maintain clear fields of fire for them, especially if you can start them on elevated terrain and with cover, and they'll do fine in most matches.

10 man squads? Waste of points - don't plan for failure. Lascannons? Hard to justify the expense in most situations. 4 Heavy Bolters against Tau or Eldar? Now we're talking.

[faolan]

It seems that, with the Devs at least, a lot of people are hung up on 10man squads for EVERYTHING, and they become sub-optimal when used like that. When used as a 5'er, they're just fine. They, honestly, bring far more firepower to a game than a Predator does, and won't draw the sheer weight of fire that the Pred will, lending to their survivability.

I think they do best when you take 1 squad, put them into a drop pod, and then can deep strike them pretty accurately on the first turn onto whatever terrain you want, then they're set up in a commanding position for the rest of the game.

[RampageRabbit]

Man, I'm really glad to here what some of you guys are saying about these particular units. I must confess that I had been disuaded from taking them at all due to stuff I read on forums, but I think I might give some of them a try now. Tbh, I probably won't ever be in the tourney scene, more than likely just the LGS and games with friends so why the hell now try this stuff out!

I am really thinking about that thunderfire cannon now, it seems so cool and I wanted a techpriest anyway so 2 birds with one stone kind of. I wish I could upgrade him to a Master of the Forge though. Too bad, the next thing up on my shopping list is Rhinos for my newly built tact squads. Maybe I'll just splurge and get a Cannon anyway. I like fun.

[faolan]

Honestly, if you aren't going to be a highly competitive tourney player, take whatever you want and whatever looks/feels interesting for that game.

[Vaktathi]

It seems that, with the Devs at least, a lot of people are hung up on 10man squads for EVERYTHING, and they become sub-optimal when used like that. When used as a 5'er, they're just fine. They, honestly, bring far more firepower to a game than a Predator does, and won't draw the sheer weight of fire that the Pred will, lending to their survivability.

I think they do best when you take 1 squad, put them into a drop pod, and then can deep strike them pretty accurately on the first turn onto whatever terrain you want, then they're set up in a commanding position for the rest of the game.Actually as a 5man squad, they drop in effectiveness far faster and make an easier target for most opponents as they think "every guy I kill is one less heavy weapon".

At least, that's what I've seen and think to myself as well.

[RocketRollRebel]

5 man dev squad with 4 ml is only around 150pts. Thats not bad and it makes for an effective anti-med/light armor, anti-MC and anti-horde when they really need to be. A little more than their red armored brethren but still manageable I think. Plus if you take the TFC you can plop them into 3+ cover.

Thunderfire cannon is still nice too and I feel gets underused. The mini is a monster to put together and seems to lose its effectiveness vs mech but that's why you have the devs so you can get them out of their tanks and hit them with the TFC. :D

[Mycroft Holmes]

Actually as a 5man squad, they drop in effectiveness far faster and make an easier target for most opponents as they think "every guy I kill is one less heavy weapon".

At least, that's what I've seen and think to myself as well.

I do this pretty consistently with SW Long Fang squads. Dropping a Demolisher shell on them in cover is worth it when 50% of the heavy weapons evaporate before they get to shoot.

Mycroft

[DarkLink]

Right, you may not need a full 10man squad, but you want more than one ablative wound. My GKs would just stormbolter them to death, or machine spirit a few TL heavy bolters and pick them off one or two at a time. Adding 2-3 more wounds, though, makes them a fair bit more dangerous, because I have to actually dedicate something to kill them rather than just take some pot-shots.

[Melissia]

And my Exorcists can EASILY wipe out a five-man squad with one salvo, especially if they aren't in cover.

[RocketRollRebel]

I do this pretty consistently with SW Long Fang squads. Dropping a Demolisher shell on them in cover is worth it when 50% of the heavy weapons evaporate before they get to shoot.

Mycroft

this is where the TFC comes in handy;)

[Judge]

The segeants are always the first to go, so Dev. squads come with a built-in spare wound. Why add extra wounds when you could put the points towards another Dev. squad (or Vindicators for tightly packed enemies)? If you haven't got anything better to spend the points on, sure, an extra wound or two doesn't hurt. You always have something better to spend the points on.

[DarkLink]

The segeants are always the first to go, so Dev. squads come with a built-in spare wound. Why add extra wounds when you could put the points towards another Dev. squad (or Vindicators for tightly packed enemies)?

Because that one wound runs out really, really quick. Which means that heavy weapons start dropping really really quick.

[Judge]

In most cases, my preferred Heavy Weapon is the rocket launcher - 10 points. Say you've got a Long Fang pack with 5 rocket launchers? 140 points, with a spare wound in the sergeant (though this one has a function). Buffo was proud of Dark Lances? Shoot - here's 15 rockets for 420 points.

Each heavy weapon is a mere 25 points. A spare, otherwise useless, wound marine is 15 points. You're saying it's better spend 30-60 points on spare wounds for the rockets when you could have another 3-6 rockets to stick on other marines instead? Pass thanks. Don't plan for any part of any unit to be useless, or even redundant, unless you're out of other, inherently effective units to spend points on. There really aren't that many weapons that will hit (as many longer-ranged weapons will target more expensive squads) Devastators, as they're usually in the back, and often in cover. After all, who's going to spend a round of shooting their own 5 man Devastator squad at yours (killing ~2 if they're in cover) when they could disable or destroy a more (seemingly) threatening Dreadnaught instead?

[DarkLink]

In most cases, my preferred Heavy Weapon is the rocket launcher - 10 points. Say you've got a Long Fang pack with 5 rocket launchers? 140 points, with a spare wound in the sergeant (though this one has a function). Buffo was proud of Dark Lances? Shoot - here's 15 rockets for 420 points.

Each heavy weapon is a mere 25 points. A spare, otherwise useless, wound marine is 15 points. You're saying it's better spend 30-60 points on spare wounds for the rockets when you could have another 3-6 rockets to stick on other marines instead? Pass thanks. Don't plan for any part of any unit to be useless, or even redundant, unless you're out of other, inherently effective units to spend points on. There really aren't that many weapons that will hit (as many longer-ranged weapons will target more expensive squads) Devastators, as they're usually in the back, and often in cover. After all, who's going to spend a round of shooting their own 5 man Devastator squad at yours (killing ~2 if they're in cover) when they could disable or destroy a more (seemingly) threatening Dreadnaught instead?

Normal Marine devastators are slightly more expensive. Well, maybe not the missile launchers (not sure on the comparative prices), but other weapons are.

Plus, if your other heavy slots are taken and you've only got one dev squad, then you can't fit any more weapons in the squad. Your only real upgrade choice is to add a wound or two if you feel it appropriate.

[Judge]

Heavy Bolters are cheaper; Lascannons are atrociously more expensive. I could see taking extra wounds to protect a 40 point / model investment (although I'd wonder why you were wasting that many points on a squad when a Vindicator could do the same job for less).

Same Long Fang squad - 245 points for 5 lascannons, sergeant, 2 spare wounds. You could have 2 Vindicators for less.

[RocketRollRebel]

Heavy Bolters are cheaper; Lascannons are atrociously more expensive. I could see taking extra wounds to protect a 40 point / model investment (although I'd wonder why you were wasting that many points on a squad when a Vindicator could do the same job for less).

Same Long Fang squad - 245 points for 5 lascannons, sergeant, 2 spare wounds. You could have 2 Vindicators for less.

wow BA lc are 25pts... awkward.

[Bean]

And my Exorcists can EASILY wipe out a five-man squad with one salvo, especially if they aren't in cover.

An Exorcist which kills five models in one shot is getting extremely lucky.

Point in fact, an Exorcist only has a 0.0372 (3.72%) probability of wiping a five-man squad of marines--without cover. That's hardly "easily." =P

You might hit that roughly-one-out-of-27 chance frequently, but that speaks primarily about how lucky you are--it says little about the Exorcist.

[Judge]

"If you're keeping score and you lose, you've got no one to blame but yourself."

[AirHorse]

I personally think people slight exagerate how vulnerable devastators are, you only have to glance a pred or a vindi and its unable to shoot. The main drawback for devastators over a tank is that they are vulnerable to small arms fire, but I find that it takes a few turns before you get there because of their range and as space marines they still have to draw a pretty reasonable amount of fire to be brought down. I also find four missile launchers particularily effective when compared to the autocannons and heavy bolters of my preds, so even though they are more expensive you get what you pay for if you use em right.

I personally like using a devastator squad with four missile launchers. I also run two autocannon predators, so they arent normally the first target for long range firepower which lets them get off a couple of barrages. And even if they are targetted, then my preds have less chance of getting glanced or destroyed. Sometimes if one of my tactical squads is going to be on the defensive ill use their rhinos for the devs and have the tactical squads get out of sight instead.

[codiddy]

Same Long Fang squad - 245 points for 5 lascannons, sergeant, 2 spare wounds. You could have 2 Vindicators for less.

the difference is those devastators are going to be able to shoot until they are all dead. They don't have to be worried about being shaken or stunned.

Also why would you treat the sergeant as just an extra wound? he has a signum. Do you not like to hit on 2's?

[Inquisitor Soren]

In my expierence Devs seem to be overlooked for other targets. Five marines is just as vulnerable, in most cases, as a predator. Though the Pred is much cheaper in general it seems that people ignore the Five Missiles in cover for the tank running itself down their throats. Then again I don't play Marines and can only offer what I have personally seen, and I am by no means great at 40k. I prefer the fluff and the painting more than playing, odd I know.

As for Thunders? I have to say I love every aspect of them, I proxied up three for a Apoclypse game at one point and loved how they were ignored as they rained holes into the Orks lines, it was beautiful. I would say if you're lucky with scatter die they could be decent even for dealing with light armor vehicles as well as hordes and even some of the smaller MCs. Heck even when they die is the Techmarine not a IC? If so slap him to another squad and bam, insta powerfist added to the squad! If not? No loss, send him to go repair the damaged long range Dreadnought that has been 'disarmed'. Heck he even gives you a free upgrade to cover as well. Now is there a better pick for 100pts in the SM codex? No joke is there?

[Sir Biscuit]

The popular 5-man long fangs squad with missile launchers comes to 115 points. Five Devastator marines with the same load out comes to 150. They're a little more than "slightly" more expensive. :P IN addition, one model firing at BS 5 is much, much worse than being able to split fire, so the sergeants worse to boot. BA devastators are a little more appropriately costed, at 130 for five and four ML.

Regardless, the ML is almost always the only correct answer when it comes to choosing heavy weapons. The others are too expensive by half.

Cost, by the way, is what makes them "bad". They're almost twice as expensive as a Dakkapred, and they're more than twice as expensive as two MM/HF Land Speeders, and equally as expensive as three MM attack bikes. All those other options tend to be more efficient anti-tank.

One thing they are, however, IS resilient. Typically, they're going to be deployed far back, with some sort of cover. At the ranges they're engaging at, the only kind of weapons that can fire back are other heavy weapons. That give the opponent the choice of killing a few devastators and missile launchers, or firing at your mechanized forces with their heavy weapons. It's not uncommon for devs to survive long into late game, as blowing up transports and other hard tanks is a higher priority, and a lot of small arms spend most of the game out of range. So that's something to consider.

EDIT: forgot thunderfires. They're not good because they are AV10 and any glancing or penetrating hit kill them. While they are probably the best way to get a techmarine, if your list calls for one, they are not a particularly devastating unit in their own right. Vindicators do the blast support thing much better, so if you're after blast attacks take one of those instead.

[DarkLink]

The popular 5-man long fangs squad with missile launchers comes to 115 points. Five Devastator marines with the same load out comes to 150. They're a little more than "slightly" more expensive. :P IN addition, one model firing at BS 5 is much, much worse than being able to split fire, so the sergeants worse to boot. BA devastators are a little more appropriately costed, at 130 for five and four ML.

Regardless, the ML is almost always the only correct answer when it comes to choosing heavy weapons. The others are too expensive by half.

Cost, by the way, is what makes them "bad". They're almost twice as expensive as a Dakkapred, and they're more than twice as expensive as two MM/HF Land Speeders, and equally as expensive as three MM attack bikes. All those other options tend to be more efficient anti-tank.

One thing they are, however, IS resilient. Typically, they're going to be deployed far back, with some sort of cover. At the ranges they're engaging at, the only kind of weapons that can fire back are other heavy weapons. That give the opponent the choice of killing a few devastators and missile launchers, or firing at your mechanized forces with their heavy weapons. It's not uncommon for devs to survive long into late game, as blowing up transports and other hard tanks is a higher priority, and a lot of small arms spend most of the game out of range. So that's something to consider.

EDIT: forgot thunderfires. They're not good because they are AV10 and any glancing or penetrating hit kill them. While they are probably the best way to get a techmarine, if your list calls for one, they are not a particularly devastating unit in their own right. Vindicators do the blast support thing much better, so if you're after blast attacks take one of those instead.

Pretty much agree with everything here. SW Long Fangs are cheap enough that extra wounds aren't needed. Normal Devastators are, I think. Though, I will say that Thunderfire cannons, placed behind fortified cover, get fairly resilient due to the 3+ cover save.

[Inquisitor Soren]

Well the one other thing I just thought about is that a Thunder in cover would gain the 4+ save as well, its not a lot but it is still a 50% increase in durability in theory. I would give both units a try and see how they fare for you man, theory hammer is meaningless in the end it depends on personal playstyle and your opponents. Cheers either way.

[Mr. Pants]

One of the heavy choices in my marine rotation is a five man devastator squad with four missile launchers and las/plas razorback to drive them from battle to battle. I'm rarely disappointed with their performance and the razorback goes a long way towards offsetting their lack of mobility. As an added bonus, it can be used to screen the marines from long range enemy fire and act as an anti-tank unit in it's own right.