77474
Post by: SHUPPET
And I think that's because a lot of you actually were.
A lot of talk about "badly written codex, Cruddex 2.0, I'm not crying I just wanted more variety" has quickly dissipated with the release of the dataslates, well most pointedly Skyblight Swarm. Now the general response has turned to positive, with much talk of "back to being happy with the state of my Tyranids, if this was only in the original codex I would have never complained to begin with".
Well... no. Looking at all our 6E rules as one bundle, even with the dataslates rolled in the book is still as bland as ever. Forest infiltrating Lictors, ruin infiltrating Stealers, Spore Mines that run at 6" instead of 3", re-rolling Tervigon spawn rolls of 1, and 18" Synapse range on some Warrior units, do NOT make our codex less bland. That is not to say there isn't some possible uses for these, and definite uses for the ones not mentioned (Endless, Skyblight & Artillery formations). However, they add very little flavor to list building and even less variation.
Lets address the elephant in the room - Skyblight. Yes, it is powerful, and likely our most competitive option between both this and the last dex. At the same time, it costs over 1000 points minimum to take if used sensibly (sure you could leave the TL Devourers at home and not pack more gargoyles if you wanted to keep it at 800-900 pts, but that begs the question as to why you are taking it in the first place). And after this sizable points investment, the rest of your list writes itself. This doesn't give me more options for list building, it just gives me a list and says "here play like this or go directly back to the same old book". The other good options are just this to lesser extremes, with the exception of Artillery which is basically just a plain buff to these units / FOC if you are taking them. But this is not even SLIGHTLY improving the quality of the Nid dex. It makes it more powerful, and apparently that's all most of you ever wanted because it seems we are content now.
Me? I'm here just making this thread "crying" about Raveners. About Rippers. Walking Tyrants. Pyrovores. Swarmlord. Shrikes. Hive Guard. Drop Pods. Doom. BRB powers. Haruspexhormagantgenestealerscythingtalonscrushingclawstyranidprimetervigonetc etc etc.
Sure I'll take what I can get. Lictors pretty much not even appearing on the FOC anymore is fun. Endless Swarm makes my Trygon something other than a counts-as Mawloc. Re-rollable pinning blasts are my best bet for any attempt I want to try to make with stealers or horms. But anybody who claimed they were unhappy with the original release due to "bad internal balance and bad writing" but is now content thanks to dataslates (may as well just call it "thanks to Skyblight and Artillery") has completely lost their integrity. It's a shame that after all that talk, most of you didn't actually want a "fun" codex, you were just as happy being able to Buy flyerspam and get some cheap victories. i'm not even going to call it "building", because close to zero thought goes into any list related decisions after deciding to take that formation.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
This isn't about a competition with SoB, who I agree have had worse treatment than Nids. But looking at everything with the perspective of "well, you aren't as bad off as Sisters!" makes a 40k discussion forum pretty pointless. If you want to talk about Sisters, make a thread. This thread is about Nids.
73002
Post by: gravitywell
Rumor is that they might get some FW love.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
Also, this thread is also largely about the conflict of opinion on whether or not we have a good product with the Nids book. This conflict is largely non-existent with SoB as I'm pretty sure everyone agrees they have been shafted.
Now, since we have gotten the inevitable irrelevant posts about Sisters of Battle out of the way nice and early, please feel free to contribute to the actual topic at hand.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
 SHUPPET wrote:This isn't about a competition with SoB, who I agree have had worse treatment than Nids. But looking at everything with the perspective of "well, you aren't as bad off as Sisters!" makes a 40k discussion forum pretty pointless. If you want to talk about Sisters, make a thread. This thread is about Nids.
Now, now, if you want to post on a public and open forum you have to expect people to not agree with you. Just because you don't like the fact that I don't think Nids are nearly as worse off because my army is sitting in a deeper hole doesn't invalidate my position, nor does it mean I need to leave just because I don't agree with your assessment.
Frankly I think Nids have issues (mostly that the codex doesn't support being able to build lists that fit all four phases of an invasion), but they're not horrible. I'd say they're middle of the road at worst, even without the dataslates. I feel the real issue is that the Tau and Eldar codexes aren't properly balanced and they do more to unbalance the game and that is what is really causing the problem more than how bland your book is.
53708
Post by: TedNugent
All codexes, regardless of how competitive they are or not, are always filled with uninspired copypasta from previous editions and hideously bad internal codex balance.
Half the units, especially the most flavorful units (mandrakes, Warbikers, Stormboyz, Harlequins, etc), can barely be used even in a friendly game.
And in spite of the excessive copypasta and minute unit cost/statline tweaks, the internal and cross-codex balance only seems to get worse over time instead of becoming more refined. 6th edition and they cost a Guardsman Power Fist at 25 points? Even after challenge rules, astonishing. GW's brains are clearly lagging behind their hands. After 6 editions, they still can't get it right.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
I wouldn't count the first two editions as they were pretty different games than 3rd onward.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
 ClockworkZion wrote: SHUPPET wrote:This isn't about a competition with SoB, who I agree have had worse treatment than Nids. But looking at everything with the perspective of "well, you aren't as bad off as Sisters!" makes a 40k discussion forum pretty pointless. If you want to talk about Sisters, make a thread. This thread is about Nids.
Now, now, if you want to post on a public and open forum you have to expect people to not agree with you. Just because you don't like the fact that I don't think Nids are nearly as worse off because my army is sitting in a deeper hole doesn't invalidate my position, nor does it mean I need to leave just because I don't agree with your assessment. Frankly I think Nids have issues (mostly that the codex doesn't support being able to build lists that fit all four phases of an invasion), but they're not horrible. I'd say they're middle of the road at worst, even without the dataslates. I feel the real issue is that the Tau and Eldar codexes aren't properly balanced and they do more to unbalance the game and that is what is really causing the problem more than how bland your book is.
What? You did not agree or disagree in your original post, you merely made a completely off-topic reference to Sisters, a reference which I told you i DID agree with, and politely asked you to save further posts about Sisters of Battle to threads about, well, Sisters of Battle. You will not find an argument here friend, although I sense you will keep fishing. Once again though, please do feel free to leave a response with your opinion on how Tyranid players opinions have changed from negative to positive with the release of a single, inflexible build. Because this I would be very interested to hear about, hence why I made the thread. However I'll be quite honest with you, I do not care even slightly about your opinions on how bad Sisters of Battle are lol. And if I did, I would have done what I suggest you do, and find the relevant thread for it or make one yourself. Automatically Appended Next Post: Verging on 7. And how much I agree with you.
26519
Post by: xttz
SHUPPET wrote:Me? I'm here just making this thread "crying" about Raveners. About Rippers. Walking Tyrants. Pyrovores. Swarmlord. Shrikes. Hive Guard. Drop Pods. Doom. BRB powers.
Doom (and Parasite) aren't so much an issue for me personally, even if I did convert them. Even spore pods, as the ones I have still make decent and thematic terrain.
My issue is more with the general laziness to address key tactical options within the codex...
There's no general fast transport / deep strike option. Even if GW didn't want to make a spore model, they could have just written in the ability to purchase the Deep Strike rule to simulate it, on the assumption the pod was splattered on arrival. Hell, that's even been a rule before.
There's very little in the way of reliable, ranged anti-armour. Exocrines can't handle AV13/14, Rupture Cannons are intensely poor, and Warp Lance doesn't have any options to get in range. All we get are HVCs, which typically come on expensive platforms, have poor AP, and you can't even take two of them on the same model.
They took away BRB powers, but replaced them with just a single table that contains a mish-mash of all powers. That stops you building lists around psykers with a certain role - unlike other races who get multiple tables to choose from. Would it really have been a hardship to include two tables of powers, each with their own theme?
Key units are incredibly easy to pick off, weakening the army as a whole. Other armies have simple rules to help counteract this (such as putting Farseers or IG Officers within a unit). Why can't we do this with Warriors and Venomthropes?
There was no thought given at all to some units. I really wanted to like Pyrovores and Rippers (especially the FW ones). Instead their rules are so badly done they're basically a handicap to take. They don't have to be great, or even good. But it would be nice if they were playable.
The army ****ing EATS ITSELF
gravitywell wrote:Rumor is that they might get some FW love.
We're getting some FW products. I'm not so sure about love if the Malanthrope and Hierdodule rules are anything to go by.
81860
Post by: Murdius Maximus
Blood Angels would like to speak with you for a moment...
57646
Post by: Kain
ClockworkZion wrote:I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
"Hey, transexuals never faced a concerted effort at genociding them away like the Jews have, so they shouldn't complain."
Extreme, yes.
But your logic is identical and equally fallacious.
7075
Post by: chaos0xomega
 Kain wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
"Hey, transexuals never faced a concerted effort at genociding them away like the Jews have, so they shouldn't complain." Extreme, yes. But your logic is identical and equally fallacious.
And this ladies and gentlemen, right here, is a rather awesomely ironic example of a logical fallacy, in this particular case, the fallacy is known as 'reductio ad absurdum'
57646
Post by: Kain
chaos0xomega wrote: Kain wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
"Hey, transexuals never faced a concerted effort at genociding them away like the Jews have, so they shouldn't complain."
Extreme, yes.
But your logic is identical and equally fallacious.
And this ladies and gentlemen, right here, is a rather awesomely ironic example of a logical fallacy, in this particular case, the fallacy is known as 'reductio ad absurdum'
I am not making an argument, which is what you need for a logical fallacy to occur.
I am merely pointing out that this argument hinges on faulty logic.
As for my beliefs.
The greater suffering of one group does not excuse allowing the continued suffering of another or invalidate the complaints of that group.
Just because the SoBs have it bad does not mean no one else is allowed to complain or that they should stop complaining. Rather that both groups should join together and complain louder until they are heard.
Otherwise me living in one of the most corrupt nations on Earth where bribes happen in the open and nobody caring would invalidate the political complaints of literally everyone in America and Europe over in off-topic.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
Forgive me for not agreeing with the initial assessment of how bad the Tyranid codex is because of my playing an army that is all around worse off. If I'm guilty of anything it's a "Grass is Greener" mentality when it comes to these newer codexes with actual model support, codexes in actual book format and generally a public show of support.
Well that and a general desensitization to the problems of other books because of the rampant hyperbole the internet shoves in your face over everything that isn't the most awesome thing in the game. Call it what you will but I get burnt out on the negativity the internet shows about every little detail in every single book.
Tyranids is not a bad book. It might be a little bland, or lacking full options for every stage of the invasion being represented on the table, but it is not bad. It's just overshadowed heavily by Tau and Eldar, which are currently overshadowing all the other armies.
55306
Post by: Hivefleet Oblivion
Don't really agree with the original premise - we changed up our list right after the new codex, and tried out a bunch of stuff we hadn't used for ages, like Mawlocs, even things like Carnifexes were more usable.
Some of the problem was the way people convinced themselves that the wishlist would all be granted. Some of the problem was a lazy codex, with some nonsensical builds and some dreadful cut and pasted illustrations and copy.
We ran Skyblight last night and vaporised a taudar list. (we run it because that's the list we've always wanted, having been running a flying circus ever since we got the Crone). But we'd still have fun without Skblight.
Yes, the new codex was disappointing in some key respects, but it was never remotely as bad as some of the moaners contended. And there is variety of builds, which we'll continue to explore.
A lot of this is how you handle change. We lost our genestealers in 6th but, so what, then we had fun with flyrants and psychic powers. We lost the psychic powers and our pods, but now we have fun with flyers, carnifexes, and spore mines. And we might even take those genestealers out for a frolic again too.
80673
Post by: Iron_Captain
Is this a record for a thread going off topic? Automatically Appended Next Post: chaos0xomega wrote: Kain wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
"Hey, transexuals never faced a concerted effort at genociding them away like the Jews have, so they shouldn't complain." Extreme, yes. But your logic is identical and equally fallacious.
And this ladies and gentlemen, right here, is a rather awesomely ironic example of a logical fallacy, in this particular case, the fallacy is known as 'reductio ad absurdum'
Wouldn't it be a 'reductio ad hitlerum'?  In any case, I think the Tyranid codex is not so bad. I feel a lot of people just complained for the sake of complaining. It is mostly that codices in general are rather bad. Especially with internal balance. imo, GW should do a complete reboot with the next edition. Everyone should get a new codex at the same time, so that they can be properly tested bot internally against each other.
83810
Post by: Saevus
I am almost certain the OP was really discussing the mindset of Nid players and the bellyaching that occured with the new codex, but then magically after a couple data slates, it turns out everything is ok in the end.
Dataslates that force you to use a powerful but limited list, don't a good codex suddenly make.
Ultimately, people are fickle. No one has ever complained that they are too OP, Kicking the crap out of people is fun afterall. That is what people want. Even if 40k became a perfectly balanced system, people would find reasons to complain. Such is life.
I personally think Nid players overeacted. The codex lacks a bit in quality (fluff, a lot of cut and paste, etc) but tbh, Nids are boring as hell and that is their fault for being the most mind numbingly bland army in the 40k universe. All that aside, Nids are still a decent army....I think the big reason people were upset was exactly as you say, percieved power creep. We had a series of Codex's that kind of got sillier as time went on, then the Nid one dropped and it wasn't LOLWTFPWNED Over powered and people were caught off guard and they complained. But is it suprising they are suddenly happy when some power creeps their way? No, not at all. Standard practice.
As for all the units that are now invalidated by the dex/slates.....standard fair. Too many unit types and models to effectively balance 40k. Part of its problem as a competative game. But then.....all the game systems have these issues one way or the other.....I hate to sound cliche, but I play 40k with a good group of buddies as a fun game, and we have a blast with our fluffy armies. If I tried to make a netlist and fight the taudar, or waveserpent spam I see at some of the cons, I'd hang myself.
25580
Post by: Maelstrom808
Bought the new codex, tested it, then sold my Nids, and I don't regret it at all. It just wasn't the army I wanted to play anymore. For me, the dataslates haven't changed a thing in that aspect. I used the money to start a Lizardmen army and am the happiest I've been in a long time with my army collection.
44276
Post by: Lobokai
the Frontline gaming crew has developed a solid tourney list that uses the standard FoC with no formations. You've got to like MC and FMC for it to work, but a solid competitive build that will crush some of the current deathstars is in that codex (something my DA are having a hard time finding in theirs).
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
SHUPPET wrote:This isn't about a competition with SoB, who I agree have had worse treatment than Nids. But looking at everything with the perspective of "well, you aren't as bad off as Sisters!" makes a 40k discussion forum pretty pointless. If you want to talk about Sisters, make a thread. This thread is about Nids.
I thought this was a thread for getting up on your soap box and assuming incorrectly why others disagree with your opinion and how stupid they are.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
 Iron_Captain wrote:Wouldn't it be a 'reductio ad hitlerum'?
In any case, I think the Tyranid codex is not so bad. I feel a lot of people just complained for the sake of complaining.
It is mostly that codices in general are rather bad. Especially with internal balance. imo, GW should do a complete reboot with the next edition. Everyone should get a new codex at the same time, so that they can be properly tested bot internally against each other.
What's even funnier is that the argument it makes is factually wrong, since gays and transsexuals were specifically targeted in the Holocaust, just like the Jews. So, yes, there *was* a concentrated attempt to eradicate them! Though you can't call it a genocide, since they're not a specific ethnic type... and to do so is also a factual error.
Tyranids, in their fluff, don't have a lot of variety. "Drown them in bugs" is their main tactic, with very little variation. Sure, in a few battles here and there they get creative and have something tunnel up out of the ground, or swoop down from the sky... but then they drown the targets in more bugs. It's a locust swarm, the ways in which it does its thing is fairly one-note. That the main Codex was bland is not without merit, but I think a lot of people *were* hoping for a few power-house builds using the models they already owned. This is a fool's errand with a GW game, who exist to make you buy more models. That's why units go from Great to Meh, or Meh to Great, with alternating editions. It's to get you to buy the models that were meh in the last edition in this edition, and then to buy more of the meh models from this edition in the next edition when they're great.
61785
Post by: Dalymiddleboro
As least you have a physical book... poor sisters of battle....
44924
Post by: Zande4
1: Most people got over complaining and got on with what we were given, no point crying about it anymore.
2: Sisters players will always make threads like this about them because the players that codex attracts are the people that like to feel special and unique. If Tyranid, Ork or BA players complain about how unfair they've got it then that takes away from the poor SoB players who have it so hard and must always be the worst off and let everyone know about it... all... the... time...
74682
Post by: MWHistorian
The criticisms falling off couldn't have anything to do with everything having already been said.
We can say "It's a boring, bland, uninspired, mono-build, weak dex" only so many times before we wander off and find something else to do.
(The data slates really don't change those criticisms.)
68714
Post by: VorpalBunny74
Sisters of Battle? Luxury. My squats can't even be used!
*doesn't even have squats*
In any case the thing I most dislike about the Tyranid codex is instinctive behaviour, because it turns a vicious army of alien predators into the Babysitters Club, with synapse needed to make sure the little ones do what they're told.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
IB is an old rule, and has been with the Tyranids since their inception. It's taken a few different forms over the years, but ties into the old "Shoot the Big Ones!" army-wide rule from way back.
IIRC, that allowed the enemy to shoot at the big bugs regardless of any intervening models. They didn't get cover saves from other Tyranids.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
IB needs more buffing action to offset the penalties or less penalties to the rule honestly.
But that's pretty much every Nid book to date.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
ClockworkZion wrote:IB needs more buffing action to offset the penalties or less penalties to the rule honestly.
But that's pretty much every Nid book to date.
4th edition with it's EW and strong biomorphs say hi.
Same with 2nd edition. *Shiver* damned nid cards, best anti-psykers in the game.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
 ZebioLizard2 wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:IB needs more buffing action to offset the penalties or less penalties to the rule honestly.
But that's pretty much every Nid book to date.
4th edition with it's EW and strong biomorphs say hi.
Same with 2nd edition. *Shiver* damned nid cards, best anti-psykers in the game.
I played with the 4th Ed Dex and if rgot that EW was a thing.
Well it had the right idea at least.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
It's interesting how 40k discussion often degrade*** in to "well at least it's not as bad as ...." or "why are you complaining about the balance of .... when it's not nearly as terrible as ....". Sometimes I get the feeling that instead of people wanting things to improve, they just want everything to suck as hard as the worst thing sucks now (which is typically something from a Codex that hasn't even been updated, from a Codex with wildly unbalanced options or a Codex that GW apparently seems to hate). Often I just wish GW did what they did in 3rd edition, frakk the old codices and start fresh. New edition, new rules, burn the old books so we can get rid of the silliness where the game designers are trying to fit new rules in to an old rusty framework. The Tyranid codex sucks. There's a ton of units that just flat out suck and a ton of things that could have been viable tactics/options which flat out suck because of poor implementation. Are there worse codices? Yeah, there are, but this one was released just a few months ago and for the current edition. ***and by "degrade', in this particular thread it was the 1st reply 
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Sometimes I get the feeling that instead of people wanting things to improve, they just want everything to suck as hard as the worst thing sucks now (which is typically something from a Codex that hasn't even been updated, from a Codex with wildly unbalanced options or a Codex that GW apparently seems to hate).
It's less wanting everything to suck and more wishing people would quit crying that they have it the worst (which is what many of the threads like this do) when other things are worse off than their army.
AllSeeingSkink wrote:Often I just wish GW did what they did in 3rd edition, frakk the old codices and start fresh. New edition, new rules, burn the old books so we can get rid of the silliness where the game designers are trying to fit new rules in to an old rusty framework.
The switch in 3rd was largely to push the new (at the time) tournament scene. While I don't think that it was a bad idea, but it was very rushed and that mistake shouldn't be repeated for sure.
If they reboot the game they need to take a good long time to work on it and really fine tune it. And once it's fine tuned basically run a "living edition" with it and focus on updating the armies and codexes over time instead of the entire game.
68714
Post by: VorpalBunny74
 Psienesis wrote:IB is an old rule, and has been with the Tyranids since their inception. It's taken a few different forms over the years, but ties into the old "Shoot the Big Ones!" army-wide rule from way back.
IIRC, that allowed the enemy to shoot at the big bugs regardless of any intervening models. They didn't get cover saves from other Tyranids.
Oh I know IB is an old rule, I just think the current incarnation of it is a bit silly.
I want Hormagaunts to act like a pack of wolves when out of synapse, not like the Three Stooges.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
ClockworkZion wrote:It's less wanting everything to suck and more wishing people would quit crying that they have it the worst (which is what many of the threads like this do) when other things are worse off than their army.
I don't think anyone ever suggested Tyranids have it the worst. You don't have to be the worst in 40k to have things suck and be poorly written. In fact the 2nd reply to this thread was agreeing that sisters have it worse.
70442
Post by: Addaran
SHUPPET wrote:And I think that's because a lot of you actually were.
A lot of talk about "badly written codex, Cruddex 2.0, I'm not crying I just wanted more variety" has quickly dissipated with the release of the dataslates, well most pointedly Skyblight Swarm. Now the general response has turned to positive, with much talk of "back to being happy with the state of my Tyranids, if this was only in the original codex I would have never complained to begin with".
Well... no. Looking at all our 6E rules as one bundle, even with the dataslates rolled in the book is still as bland as ever. Forest infiltrating Lictors, ruin infiltrating Stealers, Spore Mines that run at 6" instead of 3", re-rolling Tervigon spawn rolls of 1, and 18" Synapse range on some Warrior units, do NOT make our codex less bland. That is not to say there isn't some possible uses for these, and definite uses for the ones not mentioned (Endless, Skyblight & Artillery formations). However, they add very little flavor to list building and even less variation.
Lets address the elephant in the room - Skyblight. Yes, it is powerful, and likely our most competitive option between both this and the last dex. At the same time, it costs over 1000 points minimum to take if used sensibly (sure you could leave the TL Devourers at home and not pack more gargoyles if you wanted to keep it at 800-900 pts, but that begs the question as to why you are taking it in the first place). And after this sizable points investment, the rest of your list writes itself. This doesn't give me more options for list building, it just gives me a list and says "here play like this or go directly back to the same old book". The other good options are just this to lesser extremes, with the exception of Artillery which is basically just a plain buff to these units / FOC if you are taking them. But this is not even SLIGHTLY improving the quality of the Nid dex. It makes it more powerful, and apparently that's all most of you ever wanted because it seems we are content now.
Me? I'm here just making this thread "crying" about Raveners. About Rippers. Walking Tyrants. Pyrovores. Swarmlord. Shrikes. Hive Guard. Drop Pods. Doom. BRB powers. Haruspexhormagantgenestealerscythingtalonscrushingclawstyranidprimetervigonetc etc etc.
Sure I'll take what I can get. Lictors pretty much not even appearing on the FOC anymore is fun. Endless Swarm makes my Trygon something other than a counts-as Mawloc. Re-rollable pinning blasts are my best bet for any attempt I want to try to make with stealers or horms. But anybody who claimed they were unhappy with the original release due to "bad internal balance and bad writing" but is now content thanks to dataslates (may as well just call it "thanks to Skyblight and Artillery") has completely lost their integrity. It's a shame that after all that talk, most of you didn't actually want a "fun" codex, you were just as happy being able to Buy flyerspam and get some cheap victories. i'm not even going to call it "building", because close to zero thought goes into any list related decisions after deciding to take that formation.
One of the problem with the codex was that while there was some nice buff (lower cost for termies, horma and carnifex!) there was a bunch of not needed nerfs.
Everyone knew tervigons would get nerfed (every list had 2-3 minimum!) same with DoM.
Removing the pods sucked. A bunch of the armies have them, it was only a huge problem with the OP DoM. The nerf to scything talons..... That's just mean. We lost half of our TL. Parasite of Mortrex was just a fun character to put in fluffy army, but wasn't that effective, specialy compared to flyrant. The change to "weapons" is HUGE for melee. You used to be able to stack them. Now, double bone sword is weaker in every way then bonesword + lash whip, except that it cost 5 points less.
The dataslates does give great formations. Getting Lictors that don't count for FOC is awesome if you like Mawlocks. Heavy support being so good choices, living artillery is awesome. You get biovores, exocrine and synapse, while still being able to take trygons, tyrano and mawlocks. Endless swarms sounds insanely fun. You can get super aggressive and you'll still have troops at the end for objectives. It's a very nice buff to swarm armies. (able to get more models then the FOC used to allow and half the time, the squads might come back.... in the middle of battle if you have trygons) I've even heard good things about the silly genestealers, beeing able to charge first turn and hurt back of tanks. Skyblight obviously, dont need explaining.
Raveners, walk-rants/swarmy seems to possibly have formation coming. Wait for the 3rd dataslate before giving hope.
Saevus wrote:
I personally think Nid players overeacted. The codex lacks a bit in quality (fluff, a lot of cut and paste, etc) but tbh, Nids are boring as hell and that is their fault for being the most mind numbingly bland army in the 40k universe. All that aside, Nids are still a decent army....I think the big reason people were upset was exactly as you say, percieved power creep. We had a series of Codex's that kind of got sillier as time went on, then the Nid one dropped and it wasn't LOLWTFPWNED Over powered and people were caught off guard and they complained. But is it suprising they are suddenly happy when some power creeps their way? No, not at all. Standard practice.
Nids bland? They are one of the unique and fun army. The fluff is awesome. Personnaly, it's the 300 different space marines and chaos space marines that don't interest me to read about them. The sisters of battle, xenos and demons is where the fun is!
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
ClockworkZion wrote:If they reboot the game they need to take a good long time to work on it and really fine tune it. And once it's fine tuned basically run a "living edition" with it and focus on updating the armies and codexes over time instead of the entire game.
As long as they burn the old rules and codices so we don't have the situation we have now where each new edition is hamstrung by trying to fit in to old codices.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
AllSeeingSkink wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:If they reboot the game they need to take a good long time to work on it and really fine tune it. And once it's fine tuned basically run a "living edition" with it and focus on updating the armies and codexes over time instead of the entire game.
As long as they burn the old rules and codices so we don't have the situation we have now where each new edition is hamstrung by trying to fit in to old codices.
I wouldn't go as far as burning them (I generally like to avoid abusing books, it's not their fault after all) but yes, the edition would need to launch with a massive erratta or new books for every army.
And then the player base would be mad for the massive invalidation of all the rules at the same time. Automatically Appended Next Post: AllSeeingSkink wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:It's less wanting everything to suck and more wishing people would quit crying that they have it the worst (which is what many of the threads like this do) when other things are worse off than their army.
I don't think anyone ever suggested Tyranids have it the worst. You don't have to be the worst in 40k to have things suck and be poorly written. In fact the 2nd reply to this thread was agreeing that sisters have it worse.
I admit to over reading into it. You see a lot of threads that are like this and you end up basically learning a response which isn't always appropriate (but usually fits).
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Personally I'm still not happy with the book, I'm glad the dataslates make it a little more interesting than the 5th ed book but they're obvious cash-grab DLC that should have been in the Codex, and you can only polish a turd so much.
26519
Post by: xttz
Saying the Nid codex is fine just because a certain build can beat Tau is missing the bigger picture.
It's like saying that your new car is fine because it's faster than someone else's, while ignoring the fact that the seats are made of bare wood and the brakes only work every other time you press them.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
The thing that annoys me about the dataslates, while YES, the do make some troops more effective and in that sense increase options, they....
1. Cost more money above and beyond the codex which should not have sucked in the first place.
2. While they make certain units better, they force you in to taking that unit in a formation when the unit shouldn't have sucked in the first place.
Yay, the Skyblight formation doesn't suck... but I don't want to go out and buy $400 of gargoyles and harpies, I'd rather I could just make a balanced list from within the codex.
If the Ravener/Trygon formation doesn't suck, that will be nice... however it is still going to be annoying that to make Trygons and Raveners useful, you have to buy 3+ boxes of Raveners and 3 boxes of Trygons/Mawlocks. Someone walks in to a GW and picks up a box of Raveners for $74AUD only to find out they are terrible unless you buy another $148 worth of of Raveners and $288AUD worth of Trygon/Mawlock boxes. That's $510 worth of models just so Raveners can not suck quite so hard. 
46128
Post by: Happyjew
AllSeeingSkink wrote:The thing that annoys me about the dataslates, while YES, the do make some troops more effective and in that sense increase options, they....
1. Cost more money above and beyond the codex which should not have sucked in the first place.
2. While they make certain units better, they force you in to taking that unit in a formation when the unit shouldn't have sucked in the first place.
Yay, the Skyblight formation doesn't suck... but I don't want to go out and buy $400 of gargoyles and harpies, I'd rather I could just make a balanced list from within the codex.
If the Ravener/Trygon formation doesn't suck, that will be nice... however it is still going to be annoying that to make Trygons and Raveners useful, you have to buy 3+ boxes of Raveners and 3 boxes of Trygons/Mawlocks. Someone walks in to a GW and picks up a box of Raveners for $74AUD only to find out they are terrible unless you buy another $148 worth of of Raveners and $288AUD worth of Trygon/Mawlock boxes. That's $510 worth of models just so Raveners can not suck quite so hard.
I wouldn't know about their effectiveness. My local store has banned their use for tournaments, and others don't want to play against them in casual.
9982
Post by: dementedwombat
It still ignites a small blow-torch of anger in my heart that tyranids can't get access to frag grenade equivalents on genestealers. You'd think the scouting independent sneaky biomorphs designed to fight in close quarters would actually...you know...have a way to drag their prey out of close quarters into arms reach.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Ambush hunters being good at ambushing? Now that's just ridiculous.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
ClockworkZion wrote:AllSeeingSkink wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:It's less wanting everything to suck and more wishing people would quit crying that they have it the worst (which is what many of the threads like this do) when other things are worse off than their army.
I don't think anyone ever suggested Tyranids have it the worst. You don't have to be the worst in 40k to have things suck and be poorly written. In fact the 2nd reply to this thread was agreeing that sisters have it worse.
I admit to over reading into it. You see a lot of threads that are like this and you end up basically learning a response which isn't always appropriate (but usually fits).
Then perhaps you should have taken the time to read other people's posts before spouting off a bunch off nonsense. This was not a thread about my opinions on the Nid dex, or which codex had it worse (which I did say was Sisters), this was a thread about the contrast between people's opinions with the book in the first month and the book now. And the difference is More than just people accepting the book & getting sick of complaining about it (I also am in this boat), no the difference is far more accentuated than that, with the release of Skyblight, the current opinion of the masses has changed to completely positive when fundamentally, the book is exactly the same as it was flexibility wise as upon release, it just got more competitive. The hypocrisy is beyond belief and I think a lot of the counter-talk I saw in the original thread of "you are just mad because you didn't get Tau, not because you care about internal balance" was actually accurate. That is what this thread is about. Not that Tyranids have the worst dex, or never could compete, which was not the case even upon release. I believe I even said our new vanilla book (before dataslates) was slightly stronger than the last, but just as badly written (or worse).
But thanks for contributing about half an A4 page worth of off-topic trolling Clockwork. I'll be sure to take all future opinions I see from you with a grain of salt.
 Zande4 wrote:Sisters players will always make threads like this about them because the players that codex attracts are the people that like to feel special and unique. If Tyranid, Ork or BA players complain about how unfair they've got it then that takes away from the poor SoB players who have it so hard and must always be the worst off and let everyone know about it... all... the... time...
Yep. Making my own thread for it wouldn't attract the people who don't care it, instead I'm just going to derail other peoples threads from reply 1 with spam about SoB, without actually reading through the topic properly, and any polite requests to refrain I shall view as a challenge to my opinion, and state it as such! (exalted your post btw)
 MWHistorian wrote: SHUPPET wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
This isn't about a competition with SoB, who I agree have had worse treatment than Nids. But looking at everything with the perspective of "well, you aren't as bad off as Sisters!" makes a 40k discussion forum pretty pointless. If you want to talk about Sisters, make a thread. This thread is about Nids.
I thought this was a thread for getting up on your soap box and assuming incorrectly why others disagree with your opinion and how stupid they are.
Yep that's exactly what this is! That being said however, maybe if the post that mine was in response to, was not an open-ended off topic reference that didn't actually disagree with any opinion stated, there would have been no room for incorrect assumptions to be made. Luckily though, no incorrect assumptions were made, as the only "assumption" made by me (if you can even call it that as it is really just the obvious interpretation of a single sentence post) has been proved accurate by each further post made by him in this thread. Hmmm, actually MWH, maybe what you thought this thread was about might not be as accurate as you believed. Is it possible twas only you who made the incorrect assumption?
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
SHUPPET wrote:But thanks for contributing about half an A4 page worth of off-topic trolling Clockwork. I'll be sure to take all future opinions I see from you with a grain of salt.
Actually if you read the thread, outside of that first post, I've been in part, largely on topic.
And yes, I read your post but things like this:
Me? I'm here just making this thread "crying" about Raveners. About Rippers. Walking Tyrants. Pyrovores. Swarmlord. Shrikes. Hive Guard. Drop Pods. Doom. BRB powers. Haruspexhormagantgenestealerscythingtalonscrushingclawstyranidprimetervigonetc etc etc.
tend to send the wrong message about what you're trying to say and make it look like a bitch thread about how you think the codex still sucks while everone else has moved on. So, you know, exactly like every thread ever made to complain about a codex being "the worst ever" instead of anything productive. So perhaps maybe less hyperbole in your own posts, and a more clear cut and less sarcastic opening post and we can all get along better next time. Poe's Law and all that.
81872
Post by: Veteran of The Long War
I feel you guy's pain, CSM got the same treatment as you got.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
As for the chief complaint (that apparently everyone stopped complaining when dataslates came out), according to one person over in the Tyranid Tactics thread that hasn't really been the case:
rigeld2 wrote:Not sure which thread you've been reading - many of us haven't been down on the new codex from the start.
I mean - I pointed out the obvious flaws (Pyrovores still suck, Tervigons got expectedly nerfed, Swarmlord got unexpectedly nerfed, loss of Pods) but overall I've been happy.
Maybe the OP has only been reading the most negative voices?
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Actually we had it all then had it ripped away, they never had it at all.
81872
Post by: Veteran of The Long War
They had it pretty good in 4th. Remember the Nidzilla?
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
ClockworkZion wrote:As for the chief complaint (that apparently everyone stopped complaining when dataslates came out), according to one person over in the Tyranid Tactics thread that hasn't really been the case:
rigeld2 wrote:Not sure which thread you've been reading - many of us haven't been down on the new codex from the start.
I mean - I pointed out the obvious flaws (Pyrovores still suck, Tervigons got expectedly nerfed, Swarmlord got unexpectedly nerfed, loss of Pods) but overall I've been happy.
Maybe the OP has only been reading the most negative voices?
You're taking that out of context, rigeld's post was in response to a discussion about people being down on how competitive Tyranids would be when the Codex.
Now, I don't speak for the entire Tyranid community, but from what I've seen that isn't anywhere close to the main complaint.
You mean monobuild.dex? While powerful, just putting a Hive Tyrant, some Genestealers, and a bunch of Carnifices down on the table would have to get boring after a while. (started playing in 5th, so I wouldn't know first-hand)
That being said, the mutable upgrades of the 4th ed book are a thing of beauty.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
 PrinceRaven wrote:You're taking that out of context, rigeld's post was in response to a discussion about people being down on how competitive Tyranids would be when the Codex.
Now, I don't speak for the entire Tyranid community, but from what I've seen that isn't anywhere close to the main complaint.
It is out of context, but it's a good point to bring up regarding the idea that the 'Nid community has been largely complaining since the book came out, when we have a decently sized one here who is attesting to being largely happy with the book despite the things that were not so great about this one versus the last one.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
Actually yes, forgive me, I haven't been looking at the broad picture here, I mean the positive response to the Tyranid release has been nothing short of overwhelming. One person's post in the tactic section definitely cements this fact. Or maybe we could link a couple of other posts, from that same page... vortexdr wrote:Umm the Nids codex is still bad....Its lazy and uninspired. Yes sure we can win plenty games (i've won far more then i've lost) but that doesn't change the fact that the codex was a hash job. (The DLC's did help but really....endless swarm should of been a purchasable codex upgrade for any gaunt squads...) All I really need to say to make my point is what they did to Scy talons...Replacing re-rolls with AP6 sure is awesome /sarcasm
There's plenty of discussion either way, but to act like it's all been positive from the start is ridiculous. You read this thread? In case you missed it., heres some stats for you  CalgarsPimpHand wrote: Within the first 6 pages, I counted 81 unique users. Out of those, 19 users made only off-topic or otherwise irrelevant comments. That leaves 62 users who did make some kind of opinion about the codex known somehow. There were 12 users who posted positive views (I was pretty generous with this, anyone even playing devil's advocate or saying "wait and see" I considered positive), 5 mixed opinions, and 45 negative views. The negative views ran the gamut from long, impassioned, well-reasoned complaints, to people popping in to leave one snide comment. Percentage-wise, the Tyranid thread broke down as 19% positive, 73% negative, 8% mixed.
My point is that we went from that, to, as you said, people in the other thread with positive views on the dex, all thanks to Skyblight Hypocrisy. So yeah, I wouldn't say that I've been ignoring the amazing positive response just to focus on the negative. 73% negative, 8% mixed. Under 20% positive. Just a tip for further responses, revisionism doesn't work so well when everything is still all viewable on the forum.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
You want to know why they changed their tune maybe it's best aimed at the crowd specifically that you're criticizing instead of everyone in general. Say, by posting in the thread and getting their responses directly, instead of in the "General 40" forum where everyone, to include non Nid players will see it and respond with their own opinions about the book despite the fact that they're not really the ones you seem to be wanting accountability from.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
So now the troll / Sisters spammer is lecturing me about making off-topic threads. If this thread doesn't concern you, why enter it. As you said earlier, it's a public forum. You used this as justification to go wildly off topic. I'm posting a 40k related topic in the 40k general discussion subforum. Stop trolling. I struggle to see why you are further posting in here. From first reply onwards its clear you came in here looking for an argument, so I'm just going to go ahead and give you the report you want so badly, and just ignore all further posts. You have had your feed.
Have a nice day.
EDIT: nice subject change when presented with logic that proves you undeniably incorrect by the way. I've seen smoother.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Is it just me, or is revisionist history very popular on this forum?
6593
Post by: Ventus
Shuppet - don't lump everyone together like that. Just because we are all not complaining constantly about the poor quality, bland and unimaginative nid dex, an opinion I had on day one and still do, doesn't mean we are all happy. Everyone would be sick and tired of hearing constant complaining - I'm sure you included.
The dataslates do provide some options but it doesn't change the failure of the dex or that fact that if I want to try those rules I have to pay more on top of an already overpriced dex. It is doubtful I will get the dataslates. Others may but either way the dex is the mess we have and either we shelve/sell our nids or find a way to play them that we are happy with, dex alone or with dataslates.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
SHUPPET wrote:So now the troll / Sisters spammer is lecturing me about making off-topic threads. If this thread doesn't concern you, why enter it. As you said earlier, it's a public forum. You used this as justification to go wildly off topic. I'm posting a 40k related topic in the 40k general discussion subforum. Stop trolling. I struggle to see why you are further posting in here. From first reply onwards its clear you came in here looking for an argument, so I'm just going to go ahead and give you the report you want so badly, and just ignore all further posts. You have had your feed.
Have a nice day.
EDIT: nice subject change when presented with logic that proves you undeniably incorrect by the way. I've seen smoother.
One off topic post does not make one a spammer. I never wanted an arguement, I just didn't agree with the tone of your intro post, particularly the part I highlighted where you said were were just here to cry about a whole slew of things in the codex and it read a lot like every thread I've ever seen where someone starts playing a sad violin over how bad their army has it.
I really feel you're just trying to play the victim card for attention here (actually the whole thread feels like a massive cry for attention as the only posts you've seemed to focus on have been tied to my one off topic post at the start of things and not to any post disagreeing about the perceived power of the Tyranid codex, dataslates or not).
And if I fed off of human anguish, anger, suffering and so on I would have stayed in the Army, not spend my time on a message board.
As for the topic change, I was trying to be helpful and point you at a venue that could actually get you the answers you seem to want instead of all the stuff you don't. Forgive me for trying to point you in the direction of a more fruitful bounty of information.
I may have misread too far into your initial post but I made a solid attempt to keep on topic afterwards and you have apparently made it your duty to disagree with me specifically. Congrats. You "win" I suppose. I don't know what it's worth, or even what you're trying to win, but you "win" regardless.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
 Ventus wrote:Shuppet - don't lump everyone together like that. Just because we are all not complaining constantly about the poor quality, bland and unimaginative nid dex, an opinion I had on day one and still do, doesn't mean we are all happy. Everyone would be sick and tired of hearing constant complaining - I'm sure you included. The dataslates do provide some options but it doesn't change the failure of the dex or that fact that if I want to try those rules I have to pay more on top of an already overpriced dex. It is doubtful I will get the dataslates. Others may but either way the dex is the mess we have and either we shelve/sell our nids or find a way to play them that we are happy with, dex alone or with dataslates.
Yeah I agree with you. And I haven't lumped everyone in together, I for one was unhappy with the dex day 1 and still am - at this stage there is no point in complaining about it, its all been said. I just I find it quite disheartening that a lot of my brother in arms and uproar who claimed they needed more "versatility and better writing" in their dex, were just as easily sated with some Flyerspamcheese nonsense instead. Believe me, I haven't lumped everyone who complained about the Nid dex into this category, otherwise it would literally include myself. And yeah, price aside, the dataslates add very little in list building options, for they most part the useful ones are almost an entire list worth of tax. I'd be much happier with Skyblight if it was just an opening up of FOC slots for fliers, that way I could still take my Mawlocs in the heavys without having to blow a bunch of points on Harpys and Crones and whatever other strong units that I personally would rather not play with. Thus I find very little flexibility is added with the dataslates, in fact with all the tax for taking most the options, its generally reduced flexibility being trade off for stronger units. Not an improvement imo.
72239
Post by: helotaxi
Why the hell would that improve my outlook? Pay triple for a model (model, shipping, rules) for a slice off the cheddar wheel? No thanks. I have no intention of ever playing in a tourney again thanks to the fact that you can't even compete with a balanced list anymore. I like the formations because they open up more possibilities for fielding a list with a little more flavor. I doubt that I'll ever field a Skyblight, but the synapse swarm and the endless swarm are real possibilities.
In truth the codex isn't the real problem. The 6ed rules in general are. Nids are a CC army and should remain that way. Trashing the viability of CC armies with the core rules is what nerfed the Nids. Some of it could have been "fixed" with the Codex, but IMO there is enough cheese out there already. The Nid book is probably one of the most balanced books in the new edition. The fact that several of the others are wholesale broken isn't a fault on the Nids.
6593
Post by: Ventus
I feel your pain Shuppet. I am trying to be motivated enough to play my nids but find it difficult after putting up with the 5th edition mess for 4 years.
The skyblight formation seems very strong and Reece and friends over at frontlinegaming also have settled on a FMC list as their choice for a decent list. One thing that bothers me is that I have to buy so many models its not funny to run something like that. I'm fine with buying new models to add to your army (say 1-2), but I recently bought 2 flyrants (I used to use one sometimes and attached wings to one of my metal tyrants for the game) because they were already the goto HQ and still are but I really don't want to buy crones and harpies and exocrines. I'm tired of replacing so much of my army (had to buy many models when the last dex came out to try to get the army to work - trygons, hive guard, venomthropes, a tervigon (recently - never used them last dex), gargoyles, raveners, etc) .
For my space marine army I don't think I bought anything that wasn't already around - my bike army and salamander army still functioned, just needed to convert a few grav weapons and make some minor changes.
71534
Post by: Bharring
Well at least Malantai + Pod is gone... his ability to drop an infantry cluster then kill an army always bothered me more than getting my face smashed in by Iron Arm swarms... If he's not intercepted, and I went infantry heavy, it was GG.
That, and the one time I managed to get into melee with him, he solo'ed Asuraman (I need new dice).
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Ah, Doom, people were so scared of the little bugger and its low average damage output.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
PrinceRaven wrote:Ah, Doom, people were so scared of the little bugger and its low average damage output.
Yeah. Maybe I'm being the revisionist here but I never felt Doom was that great. He was cool and fun, but not very strong. He was cheese in the typical sense of the term. Not how people on here use the term as if its interchangeable with " OP", but cheese in the sense that he will work well and help you table someone if your opponent brought the wrong list, or if your opponent plays badly. However you can't rely on this and it's actually a bad thing to rely on, and he was so inconsistent I generally just packed him when I was building a new list that I knew wasn't refined yet anyway, just so I could show off my model. He was generally the first thing to go when I started tweaking. It was always interesting to see if he would dominate or just feed an expensive kill point for one S8 shot.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
I always found the using the fear of the Doom to distract my opponent's deployment and distract their Strength 8 shooting units to be much more useful than the Doom's actual damage.
It was cheap enough that my opponent could immediately take it down with a few Krak Missiles and I'd still be satisfied that it did its job.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
chaos0xomega wrote: Kain wrote: ClockworkZion wrote:I'd take a bland codex over a digital only codex that hasn't seen a single new model added to it since 3rd edition.
"Hey, transexuals never faced a concerted effort at genociding them away like the Jews have, so they shouldn't complain."
Extreme, yes.
But your logic is identical and equally fallacious.
And this ladies and gentlemen, right here, is a rather awesomely ironic example of a logical fallacy, in this particular case, the fallacy is known as 'reductio ad absurdum'
Reductio ad absurdam is not a logical fallacy.
71534
Post by: Bharring
Reducto ad absurdum is a fallacy is a fallacy (that was too much fun to type...)
Doom's damage potential was huge against certain list types. Anything infantry-heavy without ubiquitous invulns. As long as you podded him, allowing him to eat any target before he gets shot at.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Reductio ad absurdum is a perfectly valid argument form when it isn't being used to construct a straw man argument (in which case the straw man is the invalid part of the argument).
Doom's damage potential was good against low leadership armies, but at the same time low leadership armies normally have cheap enough troops that they can afford to lose a few.
62560
Post by: Makumba
Reductio ad absurdam is not a logical fallacy.
Plus gay , transsexual etc people were persecuted by the nazis . They even had their own sign . Red was for communits , yellow for jews , black for criminals and pink was gay and transsexual people . Not a good example then.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
Bharring wrote:Doom's damage potential was huge against certain list types. Anything infantry-heavy without ubiquitous invulns. As long as you podded him, allowing him to eat any target before he gets shot at.
Doom was good against low LD armies that couldn't grab cover and that didn't have a lot of small arms fire or a lot of S8 shooting.
Doom directly won me ... 1 game? Maybe 2? In all of my time with the 5th edition codex.
The reason he was so effective is because of the fear he instilled. It significantly changed my opponents deployment every time. For the first turn it limited his movement - for the second turn and further everyone literally scattered, tripping over themselves to run away from it.
My worst loss ever was against a Necron silver horde that ignored Doom for two turns because he did 0 wounds (missed my charge distance to get stuck into assault) and when I finally did 3 wounds, he fired a bunch of small arms and killed it. He didn't let it change his deployment. He didn't let it scare him from moving around, or force him to stay in cover... he paid about as much attention to it as he would a tac squad.
Which is about the right amount.
28424
Post by: Eddtheman
When I first heard that Tyranids were going to be updated, I was very excited. Overall, I feel that the changes to armies and the core rules show GWs main push for 6th edition is that players can and should be able to build whatever they want. Armies can take allies to recreate forces usually only allowed in the fiction. It feels to me like GW is trying to say "Take your IG, add a SM strike force, include an inquisitor to watch over everyone, add a tau battlesuit cadre, add a fortress, add whatever you'd like, it's your game" I'd hoped that the new Tyranid codex would take their 6th edition concepts and add them to Tyranids, an army that used to give players the MOST choices and options.
And then I got the book.
TO say I was let down would be an understatement. This is the first major release in IDK how long that actually lost options. For all its faults, I actually felt like the concepts that Cruddace included in the previous book were great. He made the army rely more on synergy and introduced the all-reserved nid army. I feel like the army lost most of its synergy and it definitely lost it's previous deployment options. It also lost it's BRB psychic powers; now the only book in the game to not have access, either on its own or through allies. Instinctive Behavior became more of a hindrance and Synapse less of a benefit. Besides the venomthrope, units in the previous book that attempted to build synergy lost these options. Units in the previous codex that were auto include lost some of their power (I think everyone expected that) but may of the less played options had at best a lateral shift in terms of effectiveness None of the new options change the feel of the new army or change how the army played in the previous edition.
In the old book, I usually ran either swarm nids or drop nids. My no-shooting drop nid army is not an option any more. I cant use the ymgarls or mycetic spores any longer. My swarm army, which actually included hormagaunts and carnifeces, looks like it stayed roughly the same size as before. Points drops were eaten up by adding options and points increases in other units. When I look at my army with the new book, I see largely the same army with less options and less flavor. Sything talons lost their only rules, Toxin and Adrenal glands on gaunts became prohibitively expensive to the point that they are no longer options, IB made running hordes of small gribblies even less attractive, as the death of a synapse creature can cause the unit to rout or attack itself.
Anyone who played tyranids in the previous edition could tell you the the problems that plagues the tyranid army. Small Gribblies were too expensive to be anything but small unit objective holders. Nids had very few options for dealing with tanks and flyers. Mid-sized monsters were too expensive for only t4, genestealers did not have the staying power to survive in an edition with overwatch, interceptor, and no assaults from the board edge. TMCs were too expensive for a WS 3 3-5 attack model, and died way too easily to most things in the game.
I feel that the reason that most Nid players are complaining, even though many have not had the opportunity to play the new book, is that a single read through will show anyone with an understanding of the previous codex that the fundamental issues that plagued the previous codex and weakened the army overall were not addressed. Yes many options dropped in cost, but I feel that those units ended up being costed what they should have been in the last codex, in addition to receiving a drop in effectiveness. In addition, alot of the options that myself and many tyranid players felt would give us options were not added. In an edition that is all about adding more choices and options to one's army, tyranid players are on the outside looking in and were not given anything to make up for the exclusion of BRB psychic powers, fortifications or allies.
This is what I said when the book came out and I'm sticking to it
27151
Post by: streamdragon
For the low low price of $14.99 you can have your old scything talons back!*
*For Carnifexes only. Only when taken as part of a formation. Formations not allowed in all gaming settings. Please speak to your TO for tournament information regarding formations. If rashes, chitin or hive mind like thoughts begin, please stop using formations and see your closest inquisitor.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
I would so rather have old Scything Talons than rerolls to wound. You can get that anyway with Toxin Sacs, it's hitting with a WS 3 model that's the problem.
26170
Post by: davethepak
Most of the nid players in my area still feel the same about the book, the formations have not changed that.
A couple of the new data-slates have some "useful" formations in them, but many folks feel they are a bit too....excessive in their requirements for individual play styles (how many of what????).
Personally, I was a bit disappointed in them (for many of the reasons stated many times before) and also in just the lack of more...options.
I was hoping for things like "add this special zone thrope, and you get to pick your power for your tyrant" or something to boost some of the existing weaknesses.
I mean, I have NEVER played a game with my carnifexes and thought "man, if only I could split fire this unit...".
Or my walking tyrant and said "wow, if only this guy had more synapse...."
Or "man, I just can't seem to wound with my carnifexs, I wish I had rerolls to wound with them..."
No, I said things like -
* the scything talon nerf and a lack of any way to get to hit rerolls is big, I hope I get something in a dataslate.
* a walking tyrant is so easily killed, I hope I get something to make him more survivable.
* I love raveners, I hope they get something to make them more survivable.
* warriors are only useful in a few very distinct builds/playstyles - man it would be nice if they were more useful over all.
* The haurspex is a cool model, and *almost* good enough to take, I hope he gets a boost...
etc.
Again, NONE of this is about power or the book (have not lost a game yet with the new book) - its about all the previous complaints - and after many games, I feel they are still valid.
Take the new slate for example - do any of these guys writing the material actually play the game?
Time for some new blood or less "yes men" in the design studio.
76206
Post by: Rotary
My army is moving more towards skyblight to help it balance out against my resident tau player but it isn't an answer, just a crutch.
Sure they gave us a few good flyers, flying hive tyrants were already a solid choice before, but they randomly made so-so and balanced units worse. I've given up worrying about this codex because it can't/wont be fixed until the next rewrite.
26170
Post by: davethepak
Ah, one thing I can say, is that in my experience in ACTUAL PLAY the IB rules are not as bad as they first seemed.
In several of them you still control the movement of the models, and thus can manage the "attack closest" provision.
Oh, its still a pain to not control your own army, but its just not as bad as many had thought (again, people need to actually read them carefully, and play games).
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
In my experience Instinctive Behaviour is absolutely awful if you do not build your list to minimise its impact as much as possible, resulting in restrictive list building.
26170
Post by: davethepak
PrinceRaven wrote:In my experience Instinctive Behaviour is absolutely awful if you do not build your list to minimise its impact as much as possible, resulting in restrictive list building.
I didn't say it was not bad or annoying, or that I think it should be in the book (it shouldn't - the lack of fearless on models with bad saves is enough) - I just am saying its not the sky is falling as was thought before.
Sure, it sucks, and YES, you are correct, you should build your list to avoid it as much as possible, and YES, that is restrictive.
But its not debilitating as many think, especially if they read WHEN you take the test as well..
Regardless, the book is still bland, has needless nerfs, terrible artifacts, lame psychic mechanics (why couldn't it have been "this is your defualt, or your could roll), bad units that were bad before and popular units just removed.
51881
Post by: BlaxicanX
People weren't complaining because it "wasn't OP" (some people might have, but certainly not the majority), they were complaining because it's a lazy, half-assed job where a ton of options were nerfed or taken away with no replacements put in their place and with almost zero effort put into the fluff.
And imo that's all absolutely true.
I'm glad that these dataslates are giving Tyranids a much needed and deserved power boost. But the codex is still ass, and frankly it's lame that we needed this dataslates in the first place.
26519
Post by: xttz
davethepak wrote: PrinceRaven wrote:In my experience Instinctive Behaviour is absolutely awful if you do not build your list to minimise its impact as much as possible, resulting in restrictive list building.
I didn't say it was not bad or annoying, or that I think it should be in the book (it shouldn't - the lack of fearless on models with bad saves is enough) - I just am saying its not the sky is falling as was thought before.
Sure, it sucks, and YES, you are correct, you should build your list to avoid it as much as possible, and YES, that is restrictive.
But its not debilitating as many think, especially if they read WHEN you take the test as well..
Regardless, the book is still bland, has needless nerfs, terrible artifacts, lame psychic mechanics (why couldn't it have been "this is your defualt, or your could roll), bad units that were bad before and popular units just removed.
Instinctive Behaviour is a fantastic example of poor game design. Instead of being rewarded for having something, you're actively punished for not having it. Imagine if Marines lost AtSKNF and Chapter Tactics when their captain or sergeant was killed, and then followed up by running away or shooting each other. There'd be a nerdy riot.
Then to make matters worse, we don't even get real tools to protect these critical units. No Synapse creatures can take a 2+ save. Only the easily ID'd T4 model gets an invuln. Venomthropes can't hide in units like their Warlock, Big Mek or Apothecary counterparts in other armies.
 BlaxicanX wrote:I'm glad that these dataslates are giving Tyranids a much needed and deserved power boost. But the codex is still ass, and frankly it's lame that we needed this dataslates in the first place.
The dataslates aren't a power boost so much as a small compensation for not having allies. Only a couple of them (Endless Swarm / Skyblight) open up new abilities (that really should have been in the codex from day 1). The rest is just a convoluted bunch of rules to ignore the usual FOC, often with the 'tax' of taking mediocre units like Warriors to do so. We've replaced the undercosted Tervigon crutch with the easily-spammed Skyblight crutch.
Formations did virtually nothing to address the real issues of the codex, namely:
Unreliable ranged anti-armour options
Survivability of key units (especially synapse and venomthropes)
Poor assault abilities on many melee-focused units (re-rolls / WS3 / single ScyTals on MCs)
Lack of fast transport / deployment options
A single psychic table containing a mish-mash of different roles
The overall effect of all this is that it really feels like Tyranids are an NPC race in 40k. They exist to be beaten by the 'proper' races, rather than played in their own right.
60662
Post by: Purifier
 xttz wrote:The dataslates aren't a power boost so much as a small compensation for not having allies.
It boosted their power though, so I'd say calling it a power boost is fair.
And WOW the off topic whine in this thread. OP makes a valid point. He is disappointed by his fellow swarms for rolling over and having their bellies tickled by datasheets after ranting and raving about internal balance, and for some reason Sisters and BA (Sisters in particular) come stomping, saying "I HAVE IT WORSE!"
Yes, that's right, but it wasn't what the conversation was about. It's like you don't read the thread at all, you just want a soap box to yell your discontent from.
47170
Post by: Dunklezahn
Did we ever really think that a good number of the posters complaining weren't coming at it from a power level point of view given the number of Competitive players? We have a whole sub-Forum dedicated to list building and another for tactics, people are trying to win. It's also the Competitive part of the community that tends to be most vocal about power levels so if for you 40k is competitive then the reason you assume people are complaining is going to be power related.
The Dataslates, while annoying they weren't in the core book, didn't just bring additional power, they brought an additional theme. Respawning units is a very cool and very Nid-like thing. Giving us more access to FMC's or Heavy Support options let us make more of an army that was. It appeased all walks of Nid life because who doesn't love more options. However if once again you have that competitive mindset you are gonna assume people are happy about the Skyblight type slates rather than the Tyrant Nodes or Warrior Nodes.
A lot of folks *were* complaining about power levels, some folks were genuinely mostly about the fluff, themes, models etc but I reckon most were complaining we stayed mid/low tier in terms of competition
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
 Dunklezahn wrote:A lot of folks *were* complaining about power levels, some folks were genuinely mostly about the fluff, themes, models etc but I reckon most were complaining we stayed mid/low tier in terms of competition
Actually I think it was most people complaining about internal balance. I know that's what I was mostly complaining about and seeing most other people complaining about. So many units I like (models and fluff) are crap
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
BlaxicanX wrote:People weren't complaining because it "wasn't OP" (some people might have, but certainly not the majority), they were complaining because it's a lazy, half-assed job where a ton of options were nerfed or taken away with no replacements put in their place and with almost zero effort put into the fluff.
And imo that's all absolutely true.
I agree with that sentiment too. Which is why I made the thread. It feels like the majority have shifted from unhappy, across to satisfied about the Tyranid codex with the release of some powerful formations, even though the flaws that there from day 1 are still just as evident as ever. The counter-response at the time was "you are just crying because you didn't get a tau/eldar book and thats what you expected" and our response was "no we wanted diversity". The integrity shown by those Tyranid players who claimed this but yet are saying stuff like "i should have just been patient im very happy with the way things panned out" are being quite hypocritical and merely proving those right, who claimed you were a bunch of powergamers whining about not getting a badass dex.
To me, badass dex is not what I want. I do not care about Skyblight. I like being the underdog. Some of us genuinely wanted to be able to use more than 30% of the units in our codex for something sensible at all.
47170
Post by: Dunklezahn
AllSeeingSkink wrote:[Actually I think it was most people complaining about internal balance. I know that's what I was mostly complaining about and seeing most other people complaining about. So many units I like (models and fluff) are crap
I said most, I make no claims to know what you yourself were thinking. The Dataslates do very little to address internal balance however so if that were the majority opinion that wouldn't support SHUPPET's assertion that people seem much happier with the dex post dataslate.
I haven't really studied the Nid community opinion much post codex (So much negativity) but if a more positive trend is being seen post dataslate then It would support the theory that internal balance was not the majority issue for them to have such a mollifying effect.
47462
Post by: rigeld2
I think a lot of it is "Well, this is what we've got (even though it sucks internally) let's make it work." and post-slate it's "Oh. Well this got easier to make it work. Awesome!"
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
From what I've seen the dataslates are like turd polish. Tyranid players are happy that they they can polish their turd, but still unhappy about receiving a turd in the first place. There's also a lot of talk about how splitting the polish into 3 little vials and charging $18 each is a d*** move when the entire bottle of turd polish should've been supplied with the turd.
The dataslates have done a bit for internal balance though. Deathleaper, Genestealers and Lictors have become a bit less terrible, Hormagaunts & Termagaunts got a bit of a boost, and Gargoyles got a massive boost.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
PrinceRaven wrote:The dataslates have done a bit for internal balance though. Deathleaper, Genestealers and Lictors have become a bit less terrible, Hormagaunts & Termagaunts got a bit of a boost, and Gargoyles got a massive boost.
But it's still a kick in the balls you have to buy so many of them to make those units viable.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Yeah, but it's nice for the people who ran those sorts of lists in previous editions and already have the models. Besides, more options are always better, I'll take as much turd polish as I can.
47170
Post by: Dunklezahn
PrinceRaven wrote:
The dataslates have done a bit for internal balance though. Deathleaper, Genestealers and Lictors have become a bit less terrible, Hormagaunts & Termagaunts got a bit of a boost, and Gargoyles got a massive boost.
That's not internal balance though, those are simply buffs. Lictors are still objectively worse than the rest of the elites section, except maybe Pyrovores. If anything it made internal balance worse as why take massed Gaunts when you can take super scoring Gargoyles with Skyblight?
Gargoyles were already better than Gaunts, make them Scoring+ with Skyblight and the internal balance is worse.
Stealers are still worse than Hormagaunts because of their high cost/low durability.
They made the Nid dex stronger, they made internal balance at best unchanged and potentially worse.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Lictors went from borderline unplayable to slightly viable, I'd say that's a positive in terms if internal balance.
You do bring up a good point about Gargoyles competing with other Troops though.
47170
Post by: Dunklezahn
PrinceRaven wrote:Lictors went from borderline unplayable to slightly viable, I'd say that's a positive in terms if internal balance.
You do bring up a good point about Gargoyles competing with other Troops though.
Yeah, I suppose, "Internal Balance" is a tricky thing to quantify, Lictors got more appealing but it didn't effect "Competitive" lists in the sense that they still wouldn't get taken over the other options from a pure effectiveness standpoint. It brought them closer into line but it didn't change things enough for someone who is looking at the dex for power to take them I don't think.
I think that's why Skyblight is touted as it is. The Living Artillery gives you more Heavy Support with a buff which is nice but the Skyblight let you take 3 resurrecting Scoring+ units that effectively replaced the need for more scoring troops, an area that was perceived as being very weak in the dex and hurt the internal Gaunt balance by making the foot mounted ones less viable to the point where they would be dropped from tourney style lists.
It can't be coincidence that the one that caused the most damaging internal balance shift and carried the most "power" is the one people are talking about as saving the dex.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
I have yet to hear anyone actually claim Skyblight Swarm "saved the dex". I have, however, repeatedly heard people call it really cheesy and not something they would run outside of hardcore tournaments.
27151
Post by: streamdragon
PrinceRaven wrote:I would so rather have old Scything Talons than rerolls to wound. You can get that anyway with Toxin Sacs, it's hitting with a WS 3 model that's the problem.
Wait, I thought the new Dataslate had a formation that gave Fexes d3+1 HoW hits (Old One who?), and rerolls of 1 to hit in CC?
Does it really let you reroll 1s to wound? Bahahahahahahaa
47170
Post by: Dunklezahn
It seems to have become the basis for any Nid force running in a tourney that allows dataslates. Even the guys at Frontline have gone from seeing the Nids as a comedy "Forge the Narrative" army to suddenly being tourney winners and outshooting Tau. (I'm not referencing them badly I want to point out, I love their stuff)
From a competitive standpoint, Skyblight has saved the Nid dex, it's a mono-build but thats one more build than they think they had before. Other slates are mentioned as improvements, Skyblight is mentioned as a winner.
45133
Post by: ClockworkZion
Dunklezahn wrote:That's not internal balance though, those are simply buffs. Lictors are still objectively worse than the rest of the elites section, except maybe Pyrovores. If anything it made internal balance worse as why take massed Gaunts when you can take super scoring Gargoyles with Skyblight?
Because formations don't take FOC slots so you'll still need Troop choices?
27151
Post by: streamdragon
ClockworkZion wrote: Dunklezahn wrote:That's not internal balance though, those are simply buffs. Lictors are still objectively worse than the rest of the elites section, except maybe Pyrovores. If anything it made internal balance worse as why take massed Gaunts when you can take super scoring Gargoyles with Skyblight?
Because formations don't take FOC slots so you'll still need Troop choices?
I think the keyword there might be "massed".
As in, why would I take 30 hormagaunts when I can take 30 super scoring Gargoyles instead?
The obvious answer being "I wouldn't."
58365
Post by: Ol'Dirty
The nid codex is still bad I just think skyblight and the artillery formation gave us two possible competitive options, more so from skyblight. It'd be nice if we got the doom and pods back in the next dataslate, but I won't hold my breath. I'll still play them as best as I can.
77474
Post by: SHUPPET
Changes that I think we need (will not make us OP it is not more than we ever had before, will really bring a bunch more diversity to the dex)
- BRB powers being the same as last dex
- Scything Talons, Crushing Claws & Boneswords being the same as last dex
- Pods, and/or Trygon tunnels being active same turn
- Hive Guard & Zoanthrope being the same as last dex. Tervigon gettiing back the option of 2 purchasable powers.
- EW available for Raveners through a dataslate, make it only in range of the Trygon Prime or something.
- Preferred enemy working the way it did in the last dex
- Genestealers getting their fleshhooks, and a point reduction. Rippers need to be costed appropriately as well. Hormagants 2 points cheaper. Adrenal glands at 1 ppm.
- Rupture Cannon being AP 1 (this thing is expensive as hell on one of the most expensive platforms in the game and only has 2 shots at BS 3. I think we could make the shots count a little more. The name suggests it tears through armor as well.)
- Just.... re-work Haruspex completely. Needs to either fill the role that old school Carnifex used to, and cost like 90 points, or needs to much more effective in close combat for 160.
I'd have nothing else to complain about with these changes. Harpy probably needs something as well, but Hive Crone is still very playable as is. Lictors being too ninja even for the FOC makes them alright as well, although I still think they could stand to be 10 pts cheaper.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
I think Raveners need more impact for their points. They're a 30pt glass cannon unit that doesn't have much cannon but is very glass. I don't mind the "glass" bit if they actually had some punch to them. I'd like them to be the sort of unit that if you DON'T dedicate fire to them and let even just 1 or 2 through they'll create a mess. At the moment they're the same price as Shrikes, gaining +1 Ini and Deepstrike, but not being Synapse and having worse weapon options makes them very hard to choose over Shrikes.
84411
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi
The Tyranids codex is horribly crappy, first the fluff is just cut and paste from previous editions, with a lot being cut out (only the Fall of Shadowbrink story is at all new)
second The number of useless units, wargear, powers, artifacts, etc. within the codex would be laughable if it wasn't so sad.
Aside from the pictures and one new story in the fluff there is nothing of worth in the Nids Codex.
The reason that the dataslates have calmed the rage is first the fluff is very good, and not just a cheesy ripoff of past codexes (and the fluff mirrors the actual formations ZOMG!), and second some of the formations (3 of them IMO) actually make the nids reasonably competitive.
53985
Post by: TheKbob
Yea, but they resold you a skimped down 5E codex and put all the new stuff in 3 separate purchases at what, $15 a pop?
That's not really the way I want my "model company" who just happens to produce rules to function.
My least favorite part is the things that make the bugs most viable are force organization breaking. The rules that define what an army is in Warhammer 40k are rapidly dying in front of our face. I don't see it as a good thing.
28300
Post by: creeping-deth87
I'm sorry, but I can shed few tears for the loss of Biomancy. T9 MCs with eternal warrior was absolutely ridiculous, and Tyranids did just fine without it in 5th edition. Tyranid players have my sympathy for a disappointing codex, but I absolutely cannot get behind any suggestion of reintroducing that psychic discipline. It's just too much.
53985
Post by: TheKbob
 creeping-deth87 wrote:I'm sorry, but I can shed few tears for the loss of Biomancy. T9 MCs with eternal warrior was absolutely ridiculous, and Tyranids did just fine without it in 5th edition. Tyranid players have my sympathy for a disappointing codex, but I absolutely cannot get behind any suggestion of reintroducing that psychic discipline. It's just too much.
I dunno, all the other powers did them well, though.
And Nids players in 5E, 6E, and now 6E Codex are pretty much a simple algorithm for competitive play:
IF (allow dataslates)
> Take 1, 2, all the Formations
Else IF (not allow dataslates)
> Take monobuild variant
Else
> Lose
I love the Nids thematically and they have lively, amazing models that people do a lot of great (gory!) things with. But to say they've been anywhere on the top of the game in the last few editions and several years is throwing them under the bus.
26170
Post by: davethepak
I don't miss biomancy.
I miss telepathy.
Anyway, sounds like a lot of folks are in agreement here...has this gone from a "thread" to a support group?
Oh, and the notion that marines would lose ATSKNF if they lose a commander or sgt, that is priceless.
then they would understand (I play marines as well, and yeah, that would suck).
84411
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi
SHUPPET wrote: BlaxicanX wrote:People weren't complaining because it "wasn't OP" (some people might have, but certainly not the majority), they were complaining because it's a lazy, half-assed job where a ton of options were nerfed or taken away with no replacements put in their place and with almost zero effort put into the fluff.
And imo that's all absolutely true.
I agree with that sentiment too. Which is why I made the thread. It feels like the majority have shifted from unhappy, across to satisfied about the Tyranid codex with the release of some powerful formations, even though the flaws that there from day 1 are still just as evident as ever. The counter-response at the time was "you are just crying because you didn't get a tau/eldar book and thats what you expected" and our response was "no we wanted diversity". The integrity shown by those Tyranid players who claimed this but yet are saying stuff like "i should have just been patient im very happy with the way things panned out" are being quite hypocritical and merely proving those right, who claimed you were a bunch of powergamers whining about not getting a badass dex.
To me, badass dex is not what I want. I do not care about Skyblight. I like being the underdog. Some of us genuinely wanted to be able to use more than 30% of the units in our codex for something sensible at all.
No the codex still sucks, the dataslates don't change the codex
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
creeping-deth87 wrote:I'm sorry, but I can shed few tears for the loss of Biomancy. T9 MCs with eternal warrior was absolutely ridiculous, and Tyranids did just fine without it in 5th edition. Tyranid players have my sympathy for a disappointing codex, but I absolutely cannot get behind any suggestion of reintroducing that psychic discipline. It's just too much.
Tyranids were one of the lowest tiers in 5th edition, due to mech-hammer proving hard for melee nids to crack.
72530
Post by: Arbiter_Shade
creeping-deth87 wrote:I'm sorry, but I can shed few tears for the loss of Biomancy. T9 MCs with eternal warrior was absolutely ridiculous, and Tyranids did just fine without it in 5th edition. Tyranid players have my sympathy for a disappointing codex, but I absolutely cannot get behind any suggestion of reintroducing that psychic discipline. It's just too much.
Tyranids are my main army and I agree/disagree with this completely/not at all.
I think Tyranids are the prime example of an army that would use a psychic discipline called Biomancy. I also think that MCs with Biomancy are far to powerful and need to be altered.
My solution is to change the powers in Biomancy, specifically Iron Arm. On a Librarian or a Sorcery it is cool and kinda fluffy, on a MC or a FMC like a Hive Tyrant or a Daemon Prince it is WAAAY over the top.
Back on topic, I am still disappointed in this codex. The fluff is bad, the rules are bad, the rules don't represent the fluff at all, the new units are boring/uninspired as well as being underwhelming in their table top presence. The codex is still monolist as all hell, what was broken in 5th is still broken, things that were bad in 5th got better by virtue of the fact that everything that they competed with got nerfed. There were so many confusing and uncalled for nerfs, I just don't understand what thought went into this book if any at all.
I can sum up my feelings of the codex at large with a specific example; Scything Talons. Was it really necessary to nerf them? Considering that the Trygon was written with those rerolls to hit in mind now he just falls flat on his face in terms of viability...Same with Hormagants.
53985
Post by: TheKbob
Tyranids are the bros who know the pain of the Sisters of Battle. A book gets released, models are removed, and models that are bad got worse.
I'll poor one out for the bugs. Right after I get some actual dedicated AA and maybe a new model. Just one. Just. One.
*SoBs*
44971
Post by: Wakshaani
Yeah, we don't use dataslates here, so if it ain't Codex, it ain't in.
As such, I'd really like to see the core stuff improved a bit in terms of diversity more than pure power.
Like, you know, a transport would be nice. Maybe a couple, since many of the models have Bulky and variants that only matter when transports are involved.
Tweaking the ally rules so that we can ally wth ourselves, allowing Tyranid the same number of army slots as everyone else. That we can be out-swarmed is painful.
Some point cost jiggering and more options given.
For instance, give Hive Tyrants a choice to take wings *or* a 2+ save but not both. Thus, your ground-pounders are a tad tougher while the fliers stay fragile(ish). Allow Tyrant Guard the option to up-armor as well.
More modification in general would be well-liked. Give a handful of your Hormagaunts rending for X a model, akin to having special weapons in normal squads. (And for goodness sakes, let sycthing talons do *something* out there!)
Genestealers *need* to have flesh hook options and should be less expensive to boot. They just die horribly right now. The more options the better.
Can we take larger Pyrovore broods? Or allow Pyrovores and/or Venomthropes to just be added to Warrior broods? They're vulnerable on their own but should be in the force pitching in some how. Let the Warriors personally herd one per brood or somesuch.
Get the Tyranid Prime down in points. His statline doesn't equare his points at all. Cheaper is better than the same cost for more power.
I wouldn't mind seeing mutant Warriors in Elite and Heavy slots again. Elite are kitted out for melee with a 3+ save while the heavies can each take a bio-cannon, allowing you to have a nice battery of, say, venom cannon fire. It's not exactly game-changing, but it's something neat. (Mind you, Heavy Support's already crowded to death, but.)
More spore mine options! Where's the poison? Acid? Electric? Everybody loves spore mines!
Lastly, more plastic kits. A Venomthrope/Zoanthrope three-pack will probably push $50 while a Pyrovore/Biovore will be close to $70, but with Finecast going down, we need these kits. (I'd obviously prefer cheaper, but.)
Dataslates are nice, but the core book needs the repairs more.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
Honestly I'm not all that happy with the dataslates anyway. They SLIGHTLY improve the useful of some units at the cost of you having to buy all the models in the formation. Oh yay, Lictors are slightly less crap... but now I have to buy 5 of them... I only have 2 of them... I really don't want another 3 for $121AUD. Oh yay, we have a super spammy monobuild in the Skyblight... but I have 20 Gargoyles and 1 Harpy... I really don't want to have to buy another 10 gargoyles and another 2 Harpies for $278.
Then you have the fact the dataslates come to $45 total on top of the codex price and are digital only.
Dataslates are just GW's way of selling you more stuff and letting the Tyranids break the FOC like everyone else already can. Why they even bother with the FOC anymore I have no idea.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
ClockworkZion wrote: SHUPPET wrote:This isn't about a competition with SoB, who I agree have had worse treatment than Nids. But looking at everything with the perspective of "well, you aren't as bad off as Sisters!" makes a 40k discussion forum pretty pointless. If you want to talk about Sisters, make a thread. This thread is about Nids.
Now, now, if you want to post on a public and open forum you have to expect people to not agree with you. Just because you don't like the fact that I don't think Nids are nearly as worse off because my army is sitting in a deeper hole doesn't invalidate my position, nor does it mean I need to leave just because I don't agree with your assessment.
No, he is totally right. I am playing Sisters of Battle too, I have been very butthurt about not getting any new release too, but OP did not in any conceivable way imply that tyranids were worst off than Sisters. He even explicitly stated otherwise. I am the first to go berserk on people who complained that they are the worst off when they clearly are not (I got banned from Warseer partially because of a guy that pretended that Dark Angels had it the worse and were so much more mistreated than Sisters of Battle), but everything you are doing here is give us Sisters players a bad name, and needlessly aggravating people.
Sisters have it worse than Tyranids. The OP wanted to make a thread about how he/she perceives that many Tyranid players who complained about the codex were hypocrites that only care about the power level of the most powerful build rather than about the codex being fluffy and fun. Anything related to Sisters here except maybe “We are in a similar situation, Sisters players complain more about the level of the most competitive build than about it being fluffy” or “It is the contrary here, Sisters of Battle players really care about the book being fluffy and fun rather than the level of the most competitive build” is off-topic and irrelevant.
Now, back on topic, I am curious about what Tyranid players would have found inspiring and fun rather than bland. What kind of rules would you have written/wanted ?
xttz wrote:Instinctive Behaviour is a fantastic example of poor game design. Instead of being rewarded for having something, you're actively punished for not having it.
Why is that bad if you are properly compensated for it by point reduction or whatever advantage ? I think it is fluffy that if they loose synapse, tyranids start acting more like wild animals instead of working as an invasion army.
However, I would like to see a return of the mutant gaunt synapse, from an old codex (cannot remember which one). They were usually represented by a gaunt with a warrior's head, it looked and felt awesome. But maybe I am the only one.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
The problem is that Tyranid units with low leadership and Instinctive Behaviour are not properly compensated for it at all. Plus the 1-3 results for Feed and Lurk are not only severely punishing but also make absolutely no sense fluff-wise.
When the primary strategy for dealing with Instinctive Behaviour is "only run units that aren't affected a lot/at all by Instinctive Behaviour" someone dropped the ball.
26519
Post by: xttz
 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: xttz wrote:Instinctive Behaviour is a fantastic example of poor game design. Instead of being rewarded for having something, you're actively punished for not having it.
Why is that bad if you are properly compensated for it by point reduction or whatever advantage ? I think it is fluffy that if they loose synapse, tyranids start acting more like wild animals instead of working as an invasion army.
However, I would like to see a return of the mutant gaunt synapse, from an old codex (cannot remember which one). They were usually represented by a gaunt with a warrior's head, it looked and felt awesome. But maybe I am the only one.
The rules already covered this situation- smaller Tyranids have terrible leadership and are very likely to break and run if attacked without synapse. We didn't need additional special rules to make this more likely.
The cleanest solution I can see would be allowing Warriors to join gaunt broods as a kind of sergeant. That keeps things in line without being ridiculously easy to pick off.
44971
Post by: Wakshaani
I still favor the idea of Tyranids getting a GUard-like "Platoon" system, with a unit of Warriors as a "command squad", 2-5 units of gaunts/gants, then some supporting elements like Pyrovores, Venomthropes, and Ripper swarms being 0-2 add-on things. Get up a right proper horde-swarm.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Wakshaani wrote:I still favor the idea of Tyranids getting a GUard-like "Platoon" system, with a unit of Warriors as a "command squad", 2-5 units of gaunts/gants, then some supporting elements like Pyrovores, Venomthropes, and Ripper swarms being 0-2 add-on things. Get up a right proper horde-swarm.
Okay that sounds pretty good!
I'd still prefer if it they could modify stats with biomorphs though, a return to the 4th ed system.
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
PrinceRaven wrote:Plus the 1-3 results for Feed and Lurk are not only severely punishing but also make absolutely no sense fluff-wise.
Feed is the member of the unit attack each other, and Lurk is they all go to the closest cover, is that right ?
27151
Post by: streamdragon
I believe they're automatic hits, not attack rolls for Feed.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: PrinceRaven wrote:Plus the 1-3 results for Feed and Lurk are not only severely punishing but also make absolutely no sense fluff-wise.
Feed is the member of the unit attack each other, and Lurk is they all go to the closest cover, is that right ?
Correct on feed, streamdragon is right in that they automatically hit. You're thinking of the old Lurk though (the one that made sense). New Lurk is on a 1-3 you run away from the terrain you're hiding in (fall back).
78973
Post by: Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl
Yeah, but that is a game mechanics detail  .
PrinceRaven wrote:You're thinking of the old Lurk though (the one that made sense). New Lurk is on a 1-3 you run away from the terrain you're hiding in (fall back).
Okay, I see. So now the lurking gaunt are more like scared of the big guys running around doing a lot of noise, and would rather attack the sick and old animals left behind by the tribe.
Well, from a pure fluff point of view, that does not seem so out of place, even though the fall back is a bit harsh, and something like making a morale test after taking just one wound rather than loosing 25% of the unit would make more sense. Maybe the details of the mechanic needs to be ironed out, but the basic idea seems okay to me. Of course, giving other way to mitigate it would be nice too. Like adding those awesome mutants, but it really seems I am the only one who loves them. Gaunt should have mutants options like other units have leader and special weapon options ! Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, adding the mutant would allow an army of small creature, with the only big one would be the mandatory HQ, say a broodlord. Something that as far as I know have not been possible for quite a long time !
(Yeah, it would not go well with the current trend of making every army rely on very big, very resistant models, but hey, it could be cool. And since the gaunt can already have poisons, if the mutants gave them access to haywire, they maybe could work !)
20086
Post by: Andilus Greatsword
Wakshaani wrote:Yeah, we don't use dataslates here, so if it ain't Codex, it ain't in.
Pretty much, especially if they are formations, in which case it's doubly-so. If it's a new unit Dataslate then my gaming group would probably get behind it, but I don't know anybody who is okay with formations outside of Apoc. I dunno how many tournaments allow dataslates either, so even competitive players should be still complaining.
At the OP: the reason people aren't complaining about the Nid Dex now is because it has been a couple months and now we're complaining about the Taurox.
53744
Post by: rollawaythestone
The Tyranid formations are poorly designed with some having no right to exist in the game (Skyblight). It is awful that FMC spam is the only strong Nid build. That's not to say that there are not changes to the dex that I like.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: PrinceRaven wrote:You're thinking of the old Lurk though (the one that made sense). New Lurk is on a 1-3 you run away from the terrain you're hiding in (fall back).
Okay, I see. So now the lurking gaunt are more like scared of the big guys running around doing a lot of noise, and would rather attack the sick and old animals left behind by the tribe.
Well, from a pure fluff point of view, that does not seem so out of place, even though the fall back is a bit harsh, and something like making a morale test after taking just one wound rather than loosing 25% of the unit would make more sense. Maybe the details of the mechanic needs to be ironed out, but the basic idea seems okay to me. Of course, giving other way to mitigate it would be nice too. Like adding those awesome mutants, but it really seems I am the only one who loves them. Gaunt should have mutants options like other units have leader and special weapon options
I've read some really good fluff entries and Black Library novels which accurately show what lurking Tyranids do: Hide in terrain or buildings and wait to ambush the enemy. The 1-3 result on new Lurk doesn't represent this at all, you can have some Termagants hiding in a building or camping an objective in a ruin and for no reason at all they get spooked and run away from the terrain they're supposed to want to hide in. That doesn't sound like ambush tactics to me.
Sure, they'll run away if there's an actual threat attacking them, which is perfectly represented by morale tests made against leadership 6.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
xttz wrote:The cleanest solution I can see would be allowing Warriors to join gaunt broods as a kind of sergeant. That keeps things in line without being ridiculously easy to pick off.
Ya know, I think this is why the Tyranid Prime is so massively over costed. They decided to make an IC Synapse, but then decided that was too good so they better cost it so high that no one thinks it's a viable way to get synapse.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Honestly, the fact that it takes up an HQ slot is a bigger deterrent to me than the ridiculous points cost. If I could get a Prime in Elites I would probably do it, attach it to a Venomthrope, then stick them both in a Bastion.
59981
Post by: AllSeeingSkink
PrinceRaven wrote:Honestly, the fact that it takes up an HQ slot is a bigger deterrent to me than the ridiculous points cost. If I could get a Prime in Elites I would probably do it, attach it to a Venomthrope, then stick them both in a Bastion.
Every FOC slot of the Tyranids is over loaded. I usually don't have a spare elite nor do I have a spare HQ. IMO they should have just given Tyranids a bigger FOC to start with.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
I always max out on Heavy Support and HQ but very rarely am I out of Elite slots, and when I am it's because I'm running a second Zoanthrope for Synapse.
53985
Post by: TheKbob
I list build a great deal for 'Nids because I always fancy painting a gore based one and I too run into the issues of force organization restrictions.
The one army that could use the ability to break force organization entirely is not allowed while the armies with currently the most ridiculous level of toys get to do so willy-nilly.
Troubling. And it would be even "fluffy" for the 'Nids as they "adapt" to the setting.
The Tyranid Prime moving to elite, maybe taken as a 1-3 choice, and dropping back down to previous points cost would be a game changer, I bet.
Also, Wings. Wings wings wings.
25247
Post by: N.I.B.
This codex was such a huge disappointment. Fluff and model-wise Tyranids are awesome, you would think the army would also be a gold mine for a game designer. The unique units/playstyles are already there, just need to smash the ball and cash in. Instead the rules team lit a cigarette and watched the tennis ball fly past them in a slow loop.
Data slates aren’t the answer for people like me were the tournaments are printed codices only, and friendly games follow.
New Haruspex. Read the fluff, awesome, I see a fast tar-pitting monster, Mauler-fiend esque but more oomph and a uniqe way of closing the distance. Then read the rules. Wat. The model team must have forgot to mention to the game designers that the Exocrine was a dual kit, until a couple of days before deadline.
The T4 range is staying untouched on the shelves. This, along with spores gone, was to me the biggest let-down in the codex. Raveners don’t even get close combat biomorphs. I guess the Great Devourer forgot how to make them by sheer embarassment after mistakingly giving AG/TS to Hive Guards.
Special characters removed or inexplicably nerfed. They could so easily have opened up the FOC by allowing Parasite open up Gargoyles as troops, and so on. Or just a Flyrant doing the same.
Swarmlord is a joke, lost so much utility and force multiplication with Biomancy. Even his home turf, being the baddest dude in combat, was soiled on. And a point hike. Wat.
Deathleaper, who thought it was a good idea to shift him to HQ, now that Elite slots aren’t crowded anymore but HQ slots are taken by the monobuild? With IB and no synapse? Have fun with ’only snapshots!’ when Vector Strikes ignore that completely. Needed so little to be viable, like T5 and synapse.
Tyranid Prime insane point hike, because buy another Tyrant kit instead.
Spore deployment ripped out of the codex and no alternative play style replacement???
Close combat weapons back to bland, generic space marine standard mechanic. Why?
Scything Talons, no rerolls for you, AP6. Wait, what? What? Why? I had a bunch of Termagants chow through a brood of ScyTal Carnifexes in a tournament last week, because they couldn’t hit my Gants. Poor fella.
Trygon hasn’t gotten any play time since 6th ed killed Fleet, so they made him even worse. *ironic applause*
Genestealer/Trygon cost stay the same. Because F you, close combat fans. Trygon hole couldn’t even be fixed with a data slate. Subterranian Assault, HAHAHA *crying*
Troops are a pain to add to a list. Tervigon with tax still your best bet, although not much above nekkid hiding Warriors. Zero theme.
Two Flyrants three Crones and whatever MC’s except Trygons you want in your HS and that’s your viable build. Any other build and you need rigid social contracts to make it a game.
I win almost as much as with the Biomancy codex, I have a lof of fun with the flying circus but I don't see the alternative build prolonging the lifespan of the codex.
69849
Post by: PrinceRaven
Trygons are actually 10 points cheaper, which still doesn't make up for the Scything Talons nerf.
25247
Post by: N.I.B.
Yeah, I just couldn't be arsed to type 'more or less'. The rules are a shame on a great model.
30143
Post by: Carnage43
PrinceRaven wrote:Trygons are actually 10 points cheaper, which still doesn't make up for the Scything Talons nerf.
Correct.
Trygons used to be 200 points in their 5th edition incarnation, which at the time was a bit on the high side, but not insanely so.
Since then;
Melee has been nerfed via random charge ranges, over watch and a handful of other small changes. Which warrants a moderate points decrease.
Fleet has been nerfed and no longer allows run + charge. Which warrants a minor points decrease.
Shooting has good bat gak crazy over the top, and T6 W6 3+ save is....not a lot anymore.
The nerf to scything talons dropped their melee damage output by around 25% against WS4 and less, warranting a solid points decrease.
If trygons were 150 points I still don't think anyone would take them competitively.
|
|
