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.

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

How so? Care to clarify?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

Those sound..... last time I check MC's can shoot 360, Walkers are vehicles and the rules fpr void shield I can see it only effecting models inside the "Zone"

Tyrannocytes is a rules change going with what they think is RAI.

Void Shields really needs to be clarified. I'm glad that's taken care of.

Tank traps isn't a big deal. Who brings them anyways? BTW, I agree with them on this. Walkers move like infantry and not like tanks.

BTW, these FAQ's aren't just arbitrary, and they aren't just changed by Reece and the guys at Frontline. They were actually voted on by a panel of TO's and community leaders. You're going to see them at most of the larger tournaments throughout the US (and probably Europe as well).

 jy2 wrote:

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

How so? Care to clarify?

My list revolved around a Void Shield Generator with Tank Traps, which had the effect of keeping a Barbed Heirodule safe from walkers or super heavy Walkers that might assault him. The Tank Traps work especially well, because if there are no walkers that I fear assaulting me, I can move through them as if they are open terrain and don't have to make a Move Through Cover Roll. Meanwhile they provide a 4+ cover save to Barbie which gets amplified to a 2+ by the Malanthrope. Between all of that it was very, very, very hard for opponents to get 1st blood from me, and yet easy for my entire firepower to start on the table, and come to bear on turn 1.

I also had a Tyrannocyte in the list, but that nerf is fairly mild all things considered, and if my void shield generator hadn't been turned into a giant liability, it would have stayed in the list.

Re: the FAQ being good, and decided by committee. I agree that it is a good thing. I'm pissed right now because it hit me fairly hard, but I think pretty much everything in the FAQ is a good thing. I would have never ruled that way on tank traps or Void shields for completely different and quasi contradictory reasons.

Tank Traps were only worth taking as a way to protect units from walkers assaulting. They had no other reason to cost more than a barricade which created the same cover save. There was no RAW confusion here. RAW was entirely clear. Walkers are vehicles and not skimmers. Tank Traps are impassible to any vehicles. Walkers move like infantry. How do infantry move over impassible terrain? It seems like an arbitrary nerf to an upgrade that was barely even worth its original points, and now will never see the table again until the rules or points cost are changed.

Void Shield generators are more complicated. Suffice to say, the ruling creates an awful lot of stupidly exploitable scenarios. While the RAW argument for it is clear, and is more compelling than the RAW argument against it, the impact of the rule as FAQed is game breaking in a way that isn't worth a crucifiction on the cross of RAW. My guess is that the committee didn't get much table time in with Void Shield Generators, and don't understand the full implications. If void shield generators are as popular at LVO as in my local meta I am sure they will hear the cries of frustration come gameday.

ETA: On the plus side, when you are traveling 1,100 miles, packing a Tyrannocyte and a Void Shield generator are kinda a pain.

tag8833 wrote:

Spoiler:

 jy2 wrote:

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

How so? Care to clarify?

My list revolved around a Void Shield Generator with Tank Traps, which had the effect of keeping a Barbed Heirodule safe from walkers or super heavy Walkers that might assault him. The Tank Traps work especially well, because if there are no walkers that I fear assaulting me, I can move through them as if they are open terrain and don't have to make a Move Through Cover Roll. Meanwhile they provide a 4+ cover save to Barbie which gets amplified to a 2+ by the Malanthrope. Between all of that it was very, very, very hard for opponents to get 1st blood from me, and yet easy for my entire firepower to start on the table, and come to bear on turn 1.

I also had a Tyrannocyte in the list, but that nerf is fairly mild all things considered, and if my void shield generator hadn't been turned into a giant liability, it would have stayed in the list.

Re: the FAQ being good, and decided by committee. I agree that it is a good thing. I'm pissed right now because it hit me fairly hard, but I think pretty much everything in the FAQ is a good thing. I would have never ruled that way on tank traps or Void shields for completely different and quasi contradictory reasons.

Tank Traps were only worth taking as a way to protect units from walkers assaulting. They had no other reason to cost more than a barricade which created the same cover save. There was no RAW confusion here. RAW was entirely clear. Walkers are vehicles and not skimmers. Tank Traps are impassible to any vehicles. Walkers move like infantry. How do infantry move over impassible terrain? It seems like an arbitrary nerf to an upgrade that was barely even worth its original points, and now will never see the table again until the rules or points cost are changed.

Void Shield generators are more complicated. Suffice to say, the ruling creates an awful lot of stupidly exploitable scenarios. While the RAW argument for it is clear, and is more compelling than the RAW argument against it, the impact of the rule as FAQed is game breaking in a way that isn't worth a crucifiction on the cross of RAW. My guess is that the committee didn't get much table time in with Void Shield Generators, and don't understand the full implications. If void shield generators are as popular at LVO as in my local meta I am sure they will hear the cries of frustration come gameday.

First of all, I agree with your thoughts on the Tyrannocyte. His "nerf" isn't really that big of a deal. I mean, if you want to go purely RAW, monstrous creatures can only fire 2 guns anyways. The fact that he can fire all 5 of his guns indicates to me that his shooting is non-standard anyways. In any case, that item is just a minor issue.

With tank traps, I never really thought about your strategy, but the rules "change" for that isn't game-breaking either. This one here, I'm sure that they were going off based on RAI. Walkers are supposed to move like infantry. They don't take immobilization tests for going through difficult terrain. Instead, they just take difficult terrain movement penalties just like standard infantry. Since infantry can move through tank traps, I can see why the case was made for walkers to move over them freely as well.

Don't worry Tag, you're probably the only one using this tactic. Not too many other players are using it, so it just means you're going to play with your Barbie just like everyone else.

Void shields is a major ruling and one that makes them really damn good. It's a double edged sword. That means your opponent can conga-line his blob squad or seer council and still be protected by his void shields. It also means you can conga-line your hormagants or gargoyles or, better yet, your Skytyrant formation and still receive its benefits. In any case, it is a clarification that is long needed. I have seen players go both ways with it (someone played it the conga-line version at the 11th Co. GT). At least now you know what to expect from it.

 jy2 wrote:
Don't worry Tag, you're probably the only one using this tactic. Not too many other players are using it, so it just means you're going to play with your Barbie just like everyone else.

I like to think I'm pretty bright, but I'm also old enough to know that if I've thought of it so have dozens of others. Also, I haven't exactly been secret about it. I've posted questions about it on the FLG forum several times over the last 6 months. Mainly trying to figure out how to build tank traps such that they give cover to Barbie without making an illegal model for them.

But I'm also non-conformist enough that I don't want to play Barbie just like everyone else. Gotta put my special touch on it. Eats me up that there are going to be multiple lists with 3 Flyrants, Barbie, and a Malanthrope, and that we are talking about a 15% difference between my list and other Tyranid lists. I was tempted to run my Raveners list, and just eat losses whenever I run into AD Lance, Flying Circus, or farsight bomb. I have worked so hard to build a list with MCs in Tyrannocytes rather than a Barbed Heirodule. Right now, I'm tempted to bring out the LAN list that I've had good success with, except Necron lists like yours eat it up, and it struggles mightily against lists with 4+ Wave Serpents, and often gives up 1st blood which puts me at a significant disadvantage in BAO missions. So, yeah, just like everyone else, I'll probably end up running THE tyranid tourney list.

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

that ruling on Voidshields seems a little silly... you can deploy a single model within range of it and then string the unit up the board ( ala gargoyles) and still be protected?

madness.

I don't like the Tyrannocyte ruling either, in the UK it is currently ruled as counting as an MC with 360 LOS that can fire all 5 weapons.

 Wilson wrote:
that ruling on Voidshields seems a little silly... you can deploy a single model within range of it and then string the unit up the board ( ala gargoyles) and still be protected?

Unfortunately with Imperial Knights being such a thing, and Necron AV13 wall, it is quite difficult to run an effective tyranid hoard army, because you have no meaningful way to interact with those two builds, so Tyranids aren't prepared to take advantage of this in the way that Demons, Orks, and IG that are more capable of hoard builds.

If endless swarm had Objective secured, I might make a go of it. I'd also be tempted to run skyblight with 60-90 Gargoyles alongside a flying circus if I had that many gargoyles. Of course both of those ideas are mainly theory hammer, I've never tried to pull this sort of stunt because it would have been understandably unpleasant for my opponents, and it can be hard to get games done in a tourney timeframe with high model count lists.

So I had a handful of games last night testing different things, one of which I used the Pentyrant list against a matchup I thought would be a nightmare for it: Venom Spam Dark Eldar.



So we played the ETC missions, rolled Big Guns Never Tire, a Maelstrom secondary (honestly don't remember which one), and Hammer and Anvil deployment (which I think was my death sentence). I got the first turn and deployed first at the edge of my deployment zone inside a ruin with the Bastion out front, he measured my out and deployed out of my range (or so he thought), but with three of the Flyrants I rolled Onslaught so I could reach out and get to him (or so I thought). I failed to run far enough with two of the three Flyrants, and in his return fire I lost two of them to massed poisoned fire. The rest of the game he proceeded to pick the Flyrants off at a clip of about one a turn, and he won pretty handily.

Despite my bad luck in deployment and run rolls, I feel like this is an exceedingly bad matchup for the Pentyrant list. Just the weight of twin linked poisoned fire is incredibly hard for Tyranids anyway, but they've got the weight of fire to take down the lower wound count of the Pentyrants quite well.

Is this as bad a matchup as I think it is? Or am I more the victim of a bad deployment and my own over-aggression?

 Tarnag wrote:
Is this as bad a matchup as I think it is? Or am I more the victim of a bad deployment and my own over-aggression?

You definitely played a little over-aggressive. I've taken down similar lists with a 2-3 flyrant approach. Venoms/Raiders with warriors inside is why E.Grubs exist.

A venom by itself isn't terribly threatening to a flyrant. 12 shots, 2 hits, 1 wound, and then your 3+ armor save, so statistically, it should take 12 Venoms to kill a single flyrant. The warriors inside can do a similar amount of damage, but only once they get into 12". I'm not saying it is a cake walk. Dark Eldar poison is good against Tyranids, but they are also really vulnerable to template weapons.

LVO has decided that 22 Venoms is OK, and that list would certainly cause problems for 5 flyrants, but I'm not positive it is a hard counter either.

@Tarnag
Is there a reason you played against a tailored list like that? Other than the two voidravens, that list has no anti-tank. Who did Urien roll with?

 Sinful Hero wrote:
@Tarnag
Is there a reason you played against a tailored list like that? Other than the two voidravens, that list has no anti-tank. Who did Urien roll with?

I would guess that all 3 raiders have Dark Lances, and every venom includes a squad of warriors with a blaster. It probably has a decent amount of anti-tank.

tag8833 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
@Tarnag
Is there a reason you played against a tailored list like that? Other than the two voidravens, that list has no anti-tank. Who did Urien roll with?

I would guess that all 3 raiders have Dark Lances, and every venom includes a squad of warriors with a blaster. It probably has a decent amount of anti-tank.

9 Str 8 Ap 2 shots plus 4 Str 9 Ap 2 just seems a little light to me, but I may be biased. I would expect a couple of the Scourge squads to be packing Heatlances/Haywire Blasters or some Reavers.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
@Tarnag
Is there a reason you played against a tailored list like that? Other than the two voidravens, that list has no anti-tank. Who did Urien roll with?

I would guess that all 3 raiders have Dark Lances, and every venom includes a squad of warriors with a blaster. It probably has a decent amount of anti-tank.

9 Str 8 Ap 2 shots plus 4 Str 9 Ap 2 just seems a little light to me, but I may be biased. I would expect a couple of the Scourge squads to be packing Heatlances/Haywire Blasters or some Reavers.

Lol how is 9 lances light on Antitank? Nutta

Abrupt change of subject in 3... 2... 1...

How do you guys rate the following for a 2k generalist list?

CAD

Hive Tyrant (240)
Wings, 2x twin-linked Devourers, Electroshock Grubs

Hive Tyrant (240)
Wings, 2x twin-linked Devourers, Electroshock Grubs

Mucolid Spore (15)

Mucolid Spore (15)

Hive Crone (155)

Sporocyst (100)
Venom Cannons

Sporocyst (100)
Venom Cannons

Sporocyst (100)
Venom Cannons

Skyblight Swarm

Hive Tyrant (240)
Wings, 2x twin-linked Devourers, Electroshock Grubs

Harpy (140)
Heavy Venom Cannon

Harpy (140)
Heavy Venom Cannon

Hive Crone (155)

20 Gargoyles (120)

20 Gargoyles (120)

20 Gargoyles (120)

Plenty of Gargoyles for screening and road-blocking, decent Tyrant coverage and Sporocysts have really grown on me for objective camping (Skyblight seems made for this too, as all the FMCs make for a very chaotic game leaving the Sporocysts as a lower priority target).

 Wilson wrote:

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

that ruling on Voidshields seems a little silly... you can deploy a single model within range of it and then string the unit up the board ( ala gargoyles) and still be protected?

madness.

Perhaps I am missing something, but isn't this what we do/can do with our venom/malanthrope shrouded bubbles? So if we can get a shrouded bubble extending to whole unit by conga lining, why not shields?

BTW, I have zero experience or knowledge of void shields, so am just going off what I read here. So if someone could clarify for me that would be great

 Wilson wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
@Tarnag
Is there a reason you played against a tailored list like that? Other than the two voidravens, that list has no anti-tank. Who did Urien roll with?

I would guess that all 3 raiders have Dark Lances, and every venom includes a squad of warriors with a blaster. It probably has a decent amount of anti-tank.

9 Str 8 Ap 2 shots plus 4 Str 9 Ap 2 just seems a little light to me, but I may be biased. I would expect a couple of the Scourge squads to be packing Heatlances/Haywire Blasters or some Reavers.

Lol how is 9 lances light on Antitank? Nutta

As a DE player... they suck at taking out tanks.

3 Ravagers is 9 shots: At bs4, on average 6 hits. If the armor is 12 (lance making it 12 in most cases) you need 4's to glance and 5/6 to pen, thats 3 HP's on average for 1 tank kill (thats if they dont have cover). So your using 375pts to do 3 HP's a turn on. Remember you shooting with a AV11 Open top vehicle that has to jink to live and will most likely not get its full impact in.

I only play 2 armies, Nids and DE and after many games of DE (all of 6th and almost all of 7th so far till the Nids Drop pods came out) I can say this, 20 lances isnt enough... 30 lances isnt sometimes.

A Normal DE army has 12-15 lances, 80-120 Poison shots, 8-12 Haywire in a 1500point list.

I actually stop taking Dark lances on my Raiders b.c those 3-4 extra lances dont really do anything, have 3 shots that can kill guys is better, if I can kill off Marker lights/Gun drones, Suits, Havoc's, Obliterates, Noise guys etc.. My Vehicles will last longer. PLUS, with a 4+ jink Im ALWAYS JINKING to stay alive..

DE is only 36" shooting with a 6" move (venoms can move 12 and fire 12 shots), so If you start all the way back you should be out of range of almost everything, with Malanthrope/Venom and some gants wall, you have a 2+/jink or a 3+ open cover saves.

Not to mention those Blasters in the Venoms are 18" range, and those Void Lances don't come in until turn two at the earliest.
Compare to Tyranids with three tyrants are packing 24 Twinlinked Str 6 shots and three Haywire templates, not counting the rest of the army.

To me, the Deldar list seems really light on effective anti-tank.

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Not to mention those Blasters in the Venoms are 18" range, and those Void Lances don't come in until turn two at the earliest.
Compare to Tyranids with three tyrants are packing 24 Twinlinked Str 6 shots and three Haywire templates, not counting the rest of the army.

To me, the Deldar list seems really light on effective anti-tank.

Honestly I feel Necrons would do better against Pentyrant than DE now days, Even DE Fliers cant take a Tyrant down. 2 Shots... ok, the tyrant takes a wound.. maybe 2 (cover saves etc...) then 12 TL s6 shots at a flier with AV 10... I wonder who wins lol

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Not to mention those Blasters in the Venoms are 18" range, and those Void Lances don't come in until turn two at the earliest.
Compare to Tyranids with three tyrants are packing 24 Twinlinked Str 6 shots and three Haywire templates, not counting the rest of the army.

To me, the Deldar list seems really light on effective anti-tank.

Honestly I feel Necrons would do better against Pentyrant than DE now days, Even DE Fliers cant take a Tyrant down. 2 Shots... ok, the tyrant takes a wound.. maybe 2 (cover saves etc...) then 12 TL s6 shots at a flier with AV 10... I wonder who wins lol

Usually I would agree, but this list used Splinter Scourges, effectively bumping up the number of Venom-equivalents. I can see how over-extending the Tyrants and the deployment type can give the tyranid list trouble.
12 sources of poison fire with a minimum of 12 shots per unit, and the Tyrants came into their effective range without threatening the Deldar- it's going to take a heavy toll, especially if they're rolling hot..



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Now that I think about it, three of those Venoms would have had to come from the elites sections, meaning possibly Blasterborn upping the anti-tank count, or more splinter cannons if they were tailoring.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Not to mention those Blasters in the Venoms are 18" range, and those Void Lances don't come in until turn two at the earliest.
Compare to Tyranids with three tyrants are packing 24 Twinlinked Str 6 shots and three Haywire templates, not counting the rest of the army.

To me, the Deldar list seems really light on effective anti-tank.

Honestly I feel Necrons would do better against Pentyrant than DE now days, Even DE Fliers cant take a Tyrant down. 2 Shots... ok, the tyrant takes a wound.. maybe 2 (cover saves etc...) then 12 TL s6 shots at a flier with AV 10... I wonder who wins lol

Usually I would agree, but this list used Splinter Scourges, effectively bumping up the number of Venom-equivalents. I can see how over-extending the Tyrants and the deployment type can give the tyranid list trouble.
12 sources of poison fire with a minimum of 12 shots per unit, and the Tyrants came into their effective range without threatening the Deldar- it's going to take a heavy toll, especially if they're rolling hot..

Right... and they arnt Relentless, they move 12" then they can only shoot 4 shots at 1/2 distance, just make them move the Scourges for less shots.

You need 84 poison shots to kill a Flyrant. 84 shots will get 14 hits, with a 3+ it should fail 4. (If Malanthrope is near then its even more shots)

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:
Not to mention those Blasters in the Venoms are 18" range, and those Void Lances don't come in until turn two at the earliest.
Compare to Tyranids with three tyrants are packing 24 Twinlinked Str 6 shots and three Haywire templates, not counting the rest of the army.

To me, the Deldar list seems really light on effective anti-tank.

Honestly I feel Necrons would do better against Pentyrant than DE now days, Even DE Fliers cant take a Tyrant down. 2 Shots... ok, the tyrant takes a wound.. maybe 2 (cover saves etc...) then 12 TL s6 shots at a flier with AV 10... I wonder who wins lol

Usually I would agree, but this list used Splinter Scourges, effectively bumping up the number of Venom-equivalents. I can see how over-extending the Tyrants and the deployment type can give the tyranid list trouble.
12 sources of poison fire with a minimum of 12 shots per unit, and the Tyrants came into their effective range without threatening the Deldar- it's going to take a heavy toll, especially if they're rolling hot..

Right... and they arnt Relentless, they move 12" then they can only shoot 4 shots at 1/2 distance, just make them move the Scourges for less shots.

You need 84 poison shots to kill a Flyrant. 84 shots will get 14 hits, with a 3+ it should fail 4. (If Malanthrope is near then its even more shots)

Even more. 84 shots is 14 hits. 4+ poison is 7 wounds. 3+ save is only 2 unsaved or so.

12•12=144 shots, minimum. Don't forget several Flyrants moved up trying to blow something up turn one. So it's possible several warrior squads were in rapid fire range, plus when the Flyrants come to them, the scourges don't have to move.

It's not unlikely that the two Flyrants out front could have taken over 250+ shots. 6 Venoms(12+8) at roughly 120 shots, plus 3 Raiders(18+6) at 72, and the 3 Scourge squads(24+6) at 90, is 282. There would not be a Malanthrope nearby in the opponents deployment zone, so a 3+ save is it.
Averaging that's around six wounds? With hot dice(or cold for the Nids) it's not unreasonable to knock out two Flyrants first turn and start picking off the rest later.

Raiders with splinter racks = 22shots at rapid fire range, with twin linked- average hits against flying tyrant is 7.3 per raider squad, 3 squads is 21.9. Lets just round to 22, causes 11 wounds, which on slightly below average rolling for nid saves would kill 1 tyrant a turn.

dont need 250 shots with twin linked. average rolling on anything else in range would take down a 2nd tyrant.

The DE list is light on AT though. It's not something I would expect to see on higher tables in the latter half of a tournament because theres lots of army lists that if it runs into it will not do so well with average rolling. And the more dice you roll the more likely it tends towards average.

Yeah it was a bit tailored, but that's to be expected as he'd played against my list before. I think the only part of his list that would change would be the Scourges going for Haywire rather than Splinter Cannons.

Dark Eldar I think are a tough match up as always for Nids, even with 5 Flyrants. We make short work of their vehicles when we can get there, but they out maneuver us and out gun us, and a a always could give a rats ass about our toughness.

blaktoof wrote:
Raiders with splinter racks = 22shots at rapid fire range, with twin linked- average hits against flying tyrant is 7.3 per raider squad, 3 squads is 21.9. Lets just round to 22, causes 11 wounds, which on slightly below average rolling for nid saves would kill 1 tyrant a turn.

dont need 250 shots with twin linked. average rolling on anything else in range would take down a 2nd tyrant.

The DE list is light on AT though. It's not something I would expect to see on higher tables in the latter half of a tournament because theres lots of army lists that if it runs into it will not do so well with average rolling. And the more dice you roll the more likely it tends towards average.

With a 24" move and a 18" range shot why would you get within 12" of a raider?

 Amishprn86 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Raiders with splinter racks = 22shots at rapid fire range, with twin linked- average hits against flying tyrant is 7.3 per raider squad, 3 squads is 21.9. Lets just round to 22, causes 11 wounds, which on slightly below average rolling for nid saves would kill 1 tyrant a turn.

dont need 250 shots with twin linked. average rolling on anything else in range would take down a 2nd tyrant.

The DE list is light on AT though. It's not something I would expect to see on higher tables in the latter half of a tournament because theres lots of army lists that if it runs into it will not do so well with average rolling. And the more dice you roll the more likely it tends towards average.

With a 24" move and a 18" range shot why would you get within 12" of a raider?

Trying to blow them up of course. Plus if the warriors are shooting snapshots anyway might as well move 12" to get in rapid fire range. Trying to stay away 24" from three Raiders can be difficult when you're moving up to take something out. Don't forget this was also Hammer and Anvil Deployment- the table would only be 48" wide, and a Raider in the center of their deployment can cover most of their entire deployment zone and then some.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Raiders with splinter racks = 22shots at rapid fire range, with twin linked- average hits against flying tyrant is 7.3 per raider squad, 3 squads is 21.9. Lets just round to 22, causes 11 wounds, which on slightly below average rolling for nid saves would kill 1 tyrant a turn.

dont need 250 shots with twin linked. average rolling on anything else in range would take down a 2nd tyrant.

The DE list is light on AT though. It's not something I would expect to see on higher tables in the latter half of a tournament because theres lots of army lists that if it runs into it will not do so well with average rolling. And the more dice you roll the more likely it tends towards average.

With a 24" move and a 18" range shot why would you get within 12" of a raider?

Trying to blow them up of course. Plus if the warriors are shooting snapshots anyway might as well move 12" to get in rapid fire range. Trying to stay away 24" from three Raiders can be difficult when you're moving up to take something out. Don't forget this was also Hammer and Anvil Deployment- the table would only be 48" wide, and a Raider in the center of their deployment can cover most of their entire deployment zone and then some.

I wasn't watching the game, but there could be lots of reasons this happened, board positioning on nids part, nid wanted to go for objective near Dark Eldar, wanted early firstblood, nid wanted mass destruction with e grubs, nid player was feeling bold...who knows?

The rapidfire range for dark eldar is 12" and the vehicle can go 12" and passengers can still fire snap shots, if there are splinter racks they get twin linked which equates to about a 30% hit rate. 24" return threat means you cannot really avoid it, since twin linked devs are 18", if you are in range to shoot them they are in range to shoot you. Best to hope for is positioning so they have to limit how much they can bring to bear.

blaktoof wrote:

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

blaktoof wrote:
Raiders with splinter racks = 22shots at rapid fire range, with twin linked- average hits against flying tyrant is 7.3 per raider squad, 3 squads is 21.9. Lets just round to 22, causes 11 wounds, which on slightly below average rolling for nid saves would kill 1 tyrant a turn.

dont need 250 shots with twin linked. average rolling on anything else in range would take down a 2nd tyrant.

The DE list is light on AT though. It's not something I would expect to see on higher tables in the latter half of a tournament because theres lots of army lists that if it runs into it will not do so well with average rolling. And the more dice you roll the more likely it tends towards average.

With a 24" move and a 18" range shot why would you get within 12" of a raider?

Trying to blow them up of course. Plus if the warriors are shooting snapshots anyway might as well move 12" to get in rapid fire range. Trying to stay away 24" from three Raiders can be difficult when you're moving up to take something out. Don't forget this was also Hammer and Anvil Deployment- the table would only be 48" wide, and a Raider in the center of their deployment can cover most of their entire deployment zone and then some.

I wasn't watching the game, but there could be lots of reasons this happened, board positioning on nids part, nid wanted to go for objective near Dark Eldar, wanted early firstblood, nid wanted mass destruction with e grubs, nid player was feeling bold...who knows?

The rapidfire range for dark eldar is 12" and the vehicle can go 12" and passengers can still fire snap shots, if there are splinter racks they get twin linked which equates to about a 30% hit rate. 24" return threat means you cannot really avoid it, since twin linked devs are 18", if you are in range to shoot them they are in range to shoot you. Best to hope for is positioning so they have to limit how much they can bring to bear.

They're firing snap shots anyway to hit the Flyrant, why wouldn't you move the full 12"? Their effective range is 24" compared to the 18" range of the Devourers, so in order to hit the Raiders with the Flyrants you need to be in that rapid fire range, sad fact of life.

tag8833 wrote:
So, LVO finally released their FAQ. 3 Rules changes blew up the list I had been practicing with.
1) Tyrannocytes shoot like vehicles with hull mounted weapons
2) Void Shields extend to all models in a unit, not just those in range of the shield.
3) Tank Traps are ignored by walkers and super heavy walkers. (WTF?)
I'm headed to the event, and so I've got to go back to the drawing board for my list. I imagine I'm the most affected player in this thread, but figured I'd mention it.

where did they post this? can't find it on FLG's site or on the LVO thread here. i only care b/c i'm west coast myself and our guys tend to want to follow bao/lvo's rules. can't make the event myself.

 Tarnag wrote:
So I had a handful of games last night testing different things, one of which I used the Pentyrant list against a matchup I thought would be a nightmare for it: Venom Spam Dark Eldar.

Spoiler:

His list (not gonna be exact):

Urien Rakarth

3 Raiders with Splinter Racks full of Warriors with Splinter Cannons

3 squads of 6 Scourges with Splinter Cannons

6 Venoms

2 Void Ravens

(probably missing something)

My list:

CAD:

2 Flyrants w/ Devourers and Egrubs (1 with Fighter Ace)

3 Lictors

3 squads of 3 Rippers with Deep Strike

Bastion w/ Comms Relay

Mawloc

Leviathan:

3 Flyrants w/ Devourers and Egrubs

Venomthrope

3 Mucolids

So we played the ETC missions, rolled Big Guns Never Tire, a Maelstrom secondary (honestly don't remember which one), and Hammer and Anvil deployment (which I think was my death sentence). I got the first turn and deployed first at the edge of my deployment zone inside a ruin with the Bastion out front, he measured my out and deployed out of my range (or so he thought), but with three of the Flyrants I rolled Onslaught so I could reach out and get to him (or so I thought). I failed to run far enough with two of the three Flyrants, and in his return fire I lost two of them to massed poisoned fire. The rest of the game he proceeded to pick the Flyrants off at a clip of about one a turn, and he won pretty handily.

Despite my bad luck in deployment and run rolls, I feel like this is an exceedingly bad matchup for the Pentyrant list. Just the weight of twin linked poisoned fire is incredibly hard for Tyranids anyway, but they've got the weight of fire to take down the lower wound count of the Pentyrants quite well.

Is this as bad a matchup as I think it is? Or am I more the victim of a bad deployment and my own over-aggression?

I don't think that it is a matter of a bad matchup. I think he just out-played you. Sometimes, you have to set yourself up for your alpha-strike, even if it means waiting for a turn.

Some observations on my part.

1. Did you remember that FMC's run 2D6"? In H&A deployment, you are 72"-24" = 48" away from his board edge. Flyrants have a 24"+18" = 42" threat range. That means you can get to within 6" of his board edge with your shooting. Even if you run the minimum of 2", that means there is only about 4" of deployment space where he could have safely deployed away from your guns, and that is only if you run the minimum of 2" on 2D6". It's just not very easy for him to deploy all of those tanks away from your threat range on T1.

2. However, in the case that he did manage to deploy completely out of range (there's only 2 places where he could have done this - in the 2 corners of this deployment edge), then it's easily something that you could anticipate if you've got the experience. In H&A deployment where I knew my opponent could potentially deploy outside of my threat range, this is what I would have done:

I would have deployed my flyrants back just slightly (while deploying my bastion as far forwards as possible). Then on my T1, I would swoop all of my flyrants forwards but still keep them in bastion/malanthrope bubble range. Only the back of their bases needs to be within range, so that the model is actuall 6"+2.5" = 8.5" out. So now you've got flying flyrants with 2+ jink cover. You know how many shots it would have taken just to take off 1W against a swooping flyrant with 2+ jink? 72 shots. That's right, 72 shots just to cause 1W!?!

Then next turn, hit his army with everything you've got. You should be able to take out 3-4 skimmers/venoms a turn on average.

3. Don't forget, on T2 when you go hyper-aggressive with your flyrants, you should also have your mawloc and lictors hitting his line as well. If his skimmers are out of your threat range on T1, then most likely they are bunched up and just ripe for a mawloc attack. Lictors with their S6 shooting is also a threat to their glass boats. So on his Turn 2, there's just no way that he could focus his army completely on your flyrants. He has to deal with the "local" threat as well or they will wreck his skimmers with assault. Use your support units to support your offense. They're not just for grabbing objectives. Lictors and the mawloc are actually real threats to his army.


I think that with a little more experience with a Pentyrant list, you're going to find that it isn't really as bad a matchup for Tyranids as you'd think when going up against DE. Now I am not saying it would be an easy battle, especially against a list that was slightly tailored, but even still, I believe that Pentyrant should still give a tailored DE army problems. Now going back to the "real" 40K world, that type of DE list should never exist as a TAC list. It'll just get demolished in competitive play by the likes of mechdar or AV13 Necrons, which is much more prevalent than Pentyrant Tyranids. Thus, going into competitive play, a Pentyrant list shouldn't see armies tailored to such a degree. The chances of that happening is extremely low (unless your opponent knows that there are no mechdar/mech-spam players in their meta).

 gigasnail wrote:
where did they post this? can't find it on FLG's site or on the LVO thread here. i only care b/c i'm west coast myself and our guys tend to want to follow bao/lvo's rules. can't make the event myself.

They mentioned it on their podcast, but you can always find their current FAQ here:
https://www.frontlinegaming.org/community/40k-faq/

As I said upthread, I think they did a generally good job of it. There are still quite a few outstanding issues, but there will always be some.

There is some interesting stuff about Harradins and Hierophants, even though both are banned (rightfully) at LVO.


I played Dark Eldar tonight. Brought in 3 Pyrovores in a Tyrannocyte. 3D6 wounding on 2's with no saves is a pretty effective way to empty out a raider.


I've got an incredibly specific rules question in regards to the new LVO faq. Dreadnoughts can stay embarked in Lucious Pattern Drop pods on the turn they arrive. Because it is open topped, we would prefer that as E.Grubs will toast a dread, but if it isn't E.Grubs, what armor facing is hit by a flame template placed over a Lucious Pattern Drop Pod with an embarked Dreadnought?