PDA

View Full Version : Do Thunderwolves and Lonewolves have synergy with "Logan wing"?



blameless
20-11-2009, 03:43
As per the title :) In what way would they create synergy if at all?

Please explain your reasons for your answer.

mightymconeshot
20-11-2009, 03:58
because they have synergy with every type of assualt army. they take shoots off your terms and thunderwolfs have great assualt range. if you can combine it with logans abilitys and attack bonus then well hate to be the other player. lone wolfs with terms, ss,chain fist are hard to take down and can go toe to toe with almost any mc/walker/vehicle with little problem. they probably also can tie up any normal squad for several assualt as well depending on you rolling skills.

blameless
20-11-2009, 04:01
because they have synergy with every type of assualt army. they take shoots off your terms and thunderwolfs have great assualt range. if you can combine it with logans abilitys and attack bonus then well hate to be the other player. lone wolfs with terms, ss,chain fist are hard to take down and can go toe to toe with almost any mc/walker/vehicle with little problem. they probably also can tie up any normal squad for several assualt as well depending on you rolling skills.

excellent post and very good points :D what about thunderwolves??? :confused:

can the neigh sayer also please stand up? why do you think they do not?

Arakanis
20-11-2009, 04:08
I voted no, because I think you fail to understand the concept of Synergy as applied to Warhammer 40k.

Wikipedia says this about Synergy: "Simply defined, it means that the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts." It goes on to say that synergy can be described as "A dynamic state in which combined action is favored over the sum of individual component actions."

Mmk, here's what that means for us. You're trying to tell me that Thunderwolves/Lone Wolves when working together with Wolf Guard terminators are MORE effective than if they were working with any other unit or on their own.



1-Lone wolves... by absorbing disproportionate amounts of fire to kill them (ETERNAL WARRIOR 2 WOUNDS/FNP/TDA/STORM SHIELD/fenrisian abalitive wounds) they draw the pain away from your other scoring squads. They give up a kill point if ALIVE at the end of the battle so if they are ignored they will tie up squads, kill tanks or go toe to toe with monstrous creatures and to serious damage. Very tactical and very enhancing to the overall army.

2-Thunderwolves... ARE CAVALRY! 2 wound/T5/4 rending attacks have a charge range of 19-24", cost only a bit more per model than a std terminator and are ST10 with a fist to boot! I cant see how having this counter attack threat range, speed and brutality in assault is not at all enhancing to a footsloggin bunch of terminators???

Basically, what you're saying is when playing an army it's good to have a variety of different units, and that's true. You want to be able to handle an array of threats, high armor vehicles, hordes, high armor saves, high toughness, psychic powers, etc. Here's the thing though, just because you include multiple good units in the same army does not make it Synergy.

Synergy in 40,000 is when you have two or more units who have abilities or wargear that without another unit to use it on, is either not useful at all or significantly LESS useful. In other words, to have Synergy, you have to have a specific combination that improves the performance of at least one of those units in a way that would not otherwise happen. The combination of two parts become a whole greater than the sum.

Terminators + Thunderwolves/Lone Wolves is not such a combination. Neither is say, Nidzilla. Bringing 6 Carnifexes and 2 Hive Tyrands does not count as Synergy just because it makes your army stronger.

Using a Bonesword to give Gaunts Catalyst is Synergy.
Pysker Battle Squads working with artillery to force pinning checks is Synergy
Using Culexus Assassins in an army with a number of Psykers to maximize their firepower is Synergy.
Using Pariahs and Flayed Ones is Synergy
Using Deathwing Terminators and Ravenwing Bikes (with their Turboboost and Outflank and Teleporter Homers) to get your Terminators Exactly where you want them is Synergy.

You don't seem to get what Synergy is, blameless.
Hopefully I've cleared it up for you.

blameless
20-11-2009, 04:21
Wikipedia says this about Synergy: "Simply defined, it means that the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts." It goes on to say that synergy can be described as "A dynamic state in which combined action is favored over the sum of individual component actions."

Interesting point and one that supports my thoughts on the matter exactly :)
-Being a lone terminator that is DESIGNED to benefit your army by DYING and in doing so is especially effective and important to an all terminator amy because every loss counts MORE than for power armoured marines.
-Being fast moving cavalry in an army where nothing else moves more than 6" is far more important than for their power armoured brethren.
It looks strangely like it was almost a design concept :D
either that or just total fluke that they work so well together, I wonder what word we could use to sum up this "working so well together" thing? :p


Mmk, here's what that means for us. You're trying to tell me that Thunderwolves/Lone Wolves when working together with Wolf Guard terminators are MORE effective than if they were working with any other unit or on their own.

Yup :) no questions about that one. For reason of your own definition (thanks wikipedia)


Synergy in 40,000 is when you have two or more units who have abilities or wargear that without another unit to use it on, is either not useful at all or significantly LESS useful.

that's your interpretation of "Synergy in 40,000" and it supports my thoughts anyway.
your first point from Wikipedia actually explains it better ;)


In other words, to have Synergy, you have to have a specific combination that improves the performance of at least one of those units in a way that would not otherwise happen. The combination of two parts become a whole greater than the sum.

Again... Yep that's what they do...


Hopefully I've cleared it up for you.

You have thank you :D

Just to be clear. The word "Synergy" means exactly that.
feel free to look it up in a dictionary or online but... Arakanis we are not discussing weather or not there is some special rule that the wolves have that specifically compliments all terminators only (PS neither does raven wing) but weather or not they have "Synergy" which you have said that they dont.

Even this early on it looks like the warseer community thinks that they do.

Arakanis
20-11-2009, 04:44
Sigh. You're not quite grasping the concept.
Let me try again
Synergy = Two units that together are better than they would be alone or with any other unit.
Variety = Two units that are capable of different things, but could be combined with anything to the same effect.



-Being a lone terminator that is DESIGNED to benefit your army by DYING and in doing so is especially effective and important to an all terminator amy because every loss counts MORE than for power armoured marines.
-Being fast moving cavalry in an army where nothing else moves more than 6" is far more important than for their power armoured brethren.
It looks strangely like it was almost a design concept :D
either that or just total fluke that they work so well together, I wonder what word we could use to sum up this "working so well together" thing? :p
Yes. But here's the thing. Those are both powerful units. They'd be good all by them selves! If you could make an army of nothing but Lone Wolves it would be still be really good. Combining them with Wolf Guard terminators is really not better or worse than combining them with Blood Claws, Grey Hunters, or Heck, Ultramarines. It's like saying that a Reaver Titan has Synergy with Imperial Guard because it blows up the enemy army and laughs at their threats to destroy them. It doesn't. A Reaver Titan is powerful as it is, it's powerful no matter what you put on your side. Same deal with Thunderwolf Cav and Lone Wolves. You could team them up with Grots and they'd STILL be good.




Yup :) no questions about that one. For reason of your own definition (thanks wikipedia)
Sigh again. Look, here's the thing. You can argue that having more than one type of unit in your army counts as Synergy until you're Ultramarine blue in the face, but you're not correct. Thunderwolves are cavalry and have rending and can hit like a train, right? It doesn't matter WHO is in the army, they have those abilities. Nothing at ALL changes. They are STILL TWC they have no abilities or differences if your army is Blood Claws or Wolf Guard. Ravenwing has Teleporter Homers they cannot even use. Deathwing has Deep Striking, which becomes completely safe if you include Ravenwing. Just by mixing those units together, it changes everything. Ravenwing is much less effective when combined with tacticals and predators, because you're paying for Teleporter homers you aren't using. Same deal for Deathwing without Ravenwing, you can teleport, but it's not as safe because there are no homers on the field.




that's your interpretation of "Synergy in 40,000" and it supports my thoughts anyway.
your first point from Wikipedia actually explains it better ;)
Apparently it didn't do it that well, because you seem to think it supports you. Lets do this again. Synergy means that the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts.

This is not true with Thunderwolves or Lone Wolves. No matter what you add them to, it doesn't make them any better than LW + Whatever.
Also, as for "My Interpretation" if you're saying that Synergy is "Different Units Are Good" then there is no Synergy ever, because then, ALL units would have Synergy, so the contextual dichotomy in which to define what is Synergistic and what is not doesn't exist. ;)



Again... Yep that's what they do...
Um. No. They don't. Thunderwolves + Grots would be good, because Thunderwolves are good. Dur. It's still not Synergy.



Even this early on it looks like the warseer community thinks that they do.
There have been 5 votes. Discounting yours and mine, that makes 2 for yes, and 1 for What is Synergy? That's hardly "The Warseer Community" ;)

SilverDrake
20-11-2009, 05:06
I'd go with yes, because of the simple hammer and amboss thing.
Also a Thunderwolve cavalry ads mobility and speed, for lonewolves has been said enough.

Also Thunderwolves don't tend to be such an enemy compared to a list full of Terminaters, so will imho get the synergic effect of living longer on the board, with a list of Terminators.

I.e. their role on the field of glory changes not for them but for the enemy, they are not the main menace for the competing player, but still are a fast cc attack unit. Also in a whole Terminator list, the Thunderwolves can provide speedy help to terminators in vain, or protecting theri flanks.

Thats teh synrgy effect for me. While not getting anything ruleswise this would be my tactical advantage.

So i voted for yes. Also wikipedia is a dangerous thing, don't take everything for true, but i must say i've not read te wiki article as i tend to ignore wikipedia nowadays.

regards

blameless
20-11-2009, 05:16
Sigh. You're not quite grasping the concept.
Let me try again
Synergy = Two units that together are better than they would be alone or with any other unit.
Variety = Two units that are capable of different things, but could be combined with anything to the same effect

You can sigh all you want but this is exactly MY point that you are making :p


Yes. But here's the thing. Those are both powerful units. They'd be good all by them selves! If you could make an army of nothing but Lone Wolves it would be still be really good. Combining them with Wolf Guard terminators is really not better or worse than combining them with Blood Claws, Grey Hunters, or Heck, Ultramarines.

Synergy means that the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts

-So because a unit is good all by itself it has no ability to create synergy???
-"you could make an army of nothing but"... BIKES... " it would still be really good"
-Yes it is better than with blood claws, grey hunters or heck bluemarines. Good with them but BETTER with terminators... SYNERGY!!!!

Having lone wolves is powerful with any combination yes, BUT they are especially complimentary, helpful, "synergistic" to an all terminator army above and beyond other combination.

Arakanis
20-11-2009, 05:17
Thats teh synrgy effect for me. While not getting anything ruleswise this would be my tactical advantage. While I understand that Thunderwolves and Terminators work together, so would Grey Hunters, or Blood Claws or anything else really. You're not gaining anything beyond the Sum of the Individual Parts, and thus is by definition not synergy.



So i voted for yes. Also wikipedia is a dangerous thing, don't take everything for true, but i must say i've not read te wiki article as i tend to ignore wikipedia nowadays.
Dictionary.com and Websters online dictionary (as well as my copy here at home) all say that Synergy is the whole being greater than the sum of the individual parts.

Generally speaking, it's good to check up other sources before simply discrediting one based on personal opinion of the reliability of that source.


You can sigh all you want but this is exactly MY point that you are making :p
If it was your point, then you wouldn't be arguing with me :P




-So because a unit is good all by itself it has no ability to create synergy???
-"you could make an army of nothing but"... BIKES... " it would still be really good"
-Yes it is better than with blood claws, grey hunters or heck bluemarines. Good with them but BETTER with terminators... SYNERGY!!!! If it's better with Terminators, it's because Terminators are better. Not because the combination is better. Lets pretend than TWC have an arbitary value of 7 on a 1-10 scale of effectiveness and WG terminators have a 6 whereas Blood Claws have a 4. BCs + TWC = 11 WG + WTC = 13
Okay? They're worth how much their worth, so when two good units are included in an army, the army is better by that much. However, lets say Deathwing is worth 6 and Ravenwing is worth 5 Tactical squads are worth 5 too. Deathwing + Tacticals is 11. Deathwing + Ravenwing = more than 11 because Deathwing and Ravenwing have abilities that work even better when used together.



Having lone wolves is powerful with any combination yes, BUT they are especially complimentary, helpful, "synergistic" to an all terminator army above and beyond other combination.
Again, this is like saying that Titans are good, but are better with MORE Titans. Well of COURSE that's true. But it isn't because of any ability that Titans have, it's because Titans are just that good!

I'm sorry that you are unable to see how Synergy works, my friend.

SilverDrake
20-11-2009, 05:54
I'm sorry i didn't want to discredit you, just wikipedia, okay sure their can be the same synergy effects with other units, we can agree on that, but, while the same synergy effects appear also to something else they still appear with the Terminators right?

just because they aren't special synergy effects they still remain synergy effects, i've wrote those that i see down, and the thing ist to me the really dangerous units in Codex SW are imho WGT and TWC, so they can provide themselve firedraw and in case can be fast and cc lasty, while GH are just a standard unit (a good one, but not a special cc one) and i think their will be synergy effects between them just because the simple thing both are strong units in cc terms, while the THC can be fastly redeployed, while WGT can be deployed via droppod and are then relative immobile.

Its going to be really tactical lasty so can we agree that i for sake of argument get some not ruleswise, but tactical synergys out of using THC and WGT as part of one strategy?

I think this is a personal opinion thingy, just because their is no scientific way atm available on the forum to prove either argument, its just i say they work great together in certain strategies, their i need both exactly these units to perform this strategy the best, and get mor out of it when using only ne of this unit, and you say no other units can do this as well.

When we take the whole Metagame in consideration their come missions, peaces of terrain and much more in consideration.

So i'll just say ruleswise their won't be an synergie but gameplayable their would be.

As for other links, im not that familiar with english speaking interwebs aside from wargaming ^^.

regards

Arakanis
20-11-2009, 05:58
That's quite alright Silver Drake, and definitely I'd say that TWC and WGTs can be used together for powerful effect, I would call it a good combination and a solid army core, it's just not what could be defined as "Synergy" is all I'm really saying.

And don't worry about your English man, you're keeping up with us just fine and I can understand you without any trouble.

Thanks for debating this with us. Always glad to have ya. :D

SilverDrake
20-11-2009, 06:12
Ok i just googled the german interwebs, about synergy, and it says it just means a sum greater when its parts would be, so i'd say it just means we can't get any true solution because, their is just no way either of us can prove their point scientific, or else some of us had to test any or a fitting amount of circumstances and define gamewise synergys.

I personally see synergys who are better then those receivd with other Units, but you got a point there with the Units beeing better then other ones, but imho the reached synergy of THC and WGT with eachother is just that, a better thing then both could've reached on their own, i just can't say if its especially the Wolfwing who is getting a synergy or just the both units.

But since we don't got outflanking units or even surrounding in cc in 40k, i can't definitly say anything against your points aside from, that as for (ok bad one but still) example The WGT would kill say 5/10 Orks and they just get lucky with the Morale, while if the TWC would have joined the spacewolves would annihilated the Orks because of killing the otther 5/10 Orks, thus both receive something (killing the other unit, get to reposition) Its just an example and i know its flaws but ist just the thing with synergys, from what i understand it just have to be bigger then the parts of it, not potential other parts, so as stated the Units get synergys of working together but not the Wolfwing espicially, but considering the whole thing about the Wolfwing is build about WGT as StU, i can't say the wolfwing is getting none from it either.

So....:

I'll just call it a draw ^^


Glad to be here ^^

Netfreakk
20-11-2009, 07:18
What they're debating about is the difference between the "layman's" (spell?) term and the "traditional" term of "synergy".

both have it right, but they're using the same word and are thinking two different things.

Traditional - they become better as they compliment each other.

Layman's - they function to the effect where they are not hindering and thus work "well" together.

Yes, wolf guard in TDA work very well with thundercavalry, as I might even say to my friend, "my army has great synergy" meaning that they are working together.

However, Arakanis is stating that this is the improper use of that word as they do not directly compliment each other. Arakanis would say, "Due to the use of the telehome beacon from the Ravenwing bikes, they have great synergy with the Deathwing who teleport on them."

Either way, both of you agree that the thunder Cavalry work well with Wolf-Guard which is the main point of this thread.

Gaargod
20-11-2009, 13:09
Its fairly difficult for TWC to 'directly' assist WG, as they don't have anything that specfically helps each other. Therefore, technically, Arakanis is right. However, he's completely missed the point of the thread.

Regardless of terminology used, the OP was asking 'do WGT + TWC/lone wolves work well with each other'. To which the answer i feel is yes:

TWC are always going to be a fantastic counter-assault unit. Its what they do. They can also break open tanks and generally cause lots of havoc/take a fair few shots. Considering WGT are often used to maximum effect in a land raider, you're now presenting the opponent with 2 targets which both deserve S10 attacs for the best effect (insta death / decent chance to penetrate). Furthermore, in a raider, the WG can get stuck in first, followed by the slightly slower TWC to assist vulnerable spots.

Lone Wolves are slightly different. They're great units, as they're (assuming termie armour, chainfist and SS as a common build) very hard to kill and hit big stuff like a ton of bricks. This is a good thing as otherwise 'Loganwing'/'wolfwing' (terms which i hate, as it suggests playing Deathwing with SW rules. It is NOT. Its meant to be playing Logan's Great Company, including the very best of the army) often lacks versus big things (usually limited to MMs on raiders, CF+cyclone in squads and TWC hammers). Also fufills the job of holding up a unit happily.

blameless
21-11-2009, 01:20
That's quite alright Silver Drake, and definitely I'd say that TWC and WGTs can be used together for powerful effect, I would call it a good combination and a solid army core, it's just not what could be defined as "Synergy" is all I'm really saying.

faa bro! you could also say the same thing for your raven wing, used together for powerful effect... same thing... :cries:

You can be as nit picky as you like about how you interpret the word "synergy" in relation to the battle field, 40K, wargear or even the gravitational pull of the moon... whatever! but more than other combination's LW and TWC enhance an all terminator army to a greater effect. As the poll still shows.

I agree with the above two posts that we are all talking about synergy. Which is why you keep arguing my point Arakanis.

Arakanis
21-11-2009, 01:31
Its fairly difficult for TWC to 'directly' assist WG, as they don't have anything that specfically helps each other. Therefore, technically, Arakanis is right. However, he's completely missed the point of the thread.
I believe the point of this thread was that I disagreed with blameless in ANOTHER thread ;)
That said, I understand what blameless is getting at, TWC and WG are effective together, however I that is only because TWC and WG are good by themselves.


faa bro! you could also say the same thing for your raven wing, used together for powerful effect... same thing...

Right. I'm not saying that TWC and GW aren't good together, I'm saying that it isn't Synergy.

Your poll proves that people don't understand what Synergy is, if it proves anything. It's hardly a representative population anyways. (25 people?)

spaint2k
21-11-2009, 03:17
I don't know if I should get involved, but anyone trying to argue that the definition of synergy somehow does not equal the definition of synergy are... well, I just don't understand how you operate on a day-to-day basis.

Arakanis gave a superb example of how Ravenwing have synergy with Deathwing because of their teleporter beacons. Without Deathwing, Ravenwing suddenly become a lot less useful when used in combination with anything else. Similarly, without Ravenwing, Deathwing become less useful when used in combination with anything else.

EDIT
I would say that an example of another synergistic unit in the regular marine codex is the Chaplain. Putting him with an assault squad or a terminator squad (if he's in TDA) is a lot more useful than attaching him to a devastator or tactical squad. Allowing rerolls of missed rolls to-hit on a squad that charged that turn is much more useful to an assault squad than any other squad despite the Chaplain's other skills (e.g. conferring fearless on the squad he's with).
/EDIT

Thunderwolves and Lone Wolves work well with anything else in the army. They don't have any abilities that are especially useful with terminators. Nor do the terminators have any abilities that are especially helpful for lone wolves or thunderwolves that they wouldn't confer upon any other unit.

I voted no. They're just decent units that do what they say on the box, regardless of other units in your army.

Arakanis
21-11-2009, 04:03
I don't know if I should get involved, but anyone trying to argue that the definition of synergy somehow does not equal the definition synergy are... well, I just don't understand how you operate on a day-to-day basis.



I would say that an example of another synergistic unit in the regular marine codex is the Chaplain. Putting him with an assault squad or a terminator squad (if he's in TDA) is a lot more useful than attaching him to a devastator or tactical squad. Allowing rerolls of missed rolls to-hit on a squad that charged that turn is much more useful to an assault squad than any other squad despite the Chaplain's other skills (e.g. conferring fearless on the squad he's with).


Thunderwolves and Lone Wolves work well with anything else in the army. They don't have any abilities that are especially useful with terminators. Nor do the terminators have any abilities that are especially helpful for lone wolves or thunderwolves that they wouldn't confer upon any other unit.

I voted no. They're just decent units that do what they say on the box, regardless of other units in your army.

The Chaplain is another great (and classic!) example of Synergy.

Thanks for helping me out there spaint2k4. I really cannot understand how you can argue that Synergy means anything other than what it means.

But apparently, some people can! What can you do? :rolleyes:

He Who Thirsts
21-11-2009, 05:10
Wait, from what synergy basically means is when one unit has a special ability to enhance another unit and it uses that special ability. I.E. - Ulrik allows models within line of sight to reroll ld tests, and a unit within line of sight does so and has a successful roll.

Not lone wolves and thunderwolves, which work great together.
Not having a couple of chaos dreads let loose at the enemy whil you have some havocs shooting them from afar.
Not a predator and a marine with a meltagun destroying a tank together.

Is that what were talking about? Cause some people aren't getting it.

Arakanis
21-11-2009, 06:02
Wait, from what synergy basically means is when one unit has a special ability to enhance another unit and it uses that special ability. I.E. - Ulrik allows models within line of sight to reroll ld tests, and a unit within line of sight does so and has a successful roll.

Not lone wolves and thunderwolves, which work great together.
Not having a couple of chaos dreads let loose at the enemy whil you have some havocs shooting them from afar.
Not a predator and a marine with a meltagun destroying a tank together.

Is that what were talking about? Cause some people aren't getting it.

Yes, That is what we are talking about. You nailed it. Ulrik's morale re-roll is a good example, Space Wolves have lower than average leadership (I believe this is because of Blood Claws?) and also lack fearless units, I believe. So there is Synergy between Ulrik and lower leadership units, because he can help mitigate that weakness.

He Who Thirsts
21-11-2009, 06:06
Thank you arkanasis, I just wanted to be sure. Whenever I have my doubts about synergy, I'll just see if it fits that post. Problem solved.

Mojaco
21-11-2009, 12:00
I don't fully agree with the limited view on synergy. You seem to believe synergy only exists when special rules support one another. However, it can be more sublte imo.

For example, having just one rhino and no other vehicles in an army means that every anti-tank weapon will blow it apart. However, having 4 will means that some will definatly fulfil their purpose. Is that synergy? I'm not sure, but taking more in this case does not mean that you simply get 4 times the effectiveness of the one rhino. You get the difference between nearly guaranteed failure and nearly guaranteed success. And as the rhinos can provide cover for one another, they grand an even higher chance of success.

I now this is called 'saturation of targets', but is that not a form of synergy?

A Tyranid army consisting of gargoyles, hormagaunts, leaping warriors and carnifexes will arrive in 4 waves, each easy to handle on its own. The same army consisting of Tyrants, Carnifexes and Warriors will arrive all at the same time. Could that be a form of synergy?

In that light, the OP could be an example of synergy. By posing similar threads, each capable on their own and with similar strength, the opponent is unable to take out the biggest threat and accept the survival of the others; they all a big threat.

To be clear though, I normally only use synergy in the same examples as provided by Arkanis, but perhaps these situations could be more subtle forms of synergy. Instead of 5 + 5 = 12, this might be 5 + 5 = 10.1 :)

brain_dead_1st
21-11-2009, 14:25
In my Ork army I have lootas who's massive firepower forces opponents to hide vehicles and vulnerable units.
I also have masses of close combat troops.

Either on their own would be easy to beat, "shoot the troops" "cc the lootas"
But as the lootas force the opponents out of sight they wont be shooting my cc troops so much...

Another example is burnas in a trukk in a fairly open battle field, trukk = average to poor as a vehicle, burnas really good IF they get close.
Burnas in a trukk make use of the multiple firepoints, menouverability and the trukk allows the burnas to get to a place they can fire faster with less loss of life, THEREFORE greater than the sum of individual parts

TACTICAL SYNERGY, now note, i did not specify in the first example what cc units because orks have alot of them so being more specific is not possible, the OP was specific so any justification must also be specific like in my 2nd example

My question to YES people is What exactly do they do that compliments each other that couldn't be done by other SW units? (lets keep it army specific because we all can ally in pwner units but that isnt cool)

mcbogi
21-11-2009, 15:26
Off Topic:
How does a relatively simple question spark an inane discussion about semantics? It's obvious that the OP meant whether TWC and LW's work well with Loganwing style armies.

On Topic:
I believe TWC and LW's work well with almost all types of SW armies. They provide tough alternative targets, keeping your (already tough for Loganwing) scoring units alive. They can also take on any type of unit (Infantry, MC's, Vehicles, Walkers) either to kill them off or keep them occupied for a while. TWC are very fast, something which I think most Loganwing armies will be lacking.
LW's will fit, thematically and practically, with Loganwing armies by intercepting MC's and Walkers which would otherwise pose problems for SW terminators.

spaint2k
21-11-2009, 16:09
Off Topic:
How does a relatively simple question spark an inane discussion about semantics?


Inane? You come from Iceland; didn't the Icelandic Language Council take the best part of a decade to come up with an acceptable word for telephone?

EDIT: That sounds harsher than it was meant to - it's just a joke. I believe semantics are important. /EDIT



It's obvious that the OP meant whether TWC and LW's work well with Loganwing style armies.


Then that's what he should have said. Your own answer seems to indicate that the question isn't especially exciting since they work well with *everything*.

EDIT: Maybe a more interesting question would be "In what ways could we use Lone Wolves and Thunderwolves to fill the gaps in a Wolfwing Army?" - which you've partially answered.

Arakanis
21-11-2009, 20:37
I don't fully agree with the limited view on synergy. You seem to believe synergy only exists when special rules support one another. However, it can be more sublte imo.
It's not a limited view on Synergy, it's the definition of the word, Mojaco.



For example, having just one rhino and no other vehicles in an army means that every anti-tank weapon will blow it apart. However, having 4 will means that some will definatly fulfil their purpose. Is that synergy? I'm not sure, but taking more in this case does not mean that you simply get 4 times the effectiveness of the one rhino. You get the difference between nearly guaranteed failure and nearly guaranteed success. And as the rhinos can provide cover for one another, they grand an even higher chance of success. Yes, but I mean that's still four times the effectiveness with four rhinos. Exactly what one would expect and not at all synergistic.



I now this is called 'saturation of targets', but is that not a form of synergy? It's not a form of synergy, because it's still equal to the sum of the parts.



A Tyranid army consisting of gargoyles, hormagaunts, leaping warriors and carnifexes will arrive in 4 waves, each easy to handle on its own. The same army consisting of Tyrants, Carnifexes and Warriors will arrive all at the same time. Could that be a form of synergy? That's really a case of divide and conquer. In the scope of 40k, that army can easily arrive on it's own in one big wave, however, lets say that for some reason, Gargoyles had to come in waves from reserve. But you could buy a gargoyle leader or something that could allow them all to show up at the same time. That would be Synergy.



In that light, the OP could be an example of synergy. By posing similar threads, each capable on their own and with similar strength, the opponent is unable to take out the biggest threat and accept the survival of the others; they all a big threat.That's just basic army building. It's a force multiplier basically, more units = more targets. It's not a specific combination that helps. In fact, I would argue that you could take lots of blood claws/sky claws and do that BETTER, because the blood claws can't be ignored safely, and the terminators are still just as tough.



To be clear though, I normally only use synergy in the same examples as provided by Arkanis, but perhaps these situations could be more subtle forms of synergy. Instead of 5 + 5 = 12, this might be 5 + 5 = 10.1 :)
Even if that latter point is true, it's so minuscule that it might as well not exist. There are plenty of other words that accurately describe how two effect units support each other in combat.

Semantics are important, Synergy has a very specific definition and the OP does not meet it.

imperial90
21-11-2009, 21:12
Yay semantic arguements, I love these, espeicially when one party refuses to acknowledge the proper definition of a word, semantics ARE important, espeicially if the entire arguement revolves around what a word means. In the game Warmachine the Protectorate of Menoth is known as the Synergy faction, when properly supported the protectorate army is damn near unstoppable, its support units must be dealt with before you can deal with the main force, the choir is useless on its own almost, but turns jacks into untouchable juggernoughts, the vassels do similar things. Each individual part of the protectorate army is for the most part, worst then the equivelent units of other factions, when the machine is working, each part of the army supporting every other part, making them capable of doing far more together then they ever could individually, that is synergy, the sum is greater then its parts. If a unit does its job equally well regardless of other inputs, or a force multipler affect is simply used, that is NOT synergy, like someone else pointed out, synergy is when 5+5=15, not when 5+5=10, which is a force multiplyer affect

Badger[Fr]
21-11-2009, 23:17
Yes, but I mean that's still four times the effectiveness with four rhinos.
Hardly. A single, unsupported Rhino has precisely zero effectiveness (epsilon at best, considering how utterly useless it is). But, as far as I know, four multiplied by zero is still equal to zero. Then how does it come mechanized SM builds work?

Anyway, how do you measure effectiveness in the first place? There are no power levels in 40k.

Though, force multipliers do have obvious benefits that far outweight the sum of the army's parts. As an exemple, mechanized IG armies rely on armour saturation, so as to render anti-infantry weapons useless and overload the opponent's anti-vehicle weaponry. Would the IG player field a couple of Infantry squads instead of, say, a Leman Russ, his army as a whole would be weakened, even if said Infantry squads are rather effective on their own.

That's the whole point of good list building. Throwing cost-efficient units at random simply doesn't work.

Arakanis
21-11-2009, 23:39
;4148263']Hardly. A single, unsupported Rhino has precisely zero effectiveness (epsilon at best, considering how utterly useless it is). But, as far as I know, four multiplied by zero is still equal to zero. Then how does it come mechanized SM builds work? ...this statement alone shows that you know nothing about this game. A single rhino actually CAN be highly useful, depending on what it carries, and how you use it, who you are facing, etc, etc. Saying that it's worthless all the time, is completely ridiculous and simply highlights that you really have nothing accurate to say.


;4148263']
Though, force multipliers do have obvious benefits that far outweight the sum of the army's parts. As an exemple, mechanized IG armies rely on armour saturation, so as to render anti-infantry weapons useless and overload the opponent's anti-vehicle weaponry. Would the IG player field a couple of Infantry squads instead of, say, a Leman Russ, his army as a whole would be weakened, even if said Infantry squads are rather effective on their own.
Yes, and Ork armies can rely on having more wounds than the enemy has shots. That's still a 1-to-1 ratio increase. 30 boyz are worth exactly as much as 30 boyz. 60 boyz are twice as good as 30 boyz.
1 leman russ is worth exactly as much as 1 leman russ, 3 leman russ (assuming they're not in a squadron, which actually weakens them) is equal to three times as much as 1 leman russ.

You're not talking about a whole greater than the sum, you're talking about the sum. A very, very large sum. But the sum of the parts, none-the-less.

As people have mentioned on this thread before, it seems like most just flat out do not get semantics. Sigh.

Badger[Fr]
22-11-2009, 09:19
...this statement alone shows that you know nothing about this game. A single rhino actually CAN be highly useful, depending on what it carries, and how you use it, who you are facing, etc, etc. Saying that it's worthless all the time, is completely ridiculous and simply highlights that you really have nothing accurate to say.
You are assuming said Rhino won't be destroyed on turn one, being the priority target of most anti-vehicle weapons on the board. Considering how few armies field a single, low Av transport as their only vehicle, regardless of the game's edition, I think I am the one who can reasonably question your knowledge of 40k.


1 leman russ is worth exactly as much as 1 leman russ, 3 leman russ (assuming they're not in a squadron, which actually weakens them) is equal to three times as much as 1 leman russ.
Of course they're not, because few opponents can deal with 3 long-range Av14 vehicles at a time, whereas a single Leman Russ is an easily manageable threat (be it through Los denial or the use of anti-vehicle weapons) that will probably die before achieving anything useful.



You're not talking about a whole greater than the sum, you're talking about the sum. A very, very large sum. But the sum of the parts, none-the-less.
But you failed to take the opponent's army into account, and that's where force multipliers start to matter. If I field nothing but vehicles, I denied my opponent the use of his anti-infantry weapons. I neutralized a significant part of his army without firing a single shot. A force multiplier isn't a linear effect, but tends to increase the effectiveness of one's army exponentially.


You're not talking about a whole greater than the sum, you're talking about the sum. A very, very large sum. But the sum of the parts, none-the-less.
Then please, tell me what is the point of armour saturation, if swapping two units of roughly equivalent effectiveness has no effect whatsoever on the army as a whole?

Arakanis
22-11-2009, 09:34
;4149050']You are assuming said Rhino won't be destroyed on turn one, being the priority target of most anti-vehicle weapons on the board. Considering how few armies field a single, low Av transport as their only vehicle, regardless of the game's edition, I think I am the one who can reasonably question your knowledge of 40k.
Who said anything about it being the only vehicle? All I said was that there's nothing wrong with using a single Rhino. You seem to think that a single Rhino will always be killed immediately on turn one 100% of the time. You have rated a single Rhino as zero effectiveness. I submit, that is flat out wrong. There are many ways that a single Rhino can be highly effective. (All it has to do is get a squad to an advantageous point to complete it's mission)


;4149050']
Of course they're not, because few opponents can deal with 3 long-range Av14 vehicles at a time, whereas a single Leman Russ is an easily manageable threat (be it through Los denial or the use of anti-vehicle weapons) that will probably die before achieving anything useful.
...actually, it takes exactly three times as long to kill three Leman Russes as it takes to kill one. Statistically, what I said is 100% accurate. Three Leman Russes deal out as much damage as three times One Leman Russ. Thus, no synergy. (the Whole is equal to the sum of the parts in this case)


;4149050']
But you failed to take the opponent's army into account, and that's where force multipliers start to matter. If I field nothing but vehicles, I denied my opponent the use of his anti-infantry weapons. I neutralized a significant part of his army without firing a single shot. A force multiplier isn't a linear effect, but tends to increase the effectiveness of one's army exponentially. You're describing advantageous conditions, which is a type of force multiplier, however, it has NOTHING to do with units working together to increase effectiveness beyond the sum of the parts. For example, using lots of Tanks seems like a good idea. Until you face Dark Eldar and their ungodly number of Dark Lances. They you realize that you were an idiot and you wasted all your points on AV12 armour that cost you as much as AV14. Whoops. That's all circumstantial and it has nothing to do with Synergy.


;4149050']
Then please, tell me what is the point of armour saturation, if swapping two units of roughly equivalent effectiveness has no effect whatsoever on the army as a whole? I'm not sure I get this section. The point of armour saturation is that 5+5+5 is more 5 and thus better. Synergy is when 5+5+5 = 20 and thus is better than 5+5+5. A good strategy in 40k is "MOAR" and a lot of people like to think that they're being clever, and it IS strategic. But in reality, Synergy is almost always a tactical consideration. (If I use this unit with this unit in this situation, I gain an advantage beyond the mere strength of the units.) "MOAR" says, well, if I just have as many of these awesome units my whole ARMY will be awesome. And that's true, usually. It's just not Synergy.

Anyways, there's a lot of "not understand the definition" here. I suggest anyone who posts goes and looks up "Force Multiplier" and "Synergy" and think about how those terms apply to 40k before posting and claiming I'm wrong.

Illiterate Scribe
22-11-2009, 10:20
Three Leman Russes deal out as much damage as three times One Leman Russ. Thus, no synergy. (the Whole is equal to the sum of the parts in this case)
...
I'm not sure I get this section. The point of armour saturation is that 5+5+5 is more 5 and thus better. Synergy is when 5+5+5 = 20 and thus is better than 5+5+5. A good strategy in 40k is "MOAR" and a lot of people like to think that they're being clever, and it IS strategic. But in reality, Synergy is almost always a tactical consideration. (If I use this unit with this unit in this situation, I gain an advantage beyond the mere strength of the units.) "MOAR" says, well, if I just have as many of these awesome units my whole ARMY will be awesome. And that's true, usually. It's just not Synergy.


Read what Badger said about LOS denial.

Some units have 'super guns' - Leman Russ Executioners, fire prisms, that sort of thing. They'll destroy whatever they shoot at (probably), and so the obvious solution is to keep out of sight of them, or deny them opportunities to shoot at you. If that's the case, your super gun is worthless, since it can't get a shot off at anything. It has an arbitrary value of '0' (maybe a bit more, since it's forcing your opponent to hide his/her troops, but not much).

This will be a factor in many games - as such, it can be taken as a fairly innate feature of super gun units.

What happens if you take two super gun units? If we're simply adding 'moar' guns, then both would have problems getting a shot off. By working together, however, you can make sure that the enemy's always going to be in LOS of at least one supergun, leading to a sort of ersatz enfilading fire, since they can't hide from both. You wouldn't get that with just one supergun (which they could hide from), so the whole (you fire the supergun, melting the unit) is greater than the sum of its parts (two superguns that can't fire, either due to cover or los issues).

Badger[Fr]
22-11-2009, 10:36
But in reality, Synergy is almost always a tactical consideration. (If I use this unit with this unit in this situation, I gain an advantage beyond the mere strength of the units).
Indeed, but does it mean that said synergy should necessarily depend on special rules which directly increase one's units effectiveness? If I field two Leman Russes and deploy them so that they provide interlocking fire lanes (in order to deny the opponent a cover save) and mutually protect their vulnerable flanks, the overall effectiveness of my two tanks far outweights that of two single, unsupported vehicles. The same goes for two Basilisks deployed so that they cover each other's blind spots. Synergies can be achieved through tactical means or proper list building, and do not necessarily have to be as obvious as, say, Eldar psychic powers or IG orders.

Back on topic, Thunderwolves and Lone Wolves do have synergy with Wolf Guard Terminators. Terminators are slow and vulnerable to low AP weapons. By destroying or tying up the most obvious threats and drawing fire away from your Wolf Guards, these two units ensure that the bulk of your army will reach the enemy lines unscathed. While both Lone Wolves and Thunderwolves are solid units on their own, mere destruction for its own sake will hardly win a game.

Arakanis
23-11-2009, 00:02
;4149138']Indeed, but does it mean that said synergy should necessarily depend on special rules which directly increase one's units effectiveness? If I field two Leman Russes and deploy them so that they provide interlocking fire lanes (in order to deny the opponent a cover save) and mutually protect their vulnerable flanks, the overall effectiveness of my two tanks far outweights that of two single, unsupported vehicles. The same goes for two Basilisks deployed so that they cover each other's blind spots. Synergies can be achieved through tactical means or proper list building, and do not necessarily have to be as obvious as, say, Eldar psychic powers or IG orders. If you're using two units in concert, you're playing a strategy game. I mean, come on now. You can use ANY unit with ANY other unit, to flank an enemy or create a crossfire. That's still not Synergy. It's a good move, and a sound tactical decision though. Great when you can pull it off.


;4149138']
Back on topic, Thunderwolves and Lone Wolves do have synergy with Wolf Guard Terminators. Terminators are slow and vulnerable to low AP weapons. By destroying or tying up the most obvious threats and drawing fire away from your Wolf Guards, these two units ensure that the bulk of your army will reach the enemy lines unscathed. While both Lone Wolves and Thunderwolves are solid units on their own, mere destruction for its own sake will hardly win a game. Skyclaws, Blood Claws, Swiftclaws, Long Fangs, or really any unit with long range fire power or speed could do the same. There is no special relationship between TWC or TDA WG. Sorry.

brain_dead_1st
23-11-2009, 00:24
STOP ARGUING SEMANTICS

What we havent even heard anyone say a tactic that uses both units well let alone rule combos or ideas on how they work well together...

Lets move off what is synergy because we all know it is
5 + 5 = 15

Give me an example of how they are synergy and how they work well together please

Arakanis
23-11-2009, 00:52
STOP ARGUING SEMANTICS

Haha. No. :P

Semantics are important. If you use a word, you'd better understand what that word means, especially if you're willing to fight to the death to defend your point.

All language and communication revolves around common agreed upon meanings and definitions. If you fail to understand certain words and use them incorrectly to support your flawed arguments, people who know better will correct you.

blameless misused the word Synergy, and he is arguing that it does not mean what it means. So myself and a couple others have simply decided to correct him.

blameless
23-11-2009, 01:15
Skyclaws, Blood Claws, Swiftclaws, Long Fangs, or really any unit with long range fire power or speed could do the same. There is no special relationship between TWC or TDA WG. Sorry.

This is where I keep coming back to this... you are wrong.

There is a special relationship between them as I have previously stated...

Yes Lone wolves work well as a unit regardless of the army combination... BUT they work ESPECIALLY well, with the 2+ group because of their toughness, the army's model count. Their ability to draw disproportionate amounts of firepower from the rest of your army is ESPECIALLY important/significant in an all terminator army. This is not force multiplication but SYNERGY.

Here are some of your words to see if this fits the bill for LW and Terminators

Synergy = Two units that together are better than they would be alone or with any other unit.

Yerp...


Synergy in 40,000 is when you have two or more units who have abilities or wargear that without another unit to use it on, is either not useful at all or significantly LESS useful.

Yerp again...

Lets look at this from YOUR description. What you are arguing is that synergy exists in a combined Death wing/Raven wing force because of the scout/homing beacons on the RW bikes yes?

Here is the thing... DW don't actually NEED the homing beacons to deep strike... My argument based on your reasoning is that they are MORE powerful/useful/effective on the battle field because of the combined wargear special rules. EXACTLY the same as LW and "Logan Wing"


Same deal for Deathwing without Ravenwing, you can teleport, but it's not as safe because there are no homers on the field.


Without raven wing...
"Death wing" terminators may die more/be less accurate during deep strike.


With lone wolves...
"Logan wing" terminators may die more/be less effective because of volume of fire.

Just because one is a piece of wargear to make it work so marvelously and one is a...


"dynamic state in which combined action is favored over the sum of individual component actions."
Does not mean there is no synergy!

Same for Thunder Wolves in that their abilities and special rules are AMPLIFIED when with "Logan wing" over and above their inclusion in differing army types.

At the end of the day you are arguing that unless their is EXACT wargear DESIGNED by GW to compliment another unit there is no synergy. Incorrect.

still loosing on the poll :D

Illiterate Scribe
23-11-2009, 01:34
So what is it about this:


If you're using two units in concert, you're playing a strategy game. I mean, come on now. You can use ANY unit with ANY other unit, to flank an enemy or create a crossfire. That's still not Synergy. It's a good move, and a sound tactical decision though. Great when you can pull it off.

that does not fall under your definition earlier:


Wikipedia says this about Synergy: "Simply defined, it means that the whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts." It goes on to say that synergy can be described as "A dynamic state in which combined action is favored over the sum of individual component actions."

?

blameless
23-11-2009, 01:50
blameless misused the word Synergy, and he is arguing that it does not mean what it means. So myself and a couple others have simply decided to correct him.

Nope... :) read above...

Myself and a couple of others have simply decided to correct you :D

Maybe the poll should give you an indication of the fact you are limiting synergy to SPECIFIC WARGEAR.

Arakanis
23-11-2009, 01:57
This is where I keep coming back to this... you are wrong.
So you keep saying... :rolleyes:



There is a special relationship between them as I have previously stated...
No there isn't. You keep stating it, and you keep being wrong. They're both useful units, but it's still a 5+5=10 thing.



Yes Lone wolves work well as a unit regardless of the army combination... BUT they work ESPECIALLY well, with the 2+ group because of their toughness, the army's model count. Their ability to draw disproportionate amounts of firepower from the rest of your army is ESPECIALLY important/significant in an all terminator army. This is not force multiplication but SYNERGY. ...you really just do not understand Synergy at all. Lone Wolves have the same value any Space Wolf build. Also, your argument is flawed anyways, people IGNORE the Lone Wolf as much as they can, as it awards a kill point if left alive. It doesn't draw fire at all.




Lets look at this from YOUR description. What you are arguing is that synergy exists in a combined Death wing/Raven wing force because of the scout/homing beacons on the RW bikes yes? Because by themselves Ravenwing and Deathwing are pretty good, but combined they are superior to any combination of Deathwing/Anything else Ravenwing/Anything else. Only by that specifc combination can they be that effective, and thus it is Synergistic as together they are greater than the sum of their parts.



Here is the thing... DW don't actually NEED the homing beacons to deep strike... My argument based on your reasoning is that they are MORE powerful/useful/effective on the battle field because of the combined wargear special rules. EXACTLY the same as LW and "Logan Wing"
Of course they don't NEED homing beacons, but it makes them much better than they could be WITHOUT homing beacons. Ravenwing are worth more as a unit if Deathwing are in the army, and Deathwing are worth more as a unit if Ravenwing are in the army. The same cannot be said of TWC and WG



"Death wing" terminators may die more/be less accurate during deep strike. Which we mitigate with Ravenwing teleporter homers.



"Logan wing" terminators may die more/be less effective because of volume of fire. Which can be mitigated with ANY OTHER UNIT AT ALL WHATSOEVER. Lone Wolves/Thunderwolves are just TWO units in the ENTIRE CODEX than can do this job.



Same for Thunder Wolves in that their abilities and special rules are AMPLIFIED when with "Logan wing" over and above their inclusion in differing army types. No they are not. They are EXACTLY the same. They have the same stats, the same rules, the same wargear and abilities no matter how the rest of the army is composed.



still loosing on the poll :D
...again. Your poll only proves that people don't understand what Synergy is.

In closing.

THERE. IS. NO. SYNERGY. BETWEEN. THUNDERWOLVES. LONE WOLVES. OR. WOLF GUARD TERMINATORS. NONE. AT ALL.

(Again, please look up the definition of Synergy before telling me how awesome your combination of TWC and WG are.)

Thank you.

Fiercediety
23-11-2009, 01:58
Does anyone know how a good Logan wing W/ TWC army would be set up? Theres also Iron Priests on TW.

Arakanis
23-11-2009, 02:17
Myself and a couple of others have simply decided to correct you :D
...thus far you've done a poor job of it sir, generally when you correct someone you want to be right. ;)



Maybe the poll should give you an indication of the fact you are limiting synergy to SPECIFIC WARGEAR.
I'm not limiting synergy at all. I'm saying that for a combination to be Synergistic, it needs to be greater than the sum of the parts.

You keep saying that having multiple units is synergistic for various reasons, but you're failing to understand that the advantages of multiple units, is that larger value in our arbitrary system. For example, someone brought up two units creating a crossfire to defeat another unit. I'll quote the example.


;4149138']Indeed, but does it mean that said synergy should necessarily depend on special rules which directly increase one's units effectiveness? If I field two Leman Russes and deploy them so that they provide interlocking fire lanes (in order to deny the opponent a cover save) and mutually protect their vulnerable flanks, the overall effectiveness of my two tanks far outweights that of two single, unsupported vehicles. The same goes for two Basilisks deployed so that they cover each other's blind spots. Synergies can be achieved through tactical means or proper list building, and do not necessarily have to be as obvious as, say, Eldar psychic powers or IG orders.

Here's the thing. In the case of two units versus two units, there is no greater advantage. He still has trouble with LOS and cover, it is only when two units combine their efforts against a single unit that they seem to become better. This is akin to two values of 5 applied seperately to two other targets versus two values of 5 COMBINED to a single target. I think the combined strength would make itself clear there. Having two units in the army that are worth 5, is great. It doesn't add up to 10 until you use those two 5s together. That's STILL just 10 though. There is no Synergy there.

blameless
23-11-2009, 02:23
No there isn't. You keep stating it, and you keep being wrong. They're both useful units, but it's still a 5+5=10 thing.

This is your opinion and your arguments are falling apart :)


you really just do not understand Synergy at all. Lone Wolves have the same value any Space Wolf build. Also, your argument is flawed anyways, people IGNORE the Lone Wolf as much as they can, as it awards a kill point if left alive. It doesn't draw fire at all.

your point 1- nope... they dont have the same value. they have more as I have clearly pointed out (unlike your just telling everyone that they dont :eyebrows:)
your point 2- nope again... Thats an interesting "theory" (maybe you could look that word up on Wikipedia) but not my experience.
The opponents I face all pump large amounts of fire power into my lone wolves. You really are falling apart with these broad sweeping generalizations with no facts to support.


Because by themselves Ravenwing and Deathwing are pretty good, but combined they are superior to any combination of Deathwing/Anything else Ravenwing/Anything else. Only by that specifc combination can they be that effective, and thus it is Synergistic as together they are greater than the sum of their parts.

Also for LW and Terminators... specifically better together (that has a nice ring about it :D)
like I said you are looking at it purely from a wargear perspective and missing the bigger picture entirely.


Of course they don't NEED homing beacons, but it makes them much better than they could be WITHOUT homing beacons. Ravenwing are worth more as a unit if Deathwing are in the army, and Deathwing are worth more as a unit if Ravenwing are in the army. The same cannot be said of TWC and WG

Yes it can, and like i said... missing the big picture :eyebrows:

Netfreakk
23-11-2009, 04:03
I think you're missing the point Blameless.


Here's an example:
I'll use eldar to make it more apparent.

Farseers are good no?
Pathfinders are decent no?

If I play a farseer with pathfinders and the farseer only has mind war there's no synergy with the pathfinders. If I play the farseer with guide or doom or both, then he has synergy with the pathfinders.

The ability from the Farseer is what is making them have synergy.

What you will probably say is that they don't have synergy anyway since they don't work together in your overall strategy. Well, that's tactics and not a matter of synergy between units.

Arakanis
23-11-2009, 04:13
This is your opinion and your arguments are falling apart :)
If it's just my opinion they why can't you counter it with anything more than grandly claiming that you're right without any real support? You have done nothing more than say that Thunderwolves are good and Wolf Guard are good and when put together they're both good. No one is arguing against that point, but when you say it's Synergy, you're just factually wrong.

As for my arguments falling apart, that's YOUR (rather uninformed) opinion.

I'm not going to push this any further. It at this point it's become clear, that everyone who knows what they're talking about and are getting this is on my side, and the people who haven't quite figured it out yet are backing you.

You've shown yourself to be remarkably resilient to definitions, semantics and reasoning, so I doubt you're going to come to your senses any time soon, and I think I've written enough so far that anyone who hasn't already read this will understand the truth of what I'm saying.

So with that said, I'm going to retire from this debate and let anyone who wants to read this decide whether the accepted definition of the word Synergy is correct, or if the dictionary is wrong and blameless is right.

CthulhuDalek
23-11-2009, 04:20
Hmm, but Netfreakk, he wasn't arguing that they would be "synergistic" in the first place.

I think the point is that a lone wolf and TWC both make up for the *shortcomings* of wolfguard termies. Just because other units can be used for greater effect doesn't mean that a particular combo does not result in them being better than on their own.

Using the wolfpriest example... a wolfpriest has synergy with an assault unit it joins, correct? Well Ulrik ALSO has synergy with that unit. But depending on how that unit is armed will determine whether or not it adds up to "15."

Arakanis
23-11-2009, 04:51
Hmm, but Netfreakk, he wasn't arguing that they would be "synergistic" in the first place.
Except it's titled: "Re: Do Thunderwolves and Lonewolves have synergy with "Logan wing"?"




Using the wolfpriest example... a wolfpriest has synergy with an assault unit it joins, correct? Well Ulrik ALSO has synergy with that unit. But depending on how that unit is armed will determine whether or not it adds up to "15."

I believe that would be Synergistic. Yes.

CthulhuDalek
23-11-2009, 04:52
Except it's titled: "Re: Do Thunderwolves and Lonewolves have synergy with "Logan wing"?"


I was referring to the Farseer and Pathfinder example.

Netfreakk
23-11-2009, 05:33
Mine was just an example as it seemed that Blameless was not comprehending what was being stated. You're example also works as well. The thunder Cav + WG does not work in the sense of the "traditional" use of the word.

CthulhuDalek
23-11-2009, 06:11
Just because they don't have special rules that does not affect directly whether or not they "complement" each other, does not mean they are not synergistic.

Thunderwolf cavalry can engage units that a terminator unit cannot reach. This maximizes the terminators' ability to use ranged weapons with little hindrance, allows them to close in faster, and thus allows them a greater chance to get into combat. A similar effect can be achieved with a drop pod and landraider of course. The drop pod and land raider are definitely "traditional" uses, however.

Now consider; if you want to use a unit of terminators at ten men, or 8 with a character(for whatever reason), or cannot afford a landraider crusader, or a different unit is using one -- using thunderwolf cavalry to tie up enemy units to allow you to engage becomes synergistic. Thunderwolves are not as synergistic with greyhunters, because grey hunters can already for the most part, take effective transport, without thunderwolves. In that case, thunderwolves are, as has been stated previously in the thred "5+5=10."

In my terminator and TWC example, the terminators would not be able to engage effectively without the thunderwolves. Likewise, the threat of terminators being on the table, with their effective shooting, close combat abilities, and resilience, forces the enemy to prioritize. This is saturation of targets, but in particular this works better with termies and TWC.

Also, the Lone Wolf might be even more effective to an extent. WG and LW are both threats the enemy must consider. By their very nature terminators will be more difficult to extract, so if the enemy puts effort into taking them out, they're wasting effort on a single killpoint, whereas wasting effort on killing the lonewolf can be just as futile, which means the lone wolf will be more likely to engage. A lonewolf and grey hunters do not have the same synergy because it is easier to kill off the grey hunters or pop their rhino.

blameless
23-11-2009, 06:35
If it's just my opinion they why can't you counter it with anything more than grandly claiming that you're right without any real support? You have done nothing more than say that Thunderwolves are good and Wolf Guard are good and when put together they're both good. No one is arguing against that point, but when you say it's Synergy, you're just factually wrong.

Funny I thought I was the one with actual backup to my arguments here :p What I am not saying is the following...
-Unit A is good
-Unit B is good
-Put them together=good This is what you are saying I am saying

What I have said again and again and spelled out how it works (which you obviously keep missing) is the following...
-Unit A is good
-Unit B is good
-Put them together and you get... wait for it folks :D Synergy =

Two units that together are better than they would be alone or with any other unit.

Thats right Arakanis... YOU said it :p


I'm not limiting synergy at all. I'm saying that for a combination to be Synergistic, it needs to be greater than the sum of the parts.

It is...
This is what you keep ignoring/missing.


You keep saying that having multiple units is synergistic for various reasons, but you're failing to understand that the advantages of multiple units, is that larger value in our arbitrary system. For example, someone brought up two units creating a crossfire to defeat another unit. I'll quote the example.

Totally agree with you about the LOS issue...
That example is not connected to LW and "logan wing".


Mine was just an example as it seemed that Blameless was not comprehending what was being stated. You're example also works as well. The thunder Cav + WG does not work in the sense of the "traditional" use of the word.

I am comprehending very well thank you :D

What I comprehend is that you also restrict the word synergy purely to ability or wargear rather than a unit helping another unit more than other choices available...
This is your limited view of synergy

I am just going to let the poll speak for itself.
You can insult the wider community all you like and rant and rave about how you are right and the world is wrong but in the end all you are doing is insulting people and having a pity party in the corner.

Squallish
23-11-2009, 07:18
They are synergistic:

LW & TWC provide to WGT:
- higher unit count, offering protection in numbers
- ability to engage multiple threats simultaneously
- foot speed (TWC)
- pinning units to allow them to catch up

WGT provide to LW/TWC:
- fire support
- follow-up assault
- the ability to win as objective grabbers
- cover saves until they engage


---


Two units that together are better than they would be alone or with any other unit.

The underlined portion is not needed to satisfy the definition of synergy. They only need to make each other better than they would be alone. Sadly this applies to almost any combination of units in 40k, so this is a moot argument.


The interaction of two or more agents or forces so that their combined effect is greater than the sum of their individual effects.

Notice: greater not greatest.

Even if 5+5=11 in this case, it's still synergy.

Netfreakk
23-11-2009, 18:58
I am comprehending very well thank you :D

What I comprehend is that you also restrict the word synergy purely to ability or wargear rather than a unit helping another unit more than other choices available...
This is your limited view of synergy

I am just going to let the poll speak for itself.
You can insult the wider community all you like and rant and rave about how you are right and the world is wrong but in the end all you are doing is insulting people and having a pity party in the corner.

My comments are not trying to instigate nor be insulting, don't get so worked up over it. ;) Though I don't know how you're being productive with your witty remarks. :rolleyes:

That is why I quoted, "traditional". As the word has multiple connotations as stated like 1-2 pages ago.

As I already said, I agree that Thunder wolves + wolf guard work in great harmony.

Thornz
23-11-2009, 19:33
After reading this thread, I voted YES for synergy. Blameless has a good point that some others seem to be interpreting poorly and subjectivly ... and then "vomiting" all over this thread destroying amy meaningful descussion on the actual matter.

Yes there is synergy between Lonewolves and Loganwing ...

Nakor
23-11-2009, 21:50
all this talk of synergy makes me crave powerthirst.

i voted yes
they clearly work well together, winning forever at running, arson, sports, irony and weddings and art.

Badger[Fr]
23-11-2009, 22:28
If you're using two units in concert, you're playing a strategy game. I mean, come on now. You can use ANY unit with ANY other unit, to flank an enemy or create a crossfire. That's still not Synergy.
By your very own definition, it is.


Skyclaws, Blood Claws, Swiftclaws, Long Fangs, or really any unit with long range fire power or speed could do the same. There is no special relationship between TWC or TDA WG. Sorry.
Where did I ever mentioned a "special" relationship? A couple of Thunderwolves in an otherwise Terminator-heavy army does provide additional benefits beyond their sheer combat effectiveness. That does not necessarily mean no other SW unit can fill a more or less similar role.

09Project
23-11-2009, 23:08
This does look like fun.

Anyway, for synergy surely on some level you have to have something unexpected happen. I personally wouldn't use the term when looking at 40k army builds as to be honest, I can't see that unexpected thing happening in any major way.

So to answer the question..

"Do Thunderwolves and Lonewolves have synergy with "Logan wing"?"

No. They are merely effective as can be worked out by what they are. It is effective for being the sum of the parts involved, there is nothing special or unexpected that turns up. So no synergy.

Toe Cutter
24-11-2009, 00:49
Arg. I think I hate this thread. Obviously a normal balanced person would just move on but I'm bored enough not to have anything better to do.

Mutually supportive vs synergistic appears to be something of a stumbling block here.

And just to clarify, I'm coming to hate both sides of this argument equally.

Perhaps before we jump around attempting to determine whether certain units do or do not have synergy it would be useful to determine the perceived weaknesses and strengths of the units in question?

First define the parameters of the problem and only then can we posit possible solutions to the problem.

A very basic example of synergy that doesn't require special rules to work.

A rhino can move 12". A unit of marines (with exceptions obviously - damn warseer pedantry) can embark into the rhino.

By itself the rhino poses very little offensive threat.

By themselves, an average unit of marines can move 6" and shoot or can move 6" and then assault a further 6"

When you combine the two units, the marines can move 12", jump out and shoot (thus doubling their movement) or move 6" and shoot in their rhino that renders them immune to antipersonnel weapons.

Synnergy.

Damn you all. Good night.

blameless
24-11-2009, 01:45
Anyway, for synergy surely on some level you have to have something unexpected happen. I personally wouldn't use the term when looking at 40k army builds as to be honest, I can't see that unexpected thing happening in any major way.

I am really struggling to understand any point you are making here (if there was any point intended?) :confused:


So to answer the question..
Do Thunderwolves and Lonewolves have synergy with "Logan wing"? No. They are merely effective as can be worked out by what they are. It is effective for being the sum of the parts involved, there is nothing special or unexpected that turns up. So no synergy.

Have you even read this thread through???

They are effective for what they are yes (as has been said again and again) but the point is they are MORE effective together than other combination's of units.

You could call it...
"A dynamic state in which combined action is favored over the sum of individual component actions." Thanks 'A'

OR...
"working really well together above and beyond other combination's available"

OR...
"significantly more useful together"

OR...
"Synergy"

:D

Sir_Turalyon
24-11-2009, 02:34
Another poll made to argue opinion you had before even starting it? Sigh.

No, there is not much synergy here. Thunderwolves and Lone wolves are good units that work well combined with other good units, be it Terminators, power armoured Wolf Guard, Sky/Swift Claws, even Grey Knights, with no special relation with Pupwing. If anything I would say Thundewolves shouldn't be taken with Pupwing at all - both are expansive tough hard hitting units, they both would benefit more from something cheap to draw fire from them more then from something working in almost the same way. In this matchup it's termies that draw fire from wolves :eyebrows: .

To translate meaning of word synergy to even simpler form, in hope it might be finaly understood, to game terms, it means geting good combination from elements that individualy suck (think ravenwing), or game breaker combination from elements that individualy are only good (think lash and vindicator). In this case we have good effects from already good units, nothing special. Terminators are good unit, army made from Terminators alone is difficult to play due to flexibility, adding non-Terminator unitsfixes that not because of specific synergy with Termianators, but by adding more variety.

SatireSphere
24-11-2009, 03:21
I don't know if they have "synergy" by the classical definition. But they do work well together as they both want to be up in a unit's face. Terminators act as an anvil, the shores upon which the waves break and the thunderwolves are the hammer that smashes (and sweeping advances!) the broken foe.

Lone Wolves are huge fire magnets and they have terminator armor usually, so they make sense. Not sure if that's "synergy" though.

spaint2k
24-11-2009, 06:24
I don't know if they have "synergy" by the classical definition.

Not picking on you SatireSphere since you didn't say otherwise, but this wording is kinda the point. It's not a question of "classical" definition versus "some other" definition. The definition is the definition, BY DEFINITION.

There is no other definition of synergy. You can't go round saying "Oh, well what *I* mean by synergy is something else altogether" or "Ah, well that might be the 'classical' definition of synergy, but my friends and I have always taken it to mean BLABLABLA..."

What this poll has shown is that nearly 50% of the people who bothered to vote on it have decided to utterly disregard the definition of a word in favor of something else altogether that stems from their own misconception of what the word means.

It's a great symbol of the arrogance of our generation that people can flat out sit there and say "My definition is MORE valid than the dictionary." They are probably the same people who defend people's right to illiteracy and get pissed off at people who complain about the enormous amount of spelling errors in, e.g., Dark Heresy rulebooks. They are probably the same people who confuse e.g. and i.e. and defend their misuse by babbling about accepted usage.

If Blameless meant to say "Do Thunderwolves and Lone Wolves work well with Logan Wing" then he should man up and say it, especially when he had the nerve to post a poll choice that says "What does synergy mean?" when he clearly wasn't all that well-up on the definition himself.

09Project
24-11-2009, 19:41
I am really struggling to understand any point you are making here (if there was any point intended?) :confused:



That doesn't surprise me, it seems you want it to be some great thing you have found, but it isn't.

Your thread basically says, Thunderwolves and Lonewolves work well with Logan Wing, which they do, but they don't make the units by themselves any better. The sum is still the total of its parts, there is no extra to it. Sorry but it sounds like you tried to be clever and you found a new word in the dictionary.

I like BBQ sauce with my steak, doesn't make it synergy.

Squallish
24-11-2009, 19:55
I like BBQ sauce with my steak, doesn't make it synergy.

But that IS synergy. Steak is good. BBQ sauce is good. Steak + BBQ sauce = VERY good.. better than either one alone.

Badger[Fr]
24-11-2009, 22:04
What this poll has shown is that nearly 50% of the people who bothered to vote on it have decided to utterly disregard the definition of a word in favor of something else altogether that stems from their own misconception of what the word means.
Or maybe it shows that a couple of die-hard trolls have utterly disregarded the sacrosanct definition they claim to defend in favour of an inaccurate, gamey interpretation, a widespread use of CAPS LOCK, and thinly veiled ad hominem arguments.

Please, tell me how my previous examples do not fall under the definition of a synergy, i.e. "a dynamic state in which combined action is favored over the sum of individual components"? It seems Illiterate Scribe's post has been conveniently ignored. How surprising.


to game terms, it means geting good combination from elements that individualy suck (think ravenwing),
That's not what synergy means. Nowhere does the definition state that the two elements should be unable to work on their own. Mutual dependence and synergy are two different things altogether. Mutually dependant units are synergistic, but the reverse is not true.


Thunderwolves and Lone wolves are good units that work well combined with other good units, be it Terminators, power armoured Wolf Guard, Sky/Swift Claws, even Grey Knights, with no special relation with Pupwing
No special relationship is needed to call a combination of units "synergistic", as long as said combination is superior to the sum of its individual components. The fact that a more effective combination may or may not be be achieved through different means is utterly irrelevant to the definition.


But that IS synergy. Steak is good. BBQ sauce is good. Steak + BBQ sauce = VERY good.. better than either one alone.
Basically, it boils down to: would you eat BBQ sauce as a starter, then have a Steak, or eat both at the same time? Synergy, you said? That's the whole point of cooking! As far as I'm concerned, I'd rather have a delicious cake than raw eggs, milk, and suggar...