Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2017/01/15 10:53:57
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Coming back from 5th edition, what the hell happened? Who thought all of this would be even remotely okay?
Welcome to the Age of Formations.
Oh, did I forget to tell you that Super-heavies are now pretty ok in a normal game? Noone cares about Apocalypse anymore.
GreaterGood? wrote: Thanks for the advice, I gotta ask, what about codex space marines makes them so good? I used to play back in like 3rd and space marines were always considered the worst. Do they have certain army lists or units that are good now?
The space marine codex has changed a lot, and the game around it has changed a lot too.
Maelstrom missions are pretty much standard everywhere now. Having to be able to control any objective on the board at any time pushes list building towards fast units, lots of units, and objective secured units. The space marine gladius exemplifies this perfectly. By taking a ton of tac squads they get free razorbacks/rhinos/drop pods and they all get objective secured. This is an army with 20+ units in it all with objective secured. While space marine vehicles may not be the fastest around they are fast enough that space marines have no problem grabbing objectives with them. Add in that they all get hit and run for free, and it becomes very difficult to tie them up, and keep them from racking up points. Even if space marines had bad killing power they would still be very good at winning the game through points.
Then you look at their firepower and they are well situated to deal with every kind of opponent. Wraithknights act as a solid wall for low tier armies. if your army cannot kill a wraithknight then it is going to have a really bad time. Grav weapons are the perfect counter to wraithknights and nearly every space marine unit can and will be taking a grav gun. Riptides, stormsurges, daemon princes, and bloodthirsters. If it is big and scary grav is probably the answer. Then in the off chance you face off against low armoured mob armies you're ready with your 40+bolters and 10+heavy bolters.
Then you have points left over to add your own customizations. Maybe you want the formation that lets you assualt out of deep strike. Maybe you want to take one of the best psyker formations in the game. You have battle brothers access with half the armies in the game so the options are huge and constantly expanding.
To sum up. Space marines are really good at winning on points more than killing things, and nearly every unit comes with the perfect counter to the scariest stuff from other armies. On top of that they have an incredible amount of options.
2017/01/15 14:59:22
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
The Tyranid book is mostly full of junk, if your building for competitive play you're very limited in what you can use, essentially Flyrants are your bread and butter..
That said limited competitive options/reliance on allies is the story for many books. Tyranids CAN field certain lists that compete even in very tough fields of competition.
A good example would be the Russian ETC player Alexander Kondacov's list at this years ETC, He did very well in both the team tournament and singles. He was using I think 4 flyrants, some spores, an allied renegade knight + Astra Militarum Psykana Division.
Convert the guard/knight element as a genestealer cult and walla.
2017/01/15 15:25:23
Subject: Re:Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Reavas wrote: Competitively speaking, Tyranids are possibly the worst army in the game. They have 1 or 2 competitive lists that consist of spamming a single unit *cough* flying hive tyrant *cough* and even then comparatively they cop it hard from real high tier lists like scatter-bike spam and Tau suits with marker-lights. So unless you really, and I mean REALLY like hive tyrants with wings, don't touch Tyranids with a 10 foot pole.
If you like the aesthetic, might I suggest gene-stealer cults? They have really cool lore and aren't half bad on the tabletop, I hear tau in particular have trouble against them if you roll well.
If you want a ranking from best to worst it would sort of go like this -
Low skill required and incredibly powerful lists Tau
Eldar
Necrons
Space Marines (codex abiding chapters)
Tzeench Daemons (other daemons don't count as their units can actually die...)
Imperial Knights
Moderate skill required and incredibly powerful lists Space marines (non-codex abiding such as space wolves and dark angels)
Astra Militarum with lots of tanks
Nurgle Daemons
Incredibly high skill with incredibly powerful results (If you make one mistake with this army you WILL lose the game, if you build your list wrong as well you might as well be playing garbage tier lists)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Slannesh Daemons
Orks Average and possibly competitive (A safer bet than high skill armies but does not have the capacity to be as good) Khorn Daemons/Daemonkin
Chaos Space marines
Grey Knights
Sisters of battle (with new Celestine and maybe some allies)
Skittari
Gene-stealer Cults
Garbage Tier Astra Militarum without tanks
Cult Mechanicus
Thousand sons without Magnus or daemon allies (sorry guys but we know it to be true)
Tyranids <-------
Fixed.
2017/01/15 15:37:35
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Basically every competitive tyranid build is some version of this, with a couple changes here and there. If you want to do tyranids then this is pretty much it for them. Nothing new has come out for tyranids to use since then, and lots of things have come along that make tyranids life even harder.
As an ex-Tyranid player who's models are collecting dust on a shelf that list just makes me depressed. Not just because it's depressing Tyranids are broken down to a monobuild, but also because that monobuild looks really boring to play with or against.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/15 15:37:49
2017/01/15 15:43:36
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
GreaterGood? wrote: My meta will be super competitive if I play at all. So I want to know If tyranids will keep up with tau, eldar, and daemon tournament lists. If they can, are there any good things to get first, and bad things to avoid? If Tyranids can't compete, I'll just pick a different army, so I'm not worried about the fluff or aesthetics. If you had to "rank" the armies in a top to bottom tier level of power, how would it shake out? Who's on top, and who's on bottom? Who has a chance at Tournaments? etc..
Buy 6 Flying hive tyrants or 2-3 flying hive tyrants and genestealer cult. Anything else will be hard going.
2017/01/15 16:09:33
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Basically every competitive tyranid build is some version of this, with a couple changes here and there. If you want to do tyranids then this is pretty much it for them. Nothing new has come out for tyranids to use since then, and lots of things have come along that make tyranids life even harder.
As an ex-Tyranid player who's models are collecting dust on a shelf that list just makes me depressed. Not just because it's depressing Tyranids are broken down to a monobuild, but also because that monobuild looks really boring to play with or against.
I actually think it looks pretty fun. I really like msu armies. Lots of stuff running around, and lots of stuff dying is how I want the game to be. In that vein deepstriking lictors, and spore mines everywhere sounds fun to me. Mawlocs are also pretty cool, and at the time hard countered invisibility. It looks like the kind of build where you can really adapt to what your opponent is doing, and make all the games feel different. Unfortunately I don't think it is even close to competitive now. It used to be an msu king and now compared to the gladius, war convocation, and warp spider spam it looks tame.
2017/01/15 18:02:53
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
That Lictorshame list pre-dates most of the top 7th edition codexes. It was before the current Eldar, Tau, and Space Marines. I think it was just before Necrons were released too. So decurion style formations weren't even a thing yet.
It was a neat meta-breaking list at the time. But its time is long gone.
2017/01/15 18:59:15
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
"To crush your opponents, see their figures removed from the table and to hear the lamentations of TFG." -Zathras
2017/01/15 20:14:43
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Competitive nids means spamming identically equipped flyrants under the current codex (hrmpf, stupid cruddexes). This will make your army easy to counter and possibly boring to play. Who knows what a future codex could bring though?
2017/01/16 00:22:43
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
I used to love tyranids (still do in a sense!) so this sounds like a bit of a bummer. I loved the old codex that let you make your own tyranid variants best Incidentally, you listed Nurgle Daemons as pretty good, is this a new development? (I love my daemons too)
We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come
https://www.etsy.com/uk/shop/BStores
https://www.facebook.com/BLJHogan/
https://www.zinge.co.uk/
2017/01/16 00:48:19
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
2017/01/16 03:51:17
Subject: Re:Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Reavas wrote: Competitively speaking, Tyranids are possibly the worst army in the game. They have 1 or 2 competitive lists that consist of spamming a single unit *cough* flying hive tyrant *cough* and even then comparatively they cop it hard from real high tier lists like scatter-bike spam and Tau suits with marker-lights. So unless you really, and I mean REALLY like hive tyrants with wings, don't touch Tyranids with a 10 foot pole.
If you like the aesthetic, might I suggest gene-stealer cults? They have really cool lore and aren't half bad on the tabletop, I hear tau in particular have trouble against them if you roll well.
If you want a ranking from best to worst it would sort of go like this -
Low skill required and incredibly powerful lists Tau
Eldar
Necrons
Space Marines (codex abiding chapters)
Tzeench Daemons (other daemons don't count as their units can actually die...)
Imperial Knights
Moderate skill required and incredibly powerful lists Space marines (non-codex abiding such as space wolves and dark angels)
Astra Militarum with lots of tanks
Nurgle Daemons
Incredibly high skill with incredibly powerful results (If you make one mistake with this army you WILL lose the game, if you build your list wrong as well you might as well be playing garbage tier lists)
Dark Eldar
Harlequins
Slannesh Daemons
Orks Average and possibly competitive (A safer bet than high skill armies but does not have the capacity to be as good) Khorn Daemons/Daemonkin
Chaos Space marines
Grey Knights
Sisters of battle (with new Celestine and maybe some allies)
Skittari
Gene-stealer Cults
Garbage Tier Astra Militarum without tanks
Cult Mechanicus
Thousand sons without Magnus or daemon allies (sorry guys but we know it to be true)
Tyranids <-------
Fixed.
Eh, I can see it happerning
2017/01/16 04:03:32
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
Well the suggestion was either GW hates nids or no one on the design team likes them, so if GW in general likes nids it means no one on the design team likes them.
I do wonder if nids are just seen as the punching bag army, as in they're SUPPOSED to lose to Space Marines so that's how they're designed.
The more likely explanation is, of course, incompetence.
2017/01/16 07:03:37
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
Well the suggestion was either GW hates nids or no one on the design team likes them, so if GW in general likes nids it means no one on the design team likes them.
I do wonder if nids are just seen as the punching bag army, as in they're SUPPOSED to lose to Space Marines so that's how they're designed.
The more likely explanation is, of course, incompetence.
Honestly, the former explanation would also fall under the latter. You don't go crippling one player's experience just to make another feel better, regardless of 'narrative' justification.
2017/01/16 07:53:25
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
"...OR HAS NO ONE ON THE DESIGN TEAM THAT LIKES THEM."
Miss that part?
On the new Tyranid stuff . . . what of the new stuff was worth anything at all? Everyone who knows anything knows that Codex: Tyranids is really Codex: Twin Dev Flyrant. What are these new things Tyranid players should be interested in?
Do tell, because no one knows but you.
"To crush your opponents, see their figures removed from the table and to hear the lamentations of TFG." -Zathras
2017/01/16 12:25:05
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
"...OR HAS NO ONE ON THE DESIGN TEAM THAT LIKES THEM."
Miss that part?
On the new Tyranid stuff . . . what of the new stuff was worth anything at all? Everyone who knows anything knows that Codex: Tyranids is really Codex: Twin Dev Flyrant. What are these new things Tyranid players should be interested in?
Do tell, because no one knows but you.
OR you SEE where I am commentating on the "GW WANTS THEM TO FADE AWAY" aspect? Not sure why you are so upset. After all you said GW wants to Nids to fade away. As for your "or has no one on the design team that likes them" part is just REINFORCING your debate on why GW wants them "TO FADE AWAY."
You said it, not me. You first said "GW wants Tyranids to fade away" in your first sentence. Then as your proof to this statement you gave to examples as to why GW wants Nids to fade away.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/01/16 12:32:24
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
2017/01/16 13:02:11
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
"...OR HAS NO ONE ON THE DESIGN TEAM THAT LIKES THEM."
Miss that part?
On the new Tyranid stuff . . . what of the new stuff was worth anything at all? Everyone who knows anything knows that Codex: Tyranids is really Codex: Twin Dev Flyrant. What are these new things Tyranid players should be interested in?
Do tell, because no one knows but you.
OR you SEE where I am commentating on the "GW WANTS THEM TO FADE AWAY" aspect? Not sure why you are so upset. After all you said GW wants to Nids to fade away. As for your "or has no one on the design team that likes them" part is just REINFORCING your debate on why GW wants them "TO FADE AWAY."
You said it, not me. You first said "GW wants Tyranids to fade away" in your first sentence. Then as your proof to this statement you gave to examples as to why GW wants Nids to fade away.
Actually, 60mm said...
"it almost seems they want the faction to fade away"
not
"GW wants them to fade away"
I don't know if you're a native English speaker or not but the subtle difference in wording makes a huge difference in meaning. It changes from "I'm stating this as a fact" to "their actions are questionable and could intentionally or otherwise lead to this end result".
I'm not sure about in Canada, but over here if someone said to me "it almost seems like blah blah" in that context I'd likely take it as somewhat sarcastic, like you might tell someone making poor decisions "it almost seems like you're trying to fail".
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/01/16 13:05:57
2017/01/16 14:12:09
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
I only speak English. Thing is, even using the word "Seems" doesn't really change the fact. He has given 2 examples of why he would say that "GW seems to want Tyranids to fade".
I still gave good reasons why GW doesn't "seems" at all to want Nids to fade. In the end, seems, or what not, he IMPLIED that GW wants to squats Nids. I believe I gave really good examples to his 2 examples as to why that is not the case.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
2017/01/16 14:46:02
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
GreaterGood? wrote: Thanks for the advice, I gotta ask, what about codex space marines makes them so good? I used to play back in like 3rd and space marines were always considered the worst. Do they have certain army lists or units that are good now?
They have a weapon type called Grav, which damages you based on your armor. If you're an ork, you give a rat ass about it; but if you're a terminator...
Also, such weapons have many shots; the biggest one comes with a To Wound re-roll mechanic. If it causes damage to an immobilized vehicle, the vehicle will suffer an additional hull point damage. As you can guess, it's even better against MCs than Poison or Sniper are.
They have Chapter Tactics, which change depending on your selection. Like Bikes and leaving melee whenever you want? White Scars Chapter Tactics. Like To Hit re-rolls the entire game? Ultramarines. Challenges? Black Templars. Fire? Salamanders. Sneaky and Jump Packs? Raven Guard. And the list goes on.
They have a LOT of support from Forge World. Imperial Armour 2 is solely for them. As many specific chapters like Minotaurs and Red Scorpions with their exclusive characters.
They have access to Drop Pods, one of the best transports in the game. Such things now capture objectives - and if the fellas that bought one have Objective Secured, the Drop Pod will get it too.
Space Marines is one of the few armies able to use a model with Toughness 5, 4 Wounds, 2+ armour save, 3+ invulnerable save, 3+ Feel No Pain, It Will not Die and Eternal Warrior in a 12" move body and S8 AP2 Councussive. Ah, and now they have 4 new psychic schools - one of them let them re-roll saves. Yep. Another one lets them move terrain.
Most of their previous 1-model slot units, like Thunderfire Cannons and Predators, can be taken in squads.
Finally, they have access to one of the best Decurion-like bonuses: free transports if you take 2 of one option of Core formation (which has Objective Secured to EVERYONE).
Coming back from 5th edition, what the hell happened? Who thought all of this would be even remotely okay?
GW pushing Marines even more than before as the posterchild of the game, the mighty heroes who can do no wrong and always win against the evil foes of the noble Imperium.
Seriously when was the last time Marines/Imperium lost a battle report in WD? Even in books at worst they get a Pyrrhic victory, at best they just show up and roll over whoever they fight and send them packing.
Also as someone else mentioned, formations being "the" way to do things; take what you would normally take anyways, and get free stuff to boot. Some of them are absolutely bonkers. Lords of War are now baseline in any game you want to take it, and it's tough gak for your opponent if they can't deal with it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I do wonder if nids are just seen as the punching bag army, as in they're SUPPOSED to lose to Space Marines so that's how they're designed.
A lot of things seem like this. Well except Eldar and Tau, because reasons (likely because big robots and sleek armor appeals to little kids just as much as Marines). But Orks and Nidz especially (and Chaos until recently and maybe still) always felt that way. Orks more than anyone else, it seems, are meant to be the faceless mooks that show up and beat up some similar faceless mooks (e.g. Guard) and then the real heroes (i..e Marines) show up and send them packing, everyone cheers and is in awe at the might of the Adeptus Astartes.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/01/16 14:49:05
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2017/01/16 16:09:27
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
The funny thing is that marine have to built a very specific way or they sink down to below average very quickly. If you just grab a bunch of units, you are in trouble.
2017/01/16 16:41:49
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Martel732 wrote: The funny thing is that marine have to built a very specific way or they sink down to below average very quickly. If you just grab a bunch of units, you are in trouble.
In general though almost every army has that problem; build a specific way or you get stomped. Eldar are basically the exception and that's because their choices are generally really good no matter what you take.
- Wayne
Formerly WayneTheGame
2017/01/16 16:44:26
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
I think it's magnified with marines because you have to restrain yourself from taking wargear or else you end up with 50 pt meqs. That's a lot of bad stuff in the marine codex.
2017/01/16 18:30:41
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
That's still no different with most armies.
It's easy for new players to pile on useless upgrades. Building themselves a 400 point hive tyrant.
A warrior unit that's over 200 points for three models.
Genestealers that cost 25 points each.
Just about every army with these sorts of customisable units has a pile of useless upgrades that make their point cost skyrocket.
2017/01/16 18:42:19
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Just the other day I played against a new IG player with a second-hand army. He had decided it was a good idea to spend around 100 points upgrading all of his vehicles with hunter-killer missiles. They worked as well as you might predict.
Newbie traps are everywhere.
2017/01/16 23:02:53
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Martel732 wrote: The funny thing is that marine have to built a very specific way or they sink down to below average very quickly. If you just grab a bunch of units, you are in trouble.
In general though almost every army has that problem; build a specific way or you get stomped. Eldar are basically the exception and that's because their choices are generally really good no matter what you take.
I'd kind of disagree a bit. Eldar and Necron are a bit of an exception because they generally lack improvements: eldar units have no improvements barring leaders, necrons have none. As for upgrades generally being good, there's a few odd-ducks to be honest. Most of the relics (non-Iyanden ones that is) are generally meh to outright bad once you consider your army build. Vehicle upgrades boil down to the 5++ invuln save and MtC. The rest are rather useless by and large.
2017/01/17 00:16:04
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
"...OR HAS NO ONE ON THE DESIGN TEAM THAT LIKES THEM."
Miss that part?
On the new Tyranid stuff . . . what of the new stuff was worth anything at all? Everyone who knows anything knows that Codex: Tyranids is really Codex: Twin Dev Flyrant. What are these new things Tyranid players should be interested in?
Do tell, because no one knows but you.
OR you SEE where I am commentating on the "GW WANTS THEM TO FADE AWAY" aspect? Not sure why you are so upset. After all you said GW wants to Nids to fade away. As for your "or has no one on the design team that likes them" part is just REINFORCING your debate on why GW wants them "TO FADE AWAY."
You said it, not me. You first said "GW wants Tyranids to fade away" in your first sentence. Then as your proof to this statement you gave to examples as to why GW wants Nids to fade away.
Actually, 60mm said...
"it almost seems they want the faction to fade away"
not
"GW wants them to fade away"
I don't know if you're a native English speaker or not but the subtle difference in wording makes a huge difference in meaning. It changes from "I'm stating this as a fact" to "their actions are questionable and could intentionally or otherwise lead to this end result".
I'm not sure about in Canada, but over here if someone said to me "it almost seems like blah blah" in that context I'd likely take it as somewhat sarcastic, like you might tell someone making poor decisions "it almost seems like you're trying to fail".
Exactly.
"To crush your opponents, see their figures removed from the table and to hear the lamentations of TFG." -Zathras
2017/01/17 00:20:32
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
60mm wrote:GW has been gaking on Nids for so long and so thoroughly that it almost seems they want the faction to fade away. I got out of 40k because Nids were by far my favorite and GW either hates Nids or has no one on the design teams that like them.
While I saw a bunch of things on why GW does to Tyranids, this is a load of bunk. If GW really wanted Tyranids to fade away they wouldn't have made new minis for them. Yes crap rules or not great rules but why bother making new minis and rules if you want them to fade away? Then there is Shield of Baal as well. Want Tyranids to fade away why bother having a 3 part set for the Shield Baal series then?
Also Tyranids have gotten something in every new edition. While yes they didn't get a new codex for a new edition for the first time they did get new stuff for 7th edition. Since editions are not a 4 year cycle minimum anymore, it's understandable why Nids didn't get a new codex but they got new data slates and a box set with Shield of Baal and new minis as well.
"...OR HAS NO ONE ON THE DESIGN TEAM THAT LIKES THEM."
Miss that part?
On the new Tyranid stuff . . . what of the new stuff was worth anything at all? Everyone who knows anything knows that Codex: Tyranids is really Codex: Twin Dev Flyrant. What are these new things Tyranid players should be interested in?
Do tell, because no one knows but you.
OR you SEE where I am commentating on the "GW WANTS THEM TO FADE AWAY" aspect? Not sure why you are so upset. After all you said GW wants to Nids to fade away. As for your "or has no one on the design team that likes them" part is just REINFORCING your debate on why GW wants them "TO FADE AWAY."
You said it, not me. You first said "GW wants Tyranids to fade away" in your first sentence. Then as your proof to this statement you gave to examples as to why GW wants Nids to fade away.
Actually, 60mm said...
"it almost seems they want the faction to fade away"
not
"GW wants them to fade away"
I don't know if you're a native English speaker or not but the subtle difference in wording makes a huge difference in meaning. It changes from "I'm stating this as a fact" to "their actions are questionable and could intentionally or otherwise lead to this end result".
I'm not sure about in Canada, but over here if someone said to me "it almost seems like blah blah" in that context I'd likely take it as somewhat sarcastic, like you might tell someone making poor decisions "it almost seems like you're trying to fail".
Exactly.
Still, you gave two examples how GW seems to squat Nids. I still gave examples how this is not the case.
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
2017/01/17 15:39:53
Subject: Competitively speaking, are Tyranids ok? I'm thinking of starting the game with them.
Back to OP Nids have a terrible codex (and have had bad rules for the most part since 2010). The models are great looking. And if the rumoured 8th edition comes out this year then it is anybody's guess - the core rules may make regular CC units decent again (or same/worse). Also if a new edition arrives then it is possible nids will get an 8th ed dex in the early batch which is both good and bad. Good if we get our army updated and it is done well (yes I know its GW so dont get hopes up) and bad in that if nids are an early 8th ed release they could be underpowered or have messed up rules as there will likely be a disconnect between the diff designers as to the actual end products.
So personally if you love tyranids (and who couldn't!), I would wait a bit to see how the chips fall. The other possibility is nothing new ref nids comes out and we are stuck with our garbage rules for another year. I think GW looks at 40K armies like China looks at Taiwan - the long view. One day tyrandis will have a good codex again - it could be 1 year or 20 years or just be an idea that never comes to fruition.
/ BMG: Mr. Freeze, Deathstroke / Battletech: SR, OWA / HGB: Caprice / Malifaux: Arcanists, Guild, Outcasts / MCP: Mutants / SAGA: Ordensstaat / SW Legion & X-Wing: CIS / WWX: Union
