Gaunts stayed the same price and lost fleet. Hormagaunts lost 12" charge and went down to WS3. Broodlords lost power weapons and synapse. The whole army lost grenades. Practically everything else doubled in price except zoanthropes (who lost 2+ armor in favor of a 3+ invulnerable), lictors (who are like they were in 3rd edition except they're forced to be sitting ducks for a turn), and biovores (who lost anti-tank and poison mines and went up in points).


Everything lost move through cover and 2+ armor is practically a thing of the past (available only as a tyrannofex feature and ludicrously expensive hive tyrant upgrade). You are no longer allowed to manually twin-link weapons, and in many cases are not allowed to take perfectly legitimate configurations from before (sniperfexes, flesh hooks on anything but lictors, rending MCs, etc).


Even if you owned Tyranids, you're going to have to buy a new army.

Broken Loose wrote:Even if you owned Tyranids, you're going to have to buy a new army.

Except for genestealers, gargoyles, termagants, hormagaunts, zoanthropes, and magnetized carnifex/hive tyrants/warriors...etc.

You'll be changing your FoC for sure, and I don't know how I can settle on just one take-all-comers list with all of the new options.

So, question, have they finally gone back to calling Termagants by their right name?

Altimera wrote:

Broken Loose wrote:Even if you owned Tyranids, you're going to have to buy a new army.

Except for genestealers, gargoyles, termagants, hormagaunts, zoanthropes, and magnetized carnifex/hive tyrants/warriors...etc.

You'll be changing your FoC for sure, and I don't know how I can settle on just one take-all-comers list with all of the new options.

You're spot on about the genestealers, but if by "magnetized" you mean you magnetized your fexes to permanently stay in their army case, then yes, you won't need to worry about your fexes for the next 4-6 years.

Nurglitch wrote:So, question, have they finally gone back to calling Termagants by their right name?

Termagants are now back to being termagants. "Gaunts" are gone. Too bad half the internet will ever learn how to spell termagant correctly.

Here's a question for the group - based off what you have read - rumors, leaked codexes, etc. etc., is the Hive Tyrant/Tyrant Guard combo really worth it? I'm concerned about it due to the fact that the Hive Tyrant, even for a cheap setup, runs about the same cost as a landraider and is still limited to footslogging, as well as no invul save. Pyschic powers aside making it nasty in CC, would there be more cost effective options? (i.e. Alpha warrior and adding in a unit of warriors or raveners or whatnot).

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Broken Loose wrote:Gaunts stayed the same price and lost fleet. Hormagaunts lost 12" charge and went down to WS3. Broodlords lost power weapons and synapse. The whole army lost grenades. Practically everything else doubled in price except zoanthropes (who lost 2+ armor in favor of a 3+ invulnerable), lictors (who are like they were in 3rd edition except they're forced to be sitting ducks for a turn), and biovores (who lost anti-tank and poison mines and went up in points).

Everything lost move through cover and 2+ armor is practically a thing of the past (available only as a tyrannofex feature and ludicrously expensive hive tyrant upgrade). You are no longer allowed to manually twin-link weapons, and in many cases are not allowed to take perfectly legitimate configurations from before (sniperfexes, flesh hooks on anything but lictors, rending MCs, etc).

Even if you owned Tyranids, you're going to have to buy a new army.

Genestealers & Hormagaunts still have Move Through Cover, it is just no longer an army wide rule. Toxic sacs giving poison means those two units can kill anything with a wound value so make good troops. Termagants are more playable than before although most players are going to want different guns on them. Those players that ran there army with a sole Broodlord/Warrior as HQ will now need an Alpha Warrior and Nidzilla players got screwed but other than that players should not need new armies. A few biomorph changes and most players will be ready to go.

Broken Loose wrote:You're spot on about the genestealers, but if by "magnetized" you mean you magnetized your fexes to permanently stay in their army case, then yes, you won't need to worry about your fexes for the next 4-6 years.

There is a trade off between Carnifex and Trygon. Fex's are better against AV 14 & have better gun options. Trygon has more wounds and is better in melee. So Carnifex's have a niche roll of gun-beasts that can take out Land Raiders.

Mattbranb wrote:Here's a question for the group - based off what you have read - rumors, leaked codexes, etc. etc., is the Hive Tyrant/Tyrant Guard combo really worth it? I'm concerned about it due to the fact that the Hive Tyrant, even for a cheap setup, runs about the same cost as a landraider and is still limited to footslogging, as well as no invul save. Pyschic powers aside making it nasty in CC, would there be more cost effective options? (i.e. Alpha warrior and adding in a unit of warriors or raveners or whatnot).

Alpha Warriors are more cost effective. I will still be taking Hive Tyrants because I have the models and the Psi Powers enhance the rest of the army.

Mattbranb wrote:Here's a question for the group - based off what you have read - rumors, leaked codexes, etc. etc., is the Hive Tyrant/Tyrant Guard combo really worth it? I'm concerned about it due to the fact that the Hive Tyrant, even for a cheap setup, runs about the same cost as a landraider and is still limited to footslogging, as well as no invul save. Pyschic powers aside making it nasty in CC, would there be more cost effective options? (i.e. Alpha warrior and adding in a unit of warriors or raveners or whatnot).

tyrants base prices are about 3/4ths a land raider, they come with whip/sword/talons

kitsunez wrote:

Mattbranb wrote:Here's a question for the group - based off what you have read - rumors, leaked codexes, etc. etc., is the Hive Tyrant/Tyrant Guard combo really worth it? I'm concerned about it due to the fact that the Hive Tyrant, even for a cheap setup, runs about the same cost as a landraider and is still limited to footslogging, as well as no invul save. Pyschic powers aside making it nasty in CC, would there be more cost effective options? (i.e. Alpha warrior and adding in a unit of warriors or raveners or whatnot).

tyrants base prices are about 3/4ths a land raider, they come with whip/sword/talons

True, but they need about 1/4 of the price of a land raider in upgrades to be worth using.

Broken Loose wrote: "...früher war alles besser..." (german saying: "In the past, everything was better.")

Even if you owned Tyranids, you're going to have to buy a new army.

If you want the tournament killer list, you usually have to buy the maximum of new models with every new release. Surprise

I have to buy exactly one new model: the Trygon.

Demogerg wrote:Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Why don't you use a Warrior Alpha for as a hq broodlord?

Greets
Schepp himself

I'm not sure how the BL got worst? If by losing power weapon ability he got worst vs MEQ's then it's a duh.

At 80pts though he was actually TOO cheap for what he did. He could usually eat entire tac squads on his own and the cheapest ones are 170 (unless combat squaded as our SM players don't min/max so most infantry squads are taken full size).

He is a termie plus a hormogaunt in cost, lost power weapon, can no longer be picked out in melee, gained a pt of T (doesn't matter until he is the last one alive which most cases he will be) but gains 2 powers that can severly weaken an enemy squad, that most times will work and even if you encounter a pesky librarian will still get the power off 50% of the time.

At the cost of 3 SM's he'll kill at least that many before he dies, especially backed up with up to 19 ablative wounds (yes stealers can go up to broods of 20 in case anyone who has seen the codex missed it and for those that haven't).

I can take 20 stealers for the price of 12 of my old ones and they are more killy. Not as durable but I gained 8 more stealers for the tradeoff of bolters and flamers killing them. Depending on what's shooting at them it does make the brood slightly more survivable. Heavy bolters never cared about the 4+ save anyway and a HB dev squad would kill a large majority of a brood of 12 in one round of shooting; now it'll take an extra round on average to wipe out a brood.

Fateweaver wrote:I'm not sure how the BL got worst? If by losing power weapon ability he got worst vs MEQ's then it's a duh.

At 80pts though he was actually TOO cheap for what he did. He could usually eat entire tac squads on his own and the cheapest ones are 170 (unless combat squaded as our SM players don't min/max so most infantry squads are taken full size).

He is a termie plus a hormogaunt in cost, lost power weapon, can no longer be picked out in melee, gained a pt of T (doesn't matter until he is the last one alive which most cases he will be) but gains 2 powers that can severly weaken an enemy squad, that most times will work and even if you encounter a pesky librarian will still get the power off 50% of the time.

At the cost of 3 SM's he'll kill at least that many before he dies, especially backed up with up to 19 ablative wounds (yes stealers can go up to broods of 20 in case anyone who has seen the codex missed it and for those that haven't).

I can take 20 stealers for the price of 12 of my old ones and they are more killy. Not as durable but I gained 8 more stealers for the tradeoff of bolters and flamers killing them. Depending on what's shooting at them it does make the brood slightly more survivable. Heavy bolters never cared about the 4+ save anyway and a HB dev squad would kill a large majority of a brood of 12 in one round of shooting; now it'll take an extra round on average to wipe out a brood.

He got worse because he is no longer an HQ option.

also, he used to be purchased with a retinue, and could not be singled out, so the change from HQ with retinue to upgrade character only really has a couple of minor changes the most important of which is that they cannot be taken as mandatory HQ slot.

/nerdrage

Well for me he got better. I can't take an HQ Broodlord but now I can take more than 2 if I want. I can also take 9 broods of stealers instead of just 6, which got better in general and the elite stealers are the bees knees.

For my stealer shock army the codex improved my army quite a bit.

Now it just means I can run a 2nd Tyrant or an Alpha warrior or the uber-badass assault tyrant (just need chapterhouse to get moving on the boneswords for nids). Wink, wink.

Gaunts stayed the same price and lost fleet.

Not quite true. The 5 point spinegaunt went up in price, the 6 point termagant went down in price. I'd rather have the new termagant over the old spinegaunt. Main reason is change to IB rules -- they can actually do what troops are suppose to do in 5ed. The boosts they get via tervigons (and their ability to make tervigons a scoring choice) are also big improvements.

Loss of fleet is minimal issue since everyone can run.

Hormagaunts lost 12" charge and went down to WS3.

Hormagaunt became a faster scythegaunt ala 3ed era. Most people with tactical sense and/or reduction of the kneejerk reaction realize hormagaunts are waay better then before. They actually have a purpose rather then being a waste compared to more efficient options.

Broodlords lost power weapons and synapse.

Broodlord also gained fleet and some nifty powers and is 0-6 instead of 0-1. Also synapse is readily available in the new dex (and is also less neccessary) so is minor loss.

The whole army lost grenades.

But then again many units gained option to take lashwhip which is better then a frag grenade. I won't argue that isn't a big hit to nid effectiveness (my stealers will miss it for sure) but I think for game balance and fluff it was a good change.

Practically everything else doubled in price except zoanthropes

Bit unfair when the so called doubling in price doesn't include the bundled gear, stat boosts from prior or general improvements for the unit. Yes many things lost their edge in efficiency but it is not end of the world/ stuff is completely unviability nerfings (at least in my opinion).

lictors (who are like they were in 3rd edition except they're forced to be sitting ducks for a turn),

Actually they deploy nothing like 3ed. They can appear anywhere legal for them to be placed, not just a terrain peice you nominate. They gained fleet (something oft overlooked -- I think they were pretty marginal without it). They do similar damage the turn they arrive via their shooting attack and since they no longer scatter, mishap or take dangerous terrain it is much more reliable. They are also more of a cc threat since they are 3-9 wounds instead of just 2 easy to kill ones (5ed made the 4eddex ones utter trash in close combat).

Lictors overall are better -- even without the much touted but vastly over rated assault after DS they used to have -- their problem now is less about rules and more becuase they compete with auto-add Hive Guard/zoanthropes.

and biovores (who lost anti-tank and poison mines and went up in points).

Biovores are cheaper! 45 now versus 50 before for cheapest biovore. They also went from 6+ save to 4+ (which is huge) and gained a pip of leadership. They are no longer 0-1 and aren't hampered by stupid rules (giving up KPs due to scatter) or dawn of war (assault1 now versus heavy1 before). They were never reliable antitank, now they simply aren't anti-tank. Personally, they would fit in nicely with a shooty oriented MSU approach army -- and I am not alone in that idea. I never bought a biovore, now I am considering it (or using a pyrovore model instead).

Everything lost move through cover

'Everything' is a much broader then reality. MCs have it by default. Both types of stealers, both types of gaunts, lictors and ravenors retain it. Of the 4ed units, only warriors, zoanthropes, rippers, gargoyles and biovores lost it (and arguably only warriors and gargoyles are a bit worse off for it).

and 2+ armor is practically a thing of the past (available only as a tyrannofex feature and ludicrously expensive hive tyrant upgrade).

You make it sound like it was readily available to begin with -- since only the heavy carnifex and tyrant could take it in 4ed. It will be less common, but considering I never took it, I am not lamenting its loss much.

You are no longer allowed to manually twin-link weapons

Except for one case on one unit that was a marginal choice to begin with(spitter warriors), no one in their right mind did this anyways.

and in many cases are not allowed to take perfectly legitimate configurations from before (sniperfexes, flesh hooks on anything but lictors, rending MCs, etc).

Making sniperfex illegal was a bit of a surprise, but considering the changes to barbed strangler and the cost, I woulda remodled my gunfex anyways. Flesh hooks modeled are mearly a cosmetic mod now -- hardly a big deal beyond the loss of frag rules (see above). And who took rending claws on MCs?

Granted, I am not all 100% behind some of the design choices in this new dex, but it isn't as bad as the vast majority of the internets seems to portray.

Broken Loose wrote:
Termagants are now back to being termagants. "Gaunts" are gone. Too bad half the internet will ever learn how to spell termagant correctly.

Or know their true definition:

ter·ma·gant (tûrm-gnt)
n.
A quarrelsome, scolding woman; a shrew.

Bonus, Harridan:

har·ri·dan (hr-dn)
n.
A woman regarded as scolding and vicious.

Someone at GW had a bad breakup...

Alpharius wrote:

Broken Loose wrote:
Termagants are now back to being termagants. "Gaunts" are gone. Too bad half the internet will ever learn how to spell termagant correctly.

Or know their true definition:

ter·ma·gant (tûrm-gnt)
n.
A quarrelsome, scolding woman; a shrew.

Bonus, Harridan:

har·ri·dan (hr-dn)
n.
A woman regarded as scolding and vicious.

Someone at GW had a bad breakup...

Peter Parker agrees!

Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

only if they start on the board.... now only useful on a maybe turn 3


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kitsunez wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

only if they start on the board.... now only useful on a maybe turn 3

also they have to start in reserve

I think that the termagant name, in this case, was probably inspired by the critter in Jack Vance's _The Dragon Masters_, rather than by the shrewish woman:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragon_Masters

Vance is a sufficiently well-known fantasy & SF author for it to be likely that GW staff had read him, & that book is one of his most famous (and the termagants in it are basically one of the smaller, anthropomorphic fighting dragons). In fact, I'm pretty sure that an old White Dwarf (when WD still covered non-GW games) had an article that gave game stats for dragons from _The Dragon Masters_.

kitsunez wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

only if they start on the board.... now only useful on a maybe turn 3


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kitsunez wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

only if they start on the board.... now only useful on a maybe turn 3

also they have to start in reserve

If you have the hive tyrant with the +1 reserve rolls, it would be cumulative, right? So that way you could nearly guarantee that your pods arrive early enough in the game to make a difference.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:

kitsunez wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

only if they start on the board.... now only useful on a maybe turn 3


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kitsunez wrote:

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

only if they start on the board.... now only useful on a maybe turn 3

also they have to start in reserve

If you have the hive tyrant with the +1 reserve rolls, it would be cumulative, right? So that way you could nearly guarantee that your pods arrive early enough in the game to make a difference.

I admit thats one of the reasons to use swarmlord but i also have to say lictors are not that good i've used them a bit...they do indeed suck

Ian Sturrock wrote:I think that the termagant name, in this case, was probably inspired by the critter in Jack Vance's _The Dragon Masters_, rather than by the shrewish woman:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dragon_Masters

Vance is a sufficiently well-known fantasy & SF author for it to be likely that GW staff had read him, & that book is one of his most famous (and the termagants in it are basically one of the smaller, anthropomorphic fighting dragons). In fact, I'm pretty sure that an old White Dwarf (when WD still covered non-GW games) had an article that gave game stats for dragons from _The Dragon Masters_.

As a HUGE Jack Vance fan, you've made my day!

Eyes of the Overworld and Cugel's Saga (along with Rhialto the Marvelous) are some of the finest fantasy out there, and clearly served as inspiration for many things that were eventually found in D&D.

And believe me, Vance definitely knew the definitions to those words when he chose to use them - the man is a master wordsmith!

winterman wrote:

Gaunts stayed the same price and lost fleet.

Not quite true. The 5 point spinegaunt went up in price, the 6 point termagant went down in price. I'd rather have the new termagant over the old spinegaunt. Main reason is change to IB rules -- they can actually do what troops are suppose to do in 5ed. The boosts they get via tervigons (and their ability to make tervigons a scoring choice) are also big improvements.

Loss of fleet is minimal issue since everyone can run.

Hormagaunts lost 12" charge and went down to WS3.

Hormagaunt became a faster scythegaunt ala 3ed era. Most people with tactical sense and/or reduction of the kneejerk reaction realize hormagaunts are waay better then before. They actually have a purpose rather then being a waste compared to more efficient options.

Broodlords lost power weapons and synapse.

Broodlord also gained fleet and some nifty powers and is 0-6 instead of 0-1. Also synapse is readily available in the new dex (and is also less neccessary) so is minor loss.

The whole army lost grenades.

But then again many units gained option to take lashwhip which is better then a frag grenade. I won't argue that isn't a big hit to nid effectiveness (my stealers will miss it for sure) but I think for game balance and fluff it was a good change.

Practically everything else doubled in price except zoanthropes

Bit unfair when the so called doubling in price doesn't include the bundled gear, stat boosts from prior or general improvements for the unit. Yes many things lost their edge in efficiency but it is not end of the world/ stuff is completely unviability nerfings (at least in my opinion).

lictors (who are like they were in 3rd edition except they're forced to be sitting ducks for a turn),

Actually they deploy nothing like 3ed. They can appear anywhere legal for them to be placed, not just a terrain peice you nominate. They gained fleet (something oft overlooked -- I think they were pretty marginal without it). They do similar damage the turn they arrive via their shooting attack and since they no longer scatter, mishap or take dangerous terrain it is much more reliable. They are also more of a cc threat since they are 3-9 wounds instead of just 2 easy to kill ones (5ed made the 4eddex ones utter trash in close combat).

Lictors overall are better -- even without the much touted but vastly over rated assault after DS they used to have -- their problem now is less about rules and more becuase they compete with auto-add Hive Guard/zoanthropes.

and biovores (who lost anti-tank and poison mines and went up in points).

Biovores are cheaper! 45 now versus 50 before for cheapest biovore. They also went from 6+ save to 4+ (which is huge) and gained a pip of leadership. They are no longer 0-1 and aren't hampered by stupid rules (giving up KPs due to scatter) or dawn of war (assault1 now versus heavy1 before). They were never reliable antitank, now they simply aren't anti-tank. Personally, they would fit in nicely with a shooty oriented MSU approach army -- and I am not alone in that idea. I never bought a biovore, now I am considering it (or using a pyrovore model instead).

Everything lost move through cover

'Everything' is a much broader then reality. MCs have it by default. Both types of stealers, both types of gaunts, lictors and ravenors retain it. Of the 4ed units, only warriors, zoanthropes, rippers, gargoyles and biovores lost it (and arguably only warriors and gargoyles are a bit worse off for it).

and 2+ armor is practically a thing of the past (available only as a tyrannofex feature and ludicrously expensive hive tyrant upgrade).

You make it sound like it was readily available to begin with -- since only the heavy carnifex and tyrant could take it in 4ed. It will be less common, but considering I never took it, I am not lamenting its loss much.

You are no longer allowed to manually twin-link weapons

Except for one case on one unit that was a marginal choice to begin with(spitter warriors), no one in their right mind did this anyways.

and in many cases are not allowed to take perfectly legitimate configurations from before (sniperfexes, flesh hooks on anything but lictors, rending MCs, etc).

Making sniperfex illegal was a bit of a surprise, but considering the changes to barbed strangler and the cost, I woulda remodled my gunfex anyways. Flesh hooks modeled are mearly a cosmetic mod now -- hardly a big deal beyond the loss of frag rules (see above). And who took rending claws on MCs?

Granted, I am not all 100% behind some of the design choices in this new dex, but it isn't as bad as the vast majority of the internets seems to portray.

Best post in this thread!!!

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Don't forget that lictors now have bonus usefulness with the addition of spore transports. The pin-point deepstriking and the +1 to reserve rolls might actually see some use now, whereas before lictors had very little real purpose.

Unfortunately they still have very little real purpose--they apparently need to be on the board to grant +1 to reserves so that means turn 3 at the very earliest since they themselves must start in reserve. Furthermore, there is also some question as to whether or not you can use their deep strike beacon ability they turn they come in--if not then it's pretty much useless.

How the hell did I doublepost?

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

Alpharius wrote:

Broken Loose wrote:
Termagants are now back to being termagants. "Gaunts" are gone. Too bad half the internet will ever learn how to spell termagant correctly.

Or know their true definition:

ter·ma·gant (tûrm-gnt)
n.
A quarrelsome, scolding woman; a shrew.

Bonus, Harridan:

har·ri·dan (hr-dn)
n.
A woman regarded as scolding and vicious.

Someone at GW had a bad breakup...

A long time ago, back before the Brits found out that the god of Islam was the same YHVH that they believed in, they thought that Muslims worshiped "Termagant." Having our line troops be named after a chief deity is WAY more badass than any alternatives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Termagant

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

Please stop trolling you trollish troll.

What we all have to remember is that the 5th Codex is going to be DIFFERENT to the 4th. Keep an open mind about things... People would complain if the current Codex was not updated or it was only changed very slightly and people would also complain if it changes alot. Fluff-wise, the Tyranids are constantly changing as they meet new species' and find ways to defeat them.
For now, give GW a chance to change something; once its done and published, its done. I know that GW can be a trying at times to say the least but remember that this is going to be a turning stone for Tyranids and their proper introduction to 5th.
I, for one, am looking forward to the changes. We, as gamers, are just going to have to review the Codex and play test for ourselves to see what works.

EdM

now that i have had a chance to read it....

its nice gonna be some fearsome stuff out there now from tyranid

I am preparing for copious amounts of plastic surgery.

Tevigons: gaunts for the guant god

I believe that at one time, Genestealers were a completely different army than Tyranids, then GW decided to thrust them together. I would prefer to have the Genestealers and cultists as a completely different force, but what can you do. I also still wish that the Orks could have Cyboars and Madboys.

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

Please stop trolling you trollish troll.

Shuma is one of those guys who started playing 40k last year and thinks he knows all the backstory, when most times he hilariously doesn't get the game. I also suspect he barely plays, thus reinforcing his armchair-general take on tactics.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

Not trying to be mean or rude so please forgive me if I am. But pray tell how is he going to do it? The person wants to use the Tyraind codex. He wants to use an army that is old. The only choice he had was to do what he is doing now. So how is it his fault it's not so "Fluffy" as you say it is? He probably even knows it's not "Fluffy". For him, it's GW just making it harder for him to play an army that he wants to play and army that was playable along time ago. Shure he could do what others have done, and use the Ork Codex or the IG codex and use "counts as" but I am guessing he dosn't want to use "counts as".

Hey give him some credit, he wants to keep using the Tyraind codex no matter what. Yes he could have a more stronger army by going "counts as" but he wants to keep it as Tyranid as he can. Unless you think Genestealers shouldn't be Tyraind to begin with.

Defiler wrote:

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

Please stop trolling you trollish troll.

Shuma is one of those guys who started playing 40k last year and thinks he knows all the backstory, when most times he hilariously doesn't get the game. I also suspect he barely plays, thus reinforcing his armchair-general take on tactics.

Davor wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

Not trying to be mean or rude so please forgive me if I am. But pray tell how is he going to do it? The person wants to use the Tyraind codex. He wants to use an army that is old. The only choice he had was to do what he is doing now. So how is it his fault it's not so "Fluffy" as you say it is? He probably even knows it's not "Fluffy". For him, it's GW just making it harder for him to play an army that he wants to play and army that was playable along time ago. Shure he could do what others have done, and use the Ork Codex or the IG codex and use "counts as" but I am guessing he dosn't want to use "counts as".

Hey give him some credit, he wants to keep using the Tyraind codex no matter what. Yes he could have a more stronger army by going "counts as" but he wants to keep it as Tyranid as he can. Unless you think Genestealers shouldn't be Tyraind to begin with.

Actually according to his profile he has been playing the game since 98..... Also, i really think its you guys who are being the trolls not him. I actually agree with what he said, you can't play a genestealer cult list with the current or future codex. you can play a tyranid vanguard list, which i think is what the OP was trying to say.

Sneezypanda wrote:Actually according to his profile he has been playing the game since 98..... Also, i really think its you guys who are being the trolls not him. I actually agree with what he said, you can't play a genestealer cult list with the current or future codex. you can play a tyranid vanguard list, which i think is what the OP was trying to say.

Very well said. And the good news is that gargoyles are vanguard organisms, and lo and behold there is a gargoyle independent character HQ choice.

Shuma may troll at times, but he is 100% right.
A stealer cult is usually a 3/1 ratio of humans who worship nids and hybrids.
Units like pure's are rare in them and not seen often.
Also, the new or previous dex isnt really any good to represent them.

Better off using a guard dex to make such lists.
Shame there isnt an official one, but just like life, GW is a bitch.

I've never had a problem with using human figures to represent Cultists, counting as any of the gaunt variants - either holding boring old human weapons (counting as some believable nid equivalent) or more fluffily holding actual nid weapons grafted onto their arms.

I can just see the scene at the cultists' secret headquarters: "Our glorious day of revolution has arrived, brothers, our allies have landed! Now everyone line up over there for a free gift. Stop sceaming, Brother Bob, it's only an alien parasite, the pain goes away as soon as its mind control tendrils reach your brain - see?"

hmmm, I wonder if spore pod MSU army would work... small units that don't count for KP but still shootings S6 shots? might work here....

I remember second edition Genestealer cult army I think thats the last time they were represented with a actual list. Also, you had to paint them i believe purple.

SWPIGWANG wrote:hmmm, I wonder if spore pod MSU army would work... small units that don't count for KP but still shootings S6 shots? might work here....

If you mean Mycetic Spores (Landing Spores), they're Monstrous Creatures so they're not exactly small, they do count for killpoints, and the S6 shots which suffer from a 6" range and a low Ballistic Score.
If you mean Sporemine Clusters, they don't have S6.

Yeah translations for the spore pod rules were scetchy, some thinking they didn't count for KPs but it seems pretty clear they are simply non-scoring but would still count as KP.

And I think he means small as in the units that are in them are low model count in order to spam pods. Also the pods can take twinlinked deathspitters or blast weapons, which are less affetced by the BS2 and range from 18-24". More of an FYI though, as his idea is built on a faulty premise.

winterman wrote:Yeah translations for the spore pod rules were scetchy, some thinking they didn't count for KPs but it seems pretty clear they are simply non-scoring but would still count as KP.

Aye, correct. The 'Living Bomb' rule Sporemines have specifies they're disregarded for all mission objectives (e.g. holding objectives, killpoints etc). Mycetic Spores are indeed non-scoring, but still count for KPs.

And I think he means small as in the units that are in them are low model count in order to spam pods. Also the pods can take twinlinked deathspitters or blast weapons, which are less affetced by the BS2 and range from 18-24". More of an FYI though, as his idea is built on a faulty premise.

Note that a Mycetic Spore has to shoot at the closest enemy though. As the Spore's passengers can't assault the turn they arrive, (large) blast weapons may do harm than good if you happen to land very close to an enemy unit; they could easily scatter back onto the pod and it's ex-occupants.

That's the big problem I found when testing the Spores...a lot of times I had much better targets than what I had to shoot at. Like the side of the next Battlewagon instead of the front of the closest, or at the Trukk right beside it.

All in all, my big complaint with the new stuff done with the codex is that some of it just doesn't make sense. The Tyrannofex is a particular example. It has an option to pay points to "upgrade" it's Hellhound gun (essentially) to a 20 shot weapon at S4 AP5 with a range of 12". Ok, but wait...average rolling with his BS3 means 10 S4 hits at something 12" away...you could get close to that many hits from being able to put a flamer template oriented anyway you want within 12". And even if you get more hits with the S4 gun, a few extra hits don't make up for S4 AP5 versus S6 AP4 ignoring cover. Unless something was mistranslated (and it'd be hard to mistranslate the range numbers or S) then that weapon option doesn't even make sense. There's no reason to bother with it.

Or crushing claws. Putting Crushing Claws on a Carnifex gives it +d3 extra attacks...ok, slightly better than what it used to do. But wait, since you're dropping a pair of Scything Talons to take it, you're swapping out 4 attacks rerolling all misses for 6 attacks (on average) only rerolling 1's. Considering the WS3, it'll almost never be hitting on better than 4's (other than if the Tyrant gets off the WS1 power), so the loss of the rerolls to 2's and 3's completely offsets the extra attacks. If you roll a 1 on your d3, you're actually worse off than you were with 2x ST. With a 3 on it you're better, but with a 2 it's a marginal change, certainly not worth the point cost of the upgrades.

Those are the things that bother me about the codex. There are little random things here and there that just don't make sense...like no one even gave any thought to actually playing these units.

The 20 shot gun would be good for killing DP's and GD's. Sure you need 6's to wound but you could kill or severly cripple a DP with those 20 shots. A single flamer isn't going to do a whole lot to a DP or a GD.

It's like the Punisher for IG. Crappy at killing mobs of infantry but better than the other variants at picking out single models.

Except at BS 3, that is only 10 hits against a DP/GD, 1.6 wounds, and depending on 3+ or 4++, that is .80 or less failed saves. So I don't see this hurting MC either.

What's the math against Ogryns? I'm too lazy (and yes people do take them contrary to the majority of WAACer's)

Against Ogryns, 10 Hits, 5 wounds: If no cover, that is 5 auto fails (Armour 5+) or 1.67 dead Ogryns. If they have a 4+ cover, then that is 2.5 failed saves or .83 dead Ogryns.

If we are using the template weapon against a unit of 5 Ogryn, then I don't see why you couldn't get 4 hits with a template. 4 Hits equates to 3.33 wounds with no save allowed or 1.1 dead Ogryn.

Neither one seams very impressive to me in this scenario.

Fateweaver wrote:What's the math against Ogryns? I'm too lazy (and yes people do take them contrary to the majority of WAACer's)

One dead Ogryn. And you're in assault range after you shot once.

wyomingfox wrote:Against Ogryns, 10 Hits, 5 wounds: If no cover, that is 5 auto fails (Armour 5+) or 1.67 dead Ogryns. If they have a 4+ cover, then that is 2.5 failed saves or .83 dead Ogryns.

If we are using the template weapon against a unit of 5 Ogryn, then I don't see why you couldn't get 4 hits with a template. 4 Hits equates to 3.33 wounds with no save allowed or 1.1 dead Ogryn.

Neither one seams very impressive to me in this scenario.

10x S4 vs T5 != 5 wounds, so even less impressive. :p

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

This arguement over who was right and who was wrong over the fluffy-ness of my army is a moot point when one considers that I have taken into account the ratio of humans to hybrids to purestrains.

and that the army only had one aspect of "counts-as" in the element of gaunts as hybrids.

The entire point of my arguement is that the Broodlord is no longer an HQ, and that makes me a saaaad panda.

Demogerg wrote:This arguement over who was right and who was wrong over the fluffy-ness of my army is a moot point when one considers that I have taken into account the ratio of humans to hybrids to purestrains.

and that the army only had one aspect of "counts-as" in the element of gaunts as hybrids.

The entire point of my arguement is that the Broodlord is no longer an HQ, and that makes me a saaaad panda.

Couldn't you just use a Broodlord model as a count-as Alpha Warrior with a pair Boneswords and Rending Claws, and attach him to a unit of Genestealers? Compared to the 4E Broodlord, you'd have a slightly different statline, and the only big things you'd loose is Infiltrate and that he can be singled out in combat. But you gain the ability to capture objectives and the ability to cause Instant Death.

Couldn't we drop this discussion.

I heard that the US preview copies are in the store now. Any clarifications on how Hive Guard functions concerning denying cover saves from terrain and special wargear. Anyone able to post the exact wording of the entry?

Before I start ripping all the arms off my nids, can someone tell me if gaunts with devourers are still viable in the new codex or is the point cost not worth it.

Also how do devourers work on carnifex? is 2 twin-linked devourer still an option worth taking or is it now more in favor of heavy venom cannon?

Redemption wrote:

Couldn't you just use a Broodlord model as a count-as Alpha Warrior with a pair Boneswords and Rending Claws, and attach him to a unit of Genestealers? Compared to the 4E Broodlord, you'd have a slightly different statline, and the only big things you'd loose is Infiltrate and that he can be singled out in combat. But you gain the ability to capture objectives and the ability to cause Instant Death.

Its going to work out that way actually, I just hate doing a Broodlord "Counts-as" when there is a Broodlord option in the codex, feels dirty. I'm usually a 100% WYSIWYG player. Hence the nerdrage/sadface/sadpanda/facepalm/KHAAAAAAAN!!!!

sirisaacnuton wrote:That's the big problem I found when testing the Spores...a lot of times I had much better targets than what I had to shoot at. Like the side of the next Battlewagon instead of the front of the closest, or at the Trukk right beside it.

All in all, my big complaint with the new stuff done with the codex is that some of it just doesn't make sense. The Tyrannofex is a particular example. It has an option to pay points to "upgrade" it's Hellhound gun (essentially) to a 20 shot weapon at S4 AP5 with a range of 12". Ok, but wait...average rolling with his BS3 means 10 S4 hits at something 12" away...you could get close to that many hits from being able to put a flamer template oriented anyway you want within 12". And even if you get more hits with the S4 gun, a few extra hits don't make up for S4 AP5 versus S6 AP4 ignoring cover. Unless something was mistranslated (and it'd be hard to mistranslate the range numbers or S) then that weapon option doesn't even make sense. There's no reason to bother with it.

Or crushing claws. Putting Crushing Claws on a Carnifex gives it +d3 extra attacks...ok, slightly better than what it used to do. But wait, since you're dropping a pair of Scything Talons to take it, you're swapping out 4 attacks rerolling all misses for 6 attacks (on average) only rerolling 1's. Considering the WS3, it'll almost never be hitting on better than 4's (other than if the Tyrant gets off the WS1 power), so the loss of the rerolls to 2's and 3's completely offsets the extra attacks. If you roll a 1 on your d3, you're actually worse off than you were with 2x ST. With a 3 on it you're better, but with a 2 it's a marginal change, certainly not worth the point cost of the upgrades.

Those are the things that bother me about the codex. There are little random things here and there that just don't make sense...like no one even gave any thought to actually playing these units.

carnifex swings asuming 4+ to hit as not alot of stuff out there is ws 7+

2x scything 4 attacks = 2 hit 2 reroll = 3 hits 75%

1 scything one other = 4 attack = 2 hit + 2 misses re roll 1's = 2.16 hits

1 scything 1 crushing = base 4 = 2.16 hits + 2 crushing = 1.08 = 3.24 hits.


looks like scything crushing nets you .24 hits a turn more.

Before I start ripping all the arms off my nids, can someone tell me if gaunts with devourers are still viable in the new codex or is the point cost not worth it.

They seem much better to me then they are now but YMMV. The cost of a dev-gaunt is the cost of a current spinegaunt x2. Devs on gaunts (and warriors for that matter) are 18" S4 AP- A3 and force a -1 to morale test for casualties.

Also how do devourers work on carnifex? is 2 twin-linked devourer still an option worth taking or is it now more in favor of heavy venom cannon?

They (and tyrants) get an upgraded version of the gaunt/warrior one. S6 AP- A6 twinlinked and -1ld thing. Two of those is still an option. It is definitely improved over the current, but the whole package sure costs a lot more. It isn't a no brainer option like now, but it has its uses.

Thanks for the quick reply back. I'm think i like where the gaunts are going these days. I figure for the carnifex i gotta rip half of them off and try a heavy venom canon/ MC devourer combo. though I'm sure the point costs now will put me way over my usual 2000pt limit.

For the Warriors, do you take a heavy weapon 1 per brood or 1 for every 3 warriors? and then devourer vs deathspitter for the rest?

Okay, everyone say it with me "Termagant, Hormagaunt".

Not gaunt, or gant, or Termigaunt, or whatever other abortion of language you can come up with...

Nurglitch wrote:Okay, everyone say it with me "Termagant, Hormagaunt".

Not gaunt, or gant, or Termigaunt, or whatever other abortion of language you can come up with...

well, I have 20 Termygauntz that disagree with you. /trolled lol

lixulana wrote:

sirisaacnuton wrote:That's the big problem I found when testing the Spores...a lot of times I had much better targets than what I had to shoot at. Like the side of the next Battlewagon instead of the front of the closest, or at the Trukk right beside it.

All in all, my big complaint with the new stuff done with the codex is that some of it just doesn't make sense. The Tyrannofex is a particular example. It has an option to pay points to "upgrade" it's Hellhound gun (essentially) to a 20 shot weapon at S4 AP5 with a range of 12". Ok, but wait...average rolling with his BS3 means 10 S4 hits at something 12" away...you could get close to that many hits from being able to put a flamer template oriented anyway you want within 12". And even if you get more hits with the S4 gun, a few extra hits don't make up for S4 AP5 versus S6 AP4 ignoring cover. Unless something was mistranslated (and it'd be hard to mistranslate the range numbers or S) then that weapon option doesn't even make sense. There's no reason to bother with it.

Or crushing claws. Putting Crushing Claws on a Carnifex gives it +d3 extra attacks...ok, slightly better than what it used to do. But wait, since you're dropping a pair of Scything Talons to take it, you're swapping out 4 attacks rerolling all misses for 6 attacks (on average) only rerolling 1's. Considering the WS3, it'll almost never be hitting on better than 4's (other than if the Tyrant gets off the WS1 power), so the loss of the rerolls to 2's and 3's completely offsets the extra attacks. If you roll a 1 on your d3, you're actually worse off than you were with 2x ST. With a 3 on it you're better, but with a 2 it's a marginal change, certainly not worth the point cost of the upgrades.

Those are the things that bother me about the codex. There are little random things here and there that just don't make sense...like no one even gave any thought to actually playing these units.

carnifex swings asuming 4+ to hit as not alot of stuff out there is ws 7+

2x scything 4 attacks = 2 hit 2 reroll = 3 hits 75%

1 scything one other = 4 attack = 2 hit + 2 misses re roll 1's = 2.16 hits

1 scything 1 crushing = base 4 = 2.16 hits + 2 crushing = 1.08 = 3.24 hits.


looks like scything crushing nets you .24 hits a turn more.

Yeah, I crunched the numbers. I know that the Claws on average net you slightly more hits than without...but only slightly. If the claws net you .24 hits a turn more, you're looking at a fairly expensive upgrade that will on average net you 1 additional hit every 4 rounds of combat or so. It would seem to me like 4 rounds of combat is about the best a Carnifex could ever hope of seeing in an average game, thanks to being slow, so maybe 1 more hit in the game...not worth points that could get me an extra Ymgarl Stealer, or almost 2 regular Stealers, or half a Hive Guard, etc. IMO anyway. In addition, it makes the Fex worse at trying to rip open tanks moving more than 6", as having the rerolls to all misses is much better than 2 extra attacks if you're fishing for 6's than 4+'s.

All in all, it's a massively underwhelming option for the Fex. Which is a shame, because (a) I think they look kinda cool, (b) early rumors indicated they would be pretty awesome, and (c) a CC/ST Fex is front and center on the Codex. It's not utterly useless, but I don't think it's worth bothering with at the point cost, as its benefits are generally pretty marginal (and even despite to the marginal benefits, it does still have its drawbacks...restricting you to swinging at PF initiative, as opposed to without the claws, a Fex with FC could be swinging at I4 on the charge).

Now, that having been said, the math on the Claws looks better if you can hit the target with the WS1 psychic power first, but you'll often have to ram it past Hoods/Runic Weapons/SitW/RoWarding.

Frankly, I don't see much that entices me to run CC options on the Fex at all, other than the cheapness. You could give him 2 shooting weapons and make him formidable at range and he still has 5 S9 attacks on the charge. No rerolls, but I think the shooting more than makes up for it.

They prety uch made CC fexes pointless...

But they had to, to make room for the trygon. The fex comes into its own as long range fire support/suppression with land raider busting counter-assault capabilities.

He really should have either a venom cannon/strangelthorn cannon and scything talons or be a dakkafex.

The good news on crushing claws is that they are actually a worthwhile upgrade on tervigons. Tervies don't have +2 initiative on the charge, and with only 3 base attacks they get a much bigger boost in CC power.

Gaunt Gaunt Gaunt. Sorry, about that, I never knew it was a Termagant just till recently. I like the sound of Termagaunt better. Gant sounds so anoying, yuck.

Toe-Mae-Toe Toe-ma-Toe
Poe-Tae-Toe Poe-ta-Toe

Both the same but sounding differently. I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Shep wrote:They prety uch made CC fexes pointless...

But they had to, to make room for the trygon. The fex comes into its own as long range fire support/suppression with land raider busting counter-assault capabilities.

He really should have either a venom cannon/strangelthorn cannon and scything talons or be a dakkafex.

The good news on crushing claws is that they are actually a worthwhile upgrade on tervigons. Tervies don't have +2 initiative on the charge, and with only 3 base attacks they get a much bigger boost in CC power.

True...I didn't even consider the fact that an uber-CC Carnifex that can drop pod renders completely moot their new hotness model.

I've been playtesting Dakkafexes, but had a random thought recently to give a shot to Dev/VC...gives him something to do the first turn besides running, gives me some long range shooting in case of shenanigans like Lootas in Spearhead deployment, gives me extra tank-busting capability (because against Guard and some SM the 3 Elite slots won't be enough)... and it's still pretty killy against infantry, as a 9/4 small blast is not the worst thing in the world to hit them with. Also provides a nice tool for ID'ing T4 models *cough*Zoeys/Warriors*cough*.

Yeah the spore pod is kind of iffy thing; its a monstrous creature so it can get some really mass amounts of shots but its at BS2 so meh.

What did the Tyranid do when it met Pamela Anderson?

it Lictor.

warpcrafter wrote:I believe that at one time, Genestealers were a completely different army than Tyranids, then GW decided to thrust them together. I would prefer to have the Genestealers and cultists as a completely different force, but what can you do. I also still wish that the Orks could have Cyboars and Madboys.

I agree, but in the end you can proxy it. I have done for a while now. Whats the difference between a gaunt and a brood brother? Not much really. You cant take vehicle, but I guess thats where Apocyclpse comes into its own, just mash your nids and IG together...

You can take cyboars as proxies for bikes and I cant really see many players arguing the toss on that one.

Venom Cannons really aren't THAT much better at tank killing this time around. They regained the ability to penetrate, but they still have a -1 to the damage table roll and are only one blast shot.

Carnifexes have some of their issues solved by having a pod, but then the cost on an already un-competitively priced model goes even higher when you could just get a Trygon that does the same thing cheaper, and allows further units to come through his tunnel. It's not like both the Trygon and the Carnifex aren't going to sit there and take shots for a turn, and the price on the pod doesn't seem to be justified when all it adds, after an upgrade, is a reasonable strength blast with no ap and tentacles with a 6 inch range. Even better, the Trygon doesn't carry an extra killpoint with it to get into enemy lines.


Edit: Although I am looking forward to abusing the spore mine pre-deployment deepstriking to force opponents to sit where I want them to. Unless they're mech.

I wonder about the effectiveness of a brood of Fexes packing Barbed Stranglers*. Several mid strength large blasts, being thrown across the table, causing Pinning checks, and then able to lay the smack down when they get into HtH... Use a Tervigon to let them shoot while Running for more funness. That or near bare bones Fexes with no upgrades other than Adrenals and maybe Bio-Plasma would make for an intimidating brood coming across the table at you as well.


*Getting people to call them Stranglethorn Cannons is even less like than people saying Termigant.

I'm going to run a pair of screamer-killers in one slot and a Trygon and Mawloc in the other slot.

440pts for 2 screamer killer fexes with bioplasma, frag grenades, glands and regen but it'll be a damn fun unit to scare people with.

Termiganigaunts is what I call mine.

Actually, I just call them gaunts *shrug*


On-topic, after reading this thread I'm still slightly confused, am I cutting the top arms off my carnifexs (or whatever the plural is) for tals? I should probably just paint some tals up anyway just in case.

Further, doesn't anyone else feel the venom cannon has become terrible at anti-tank compared to being the bad at anti-tank it was? BS3 meant we hit 3/6 on a die roll and had TWO shots. Now we'll be hitting on an alleged 2/6 with ONE shot. Am I the only one who thought that was worth mentioning because I can't remember reading it anywhere. Talk about the tyrannofex S10 gun, warp lance, and wether or not to use tals or CC is the conversation I see most.

Anti-tank is our biggest weakness and our standard go-to gun got even worse. I have little faith in CC anti-tank, are warp lance and Tyrranofax (spelling idk?) our new ranged AT weapons?

please don't mention melee, I'm looking for speculation on ranged AT only regarding the VC change.

Ramshackle_Curtis wrote:What did the Tyranid do when it met Pamela Anderson?

it Lictor.

Lictor?? It hardly even knew her!!!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

wyomingfox wrote:Except at BS 3, that is only 10 hits against a DP/GD, 1.6 wounds, and depending on 3+ or 4++, that is .80 or less failed saves. So I don't see this hurting MC either.

His point is still valid. A gun that shoots 20 shots, even at BS 3, has a better chance at effectively damaging smaller or more well spread out units than does a flamer template. The flamer template shines against large numbered and closely spaced units.

For example, the 20 shot gun will do better against a 5 man Terminator squad that is getting within assault range that will the flamer template.

Flamer:

5 hits * (5/6 wound) * (1/6 failed save) = 25/36 dead terminators. <--Being generous and assuming all 5 Terminators are lined up such that the template can hit all of them.

Big shooty gun:

20 shots * (1/2 hit) * (1/2 wound) * (1/6 failed save) = 20/24 dead terminators

The difference is slight, but the point remains that the 20 shot gun is more worthwhile if your point for taking it is to merely eliminate small, deadly threats that have gotten close to the Tyrranosaur (sp?). Consider it more of a point defense weapon than an offensive weapon. Remember, the smaller the incoming unit is, the more the effectiveness of the 20 shot gun eclipses that of the flamer template. The template, can at most have as many hits as their are models in the unit, while the "upgrade" gun can be expected to hit 10 times, but has the chance of hitting 20.

And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

lord_blackfang wrote:And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

Good point; I didn't read all the way through the codex last night; I assumed that the big gun was standard and the other guns were alternate secondary weapons. If you can only have one of each, then, yes, the big gun is the way to go.

Railguns wrote:Edit: Although I am looking forward to abusing the spore mine pre-deployment deepstriking to force opponents to sit where I want them to. Unless they're mech.

That's not abuse...it's exactly what they're intended for.

Gandair wrote:Further, doesn't anyone else feel the venom cannon has become terrible at anti-tank compared to being the bad at anti-tank it was? BS3 meant we hit 3/6 on a die roll and had TWO shots. Now we'll be hitting on an alleged 2/6 with ONE shot. Am I the only one who thought that was worth mentioning because I can't remember reading it anywhere. Talk about the tyrannofex S10 gun, warp lance, and wether or not to use tals or CC is the conversation I see most.

Anti-tank is our biggest weakness and our standard go-to gun got even worse. I have little faith in CC anti-tank, are warp lance and Tyrranofax (spelling idk?) our new ranged AT weapons?

please don't mention melee, I'm looking for speculation on ranged AT only regarding the VC change.

The Venom Cannon is a Blast now, so you'll hit a bit more than 1/3 of the time, considering you can probably scatter 4-6" (-BS3) and still hit your target, depending on the size of your target. Add the ability to penetrate and you probably are about even with what is was before.

As for new ranged anti-tank, you're forgetting a very important new addition to the army list: the Hive Guard. For 150 points, you get 6 24" BS4 S8 shots that don't require line of sight, on a T6 platform. That's a pretty reliable and cost efficient anti-light armour; ideal for popping open transports so you can assault the fleshy contents with our numerous assault troops in the next assault phase. The Zoanthrope's new Warp Lance is better suited for heavier armour.

And there's some other stuff that can work in a jiffy, such as a Trygon's Bio-electric field (especially if it's amplified, plus the Trygon can easily pop up behind some vehicles for easy access to rear AV10) or some TL Devourers, although those are more suited for anti infantry.

I dont see where the Zoanthropes can be split off any more


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The other thing is 9 Tyranid Warriors and Alpha Warrior in a pod is kind of keen.

lord_blackfang wrote:And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

I hate that weapon name more every time I hear it. I'm simply going to call it a Bio Cannon, what the old Exocrine's gun was called.

Hollismason wrote:I dont see where the Zoanthropes can be split off any more

Lictors and Zoanthropes are indeed no longer deployed individually, unless you take them in seperate FoC slots.

Aduro wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

I hate that weapon name more every time I hear it. I'm simply going to call it a Bio Cannon, what the old Exocrine's gun was called.

Yeah not a fan of the name either. I'm hoping it's just the German version of the name and the English one is better. The Thorax weapons are named horribly in German as well, with stuff like 'Suck Larvae' and 'Shock Maggots'.

Hollismason wrote:The other thing is 9 Tyranid Warriors and Alpha Warrior in a pod is kind of keen.

I heard 20 small dudes or 1 Monstrous Creature can fit in a pod. What are the passenger limitations for mid size critters like the Warriors?

Aduro wrote:

Hollismason wrote:The other thing is 9 Tyranid Warriors and Alpha Warrior in a pod is kind of keen.

I heard 20 small dudes or 1 Monstrous Creature can fit in a pod. What are the passenger limitations for mid size critters like the Warriors?

It's 20 Infantry or 1 Monstrous Creature, so technically you could fit 20 Warriors in a pod. Of course, you'd need 11 Alpha Warriors for that, and even with 1 Alpha Warrior you're looking at an almost 400 point squad before any upgrades.

Warriors are max Nine? I thought it was a bit more than that... Convenient then because I just made up a brood of nine Warriors the other day as it was all I had on hand for em, figuring I'd add in the missing guys later.

How many points would Nine Warriors and an Alpha, all armed with Boneswords and Deathspitters cept for one with a Barbed Strangler cost?

Aduro wrote:Warriors are max Nine? I thought it was a bit more than that... Convenient then because I just made up a brood of nine Warriors the other day as it was all I had on hand for em, figuring I'd add in the missing guys later.

How many points would Nine Warriors and an Alpha, all armed with Boneswords and Deathspitters cept for one with a Barbed Strangler cost?

Aye, Warrior brood size is 3-9. And as for your squad, assuming you use a pair of Boneswords instead of the Bonesword & Lash Whip combo (which is more expensive), your total cost would be just under 500 points. Without a Mycetic Spore that is. And keep in mind that the squad would just scream 'Shoot me with a S8 Large Blast'.

I'm sure it would, but it would be the lead brood for a Midzilla army, with at least two more units of Warriors and other assorted fun stuff for target saturation.

6 Warrrios w/ Boneswords and a pod is like 280 which is a good deal for 18 wounds.

I had a thought.

I was worried about str 8 blast templates with my warriors for a long time, until EW was created.

I then thought about my expensive Chaos maries squads on bikes, and noise marine squads, and blood angel assault squads.

Devestator squads are supposed to smash these. IG battle tanks are supposed to smash these.

Thats what they are for.

In a vacum, then worry. If you play on a board with sparse terrain, then worry.

In the end, after scatter, LOS issues, missing with the rolls, etc, Warriors are fine. If you have any number of aquads, these bad ass high strength weapons need to pick targets.

Its unlikely that the squad gets wiped out in one turn. If it does, then what about the other warrior squads, gene stealers, poison weilding gaunts, screamer killers, etc.

In the end, you should be forced to respect high strength blast weapons wielded by specialists that are designed to kill these types of squads.

We lost a get out of jail free card.

I'm not That worried about the big blasts with my Warriors. They'll be behind Gaunt screens so they'll have a 4+ cover save against most attacks, I'm taking a pair of Venemthropes so they'll have a 5+ vs the indirect stuff. Keep am spread out so they'll only get two or three at best, and use the Alpha with his toughness of 5 for a couple of wound sponges that don't get Insta gibbed by Str8 and you should get there with most of your unit intact.

Yay for sensible posts.

I have to give this forum credit.

Most of the time the title of Whineseer should go to dakka.

So far dakka has had less whine in 23 pages of this thread than warseer has had in 2 pages of thread about the nid codex.

Aduro wrote:

lord_blackfang wrote:And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

I hate that weapon name more every time I hear it. I'm simply going to call it a Bio Cannon, what the old Exocrine's gun was called.

Yeah, Capsule Cannon is just the German translation for it. In the English Dex it's called a Rupture Cannon (if i'm not mistaken).

People keep talking about how Venomthropes are crap but I really like them. Also, they are infantry so you can put up to 3 in a squad. That's pretty awesome because you can also put a Alpha Warrior wit them.

It also backs up Tyranid warriors with defensive grenades.


Here's your combo though. Death Leaper + venomthrope. With a Podding army thats pretty nifty.


Havng actually sat down and read the codex its pretty awesome with lots and lots of viable builds even if he Carnifex did get the shaft which was disappointing.

airmang wrote:

Aduro wrote:I hate that weapon name more every time I hear it. I'm simply going to call it a Bio Cannon, what the old Exocrine's gun was called.

Yeah, Capsule Cannon is just the German translation for it. In the English Dex it's called a Rupture Cannon (if i'm not mistaken).

Better, but not by much. I'm too used to calling it a Bio Cannon now.

Hollismason wrote:People keep talking about how Venomthropes are crap but I really like them. Also, they are infantry so you can put up to 3 in a squad. That's pretty awesome because you can also put a Alpha Warrior wit them.

It also backs up Tyranid warriors with defensive grenades.


Here's your combo though. Death Leaper + venomthrope. With a Podding army thats pretty nifty.


Havng actually sat down and read the codex its pretty awesome with lots and lots of viable builds even if he Carnifex did get the shaft which was disappointing.

What does Deathleaper need a Venomthrope for? He's already hard enough to shoot with his essential "Nightfighting" rule. Following it up with a 5+ cover save is nice too, but it seems a bit overkill, IMO. The defensive grenades and the difficult terrain-assault thing is also nice, but who in their right mind would assault Death Leaper with anything less than an Assault Terminator Squad or a Command Squad. I would much rather have those Venomthropes giving their bonuses to Termagants and Warriors, but maybe I'm missing something . . .

Darth Bob wrote:

Hollismason wrote:People keep talking about how Venomthropes are crap but I really like them. Also, they are infantry so you can put up to 3 in a squad. That's pretty awesome because you can also put a Alpha Warrior wit them.

It also backs up Tyranid warriors with defensive grenades.


Here's your combo though. Death Leaper + venomthrope. With a Podding army thats pretty nifty.


Havng actually sat down and read the codex its pretty awesome with lots and lots of viable builds even if he Carnifex did get the shaft which was disappointing.

What does Deathleaper need a Venomthrope for? He's already hard enough to shoot with his essential "Nightfighting" rule. Following it up with a 5+ cover save is nice too, but it seems a bit overkill, IMO. The defensive grenades and the difficult terrain-assault thing is also nice, but who in their right mind would assault Death Leaper with anything less than an Assault Terminator Squad or a Command Squad. I would much rather have those Venomthropes giving their bonuses to Termagants and Warriors, but maybe I'm missing something . . .

I agree, i'd rather have them buffing my gants from getting assaulted by super CC units.

Units within 12 inches roll one less dice than normal for their terrain check add that with the Venomthropes Toxic Miasma and the dangerous terrain check units within 6 have e to take in order to assault a unit.


Basically if the Venomthropes and Deathleaper are near each other and in cover the opponent has to roll 1 less dice to assault and has to roll for dangerous terrain.

It makes it a really dificult unit to get rid of unless you shoot at it.

Hollismason wrote:Units within 12 inches roll one less dice than normal for their terrain check add that with the Venomthropes Toxic Miasma and the dangerous terrain check units within 6 have e to take in order to assault a unit.


Basically if the Venomthropes and Deathleaper are near each other and in cover the opponent has to roll 1 less dice to assault and has to roll for dangerous terrain.

It makes it a really dificult unit to get rid of unless you shoot at it.

Still doesn't seem worth it. Why would you do anything other than shoot Deathleaper? The beast is WS9, St 6, I7.

Plus Venomthropes aren't terribly durable. So if you shoot it rather than 'Leaper he'll lose most of the benefits. Again, I think the Gaunts and Warriors could benefit more. Hell, even Zoanthropes, since they're almost worthless if they get tied up in assault.

It get's even more bizzare when you realize you can have a Alpha warrior join the Deathleaper and gain stealth.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
edit:
Oh and an Alpha Warrior can join a squad of Venomthropes and arrive in a pod with them.


Honestly out of All of the HQs I like the Alpha Warrior the best. 80 points comes with some antipsyker ability and has some nifty stuff like a Cheapo regenerate, Boneswords and lash whip etc... the fact that he is infantry and not a monstrous creature really benefits the tyranids greatly.

Alpha warriors can't join Deathleaper.

Usually how fast is the shipping on preorders direct from GW in the US? How long do I have to be kept waiting???

I was told that I would be getting mine on the 16th up here in Canada dunno bout the south but im pretty sure its the same thing.

Well I'm not to the south of Canada, more westerly, but that still answers my question well enough!

everyone should get their stuff the 16th, thats the international date i thought.

airmang wrote:Alpha warriors can't join Deathleaper.

Yeah he can, the deathleaper has no restrictions on stuff joining it, its a unique infantry and is actually not a special character. The alpha warrior is just infantry and independent character.


This is why people are all like Ah man Venomthropes suck, no they dont stick an alpha warrior with them to deal with CC etc.. and you have a pretty kick ass little unit. The Alpha also has t5 so that helps as well.

Hollismason wrote:

airmang wrote:Alpha warriors can't join Deathleaper.

Yeah he can, the deathleaper has no restrictions on stuff joining it, its a unique infantry and is actually not a special character. The alpha warrior is just infantry and independent character.


This is why people are all like Ah man Venomthropes suck, no they dont stick an alpha warrior with them to deal with CC etc.. and you have a pretty kick ass little unit. The Alpha also has t5 so that helps as well.

Independant characters can't join units that always consist of a single model, unless the other model is also an independant character. So Deathleaper cannot join any other unit, and no independant character can join Deathleaper. You can indeed join Venomthropes, but if that is worth it is up for you to decide.

With the new codex, you can join a unit of Carnifex to borrow their T6 against shooting though.

Hollimason is right. DL is an infantry squad of one model. Only restriction on joining squads is that MC's cannot join other units, MC or not.

Alpha is an IC, not an MC. DL is an infantry unit, even if he is one model he is a unit of infantry.

Under rules Lysander can join himself to Marneus Calgar to form a unit of 2 characters.

Why you'd want to join an Alpha to a DL is beyond me as that just cripples the DL more than benefits him. Alpha attached to 3 regular lictors could be fun but I can think of better squads for the Alpha to join.

Edited....

NM, Holli is wrong. An alpha cannot join a DL. Could still join a lictor brood so long as it was 2 or 3 lictors, though again not really the best place for him.

Fateweaver wrote:Could still join a lictor brood so long as it was 2 or 3 lictors, though again not really the best place for him.

Note that an IC could still join a single model unit, as long as the unit does not always consist of a single model. As a brood of Lictors or Carnifexxes can consist of 1-3 models, an IC can easily join a single one with only one model in it. Of course, the Lictor presents a different problem, as they always need to start in reserve, and an Alpha Warrior can't deep strike. You can of course join the Alpha Warrior to a brood of Lictors after deployment and after the Lictors have appeared.

Hey, quick fact-check: What's the range of The Shadow in the Warp?

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

Please stop trolling you trollish troll.

..? So you're army consists of four people? I hardly see why you would have a hard time just using a broodlord outside of a squad then if you're not playing in a competitive or unfriendly format. As for my being trollish, forgive me for noting that a single moved slot is hardly the invalidation of an army that hasn't existed for a decade anyway.

Shuma is one of those guys who started playing 40k last year and thinks he knows all the backstory, when most times he hilariously doesn't get the game. I also suspect he barely plays, thus reinforcing his armchair-general take on tactics.

I started out of the third edition rulebook playing tyranids. Y'know, back over a decade ago WHEN THAT ARMY HAD ALREADY BEEN CUT. So forgive me for being unsympathetic. As for my grasp of tactics, I haven't posted in a tactics thread in roughly a year (they would always come down to comparisons against tourney builds, and unless they were those builds they would always be judged unfairly) and most of my musings here have been on the mathammer related to the current metagame and the effectiveness of winged warriors and the difficulty inherent in killing tyrannofexes. None of which I'm incorrect on. So I'm not particularly certain what you're talking about.

Not trying to be mean or rude so please forgive me if I am. But pray tell how is he going to do it? The person wants to use the Tyraind codex. He wants to use an army that is old. The only choice he had was to do what he is doing now. So how is it his fault it's not so "Fluffy" as you say it is? He probably even knows it's not "Fluffy". For him, it's GW just making it harder for him to play an army that he wants to play and army that was playable along time ago. Shure he could do what others have done, and use the Ork Codex or the IG codex and use "counts as" but I am guessing he dosn't want to use "counts as".

Well if he was already using four players to create a "counts as" list and was already using counts as units in that list I don't see how using a broodlord as a "counts as" in the new edition codex is any different.

Hey give him some credit, he wants to keep using the Tyraind codex no matter what. Yes he could have a more stronger army by going "counts as" but he wants to keep it as Tyranid as he can. Unless you think Genestealers shouldn't be Tyraind to begin with.

A genestealer cult isn't a tyranid army. It's a human army with some hybrids, a few genestealers and a patriarch. Its best accomplished by just using stealers and broodlords in an IG list. Something you couldn't do legally before and something you still can't now. So I don't see how things have changed for him.

Actually according to his profile he has been playing the game since 98..... Also, i really think its you guys who are being the trolls not him. I actually agree with what he said, you can't play a genestealer cult list with the current or future codex. you can play a tyranid vanguard list, which i think is what the OP was trying to say.

Thank you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

His point is still valid. A gun that shoots 20 shots, even at BS 3, has a better chance at effectively damaging smaller or more well spread out units than does a flamer template. The flamer template shines against large numbered and closely spaced units.

It's also significantly better at damaging armor 10 vehicles, and those shots are supported by either more shots or a second flame template. The tyrannofexes power lies more in it's ability to be a consistent though low end ranged threat that is exceedingly difficult to silence, to the point where it is no longer worth the effort. It's a "safe investment" in a book of very expensive glass cannons.

And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

Zoanthropes and hive guard are much better at heavy tank and transport popping, so I doubt everyone will rush for the capsule canon. The Tfex is in kind of an odd place in the codex, it's not a bad unit, but it's overshadowed by better anti infantry options and better anti tank.

Nurglitch wrote:Hey, quick fact-check: What's the range of The Shadow in the Warp?

12"

I got to take a look at the dex today. It looks really good. All the new units seem neat. I was pretty happy w/ lictor (what I was curious about the most).

My only gripe: am I missing something or do tyrant guard not stop the hive tyrant being a shooting target? He can join them like an independent character, but he's still monstrous and they're still infantry.

Kind of disappointing, seeing as how the entire fluff entry seemed to be dedicated to how they soak up wounds.

He's part of the unit, so you can choose to allocate wounds however you wish among the unit. Him being a monster or not doesn't change that. Now in combat, since he's joined to the unit like an IC, it would imply that he can still be singled out in combat by things in B2B with him...but no, not for shooting. You'd be hard-pressed to hide his unit thanks to his size, but he can still toss shooting wounds on them, just like any other IC joined to a unit.

The rules about MC that Shieldwall had in the last codex were a reference to rules from a previous game edition. Now it doesn't matter.

spinach_chin wrote:I got to take a look at the dex today. It looks really good. All the new units seem neat. I was pretty happy w/ lictor (what I was curious about the most).

My only gripe: am I missing something or do tyrant guard not stop the hive tyrant being a shooting target? He can join them like an independent character, but he's still monstrous and they're still infantry.

Kind of disappointing, seeing as how the entire fluff entry seemed to be dedicated to how they soak up wounds.

In the unit description of the Tyrant Guard it says that the Hive Tyrant can join them and counts as an independent character model. And if you look at the rulebook you will see that independent character models cannot be singled out via shooting.

That's from the german codex.

Greets
Schepp himself

Actually, he does seem to be on to something:

Base Rule Book, page 49:
Independant Characters that are monstrous creatures can always be picked out as seperate targets, unless they've joined a unit of monstrous creatures or a unit with special rules that offer them protection.

Now, RAI is most likely that a Tyrant in a unit of Guard can't be singled out in the shooting phase. What would be the use of the Shieldwall rule and the Tyrant joining the unit if the Tyrant is still a seperate target in all cases? Heck, joining would only make you lose Go to Ground.

But RAW, I dunno, the 4E version of Shieldwall specifically said the Tyrant couldn't be singled out, and there's no mention of that in the new rule (in the German codex at least, haven't seen the English one yet). I guess this is going to be another one of those points that is going to have endless discussion untill a Errata/FAQ comes out in a few months. *sigh*

This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

Redemption wrote:Actually, he does seem to be on to something:

Base Rule Book, page 49:
Independant Characters that are monstrous creatures can always be picked out as seperate targets, unless they've joined a unit of monstrous creatures or a unit with special rules that offer them protection.

Now, RAI is most likely that a Tyrant in a unit of Guard can't be singled out in the shooting phase. What would be the use of the Shieldwall rule and the Tyrant joining the unit if the Tyrant is still a seperate target in all cases? Heck, joining would only make you lose Go to Ground.

But RAW, I dunno, the 4E version of Shieldwall specifically said the Tyrant couldn't be singled out, and there's no mention of that in the new rule (in the German codex at least, haven't seen the English one yet). I guess this is going to be another one of those points that is going to have endless discussion untill a Errata/FAQ comes out in a few months. *sigh*

Ugh, well, I skipped the part about monstrous creatures because I thought they simply don't count as ICs. Unsure if shooting protection is RAI then.

Greets
Schepp himself

Got my nids stuff today
5 Days early! Only got a Trygon and the new book but im very happy because im off work for 2 weeks from today


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So who else got theres today?

Ah, that must be a benefit to living in the UK. I don't suspect to get mine until much later.

Darth Bob wrote:This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

That is they way rules read however.
That said, the CC weapon issue is somewhat avoided as I read it -- none of the CC weapon upgrades are really special close combat weapons, nor do they have to be "used" to get the effects.
The Tyrant Guard issue I saw as I read the book, and seems either an oversight or extra bad nerf.

Another fun part is again coming back to "Is there a double in a set of three" issue, for SitW.

According to GW everyone should get theres on or before the 16th, not sure if that applies to the US as well but I dont see why not

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

That is they way rules read however.
That said, the CC weapon issue is somewhat avoided as I read it -- none of the CC weapon upgrades are really special close combat weapons, nor do they have to be "used" to get the effects.
The Tyrant Guard issue I saw as I read the book, and seems either an oversight or extra bad nerf.

Another fun part is again coming back to "Is there a double in a set of three" issue, for SitW.

I'm 99.9% positive its an oversight. There is almost no benefit in taking Tyrant Guard if they are unable to do their job as guards. Games Workshop is not that stupid, they want money, and they know that if they made the ruling for Guard to not be capable of guarding the Tyrant, no-one would by guard model anymore, because there would be no point, especially with their raised point cost and unchanged statline.

Not quite sure what you mean by the last sentence, elaborate?

SitW causes perils on a pair of 1's or 6's, rolled on three dice. IIRC that is the wording

If three are rolled, is that a pair?
This comes up occationally in Eldar discussions.

Wow, that is silly. there is a pair in a set of three, so that seems pretty cut-and-dry to me. I guess you would really have to be a WaaC player to try and argue that one.

Tyranid warriors cant have wings!

Instead they are a seperate fast attack option... the Tyranid Shrike!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
This makes me think GW will finally realease a proper kit for them

kirsanth wrote:SitW causes perils on a pair of 1's or 6's, rolled on three dice. IIRC that is the wording

If three are rolled, is that a pair?
This comes up occationally in Eldar discussions.

German codex says that there have to be two 6s or 1s showing. So yeah and is a brainfry.

Greets
Schepp himself

Schepp himself wrote:

kirsanth wrote:SitW causes perils on a pair of 1's or 6's, rolled on three dice. IIRC that is the wording

If three are rolled, is that a pair?
This comes up occationally in Eldar discussions.

German codex says that there have to be two 6s or 1s showing. So yeah and is a brainfry.

Greets
Schepp himself

If you've ever played Cribbage, you know that 3 of a kind is actually 3 separate pairs - so wouldn't that be *3* wounds from perils on a or a ?!?

"Any enemy Psyker that takes a psychic test within 12" of a Tyranid with the Shadow in the Warp special rule must take the test on 3D6 and will suffer a Perils of the Warp attack on the roll of any double 1 or double 6"

But come on saying a roll of 6 6 6 isnt a double is taking rules rape a bit far isnt it? isnt it?!

If you were to declare that a roll of 6 6 6 doesn't have a pair in it.... I would be afraid of the symbolism of that number in relation to your attitude on gaming...

It's a stupid stupid stupid argument that originated with Runes of Warding. Hopefully they worded it better so we can avoid a YMDC firestorm. To say you can't roll doubles on 3 dice is just ludicrous, but the argument was--I still don't get it, but it apparently appeals to some people. Mostly people who are playing Eldar who use lots of psykers is my guess.

apwill4765 wrote:It's a stupid stupid stupid argument that originated with Runes of Warding. Hopefully they worded it better so we can avoid a YMDC firestorm. To say you can't roll doubles on 3 dice is just ludicrous, but the argument was--I still don't get it, but it apparently appeals to some people. Mostly people who are playing Eldar who use lots of psykers is my guess.

Again, the codex states that if two(2) of the three(3) D6 show a pair(2) of ones(1s) or sixes(6s) then you have failed for the last time...

Greets
Schepp himself

Yes, but if the english translation does not explicitly say that, then english-codex users are going to have issues.

Read my earlier reply, thats word for word what the codex states!

Wording or not I don't get how 3 of a kind =/= equal a pair. It doesn't in poker but 2 get 3 of something you had to first have gotten a pair of something.

Then there should be no debate. Seems pretty clear to me.

So it looks like elite slots are going to be the most heavily contested slots... I think I'm going to go with a combination of 3 zoeys, 3 hive guard, and a death leaper. I have to buy some hive guard I suppose. But that gives me a fairly decent shot at taking out armor and transports, and takes care of enemy psykers as well. How are you guys going to fill out the elite slots?

Darth Bob wrote:

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

That is they way rules read however.
That said, the CC weapon issue is somewhat avoided as I read it -- none of the CC weapon upgrades are really special close combat weapons, nor do they have to be "used" to get the effects.
The Tyrant Guard issue I saw as I read the book, and seems either an oversight or extra bad nerf.

Another fun part is again coming back to "Is there a double in a set of three" issue, for SitW.

I'm 99.9% positive its an oversight. There is almost no benefit in taking Tyrant Guard if they are unable to do their job as guards. Games Workshop is not that stupid, they want money, and they know that if they made the ruling for Guard to not be capable of guarding the Tyrant, no-one would by guard model anymore, because there would be no point, especially with their raised point cost and unchanged statline.

Not quite sure what you mean by the last sentence, elaborate?

Counter Argument: Pyrovore-pay Terminator points cost for a 2 wound, 4+ save heavy flamer with a single I1 power weapon attack. Carnifex- everything he can do, another unit can do better, cheaper, and faster.

Edit: The point is, GW(well, the codex writers at the least) has a history of just doing silly things that don't seem to make sense. They may very well have felt that Hive Tyrants were going to be dangerous enough that it wouldn't be fair to other players if they couldn't fire on him right away., and the guards should just be offensive support in cc.(and the Tyrant should have a massive points hike just in case) The existence of the freak-out when leaderless rule the Tyrant guard have seems to support that. Who knows unless they release designers notes. Another example would be the triple-nerf the assault cannon saw. Rending was nerfed, assault cannons were priced higher, and the number of platforms it could be fielded on was limited or made exhorbitantly expensive. Or the double-nerf to powerfists, where all of the powerfist options I saw went up to 25 points a piece and could no longer be combined with anything but another powerfist for an extra attack. This stuff happens.

The Hive tyrant has a psychic power "Leech Essence"

Its an auto hit psychic shooting power, does D3 S3 AP2 hits and for each wound caused the tyrant gains a wound!

Not sure the big guy needs regen any more, but with both hes unstoppable... except he gets owned by force weapons as hes not an eternal warrior?!

There's apparently a theme to this book for making Tyranids easy to kill, which would be fine if they didn't also make all the important creatures severely expensive. I'd hardly call D3 hits S3 AP2 reliable enough to actually leech wounds from anything but GEQ's, but that's if the Tyrant survives all the shooting he's going to take now that no one is sure that guards actually guard the Tyrant rather than simply acting as a choppy retinue. Tervigons help because apparently the wording on the Feel No Pain (useless on your MC's for obvious reasons) power just mentions friendly units rather than just Termagants, and Venomthropes act as a sort of KFF, but for the most part the Codex has fragility and expense written all over it.

Oh, and a T5 4+ monstrous creature. Just so your opponents' heavy bolters can claim they killed a monstrous creature too.

can winged warriors have a venom cannon? not heavy but a standard.

but for the most part the Codex has fragility and expense written all over it.

140-170 points for 6 T6 wounds and AS3+ is not fragile in my opinion. Mawloc pays 170 for 6 T6 wounds, and the Tervigon costs nearly the same amount with the catalyst power. Three Hive Guard cost 150 points and have 6 T6 wounds as well. 25-30 points per T6 wound is not what I would describe as fragile at all, especially considering how easily they gain cover saves and even FNP.

A lot of units are overpriced yes (Carnifex is the worst unit in the book by far), but then you just don't use them. Use the underpriced units, and there's a couple of them too.

I don't really expect the new guys to apply to that principal because, well, new guys. The Mawloc/Trygon is the new kit that certainly helps to kill the Carnifex. As for the Tyrant guards, yeah they are a pretty good deal as long as they actually guard the Tyrant from shooting. However from what I've been reading from people who have been over the codex, Tyrants get expensive really, really fast when you want to make them durable or extra killy, and the Tervigon tends to have that problem as well. 6W and regeneration go well together though. I think that the removal of Eternal Warrior, while irritating, does have an upside in that your opponent will actually have to decide whether he wants to use lascannons, missile launchers and such on the monstrous creatures or the thankfully cheaper Warriors.

I'm a bit worried that the book will come down to those 3 units and support while the other units just don't do enough before they get killed to justify NOT taking the few star players.

I have a feeling the Carnifex will find it niche, when enough people get their hands on it i'm sure a few setups will be worth taking, just like in the old book. I have heard great things about 2x scything talon fexs.

Sneezypanda wrote:I have a feeling the Carnifex will find it niche, when enough people get their hands on it i'm sure a few setups will be worth taking, just like in the old book. I have heard great things about 2x scything talon fexs.

The niche is the same as before: long range anti-armor. Sure, Zoeys are S10 but 18" range - if they pod in, then assuming there's no Psychic Hood, they'll pop one tank and then get evaporated by bolter fire (T4 W2 3++ isn't that great against rapidfiring bolter squads. Hive Guard are admittedly good, but still only 24" range.

Heavy VC is 48" S9 blast Assault 2. For immobilizing and popping transports, it will be great, and it can stop tanks from firing as well.

I'm planning to run a Trygon, a brood of 2 VC/ST fexes, and a podding Dakkafex in my heavy support. In addition to 3 Zoeys (possibly in a pod) and 3 Hive Guard, and a Heavy VC on my walking Tyrant. A lot of people are meching up these days, and I'll want those enemy troops *out* of their transports where my little guys can get at them. The 3 Heavy VCs makes for another 12 wounds at T6 Sv3+ that must be eliminated in order to silence the anti-tank, in addition to the 12 T6 Sv3+ from the Hive Guard and the 6 T4 3++ from the Zoeys.

Yeah, it's a lot of points for those Fexes, but I think it will be worth it in today's mech'd up meta.

(T4 W2 3++ isn't that great against rapidfiring bolter squads.

Zoanthropes have W3 now and 60 points a pop isn't a lot considering they have multiple psychic powers automatically now on top of that BS4 S10 AP1 lance.

a brood of 2 VC/ST fexes

Cool, only 450 points for 8 T6 wounds with 3+ saves.

Railguns wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

That is they way rules read however.
That said, the CC weapon issue is somewhat avoided as I read it -- none of the CC weapon upgrades are really special close combat weapons, nor do they have to be "used" to get the effects.
The Tyrant Guard issue I saw as I read the book, and seems either an oversight or extra bad nerf.

Another fun part is again coming back to "Is there a double in a set of three" issue, for SitW.

I'm 99.9% positive its an oversight. There is almost no benefit in taking Tyrant Guard if they are unable to do their job as guards. Games Workshop is not that stupid, they want money, and they know that if they made the ruling for Guard to not be capable of guarding the Tyrant, no-one would by guard model anymore, because there would be no point, especially with their raised point cost and unchanged statline.

Not quite sure what you mean by the last sentence, elaborate?

Counter Argument: Pyrovore-pay Terminator points cost for a 2 wound, 4+ save heavy flamer with a single I1 power weapon attack. Carnifex- everything he can do, another unit can do better, cheaper, and faster.

Edit: The point is, GW(well, the codex writers at the least) has a history of just doing silly things that don't seem to make sense. They may very well have felt that Hive Tyrants were going to be dangerous enough that it wouldn't be fair to other players if they couldn't fire on him right away., and the guards should just be offensive support in cc.(and the Tyrant should have a massive points hike just in case) The existence of the freak-out when leaderless rule the Tyrant guard have seems to support that. Who knows unless they release designers notes. Another example would be the triple-nerf the assault cannon saw. Rending was nerfed, assault cannons were priced higher, and the number of platforms it could be fielded on was limited or made exhorbitantly expensive. Or the double-nerf to powerfists, where all of the powerfist options I saw went up to 25 points a piece and could no longer be combined with anything but another powerfist for an extra attack. This stuff happens.

Counter-Counter Argument: The examples you have given did not change the function of the subject that they nerfed. The whole point of taking Guard was to act as a meatshield for the Tyrant. If the Tyrant is "dangerous enough" why does it need offensive support? I'll reiterate my statement; if the Tyrant Guard does not Guard the Tyrant...what is the insentive?

Therion wrote:
Zoanthropes have W3 now and 60 points a pop isn't a lot considering they have multiple psychic powers automatically now on top of that BS4 S10 AP1 lance.

Nope, Zoanthropes still have 2 wounds.

Strangelooper wrote:

Sneezypanda wrote:I have a feeling the Carnifex will find it niche, when enough people get their hands on it i'm sure a few setups will be worth taking, just like in the old book. I have heard great things about 2x scything talon fexs.

The niche is the same as before: long range anti-armor. Sure, Zoeys are S10 but 18" range - if they pod in, then assuming there's no Psychic Hood, they'll pop one tank and then get evaporated by bolter fire (T4 W2 3++ isn't that great against rapidfiring bolter squads. Hive Guard are admittedly good, but still only 24" range.

Heavy VC is 48" S9 blast Assault 2. For immobilizing and popping transports, it will be great, and it can stop tanks from firing as well.

Yeah, it's a lot of points for those Fexes, but I think it will be worth it in today's mech'd up meta.

I disagree. If you want that kind of long range fire power, I think you're better off with a Tyranofex. It's cheaper than running a pair of Fexes, with a stronger gun that doesn't get penalized on the damage chart, and packs a couple of extra anti-infantry guns at the same time. Two less wounds, but a better armor save. Not to mention I just like the idea of running something larger than a standard Fex.

LoLcAtMaN wrote:can winged warriors have a venom cannon? not heavy but a standard.

Yes they can



Ive just finished reading all the unit fluff and special rules, seems like a great list although no eternal warrior anywhere!

of course there are plenty of T6 unit (Tyrant, fex and trygon to name a few)

Tyrant guard CANNOT take wounds for the tyrant, He can join the unit but im not sure if he can still be picked out by shooting? The rule reads...

"Shieldwall: Tyrant Guard are used as living shields whose entire purpose is to protect the Hive tyrants from harm, heedless of any personal injury.

A Single Hive tyrant (Including the Swarmlord) may join a unit of tyrant guard exactly as if it were an independant creature. If a Hive tyrant (Or swarmlord) has joined a unit of Tyrant guard, the unit cannot go to ground, voluntarily or otherwise."

So rules experts, can an enemy pick the tyrant out of this unit? Im guessing not in Shooting only in CC but Im not sure!

Keldon_Uk wrote:can an enemy pick the tyrant out of this unit? Im guessing not in Shooting only in CC but Im not sure!

Wounds can be allocated to the Tyrant with volume of shots, but individually picked out? Not unless the unit has a special rule that lets you pick out a single character, same as any other independent character in a unit. Shieldwall just means that a monstrous creature can join infantry-sized models to form a unit, which normally cannot happen.

All normal independent character rules apply once he joins the unit.

"...May not go to ground, voluntarily or otherwise."

I assume this means they are immune to pinning? That's handy for the tyrant guard, at least.

I guess they just don't want deathstar Hive-tyrants running around with units of Tyrant Guard to soak up the damage.

My point, Darth Bob, is that the chances that a codex will contain design decisions or thematic changes that make no sense is very, very high. It doesn't have to make sense, the combination of poor editing, writer bias(Alessio's Skaven book), or bean counter level decisions almost always conspires to cause strange issues. Want to cite an example of role change? Carnifexes were close combat monsters. Thematically they are supposed to be, but in the current codex kitting up a Carnifex for close combat is nearly universally a poor expenditure of points unless your opponent obliges you and lets the waddling tard catch something. But, the army desperately needed a way to deal with vehicles. Zoanthropes had too many opportunities to fail to be useful, Hive Tyrant venom cannons were glorified autocannons that couldn't pen, and a flying tyrant could only catch one tank at a time, so the Carnifex capable of carrying 2 S10 and 1 S8 shot became a gun platform. A role was changed, even though most of the biomorphs were CC options.

Consider Space Marine Vanguards. The ability to deepstrike and assault with a bunch of power weapon/fist/relic blade attacks outta nowhere should be incredible, but because the models are so expensive, have a high chance to not actually get to "Heroic Intervention", and aren't any harder to kill than your standard marine, their is no incentive to take them even though they have a well stated purpose. Sisters Repentia? Sure, 20 point models with W1, T3 and a poor armor save who will always go last are totally going to be popular right? No, there was no incentive to take them despite being a unit of freaking eviscerator armed psycho nuns because they were a liablity. This sort of thing happens with every book that comes out, there doesn't have to be an incentive to take a unit for it to exist. If we go and decide that a unit was intended to work a certain way even if the rules say they don't actually do this, it's just as likely that the designers had the opposite interpretation, or they may have just been incompetent. Unfortunately we'll probably never know because again, the released "designers notes" usually never actually clarify much. Nor can we rely on FAQs that may or may not come out in a timely manner or even give us a concrete answer, like the Space Wolf faq that basically told people to do what they want on a particular issue.

I'll give them credit where it is due. The Skaven release was genuinely exciting even though I don't pay Fantasy. I like many of the new kits they have been releasing (except the Beasmen). GW has certainly created an interesting lore for their game systems. I appreciate the fact that this game works best when both players are out to have fun and can thusly resolve rules issues by going with whatever they like, but at the same time this does not excuse them from properly editing, testing, and thinking out their products. I don't want to hate them but I'm going to hold them responsible for their screwups.

A 5 man squad of thunderhammer terms will beat the dog crap out of a carnifex every single time even if it gets the charge. He may take them all out but he'll in all likelyhood die.


A trigon charging the same squad will probably live through it.

I dunno I am not great at math hammer. 3+ to hit with 7 attacks reroll all misses because of talons.

apwill4765 wrote:It's a stupid stupid stupid argument that originated with Runes of Warding. Hopefully they worded it better so we can avoid a YMDC firestorm. To say you can't roll doubles on 3 dice is just ludicrous, but the argument was--I still don't get it, but it apparently appeals to some people. Mostly people who are playing Eldar who use lots of psykers is my guess.

It says theres perils with any pairsof 1s or 6s and it is much better worded.

Oh, I'm sure there will be people that will attempt to argue that you can't get a pair if you roll three dice. Why not? Some complete morons couldn't handle 'doubles', so why shouldn't their illiteracy extend to a synonym?

Aduro wrote:

Strangelooper wrote:

Heavy VC is 48" S9 blast Assault 2. For immobilizing and popping transports, it will be great, and it can stop tanks from firing as well.

Yeah, it's a lot of points for those Fexes, but I think it will be worth it in today's mech'd up meta.

I disagree. If you want that kind of long range fire power, I think you're better off with a Tyranofex. It's cheaper than running a pair of Fexes, with a stronger gun that doesn't get penalized on the damage chart, and packs a couple of extra anti-infantry guns at the same time. Two less wounds, but a better armor save. Not to mention I just like the idea of running something larger than a standard Fex.

True, the Tyrannofex is a lot less points and the gun is stronger. It would certainly be a better choice in lower point games, or as a true anti-AV14 if the LandRaider/LRBT meta is strong in your area and/or you don't want to bring Zoeys. But as soon as you start to max out your Heavy slots, you're looking at a 2 shots backed by 6 wounds (Tyrannofex) vs 4 shots backed by 8 wounds (2 VC fexes) in that precious slot (or even 6 shots backed by 12 for a full brood, though I wouldn't do that in less than 2000 pts).

I don't see my VC Fexes going after predators or land raiders except in a target-poor environment - instead they'd use their VCs to open up Rhinos and Razorbacks while they advance up the board and get ready to mess it up in combat. The Zoeys would handle the heavy tanks. And really, it's the combination of Fexes, Zoeys and Tyrant VC that should make for too much antitank to nullify quickly. In addition, once some infantry ventures out of their immobilized/popped transports, that's 4 AP3 blasts that instakill marine characters flying around - even misses by the Fexes can be entertaining! The S10 Capsule Cannon is only AP4 I believe. My point is that the Fexes can do more than just shoot vehicles, while the Capsule Cannon Tyrannofex is pretty dedicated. Is it worth the extra points for the extra shots and extra wounds? I think so.

If the Tyranofex is hanging back shooting, that 2+ save won't do much against weapons that can reach out far enough to hurt him (Lascannons, Railguns, deepstriking plas/meltas). It'll save him from missile launchers I guess, or help him in melee if he gets into combat with something strong that doesn't ignore armor saves (ie Ogryn ) If he gets into combat, he's got 3 attacks vs the 8 attacks of the paired Fexes.

But probably the main reason I'll field the Fexes is that they're already built, and it might be a while till I can spend >$100 to kitbash a Tyrannofex.

Strangelooper wrote:Heavy VC is 48" S9 blast Assault 2. For immobilizing and popping transports, it will be great, and it can stop tanks from firing as well.

Is it actually Assault Two? I heard it was only Assault One...

If it is assault 2, then it would be an excellent heavy-infantry killer. 2 blasts @ S9 can really wreck some infantryman's day.

Everything I've heard is Assault One, which is why I don't think two Fexes are better than one T-Fex, who'll have just as many shots. I wouldn't leave him hanging in the back field either. He'll be near the mid/back of the Hoard, but he'll be advancing right along with them, so he's supported by Synapse and Venomthropes and the rest of the Synergetic goodness, as well as making use of his anti-infantry blasts and templates that he gets along with his anti-tank gun if the opportunity arises.

Hollismason wrote:A 5 man squad of thunderhammer terms will beat the dog crap out of a carnifex every single time even if it gets the charge. He may take them all out but he'll in all likelyhood die.


A trigon charging the same squad will probably live through it.

I dunno I am not great at math hammer. 3+ to hit with 7 attacks reroll all misses because of talons.

Different uses between them, carnifexes are capable of dealing significantly more damage at range and you can get more of them per force org slot. Trygons are larger, more expensive targets with no real use at range, forcing them to either take a very dangerous walk across the board or risk coming up near an army, possibly scattering away, and most certainly taking a couple of plasma or melta shots before being able to utilize the superior close combat potential (the large size makes cover difficult to attain, and the creature is still wounded on a 2+ from missiles).

As for the mathhammer, the trygon will hit roughly 6-7 times and wound roughly 6. Four of six saves will be made. On the return you have six attacks, 3 hits, and roughly 3 wounds. Next round the trygon will go again, killing another two averagely, then taking another wound on the return. Final round it wins combat. Keep in mind though, it's highly unlikely that it wouldn't have taken a lascanon shot or two, and it's even less likely that it would be the one getting the charge considering you can't charge from deepstrike, and it's not too common to see thunderhammers outside of a metal box (that same squad charging from and supported by their box would probably kill the trygon in the first round while losing two of their own number).

This rumor page (http://forum.warpshadow.com/viewtopic.php?t=12625&start=0) lists it as being assault 1. So I guess no double-tapping with this.

On another topic; has anybody heard about this upgrade?

"- Toxic blood - When this model loses a wound in melee the model that caused the wound must stand an I check or lose a wound with no AS allowed, tanks are hit on 4+ with a glancing hit"

Taken from the same page. Any ideas on if this made the final cut, and what units get to take it?

Strangelooper wrote:True, the Tyrannofex is a lot less points and the gun is stronger. It would certainly be a better choice in lower point games, or as a true anti-AV14 if the LandRaider/LRBT meta is strong in your area and/or you don't want to bring Zoeys. But as soon as you start to max out your Heavy slots, you're looking at a 2 shots backed by 6 wounds (Tyrannofex) vs 4 shots backed by 8 wounds (2 VC fexes) in that precious slot (or even 6 shots backed by 12 for a full brood, though I wouldn't do that in less than 2000 pts).

As has been said, the Venom Cannon is only Assault 1. Taking scatter in mind you will hit less than half the time, depending on the size of your target. The Capsule Cannon hits once on average, with a higher strength, without the -1 to the damage result and at a longer range. So for anti-vehicle, the Capsule Cannon is at probably about twice as good. Of course the Venom Cannon can always scatter on another enemy, so you might get lucky there.

In addition, once some infantry ventures out of their immobilized/popped transports, that's 4 AP3 blasts that instakill marine characters flying around - even misses by the Fexes can be entertaining! The S10 Capsule Cannon is only AP4 I believe.

The Venom Cannon is also AP4. Only the Zoanthrope's Warp Blast & Lance, the Carnifex' Bioplasma and the Tyrant's Life Leech are AP3 or better.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:On another topic; has anybody heard about this upgrade?

"- Toxic blood - When this model loses a wound in melee the model that caused the wound must stand an I check or lose a wound with no AS allowed, tanks are hit on 4+ with a glancing hit"

Taken from the same page. Any ideas on if this made the final cut, and what units get to take it?

It is in, with the slight modifications that the unit (not model) that caused the wounds must take the test, and that tanks should be changed walkers. The Hive Tyrant, Tervigon and Broodlord can get it as upgrade, and the Pyrovore always has it.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:This rumor page (http://forum.warpshadow.com/viewtopic.php?t=12625&start=0) lists it as being assault 1. So I guess no double-tapping with this.

On another topic; has anybody heard about this upgrade?

"- Toxic blood - When this model loses a wound in melee the model that caused the wound must stand an I check or lose a wound with no AS allowed, tanks are hit on 4+ with a glancing hit"

Taken from the same page. Any ideas on if this made the final cut, and what units get to take it?

It's in and...wait...Hive Tyrants, Tervigons and Broodlords can take it.

Greets
Schepp himself

Edit: Redemption beat me to it! Go to work!

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:This rumor page (http://forum.warpshadow.com/viewtopic.php?t=12625&start=0) lists it as being assault 1. So I guess no double-tapping with this.

On another topic; has anybody heard about this upgrade?

"- Toxic blood - When this model loses a wound in melee the model that caused the wound must stand an I check or lose a wound with no AS allowed, tanks are hit on 4+ with a glancing hit"

Taken from the same page. Any ideas on if this made the final cut, and what units get to take it?

Just to a note, in the english version its walkers that get the 4+ glancing, which makes more sense

Strangelooper wrote:
True, the Tyrannofex is a lot less points and the gun is stronger. It would certainly be a better choice in lower point games, or as a true anti-AV14 if the LandRaider/LRBT meta is strong in your area and/or you don't want to bring Zoeys. But as soon as you start to max out your Heavy slots, you're looking at a 2 shots backed by 6 wounds (Tyrannofex) vs 4 shots backed by 8 wounds (2 VC fexes) in that precious slot (or even 6 shots backed by 12 for a full brood, though I wouldn't do that in less than 2000 pts).

Just to address this , if there is any significant amount of AV 14 where you play, the Tyrannofex is more than twice as effective at popping AV 14 than two heavy venom cannon Carnifexes. With the venom cannon -1 to the vehicle damage chart, it can only destroy AV 14 on back to back rolls of "6," while the capsule cannon needs back to back rolls of "5+." Also, the capsule cannon can destroy on a glance, which the venom cannon cannot do, I believe.

my nids came in the the post just need to get it from the post office

Schepp himself wrote:Edit: Redemption beat me to it! Go to work!

What makes you think I'm not at work?

Saldiven wrote:Also, the capsule cannon can destroy on a glance, which the venom cannon cannot do, I believe.

What makes you think that? It's just a S10 AP4 weapon. The only way it can kill on a glance is if it gets a weapon destroyed or immobilised result after all weapons are already destroyed and the vehicle is already immobilised, but that goes for every weapon.

Lyracian wrote:

Strangelooper wrote:Heavy VC is 48" S9 blast Assault 2. For immobilizing and popping transports, it will be great, and it can stop tanks from firing as well.

Is it actually Assault Two? I heard it was only Assault One...

I just had a quick glance at a store copy of the codex - I *thought* the Heavy VC was Assault 2 AP3, but I could be (wishfully) misremembering. Damn. Uh, yeah if it's only Assault 1 AP4 then that does make the Fex a rather expensive platform.

Time to glue my two fexes to one another and call them "Tyranno"...

Nope the Heavy Venom Cannon is definately Assault 1 Blast. And Acid Blood, IMHO, is the saving grace for the Pyrovore.

This should put an end to the Tyrant Guard debate.

Tyranid Codex page 35, copright Games Workshop wrote:A single Hive Tyrant (including the Swarmlord) may join a unit of Tyrant Guard exactly as if it were an independent character.

That is the entry for shield wall. The Hive Tyrant only acts as an Ic in that it is able to join a unit, it does not become an IC and therefore does not have any other rules that adhere to IC's. Since this is an odd case of a unit joining another unit, the Tyrant would function as if it were an upgrade character, and therefore not targetable in Shooting or CC.

If Swarmlord is an IC, however, he would be targetable.

It is not a retinue, the Guard can seperate.

No upgrade character status.

kirsanth wrote:It is not a retinue, the Guard can seperate.

No upgrade character status.

I did not say it was an Upgrade Character I said it acts as if it were. You can act like something while not outright being it. It does not count as an Upgrade character; it acts as one in that it is untargetable in CC and Shooting. The alocation of wounds goes to the owner of the Tyrant and it's Guard. You cannot pick out the Tyrant in shooting or CC, since it's not an IC, just one unit joining another.

Darth Bob wrote: It does not count as an Upgrade character; it acts as one in that it is untargetable in CC and Shooting. The alocation of wounds goes to the owner of the Tyrant and it's Guard. You cannot pick out the Tyrant in shooting or CC, since it's not an IC, just one unit joining another.

MCs can be targeted, unless a rules actually prevents it.
None do.

The rest is just hopeful, despite the text.

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:

MCs can be targeted, unless a rules actually prevents it.
None do.

Please quote a rule from the rule book that say that, because IIRC, that is only "IC's which are Monstrous Creatures". The Hive Tyrant, however, is not an IC.

I don't recall (dont have rule book in front of me) Monstrous Creatures being able to join units unless they were IC's. So therefore, the Hive Tyrant would be a first-timer in that it is a non-IC Monstrous Creature that can join a unit.

Gotcha, so you are saying it joins one exactly as an IC, but does not have the drawbacks of being one?

editing to add:
I think I understand the issue, but it would seem that "joined exactly as if" would mean both sides of the coin. Otherwise it would say something along the lines of "may join despite the HT not being a".

/shrug

kirsanth wrote:Gotcha, so you are saying it joins one exactly as an IC, but does not have the drawbacks of being one?

Precisely.

It says "as if it were an IC". So it does not gain the "IC" special rule, they just use the reference of "IC" to let you know that it joins a unit like an IC. If it said "a tyrant joining a unit of guard gains the "IC" special rule" then it would actually be an IC.

Interesting...that'd be the only way Tyrant Guard are even in the realm of playability, so sounds plausible.

The alternative is that perhaps Cruddace forgot about the random caveat about MC IC's and how they would need special exceptions to give them regular IC protection in a non-MC squad.

Either way, I like Darth Bob's take on it. Maybe this book will get a FAQ as quickly as the SW one.

If an IC MC is joined it can be picked out, if the MC is joined exactly as if it were an IC, then, logically, it could be able to be picked out as well.

Oh, I much prefer Darth Bob's take on it, but I am not certain how valid it is; as such I tend to take vague rules for my units in the least beneficial way.

Its really the "exactly" that gets me.

More reading!

kirsanth wrote:If an IC MC is joined it can be picked out, if the MC is joined exactly as if it were an IC, then, logically, it could be able to be picked out as well.

Oh, I much prefer Darth Bob's take on it, but I am not certain how valid it is; as such I tend to take vague rules for my units in the least beneficial way.

Its really the "exactly" that gets me.

More reading!

You can have a replica of a M41A Pulse Rifle that looks exactly as if it were real. And yet, it is not real.
Conversely...
You can have a non IC that joins a unit exactly as if it were an IC. And yet, it is not an IC.

I think logic would also point more towards the Guard being able to guard the Tyrant since logic would tell us that their ability to guard the Tyrant is the only way they are at all viable.

Unfortunately, Darth Bob, logic and GW rules do not always go hand in hand.....

Darth Bob wrote:I think logic would also point more towards the Guard being able to guard the Tyrant since logic would tell us that their ability to guard the Tyrant is the only way they are at all viable.

This is a logical fallacy, examples of which can be found in Chaos Possessed, Stormtroopers, and tankbustas.

Janthkin wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:I think logic would also point more towards the Guard being able to guard the Tyrant since logic would tell us that their ability to guard the Tyrant is the only way they are at all viable.

This is a logical fallacy, examples of which can be found in Chaos Possessed, Stormtroopers, and tankbustas.

Theres a difference between a unit sucking and a unit not doing what it is meant to do (where they could in the previous codex.)

Dysartes wrote:Unfortunately, Darth Bob, logic and GW rules do not always go hand in hand.....

This is true, but since it is rather vague, we have no choice but to either use RAI or RAW. When it comes to vague subjects, I usually go for the RAW factor. And RAW-wise, my argument seems pretty solid. It does not explicitly say the Tyrant gains the IC characteristic, therefore, for all intensive purposes, it does not. Therefore, no targeting him explicitly in assault or shooting.

Darth Bob wrote:This is true, but since it is rather vague, we have no choice but to either use RAI or RAW. When it comes to vague subjects, I usually go for the RAW factor. And RAW-wise, my argument seems pretty solid. It does not explicitly say the Tyrant gains the IC characteristic, therefore, for all intensive purposes, it does not. Therefore, no targeting him explicitly in assault or shooting.

First, "intents and purposes".

Second, when the rules are vague, it is generally more acceptable to use the least advantageous interpretation -- not claim older RAW = RAI.
If they intended the rules to remain the same, they would not change them.

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:This is true, but since it is rather vague, we have no choice but to either use RAI or RAW. When it comes to vague subjects, I usually go for the RAW factor. And RAW-wise, my argument seems pretty solid. It does not explicitly say the Tyrant gains the IC characteristic, therefore, for all intensive purposes, it does not. Therefore, no targeting him explicitly in assault or shooting.

First, "intents and purposes".

Second, when the rules are vague, it is generally more acceptable to use the least advantageous interpretation -- not claim older RAW = RAI.
If they intended the rules to remain the same, they would not change them.

Woops...

But then the rules are not the same now are they? The Tyrant is able to seperate from the unit. Before, he was not, as the unit was counted as a retinue. Therefore it is just as easy to argue that that was the change that was made, rather than the change being him as a target.

Sorry, but this is a huge disadvantage, and I'm not going to concede to taking what may or may not be a nerf without putting up a fight. The inability of the guard the tyrant makes absolutely no sense, and is complete bullcrap. Since RAW (whether by technicality or not) points to the fact that they can guard the tyrant, RAI points to the fact that they can guard the tyrant (if you interperet it thusly) and a simple understanding of english points to the fact that the Tyrant Guard can guard the tyrant, then I say the guard can guard the tyrant and the Tyrant should not be targetable in CC or Shooting.

That is my stand on the subject and I will not change it until an official FAQ comes out.

An official FAQ means squat. Now if it's an Official Errta now that changes the rules. FAQ are nothing more than 'house rules'

sirisaacnuton wrote:[...]
Either way, I like Darth Bob's take on it. Hopefully this book will get a Gwar!-FAQ as quickly as the SW one.

Corrected your sentence there. As GW mostly uses the Gwar!-Faq anyway you can use this without doubts.

Greets
Schepp himself

kirsanth wrote:If an IC MC is joined it can be picked out, if the MC is joined exactly as if it were an IC, then, logically, it could be able to be picked out as well.

Oh, I much prefer Darth Bob's take on it, but I am not certain how valid it is; as such I tend to take vague rules for my units in the least beneficial way.

Its really the "exactly" that gets me.

More reading!

Kinda like Counter Assault huh? "The unit that counter assault gets a +1 attack bonus exactly as if it assaulted." The RaW take on this has historically been that "as if" does not equate to being an assault, therefore FC did not stack with CA. Now we have had several heated debates in YMDC given the recent SW FAQ rulings.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Schepp himself wrote:

sirisaacnuton wrote:[...]
Either way, I like Darth Bob's take on it. Hopefully this book will get a Gwar!-FAQ as quickly as the SW one.

Corrected your sentence there. As GW mostly uses the Gwar!-Faq anyway you can use this without doubts.

Greets
Schepp himself

Correction the GW SW FAQ uses about 50-60% or so of GWAR's FAQ, the rest runs contrary to GWAR's FAQ.

Precisely, wyomingfox.

Also note: Gwar! already has a FAQ for Tyranids.



Editing to add:
I almost wrote "Exactly, wyomingfox" but managed not to.
hehe

Gwar!'s ruleing is that they do get protection in shooting, but not in CC. I can live with that, though I still say by a technicality, you could still argue it.

Whatever, I suppose in friendly games you're just going to have to discuss it beforehand, and hopefully this won't be a big problem at tournaments.

Who the feth cares what Gwar thinks? His faq is just common sense conclusions that most people should come to as long as they are not functionally slowed.


I

Hollismason wrote:Who the feth cares what Gwar thinks?

Quoted for truth.

My new bane is podding Venomthropes with a Alpha warrior for back up surrounded by Genestealers. So frustating.

Hollismason wrote:Who the feth cares what Gwar thinks? His faq is just common sense conclusions that most people should come to as long as they are not functionally slowed.


I

Nurglitch wrote:

Hollismason wrote:Who the feth cares what Gwar thinks?

Quoted for truth.

Let's change the subject, before thread lockage please.

Darth Bob wrote:Gwar!'s ruleing is that they do get protection in shooting, but not in CC. I can live with that, though I still say by a technicality, you could still argue it.

Whatever, I suppose in friendly games you're just going to have to discuss it beforehand, and hopefully this won't be a big problem at tournaments.

Gwar's updated his FAQ to protection from shooting and CC now.

airmang wrote:Nope the Heavy Venom Cannon is definately Assault 1 Blast. And Acid Blood, IMHO, is the saving grace for the Pyrovore.

It is also only 36" range. Both venom cannons and barbed stranglers and their heavy variants are all 36" range.
I also could not find any reference to how big the tervigon/tyrannofex are supposed to be for conversions. The description says "massive" for both, which is also what is used to describe the Hive Tyrant. I can't remember what the carnifex was.

mikesorensonxx wrote:

airmang wrote:Nope the Heavy Venom Cannon is definately Assault 1 Blast. And Acid Blood, IMHO, is the saving grace for the Pyrovore.

It is also only 36" range. Both venom cannons and barbed stranglers and their heavy variants are all 36" range.
I also could not find any reference to how big the tervigon/tyrannofex are supposed to be for conversions. The description says "massive" for both, which is also what is used to describe the Hive Tyrant. I can't remember what the carnifex was.

Looking at the artwork, I suspect they will be a shared kit - both walk on all three legs, and both seem to have three rows of "chimneys," as opposed to the Tyrant's 2. The scale in the pictures is of no help, though - both are shown surrounded by 'gaunts, who look about ankle-high. I'm guessing that it's going to be about as tall as a Tyrant, but more bulky.

The info I have puts Barbed Stranglers at 24", Heavy at 36". Venom Cannons at 36", Heavy at 48".

3 legs?

Three PAIRS of legs, yes. I really dislike the artwork for the Tyranofex, mostly with gun placement, though the Tervigon looks better and I might base my work off of it a bit more than originally planed.

Aduro wrote:The info I have puts Barbed Stranglers at 24", Heavy at 36". Venom Cannons at 36", Heavy at 48".

No, they're all 36". The only 48" ranged Tyranid weapons are the Tyrannofex' Capsule Cannon and the Biovore's Sporemine Launcher.

Aduro wrote:The info I have puts Barbed Stranglers at 24", Heavy at 36". Venom Cannons at 36", Heavy at 48".

German codex: both venom cannon variants: 36", both strangler variants: 36".
Only the capsule (sorry) cannon and the biovore are 48".

Greets
Schepp himself

Edit: Damn it Redemtion, work HARDER!

As for the tyrant guard issue, I'm 100% with Darth Bob. It states he can join it like an IC but gains no other ability of an IC, such as being able to leave the unit. Once he's in he's stuck there.

He only acts like an IC for the purposes of joining the unit, nothing else.

Darkness wrote:As for the tyrant guard issue, I'm 100% with Darth Bob. It states he can join it like an IC but gains no other ability of an IC, such as being able to leave the unit. Once he's in he's stuck there.

He only acts like an IC for the purposes of joining the unit, nothing else.

Yeah, I agree that makes the most sense. If he were a full IC, the only thing you'd gain is the Tyrant Guard enraging when the Tyrant dies. Still curious as to what the official FAQ will say though.

Schepp himself wrote:Edit: Damn it Redemption, work HARDER!

I have to do something while I wait for compile times.

Wow, reading through this thread is such a blast from the past.

You've got the excitement about the new releases. Photos surreptitiously shared! New stats posted, directly or indirectly. ("It's once, twice, three tiiiimes a Rhino, and I looooove it.")

The models pick up annoying new nicknames even though their names are already short and the models aren't even out yet.

Then there's all the talk about how the army will work. This of course leads to questions about how the 12,000 special rules in the new codex will collide with each other as well as with the 144,000 other special rules in the rules and other codexes. There're arguments about this, talk of the need for FAQs and clarifications, and the book has not even been released yet.

Always in the background the everpresent fear ... Will the evil GW swoop down and demand the leaked info be removed?

It was nostalgic to read this, but also a relief. Ah, to be free of GW gaming. The models are fun but the games are dreary, hung on the same tired old gaming engines that, from a mechanical perspective, simply do not provide interesting games. If I were just a collector, it would be one thing, but it's a lot of money and a lot of time to spend on the game just to have the underlying game suck.

Look at it this way -- any game that can be won because some pimply teenager sits down looking for the right power combo is not what you could call a great system.

So I gave up on it, the pretty models (and they are not always pretty) eventually being outweighed by the bad gaming. I'd love to see them completely revamp the game but that's not going to happen. That's why I've been away so long that most of you probably don't even know who I am. Lord knows I saw few if any names I recognized! I wonder if Snord even posts here any more, or Hubcap. I guess moving on is just something one does.

Anyway, the Trygon certainly is cool! I hope you guys get fun out of the new stuff.

bugswarm wrote:Wow, reading through this thread is such a blast from the past.

You've got the excitement about the new releases. Photos surreptitiously shared! New stats posted, directly or indirectly. ("It's once, twice, three tiiiimes a Rhino, and I looooove it.")

The models pick up annoying new nicknames even though their names are already short and the models aren't even out yet.

Then there's all the talk about how the army will work. This of course leads to questions about how the 12,000 special rules in the new codex will collide with each other as well as with the 144,000 other special rules in the rules and other codexes. There're arguments about this, talk of the need for FAQs and clarifications, and the book has not even been released yet.

Always in the background the everpresent fear ... Will the evil GW swoop down and demand the leaked info be removed?

It was nostalgic to read this, but also a relief. Ah, to be free of GW gaming. The models are fun but the games are dreary, hung on the same tired old gaming engines that, from a mechanical perspective, simply do not provide interesting games. If I were just a collector, it would be one thing, but it's a lot of money and a lot of time to spend on the game just to have the underlying game suck.

Look at it this way -- any game that can be won because some pimply teenager sits down looking for the right power combo is not what you could call a great system.

So I gave up on it, the pretty models (and they are not always pretty) eventually being outweighed by the bad gaming. I'd love to see them completely revamp the game but that's not going to happen. That's why I've been away so long that most of you probably don't even know who I am. Lord knows I saw few if any names I recognized! I wonder if Snord even posts here any more, or Hubcap. I guess moving on is just something one does.

Anyway, the Trygon certainly is cool! I hope you guys get fun out of the new stuff.

Good god, it's Bugswarm.

Nope, haven't seen Snord or Hubcap in quite an age.

And yes, some things don't change - enough people continue to buy/play that GW isn't motivated to write/edit better. Some of the new bugs should be lovely, though.

bugswarm wrote:I guess moving on is just something one does.

Clearly not if you're still reading and posting.

Nurglitch wrote:

bugswarm wrote:I guess moving on is just something one does.

Clearly not if you're still reading and posting.

What he said.

And yes, some things don't change - enough people continue to buy/play that GW isn't motivated to write/edit better. Some of the new bugs should be lovely, though.

I thought fourth was much better than third and fifth much better than fourth. But thats just me. I've never played a game of second, so who knows.

ShumaGorath wrote:

And yes, some things don't change - enough people continue to buy/play that GW isn't motivated to write/edit better. Some of the new bugs should be lovely, though.

I thought fourth was much better than third and fifth much better than fourth. But thats just me. I've never played a game of second, so who knows.

Define "better?" We're still having an absurd number of arguments about things that a tiny bit of editing would render moot.

In terms of playing the game, there have been elements of the last four editions that I liked, and others that I haven't. (2nd was best for narrative story-telling, though, if abysmal from a balance perspective.)

airmang wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:Gwar!'s ruleing is that they do get protection in shooting, but not in CC. I can live with that, though I still say by a technicality, you could still argue it.

Whatever, I suppose in friendly games you're just going to have to discuss it beforehand, and hopefully this won't be a big problem at tournaments.

Gwar's updated his FAQ to protection from shooting and CC now.

Where is this Gwar FAQ?

Where else would a troll reside? In the dank dark reaches of YMTC.

Can someone verify that the Toxic Sacs biomorph 4+ poison is applied to ranged weapons?

Janthkin wrote:We're still having an absurd number of arguments about things that a tiny bit of editing would render moot.

The lack of editing has made plenty of issues moot.

Yup. I'd say this thread is just about run itself out.

FoxPhoenix135 wrote:Yup. I'd say this thread is just about run itself out.

UNLESS! Someone can tell me what should the squad size be of their termagant squads when using a dual Tervigon list. 10? 20? 30? I'm looking for a swarm list, and I need to know how many more gaunts I need to buy.

I think the News and the Rumors are done, and it's all down to Tactics and Strategies.

Hi Bugs,

Glad to see you still have an interest. I still have fun with the game, and I agree with Shuma that it HAS improved over the last couple of editions. It's not all I play, though.

Belphegor wrote:Can someone verify that the Toxic Sacs biomorph 4+ poison is applied to ranged weapons?

No, it's Close Combat only.

just fought it yesterday using the store copy with a friend. He was pissed that his army lost it's ability to be hurtful in shooting, as he ran warriors with deathspitter, thropes and boomfexes, can't biomorph as much as he used to and that after he won he went on to say that the Swarmlord is useless given that Kharn almost took it down solo.

Expect many same sentiments from other Nid players the first few weeks...just like us 3rd ed Chaos Marines.

Kurgash wrote:just fought it yesterday using the store copy with a friend. He was pissed that his army lost it's ability to be hurtful in shooting, as he ran warriors with deathspitter, thropes and boomfexes, can't biomorph as much as he used to and that after he won he went on to say that the Swarmlord is useless given that Kharn almost took it down solo.

Expect many same sentiments from other Nid players the first few weeks...just like us 3rd ed Chaos Marines.

No. Stop. I played 3rd Edition Chaos, and I now play 4th edition Chaos. The Nid codex by no means compares to the amount of crap in the Chaos Codex.

Darth Bob wrote:

Kurgash wrote:just fought it yesterday using the store copy with a friend. He was pissed that his army lost it's ability to be hurtful in shooting, as he ran warriors with deathspitter, thropes and boomfexes, can't biomorph as much as he used to and that after he won he went on to say that the Swarmlord is useless given that Kharn almost took it down solo.

Expect many same sentiments from other Nid players the first few weeks...just like us 3rd ed Chaos Marines.

No. Stop. I played 3rd Edition Chaos, and I now play 4th edition Chaos. The Nid codex by no means compares to the amount of crap in the Chaos Codex.

I apologize, I now found the word I was looking for in regards to both codices, Customization. Idk about you but I miss my 3rd Ed Chaos.

I miss the first 3rd ed. Chaos, I don't miss 3.5.

That gakked my army big time.

Fateweaver wrote:I miss the first 3rd ed. Chaos, I don't miss 3.5.

That gakked my army big time.

I can't remember which was which as I went over to fantasy for a time, what were the changes from 3rd to 3.5? All I remember my codex having was demonic gifts, good dreads, chosen terminators of tzeentch all casting spells, 2 wound rubric marines and chainaxes that did the 4+ armor save max

Janthkin wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

And yes, some things don't change - enough people continue to buy/play that GW isn't motivated to write/edit better. Some of the new bugs should be lovely, though.

I thought fourth was much better than third and fifth much better than fourth. But thats just me. I've never played a game of second, so who knows.

Define "better?" We're still having an absurd number of arguments about things that a tiny bit of editing would render moot.

In terms of playing the game, there have been elements of the last four editions that I liked, and others that I haven't. (2nd was best for narrative story-telling, though, if abysmal from a balance perspective.)

It's certainly true that the game still has it's share of problems, but all games have those, and the core gameplay of 40k has improved in every edition since third. I don't see ridiculous phalanxes of men like I did in third, armies are now composed of something other than the elites slot with plasmaguns unlike fourth, and in sixth you will likely see an increase in "going to ground" style unit abilities when that arises. We're finally back to semi balanced armies (with a few exception in tourney play) and we've escaped blocks of men or ten hour games that were regular in third and second. 40k isn't a perfect game, but there are few out there with any level of customizability that are.

Yeah! Looking at you War machine!

Kurgash wrote:

Fateweaver wrote:I miss the first 3rd ed. Chaos, I don't miss 3.5.

That gakked my army big time.

I can't remember which was which as I went over to fantasy for a time, what were the changes from 3rd to 3.5? All I remember my codex having was demonic gifts, good dreads, chosen terminators of tzeentch all casting spells, 2 wound rubric marines and chainaxes that did the 4+ armor save max

That was 3.5. I had a WE army and while 4+ save axes were cool I hated chasing landraiders and landspeeders all game.

Not the thread for it but it made my army unfun. The newest CSM codex makes a Zerker heavy army usable again.