Welcome ladies and gentleman, boys and girls, children of all ages.

This is the Codex: Orks and Codex: Tyranids Balance Errata, a part of the larger 40k Balance Errata. The goal of these Balance Errata is to create a more balanced and varied 40k and can be applied to their respective codex.

Also, to anyone looking at these Balance Errata the goal was to use the lightest hand as possible using points as the primary mechanism of change. Using weapon profile changes as well as Unit Composition more sparingly. Altering model stats even more sparingly, and lastly rewriting or adding new rules only when absolutely necessary.

Note that these changes are replacements unless notates as additions or removals.

Codex: Orks


Change Log:


Codex: Tyranids



Change Log:


Ok, here is the first drafts of both the Ork and Tyranid Codices. Let me have it? What did I get right? What did I get wrong? Did I address internal balance? Did I address external balance with my other Balance Erratas? Anything standing out as way too powerful? Still now powerful enough? Did I create some new super unit without thinking? Let me have it! All feedback is greatly appreciated, the more community feedback and quality discussion we have the better balanced these individual errata and the project as a whole is.

Thank you again for any help and feedback!

Price reductionto 200 won't help naughts. Don't see a reason to make buggies more expensive. +1 HP to walkers won't cut it. Their problem in regular lists is not only mediocre walker durability but that they eat up Heavy Support and don't mesh well with any ork playstile except for walker wall. Orks are all about target saturation which requires timing. Means the majority of your stuff must maintain the same speed. And walkers are ~ 1 turn slower to reach the enemy than footsloggas and a lot slower than speed freaks. And unlike sm walkers that can at least be droppoded or perform long range fire support, our walkers can't do it good enough. It's a more complex problem all in all.

It'd not be as bad if they could at least be somewhat spammable. I've suggested making kanz cheaper - 35 pt and dreads to be allowed to be taken in squadrons of 1-3. So far, playtests have shown that it's a passable solution.
I've also added Ramshakkle 6+ to all ground vehicles and tweaked Armor Plates to give +1 to ramshakkle and cost 5 pt for kanzand, buggies and trukks, 10 for dreads, 15 for battlewagons and 20 for naughts that i've also made superheavies but with some restrictions like regular 6" movement, ability to catastrophic explode only with the weakest result and -1 on stomps so that they can't insta-remove stuff - all in all, very-heavies but not super.

25 pt for a kannon or zzap is too much if you don't change their rules.

Your proposed mob rule is too good. It combines both ld and no chance of truly failing it.

I gotta say this looks good. I can also say that I can count my games of 7th on one hand, and my games in the last year on that same hand, so take that with a grain of salt.

One thing I do know that hasn't been addressed is Zagstruk the Stormboy hero. He's absolutely useless and could do with an improvement. To reiterate what was covered in Kooaei's fandex thread he's rather crap. The HoW is a forgettable effect, he gives no leadership effect unless he's the warlord, he straight up just does nothing at all, doesn't reflect his fluff at all, and isn't worth half his current points cost.

I don't think he could be fixed with a points adjustment, because he does nothing and is worse than a klaw Nob for the unit. But if he got a klaw and then some kind of leadership effect (even LD9 or some weak crap), and then was 10pts over a standard Klaw Nob, we'd be on the money.

I do also second Kooaei's comment that walkers really suffer from their position in the force org chart, that they really cannot compare to guns and wagons and such in Heavy Support and that this is a bigger problem than their points cost or durability. You could try cutting and pasting the dread mob rules for dreads and kans - cheaper, squads, troops / fast attack. That would be a start, though admittedly they probably cannot be fixed in the edition we currently find ourselves in, as they're an unholy combination of melee, slow, and vehicle that goes well beyond a mere points change to fix up.

Will get in a game or two with this errata, and compare to the normal dex. My opponent should be cool with using the normal and then Space Marines dex, though as he's a space wolves player it won't be a perfect test in that regard. Will be at least two weeks before I can do any playtesting at all - though that gives us some time to get a finished beta to test out

koooaei wrote:Price reductionto 200 won't help naughts. Don't see a reason to make buggies more expensive. +1 HP to walkers won't cut it. Their problem in regular lists is not only mediocre walker durability but that they eat up Heavy Support and don't mesh well with any ork playstile except for walker wall. Orks are all about target saturation which requires timing. Means the majority of your stuff must maintain the same speed. And walkers are ~ 1 turn slower to reach the enemy than footsloggas and a lot slower than speed freaks. And unlike sm walkers that can at least be droppoded or perform long range fire support, our walkers can't do it good enough. It's a more complex problem all in all.

It'd not be as bad if they could at least be somewhat spammable. I've suggested making kanz cheaper - 35 pt and dreads to be allowed to be taken in squadrons of 1-3. So far, playtests have shown that it's a passable solution.
I've also added Ramshakkle 6+ to all ground vehicles and tweaked Armor Plates to give +1 to ramshakkle and cost 5 pt for kanzand, buggies and trukks, 10 for dreads, 15 for battlewagons and 20 for naughts that i've also made superheavies but with some restrictions like regular 6" movement, ability to catastrophic explode only with the weakest result and -1 on stomps so that they can't insta-remove stuff - all in all, very-heavies but not super.

25 pt for a kannon or zzap is too much if you don't change their rules.

Your proposed mob rule is too good. It combines both ld and no chance of truly failing it.

I am hearing you on the Walkers. I did feel like I didn't go far enough with them at first, even with increased durability they aren't good. I considered giving all Ork vehicles Ramshackle(5+). But I'm really trying to not go overboard on rule changes. I was planning on allowing Deff Dreads to be a Squadron, but forgot to add it!

Naught as SHV or a weird mashup doesn't sit well. I'd rather avoid that solution.

War buggies, it was having a scoring 25pt unit with that much utility, I could easily require 2 to make a unit at old cost, acceptable? Though, even at 30pts they excel at harassment and have uses. Il probably just up them to 2+ for a unit.

I was thinking of adding a Flakk shell to the a Cannon, though 25pts for a BS3 S8 AP3 36" shot from a durable platform isn't terrible. The Zzap gun isn't great due to its random nature... And single shot. What if that additional damage result dealt a second HP. So 2HPs per Glance or Pen? Zzap is only 2pts more than it was before. Are these options really that terrible? 125pts for five BS3 Missiles from T7 doesn't seem horrible weak. Not as good as 90pt for sure... But is it worth it if it has a Flakk shell option?

Dakkamite wrote:I gotta say this looks good. I can also say that I can count my games of 7th on one hand, and my games in the last year on that same hand, so take that with a grain of salt.

One thing I do know that hasn't been addressed is Zagstruk the Stormboy hero. He's absolutely useless and could do with an improvement. To reiterate what was covered in Kooaei's fandex thread he's rather crap. The HoW is a forgettable effect, he gives no leadership effect unless he's the warlord, he straight up just does nothing at all, doesn't reflect his fluff at all, and isn't worth half his current points cost.

I don't think he could be fixed with a points adjustment, because he does nothing and is worse than a klaw Nob for the unit. But if he got a klaw and then some kind of leadership effect (even LD9 or some weak crap), and then was 10pts over a standard Klaw Nob, we'd be on the money.

I do also second Kooaei's comment that walkers really suffer from their position in the force org chart, that they really cannot compare to guns and wagons and such in Heavy Support and that this is a bigger problem than their points cost or durability. You could try cutting and pasting the dread mob rules for dreads and kans - cheaper, squads, troops / fast attack. That would be a start, though admittedly they probably cannot be fixed in the edition we currently find ourselves in, as they're an unholy combination of melee, slow, and vehicle that goes well beyond a mere points change to fix up.

Will get in a game or two with this errata, and compare to the normal dex. My opponent should be cool with using the normal and then Space Marines dex, though as he's a space wolves player it won't be a perfect test in that regard. Will be at least two weeks before I can do any playtesting at all - though that gives us some time to get a finished beta to test out

Zagstruk, didn't take too much of a look at the Special a Characters honestly, Ld9 and a Points drop seems reasonable though.

And when you're ready for a test game,not wont be difficult to make the Space Wolf version, won't take any time at all.

Thanks for all the feedback!

I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

 Matthew wrote:
I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

Thanks, I took inspiration from both the current Mob Rules and the 4E codex Mob Rule. I felt that a large Mob of Boyz should feel like almost an unstoppable force when it is a true Mob, ork confidence ie Leadership directly proportional to the number of boyz seems fitting. I feel it is a better fit than the old Fearless Orks. And once the Boyz get down to 10 or less models Morale becomes a big problem and they can be broke and scattered quite easily.


@koooaei

I realize I forgot to address your concerns about Mob Rule. It is more powerful than the Old Mod Rule, espeically for big mobs of boyz, but for small mobs under 10 models it is actually a liability as a unit with a character under 10 models still passes morale 1/3 of the time, and 1/2 of the time in Close Combat. Now, Orks get no way to pass a failed morale under 10 models and have much less protection in CC from being broken or swept. And now the Bosspole has a good use for Mobs that fall under 10 Models. The rule is only stronger when there are Lots of Boyz in a unit, but does come with a corresponding weakness.

It is a boost where Orks could use it and thematically should have it while offering a corresponding weakness, and it cleans up the mess of rolling that was the Old Mob Rule.

5-20-15 Added

Boss Zagstruck Da Boss: 45pts

5-20-15 Changed

Deff Dread
4HP
May include up to two additional Deff Dreads…80 pts/model
Any modal may replace any of its Big Shootas with one of the following... Power Klaw: Free

Killa Kans
3HP
May include a second unit of 1-6 Killa Kans, both units count as only one Heavy Support Slot.... 50pts/model

Gorkanaut: 200pts
6HP
Special Rules: Add Assault Vehicle

Morkanaut: 200pts
6HP
Special Rules; Add Assault Vehicle
May take a Kustom Force Field: 40pts

5-20-15 Changed

Unit Composition: 2 Mek Gunz, 4 Gretchin
Mek Gunz: 40pts, 20pts/model
Any Mek Gun can replace its Kannon with one of the following... Zzap Gun: Free; Bubblechukka: Free; Smasha-Gun: Free; Lobba: 5pts; Kustom Mega-Kannon: 10pts; Traktor Kannon: 10pts;

there is one glaring thing missing from your genestealers; and that is the lack of flesh hooks. A BS0 unit should not be without assault grenades of some sort.

The thing I would like to see would be a big mek in mega armour being able to take a Shokk Attack Gun. Also the burna boyz give the poor ladz access to a Nob. They are the unit besides grots that don't have access to a Nob.

 morfangdakka wrote:
The thing I would like to see would be a big mek in mega armour being able to take a Shokk Attack Gun. Also the burna boyz give the poor ladz access to a Nob. They are the unit besides grots that don't have access to a Nob.

Done and done. Very reasonable changes that should have been stock.

I'll get those added later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

StarHunter25 wrote:
there is one glaring thing missing from your genestealers; and that is the lack of flesh hooks. A BS0 unit should not be without assault grenades of some sort.

Great point, and its probably the best biomorph. 1pt/model, and its not like they can actually fire them as a weapon, they just get Assault Grenades out of it.

I wont comment on the orks as I dont really know how they work but Nids I do know

I like lots of the options you proposed I like that they arent overpowered proposal and that you also considered nerfing a few things.

for the Shadow in the warp I dont know if it works well since if they cast on a psyker they already deny on a 5+ or even a 4+ if higher lvl, My proposal on this is that it makes casting spell if within SitW you get a -1 on harnessing warp charges(normally requiring a 5+ instead of a 4+)

for the Tyranofex the rupture cannon does not get solved by getting a cheaper price tag, lets put it this way, you need 3 Tyranofex upgraded with the rupture cannon all firing into a unit of space marine (or even sister of battle) to average making one casualty per turn. This is completely unacceptable comming from the codex's biggest gun.
my proposal on this is it should get ap3 (instead of ap4) and 3 shots (instead of 2) with a special chain reaction rule where if you hit with at least 2 shots those shot become ap1, potentially with a light point increase but frankly I think that 30pts and losing the acid spray is enough of a cost for this kind of gun.

Venomthropes are a bit weak in my mind compared to Malanthope, I Iitterally never consider them, Venomthropes always seem to just die so easilly.
I personally felt that the Venomthope should get a point decrease instead of increase (down to 40pts), with malanthropes increasing to 95pts (+10pts) and going down to 4+ArSv (instead of 3+)

Trygons holes should only allow one unit to come out of it per turn. more would seem a bit too much, although allowing it to work on same turn he came out is a must.

I dont know if Exocrines or Carnifexes require a point decrease, they seem pretty well pointed to me.
I wouldnt mind carnifexes going back to Str10 and maybe Ws4 though for a light cost.

maybe a 1pts decrease for the Genestealers.

I got a lot more but this is food for though

 fartherthanfar wrote:
I wont comment on the orks as I dont really know how they work but Nids I do know

I like lots of the options you proposed I like that they arent overpowered proposal and that you also considered nerfing a few things.

for the Shadow in the warp I dont know if it works well since if they cast on a psyker they already deny on a 5+ or even a 4+ if higher lvl, My proposal on this is that it makes casting spell if within SitW you get a -1 on harnessing warp charges(normally requiring a 5+ instead of a 4+)

for the Tyranofex the rupture cannon does not get solved by getting a cheaper price tag, lets put it this way, you need 3 Tyranofex upgraded with the rupture cannon all firing into a unit of space marine (or even sister of battle) to average making one casualty per turn. This is completely unacceptable comming from the codex's biggest gun.
my proposal on this is it should get ap3 (instead of ap4) and 3 shots (instead of 2) with a special chain reaction rule where if you hit with at least 2 shots those shot become ap1, potentially with a light point increase but frankly I think that 30pts and losing the acid spray is enough of a cost for this kind of gun.

Venomthropes are a bit weak in my mind compared to Malanthope, I Iitterally never consider them, Venomthropes always seem to just die so easilly.
I personally felt that the Venomthope should get a point decrease instead of increase (down to 40pts), with malanthropes increasing to 95pts (+10pts) and going down to 4+ArSv (instead of 3+)

Trygons holes should only allow one unit to come out of it per turn. more would seem a bit too much, although allowing it to work on same turn he came out is a must.

I dont know if Exocrines or Carnifexes require a point decrease, they seem pretty well pointed to me.
I wouldnt mind carnifexes going back to Str10 and maybe Ws4 though for a light cost.

maybe a 1pts decrease for the Genestealers.

I got a lot more but this is food for though

Thank you for the feedback. I'm relying on people to comment on the armies they know well, haha. Thank you, the goal was better internal and external balance. Gotta nerf the too good thing and buff the not so good things.

Shadow in the Warp was meant to give the Tyranid player the ability to Deny Blessing and Conjuring on a 5+. Sure, they may be able to Deny a Malediction or Witchfire better than that, but having a reliable way to stop blessing is huge. I also meant for the -3 LD to remain in place. It is fitting to lower a Psyker's morale. I'll fix that.

I like your idea, but reducing Harnessing to a 5+ is almost too good while in range of Shadows, that change alone would be a massive buff for the army. I think a more moderate and functional buff is in order.

I wasn't really trying to Fix the Rupture Cannon, but do see your problem with it. It probably should have AP3 or be Heavy 3. Firing at a 3+ infantry enemy is the wrong target to show its efficiency, its Long ranged S10, something that is a premium in the game. I don't think it should have both, and I would like to avoid adding any extra special rules if possible. I'll probably give it AP3 but it already has gotten a 20% decrease in cost to field it with Rupture Cannon.

Sure, Venomthropes look bad compared to the Malanthrope, but that is because the Malantrope is too good for its points. Its hardier than a Prime with 4 wounds, and a host of special abilities equal to the Venomthropes. After the balance errata you'll see how much starting every game with either a 3+ or 2+(Ruines or Nightfight) really is. I mean Orks pay 40pts(formerly 50pts) just for a 6" 5++ bubble, a 6" Shrouding Bubble is better. Basically the Malanthrope is an undercosted Forgeworld unit that is currently outside the scope of this errata, of course the Venomthrope looked pricey compared to it.

Trygons, There is a natural limit to how many units someone will bring through, placement. I don't think it needs to be spelled out.

Exocrines and Carnifexes are getting a drop on base cost due to being T6 with a 3+, it was overvalued and unless the unit had some good special rules or abilities ie Flyrant, Tervigon, Mawloc, it is really lackluster. Carnifexes needed help, the Dakka Fex was the best Fex out ther, but with the increase to Devourers it only drops in cost by 10pts, while Melee builds drop by at least 20pts.

Genestealers should be fine and are solid with their cheaper upgrades, especially once they gain Fleshhooks so can charge through terrain at Initiative for likely 1pt/model or possible free...

Keep the feedback and suggestions coming!

Should separate the tyranid wings into gliding wings and swooping wings for two different costs. Gliding just make it a jump MC, swooping wings make it a FMC, (and can of course be used to glide as well.)

niv-mizzet wrote:
...gliding wings...

niv-mizzet wrote:Should separate the tyranid wings into gliding wings and swooping wings for two different costs. Gliding just make it a jump MC, swooping wings make it a FMC, (and can of course be used to glide as well.)

Not a bad suggestion, could be used across the board. +40pts for Gliding, +80 for Swooping.

koooaei wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:
...gliding wings...

Spoiler:

Definitely got a laugh out of me!

Sure, Venomthropes look bad compared to the Malanthrope, but that is because the Malantrope is too good for its points. Its hardier than a Prime with 4 wounds, and a host of special abilities equal to the Venomthropes. After the balance errata you'll see how much starting every game with either a 3+ or 2+(Ruines or Nightfight) really is. I mean Orks pay 40pts(formerly 50pts) just for a 6" 5++ bubble, a 6" Shrouding Bubble is better. Basically the Malanthrope is an undercosted Forgeworld unit that is currently outside the scope of this errata, of course the Venomthrope looked pricey compared to it.

even if not considering the Malanthrope in this errata (sad), the Venomthropes issue is that hes just standing arround waiting to be shot with his thumb up its bum (or... tentacles... insert graphic anime images here). The orks with the 5++ can at least stay in a unit which will be abblative wounds for LOS, yes shrounding is much stronger than a 5++ but not if it just dies before everything else and then nothing gets the shrouding. there is enough ignore cover weapons out there that have no issue taking out venomthropes which are just so frail if they have no cover. even if you take a unit of 3, a single volley by the nerfed Waveserpent is likely to wipe it out. and then the rest of your army is completely unprotected.
In all the games I've seen people use Venomthropes, they always die very fast (as long as the opponent has good targeting priorities) without causing the opponent any real issues. I dont see why it would need a point increase.

I agree that the malanthrope is too good, but I would want to balance it out between the 2 so I could actually have a choice to make between one and the other, and the Malanthrope is so popular for Nids you might want to consider it in the errata cause it does need a nerf and if you dont then people could consider playing it with your rule thus nullifying the effect of your balancing.

The Prime is a bad example as he has been massively nerfed from the previous codex (45pts increase with no upgrades at all) if anything in the codex needs a point decrease its the Prime. I cant imagine him why hes over 100pts, why would anyone even consider him over a flyrant? My recommendation for him is he goes down to 100pts (25pts decrease) and starts with Regeneration. it might seem like a big upgrade but this guy needs it if he wants to compete in the HQ slot for internal balance and I dont think that compared to other codex HQ Beatstick he would be OP. also he should be able to get Wings for 20pts (jump pack).

wasn't really trying to Fix the Rupture Cannon, but do see your problem with it. It probably should have AP3 or be Heavy 3. Firing at a 3+ infantry enemy is the wrong target to show its efficiency, its Long ranged S10, something that is a premium in the game. I don't think it should have both, and I would like to avoid adding any extra special rules if possible. I'll probably give it AP3 but it already has gotten a 20% decrease in cost to field it with Rupture Cannon.

I agree that the a 3+ infantry isnt the Rupture Cannon's prime target but what if your fighting space marine, nids or Eldar where that all he has on the board (you get a 200+pts which cant shoot or fight in close combat), even if you are fighting againsts what the rupture cannon is suppose to be good against (high AV vehicule) how efficient is it really? lets see, 2 shots at Bs3 means 1 hit, 1 hit on let say AV14 mean a 0.5 HP if no cover, Invul or Jinking, and due to new damage chart even if it is a pen, it cant possibly kill it, you need an average of 8 rupture cannon Tyranofexs to kill a single Landraider in the open (1600pts of dedicated anti-heavy tank to kill a single land raider?).
So what is the gun for? not heavy vehicules, not MC since they also have 3+ArSv or better, not heavy infantry, certainly not light infantry, maybe open topped skimmer? no cause they jink.
It litterally has no target you can be happy about shooting, like I said the issue with the gun isnt the points, its the effectiveness on the board which at the moment is null due to the expensive platform that is carrying it.
My proposal turns the gun into a something that can actually harm stuff, still far from being destroyer though so isnt op, yet fluffy with the chain reaction ability which, with some good luck, could actually kill a Landraider in one volley, as many other guns in the warhammer universe can do.
If you want to avoid inventing rules (your SitW..cough cough) maybe just make the shots destroyer and call it a day.

 Matthew wrote:
I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

Oddly I think he made the codex worse. Sure he lowered prices on a few things that were expensive but those units had other issues that caused them not to be popular. However he significantly increased the prices on everything that was halfway decent in the ork codex, bikers, warbuggies, Mek guns, deffkoptas, nerfed Mek tools so that multiple Meks are useless.

Only thing he changed of any significant value was mob rule for infantry.

He made dread mob lists pretty powerful though with cheap killa kans and nauts and stompas.
Basically I don't think price increases on bikes, mek guns, deffkoptas, and warbuggies are warranted.

Orks have to marginally competitive lists right now green tide and bike spam. Neither of which is top tier. If he was trying to appropriately cost bikes with the fact he made ork boy squads able to purchase them for fast ob secured troops then the price of bike upgrade should be no more then 15ppm which means a basic boy is 20ppm or 2ppm more then the old warbikers ppm.

fartherthanfar wrote:

Sure, Venomthropes look bad compared to the Malanthrope, but that is because the Malantrope is too good for its points. Its hardier than a Prime with 4 wounds, and a host of special abilities equal to the Venomthropes. After the balance errata you'll see how much starting every game with either a 3+ or 2+(Ruines or Nightfight) really is. I mean Orks pay 40pts(formerly 50pts) just for a 6" 5++ bubble, a 6" Shrouding Bubble is better. Basically the Malanthrope is an undercosted Forgeworld unit that is currently outside the scope of this errata, of course the Venomthrope looked pricey compared to it.

even if not considering the Malanthrope in this errata (sad), the Venomthropes issue is that hes just standing arround waiting to be shot with his thumb up its bum (or... tentacles... insert graphic anime images here). The orks with the 5++ can at least stay in a unit which will be abblative wounds for LOS, yes shrounding is much stronger than a 5++ but not if it just dies before everything else and then nothing gets the shrouding. there is enough ignore cover weapons out there that have no issue taking out venomthropes which are just so frail if they have no cover. even if you take a unit of 3, a single volley by the nerfed Waveserpent is likely to wipe it out. and then the rest of your army is completely unprotected.
In all the games I've seen people use Venomthropes, they always die very fast (as long as the opponent has good targeting priorities) without causing the opponent any real issues. I dont see why it would need a point increase.

I agree that the malanthrope is too good, but I would want to balance it out between the 2 so I could actually have a choice to make between one and the other, and the Malanthrope is so popular for Nids you might want to consider it in the errata cause it does need a nerf and if you dont then people could consider playing it with your rule thus nullifying the effect of your balancing.

The Prime is a bad example as he has been massively nerfed from the previous codex (45pts increase with no upgrades at all) if anything in the codex needs a point decrease its the Prime. I cant imagine him why hes over 100pts, why would anyone even consider him over a flyrant? My recommendation for him is he goes down to 100pts (25pts decrease) and starts with Regeneration. it might seem like a big upgrade but this guy needs it if he wants to compete in the HQ slot for internal balance and I dont think that compared to other codex HQ Beatstick he would be OP. also he should be able to get Wings for 20pts (jump pack).

wasn't really trying to Fix the Rupture Cannon, but do see your problem with it. It probably should have AP3 or be Heavy 3. Firing at a 3+ infantry enemy is the wrong target to show its efficiency, its Long ranged S10, something that is a premium in the game. I don't think it should have both, and I would like to avoid adding any extra special rules if possible. I'll probably give it AP3 but it already has gotten a 20% decrease in cost to field it with Rupture Cannon.

I agree that the a 3+ infantry isnt the Rupture Cannon's prime target but what if your fighting space marine, nids or Eldar where that all he has on the board (you get a 200+pts which cant shoot or fight in close combat), even if you are fighting againsts what the rupture cannon is suppose to be good against (high AV vehicule) how efficient is it really? lets see, 2 shots at Bs3 means 1 hit, 1 hit on let say AV14 mean a 0.5 HP if no cover, Invul or Jinking, and due to new damage chart even if it is a pen, it cant possibly kill it, you need an average of 8 rupture cannon Tyranofexs to kill a single Landraider in the open (1600pts of dedicated anti-heavy tank to kill a single land raider?).
So what is the gun for? not heavy vehicules, not MC since they also have 3+ArSv or better, not heavy infantry, certainly not light infantry, maybe open topped skimmer? no cause they jink.
It litterally has no target you can be happy about shooting, like I said the issue with the gun isnt the points, its the effectiveness on the board which at the moment is null due to the expensive platform that is carrying it.
My proposal turns the gun into a something that can actually harm stuff, still far from being destroyer though so isnt op, yet fluffy with the chain reaction ability which, with some good luck, could actually kill a Landraider in one volley, as many other guns in the warhammer universe can do.
If you want to avoid inventing rules (your SitW..cough cough) maybe just make the shots destroyer and call it a day.

I wouldn't mind errataing the Malanthrope, but right now I'm trying to nail down internal and external balance within codices. It is definitely a popular unit that deserves to be addressed in time. And as you'll see I did recost the Prime, he's now
85pts, so I'd be looking at 115pts for a Malanthrope. Very durable chassis and always a 3+ or 2+ Cover save and a Shrouding Bubble. Basically would pay 65pts for +2 wounds and +1T and a 3+ AS which is a huge increase in Durability. Compared to the Prime is has lower CC stats for +1 Wound and a Shrouding Bubble for 30pts, but no IC. That seems to preliminary be right on.

So, we're looking at 50 vs 45pts for a 6" Shouding Bubble. Yes the Venomthrope dies quickly, but of course it is going to be a high priority target, the durability it brings a 14" Diameter Circle is huge, if an opponent ignores it their ability to hurt anything in the defensive bubble is pretty much nill. Even if it only protects for a single turn, or forces a large amount of the opponent's army to focus on it for a turn it is bringing a significant level of value to the list. And not all opponents have easy access to Ignore's Cover. Sure a Wave Serpent, a fairly pricey unit, can blow it's one use ability to neuter kill the Venomthrope, but that is a significant investment on their part. It takes on average just over 7 shots(average number) from a Serpent Shield to take out the Venomthrope, that means its fairly even odds that it will kill it or it won't, and that Eldar Player had to also maneuver their Transport into 24" of a particular target with 50/50 odds of killing it. For a 50 pt model, that is already haveing a solid effect on the game, and we are talking about one of the best counters for the Venomthrope. What is the Average SM player doing against it? Dark Eldar Player? etc. Ridiculous Ignore's Cover is less prevalent than it used to be, sure some armies have a counter, and even if they do it requires an investment in resources to accomplish. At 40pts as you suggest it is a must have, at 50 you have decisions to make. 45pts, the Shrouded abiltity was pretty much a must have. Must haves do not reflect good internal or external balance.

I've already said that the Rupture Cannon needs to be fixed, I'm probably going to make it Heavy 3 AP3 and bump it back to a +3pt upgrade. That gives it a lot more use and utility, and makes a better against AV with Rate of Fire, and AP3 gives it some use against say a Wraithknight and would be the only ranged Tyranid Weapon that could put a wound a turn on one.

Yes, I did write a new rule for Shadow in the Warp, because the old rule written for 6th Edition and factored into the cost of all the models no longer applies. So, either leave a non functioning army wide rule and decrease the point of everything with it, or rewrite the rule to have the same relative effect and usefulness. That is different than just adding Special Rules to a model. Sure, I did for the Pyrovore, I gave it a second firemode that uses the rules already in the game as the easiest fix. I never said I wouldn't rewrite certain rules, but I don't like doing it within the scope of this Errata and would prefer not to in most cases. I think Heavy 3 AP3 for the Rupture Cannon will solve the problem and give it some utility.

gungo wrote:

 Matthew wrote:
I like your Ork changes, especially the mob rule one.

Oddly I think he made the codex worse. Sure he lowered prices on a few things that were expensive but those units had other issues that caused them not to be popular. However he significantly increased the prices on everything that was halfway decent in the ork codex, bikers, warbuggies, Mek guns, deffkoptas, nerfed Mek tools so that multiple Meks are useless.

Only thing he changed of any significant value was mob rule for infantry.

He made dread mob lists pretty powerful though with cheap killa kans and nauts and stompas.
Basically I don't think price increases on bikes, mek guns, deffkoptas, and warbuggies are warranted.

Orks have to marginally competitive lists right now green tide and bike spam. Neither of which is top tier. If he was trying to appropriately cost bikes with the fact he made ork boy squads able to purchase them for fast ob secured troops then the price of bike upgrade should be no more then 15ppm which means a basic boy is 20ppm or 2ppm more then the old warbikers ppm.

Thanks for the feedback, I'm interested in discussing this. Some of rarely used units were either too expensive or had issues, ideally they should be recosted to correct the majority of the imbalance. Which units do you feel are still absolutely subpar choices in relation to the rest of the Errated Codex?

We may be looking at things from a desired balance perspective. Some things did get a small points increase, namely bikes(But massive points drop on Nobs and Nob Bikers), Mek Guns are slightly more expensive with a two gun minimum for the unit, but there are also large points decreases on the seldom seen Guns. This was meant to greatly increase internal balance.

I did increase the cost on Deffkoptas and Warbuggies, but have had second thoughts about it. My next set of changes is dropping them back to their original costs, but increasing the minimum unit size to two. I do have a problem with ultra cheap units, most codices aren't putting any single model unit on the table for under 40pts. The unit/cost is just fine, its just the minimum cost for a unit is too low. This is also congruent with my change to Mek Guns.



Where did I significantly increase cost? Also, internal balance is key, every codex under these Errata will or should find their best units or combos to either worse, illegal, or more expensive. You named the best things in the Ork Codex, and those are few selection are were just too good compared to the others. By adding in some small nerfs to those best units, and considerable buffs to the rest of the codex we end up with a much more internally balanced codex which is a very good thing. The only potential problem is external balance, but given Ork's starting point most everything else I've done should be balanced to fall around the same relative point.

Sure, Ork Warbikers got 11% more expensive.... but White Scar Bikers lost +1 Jink, Eldar EJBs are now 4+ and Scatters are S5, Nurgle Bikers cost more, etc. Every "really good or outright broken" choice in that category has taken a hit, while the subpar choices ie Nob Bikers, Non Nurgle CSM Bikers, in category have gotten significant boosts and all have gotten better in comparison to the old standard.

I felt that if I left the Really good choices in the Ork Dex alone, Changed Mob Rules, and made all the bad stuff good enough to compete with the best choices from the PreErrata dex that Orks would end up being better than the Balance Point I am shooting for. Every book is getting their best stuff knocked down, their bad stuff boosted up, what changes is some books need more adjustment on either end of the spectrum. Eldar got hit hard on a lot of units and only a few like Shining Spears and Wraithlords got a real boost, whereas most of the stuff in the Ork Dex got a boost with only a few units geting minor debuffs. That is the kind of balance I'm looking for.


A test that I have been using is to look in the Army Lists section, every tournament list will usually either no longer be legal, will no longer work, be toned down, or exceed the points limit while the casual fun lists have either gotten better or usually cheaper. I've scrolled through the army list section and so far this has been almost universally true.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-21-15 Changed To

Deffkoptas: 60pts, 30pts/model
May include up to three additional Deffkoptas…30 pts/model

5-21-15 Changed To

Warbuggies: 50pts, 25pts/model
May include up to three additional Warbuggies…25 pts/model

5-21-15 Added

Rupture Cannon: Change To
Range: 48" Str: 10 AP:3 Heavy 3

5-21-15 Changed To

Tyrannofex: 165pts
May replace Acid Spray with one of the following... Fleshborer Hive: Free; Rupture Cannon: 30pts

5-21-15 Added

Tyrannocyte
Add "The Tyrannocyte cannot be used to Transport Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures."

When I look at the complaints re; the rupture cannon I can't say I feel much sympathy. Tyranids are like Orks, we have guns that can deal with medium vehicles, but to kill that land raider you need to go stomp on it

 Dakkamite wrote:
When I look at the complaints re; the rupture cannon I can't say I feel much sympathy. Tyranids are like Orks, we have guns that can deal with medium vehicles, but to kill that land raider you need to go stomp on it

The Rupture Cannon was a valid complaint, paying a premium to upgrade an already good AP4 weapon to a S10 long ranged AP4 gun on a BS 3 model is painful. Orks at least have volume of shots... well not against LRs, but against everything else! And Orks have more Long Range lowish AP, or at least random enough AP to do it, Nids really don't have any ranged AP3. At least now Nids have a ranged weapon that should put a wound on a Wraithknight per turn, well 5/6ths, but close enough! The Exocrine at 24" range was only doing 2/3 due to FNP.

So, we're looking at 50 vs 45pts for a 6" Shouding Bubble. Yes the Venomthrope dies quickly, but of course it is going to be a high priority target, the durability it brings a 14" Diameter Circle is huge, if an opponent ignores it their ability to hurt anything in the defensive bubble is pretty much nill. Even if it only protects for a single turn, or forces a large amount of the opponent's army to focus on it for a turn it is bringing a significant level of value to the list. And not all opponents have easy access to Ignore's Cover. Sure a Wave Serpent, a fairly pricey unit, can blow it's one use ability to neuter kill the Venomthrope, but that is a significant investment on their part. It takes on average just over 7 shots(average number) from a Serpent Shield to take out the Venomthrope, that means its fairly even odds that it will kill it or it won't, and that Eldar Player had to also maneuver their Transport into 24" of a particular target with 50/50 odds of killing it. For a 50 pt model, that is already haveing a solid effect on the game, and we are talking about one of the best counters for the Venomthrope. What is the Average SM player doing against it? Dark Eldar Player? etc. Ridiculous Ignore's Cover is less prevalent than it used to be, sure some armies have a counter, and even if they do it requires an investment in resources to accomplish. At 40pts as you suggest it is a must have, at 50 you have decisions to make. 45pts, the Shrouded abiltity was pretty much a must have. Must haves do not reflect good internal or external balance.

Im not sure your math is correct, wouldn't 5 serpent shield shot still average a kill? even if the wave serpent doesnt have Bs5 (aspect host/ Dire avenger formation),
5 shots average 3.333 hits on Bs4, 3.33 hits average 2.77wounds, then a 5+ ArSv mean a Venomthrope should die from this, and this isnt considering the extra TL gun and potential shuriken cannon the Wave serpent shoots. it certainly is a much better then 50% chance for a waveserpent to kill a venomthrope.

space marine players have thunderfire cannon that ignore cover, or flamers, tau have markerlights and SMS etc.
or you can just rate of fire it, most of the time it wont have a ruin to hide behind so they are looking at a 3+ cover which makes them as tough to kill as 2 space marines (which isnt that hard to kill). or a sinlge Str8+ shot to go through which is surprising how often I see that happen.
a 2+ is difficult to keep since the nids army isnt meant to stay behind cover and shoot, even if there are Ruins, the low range on most of their weapons means that you need to move forward, also to take advantage of their CC skills.
When moving forward you can still get a 3+ cover from itervening models but the opponent can also just shoot the guys in front who will only have a 5+ cover and then reache the shrouders afterwards.

You are saying the opponent need to dedicate a lot of firepower to take out the venomthrope but my experience taught me that if want some cover, you need lots of venomthropes to last more then one turn. A single venomthrope tends to not take any more than 1/5 of the opponents firepower (even with no ignore cover weapons) and then the rest shoots your army, basicly it barely harm the opponent unless he isnt a shooty army at all or the opponent is a terrible judge of priority.

I wouldnt really consider a venomthrope at 50pts, even 45pts is a big maybe, (at least not for a TAC list... even if the Malanthrope wasnt an option). maybe if I took a Bastion but even then...not really. its just so frail.

as a question, how many games have you seen a venomthrope play in where the players are experienced?

 fartherthanfar wrote:

So, we're looking at 50 vs 45pts for a 6" Shouding Bubble. Yes the Venomthrope dies quickly, but of course it is going to be a high priority target, the durability it brings a 14" Diameter Circle is huge, if an opponent ignores it their ability to hurt anything in the defensive bubble is pretty much nill. Even if it only protects for a single turn, or forces a large amount of the opponent's army to focus on it for a turn it is bringing a significant level of value to the list. And not all opponents have easy access to Ignore's Cover. Sure a Wave Serpent, a fairly pricey unit, can blow it's one use ability to neuter kill the Venomthrope, but that is a significant investment on their part. It takes on average just over 7 shots(average number) from a Serpent Shield to take out the Venomthrope, that means its fairly even odds that it will kill it or it won't, and that Eldar Player had to also maneuver their Transport into 24" of a particular target with 50/50 odds of killing it. For a 50 pt model, that is already haveing a solid effect on the game, and we are talking about one of the best counters for the Venomthrope. What is the Average SM player doing against it? Dark Eldar Player? etc. Ridiculous Ignore's Cover is less prevalent than it used to be, sure some armies have a counter, and even if they do it requires an investment in resources to accomplish. At 40pts as you suggest it is a must have, at 50 you have decisions to make. 45pts, the Shrouded abiltity was pretty much a must have. Must haves do not reflect good internal or external balance.

Im not sure your math is correct, wouldn't 5 serpent shield shot still average a kill? even if the wave serpent doesnt have Bs5 (aspect host/ Dire avenger formation),
5 shots average 3.333 hits on Bs4, 3.33 hits average 2.77wounds, then a 5+ ArSv mean a Venomthrope should die from this, and this isnt considering the extra TL gun the Wave serpent shoots. it certainly is a much better then 50% chance for a waveserpent to kill a venomthrope.

space marine players have thunderfire cannon that ignore cover, or flamers, tau have markerlights etc.
or you can just rate of fire it, most of the time it wont have a ruin to hide behind so they are looking at a 3+ cover which makes them as tough to kill as 2 space marines. or a sinlge Str8+ shot to go through which is surprising how often I see that happen.
a 2+ is difficult to keep since the nids army isnt meant to stay behind cover and shoot, even if there are Ruins, the low range on most of their weapons means that you need to move forward, also to take advantage of their CC skills.
When moving forward you can still get a 3+ cover from itervening models but the opponent can also just shoot the guys in front who will only have a 5+ cover and then reache the shrouders afterwards.

You are saying the opponent need to dedicate a lot of firepower to take out the venomthrope but my experience taught me that if want some cover, you need lots of venomthropes to last more then one turn. A single venomthrope tends to not take any more than 1/5 of the opponents firepower (even with no ignore cover weapons) and then the rest shoots your army, basicly it barely harm the opponent unless he isnt a shooty army at all or the opponent is a terrible judge of priority.

I wouldnt really consider a venomthrope at 50pts, even 45pts is a big maybe, (at least not for a TAC list... even if the Malanthrope wasnt an option). maybe if I took a Bastion but even then...not really. its just so frail.

as a question, how many games have you seen a venomthrope play in where the players are experienced?

My math was right... but the Venomthrope doesn't have a 4+ Save. So yes, a Wave Serpent, which is a perfect counter in every way does nuke it most of the time, but does also have to close into range.

Either way we cant' assume the enemy will always have the perfect covering ignoring weapon. Against a lot of builds the Venomthrope brings a large amount of durability to the army, especially first turn, with 50% chance of Nightfight is a 2+ or 3+ cover.

But, for some reason I had it in my head that the Venomthrope had a 4+ when I adjusted its point, I'll be reverting them back to 45pts as that is a very good pricepoint.


To answer your question, the last time I faced one was at NOVA last year, she won one of the lower brackets. I nuked the Venomthrope 1st turn, but I was Tau, and I had to devote resources to killing it that would have killed a Hive Crone before it got airborne. Having the venomthrope dictated my strategy, whcih in of itself is worth points.

Trading a 110-140 pt vehicle for a 50pt model doesn't sound like a failure on the part of a 50pt model to me...

Bharring wrote:
Trading a 110-140 pt vehicle for a 50pt model doesn't sound like a failure on the part of a 50pt model to me...

I agree, it still has its uses, but given I was thinking it had a 4+ save, no reason to change it, 45pts is appropriate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-21-15 Removed

Venomthrope Brood: 50pt, 50pt/model

Shadow in the warp should be "enemy models within synapse range suffer a -2 to leadership and only harness warp charges in a psychic test on a roll of 5-6."

Tying shadow to synapse helps boost things like the norn crown.

The leadership penalty to everything is representative of the nightmares and stuff the entire planet feels when hive ships are in orbit.

The 5-6 harnessing makes casting abilities less reliable which means more charges to cast which increases chances of perils.

This fits the fluff.

Lance845 wrote:
Shadow in the warp should be "enemy models within synapse range suffer a -2 to leadership and only harness warp charges in a psychic test on a roll of 5-6."

Tying shadow to synapse helps boost things like the norn crown.

The leadership penalty to everything is representative of the nightmares and stuff the entire planet feels when hive ships are in orbit.

The 5-6 harnessing makes casting abilities less reliable which means more charges to cast which increases chances of perils.

This fits the fluff.

Hmm, I wa spooking at returning the LD Penalty, but keeping it a Deny on a 5+ if the power was cast within Synapse.

Casting on LD -3 was a 36% decrease in casting. Everything denied on a 6, so 17%.

Harnessing on a 5+ instead of a 4+ is a actually a 50% increase in required dice, or reduction of 33%. With no change in Deny and the stock LD penalty harnessing on a 5+ is roughly the same amount of psychic protection as before.

Now that I've run the math, this does seem like the best solution on par with with the original in effect. Thank you and the other poster who suggested it. When I considered it I thought it was too powerful, hence the 5+ deny. But, now after running the math I find it the best solution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:





5-21-15. Changed To

Shadow in the Warp: Replace "When an enemy Psyker, Psychic Pilot, or Brotherhood of Psykers attempts to harness warp charges while in Synapse range the are only successfully harnessed on a 5+ instead of a 4+. In addition they suffer -3 Leadership while within Synapse Range.."

Automatically Appended Next Post:
5-21-15 Change To

Genestealer Brood: 65pts, 13pts/model
Any model may take Fleshhoods... 1pt/model
Any model may take Scything Talons... 2pts/model
All Genestealers in the unit may take any of the following biomorphs... Adrenal Glands: 1pt/model; Toxin Sacs: 2pt/model

I think the -3 leadership to only psycher is silly. 1) the shadow in the fluff effects everyone. Psychers more so, but everyone is effected. 2) reducing the penalty to apply it to all models helps impact things like fear, pinning, loosing assaults. It provides a lot of synergy that the nid dex is currently sorely lacking. 3) -2 is not a massive penalty. And again only within synapse.

Lance845 wrote:
I think the -3 leadership to only psycher is silly. 1) the shadow in the fluff effects everyone. Psychers more so, but everyone is effected. 2) reducing the penalty to apply it to all models helps impact things like fear, pinning, loosing assaults. It provides a lot of synergy that the nid dex is currently sorely lacking. 3) -2 is not a massive penalty. And again only within synapse.

That is way too massively powerful if it is a blanket Leadership penalty and way more powerful than the original effect. It's unbalancing.

LD10 would be checking at 72 instead of 92% Success
LD9 would be checking 59 instead of 84% Success
LD8 would be checking at 44 instead of 84% Success
LD7 would be checking at 28 instead of 58% Sucess

-2 Leadership is grossly powerful, way too much so for an effect that covers as much table as SitW. Fluff or no. Even -1 to all units is too powerful, where as -3 LD for Psykers and the reduced harnessing almost mathematically fits the old rule perfectly and does what it is supposed to do.

I would consider a blanket -1 Leadership, but never a -2. That option isn't even on the table.

Alternatively. The penalty with current rules is basically worthless.

Consider this, how much in the mid repertoire actually makes people take leadership tests?

The living artillery node causes pining. We have few but basically everyone is fearless or atsknf or so high leadership it wouldn't matter anyway.

Nids pay for fear and basically can't use it. This would help change that.

Or, make sitw negate fearless/atsknf. That way we might be able to.

Lance845 wrote:
Alternatively. The penalty with current rules is basically worthless.

Consider this, how much in the mid repertoire actually makes people take leadership tests?

The living artillery node causes pining. We have few but basically everyone is fearless or atsknf or so high leadership it wouldn't matter anyway.

Nids pay for fear and basically can't use it. This would help change that.

Or, make sitw negate fearless/atsknf. That way we might be able to.

It does effect some Perils results, especially the most critical. it does affect unit leadership for units with the Brotherhood of Psyker etc.

It doesn't have a huge impact on the game, but the original wasn't designed to do any more than that originally. I'm not trying to reinvent the rule, just balance what we have. The less orignal and sweeping content I write the better. What you are suggesting is immensely powerful and drastically alters balance. Your example negates combat. Losing a combat by 1 against guants becomes testing at -3 and being 50/50 or worse of being swept by them. You also failed to mention moral tests, because with a couple of SitW Flyrants its easy to force Morale tests with almost every firing.

Not all armies have Fearless or ATSKNF, far from it actually. How does tau fair? or most of CSM? or Necron? or Orks? or Astra Militarum? or Dark Eldar? or Eldar? etc.

Again, your proposed changes are extremely powerful, and would be unbalancing. As the change is now, it performs as intended and does hamper psychic powers annd serves as a deterrent. This is all good, and works much better than the broken rule from the 6th to 7th transition. No need to create more problems and balance issues than already exist. This isn't my re-imagining of 40, but a re-balancing of what we already have. The lighter hand the better.

As a newer tyranid player a lot of these changes look good, though I think 80 points for the wings on the Hive Tyrant may be a little heavy handed, I know they're strong but 80 points is kind of a lot. (See Edit)
I'd also like to see Deathleaper get a little more love, instead of changing his points make him worth 130 points. I don't know if the idea of you errata is simply to balance or innovate, but I think it might be interesting if Deathleaper allows the taking of Lictors as troops choices, and when he is attached to a squad of 3 Lictors he gains a unique "Blur of Bone" special rule which gives he and his squad 4+ invulnerable saves for one turn, usable once per game, no matter how many times he separates and rejoins different lictor squads, make it declarable like a Jink save.

Also I really like your change to Shadow in the Warp, very nice.


EDIT: I now see that you actually reduced the foot tyrants point cost so the increase of wings cost seems more justified.


Also, considering the changes you made for the Genestealers, maybe add the possibility for Hormagaunts to purchase Flesh Hooks for 1pt a model, or maybe give them for free if you bring a group of 40 hormagaunts, that would increase the points sink as a cost factor to gaining the flesh hooks.

 Alaxandir wrote:
As a newer tyranid player a lot of these changes look good, though I think 80 points for the wings on the Hive Tyrant may be a little heavy handed, I know they're strong but 80 points is kind of a lot.
I'd also like to see Deathleaper get a little more love, instead of changing his points make him worth 130 points. I don't know if the idea of you errata is simply to balance or innovate, but I think it might be interesting if Deathleaper allows the taking of Lictors as troops choices, and when he is attached to a squad of 3 Lictors he gains a unique "Blur of Bone" special rule which gives he and his squad 4+ invulnerable saves for one turn, usable once per game, no matter how many times he separates and rejoins different lictor squads, make it declarable like a Jink save.

Also I really like your change to Shadow in the Warp, very nice.

Thanks for the feedback. Keep it coming.


80pts is about what Wings are worth, and the base cost has been decreased enough to compensate. The Flyrant is definitely worth its poitns, almost a little too good with its shooting. Basically the Hive Tyrant took 45pts base and shifted them to Wings. It then decreased its cost by 20pts as a discount for T6 3+ being over valued, then increased its cost by 20pts, 10pts for each Master Level on an MC. 165-45-20+20 = 120pts. 120+80 is a 200pts Base Flyrant vs 165 + 35 =200 for the old Base Flyrant. While the Hive Tyrant was terribly costed, the Flyrant was good because of how much they undercosted the Psychic Mastery Levels and how much the undercosted the Wings. Now, a Walkrant is a reasonable choice and balanced with the Flyrant. This is how I've approached a lot of the Errata.

Deathleaper got a significant price decrease, as much cool stuff we could do, I"m trying to keep rules writing to a minimum focusing primarily on points cost, occasionally weapon profiles, and occasionally fixing special rules. Basically, the lighter the hand the better.

I just thought of something cool for Hormagaunts, I know its not really to the context of your Errata but i wanted to share.

Imagine if full broods of Hormagaunts (40) gained 1d3 hammer of wrath attacks on charge, that would be nifty

This is carried down from an above post because it looks like you responded before i finished my editing
[[Also, considering the changes you made for the Genestealers, maybe add the possibility for Hormagaunts to purchase Flesh Hooks for 1pt a model, or maybe give them for free if you bring a group of 40 hormagaunts, that would increase the points sink as a cost factor to gaining the flesh hooks.]]

 Alaxandir wrote:
I just thought of something cool for Hormagaunts, I know its not really to the context of your Errata but i wanted to share.

Imagine if full broods of Hormagaunts (40) gained 1d3 hammer of wrath attacks on charge, that would be nifty

This is carried down from an above post because it looks like you responded before i finished my editing
[[Also, considering the changes you made for the Genestealers, maybe add the possibility for Hormagaunts to purchase Flesh Hooks for 1pt a model, or maybe give them for free if you bring a group of 40 hormagaunts, that would increase the points sink as a cost factor to gaining the flesh hooks.]]

I'm not keen on adding extra things to the game with this errata. Also, the HoW on against doesn't seem quite right.

Flesh Hooks won't work,mad they'd all gain a shooting attack, and they are supposed to be a more specialized biomorphic.

With Genestealers, if fleshhooks are added, they should be extra cost.

I wish more melee options didn't have them. Incubi don't. Termies don't. Banshees shouldn't (out of scope for your balance update). Assault Grenades should be a big deal, IMO, and would hate to see them more ubiquitous.

Bharring wrote:
With Genestealers, if fleshhooks are added, they should be extra cost.

I wish more melee options didn't have them. Incubi don't. Termies don't. Banshees shouldn't (out of scope for your balance update). Assault Grenades should be a big deal, IMO, and would hate to see them more ubiquitous.

Genestealers are 13pts/model and can purchase Fleshhoods for 1pt/model.

I agree Assault Grenades should be a bigger deal, but GW has been too heavy handed in giving them out, so they should be more widely availabe at cost, lest we go through and start removing them from units... which is a distasteful idea.

well, when the Nid codex came out, psyker tests where taken on a Ld test, and a -3 to that is pretty huge actually, making it very hard for any psykers to cast spells if within SitW, so the rule WAS a very powerfull one, since Ld doesnt affect non-peril spells it got a massive reduction in affect.

My idea of getting back to a similar effect would be -1 to warp charge harnessing rolls if withing SitW AND a -2 to Ld on psykers on top, now, that is maybe a bit too strong, but it would be an equivalent effect I believe (I didnt do the math tho).

I wouldnt mind a global -1 to ld (all non-nids units) if a SitW unit is still on the board and a +1 to denying the witch roll for nids if the spell of a non-Nids psyker is cast within Synapse

this would be more fluffy as it would be something that affects everyone on the board while especially affecting Psykers (as the fluff says).
It certainly is stronger than the current SitW but I don't think it would be stronger than pre-6th edition SitW.

 fartherthanfar wrote:
well, when the Nid codex came out, psyker tests where taken on a Ld test, and a -3 to that is pretty huge actually, making it very hard for any psykers to cast spells if within SitW, so the rule WAS a very powerfull one, since Ld doesnt affect non-peril spells it got a massive reduction in affect.

My idea of getting back to a similar effect would be -1 to warp charge harnessing rolls if withing SitW AND a -2 to Ld on psykers on top, now, that is maybe a bit too strong, but it would be an equivalent effect I believe (I didnt do the math tho).

I wouldnt mind a global -1 to ld (all non-nids units) if a SitW unit is still on the board and a +1 to denying the witch roll for nids if the spell of a non-Nids psyker is cast within Synapse

this would be more fluffy as it would be something that affects everyone on the board while especially affecting Psykers (as the fluff says).
It certainly is stronger than the current SitW but I don't think it would be stronger than pre-6th edition SitW.

Harnessing on a 5+ instead of a 4+ is roughly equivalent to the old Casting at LD-3. And with the Psykers at -3 Leadership the net effect has been returned as closely as possible to the old one. The math works out and Inupdated the Errata already. Additional penalties would be really pushing the power level up, more so than the original or intended effect.

I'm not sure if this is the right thread for this comment, but:

A few weeks ago there was a thread about what needed fixing in the Orks codex. I suggested a minor rules change to Da Finkin' Kap that I've been using in my local group. It's been received pretty positively in that it's not OP (I still got stomped by a Necron Decurion) but has resulted in a lot more close games (in terms of units being destroyed/run off the table - we usually play Maelstrom so getting VPs is still largely up to chance).

Add the following to the end of the description of Da Finkin' Kap: "Alternately, the wearer of Da Finkin' Kap may choose to select any one Warlord Trait without being required to roll randomly; this option negates the ability to generate a second Warlord Trait from the Strategic table."

This works well for obvious reasons but it also enhances the survivability of The Green Tide and the Ork Warband formations: the ability to Waaagh every turn after the first combined with the Prophet of the Waaagh! trait makes the army Fearless every turn after the first. It obviates all the hassle of the original, or even the updated Mob Rule rules.

Of course, the obvious nerfs/downsides to using the rule this way is that it's extremely limiting: it requires you to take one of two very specific, model-heavy formations for this strategy to be effective, you're limited in your choice of Warlord (the stock Warboss who can only use this relic).

But for people who want to run an old-fashioned Boyz-heavy army (because they've built up a mountain of them over the years and editions) this is a pretty good way to make lists much less fragile than the current codex allows.

 Multimoog wrote:
I'm not sure if this is the right thread for this comment, but:

A few weeks ago there was a thread about what needed fixing in the Orks codex. I suggested a minor rules change to Da Finkin' Kap that I've been using in my local group. It's been received pretty positively in that it's not OP (I still got stomped by a Necron Decurion) but has resulted in a lot more close games (in terms of units being destroyed/run off the table - we usually play Maelstrom so getting VPs is still largely up to chance).

Add the following to the end of the description of Da Finkin' Kap: "Alternately, the wearer of Da Finkin' Kap may choose to select any one Warlord Trait without being required to roll randomly; this option negates the ability to generate a second Warlord Trait from the Strategic table."

This works well for obvious reasons but it also enhances the survivability of The Green Tide and the Ork Warband formations: the ability to Waaagh every turn after the first combined with the Prophet of the Waaagh! trait makes the army Fearless every turn after the first. It obviates all the hassle of the original, or even the updated Mob Rule rules.

Of course, the obvious nerfs/downsides to using the rule this way is that it's extremely limiting: it requires you to take one of two very specific, model-heavy formations for this strategy to be effective, you're limited in your choice of Warlord (the stock Warboss who can only use this relic).

But for people who want to run an old-fashioned Boyz-heavy army (because they've built up a mountain of them over the years and editions) this is a pretty good way to make lists much less fragile than the current codex allows.

Interesting change, but is it necessary? Sure, it fixes one build of Orkz, but how does it help balance the army internally or externally? IMO that is why the new Mob Rule is important, it affects more than just one unit choice, doesn't require a specific combination, and just works accross the board to help balance Orks.

It is good as a single short term fix, but I don't think it has a place in a Balance Errata like this, no "must have" or shoehorned choice really does.

 Zagman wrote:


Interesting change, but is it necessary? Sure, it fixes one build of Orkz, but how does it help balance the army internally or externally? IMO that is why the new Mob Rule is important, it affects more than just one unit choice, doesn't require a specific combination, and just works accross the board to help balance Orks.

It is good as a single short term fix, but I don't think it has a place in a Balance Errata like this, no "must have" or shoehorned choice really does.

That's very true, but in terms of an overall, armywide mechanic, I can imagine paying 10 points to pick any Warlord trait is something that could benefit a wide variety of Ork builds without being OP while staying in spirit of the fluff/original rule. I think Necrons have something similar?

 Multimoog wrote:

 Zagman wrote:


Interesting change, but is it necessary? Sure, it fixes one build of Orkz, but how does it help balance the army internally or externally? IMO that is why the new Mob Rule is important, it affects more than just one unit choice, doesn't require a specific combination, and just works accross the board to help balance Orks.

It is good as a single short term fix, but I don't think it has a place in a Balance Errata like this, no "must have" or shoehorned choice really does.

That's very true, but in terms of an overall, armywide mechanic, I can imagine paying 10 points to pick any Warlord trait is something that could benefit a wide variety of Ork builds without being OP while staying in spirit of the fluff/original rule. I think Necrons have something similar?

10pts to pick a Warlord Trait is light. Especially when Master of Ambush is one of the options, it is so massively powerful guarenteeing it along should be much much more than ten pts.

The Scything talon only getting ap6 as a rule is quite poor.
I really liked the old: one set gives Re-roll "1" in CC tohit, and Two sets gives Reroll all failed tohit rolls in CC.
I realise it would increase the general power of Nids but not by that much.

 fartherthanfar wrote:
The Scything talon only getting ap6 as a rule is quite poor.
I really liked the old: one set gives Re-roll "1" in CC tohit, and Two sets gives Reroll all failed tohit rolls in CC.
I realise it would increase the general power of Nids but not by that much.

Sure, it's basically just a cc weapon. No reason to change it and rebalance stuff. Lighter hand the better IMO.

Why not make SitW do -3 leadership to fear tests to all models within Synapse.

This way it doesn't effect all things leadership and can make Nid Fear rules actually get a chance to be used.

Lance845 wrote:
Why not make SitW do -3 leadership to fear tests to all models within Synapse.

This way it doesn't effect all things leadership and can make Nid Fear rules actually get a chance to be used.

The current rules are as close to the original in affect as possible in 7th. It's a solid rule, I'd hate to mess with it more than was necessary.

I'm not sold on the change to Pyrovores, giving them torrential would change their role. Changing the role is not the correct way to balance a model IMHO.

What about adding to acid blood the following:
"Meele attacks from this model gain the Armour bane special rule"

This enhances the role of "Don't let them get close, semi-glass cannons". Effective against light infantry with the heavy flamer, effective in meele against vehicles and between Initiative tests and AP2 bites can do something to heavy infantry.

Also gives a good boost in anti AV to haruspex (may require an added cost) and would make the acid blood an interesting choice on MCs. More options, always a good thing.

Does something to cover the glaring absence of anti AV in the nids codex and reduce the dependancy to flyrants.

im not sure if reducing the number of models in units is the way to go for ork balance, its not the ork way. the ork way is tons of cheep, fast, heavy hitting vehicles for overwhelming the enemy (just like boyz). if warbuggies was reduced to max 2 or 3 then just to get more you have to use up more fast attack slots (an otherwise very contested slot), same goes for mek gunz, we need these in large number squads because the heavy support is the most crowded in our codex.
while i do admit ive remarked in other posts that orks have the easiest way to unlock multible cads since we have a dirt cheap troop choice, i have found that some campaign and tournaments could be limiting (some limit to max 2 cad).
a campiagn i just started has the limit of 1 cad (no formations or codex detachments), it was a way to better balance the campaign, at that moment im glad most of our units often have large numbers (warbuggies, deffkoptas, mekgunz). i would suggest alternative limitations for this errata (though none come to mind atm)

here are other ork suggestions:
deffkoptas get a character kopta at no cost or bonus (like the chracter in flash gitz or meganobz) this way they can hit the breakin heads result on the mob rule table (also the option for the char to take a bosspole) (this assuming the mob rule table stays rouphly the same)

the errata mob rule seems too cheasy, i wouldve just gone with the 4th edition version and just use that.... or just give the squad the option of passing a moral test at the cost of randum amount of strength 4 hits (d3 for squads 10 and under, d6 for squads 11-20, d6 +3 for squads 21-30), and make the strength 4 hits ap4 (just to balance it out).

and being a little eager for kan and dredd strategies, i might suggest giveing our walkers scout...as a way to help solve the issue of their slowness, or maybe have a bigmek upgrade that allows for the teleport (deepstrike) of these walkers.

the errata mob rule seems too cheasy, i wouldve just gone with the 4th edition version and just use that.... or just give the squad the option of passing a moral test at the cost of randum amount of strength 4 hits (d3 for squads 10 and under, d6 for squads 11-20, d6 +3 for squads 21-30), and make the strength 4 hits ap4 (just to balance it out).

The errata mob rule is worse than the 4th edition one, which was the same thing with no casualties.

Random S4 hits has the same problem as the current mob rule - extra dice rolls for the hell of it. AP4 is brutal to ard boyz, which are already very overcosted, as well as to bikers and such (losing 30pts of bikers to mob rule is ridiculous). Doesn't seem necessary to me at all.

That campaign sounds pretty bad mate. Orks want to spam CAD, and are disproportionately adversely affected by having that option removed. Its the same issue as 6th edition tournies - the Eldar and Tau running the show didn't care about running multiple detachments, so they capped them, which screwed over Orks.

Spoletta wrote:I'm not sold on the change to Pyrovores, giving them torrential would change their role. Changing the role is not the correct way to balance a model IMHO.

What about adding to acid blood the following:
"Meele attacks from this model gain the Armour bane special rule"

This enhances the role of "Don't let them get close, semi-glass cannons". Effective against light infantry with the heavy flamer, effective in meele against vehicles and between Initiative tests and AP2 bites can do something to heavy infantry.

Also gives a good boost in anti AV to haruspex (may require an added cost) and would make the acid blood an interesting choice on MCs. More options, always a good thing.

Does something to cover the glaring absence of anti AV in the nids codex and reduce the dependancy to flyrants.

I tried to come up with the simplest fix to make Pyrovores better. It does change thier role by adding an additional 12" range to their threat, but since the Torrent version is weaker there is still a great incentive to close and use the Heavy Flamer. Either way the unit gained uitily. I never used Pyrovores, but with Torrent, I could see alternative uses for them, especially out of a Tyrranocyte. Torrent also give the ability for models that can't put a Flamer Template down effecively to still git models. Say the front Pyrovore is in range of the HF and the rest torrent the Flamer.

I don't really see how that change to Accid blood really is appropraite. I could see it being an argument for Acid Maw, but blood is all about hurting the units that hurt them.

Nids don't have much AV, but I did help the Tyrannofex, ground MCs in general, geenstealers with rending, etc to help out for anti AV.

geargutz wrote:im not sure if reducing the number of models in units is the way to go for ork balance, its not the ork way. the ork way is tons of cheep, fast, heavy hitting vehicles for overwhelming the enemy (just like boyz). if warbuggies was reduced to max 2 or 3 then just to get more you have to use up more fast attack slots (an otherwise very contested slot), same goes for mek gunz, we need these in large number squads because the heavy support is the most crowded in our codex.
while i do admit ive remarked in other posts that orks have the easiest way to unlock multible cads since we have a dirt cheap troop choice, i have found that some campaign and tournaments could be limiting (some limit to max 2 cad).
a campiagn i just started has the limit of 1 cad (no formations or codex detachments), it was a way to better balance the campaign, at that moment im glad most of our units often have large numbers (warbuggies, deffkoptas, mekgunz). i would suggest alternative limitations for this errata (though none come to mind atm)

here are other ork suggestions:
deffkoptas get a character kopta at no cost or bonus (like the chracter in flash gitz or meganobz) this way they can hit the breakin heads result on the mob rule table (also the option for the char to take a bosspole) (this assuming the mob rule table stays rouphly the same)

the errata mob rule seems too cheasy, i wouldve just gone with the 4th edition version and just use that.... or just give the squad the option of passing a moral test at the cost of randum amount of strength 4 hits (d3 for squads 10 and under, d6 for squads 11-20, d6 +3 for squads 21-30), and make the strength 4 hits ap4 (just to balance it out).

and being a little eager for kan and dredd strategies, i might suggest giveing our walkers scout...as a way to help solve the issue of their slowness, or maybe have a bigmek upgrade that allows for the teleport (deepstrike) of these walkers.

I didn't reduce the number of models in any squad, I did increase the minimum for some. Unless I mistyped something the units should all be allowed the same number of maximum models as before, I don't think there is a single instance where that is the case. If there was a reduction it may have gone from 1-5 to 2-5 etc.

A Deffcopter character would be nice, but I didn't want to go adding unit entries instead focusing on what is already there.

Mob Rule too cheesy, it is less powerful than the 4th edition version and vastly better than the 7th edition version. It also reduces the number of rolls significantly, and fits the spirit of the Mob rule as conveyed in 7th. Big mobs have higher leadership but take damage to pass.

Your suggested mob rule is very convoluted and will slow play down just as much as the current one with no real benefit. And AP4 is really problematic and punishing to more costly models Ard Boyz, Bikes, etc.

Dakkamite wrote:

the errata mob rule seems too cheasy, i wouldve just gone with the 4th edition version and just use that.... or just give the squad the option of passing a moral test at the cost of randum amount of strength 4 hits (d3 for squads 10 and under, d6 for squads 11-20, d6 +3 for squads 21-30), and make the strength 4 hits ap4 (just to balance it out).

The errata mob rule is worse than the 4th edition one, which was the same thing with no casualties.

Random S4 hits has the same problem as the current mob rule - extra dice rolls for the hell of it. AP4 is brutal to ard boyz, which are already very overcosted, as well as to bikers and such (losing 30pts of bikers to mob rule is ridiculous). Doesn't seem necessary to me at all.

That campaign sounds pretty bad mate. Orks want to spam CAD, and are disproportionately adversely affected by having that option removed. Its the same issue as 6th edition tournies - the Eldar and Tau running the show didn't care about running multiple detachments, so they capped them, which screwed over Orks.

Exactly, it isn't as good as the old Mob Rule, but quite a bit better than the new one.

Pyrovores need to leave the elites slot. Get them into Heavy Support. If I was choosing between Carnifex or Pyrovores it would be a more strategic choice. When it's between the thropes and Pyrovores it's no choice at all. The thropes come the vores stay.

Alternatively, Make it so every unit of gants can replace 4 gants with 1 pyrovore. Then they can fill a sergeant kind of role in the troops section. I bet they will see TONS of use if you can bring some flamers with your hordes. You wouldn't even need to change their stat line at all then.

Just remove that really stupid self destruct rule.

yeah sorry, misread your rules for unit restrictions. so you didnt change the max, but you did the minimum? if that is the case then why the increas of minimum? if the minimum is increased then the units become expensive. that could work for balance but changes the strategies of units. for example a defkopt that doesnt have a character option has to come in squads of 3, the squad has a high chance of running if just one kopta dies (thats why most poeple take them min squads of one bike as cheep ogj sec).

i was just throwing ideas at the wall with mobrule.

"The Flyrant is definitely worth its poitns, almost a little too good with its shooting. "

No the flyrant is undercosted, severely actually. It is too strong for its points cost, especially considering 5 can be taken in most tournament settings. It's OP, and needs either a nerf or an 0-1 restriction. Your rules do nothing to reign in one of the most abusive units of the entire game, and thats a problem.

Also the bubble 2+ cover is waaaaaaaay too accessible for tyranids. Malanthropes need some serious work done to make them a reasonable unit

 Silverthorne wrote:
"The Flyrant is definitely worth its poitns, almost a little too good with its shooting. "

No the flyrant is undercosted, severely actually. It is too strong for its points cost, especially considering 5 can be taken in most tournament settings. It's OP, and needs either a nerf or an 0-1 restriction. Your rules do nothing to reign in one of the most abusive units of the entire game, and thats a problem.

Also the bubble 2+ cover is waaaaaaaay too accessible for tyranids. Malanthropes need some serious work done to make them a reasonable unit

If I was going to redo HT I would do this.

Step 1: Bring in a Armor Plating Biomorph that can be taken by HT, Warriors, Fexs, Primes and such that increases armor save by +1. This way Walkrants can get a single great save going for them.

Step 2: Points reduction on HT. Go from 165 to 145.

Step 3: Wings cost 45 instead of 35 AND replace a pair of Sycthing Talons. Wings will also be exclusive to Armor Plating. No Flyrants with 2+

The over all here is that a HT now costs a little less as a flyrant and a lot less as a walkrant while reducing it's TLDwBLW to 6 shots. It also means your thorax swarm becomes your second weapon you fire off each turn making things besides the electroshock grubs a tad more useful.

The unit is still great with a more fair price point while other options for the HT become more viable. You want the 2 pair tldwblw? Make it a walkrant and armor it up.

That being said, Cover is basically all we got. The only source of an invul save in the basic codex is on a zoanthrope. You cannot take away nid cover without crippling the entire army.

Lance845 wrote:

 Silverthorne wrote:
"The Flyrant is definitely worth its poitns, almost a little too good with its shooting. "

No the flyrant is undercosted, severely actually. It is too strong for its points cost, especially considering 5 can be taken in most tournament settings. It's OP, and needs either a nerf or an 0-1 restriction. Your rules do nothing to reign in one of the most abusive units of the entire game, and thats a problem.

Also the bubble 2+ cover is waaaaaaaay too accessible for tyranids. Malanthropes need some serious work done to make them a reasonable unit

If I was going to redo HT I would do this.

Step 1: Bring in a Armor Plating Biomorph that can be taken by HT, Warriors, Fexs, Primes and such that increases armor save by +1. This way Walkrants can get a single great save going for them.

Step 2: Points reduction on HT. Go from 165 to 145.

Step 3: Wings cost 45 instead of 35 AND replace a pair of Sycthing Talons. Wings will also be exclusive to Armor Plating. No Flyrants with 2+

The over all here is that a HT now costs a little less as a flyrant and a lot less as a walkrant while reducing it's TLDwBLW to 6 shots. It also means your thorax swarm becomes your second weapon you fire off each turn making things besides the electroshock grubs a tad more useful.

The unit is still great with a more fair price point while other options for the HT become more viable. You want the 2 pair tldwblw? Make it a walkrant and armor it up.

That being said, Cover is basically all we got. The only source of an invul save in the basic codex is on a zoanthrope. You cannot take away nid cover without crippling the entire army.

What i would do the HT is the following: Wings upgrade drops your R to 5. Brings it in line with other Nid FMC, can't be too sturdy and still fly, nids don't have fantasy gizmos for that. At R5 it would be a good unit but much more risky.
On the cover there is one thing i would do. Taking aside the Malanthrope which is FW and in this thread we are not considering FW, there is still the problem that a Venom does what it does for 45 and there is almost no reason to take more than one model in the unit.
I would change the venom shroud rule to depend on the number of venoms in the unit:
1) Models in 6" that do not have the shrouded rule get the Stealth rule.
2) Models in 6" get shrouded.
3) Models in 9" get shrouded.

At least now there is a choice in the number of venoms you carry.

Also since we are taking a good look at everything nid, should we also remember that part of the codex than no one in his right mind uses? Maybe that we should think of something to give nids back their beautiful tails?
Maybe the following:
Bone tails from 15 to 10
Thresher Scythe from 10 to 5 and replace rend with shred
Prehensile pincer from 10 to 5
Toxin spike gains ID on 6

On a final note, can't we do something for stranglewebs? Maybe remove pinning and add "A model hit by this weapon must pass a Pinning test" or "A model hit by this weapon must pass a STR check or get pinned" like the old codex.

Spoletta wrote:

Lance845 wrote:

 Silverthorne wrote:
"The Flyrant is definitely worth its poitns, almost a little too good with its shooting. "

No the flyrant is undercosted, severely actually. It is too strong for its points cost, especially considering 5 can be taken in most tournament settings. It's OP, and needs either a nerf or an 0-1 restriction. Your rules do nothing to reign in one of the most abusive units of the entire game, and thats a problem.

Also the bubble 2+ cover is waaaaaaaay too accessible for tyranids. Malanthropes need some serious work done to make them a reasonable unit

If I was going to redo HT I would do this.

Step 1: Bring in a Armor Plating Biomorph that can be taken by HT, Warriors, Fexs, Primes and such that increases armor save by +1. This way Walkrants can get a single great save going for them.

Step 2: Points reduction on HT. Go from 165 to 145.

Step 3: Wings cost 45 instead of 35 AND replace a pair of Sycthing Talons. Wings will also be exclusive to Armor Plating. No Flyrants with 2+

The over all here is that a HT now costs a little less as a flyrant and a lot less as a walkrant while reducing it's TLDwBLW to 6 shots. It also means your thorax swarm becomes your second weapon you fire off each turn making things besides the electroshock grubs a tad more useful.

The unit is still great with a more fair price point while other options for the HT become more viable. You want the 2 pair tldwblw? Make it a walkrant and armor it up.

That being said, Cover is basically all we got. The only source of an invul save in the basic codex is on a zoanthrope. You cannot take away nid cover without crippling the entire army.

What i would do the HT is the following: Wings upgrade drops your R to 5. Brings it in line with other Nid FMC, can't be too sturdy and still fly, nids don't have fantasy gizmos for that. At R5 it would be a good unit but much more risky.
On the cover there is one thing i would do. Taking aside the Malanthrope which is FW and in this thread we are not considering FW, there is still the problem that a Venom does what it does for 45 and there is almost no reason to take more than one model in the unit.
I would change the venom shroud rule to depend on the number of venoms in the unit:
1) Models in 6" that do not have the shrouded rule get the Stealth rule.
2) Models in 6" get shrouded.
3) Models in 9" get shrouded.

At least now there is a choice in the number of venoms you carry.

Also since we are taking a good look at everything nid, should we also remember that part of the codex than no one in his right mind uses? Maybe that we should think of something to give nids back their beautiful tails?
Maybe the following:
Bone tails from 15 to 10
Thresher Scythe from 10 to 5 and replace rend with shred
Prehensile pincer from 10 to 5
Toxin spike gains ID on 6

On a final note, can't we do something for stranglewebs? Maybe remove pinning and add "A model hit by this weapon must pass a Pinning test" or "A model hit by this weapon must pass a STR check or get pinned" like the old codex.

The problem with the shrouded changing depending on number of models is that venomthrops are already not very survivable. The reason malanthropes are so popular is they are venomthropes that can hang around through an attack. Coupled with their complete lack of survivability, if each time you lost one their survivability got WORSE because shrouded would keep on degrading they would become target 1 no matter what.

The issue of venoms is their ability to take a hit, any hit. People bring them in groups of 1 because the 6 inches is not a very big bubble. If you want your army covered you need one on each flank. If they got more expensive to be viable you would stop seeing them all together.

geargutz wrote:
yeah sorry, misread your rules for unit restrictions. so you didnt change the max, but you did the minimum? if that is the case then why the increas of minimum? if the minimum is increased then the units become expensive. that could work for balance but changes the strategies of units. for example a defkopt that doesnt have a character option has to come in squads of 3, the squad has a high chance of running if just one kopta dies (that why most poeple take them min squads of one bike as cheep ogj sec).

i was just throwing ideas at the wall with mobrule.

I didn't change the max, just the minimum because 18 and 25pt units that are capable is a bit too much. Being a separate unit in and of itself is powerful, as it takes a minimum of an activation away from your opponent. I feel we need to be very wary of any unit under 40-50pts hence the change to minimum squad size. Each model is balanced for its cost, but the extremely cheap MSU can be problematic. Other codicies got the same treatment ie Nurglins, Furries, etc.

Deftkoptas come in squads of two, with up to three additional. 60pts is still cheap, and a pair of Koptas is still quite useful. LD7 is still a 58% chance of success and Koptas will most likely be far enough away to attempt a regroup, again a 58% chance of regrouping. Snap shots are also only a 50% reduced chance of hitting.

This Mobrule works well, as it reflects how Orks act in Mobs, and greatly reduces wounds taken and leaderships failed for Mobs, especially units that have 8+ models. The 7th Ed mobrule was very punishing and took quite a bit of rolling... especially random allocation, and really didn't offer an advantage. It was also quite convoluted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Silverthorne wrote:
"The Flyrant is definitely worth its poitns, almost a little too good with its shooting. "

No the flyrant is undercosted, severely actually. It is too strong for its points cost, especially considering 5 can be taken in most tournament settings. It's OP, and needs either a nerf or an 0-1 restriction. Your rules do nothing to reign in one of the most abusive units of the entire game, and thats a problem.

Also the bubble 2+ cover is waaaaaaaay too accessible for tyranids. Malanthropes need some serious work done to make them a reasonable unit

I'm still struggling with the Tyrant, when I wrote the first draft of the Errata for Tyranids, my general Errata had a limit on FMCs, on per full 500pts in a list. I've since removed that restriction and things like Pentarants are now more problematic, extremely so as a 10pt increase in cost and always being visible with no terrain cover saves doesn't really balance them out with opening up their Psychic access. When they were limited to say 3 in 1850, it wasn't a problem.

I'm considering making Wings reduce the Hive Tyrant's AS to a 4+. I would also make Daemon Princes unable to take a 3+ AS with Wings. Since I've also make it that FMCs are always visible and cannot claim a cover save outside of Jinking while Swooping, I'd let them start the game in Swooping Mode when deployed. Thoughts?

That is because the Malanthrope is a terribly costed model, it should be ~115pts, not 85pts. Since this errata doesn't include quite a bit of content that isn't in the Codices right now, so the Malanthrop is currently out until I add a little section for it. But, its fine as is so long as it is costed appropriately, 115pts would be fair.


@Lance845 and Spoletta
What about the above changes reducing the Flyrant to a 4+AS? Fitting as almost all Skyfire weapons are AP4 and my Erratas have given fair access to skyfire missiles. I do like idea of the HT changes and they could work, but that is adding quite a bit more changes and conditions. I'm looking for the simplest solution.

I didn't really think about the Tail Biomorphs, you are right, they do probably need a decrease in cost.

I'm not a fan of making the Venomthropes abilities dependent on number of models, it is punishing, and they are already fragile and a fire magnent. I originally had it at 50pts, but after a good go around and realizing it only has a 5+AS which means most cover ignoring weapons can wound it easily, I felt it was balanced when compared to say an Ork KFF.

I'll take another look at Stranglewebs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lance845 wrote:
Pyrovores need to leave the elites slot. Get them into Heavy Support. If I was choosing between Carnifex or Pyrovores it would be a more strategic choice. When it's between the thropes and Pyrovores it's no choice at all. The thropes come the vores stay.

Alternatively, Make it so every unit of gants can replace 4 gants with 1 pyrovore. Then they can fill a sergeant kind of role in the troops section. I bet they will see TONS of use if you can bring some flamers with your hordes. You wouldn't even need to change their stat line at all then.

Just remove that really stupid self destruct rule.

Hmm... I'm not terribly opposed to moving the Pyrovore out of the Elites slot. I don't really want to mix it into the Troops as a Seargent HQ, especially with non synergistic special rules.

The Torrent ability is not enough to make them worth considering for a third Elite?

There is only six options in Elites and seven in Heavy support already. Making that five and eight seems like it crowds heavies with even more.

 Zagman wrote:


@Lance845 and Spoletta
What about the above changes reducing the Flyrant to a 4+AS? Fitting as almost all Skyfire weapons are AP4 and my Erratas have given fair access to skyfire missiles. I do like idea of the HT changes and they could work, but that is adding quite a bit more changes and conditions. I'm looking for the simplest solution.

I didn't really think about the Tail Biomorphs, you are right, they do probably need a decrease in cost.

I'm not a fan of making the Venomthropes abilities dependent on number of models, it is punishing, and they are already fragile and a fire magnent. I originally had it at 50pts, but after a good go around and realizing it only has a 5+AS which means most cover ignoring weapons can wound it easily, I felt it was balanced when compared to say an Ork KFF.

I'll take another look at Stranglewebs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lance845 wrote:
Pyrovores need to leave the elites slot. Get them into Heavy Support. If I was choosing between Carnifex or Pyrovores it would be a more strategic choice. When it's between the thropes and Pyrovores it's no choice at all. The thropes come the vores stay.

Alternatively, Make it so every unit of gants can replace 4 gants with 1 pyrovore. Then they can fill a sergeant kind of role in the troops section. I bet they will see TONS of use if you can bring some flamers with your hordes. You wouldn't even need to change their stat line at all then.

Just remove that really stupid self destruct rule.

Hmm... I'm not terribly opposed to moving the Pyrovore out of the Elites slot. I don't really want to mix it into the Troops as a Seargent HQ, especially with non synergistic special rules.

The Torrent ability is not enough to make them worth considering for a third Elite?

There is only six options in Elites and seven in Heavy support already. Making that five and eight seems like it crowds heavies with even more.

The Flyrants AS is not the problem. People complain constantly about how many come because of the destruction they lay down. 12 tl s6 shots in the air is a bit much per model. The Flyrant is one of the few survivable models we have. Nids need to maintain some of that. Especially with the Tyrant as he is often the center piece of the swarm holding it all together and going where the fighting is thickest. Reducing it's punch by half by making the wings take up a slot with the appropriate point adjustments puts it into a place that makes a lot more sense while maintaining it's usefulness. I would not stop taking Tyrants if I had to fire off a template and 1 set of devourers each turn.

I think the problem with tail biomorphs is that they do not benefit from any other rules. No poison, no furious charge etc etc... If they did they would be used more often.

Both Heavy and Elites are crowded.

There needs to be a bit of a shuffle. I feel like Trygons and Trygon Primes should be in fast attack. Pyrovores in Heavy or Troops and the option to replace a small cluster of gants with one would make them super viable and useful. Again, the real issue is that Pyrovores are competing against things that are MUST BRING. The thropes are all must haves in one way or another. You cannot put the pyrovore next to them and expect them to show up at all. Being able to drop a flamer into a group of devil gants and watch the world burn would be great. The Biovore would gain a little survivability in the form of ablative gant wounds and the gants would gain a template to use. Awesome.

You have 3 elite slots and limited points. You would take something other then cover saves/synapse/warp lance?

Lance845 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Zagman wrote:


@Lance845 and Spoletta
What about the above changes reducing the Flyrant to a 4+AS? Fitting as almost all Skyfire weapons are AP4 and my Erratas have given fair access to skyfire missiles. I do like idea of the HT changes and they could work, but that is adding quite a bit more changes and conditions. I'm looking for the simplest solution.

I didn't really think about the Tail Biomorphs, you are right, they do probably need a decrease in cost.

I'm not a fan of making the Venomthropes abilities dependent on number of models, it is punishing, and they are already fragile and a fire magnent. I originally had it at 50pts, but after a good go around and realizing it only has a 5+AS which means most cover ignoring weapons can wound it easily, I felt it was balanced when compared to say an Ork KFF.

I'll take another look at Stranglewebs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Lance845 wrote:
Pyrovores need to leave the elites slot. Get them into Heavy Support. If I was choosing between Carnifex or Pyrovores it would be a more strategic choice. When it's between the thropes and Pyrovores it's no choice at all. The thropes come the vores stay.

Alternatively, Make it so every unit of gants can replace 4 gants with 1 pyrovore. Then they can fill a sergeant kind of role in the troops section. I bet they will see TONS of use if you can bring some flamers with your hordes. You wouldn't even need to change their stat line at all then.

Just remove that really stupid self destruct rule.

Hmm... I'm not terribly opposed to moving the Pyrovore out of the Elites slot. I don't really want to mix it into the Troops as a Seargent HQ, especially with non synergistic special rules.

The Torrent ability is not enough to make them worth considering for a third Elite?

There is only six options in Elites and seven in Heavy support already. Making that five and eight seems like it crowds heavies with even more.

The Flyrants AS is not the problem. People complain constantly about how many come because of the destruction they lay down. 12 tl s6 shots in the air is a bit much per model. The Flyrant is one of the few survivable models we have. Nids need to maintain some of that. Especially with the Tyrant as he is often the center piece of the swarm holding it all together and going where the fighting is thickest. Reducing it's punch by half by making the wings take up a slot with the appropriate point adjustments puts it into a place that makes a lot more sense while maintaining it's usefulness. I would not stop taking Tyrants if I had to fire off a template and 1 set of devourers each turn.

I think the problem with tail biomorphs is that they do not benefit from any other rules. No poison, no furious charge etc etc... If they did they would be used more often.

Both Heavy and Elites are crowded.

There needs to be a bit of a shuffle. I feel like Trygons and Trygon Primes should be in fast attack. Pyrovores in Heavy or Troops and the option to replace a small cluster of gants with one would make them super viable and useful. Again, the real issue is that Pyrovores are competing against things that are MUST BRING. The thropes are all must haves in one way or another. You cannot put the pyrovore next to them and expect them to show up at all. Being able to drop a flamer into a group of devil gants and watch the world burn would be great. The Biovore would gain a little survivability in the form of ablative gant wounds and the gants would gain a template to use. Awesome.

You have 3 elite slots and limited points. You would take something other then cover saves/synapse/warp lance?

I hear what you are saying and I agree with a lot of it.

I do disagree about Flyrant durability. A T6 3+AS FMC with 4W is incredibly durable and when spammed results in something most opponents cannot address. Lowing durability is a perfectly acceptable way of balancing a model's damage output. They do bring a lot of destruction, but if opponents have a more viable way to make them Jink or damage them that destruction is balanced out by a reduced longevity or temporarily reduced efficiency. The Tyrant may be one of the more survivable models the Nids had, hell it was the most, and one of the most damaging as well. Now, Nids have access to a myriad of cheaper ground MCs, as well as having other models balanced more appropriately. I don't mind if the Flyrant can dish out damage, but when they can be spammed and dish out damage while being ridiculously durable thanks to being a T6 FMC with a 3+, that is what hurts. I don't mind the damage out put of a Dakkafex, because being a ground MC the Dakkafex can be countered and killed. Its the durability of the Flyrant that causes lots of issues and why spamming them to overwhelm your opponents ability to deal Skyfire damage is IMO the most problematic, not that they have good damage output for cost.

Tail Biomorphs do suffer from that problem, but a cost adjustment does the same thing. If they are costed appropriately they will be considered as viable options.

A shuffle, so move Pyrovores to Heavy, move Trygons and Trygon Primes to Fast attack. So instead of having 6Elites, 7Fast Attack, 7Heavy Support we'll end up with 5Elites, 9Fast Attack, and 6Heavy Support. That really scews FOC slots even worse.

We have to think we are in a Multicad/formation environment where the exact number of slots is changeable. What we have to provide is balanced units and choices. We can agree that now Pyrovores gaining Torrent makes them more cost effective and at least closer to balanced than they were before. 40pts for T4 3W 4+AS and dual Flamer profiles including torrent is a solid unit for its cost. It is a balance improvement. If we start shuffling slots we'll end up with other units that are marginalized even more.

Is the Pyrovore appropriately costed?
Is the Venomthrope appropriately costed?
Is the Zoanthrope appropriately costed?

If the answer is "yes" or "pretty" close for all three of those then they are close enough.

Those three things are very important and will often require the majority of the Elite Spots. Any of those three things in that slot can be skipped, maybe its not optimal but creating optimally equal choices is virtually impossible, just as it is impossible to balance the synergy a Venomthrope brings to the table. But, ideally a Nid army that takes other units should fair better than it did before, and an optimal build should fair worse or simply be more expensive than it was before. Pushing both extremes towards the middle is what we need to be doing.

I know that what i suggested is quite punishing for the venoms, but it is intended.
Nids right now depend on flyrants and venoms, what we are trying to do right now is eliminate that dependency.
That means nerfing Flyrants, buffing pretty much the whole codex and in the end being able to nerf the venoms without screwing the army.
Let's face it, venoms are OP. For what they bring in terms of strength multiplier they are too much of a bargain. If the codex would be modified with all the buffs we are suggesting here but without at the same time nerfing the one model that allowed such a mess of an army to be semi competitive then we are getting close to Newdar.
All the points cost have been revised, we can now afford to pay more for our shroud bubble or just accept our losses.

Another point, do we need to take a look at the nid powers? They don't need much, i would just propose the following:

Dominion increases SiTW range
The Horror add "The target unit cannot fire overwatch"
Psychic shriek increase nova to 9"
Maybe bring Warp lance to AP1, makes it a bit more reliable form of AV.

Well lets take a look at our fast attack... spore mines... yup. Not really a unit. Just kind of where they stuck them.

Sky slashers... You mean flying rippers. Should just be an upgrade to rippers, not a different unit in a different slot that only exists to sell FW models.

Moving the tyrgon and trygon prime puts usable things in the fast attack. Plus trygons are by the fluuf big ravenors. Also, they would be fast attack because of their tunnels providing fast placement for all of reserves.


The answer to venoms is not to weaken them but to provide us with other tools. They are the vehicle to foot slog with. We have builds that don't rely on foot slogging and thats when they get swapped out for other things.

MMORPGs are notorious for this kind of balancing. Something is being relied on, make it undesirable.

The actual solution is to find out why it's being relied on and address that issue. If it even IS an issue. SM have high saves and diverse weapons. Nicrons are the most durable. Nids have cover. Cover from bubble wrapping their units. Cover from shrouded. Cover. It's the thing we have to stick around. It's not an issue that we use it to the max. It's what we have instead of maximum ranged attacks and high armor. Something that boosts that cover or provides it in the open ground is a no brainer.

Spoletta wrote:I know that what i suggested is quite punishing for the venoms, but it is intended.
Nids right now depend on flyrants and venoms, what we are trying to do right now is eliminate that dependency.
That means nerfing Flyrants, buffing pretty much the whole codex and in the end being able to nerf the venoms without screwing the army.
Let's face it, venoms are OP. For what they bring in terms of strength multiplier they are too much of a bargain. If the codex would be modified with all the buffs we are suggesting here but without at the same time nerfing the one model that allowed such a mess of an army to be semi competitive then we are getting close to Newdar.
All the points cost have been revised, we can now afford to pay more for our shroud bubble or just accept our losses.

Another point, do we need to take a look at the nid powers? They don't need much, i would just propose the following:

Dominion increases SiTW range
The Horror add "The target unit cannot fire overwatch"
Psychic shriek increase nova to 9"
Maybe bring Warp lance to AP1, makes it a bit more reliable form of AV.

I'm not convinced the Venom is too good for its cost. It is very true that Nids were dependent on Flyrants and Venomthropes(usually Malanthrope) for cover. I'm not convinced Venomthropes need to be dropped down, I did when I thought they had a 4+AS, but with a 5+ they are easily killed by anthing with ignores cover, and even with a 2+ or 3+ cover save its 2 T4 wounds, easily accomplished.

IMO what is important is balancing the rest of the codex while bringing Flyrants down a peg. I feel 4+AS with Wings is a good way to accomplish that.

As for bringing the rest of the dex up, we've got cheaper upgrades and lower base cost MCs to help with that.

Also, we have to keep in mind the goal balance point. We don't need nids to keep up with the current competetive Meta, as they no longer would exist under this Errata, the balance point is quite a bit lower.

Lance845 wrote:Well lets take a look at our fast attack... spore mines... yup. Not really a unit. Just kind of where they stuck them.

Sky slashers... You mean flying rippers. Should just be an upgrade to rippers, not a different unit in a different slot that only exists to sell FW models.

Moving the tyrgon and trygon prime puts usable things in the fast attack. Plus trygons are by the fluuf big ravenors. Also, they would be fast attack because of their tunnels providing fast placement for all of reserves.


The answer to venoms is not to weaken them but to provide us with other tools. They are the vehicle to foot slog with. We have builds that don't rely on foot slogging and thats when they get swapped out for other things.

MMORPGs are notorious for this kind of balancing. Something is being relied on, make it undesirable.

The actual solution is to find out why it's being relied on and address that issue. If it even IS an issue. SM have high saves and diverse weapons. Nicrons are the most durable. Nids have cover. Cover from bubble wrapping their units. Cover from shrouded. Cover. It's the thing we have to stick around. It's not an issue that we use it to the max. It's what we have instead of maximum ranged attacks and high armor. Something that boosts that cover or provides it in the open ground is a no brainer.

I'm still not convinced Venomthropes are as auto take as you believe they are, and I've already done quite a bit to make other units desirable.

Having units that could be merely upgrades is not a new thing, and I was trying to keep the internal structure of the codex the same. Only one errata, BA, moved a unit to a different slot.

I understand Trygons are giang Ravagers, but they are also Ground MCs, which is basically HQ and Heavy support for all armies. Sure, the Riptide a Jetpack MC is Elite, and I could definitely argue that it should be bumped to Heavy Support instead.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
6-4-15 Change To

Hive Tyrant: 120pts
May take any of the following.... Wings: 80pts
*A Hive Tyrant with Wings has its Armor Save reduced to a 4+.

Ok if you all think that the venoms are good as they are then ok.

One thing though we can agree on, can we rule out in some way the abomination that is the venom in a box?

First, I agree on Trygons as FA, and possibly adding a rule similar to the Skitaari dunestrider rule (+3" to all movement).

Second, a flyrant with a 4+ is just free "slay the warlord" to anyone with a quad gun. If space marines can have a 2+/3++ t5 biker captain/CM who also makes bikers trips, for the same cost pre-weapons as a 4+ flyrant, that is imbalance to me. Also, considering that you've been handing flakk missiles to other armies like candy this feels like a ham-fisted solution to the tyranids one-trick-pony.

Third thing to consider is to actually give a benefit to synapse besides " your army won't commit seppukku". It used to give EW to everything in range. My thought, rather than free army wide EW would be to give them something similar to what GMC have, so instead of losing all of your warriors to any battle cannon fired at them, you lose 1/3, with most taking a would or two.

Idea #4 would be to return GMC status to trygons and make them LoW, with a slight stat buff. Something like WS4 BS3 S8 T8 W6 I5 A6 Sv3+ Ld10. Give bio pulse haywire. 300ish for standard, 25pts to upgrade to Prime. Replace the gakky talons with something, maybe shred on them. Add in a upgrade 'hyper-cardio systems' that actually let it run d6" and charge, as long as it didn't shoot they turn.

StarHunter25 wrote:
First, I agree on Trygons as FA, and possibly adding a rule similar to the Skitaari dunestrider rule (+3" to all movement).

Second, a flyrant with a 4+ is just free "slay the warlord" to anyone with a quad gun. If space marines can have a 2+/3++ t5 biker captain/CM who also makes bikers trips, for the same cost pre-weapons as a 4+ flyrant, that is imbalance to me. Also, considering that you've been handing flakk missiles to other armies like candy this feels like a ham-fisted solution to the tyranids one-trick-pony.

Third thing to consider is to actually give a benefit to synapse besides " your army won't commit seppukku". It used to give EW to everything in range. My thought, rather than free army wide EW would be to give them something similar to what GMC have, so instead of losing all of your warriors to any battle cannon fired at them, you lose 1/3, with most taking a would or two.

Idea #4 would be to return GMC status to trygons and make them LoW, with a slight stat buff. Something like WS4 BS3 S8 T8 W6 I5 A6 Sv3+ Ld10. Give bio pulse haywire. 300ish for standard, 25pts to upgrade to Prime. Replace the gakky talons with something, maybe shred on them. Add in a upgrade 'hyper-cardio systems' that actually let it run d6" and charge, as long as it didn't shoot they turn.

That would be totally overpowered.

 Zagman wrote:
I do disagree about Flyrant durability. A T6 3+AS FMC with 4W is incredibly durable and when spammed results in something most opponents cannot address. Lowing durability is a perfectly acceptable way of balancing a model's damage output. They do bring a lot of destruction, but if opponents have a more viable way to make them Jink or damage them that destruction is balanced out by a reduced longevity or temporarily reduced efficiency. The Tyrant may be one of the more survivable models the Nids had, hell it was the most, and one of the most damaging as well. Now, Nids have access to a myriad of cheaper ground MCs, as well as having other models balanced more appropriately. I don't mind if the Flyrant can dish out damage, but when they can be spammed and dish out damage while being ridiculously durable thanks to being a T6 FMC with a 3+, that is what hurts. I don't mind the damage out put of a Dakkafex, because being a ground MC the Dakkafex can be countered and killed. Its the durability of the Flyrant that causes lots of issues and why spamming them to overwhelm your opponents ability to deal Skyfire damage is IMO the most problematic, not that they have good damage output for cost.

I think a lot of the flyrant's perceived durability comes from lots of armies just not taking any form of anti-air anymore. In all of the more recent batreps I've seen that have flyrants in them, the other army never has any form of anti-air. I also rarely see anyone take things like Stormravens that cost the same number of points, and should be able to take out a flyrant (without 2+ cover) on the turn they arrive. Also things like Onager Dunecrawlers taken in a group of three, two of them with the icarus array should be able to handle flyrants pretty easily, though again I haven't seen any batreps with this combination around yet.

Another thing to note is that despite triple flyrants being all over the LVO (I think it was?) I didn't hear much talk of them winning a disproportionate amount of games.

Spoletta wrote:Ok if you all think that the venoms are good as they are then ok.

One thing though we can agree on, can we rule out in some way the abomination that is the venom in a box?

Yeah, the Venomthrope in a Bastion is a PITA, but it is completely immobile. Its just like status effects from ICs measured from Vehicles as well. Don't know the best way to address this or if I need to at all. Is castled Nids really that big of an issue? Its not like they are putting and protecting huge ranged threats in there. I guess I've not run into this on the table. Sure its a bigger bubble, but its imobile, and how much can Nids castle around it? Its effective for what, 1-2 turns?

StarHunter25 wrote:First, I agree on Trygons as FA, and possibly adding a rule similar to the Skitaari dunestrider rule (+3" to all movement).

Second, a flyrant with a 4+ is just free "slay the warlord" to anyone with a quad gun. If space marines can have a 2+/3++ t5 biker captain/CM who also makes bikers trips, for the same cost pre-weapons as a 4+ flyrant, that is imbalance to me. Also, considering that you've been handing flakk missiles to other armies like candy this feels like a ham-fisted solution to the tyranids one-trick-pony.

Third thing to consider is to actually give a benefit to synapse besides " your army won't commit seppukku". It used to give EW to everything in range. My thought, rather than free army wide EW would be to give them something similar to what GMC have, so instead of losing all of your warriors to any battle cannon fired at them, you lose 1/3, with most taking a would or two.

Idea #4 would be to return GMC status to trygons and make them LoW, with a slight stat buff. Something like WS4 BS3 S8 T8 W6 I5 A6 Sv3+ Ld10. Give bio pulse haywire. 300ish for standard, 25pts to upgrade to Prime. Replace the gakky talons with something, maybe shred on them. Add in a upgrade 'hyper-cardio systems' that actually let it run d6" and charge, as long as it didn't shoot they turn.

The Trygon and Trygon Prime as FA wouldn't be terrible. I don't know if I want to that much FOC Slot swapping. If was doing a full rewrite they would be there along with condensed profiles for Shrikes and Rippers, etc.

I am not willing to make the Trygon a GMC, that is a major rewrite. I started by making the Wraithknight an MC, but was quickly convinced to move it back and just balance it as is. For the Trygons, fixing their tunnel really went a long way towards utilty and base cost they aren't bad now. I'd rather just leave them. Its 7th, access to dual CAD or formations isn't hard, FOC slot is less problematic as before.

You missed the Errata and where I mentioned that FMCs can now deploy in Swooping mode, so that is not a free Slay the Warlord. Granted, while Swooping it can always be seen. Yes, SM can put down a tough beatstick IC, but it isn't T6, and isntly a FMC requireing 6s to hit. That is the big difference. Quad Gun is now 4*.888*.666 = 2.4Wounds, 1.2 Wounds after 4+ Jink. That actually seems pretty balanced now.

I didn't not give Flakk missile out like candy, they are still a cost. And each shot, whcih is costly to come by, at BS4 is .44 Wounds, .22 Wounds if the Tyrant Jinks. What I have done is make the Hive Tyrant balanced. It still isn't an easy Slay the Warlord unless your opponent really put a lot into Skyfire. PentaRant is now more balanced. Also, don't forget your Flyrant has access to more powers, it could be rolling out Biomancy now, etc. or be rocking FNP. If you want a truly durable Tyrand you've got a Walkrant(at a very reasonalbe price) with full Tyrant Guard near a Venomthrope. There is now a price for the Flyrant, before it was one of the strongest units in the game, and putting five on the table overloaded anyone's AA capabilities. Now, at 4+AS they are significantly more balanced. DPs also got the same treatment, winds and Warpforged/PA are now mutually exllusive so standard AA weapons now can actually hurt FMCs barring the Blood Thirster.

Spoletta wrote:

StarHunter25 wrote:
First, I agree on Trygons as FA, and possibly adding a rule similar to the Skitaari dunestrider rule (+3" to all movement).

Second, a flyrant with a 4+ is just free "slay the warlord" to anyone with a quad gun. If space marines can have a 2+/3++ t5 biker captain/CM who also makes bikers trips, for the same cost pre-weapons as a 4+ flyrant, that is imbalance to me. Also, considering that you've been handing flakk missiles to other armies like candy this feels like a ham-fisted solution to the tyranids one-trick-pony.

Third thing to consider is to actually give a benefit to synapse besides " your army won't commit seppukku". It used to give EW to everything in range. My thought, rather than free army wide EW would be to give them something similar to what GMC have, so instead of losing all of your warriors to any battle cannon fired at them, you lose 1/3, with most taking a would or two.

Idea #4 would be to return GMC status to trygons and make them LoW, with a slight stat buff. Something like WS4 BS3 S8 T8 W6 I5 A6 Sv3+ Ld10. Give bio pulse haywire. 300ish for standard, 25pts to upgrade to Prime. Replace the gakky talons with something, maybe shred on them. Add in a upgrade 'hyper-cardio systems' that actually let it run d6" and charge, as long as it didn't shoot they turn.

That would be totally overpowered.

I agree, that GMC would be a nightmare to balance. Moving things to GMC is out of the question IMO.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cytharai wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
I do disagree about Flyrant durability. A T6 3+AS FMC with 4W is incredibly durable and when spammed results in something most opponents cannot address. Lowing durability is a perfectly acceptable way of balancing a model's damage output. They do bring a lot of destruction, but if opponents have a more viable way to make them Jink or damage them that destruction is balanced out by a reduced longevity or temporarily reduced efficiency. The Tyrant may be one of the more survivable models the Nids had, hell it was the most, and one of the most damaging as well. Now, Nids have access to a myriad of cheaper ground MCs, as well as having other models balanced more appropriately. I don't mind if the Flyrant can dish out damage, but when they can be spammed and dish out damage while being ridiculously durable thanks to being a T6 FMC with a 3+, that is what hurts. I don't mind the damage out put of a Dakkafex, because being a ground MC the Dakkafex can be countered and killed. Its the durability of the Flyrant that causes lots of issues and why spamming them to overwhelm your opponents ability to deal Skyfire damage is IMO the most problematic, not that they have good damage output for cost.

I think a lot of the flyrant's perceived durability comes from lots of armies just not taking any form of anti-air anymore. In all of the more recent batreps I've seen that have flyrants in them, the other army never has any form of anti-air. I also rarely see anyone take things like Stormravens that cost the same number of points, and should be able to take out a flyrant (without 2+ cover) on the turn they arrive. Also things like Onager Dunecrawlers taken in a group of three, two of them with the icarus array should be able to handle flyrants pretty easily, though again I haven't seen any batreps with this combination around yet.

I agree somewhat. A big problem is many armies did not have any form of cost effctive AA. Even a Quadgun at BS4 was only .8Wounds/Turn against a Flyrant. To over the course of a game it would kill 1, what about the other 4? Well, just how much AA would it take. With a 3+ it would take 27 S7 AP4 Skyfire Missiles. Now a Quadgun does 2.4 Wounds, 1.2 if the Flyrant Jinks. Now it takes 9 BS4 S7 AP4 Skyfire Missiles to kill a Flyrant, 18 BS4 shots if the Flyrant Jinks. AA now has a reasonable chance to hurt a Flyrant or make it Jink. A Jinking Flyrant really does take down its very good, durable, and mobile firepower quite well.

As it stood, no army could really field enough AA to take out more than one for two Flyrants. And the cost of fielding that much AA nuetered them against other armies.

The Hive Tyrant wasn't very durable on the ground, but in the air it was one of the more durable models in the game, and it had great firepower and was a Psyker.

And its not like a Nids player won't target the AA that can hurt Flyrants. The lack of AA in most armies was a sing of how horribly overcosted or underperforming AA was. Who fields Flakk missiles when most FMCs havea 4+AS? Etc.


Triple Flyrants may not have at BAO, but when these Errata are factored in likely all of those competetiive lists would either not have been possible or would have costed signicantly more, or had their capabilities decreased. In that environment, where everything else at the top comes down, unmodified Flyrants jump up as kind of the hill. Tripple Flyrants may not have stomped the BAO, but against Errated armies they will be problematic. AT 4+ AS, they will still be a very good unit, but signicantly more balanced. Not to mention the rest of the Nid codex got better to support them so its not Codex: Flyrant.

 Zagman wrote:

I agree somewhat. A big problem is many armies did not have any form of cost effctive AA. Even a Quadgun at BS4 was only .8Wounds/Turn against a Flyrant. To over the course of a game it would kill 1, what about the other 4? Well, just how much AA would it take. With a 3+ it would take 27 S7 AP4 Skyfire Missiles. Now a Quadgun does 2.4 Wounds, 1.2 if the Flyrant Jinks. Now it takes 9 BS4 S7 AP4 Skyfire Missiles to kill a Flyrant, 18 BS4 shots if the Flyrant Jinks. AA now has a reasonable chance to hurt a Flyrant or make it Jink. A Jinking Flyrant really does take down its very good, durable, and mobile firepower quite well.

As it stood, no army could really field enough AA to take out more than one for two Flyrants. And the cost of fielding that much AA nuetered them against other armies.

The Hive Tyrant wasn't very durable on the ground, but in the air it was one of the more durable models in the game, and it had great firepower and was a Psyker.

And its not like a Nids player won't target the AA that can hurt Flyrants. The lack of AA in most armies was a sing of how horribly overcosted or underperforming AA was. Who fields Flakk missiles when most FMCs havea 4+AS? Etc.

There's also a few more things to consider though, as hammer and anvil can put a pretty big gap between the 18" range flyrant and the AA that it wants to get at. I completely agree that lots of armies lack adequate AA for things like triple/penta flyrants, cron air, buffed up daemon princes etc. Even nids lack adequate AA if someone decides to not take flyrant lists. But that 4+ armor save vs a dunecrawlers gatling rocket launcher that has Heavy 5, Skyfire, Ignores Cover, and S6 AP4 at 48" range seems pretty terrifying. That's before the dunecrawler shoots its other two weapons. And the dunecrawler costs 125 points...

Edit- Still working on through reading through all the other Errata that you've done Zag, so if I say something derpy or complain about something that's already fixed let me know haha
Edit2 - Just realized after re-reading the BRB errata that all armies would have access to all psychic schools, which also would color my opinion of flyrant durability (I don't think anyone wants to go back to the old iron arm insanely durable flyrants)

A few thoughts from me on the Orks, some opinions and some questions:

- Flash Gitz really need to be out of the Heavy Support slot. I think Elites would be better for them by far. As it is, even with the changes, I couldn't see myself taking them over mek guns or lootas

- I saw that you addressed the cybork body malarky, but I'm wondering what you think about stikkbomb chukkas? As it is, every unit that could go in a transport with that upgrade already has assault grenades...

- It's a small thing, but it always irked me that you couldn't take shootas instead of choppa/slugga on kommandos. Considering their frequent role in my games as cover/objective campers, or outflanking harassers, shootas would be a big boon to the unit, and to me it feels even a bit more thematic (they'z actin more like the beakies, roit?)

Aside from that, I quite like the new mob rule, and most of these rebalancings are pretty alright. Sad to see the bikers get a price hike though...

Cytharai wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

I agree somewhat. A big problem is many armies did not have any form of cost effctive AA. Even a Quadgun at BS4 was only .8Wounds/Turn against a Flyrant. To over the course of a game it would kill 1, what about the other 4? Well, just how much AA would it take. With a 3+ it would take 27 S7 AP4 Skyfire Missiles. Now a Quadgun does 2.4 Wounds, 1.2 if the Flyrant Jinks. Now it takes 9 BS4 S7 AP4 Skyfire Missiles to kill a Flyrant, 18 BS4 shots if the Flyrant Jinks. AA now has a reasonable chance to hurt a Flyrant or make it Jink. A Jinking Flyrant really does take down its very good, durable, and mobile firepower quite well.

As it stood, no army could really field enough AA to take out more than one for two Flyrants. And the cost of fielding that much AA nuetered them against other armies.

The Hive Tyrant wasn't very durable on the ground, but in the air it was one of the more durable models in the game, and it had great firepower and was a Psyker.

And its not like a Nids player won't target the AA that can hurt Flyrants. The lack of AA in most armies was a sing of how horribly overcosted or underperforming AA was. Who fields Flakk missiles when most FMCs havea 4+AS? Etc.

There's also a few more things to consider though, as hammer and anvil can put a pretty big gap between the 18" range flyrant and the AA that it wants to get at. I completely agree that lots of armies lack adequate AA for things like triple/penta flyrants, cron air, buffed up daemon princes etc. Even nids lack adequate AA if someone decides to not take flyrant lists. But that 4+ armor save vs a dunecrawlers gatling rocket launcher that has Heavy 5, Skyfire, Ignores Cover, and S6 AP4 at 48" range seems pretty terrifying. That's before the dunecrawler shoots its other two weapons. And the dunecrawler costs 125 points...

Edit- Still working on through reading through all the other Errata that you've done Zag, so if I say something derpy or complain about something that's already fixed let me know haha
Edit2 - Just realized after re-reading the BRB errata that all armies would have access to all psychic schools, which also would color my opinion of flyrant durability (I don't think anyone wants to go back to the old iron arm insanely durable flyrants)

That unit sounds nasty. I haven't gottena chance to look at the AdMech stuff too much yet and haven't seen them on the table either. But, looking at the Dunecrawler Icarus weapons profiles Heavy 5 is a bit much. But, as it snap shots against anything that is not a Flyer, FMC, and against AV12 Flyers it is virtually worthless with Snap Shot. Honestly, looking at their other options I can't really see that exactly loadout being picked unless the person was tailoring their list to fight Nids. Each Dunecrawler averages 1.6 wounds per turn, meaning even if they did have that loadout, there is still a good chance the Tyranid Player has a chance to silence them. Are they a pretty hard counter yes, but a very specific one we aren't likely to see in the average list. They aren't as bad as Grav Cents vs Wratihknights even as far as hard counters go. Good thing the WalkRant is virtually immune to that unit! I'll look at them closer when I errata AdMech, but IMO that counter isn't likely to see that much table time unless its one unit as dedicated AA. And then the Nid player can just reserve its Flyrants and enter the baord in two of the three deployment types and put the hurt on them, soak one turn of casualties, then take them out the next. Heck a single Paroxysm handles the threat etc.

No worries, its a lot of matieral to go through. But assume, that the most competetivie build, units, and possiblly combinations from every Dex have been taken down a notch, two, or three.

Yes, Flyrants do have access to Biomancy, good thing they only have a 4+AS now. Granted for an army, the Powers of the Hive Mind are still pretty solid.

Jambles wrote:A few thoughts from me on the Orks, some opinions and some questions:

- Flash Gitz really need to be out of the Heavy Support slot. I think Elites would be better for them by far. As it is, even with the changes, I couldn't see myself taking them over mek guns or lootas

- I saw that you addressed the cybork body malarky, but I'm wondering what you think about stikkbomb chukkas? As it is, every unit that could go in a transport with that upgrade already has assault grenades...

- It's a small thing, but it always irked me that you couldn't take shootas instead of choppa/slugga on kommandos. Considering their frequent role in my games as cover/objective campers, or outflanking harassers, shootas would be a big boon to the unit, and to me it feels even a bit more thematic (they'z actin more like the beakies, roit?)

Aside from that, I quite like the new mob rule, and most of these rebalancings are pretty alright. Sad to see the bikers get a price hike though...

Thanks for the feedback. I didn't want to do too much FOC Slot changing if I could avoid it. I think for their cost Flash Gitz are much more balanced against the rest of the dex. I mean compared to Mek Guns that balancing worked both ways. Not striving for perfect, but I feel they are close at that price point.

Didn't think too much about Stikkbob Chukkas, I'll have to give them another once over. Main goal is not to rewrite too much, just alter things like points cost to achieve balance where possible so most things Errated aren't used past the list building stage. Some exception, Cyborg, Boss Pole, Mob Rule, Walker HP. But, I don't want to rewrite an entire codex, I want most reference material in the main book outside of list building to stand if possible.

I mean that would be a nice option for Kommandos, but I don't know if I really want to add that option for them. I've avoided changing what items units have access too where possible. I'm not terribly opposed to the idea, but in the grand scheme of balance it seems pretty minor.

Let me know what you feel I adjusted too far, or not enough. Ideally start from most important to least important. Even addressing the 10% too good units and 10% too bad units accross the board would have a major balancing effect.

I'm pretty sure the Icarus array is the most common loadout for the dunecrawlers at the moment, at the moment it serves as the only anti air you need for the army (48" range for all of its guns). It also has enough dakka to not particularly be worried about skyfire. Each one puts out 8 shots that are at least S6, most being AP4, one shot being AP2. Pop your BS +3 skitarii army-wide boost and you get to re-roll all the 6's since you're now BS 7. Not particularly amazing vs ground units, but for 375 points you basically never have to worry about air units causing you problems.

Not trying to derail on this particular example, it's just the one that sprang to mind. I'm also particularly interested in Nid tweaks cause I hate playing spam/mono build armies, but am wary to lose access to something that actually serves a purpose in its current form. And when not taken in numbers over 2 isn't particularly difficult to deal with.

Will see about playtesting some of these changes though

 Cytharai wrote:
I'm pretty sure the Icarus array is the most common loadout for the dunecrawlers at the moment, at the moment it serves as the only anti air you need for the army (48" range for all of its guns). It also has enough dakka to not particularly be worried about skyfire. Each one puts out 8 shots that are at least S6, most being AP4, one shot being AP2. Pop your BS +3 skitarii army-wide boost and you get to re-roll all the 6's since you're now BS 7. Not particularly amazing vs ground units, but for 375 points you basically never have to worry about air units causing you problems.

Not trying to derail on this particular example, it's just the one that sprang to mind. I'm also particularly interested in Nid tweaks cause I hate playing spam/mono build armies, but am wary to lose access to something that actually serves a purpose in its current form. And when not taken in numbers over 2 isn't particularly difficult to deal with.

Will see about playtesting some of these changes though

Thanks for pointing that out. Like I said, I am not that familiar with the AdMech stuff yet, and I will be balancing them at some point and looking for a lot of input when I do it. Without access to a Drop Pod taxi service I have a feeling that they'll won't require too much work.

They are amazing AA, but I doubt we'd be seeing that many of them in armies and it is one hard counter, one that I have yet to Errata, and by far the best AA unit for cost out of any dex that I am aware of. That one specific hard counter doesn't make Flyrants underpowered, or underdurable. And in regards to the vast majority of the units in the game and available AA for almost all armies a Flyrant with a 4+ is balanced. This may just be a specific example of a hard counter and not indicative of poor balance, like listing Grav Cents as proof that the Wraithknihgt isn't durable enough ie using a hard counter. We are also discounting strategies like deploying in Glide out of LoS, or DSing or entering from Reserves and attempting to Alphastrike their AA. There are options available, even FNP makes a huge difference, 48" isn't the whole table either, just close.

I'll definitely keep it in mind.

If you wouldn't mind, write a couple of lists using the Errata, just just rewrites of existing lists, try and build new ones and let me know what your thoughts are. Look at units you haven't considered, or different strategies, etc.

I appreciate what you are doing here. As GW continues to demonstrate hilarious levels of incompetence when writing rules it is a matter of time before we as players start accepting some fix along these lines. That being said, I have a few minor tweaks. Orks and Tyranids are my main armies, I play at a relatively high level with those armies, I am a prolific player with a wide variety of experience against a wide range of opponents.

*Note* I think most of what you are doing is generally good, and so if I don't mention something you can pretend I mentioned it and said "good job"

 Zagman wrote:
Big Mek
A Big Mek may replace his Slugga with one of the following... Kustom Force Field: 40pts
Mega Armour: 30pts
A Big Mek in Mega Armor may take one of the following.... Kustom Force Field: 40pts

The Teleport Blasta is overcosted. I think it should be 5 points. It is a 12" blast weapon on a BS:2 unit.

 Zagman wrote:
Burna Boyz: 70pts, 14pts/model

Its an improvement, but to run Burna Boyz they need to end up in a Battlewagon. Make the battlewagon a dedicated transport option for Burna Boyz. Also allowing them to either take a Nob or for a Mek to take a boss pole would make them much more usable.

 Zagman wrote:
Trukk
Ramshackle: Replace "Roll a D6 each time a Trukk suffers a penetrating hit. On the roll of a 5 or 6, the Trukk only suffers a glancing hit instead."

Not near enough. Ramshackle is stupid now, and only slightly less stupid as you've modified it. There are lots of approaches to make Ramshackle work. Here are a few ideas I have, I encourage you to pick one, and tweak it to work for you.
1) Ramshackle: If an "Explodes" result is rolled against a Trukk it is reduced to an "Imobilized" result.
2) Ramshackle: A Trukk has a 5++.
3) Ramshackle: When rolling on the Pen table, a Trukk reduces the roll by 2.
4) Ramshackle: Pentrating results against a Trukk instead count as 2 glances, and do not get a roll on the penn table.

 Zagman wrote:
Deffkoptas: 60pts, 30pts/model
May include up to three additional Deffkoptas…30 pts/model

With the changes you have made, there is basically no reason to ever consider taking a Deff Kopta. Right now they work as single unit objective scorers or as a quasi nob biker. By making the min squad size 2, you eliminate the 1st reason, and by fixing the points cost of nob bikers you eliminate the second reason. IF you want to make the min squad size 2, then you've got to fix their leadership. I would make them fearless. If you don't like that, make them leadership 9.

Basically, I think it should be your goal to not make a unit completely nonviable compared to other options in the codex, and your current changes to deffkoptas have that effect. I'm not entirely sure why you think Deffkoptas and Warbuggies need a squad size of 2, but if you make that change Deff Koptas become completely nonviable without some other offsetting change.

 Zagman wrote:
Heavy Support
Unit Composition: 2 Mek Gunz, 4 Gretchin
Mek Gunz: 40pts, 20pts/model
Any Mek Gun can replace its Kannon with one of the following... Zzap Gun: Free; Bubblechukka: Free; Smasha-Gun: Free; Lobba: 5pts; Kustom Mega-Kannon: 10pts; Traktor Kannon: 10pts;

That fixes one aspect of Mek Gunz. But doesn't address other problems with them.
Range: Most mek gunz are 36". They don't really have range to do what they are supposed to do (Long range fire support). Especially when you consider that Gretin are really, really short, and have to be able to draw line of sight to any target to shoot the gun. Upping the Range to 48" would fix this. Alternatively not requiring the Gretchin to draw line of sight would help with this as well, because you have more options for deployment.
Leadership: I almost always run a Mek in my Mek Gunz. I know, crazy right? The problem is I can't take a Mek as a part of a squad of Mek guns, I have to take it as a HQ selection, and that doubles the kill points of my Mek Gun unit. Allow mek gunz to take a Mek or Runt Herd, and you would fix this.

 Zagman wrote:
Flash Gitz: 90pts, 18pts/model

Flash Gitz should be Elites (WTF, GW?).
The biggest problem with flash gitz isn't their points cost, it is the fact that they don't have access to a 4+ armor save. If you reduce the price to 18 points, and give the ability to add 'eavy armor at 4 ppm that works. Alternatively, don't adjust their points, and give them 'eavy armor by default.

 Zagman wrote:
Instinctive Behavior

As long as this remains unchanged, many builds (Tyranid Hoard), and units (TFex) will remain pretty much unviable. It is a rule created to make you feel back for taking those units. I do not think this rule adds anything positive to the game in its current form, and I would either remove it, or rework it dramatically. If you want to rework it this is what I suggest:
Instinctive Behavior - Feed - Must attempt to charge the nearest non-vehicle target.
Instinctive Behavior - Lurk - Cannot charge.
Instinctive Behavior - Hunt - Must Shoot at the nearest target.

It is still a mess because of how poorly GW assigned those roles to units. (Crone is Feed? WTF? Lictor is Lurk? Why?)

 Zagman wrote:
Monsterous Bio-cannons

The Heavy Venom Cannon should be Heavy 3 instead of Blast.
I think you should be able to take two STC's or two HVC's. I don't know why you can't. The net result is a unit build that doesn't fill a clear role in an army.

 Zagman wrote:
Biomorphs

Acid Blood. Do away with the initiative test. 10 points.
Toxin Sacs. the Poison (4+) extends to Devourers

 Zagman wrote:
Rupture Cannon: Change To
Range: 48" Str: 10 AP:3 Heavy 3

Lets think this thing over. I'm not sure the AP is the problem here. I think of the Rupture Cannon as long ranged anti-mech. In its current form it is utterly useless. Nobody would ever take it unless they were trying to nerf themselves. However, tweaking the AP slightly doesn't fix it. Consider the
Barbed Heirodule's guns.
2 x Biocannon S10 AP3 assault: 6.
The Barbed Heirodule is able to provide significant anti-mech because it gets 12 shots. Even though it is only BS:3 like the TFex, it gets 6 times as many shots for a little over twice the price.
I think for 195 points the Rupture Cannon TFex should get this:
S10 AP:- Heavy 6.
There is certainly the argument for adding the AP:3, but I think it is more important to make sure the thing hits more than once per turn, and might even have the chance to pop a rhino.

 Zagman wrote:

Hive Guard Brood: 50pts, 50pt/model
The Unit may take any of the following biomorphs... Toxin Sacs: 2pts/model; Adrenal Glands: 2pts/mod

These guys need more work to make them viable. More BS, More AP, or more shots. Something. Also they should have tank hunter.

 Zagman wrote:
Trygon: 170pts; Trygon Prime: 200pts

Their gun should either be Haywire or plasma (S7 AP2). I get how you are trying to carve them out a role as a monolith / drop pod. But it costs so much to be basically a transport / deployment device. Giving it an ability to contribute to the game in other ways would make sense.

Tyrannocyte
Add "The Tyrannocyte cannot be used to Transport Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures."
May replace all five Deathspitters with one of the following... Five Barbed Stranglers: 50ts; Five Venom Cannons: 50pts

If you are going to make these changes you should also specify that it chooses targets like an MC not a vehicle. Closest unit from the base gets all 5 guns shot at it. Otherwise the BS and VC upgrades a horrifically over priced. I know that many people interpret the rules to be this already, but there are also many that don't.

Maleceptor

This is currently the worst unit available to any codex. The rules for it make it essentially worthless. It is killing itself roughly as fast as it is killing other things, and it is very pricey. The best way to use it is to never attempt its psychic power, and instead only walk it up the table like a zoenthrope with a worse save, and likely no warp blast. If that is what the thing does it should be costed accordingly (65 points). However, I think it would be fine to fix it's psychic power as well. Make it not a psychic power, but instead a normal shooting attack that can be shot 3 times at different targets with the precision shot rule. It would still probably need a points reduction, but at least then it has a purpose

Zoenthrope

Make it generate 2 warp charges per model (Like Seer council) even though it is a brotherhood of psychers. That way units of more than 1 make sense again.

Neurothrope

BS: 9.

ETA, oops, forgot this one:

Hive Tyrant: 120pts
May take any of the following.... Wings: 80pts
*A Hive Tyrant with Wings has its Armor Save reduced to a 4+.

I see what you are trying to do here, but that isn't going to work. There are way, way, way, way too much AP:4 in the game to give Winged Tyrants a 4+ save. I feel like unmodified Flying Hive tyrants are glass cannons already, but if you reduce their armor save it makes them basically unusable at that price point. I don't think you should touch the armor save. But if you feel like you have to, then you need to up it to 6 wounds. Honestly at its current price point it would make more sense for it to be 5 wounds to begin with.

The net result of these proposed changes is that you would never ever see another Flying Hive Tyrant, and much like the Deff Kopta, I think the focus should be on keeping units from becoming completely non-viable.

Can't speak for tyranids, but the above poster knows his gak with regards to Orks.

Adding battlewagons to burna boyz for example, or runtherds to mek guns goes perhaps slightly beyond the scope of your "minimal tweaks" philosophy Zagman, but it is very much the sort of changes that these units need to be worthwhile.

Removing runtherds from guns in particular is a change I was utterly bewildered by.

Wow, thanks for the feedback. It's late and I need sleep, but I'll definitely be looking at these tweaks in the near future and will respond in detail later.


One thing I've been looking at doing for Orks is adding Battlewagons as a Dedicated Transport option for "Elite" Ork units relieving some of the pressure on the Heavy Support slot.

Thoughts?

 Zagman wrote:
Wow, thanks for the feedback. It's late and I need sleep, but I'll definitely be looking at these tweaks in the near future and will respond in detail later.


One thing I've been looking at doing for Orks is adding Battlewagons as a Dedicated Transport option for "Elite" Ork units relieving some of the pressure on the Heavy Support slot.

Thoughts?

I think it is generally a good idea. Its already there for Nobz and MANZ. Burnas need it. Tankbustas could really be helped by it. It makes sense for basically all elites.

I don't know a lot about orks, but i'll try to reply to the nids comments.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Instinctive Behavior

As long as this remains unchanged, many builds (Tyranid Hoard), and units (TFex) will remain pretty much unviable. It is a rule created to make you feel back for taking those units. I do not think this rule adds anything positive to the game in its current form, and I would either remove it, or rework it dramatically. If you want to rework it this is what I suggest:
Instinctive Behavior - Feed - Must attempt to charge the nearest non-vehicle target.
Instinctive Behavior - Lurk - Cannot charge.
Instinctive Behavior - Hunt - Must Shoot at the nearest target.

It is still a mess because of how poorly GW assigned those roles to units. (Crone is Feed? WTF? Lictor is Lurk? Why?)

True, but with Primes massively reduced in cost and Shrikes/warrior slightly reduced then this is possible. Still the Lictors have no reason to be synapse dependent, neither gameplay nor fluff wise.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Monsterous Bio-cannons

The Heavy Venom Cannon should be Heavy 3 instead of Blast.
I think you should be able to take two STC's or two HVC's. I don't know why you can't. The net result is a unit build that doesn't fill a clear role in an army.

Agree, but it should be assault 3. It doesn't make any difference, but the nid codex has no heavy weapons. I like to respect codex traits.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Biomorphs

Acid Blood. Do away with the initiative test. 10 points.
Toxin Sacs. the Poison (4+) extends to Devourers

Acid blood needs some love i'm with you on that.
Toxin sacs are fine, Zag already reduced the cost.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Rupture Cannon: Change To
Range: 48" Str: 10 AP:3 Heavy 3

Lets think this thing over. I'm not sure the AP is the problem here. I think of the Rupture Cannon as long ranged anti-mech. In its current form it is utterly useless. Nobody would ever take it unless they were trying to nerf themselves. However, tweaking the AP slightly doesn't fix it. Consider the
Barbed Heirodule's guns.
2 x Biocannon S10 AP3 assault: 6.
The Barbed Heirodule is able to provide significant anti-mech because it gets 12 shots. Even though it is only BS:3 like the TFex, it gets 6 times as many shots for a little over twice the price.
I think for 195 points the Rupture Cannon TFex should get this:
S10 AP:- Heavy 6.
There is certainly the argument for adding the AP:3, but I think it is more important to make sure the thing hits more than once per turn, and might even have the chance to pop a rhino.

Zag increased the number of shots to 3 and reduced TFex cost. I'd make it 4 shots, but even with 3 it should be in a much better position.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

Hive Guard Brood: 50pts, 50pt/model
The Unit may take any of the following biomorphs... Toxin Sacs: 2pts/model; Adrenal Glands: 2pts/mod

These guys need more work to make them viable. More BS, More AP, or more shots. Something. Also they should have tank hunter.

BS4 T6 2W 3+ model that fires S8 AP4 Ignore cover ignore LOS is worth 50 points. Theyr big problem is being elites in a nid codex.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Trygon: 170pts; Trygon Prime: 200pts

Their gun should either be Haywire or plasma (S7 AP2). I get how you are trying to carve them out a role as a monolith / drop pod. But it costs so much to be basically a transport / deployment device. Giving it an ability to contribute to the game in other ways would make sense.

I don't agree. For 170 points you are getting a good package. Nice transport, some shooting and good melee. For 30 points more you get a synapse, a SiTW bubble in the middle of enemy army and more shooting.

tag8833 wrote:

Tyrannocyte
Add "The Tyrannocyte cannot be used to Transport Gargantuan Monstrous Creatures."
May replace all five Deathspitters with one of the following... Five Barbed Stranglers: 50ts; Five Venom Cannons: 50pts

If you are going to make these changes you should also specify that it chooses targets like an MC not a vehicle. Closest unit from the base gets all 5 guns shot at it. Otherwise the BS and VC upgrades a horrifically over priced. I know that many people interpret the rules to be this already, but there are also many that don't.

Would still be overpriced, honestly that's one change i don't understand.

tag8833 wrote:

Maleceptor

This is currently the worst unit available to any codex. The rules for it make it essentially worthless. It is killing itself roughly as fast as it is killing other things, and it is very pricey. The best way to use it is to never attempt its psychic power, and instead only walk it up the table like a zoenthrope with a worse save, and likely no warp blast. If that is what the thing does it should be costed accordingly (65 points). However, I think it would be fine to fix it's psychic power as well. Make it not a psychic power, but instead a normal shooting attack that can be shot 3 times at different targets with the precision shot rule. It would still probably need a points reduction, but at least then it has a purpose

What? We have something called maleceptor? Oh that's right, i think i remember something...

tag8833 wrote:

Zoenthrope

Make it generate 2 warp charges per model (Like Seer council) even though it is a brotherhood of psychers. That way units of more than 1 make sense again.

Not sure Eldar do that in the new codex.

tag8833 wrote:

Neurothrope

BS: 9.

Interesting bit. I like this (maybe 6 though, 9 seems a bit much).

tag8833 wrote:

ETA, oops, forgot this one:

Hive Tyrant: 120pts
May take any of the following.... Wings: 80pts
*A Hive Tyrant with Wings has its Armor Save reduced to a 4+.

I see what you are trying to do here, but that isn't going to work. There are way, way, way, way too much AP:4 in the game to give Winged Tyrants a 4+ save. I feel like unmodified Flying Hive tyrants are glass cannons already, but if you reduce their armor save it makes them basically unusable at that price point. I don't think you should touch the armor save. But if you feel like you have to, then you need to up it to 6 wounds. Honestly at its current price point it would make more sense for it to be 5 wounds to begin with.

The net result of these proposed changes is that you would never ever see another Flying Hive Tyrant, and much like the Deff Kopta, I think the focus should be on keeping units from becoming completely non-viable.

Spoletta wrote:
I don't know a lot about orks, but i'll try to reply to the nids comments.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Instinctive Behavior

.....

True, but with Primes massively reduced in cost and Shrikes/warrior slightly reduced then this is possible. Still the Lictors have no reason to be synapse dependent, neither gameplay nor fluff wise.

Even if I accept your premise that Tyranid units should generally need babysitters, and if we make the babysitters cheaper, a Tyranid army can be built that includes enough of them. The rule would still need a change. The leadership test is always forgotten in game, and having to roll on a table makes it stupidly unwieldy.

Spoletta wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Rupture Cannon: Change To
Range: 48" Str: 10 AP:3 Heavy 3

....

Zag increased the number of shots to 3 and reduced TFex cost. I'd make it 4 shots, but even with 3 it should be in a much better position.

So it is your position that a 195 point dedicated anti tank unit should generally take 3 turns to kill a rhino?

Spoletta wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

Hive Guard Brood: 50pts, 50pt/model
The Unit may take any of the following biomorphs... Toxin Sacs: 2pts/model; Adrenal Glands: 2pts/mod

These guys need more work to make them viable. More BS, More AP, or more shots. Something. Also they should have tank hunter.

BS4 T6 2W 3+ model that fires S8 AP4 Ignore cover ignore LOS is worth 50 points. Theyr big problem is being elites in a nid codex.

So basically you agree that the BS needs a boost and would prefer to boost the BS rather than the AP or number of shots? Sure. Fine. A boost to any of those things coupled with that points reduction is fine.

Spoletta wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Trygon: 170pts; Trygon Prime: 200pts

Their gun should either be Haywire or plasma (S7 AP2). I get how you are trying to carve them out a role as a monolith / drop pod. But it costs so much to be basically a transport / deployment device. Giving it an ability to contribute to the game in other ways would make sense.

I don't agree. For 170 points you are getting a good package. Nice transport, some shooting and good melee. For 30 points more you get a synapse, a SiTW bubble in the middle of enemy army and more shooting.

So I ask myself, "Would I ever take this unit outside a gimmick list" The answer is no. A close combat unit that deep strikes essentially only gets to contribute starting on turn 3, 4, or 5 depending how lucky you roll. Beyond that it isn't that good in CC. Certainly not able to make back its points except in the most generous of situations. Lets say you want to keep this guy as a CC unit that is massively overcosted. The best way to do that is make it so that he always arrives on turn 1.

Spoletta wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

Zoenthrope

Make it generate 2 warp charges per model (Like Seer council) even though it is a brotherhood of psychers. That way units of more than 1 make sense again.

Not sure Eldar do that in the new codex.

They do. It is called the Seer council.

Spoletta wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

ETA, oops, forgot this one:

Hive Tyrant: 120pts
May take any of the following.... Wings: 80pts
*A Hive Tyrant with Wings has its Armor Save reduced to a 4+.

I see what you are trying to do here, but that isn't going to work. There are way, way, way, way too much AP:4 in the game to give Winged Tyrants a 4+ save. I feel like unmodified Flying Hive tyrants are glass cannons already, but if you reduce their armor save it makes them basically unusable at that price point. I don't think you should touch the armor save. But if you feel like you have to, then you need to up it to 6 wounds. Honestly at its current price point it would make more sense for it to be 5 wounds to begin with.

The net result of these proposed changes is that you would never ever see another Flying Hive Tyrant, and much like the Deff Kopta, I think the focus should be on keeping units from becoming completely non-viable.

There is no doubt that something must be done to the Flyrant. Either it is 4+ save (like all other FMC) or it is R5 (like all other FMC). If you can make a tournament worthy list by just spamming as much flyrants as possible then there is something wrong.

A few things. 5 Flyrants lists isn't a terribly effective tournament build. I'm a competitive tournament player, and I have never taken more than 3 flyrants, and I have never placed below a 5 flyrant army. It is a stupid build. An unfun build. A rock paper scissors build akin to 5 imperial knights, but it is not a tourney winning build. I think the price hike for the Flyrant, and the price adjustment for the other HQ selections is a good solution. It is overcorrecting making it a 4+ armor save. If you want to weaken it, a better way would be to reduce it to T5. However, if you do that, and keep the price hikes you would rarely see them.

Another option if the goal is to fix army comp through codex FAQ's is to make the Wings a Relic that can only be taken once per army. But Since the flyrant makes up 95% of Tyranid anti-tank, that would mean that you need make the Rupture Cannon TFex, Hive Guard, and the Trygons a viable anti-tank unit. I don't think the end result of your changes should be that Tyranids lose 100% of the time to Rhino rush or Venom spam, or trukk rush or any other meched build.

ETA: Making HVC a Assault 3 gun would make Harpies a useful anti-tank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I want to chime in on the Venomthrope discussion as well. The Venom doesn't do what it is supposed to do. It isn't nearly survivable enough to provide support to the Tyranid army beyond deployment. That is why the Malanthropes is taken 100% of the time over the Venomthropes, and at events where Malanthropes aren't allowed Tyranids run exclusively flying circus / null deployment builds. My 1st thought would be to make Venmos T5 and give them a 3+ armor save, and possibly a small points reduction.

If you don't like that suggestion, you might consider making the Venom either an IC or a Character that can be joined to a unit. Think Ork Meks. If you could take the venom in a unit of Gants it would go a long way towards making is a viable unit, and therefore making Walking tyranids a viable build.

tag8833 wrote:
I appreciate what you are doing here. As GW continues to demonstrate hilarious levels of incompetence when writing rules it is a matter of time before we as players start accepting some fix along these lines. That being said, I have a few minor tweaks. Orks and Tyranids are my main armies, I play at a relatively high level with those armies, I am a prolific player with a wide variety of experience against a wide range of opponents.

*Note* I think most of what you are doing is generally good, and so if I don't mention something you can pretend I mentioned it and said "good job"

Thanks, considering you left the vast majority I'll assume you approve of most of the changes.

The Teleport Blasta is overcosted. I think it should be 5 points. It is a 12" blast weapon on a BS:2 unit.
I agree it is overcosted, but certainly not 5pts. Granted it isn't on a poor balaistic skill, but it is S8, AP2, and has ID on a 6. 10-15pts is what I was considering. Honestly just forgot to include it.

Its an improvement, but to run Burna Boyz they need to end up in a Battlewagon. Make the battlewagon a dedicated transport option for Burna Boyz. Also allowing them to either take a Nob or for a Mek to take a boss pole would make them much more usable.
I'm thinking all "Elite" Orks need to have access to Battle Wagons as dedicated Transports, relieve some of the pressure form the Heavy Support Slot.

Not near enough. Ramshackle is stupid now, and only slightly less stupid as you've modified it. There are lots of approaches to make Ramshackle work. Here are a few ideas I have, I encourage you to pick one, and tweak it to work for you.
1) Ramshackle: If an "Explodes" result is rolled against a Trukk it is reduced to an "Imobilized" result.
2) Ramshackle: A Trukk has a 5++.
3) Ramshackle: When rolling on the Pen table, a Trukk reduces the roll by 2.
4) Ramshackle: Pentrating results against a Trukk instead count as 2 glances, and do not get a roll on the penn table.
I simply wanted to make it better, but didn't want to write an entirely new rule. Maybe it should have just been a 4+. I kind of like the old flavorful Ramshacks, but I don't want to add another table and random rolling.

May include up to three additional Deffkoptas…30 pts/model

With the changes you have made, there is basically no reason to ever consider taking a Deff Kopta. Right now they work as single unit objective scorers or as a quasi nob biker. By making the min squad size 2, you eliminate the 1st reason, and by fixing the points cost of nob bikers you eliminate the second reason. IF you want to make the min squad size 2, then you've got to fix their leadership. I would make them fearless. If you don't like that, make them leadership 9.

Basically, I think it should be your goal to not make a unit completely nonviable compared to other options in the codex, and your current changes to deffkoptas have that effect. I'm not entirely sure why you think Deffkoptas and Warbuggies need a squad size of 2, but if you make that change Deff Koptas become completely nonviable without some other offsetting change.
I think we Disagree that the unit is completely nonviable. The goal was to reduce the number of units in game that are fielded at 40pts or less. 60pts for 4W at T5 with a 4+AS Scouting Jetbikes that averages 1.1 S8AP3 hits per turn and are usable as a harassment unit in assault is not bad. IMO the major problem is the Low LD which is a 58% chance to make, but they won't be under 25% so its a 58% chance to regroup. Snap firing doesn't hurt them terrible as they are only BS2 and Twinlinked most of the time. With Scout they usually won't flee off the board with a 3d6" if they do fail Morale. I don't see them as nonviable, convince me that they are.

That fixes one aspect of Mek Gunz. But doesn't address other problems with them.
Range: Most mek gunz are 36". They don't really have range to do what they are supposed to do (Long range fire support). Especially when you consider that Gretin are really, really short, and have to be able to draw line of sight to any target to shoot the gun. Upping the Range to 48" would fix this. Alternatively not requiring the Gretchin to draw line of sight would help with this as well, because you have more options for deployment.
Leadership: I almost always run a Mek in my Mek Gunz. I know, crazy right? The problem is I can't take a Mek as a part of a squad of Mek guns, I have to take it as a HQ selection, and that doubles the kill points of my Mek Gun unit. Allow mek gunz to take a Mek or Runt Herd, and you would fix this.
36" range is still effecting and controll a large portion of the board, even deployed along your board edge, even in Hammer and Anvil they can threaten all but the back 12" of your opponent's zone. Barrage limits the height of the Gretchin as being an issue for most of the guns. Its midly annoying but fixing that is beyond the scope of this Errata. Now, including a Runtherd for 5pts... that may just be doable... P.S. Taking a Mek as the free HQ slot does not double your kill points, its not an IC and joins the unit for all purposes so you've been playing that wrong. Only taking a Big Mek as a HQ slot would count as a KP. Also, check out my Purge the Alien Modificaiton that is in the main Errata, it makes KPs a bit different and much more balanced.

Flash Gitz should be Elites (WTF, GW?).
The biggest problem with flash gitz isn't their points cost, it is the fact that they don't have access to a 4+ armor save. If you reduce the price to 18 points, and give the ability to add 'eavy armor at 4 ppm that works. Alternatively, don't adjust their points, and give them 'eavy armor by default.
Maybe they should be Elites. I'm really trying to keep FOC swaps to a minimum and only if it makes an army function correctly. 18ppm is 18% lower than their original cost of 22ppm, its definitely closer. I could add the Heavy Armor upgrade for 4pts... that wouldn't be terrible.

As long as this remains unchanged, many builds (Tyranid Hoard), and units (TFex) will remain pretty much unviable. It is a rule created to make you feel back for taking those units. I do not think this rule adds anything positive to the game in its current form, and I would either remove it, or rework it dramatically. If you want to rework it this is what I suggest:
Instinctive Behavior - Feed - Must attempt to charge the nearest non-vehicle target.
Instinctive Behavior - Lurk - Cannot charge.
Instinctive Behavior - Hunt - Must Shoot at the nearest target.

It is still a mess because of how poorly GW assigned those roles to units. (Crone is Feed? WTF? Lictor is Lurk? Why?)
I agree that Iinstinctive Behavior isn't great and is annoying to use. But addressing this rule, when IMO, it isn't a major balance problem, is beyond the scope of what I'm trying to do. With better Synapse it should be better. I was considering making it simply...
Feed: Devour
Hunt: Prowl
Lurk: Seek Cover
Just eliminate the the randomly random table of random for each one and make those the default results. Thoughts?


The Heavy Venom Cannon should be Heavy 3 instead of Blast.
I think you should be able to take two STC's or two HVC's. I don't know why you can't. The net result is a unit build that doesn't fill a clear role in an army.
Completely agree, that restriction should be removed.

Acid Blood. Do away with the initiative test. 10 points. Agree
Toxin Sacs. the Poison (4+) extends to Devourers They got cheaper, so no.

Rupture Cannon
Lets think this thing over. I'm not sure the AP is the problem here. I think of the Rupture Cannon as long ranged anti-mech. In its current form it is utterly useless. Nobody would ever take it unless they were trying to nerf themselves. However, tweaking the AP slightly doesn't fix it. Consider the
Barbed Heirodule's guns.
2 x Biocannon S10 AP3 assault: 6.
The Barbed Heirodule is able to provide significant anti-mech because it gets 12 shots. Even though it is only BS:3 like the TFex, it gets 6 times as many shots for a little over twice the price.
I think for 195 points the Rupture Cannon TFex should get this:
S10 AP:- Heavy 6.
There is certainly the argument for adding the AP:3, but I think it is more important to make sure the thing hits more than once per turn, and might even have the chance to pop a rhino.
I already dropped the cost of the TFex, increased its number off shots on the Rupture Cannon by 50%, and dropped its AP to 3. It is now 161% as cost effective per shot and the shots are more effective. And it still 2+AS T6 6W MC that can take anything but a dedicated CC unit in assault.Maybe the upgrade can drop in cost by 10pts, but IMO thats about it.

The Barbed Heirodule is an absolute monster, 12 S10 AP3 Shots is kind of crazy, good thing it on a 565pt? model. For comparison the BH is 47pts/shot while the TFex is now 65pts/shot. 6 Shots at two different targets vs 3 shots at three different targets. And that is 6W at T8 with FNP at a 3+ vs 18W at T6 with a 2+. I'm thinking those aren't terrible comparisons.

Hive Guard
These guys need more work to make them viable. More BS, More AP, or more shots. Something. Also they should have tank hunter.
50pts for 2 S8 shots that don't need line of sight and ignore cover on a durable T6 platform isn't bad. They are costed better than before so balance is better. Their biggest issue is being elite.

Trygon
Their gun should either be Haywire or plasma (S7 AP2). I get how you are trying to carve them out a role as a monolith / drop pod. But it costs so much to be basically a transport / deployment device. Giving it an ability to contribute to the game in other ways would make sense.
170pts for a T6 W6 MC with Fleet and a shooting attack isn't bad at all. It got 20/30pts cheaper and its Subterranean Assault ability now works as it should. Significantly better with these changes.

Tyranocyte
If you are going to make these changes you should also specify that it chooses targets like an MC not a vehicle. Closest unit from the base gets all 5 guns shot at it. Otherwise the BS and VC upgrades a horrifically over priced. I know that many people interpret the rules to be this already, but there are also many that don't.

Yeah, they are a mess, I need to do some work for them. I've read them as can shoot all five at the closest target or it needs to be clarified. I'll probably revert the cost and clarify 45 degree line of sight for each weapon, like vehicle rules for a hull mounted weapon.

Maleceptor

This is currently the worst unit available to any codex. The rules for it make it essentially worthless. It is killing itself roughly as fast as it is killing other things, and it is very pricey. The best way to use it is to never attempt its psychic power, and instead only walk it up the table like a zoenthrope with a worse save, and likely no warp blast. If that is what the thing does it should be costed accordingly (65 points). However, I think it would be fine to fix it's psychic power as well. Make it not a psychic power, but instead a normal shooting attack that can be shot 3 times at different targets with the precision shot rule. It would still probably need a points reduction, but at least then it has a purpose

I'm not even familiar with thier rules... just familiarized myself. I don't quite understand what you are saying here. It is a 5W T6 MC with ML2, an invunerable save, a cool specialist power that it can use multiple times if it wishes, oh and it is a Synapse Creature. I can't tell if you are serious with your 65pt suggestion, it would make it essentially the best unit in the whole game. I mean I value Mastery levels on MCs at 35pts a piece, that is 70pts of its cost right there, esepcially as I opened up Psychic access. Its cost looks good for what it is and what it can do. Yeah, the 4+ hurts a bit, but it is far from the worst unit in any codex, not even close.

Zoenthrope

Make it generate 2 warp charges per model (Like Seer council) even though it is a brotherhood of psychers. That way units of more than 1 make sense again.
I intended for them to generate 1 WC per Zoanthrope like the new Seer Coucil does.

Neurothrope

BS: 9.
Not really familiar with it.

ETA, oops, forgot this one:

Hive Tyrant: 120pts
May take any of the following.... Wings: 80pts
*A Hive Tyrant with Wings has its Armor Save reduced to a 4+.

I see what you are trying to do here, but that isn't going to work. There are way, way, way, way too much AP:4 in the game to give Winged Tyrants a 4+ save. I feel like unmodified Flying Hive tyrants are glass cannons already, but if you reduce their armor save it makes them basically unusable at that price point. I don't think you should touch the armor save. But if you feel like you have to, then you need to up it to 6 wounds. Honestly at its current price point it would make more sense for it to be 5 wounds to begin with.

The net result of these proposed changes is that you would never ever see another Flying Hive Tyrant, and much like the Deff Kopta, I think the focus should be on keeping units from becoming completely non-viable.

I think you need to re-examine the situation. When I decreased the save for Winded DPs and Tyrants I also made it so FMCs can start the game Swooping. That is huge, they are still a very viable unit, hell, they will still be stand outs with increased Psychic access. Sure, they cost 10pts more and have a 4+ AS now and can always be seen while Swooping, but now they can start the game in Swooping mode, so they do not risk being Alphastriked before getting airborne and they have a much wider Psychic access. Considering they were one of the better units int he game, some kind of net nerf was required, just like all the other standout units in the game got and its fair treatment compared to other FMCs.

 Zagman wrote:
Thanks, considering you left the vast majority I'll assume you approve of most of the changes.
Absolutely. good job overall.

The Teleport Blasta is overcosted. I think it should be 5 points. It is a 12" blast weapon on a BS:2 unit.
I agree it is overcosted, but certainly not 5pts. Granted it isn't on a poor balaistic skill, but it is S8, AP2, and has ID on a 6. 10-15pts is what I was considering. Honestly just forgot to include it.
My thinking was that the range makes it threatening to the user as well as a weapon that probably gets shot a total of once per game.

Not near enough. Ramshackle is stupid now, and only slightly less stupid as you've modified it. There are lots of approaches to make Ramshackle work. Here are a few ideas I have, I encourage you to pick one, and tweak it to work for you.
1) Ramshackle: If an "Explodes" result is rolled against a Trukk it is reduced to an "Imobilized" result.
2) Ramshackle: A Trukk has a 5++.
3) Ramshackle: When rolling on the Pen table, a Trukk reduces the roll by 2.
4) Ramshackle: Pentrating results against a Trukk instead count as 2 glances, and do not get a roll on the penn table.
I simply wanted to make it better, but didn't want to write an entirely new rule. Maybe it should have just been a 4+. I kind of like the old flavorful Ramshacks, but I don't want to add another table and random rolling.
I would make it a 2+ if I wanted to solve it that way.

May include up to three additional Deffkoptas…30 pts/model

With the changes you have made, there is basically no reason to ever consider taking a Deff Kopta. Right now they work as single unit objective scorers or as a quasi nob biker. By making the min squad size 2, you eliminate the 1st reason, and by fixing the points cost of nob bikers you eliminate the second reason. IF you want to make the min squad size 2, then you've got to fix their leadership. I would make them fearless. If you don't like that, make them leadership 9.

Basically, I think it should be your goal to not make a unit completely nonviable compared to other options in the codex, and your current changes to deffkoptas have that effect. I'm not entirely sure why you think Deffkoptas and Warbuggies need a squad size of 2, but if you make that change Deff Koptas become completely nonviable without some other offsetting change.
I think we Disagree that the unit is completely nonviable. The goal was to reduce the number of units in game that are fielded at 40pts or less. 60pts for 4W at T5 with a 4+AS Scouting Jetbikes that averages 1.1 S8AP3 hits per turn and are usable as a harassment unit in assault is not bad. IMO the major problem is the Low LD which is a 58% chance to make, but they won't be under 25% so its a 58% chance to regroup. Snap firing doesn't hurt them terrible as they are only BS2 and Twinlinked most of the time. With Scout they usually won't flee off the board with a 3d6" if they do fail Morale. I don't see them as nonviable, convince me that they are.
The Deffkopta is marginally overcosted to begin with. 1 Twin Linked BS:2 shot. Compare that to what 30 points of Tau gets you, or 30 points of Eldar, or 30 points of most other armies. Even 30 points of Lootas or Flashgitz get you significantly more firepower, and 30 points worth of Warbikers isn't even close. It isn't a viable unit as a damage doing unit at its current price point. Therefore, you would never ever see it in an Ork army except for 1 thing. It is fast, and can hold an objective. So you want to essentially double the points for holding an objective. What you've done is made the price of a min squad of deff koptas the same as a min squad of Warbikers. Warbikers are better for those points, and they are better as the squad grows as well because they can take a character.



That fixes one aspect of Mek Gunz. But doesn't address other problems with them.
Range: Most mek gunz are 36". They don't really have range to do what they are supposed to do (Long range fire support). Especially when you consider that Gretin are really, really short, and have to be able to draw line of sight to any target to shoot the gun. Upping the Range to 48" would fix this. Alternatively not requiring the Gretchin to draw line of sight would help with this as well, because you have more options for deployment.
Leadership: I almost always run a Mek in my Mek Gunz. I know, crazy right? The problem is I can't take a Mek as a part of a squad of Mek guns, I have to take it as a HQ selection, and that doubles the kill points of my Mek Gun unit. Allow mek gunz to take a Mek or Runt Herd, and you would fix this.
36" range is still effecting and controll a large portion of the board, even deployed along your board edge, even in Hammer and Anvil they can threaten all but the back 12" of your opponent's zone. Barrage limits the height of the Gretchin as being an issue for most of the guns. Its midly annoying but fixing that is beyond the scope of this Errata. Now, including a Runtherd for 5pts... that may just be doable... P.S. Taking a Mek as the free HQ slot does not double your kill points, its not an IC and joins the unit for all purposes so you've been playing that wrong. Only taking a Big Mek as a HQ slot would count as a KP. Also, check out my Purge the Alien Modificaiton that is in the main Errata, it makes KPs a bit different and much more balanced.
Barrage is only available to lobbas, and they don't need changes because they work as is. Other mek guns, while it feels like 36" gives them a good enough range and board control, orks can't deploy them at the edge of their deployment edge because more than other armies orks are a close combat army and needs that space for their assault units. Also, depending on the Terrain Gretchin are generally going to fail to have line of sight for 36" in any direction. It is easy as an opponent to exploit the gretchin line of sight, and that is why most Mek guns aren't viable. Adding range allows you more flexibility to deploy further back in a position that isn't as restricted as far as LOS.




As long as this remains unchanged, many builds (Tyranid Hoard), and units (TFex) will remain pretty much unviable. It is a rule created to make you feel back for taking those units. I do not think this rule adds anything positive to the game in its current form, and I would either remove it, or rework it dramatically. If you want to rework it this is what I suggest:
Instinctive Behavior - Feed - Must attempt to charge the nearest non-vehicle target.
Instinctive Behavior - Lurk - Cannot charge.
Instinctive Behavior - Hunt - Must Shoot at the nearest target.

It is still a mess because of how poorly GW assigned those roles to units. (Crone is Feed? WTF? Lictor is Lurk? Why?)
I agree that Iinstinctive Behavior isn't great and is annoying to use. But addressing this rule, when IMO, it isn't a major balance problem, is beyond the scope of what I'm trying to do. With better Synapse it should be better. I was considering making it simply...
Feed: Devour
Hunt: Prowl
Lurk: Seek Cover
Just eliminate the the randomly random table of random for each one and make those the default results. Thoughts?
Its better than nothing. I think it is a balance problem because of how it invalidates build and units.


Rupture Cannon
Lets think this thing over. I'm not sure the AP is the problem here. I think of the Rupture Cannon as long ranged anti-mech. In its current form it is utterly useless. Nobody would ever take it unless they were trying to nerf themselves. However, tweaking the AP slightly doesn't fix it. Consider the
Barbed Heirodule's guns.
2 x Biocannon S10 AP3 assault: 6.
The Barbed Heirodule is able to provide significant anti-mech because it gets 12 shots. Even though it is only BS:3 like the TFex, it gets 6 times as many shots for a little over twice the price.
I think for 195 points the Rupture Cannon TFex should get this:
S10 AP:- Heavy 6.
There is certainly the argument for adding the AP:3, but I think it is more important to make sure the thing hits more than once per turn, and might even have the chance to pop a rhino.
I already dropped the cost of the TFex, increased its number off shots on the Rupture Cannon by 50%, and dropped its AP to 3. It is now 161% as cost effective per shot and the shots are more effective. And it still 2+AS T6 6W MC that can take anything but a dedicated CC unit in assault.Maybe the upgrade can drop in cost by 10pts, but IMO thats about it.

The Barbed Heirodule is an absolute monster, 12 S10 AP3 Shots is kind of crazy, good thing it on a 565pt? model. For comparison the BH is 47pts/shot while the TFex is now 65pts/shot. 6 Shots at two different targets vs 3 shots at three different targets. And that is 6W at T8 with FNP at a 3+ vs 18W at T6 with a 2+. I'm thinking those aren't terrible comparisons.
The flaw in your logic is that assume that a rupture cannon TFex was in the neighborhood of correctly costed to begin with. It wasn't even close. It wouldn't have made sense to take a Rupture cannon if it was free before.

The TFex is a big lunk of an MC. It is slow (BH is fast). It has low damage output in CC (BH has high). It needs a baby sitter, or to hide in terrain because of instinctive behavior (BH doesn't). It has low BS (BH makes up for this in number of shots). The army has no ability to buff it except for giving it cover saves, and theoretically FNP (BH get this by default). Because of all of these things, it was absurdly costed before, and your changes aren't near enough to make anyone include it in an army unless they are looking to nerf themselves.

You are a Tau player. Ask yourself this, would I Include a Rupture cannon Tfex in my Tau lists?



Hive Guard
These guys need more work to make them viable. More BS, More AP, or more shots. Something. Also they should have tank hunter.
50pts for 2 S8 shots that don't need line of sight and ignore cover on a durable T6 platform isn't bad. They are costed better than before so balance is better. Their biggest issue is being elite.
Definitely better than before. Still not good. What role does this unit fill? Anti-Tank? 3 of them can't kill a rhino. They are below average at anti-tank, and terrible at most other things. Not enough quantity or quality. Got to improve one.
Same question as the Rupture Cannon Tfex. Is there another army that would consider taking this unit?


Trygon
Their gun should either be Haywire or plasma (S7 AP2). I get how you are trying to carve them out a role as a monolith / drop pod. But it costs so much to be basically a transport / deployment device. Giving it an ability to contribute to the game in other ways would make sense.
170pts for a T6 W6 MC with Fleet and a shooting attack isn't bad at all. It got 20/30pts cheaper and its Subterranean Assault ability now works as it should. Significantly better with these changes.
Better but not good. I think you give a much higher respect to a S6 T6 MC with a 3+ armor than it is worth. It loses wounds at twice the speed of a Riptide. So a 6 wound Trygon is equivalent to a 3 wound riptide as far as survivability. It is slightly better in CC, but because it Lacks an Invul, it isn't much better, and the shooting profile is pitiful.

Maleceptor

This is currently the worst unit available to any codex. The rules for it make it essentially worthless. It is killing itself roughly as fast as it is killing other things, and it is very pricey. The best way to use it is to never attempt its psychic power, and instead only walk it up the table like a zoenthrope with a worse save, and likely no warp blast. If that is what the thing does it should be costed accordingly (65 points). However, I think it would be fine to fix it's psychic power as well. Make it not a psychic power, but instead a normal shooting attack that can be shot 3 times at different targets with the precision shot rule. It would still probably need a points reduction, but at least then it has a purpose
I'm not even familiar with thier rules... just familiarized myself. I don't quite understand what you are saying here. It is a 5W T6 MC with ML2, an invunerable save, a cool specialist power that it can use multiple times if it wishes, oh and it is a Synapse Creature. I can't tell if you are serious with your 65pt suggestion, it would make it essentially the best unit in the whole game. I mean I value Mastery levels on MCs at 35pts a piece, that is 70pts of its cost right there, esepcially as I opened up Psychic access. Its cost looks good for what it is and what it can do. Yeah, the 4+ hurts a bit, but it is far from the worst unit in any codex, not even close.
For every hull point it does to a vehicle, it takes 0.44 wounds from perils, and that's assuming you are willing to let it eat all of your warp charges. It has a 4+ armor save. It is as survivable as a 1.6 wound riptide. It is worse in CC than a Riptide. It does have 2 ML, but it only gets to roll for one power, and that power has to come off of the Tyranid psychic Tree. I arrived at 65 by starting at a Zoenthrope. Zoenthrope has same mastry level, similar survivability, Not as good in CC, but it has a better psychic power, and a 3+ invul. I figured it is 15 points better than a Zoenthrope. It does have synapse, and I guess that bring some value so 75 points.

I'm not sure where you get this Idea that a S6 T6 5W MC with WS:3 is good. Tac Marines will Krak Grenade it to death in CC. Lots of things can kill it in shooting. Where are the other similar MC's that you see on the tabletop? How well do they do?

Zoenthrope

Make it generate 2 warp charges per model (Like Seer council) even though it is a brotherhood of psychers. That way units of more than 1 make sense again.
I intended for them to generate 1 WC per Zoanthrope like the new Seer Coucil does.
Fair as long as a solo one still gets 2.

Neurothrope

BS: 9.
Not really familiar with it.
Its a 75 point zoenthrope that has psychic Scream. You've got to take at least 3 zoeys to upgrade one to a neurothrope. The problem is the psychic scream is meant to generate warp charges for the Warp Blast, but it doesn't work in practice because there are so many points of failure. Giving it a BS of 9 eliminates one of the many points of failure, and also makes it marginally more effective at Warp Lance.


ETA, oops, forgot this one:

Hive Tyrant: 120pts
May take any of the following.... Wings: 80pts
*A Hive Tyrant with Wings has its Armor Save reduced to a 4+.

I see what you are trying to do here, but that isn't going to work. There are way, way, way, way too much AP:4 in the game to give Winged Tyrants a 4+ save. I feel like unmodified Flying Hive tyrants are glass cannons already, but if you reduce their armor save it makes them basically unusable at that price point. I don't think you should touch the armor save. But if you feel like you have to, then you need to up it to 6 wounds. Honestly at its current price point it would make more sense for it to be 5 wounds to begin with.

The net result of these proposed changes is that you would never ever see another Flying Hive Tyrant, and much like the Deff Kopta, I think the focus should be on keeping units from becoming completely non-viable.

I think you need to re-examine the situation. When I decreased the save for Winded DPs and Tyrants I also made it so FMCs can start the game Swooping. That is huge, they are still a very viable unit, hell, they will still be stand outs with increased Psychic access. Sure, they cost 10pts more and have a 4+ AS now and can always be seen while Swooping, but now they can start the game in Swooping mode, so they do not risk being Alphastriked before getting airborne and they have a much wider Psychic access. Considering they were one of the better units int he game, some kind of net nerf was required, just like all the other standout units in the game got and its fair treatment compared to other FMCs.
The problem with this is that so much in the game is AP4, and the thing only has 4 wounds. That means every time someone says "I'm going to shoot a heavy bolter at you, do you want to jink?", the answer basically becomes "yes." and that lowers the damage output significantly, and completely eliminates the ability to use the thorax flamer which is one of the Tyranid's primary anti-tank weapons. So you've created an overcosted glass cannon that has limited damage output. I just don't see why I would even include it in an army rather than a Crone which would then be more survivable (5 wounds), and is roughly 60% the points, so I can take more of them, and have a chance to actually use their flame template. I completely understand the urge to nerf the Flyrant. But you nerfed it into oblivion, it no longer has a role to fill in the army unless you are trying to nerf yourself.

Here is an interesting question. If we did a 1 on 1 between a HYMP broadside without skyfire and a Dakkaflyrant using your proposed FAQ for both. Who would win? Because the the Broadside is less than 1/2 of the points. Does that seem right? Try it again with a min squad of Space marine devastators with heavy bolters. Does that seem right?

I'll probably drop the Teleport Blasta to 10pts.

I'll adjust Ramshakle to a 4+

I disagree the for 30pts the Deffkopta is marginally overcosted. It gives you .55 S8 AP3 hits per turn, T5, 2W, 4+AS, Jetbike, and Scout.
Eldar gives me 27[ts for a Scattbike..... 2.7 S5 AP6 hits per turn, T4, 1W, 4+AS, EJB, LD8
Tau give me 22pts for a Naked Crisis Suit or 37pts for 1 S4 AP4 Hit per turn, T4, 2W, 3+AS, Jetpack, LD8 Or

60pts for 2x Deffkoptas gives my 1.1 S8 AP3 htis per turn, T5, 4Ws, 4+AS, Jetbike and Scout
52pts for 1 Dual MP Crisis gives 2 S7 AP4 hits per turn, T4, 2W, 3+AS, Jetpack, LD8

Sure, 30pts gives you 2x Lootas, so 4 S7 AP4 Shots gives 1.33 S7 AP4 Hits, T4, 2W, 6+AS, Infantry with a Heavy weapon.

3 Warbikers vs 2 Deffkoptas
3 Warbikers have T5 3W 4+AS LD7 5 hits at S5AP5 at 18" range.
2 Deffkoptas ahve T5 4W 4+AS LD7 3.33 hits at S5AP5 at 36" range or 1.1 hits at S8AP3 at 24" range. And they Scout.
Warbikers have to test on LD sooner and are less durable, although they are more durable against S10. Warbikers bring more CC to the table and the ability to get a 3+cover if they don't shoot.

Where Warbikers are much better is their ability to take a Character and attach an IC. I'm not really seeing how overcosted Deffkoptas are. Also, if the only viable strategy for a unit is to be taken at minimum its not a well balanced unit IMO.

Did you not see that I'm looking to add a Runtherd? I agreed with this point and it is a core rules issue I'm not willing to address.

Instinctive Behavior doesn't invalidate builds its been a big part of Nids for a long time, I may have loathed it in 5th with my Nids and build armies that effectively ignored it, but still, it sucks.

I did improve the TFex with Rupture Cannon by 61%(not including AP improvement) in effectiveness. That is a huge improvement. Your comparison ignores that it is three separate units for almost the same cost. It is still a durable MC with solid CC ability and Ranged S10, which is quite rare in and of itself.
Yes, I am a Tau player right now, I have been a Nids player, a Daemons Player, an Eldar player, a Blood Angels Player, a Grey Knights player, a Necron Player, etc... Against a lot of firepower or with a 5+ cover save the TFex is more durable than a Riptide, less mobile, fearless(huge), greatly improved CC, and ranged S10. Compared to my new IA Riptide it costs less, has one fewer shots, no blast options, but is S10, somewhat shorter range, doesn't kill itself, is fearless, and competent in CC. With a 5+ cover save it is significantly more durable than a Riptide and is not vulnerable to being swept. I'd definitely swap one of my Tides to put a TFex in my backfield, itd definitely protect my tides and give me some ranged 10 which would be nice to have. And its certainly better at wounding a Wratihkngiht at range than the Riptides are or it'd be really nice to scare those T5 DPs when the touchdown getting ready to sweep my backfield. Of course I wouldn't have access to Synapse which I overlooked in this example. By the way, an IA Riptide also takes 3 turns to kill a Rhino(1.33) HP/Turn at range while the TFex needs 2(1.5HP/turn).

Heavy 2 S8 AP4 Ignores Cover and Line of Sight. That is pretty big. And 200pts of Hive Guard deal 2.66 HP/turn to a Rhino meaning they are more poitns effective at popping light AV than a Riptides and TFexes. And they can do it without line of sight or cover reducing their effectiveness. That is also 8 T6 wounds too, but its max 3 per squad so 150pts deals only 2HP/Turn what an HBCTide that risked and succeeded on its Nova does/turn.

I know what a T6 3+ MC is worth, obviously better than GW as I basically gave them all a points drop of ~20+pts. It only wounds at twice the speed against AP4+, a lot faster with AP3, and the same against Ap3, Good thing it has 6 wounds, can get cover to equal resiliancy against low AP, and doesn't actively try and kill itself like an HBCtide. And it is cheaper. And has quite a few of S5 shots too and very good CC against anything that isn't a top tier melee unit.

So T6 5W 4+/5++ is similar survivability compared to T4 2W 3++. Run the math on that one. S4 AP5 need 12 hits to kill a Zoanthrope, 60 hits to kill the Malanthrope. S8AP3 3 hits to kill a Zoanthrope, 7.5 to kill a Malanthrope. Your Riptide comparison is extremly biased and doesn't factor in the wide range of weapons available. You seem to keep missing that all Psychers have access to all power trees, so that Malanthrope can get better powers. Its an MC in CC. Has a power that has many Niche uses,. 75pts is wildly low. IMO 185-195pts seems about right. It is far away from the worst unit in the game. Where is your .44 wounds from perils coming from every turn? Run the math on that one please. Tac marines would do ok against a Malantrhope. 10 of them deals 1.66 wounds/turn with Krak while the Malanthrop deals 1.24 back. The Malanthrope is not a dedicated CC unit, but doesn't fair that badly either.

Zoanthropes will generate 1WC per thrope.


Your Flyrant examples are all over the board. Firstly, you discount completely the Master Levels of the Hive Tyrant. And equalish points of HYMP 210pts deals ~3wounds to the Hive Tyrant if it doesn't Jink. This is actually a pretty hard counter. A Tyrant only deals 1.25 wounds/turn Back. But, this is a bad comparision and not a very far one.
Marine Devs with HBs deals only .66 wounds/turn if the Flyrant doesnt Jink. The Flyrant kills 2.5 back. Even two full Dev Squads isn't fairing very well and loses that matchup due to attrition. And of course the Flyrant is likley to be the first in range and strike first. Anymore virtulaly meaningless vaacuum comparision we need to do?
Your Crone comparison doesn't factor in the T6 of the Hive Tyrant. Or the MLs. This is the best comparison. Against S5 the flyrant is 150% as durable, against S6 133% as durable against S5 125% as durable compared to the Hive Crone having 125% as many wounds and vulnerable to S10 ID... Compared to the cost difference and damage difference, and Synapse, and Masterlevels these models are fairly balanced agaisnt each other.

You definitely responded to my feedback. Adding a runtherd to Mek guns, upping ramshackle, and fixing the telporta blasta are all good things. I'm not sure we will ever see Eye-to-Eye on some of the other things. I'm going to try to pitch different approaches that might get you where you want to go with your nerfs and buffs. In some cases I'm pitching multiple solutions with the idea that you would only pick one of them.

I wonder if some of our disagreement is based on the missions we run. Most events I go to run progressive missions based on objectives. I'm going to Texas Wargamescon in a couple weeks. They run ITC missions, and most events I attend run missions that progressive or more. That is bad for units like flyrants, and good for units like Riptides, and solo Deff Koptas. We also use Mysterious objectives which helps you kill flyrants quite a bit.


Flyrants.


Deff Koptas.


Meganobz.


Rupture Cannon TFex:


Hive Guard:


Maleceptor:


Trygon

I got to agree with the last one.
Trygons are fine in their revised form, but they really need for some reliability in the tunnel process.
I'd say that them auto entering turn 2 would make them good, fluffy (they come from underground, not from the sky, it's a much more manageable process), and with a definite role.
They would become a nid cool variant of a transport.

Also, Tag read the general errata related to these posts, you'll see that all psykers have access to all disciplines.
This may help the Malanthrope.

I would also like to hear your opinion on the tail biomorphs, what i suggested was:

Bone tails from 15 to 10
Thresher Scythe from 10 to 5 and replace rend with shred
Prehensile pincer from 10 to 5
Toxin spike gains ID on 6 and stays at 10

Since we are taking on the Malanthrope then i guess that it's also time for his venomous cousin. His roll is clear and he is efficient at it. He just needs a recosting. 125 maybe?

Spoletta wrote:
Also, Tag read the general errata related to these posts, you'll see that all psykers have access to all disciplines.
This may help the Malanthrope. Maleceptor

Oh, Geez. I read it, but missed that part, or didn't think it applied to Tyranids. Wowzer. That makes a huge difference. Part of the costing of Tyranids psychers is based on their psychic power tree having many powers that are basically useless, and others like Warp Lance that are good, but require too many warp charges. Zoeys probably need to be a brood of 2 min, or have a points boost of some sort. Otherwise armies will spam single zoeys. Flyrants... I don't know. They become wildly random. If they roll Iron Arm.... Precog... They will never roll again on the Tyranid tree. The melee flyrant will be back in a big way. This completely changes the flyrant debate. It changes it so fundamentally, that I don't think any of us can really understand the full ramifications. With the ability to roll on any psychic tree, I doubt we will ever see a dakkaflyrant again.

Spoletta wrote:
Bone tails from 15 to 10
Thresher Scythe from 10 to 5 and replace rend with shred
Prehensile pincer from 10 to 5
Toxin spike gains ID on 6 and stays at 10

I like your ideas here. However, the biggest problem with tails is that they aren't usable because they get forgotten, and swing at a different initiative, and add paperwork. I would rather see the Tail add +1 Attack, and some minor special rule. Bone Tails = +1 attack, and Tank Hunter. Thresher Scythe, +1 Attack, master crafted. Prehensile, -1 attack to a model in base. Toxin Spike: +1 Attack, Poison 6+ That last one doesn't work because of rerolls, but I'll think of something better. But then you could leave the points alone.

Spoletta wrote:
Since we are taking on the Malanthrope Maleceptor then i guess that it's also time for his venomous cousin. His roll is clear and he is efficient at it. He just needs a recosting. 125 maybe?

I'm not sure about the Toxicrine. If it weren't for that 4+ armor save, and his S of 5, I think he would be perfect the way he is. I generally agree that there is always a points cost that corresponds to any set of abilities, but the Toxicrine is really good against infantry and MC's, and so very, very bad against vehicles. So his points value would kind of depend on your opponent. I could see dropping him to 145 or 150, but I think 125 is too low. I rarely see the on the table. I don't own one myself, and I think these are related to the model being so awful, and untransportable, and a pain to play. I kinda think the rules are OK. My suggestion. Give him Flesh Hooks (assault Grenades), and then leave him alone. If we ever get a model for it that isn't 12" wide, I'll bet it will see table time.

tag8833 wrote:
You definitely responded to my feedback. Adding a runtherd to Mek guns, upping ramshackle, and fixing the telporta blasta are all good things. I'm not sure we will ever see Eye-to-Eye on some of the other things. I'm going to try to pitch different approaches that might get you where you want to go with your nerfs and buffs. In some cases I'm pitching multiple solutions with the idea that you would only pick one of them.

I wonder if some of our disagreement is based on the missions we run. Most events I go to run progressive missions based on objectives. I'm going to Texas Wargamescon in a couple weeks. They run ITC missions, and most events I attend run missions that progressive or more. That is bad for units like flyrants, and good for units like Riptides, and solo Deff Koptas. We also use Mysterious objectives which helps you kill flyrants quite a bit.

I've played with lots of different mission scenarios from BAO/ITC to a lot of NOVA in 7th. I think a bigger issue is games not finishing, stealing objectives is only reliable when you know the game is about to end due to time. I've won and lost games I shouldn't have because of it. It is a major problem and with 6th/7th's bloated and scaletasitc problems games are not finishing on times and tournaments are not reducing the points value to compensate.


Flyrants.

Spoiler:

You are right that the flyrant mainly gets owned by Tau, Sicarins, Knights, and quad guns. Heavy bolter marines become 3 times as effective against it, but it still isn't a great counter.

However, I still think you are barking up the wrong tree. The problem isn't the survivability of Flyrants. I took 3 to LVO. I lost all 3 in 3 of my 6 games. I even lost my warlord once to a perils followed by a roll of 1 and a failed leadership test. Over 6 games I lost a total of 12 flyrants, and 2 of my games I tabled my opponents by turn 4. They help you kill them via perils, grounding, and needing to land to score objectives. Mysterious objectives are rough for them, because units can often get skyfire.

Solution: Dropping their BS by 1 would be a better solution to nerf the flyrant than a lower armor save. That coupled with your points increase would make them pretty mediocre compared to other tyranid options.

You really need to read my general errata like I"ve pointed you at for multiple posts. Tyranids are not stuck on only the tyranid powers tree. This really changes things. And there was a major problem with the survivability of Flyrants outside of Alphastriking them when they were on the ground. Your antecedoatal evidence doesn't help much. T6 4W 3+AS Jink and a FMC with 2MLs to work with is huge. Mysterious Objectives are gak, and a worthless unnecessary and game slowing addition.

Deff Koptas.

Spoiler:

Still clueless why you think they need a nerf. I really think some gametime would clear this up for you. You keep mentioning that they scout. The main usage for this is a deff kopta deathstar, but you can do something similar with Zhardnark anyways. Deff Koptas are fairly fragile, and don't generally want to scout. Generally they want to outflank and jump on an objective. The biggest problem with them is their leadership value. You didn't like my suggestion of upping their leadership value.
Solution 1: For mob rule checks, they always get to take hits instead of run away, even if they have less than 10 models
Solution 2: You could give them free boss poles.

Scout is a useful ability, outflank is granted by Scout. Only every fielding a unit as a minimum of 1 is a problem, units should have more use. I've used examples showing DeffKoptas are fairly well balanced internally and externally. Viewing them as only an objective grabber and shoehorned into that singular role is a problem.

Meganobz.

Spoiler:

I know this one hasn't been address, but Meganobz would take a nerf from your mob rule changes. They have low leadership. They are pricey, and there are so many hard counters to them out there. I like your tweak to Ghaz, and that gives them a place, but it would be nice if you addressed their leadership problems a bit.
Solution: For mob rule checks, they always get to take hits instead of run away, even if they have less than 10 models

It would be a relatively minor nerf, one that can be rectified with a Bosspole. And with a Bosspole they are likely better, I don't really feel like running the math but I'm guessing you didn't think about the Bosspole. Rethink your stance on this one.

Rupture Cannon TFex:

Spoiler:

We've compared this to a riptide a few times. Next time we play I will gladly let you run as many 195 point 3 shot Rupture Cannon Tfexes in place of riptides as you would like. Lets take a look at the riptide and see if we can come up with a solution there:
Solution 1: They can upgrade their Stinger Salvo to a fleshborer hive in addition to a rupture cannon. This gives them an equivalent to SMS.
Solution 2: They can choose not to shoot and get a 4D6 run move.
Solution 3: Up the BS to 4.
Solution 4: Give the rupture cannon 3 modes. Assault 10 S7 AP-, Assault 3 S10, AP:3, and Assault 1 S9 AP:3 Large blast, ordinance.
Solution 5: In CC, the TFex has a 4++.
I'm not sure any of these make the TFex a viable alternative to the anti-tank of the Flyrant or Barbed Heirodule, and I feel like that is the main purpose of the Rupture cannon, anti-tank, but there might be some usage for it if you tweak it in one of those fashions. Also if you fix the Heavy Venom Cannon so that it is assault 3 rather than blast, maybe Harpies, and Carnifexes become a viable anti-tank option

161% capability for cost with a better AP. And the Riptides you keep using for comparison got worse. That is a massive improvement. Maybe its not perfect, but it is as far as I'm willing to go right now.

Hive Guard:

Spoiler:

In the previous codex they had a higher BS. That drop in BS hurt them quite a bit. It also hurt them that the amount of shooting in the game skyrocketed since that codex. Going back to the old codex power level feels too powerful for you so I offer the following.
Solution 1: They gain Melta. That means if they are within 12" they have a pretty reliable odd of taking a hull point off of a vehicle.
Solution 2: Drop their Toughness and points. When I run Hive guard the ignore LOS doesn't really matter, because they are basically always the least threatening part of my army. Nobody ever shoots at them until everything else is dead. So their survivability isn't terribly important. Make them T4 with a 4+, but only cost 35 points.
Solution 3: Give them some rule where hits can do additional damage. I suggest Tesla. Rolls to hit of 6 give you 2 more hits.
Solution 4: Extend their range to 48"

I already showed the math on how effective they are against light AV. They are 9% cheaper now, that is a solid improvement.

Maleceptor:

Spoiler:

One important note is that Tyranid Psychers can only roll on the Tyranid Psychic power tree.

I did the math on the maleceptor's power a long time ago. I misremembered it, and thought it was only a 44% chance to take a wound from perils for each hull point it is even worse.
Here is the math:
Using 5 dice, The Maleceptor requires 5 shots (psychic power casting attempts) to statistically take a hull point off of a vehicle, and that is 25 warp dice, and during the course of that shooting it has 65% chance of taking a wound from perils.
If you roll 4 dice instead of 5, it takes 6 shots to take a hull point off a vehicle, and only 24 warp dice, and during the course of that shooting it has a 53% chance of taking a wound.

Using 5 dice, It requires 2.5 shots to statistically kill a Necron Warrior (LD 10). 12.5 warp dice, and has a 33% chance of taking a wound.
If you roll 4 dice instead of 5, it takes 3 shots to statistically kill a Necron Warrior, and only 12 warp dice, and during the course of that shooting it has a 26% chance of taking a wound.

Solution: Let this unit roll on psychic powers other than the Tyranid Tree.

Again, I repeatedly asked you to read my general Errata and told you about psychic asses. I'm discounting your argument.

Trygon

Spoiler:

I can see a way to build a gimicky list around this guy the way you've altered him. It is not a tournament list, because it depends on a 3+ roll for reserves. My favorite solution would be to alter the shooting to bring it more in line with the fluff, but I have other ideas.
Solution #1: A Trygon gives you a reserve modified akin to the Autarch.
Solution #2: A Trygon always comes in on turn 2.
Solution #3: A Trygon can roll to come in starting turn 1.
Solution #4: On the turn a Trygon arrives from reserves, he has a 2+ armor save, or shrouded, or some other survivability buff

They Trygon has gotten significantly cheaper(11% for the Trygon and 13% for the Trygon Prime) and its special ability now functions correctly. That is already a huge improvement.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
I got to agree with the last one.
Trygons are fine in their revised form, but they really need for some reliability in the tunnel process.
I'd say that them auto entering turn 2 would make them good, fluffy (they come from underground, not from the sky, it's a much more manageable process), and with a definite role.
They would become a nid cool variant of a transport.

Also, Tag read the general errata related to these posts, you'll see that all psykers have access to all disciplines.
This may help the Malanthrope.

I would also like to hear your opinion on the tail biomorphs, what i suggested was:

Bone tails from 15 to 10
Thresher Scythe from 10 to 5 and replace rend with shred
Prehensile pincer from 10 to 5
Toxin spike gains ID on 6 and stays at 10

Since we are taking on the Malanthrope then i guess that it's also time for his venomous cousin. His roll is clear and he is efficient at it. He just needs a recosting. 125 maybe?

The Trygon has already been buffed massively and its special functions correctly. I've considered making it auto arrive Turn 2... but am not sure about it. IMO it has recieved enough balancing for our purposes but its not off the table.


I liked your repricing idea for the tails and am planning on it. I don't feel I should rewrite the rules for them, but the cost decrease is needed and I'm planning on doing it. Just haven't had the time to list it for every unit.

The Malanthrope... It was horribly undercosted. I already talked about it earlier and just need to make an entry. It will likely cost 115-125pts. Compared to the new Prime(85pts) it needs to be significantly more costly that it currently is. Or it should of had a 4+ AS, or some combination of the above. It simply was too durable for its cost and the massive buffs it brings an army compared to a Venomthrope.

Zag could you use non-blue text for replies. My eyes.... they burn

Oh and now that I remembered it, I was thinking of the torrent for pyrovores. Maybe make it torrent (6") like the FW riptide? Then it leaves acid spray as the go-to long range torrent.

 Cytharai wrote:
Zag could you use non-blue text for replies. My eyes.... they burn

Oh and now that I remembered it, I was thinking of the torrent for pyrovores. Maybe make it torrent (6") like the FW riptide? Then it leaves acid spray as the go-to long range torrent.

Sorry, maybe its my monitor or my eyes but I find it less harsh than a lot of other colors. I'll pick something else next time around.

Hmm.... The Pyrovores are a S4 AP5 Torrent, Acid Spray is a S6 AP4 Torrent. They kind of fulfill the same role, but the S6 and AP4 is pretty big and they are in different FOC locations... I don't know.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SD2Ymb2WnufJwVGX3iwW62N49FcmTWNPZlzirsVf_5s/edit?usp=sharing

Just for a bit easier viewing, points down are blue, points up are red

 Cytharai wrote:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1SD2Ymb2WnufJwVGX3iwW62N49FcmTWNPZlzirsVf_5s/edit?usp=sharing

Just for a bit easier viewing, points down are blue, points up are red

That definitely makes for some easier reading. Though I think you got the Biomorphs wrong, Regeneration is definitely not more expensive. Thanks!

 Zagman wrote:
That definitely makes for some easier reading. Though I think you got the Biomorphs wrong, Regeneration is definitely not more expensive. Thanks!

Yep derped on adrenal glands and regen color coding lol. Should be corrected now

Something on topic though, 50 points for barbed stranglers and venom cannons on tyrannocytes seems a bit pricy. 125 points for the pod gets it up to wave serpent price, or alternatively a biovore brood of 3. The 5 large blasts is pretty terrifying at first, but being able to negate it through unit positioning (since the pod can't choose its target) and the pod being relatively fragile makes it a pretty hefty investment for something that's going to get one or two turns of shooting.

 Zagman wrote:

Meganobz.

Spoiler:

I know this one hasn't been address, but Meganobz would take a nerf from your mob rule changes. They have low leadership. They are pricey, and there are so many hard counters to them out there. I like your tweak to Ghaz, and that gives them a place, but it would be nice if you addressed their leadership problems a bit.
Solution: For mob rule checks, they always get to take hits instead of run away, even if they have less than 10 models

It would be a relatively minor nerf, one that can be rectified with a Bosspole. And with a Bosspole they are likely better, I don't really feel like running the math but I'm guessing you didn't think about the Bosspole. Rethink your stance on this one.

Meganobz are a unit that is only valuable once it gets into assault. They are super slow lacking the ability to run, so they are always inside transports. Every time the transport is killed around them they must take a pinning test. Odds of Failing that pinning test is 41.66. I did account for the bosspole. Adding the bosspole to the unit means they can reroll that test. That means they have a 17.37% chance of becoming essentially irrelevant because any enemy within range when the vehicle popped has an opportunity to move out of range.

In addition they will fail a leadership and run away 17.37% generally after losing one model. A single failed leadership test will take them effectively out of the game. Keep in mind that the minimum investment in this unit is 155 points.

When you account for the number of times the transport get alpha struck, you have a unit that is hugely unreliable. Your "minor" nerf has made it somewhere between 17.37% and 34% less reliable. I wouldn't be surprised if the result is Meganobz only getting taken when accompanied by Ghaz in large point games. You mention a 9% price drop for Hive Guard making them effective even though they are still 33% less powerful than they were in the 5th edition Tyranid codex. A 17.37% nerf to MANZ still seems "Relatively minor"?

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:

Meganobz.

Spoiler:

I know this one hasn't been address, but Meganobz would take a nerf from your mob rule changes. They have low leadership. They are pricey, and there are so many hard counters to them out there. I like your tweak to Ghaz, and that gives them a place, but it would be nice if you addressed their leadership problems a bit.
Solution: For mob rule checks, they always get to take hits instead of run away, even if they have less than 10 models

It would be a relatively minor nerf, one that can be rectified with a Bosspole. And with a Bosspole they are likely better, I don't really feel like running the math but I'm guessing you didn't think about the Bosspole. Rethink your stance on this one.

Meganobz are a unit that is only valuable once it gets into assault. They are super slow lacking the ability to run, so they are always inside transports. Every time the transport is killed around them they must take a pinning test. Odds of Failing that pinning test is 41.66. I did account for the bosspole. Adding the bosspole to the unit means they can reroll that test. That means they have a 17.37% chance of becoming essentially irrelevant because any enemy within range when the vehicle popped has an opportunity to move out of range.

In addition they will fail a leadership and run away 17.37% generally after losing one model. A single failed leadership test will take them effectively out of the game. Keep in mind that the minimum investment in this unit is 155 points.

When you account for the number of times the transport get alpha struck, you have a unit that is hugely unreliable. Your "minor" nerf has made it somewhere between 17.37% and 34% less reliable. I wouldn't be surprised if the result is Meganobz only getting taken when accompanied by Ghaz in large point games. You mention a 9% price drop for Hive Guard making them effective even though they are still 33% less powerful than they were in the 5th edition Tyranid codex. A 17.37% nerf to MANZ still seems "Relatively minor"?

What are you rambling on about?

New Mob Rule(Dependent on Bosspole)
LD7 58% chance of success, 83% after Bosspole Reroll.

Old Boss Rule(Dependent on Boss Nob being alive and Bosspole)
LD7 58% chance of success, 72% after Mob Rule, 81% chance after Bosspole Reroll. In CC it becomes 90%

When an IC with LD>7 their morale becomes significantly better, though it allows them to potentially lose combat under the new Mob Rules more often. Also, passing due to the Old Mob Rule results in an average of 1.75 wounds vs the 1 of the new Mob Rule and Boss Pole barring CC.

Last time I checked 83%>81%... A 2.5% boost to LD in that situation is hardly a 17% nerf.

Now, I had been considering a 5pt discount for Meganobz, but strongly disagree without your math and your "17% nerf".

Hive guard.... Though I fielding them I forgot about BS4. What was their old cost? They may need another 5pt drop.

At 8 or more models that percentage goes up and a BW could hold 10.

 Zagman wrote:
Last time I checked 83%>81%... A 2.5% boost to LD in that situation is hardly a 17% nerf.

GAC. Can't do math tonight. You are correct. I had them passing 95% with current mob rule, but your math is right, mine was wrong.

 Zagman wrote:
Hive guard.... Though I fielding them I forgot about BS4. What was their old cost? They may need another 5pt drop.

In the 5th ed codex I'm pretty sure they were 50 PPM. Same stats you have except 1 higher BS.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
Last time I checked 83%>81%... A 2.5% boost to LD in that situation is hardly a 17% nerf.

GAC. Can't do math tonight. You are correct. I had them passing 95% with current mob rule, but your math is right, mine was wrong.

 Zagman wrote:
Hive guard.... Though I fielding them I forgot about BS4. What was their old cost? They may need another 5pt drop.

In the 5th ed codex I'm pretty sure they were 50 PPM. Same stats you have except 1 higher BS.

No worries. Can't believe how many times Ibe made simple mistakes, haha. I'm still leaning towards 35ppm after my Terminater changes which seems fair.

Hive Guard, I'll have to dig out a 5th Ed Codex, but if they were 50ppm and Bs4 they'll get another 5pt discount for sure.

I'm still not sold on the "Nids get all Psy powers" stuff, mainly for two reasons:

1) Fluff wise it makes no sense that a nid harnesses warp.
2) It would make balancing our psy models quite hard. I believe that revamping the nid powers would be enough.

Thanks for starting this thread!!!!!!
My opinion:
-Bosspole: Auto hit d3 S4 AP6 = pass test
-Mek Tools: keep RAW.
-KFF: Keep points.
-Add portable voidshield option 100pts
-Consider keeping all stats points etc for dorkanauts. Add "superheavy walker." Add "assault vehicle."
-kanz. 3HP. Kan klaw = PK. Move to elite.
-ddreads 4hp. Cheaper riggers.
-better / funnier psychic powers. Add discipline.
-waagh affects warpcharge/perils/manifestation chances
-allow zagstruks stormboyz to assault from deepstrike. Lose ere we go if so.

Spoletta wrote:I'm still not sold on the "Nids get all Psy powers" stuff, mainly for two reasons:

1) Fluff wise it makes no sense that a nid harnesses warp.
2) It would make balancing our psy models quite hard. I believe that revamping the nid powers would be enough.

GW made them Psykers and they have a strong Psychic presence already. Its not about fluff, but a a level playing field. I'd much rather do a large rewrite of all the powers and Psykers in general, but this and tweaking the worst powers is enough. There is still a good amount of utility for Nids to use their power list, doesn't create super melee monsters like Biomancy, or open up Invis etc but its options, and as long as those optoins don't have anything majorly broken left its just fine to open up access.

doktor_g wrote:Thanks for starting this thread!!!!!!
My opinion:
-Bosspole: Auto hit d3 S4 AP6 = pass test
-Mek Tools: keep RAW.
-KFF: Keep points.
-Add portable voidshield option 100pts
-Consider keeping all stats points etc for dorkanauts. Add "superheavy walker." Add "assault vehicle."
-kanz. 3HP. Kan klaw = PK. Move to elite.
-ddreads 4hp. Cheaper riggers.
-better / funnier psychic powers. Add discipline.
-waagh affects warpcharge/perils/manifestation chances
-allow zagstruks stormboyz to assault from deepstrike. Lose ere we go if so.

You are welcome!

I've been tempted to do that for the boss pole. Make it a d3 wounds at AP6 but be an auto pass. Fixes ld issues for any unit that can have one, doesn't fix units that dont' get them.
Stacking Meck tools is still problem. Its not one attempt, its one success. So haveing more than one Mek just helps ensure you'll be successful.
Revert back to 50pt KFFs?? Since it switched to per model I don't think that is necessary at all. 40pts seems fair.
I'm trying to not move FOC slots as much as possible, though Kans probably need a bit more love, I feel as if the changes is enough to really give them a boost.
I could have dropped the price of Riggers.
I didn't want to rewrite that much. Per my main Errata, Weirdboyz now have access to all powers short of Malefic.
I didn't want to rewrite too many rules, I already rewrote Bosspole, Cyborg, and Mob Rule. The goal was the ligthest touch to have a desired effect.
Now a bad suggestion about Zagstruks, but again I'm trying not to change anything too major or rewrite rules write new ones.

 Zagman wrote:
I'd much rather do a large rewrite of all the powers and Psykers in general, but this and tweaking the worst powers is enough. There is still a good amount of utility for Nids to use their power list, doesn't create super melee monsters like Biomancy, or open up Invis etc but its options, and as long as those optoins don't have anything majorly broken left its just fine to open up access.

I definitely support the idea here. Here are some thoughts on how to apply this to Tyranids that keep the Tyranid powers in play, and head off some potential problems.

I'm assuming that psychers that come with predefined psychic powers still have those, and thus if they roll on another tree, they give up the primaris. If that isn't right, I'll tweak this.

1. Zoey's. If you made Warp Blast / Lance Warp Charge 1, and you reduced zoeys to Mastery Level 1 or Mastery Level (# of zoeys in Brood), they would be a little more in line with fluff, and less likely to create exploitable spamming of psychic powers.

2. The Swarmlord. If he chooses to go with the Tyranid tree, I think he should know all tyranid psychic powers. He has no shooting, but at least this way he is guaranteed to have access to Wrap Lance, and catalyst, and he has an incentive to stick with the Tyranid tree.

3. Tyrants. I propose that you make Wings and Mastery Levels mutually exclusive. So in order to Take Wings a Tyrant gives up psychic abilities. In exchange, I propose you give the Flyrant back its 3+ armor save, and reduce the cost of wings a bit. I think this heads off problems with psychic powers and also creates a situation where a heavily nerfed Dakka Flyrant is still available as an anti-tank option. I feel like this is a great solution because it fixes some of the unreliable/glass cannon issues Flyrants currently have. They tend to take a wound from perils, and then another from grounding. At the same time it is a significant nerf to the damage output.

4. The Broodlord. ML2. This somewhat justifies his price point, and is also a useful tweak to genestealers making them a substantially more versatile unit. Also offsets the fact that his default power is "The Horror", and in most situations that power is useless.
How to fix "The Horror"


5. Tervigon. Access to a 25 point upgrade to become ML 2. This makes it a bit more versatile and attractive. I'd be tempted to drop its base points by that, because the other HQ choices got better, and the 30 gant tax is pretty sever for making him a troop.

6. Nurothrope. He is a zoenthrope upgrade character. If you take one he adds 1 mastery level to you squad and +2 warp dice instead of +1 for the ordinary Zoey.

7. Maleceptor. Either Get rid of psychic overload, or fix it.
Here is my suggestion to fix it:

Something that I was pondering with the Trygon. Maybe make the tunnel itself kind of like a transport/drop pod where you could assign a unit of infantry to it at the start of the game. The infantry assigned to it comes through the turn the Trygon deploys (possibly too strong), or automatically comes through the hole the turn after the Trygon arrives. Might make up a bit for the fact that you could have a specific unit that you want to effectively deepstrike via the tunnel, but due to reserves rolls comes in the turn before the Trygon, forcing them to footslog across the table.

The opening up Psychic access needs some clarification. If a unit has preset powers and has no option to roll, it does not gain the ability to roll for powers. If it has preset powers and the ability to roll it can roll on any tree. For instance many GK squads have preset powers, they retain these. Only those units ie Librarians that are allowed to roll for powers get to roll on any tree. Another example is the Broodlord, he knows one power and that is it. Zoanthropes know Warp Blast in addition to another power, if they choose Hive Mind they'll also gain the Primaris, if they choose another tree they will lose out on the Primaris power.

I'm thinking Zoanthropes will have ML equal to number of Zoanthropes in the brood. Losing Zoanthropes loses powers and ML.

IMO the Broodlord doesn't really need buffs to be worth his points. He is T5 S5 3W 4 Attacks, Rending, Fleet, Infiltrate, and Move through Cover, and generates a WC, all for 60pts. That is solid. The problem was Genestealers cost for durability, not the Broodlord.

The Terivgon is a solid unit. 6W T6 MC with ML1 and generates units. I think some of this is wishlisting. And MC MLs are worth 35pts.

Maleceptors will have Psychic Overlord in addition to what it rolls, that is already a big boost. Makes it essentially one of the most versatile Psykers for Tyranids.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cytharai wrote:
Something that I was pondering with the Trygon. Maybe make the tunnel itself kind of like a transport/drop pod where you could assign a unit of infantry to it at the start of the game. The infantry assigned to it comes through the turn the Trygon deploys (possibly too strong), or automatically comes through the hole the turn after the Trygon arrives. Might make up a bit for the fact that you could have a specific unit that you want to effectively deepstrike via the tunnel, but due to reserves rolls comes in the turn before the Trygon, forcing them to footslog across the table.

You must have been reading my mind. This is exactly the solution that I came up with on my long drive yesturday.

Kind of like the Escort ability of Stormtalons. Assign one infantry unit to the Trygon, it arrives on the same turn as the Trygon no matter when the Trygon arrives. They are rolled together for reserves.

tag8833 wrote:

2. The Swarmlord. If he chooses to go with the Tyranid tree, I think he should know all tyranid psychic powers. He has no shooting, but at least this way he is guaranteed to have access to Wrap Lance, and catalyst, and he has an incentive to stick with the Tyranid tree.

3. Tyrants. I propose that you make Wings and Mastery Levels mutually exclusive. So in order to Take Wings a Tyrant gives up psychic abilities. In exchange, I propose you give the Flyrant back its 3+ armor save, and reduce the cost of wings a bit. I think this heads off problems with psychic powers and also creates a situation where a heavily nerfed Dakka Flyrant is still available as an anti-tank option. I feel like this is a great solution because it fixes some of the unreliable/glass cannon issues Flyrants currently have. They tend to take a wound from perils, and then another from grounding. At the same time it is a significant nerf to the damage output.

[/spoiler]

I'm really liking those.

Also, i still believe that the following should happen to make nid powers a bit more appetible:

Dominion increases SiTW range
The Horror add "The target unit cannot fire overwatch"
Psychic shriek increase nova to 9"
Maybe bring Warp lance to AP1, makes it a bit more reliable form of AV.

 Zagman wrote:
I'm thinking Zoanthropes will have ML equal to number of Zoanthropes in the brood.
Automatically Appended Next Post:

I think the additional book keeping for the gaining and losing powers might be a bit much. If you're running multiple broods that's a lot of gaining and losing powers (a-la daemons) that I think is a bit tedious. Getting additional warp charges for larger broods is a pretty good fix as it stands IMO.

 Cytharai wrote:
Something that I was pondering with the Trygon. Maybe make the tunnel itself kind of like a transport/drop pod where you could assign a unit of infantry to it at the start of the game. The infantry assigned to it comes through the turn the Trygon deploys (possibly too strong), or automatically comes through the hole the turn after the Trygon arrives. Might make up a bit for the fact that you could have a specific unit that you want to effectively deepstrike via the tunnel, but due to reserves rolls comes in the turn before the Trygon, forcing them to footslog across the table.

You must have been reading my mind. This is exactly the solution that I came up with on my long drive yesturday.

Kind of like the Escort ability of Stormtalons. Assign one infantry unit to the Trygon, it arrives on the same turn as the Trygon no matter when the Trygon arrives. They are rolled together for reserves.

Yeah that's always been my biggest detractor of trying a Trygon delivery system list. There's just too much of a chance the thing you REALLY want coming through the tunnel not co-operating

Tyrannocyte
If you are going to make these changes you should also specify that it chooses targets like an MC not a vehicle. Closest unit from the base gets all 5 guns shot at it. Otherwise the BS and VC upgrades a horrifically over priced. I know that many people interpret the rules to be this already, but there are also many that don't.

Yeah, they are a mess, I need to do some work for them. I've read them as can shoot all five at the closest target or it needs to be clarified. I'll probably revert the cost and clarify 45 degree line of sight for each weapon, like vehicle rules for a hull mounted weapon.

Just as an aside for Tyrannocytes, giving them hull-mounted weapon esque guns allows them to fire at most 3, though most often they will be shooting 2 guns. Check the image
http://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2015/1/18/679561_sm-Tyrannocyte%20Top.JPG

Spoletta wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

2. The Swarmlord. If he chooses to go with the Tyranid tree, I think he should know all tyranid psychic powers. He has no shooting, but at least this way he is guaranteed to have access to Wrap Lance, and catalyst, and he has an incentive to stick with the Tyranid tree.

3. Tyrants. I propose that you make Wings and Mastery Levels mutually exclusive. So in order to Take Wings a Tyrant gives up psychic abilities. In exchange, I propose you give the Flyrant back its 3+ armor save, and reduce the cost of wings a bit. I think this heads off problems with psychic powers and also creates a situation where a heavily nerfed Dakka Flyrant is still available as an anti-tank option. I feel like this is a great solution because it fixes some of the unreliable/glass cannon issues Flyrants currently have. They tend to take a wound from perils, and then another from grounding. At the same time it is a significant nerf to the damage output.

[/spoiler]

I'm really liking those.

Also, i still believe that the following should happen to make nid powers a bit more appetible:

Dominion increases SiTW range
The Horror add "The target unit cannot fire overwatch"
Psychic shriek increase nova to 9"
Maybe bring Warp lance to AP1, makes it a bit more reliable form of AV.

I don't feel it is right taking ML away from Flyrants. I don't feel right shourt of a Prime bieng Hq that they shouldn't be led by a powerful presence. I don't think the Swarmlord having all Tyranid powers is out of scope at all. I may add that in.

I already fixed Dominion, reread SiTW. It affects synapse range. Anything that increases Synapse range increases SiTW range as well.
That would be interesting for Horror.
Maybe a larger NOVA range is necesary... I don't know.
Warp lance already deals an HP on a 2+ and pens anything in the game on a 3+ or better. That isn't bad at all. It is WC2, but with broods producing more WCs it still feels ok.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cytharai wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
I'm thinking Zoanthropes will have ML equal to number of Zoanthropes in the brood.
Automatically Appended Next Post:

I think the additional book keeping for the gaining and losing powers might be a bit much. If you're running multiple broods that's a lot of gaining and losing powers (a-la daemons) that I think is a bit tedious. Getting additional warp charges for larger broods is a pretty good fix as it stands IMO.

 Cytharai wrote:
Something that I was pondering with the Trygon. Maybe make the tunnel itself kind of like a transport/drop pod where you could assign a unit of infantry to it at the start of the game. The infantry assigned to it comes through the turn the Trygon deploys (possibly too strong), or automatically comes through the hole the turn after the Trygon arrives. Might make up a bit for the fact that you could have a specific unit that you want to effectively deepstrike via the tunnel, but due to reserves rolls comes in the turn before the Trygon, forcing them to footslog across the table.

You must have been reading my mind. This is exactly the solution that I came up with on my long drive yesturday.

Kind of like the Escort ability of Stormtalons. Assign one infantry unit to the Trygon, it arrives on the same turn as the Trygon no matter when the Trygon arrives. They are rolled together for reserves.

Yeah that's always been my biggest detractor of trying a Trygon delivery system list. There's just too much of a chance the thing you REALLY want coming through the tunnel not co-operating

Tyrannocyte
If you are going to make these changes you should also specify that it chooses targets like an MC not a vehicle. Closest unit from the base gets all 5 guns shot at it. Otherwise the BS and VC upgrades a horrifically over priced. I know that many people interpret the rules to be this already, but there are also many that don't.

Yeah, they are a mess, I need to do some work for them. I've read them as can shoot all five at the closest target or it needs to be clarified. I'll probably revert the cost and clarify 45 degree line of sight for each weapon, like vehicle rules for a hull mounted weapon.

Just as an aside for Tyrannocytes, giving them hull-mounted weapon esque guns allows them to fire at most 3, though most often they will be shooting 2 guns. Check the image
http://images.dakkadakka.com/gallery/2015/1/18/679561_sm-Tyrannocyte%20Top.JPG

I agree about the bookkeeping. I was on the fence, but I think just one WC per Zoanthrope would be fine.

I'm going to make that change for Trygons.

I will be fixing the Tyrannocyte. I'm ok with letting them fire all of them so long as they are Hull Mounted. Just need to fairly price them, IMO stock pricing wasn't terrible if the function like that.

 Zagman wrote:
I'm thinking Zoanthropes will have ML equal to number of Zoanthropes in the brood. Losing Zoanthropes loses powers and ML.

I think this is the right way to go. I don't think the book keeping is problematic. The only question is the Role for the Nuerothrope.

 Zagman wrote:
IMO the Broodlord doesn't really need buffs to be worth his points. He is T5 S5 3W 4 Attacks, Rending, Fleet, Infiltrate, and Move through Cover, and generates a WC, all for 60pts. That is solid. The problem was Genestealers cost for durability, not the Broodlord.

Why would I take 1 instead of additional Genestealers? Genestealers get you more attacks and more wounds on a point for point basis. Taking more squads gets you msu. Taking larger squads lets you congaline to a venomthrope.

 Zagman wrote:
The Terivgon is a solid unit. 6W T6 MC with ML1 and generates units. I think some of this is wishlisting. And MC MLs are worth 35pts.

How many Tervigons do you see today? The only time I bring mine out is when I'm looking to nerf myself. If I really want to tank a game I just bring both Tervigons. My initial interpretation was that you were reducing the power level of everything so that the Tervigon would become useful, but with the exception of Flyrants, Gargoyles, and Mawlocs you are buffing everything. I don't think the Tervigon will be very balanced compared to other codex options that all have a better damage output on a point for point basis.

Also, you are nerfing summoning, I assumed that would apply to termagants generated by the tervigon as well, right?

ETA: 35 points for a ML on an MC isn't a good rule. A ML on a FMC is way, way more valuable than a ML on a walking MC. So 35 points per ML on a Winged Demon Prince might or might not be fair, but it is less valuable to a Tervigon. Also the Tervigon isn't an IC, that is why I used the same price as a ML to a space marine libby. Space marine libbys can make better use of many powers via being an IC, while a Tervigon can make better use of some powers via being a MC. I figured it was a wash.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
I'm thinking Zoanthropes will have ML equal to number of Zoanthropes in the brood. Losing Zoanthropes loses powers and ML.

I think this is the right way to go. I don't think the book keeping is problematic. The only question is the Role for the Nuerothrope.

Yeah, I tend towards trying to simplify 40k, which means that additional book keeping is something I shy away from. I think Neurothropes are still pretty solid in that they unlock spirit leech.

How would you feel about given all MCs a 12" move by default, similar to GMCs? At the moment I think the "MC" creature type is pretty undervalued in comparison to gargantuan, flying and jump unit types.

I don't believe it would buff any powerhouse MCs even further because all the best ones are JMC or FMC so it would only benefit the rest of the field which is generally lacklustre.

I disagree, we would have to increase all the costs of actual MC by 30-50 points.

They are fine as they are, i don't find them undervalued (if costed accordingly).

Spoletta wrote:
They are fine as they are, i don't find them undervalued (if costed accordingly).

Can you give me some examples of MCs you think are costed correctly? I don't believe they are and that is why we only tend to see JMCs and FMCs being used in the majority of competitive lists.

A rule along the lines of the Tryanid Hierodule may be more appropriate instead;

- An MC can either move (if not gliding or jumping) twice and shoot 1 weapon, or move once and shoot 2 weapons

Thoughts?

Riptides, Dread Knights, Winged DP, Blood Thirsters, Great Unclean Ones, Flyrants, Wraith Knights (when they were MC's), Telos, and cronos are the MCs that see regular play. I've seen Dimacharons, but I think that is mainly because people haven't figured out it's weaknesses yet. More important than being fast is being survivable. TMC's just aren't very survivable.

They are supposed to be highly survivable, but the current meta is S7 from tau. S6 and rending from Eldar, S6 for Tyranids, Posion from DE, and Grav / S8 from SM, and big tarpits from Demons. So in many cases TMC's die about like a squad of space marines with an equivalent number of wounds. Zagman is trying to reduce the amount of high S shooting in the game. If he succeeds we might see normal TMC's again. Personally, I think the base TMC should change to T7 to accomdate the new age of High Strength shooting, but Zagman isn't comfortable with that type of wholesale change, so we will have to settle for a bit of a price decrease for now from him.

I expect the new Tyranid Codex from GW later this year. I imagine it will address the general uselessness of TMC's. Now that everyone bought flyrants GW will probably nerf them into oblivion like they did Tervigons and Hive Guard, and pick a new hotness.

Riptides - JMC
Dread Knights - JMC
Winged DP - FMC
Blood Thirsters - FMC
Great Unclean Ones - MC
Flyrants - FMC
Wraith Knights - JMC
Telos - is this FW? not sure
Cronos - MC

see the theme here is that the good MCs are mobile ones. pretty much everything else is not considered worth taking. I suppose the issue of getting slow units into combat is a game wide one - however MCs have no way of getting around this because they cannot be joined by an IC (i.e Gate of Infinity shenanigans)

Yeah, you can add Wraithlords to the slow MC's that don't see the tabletop too. Similar durability to last editions wraithknight, but too slow to provide any CC threats or move around for objective contesting

I would never give MC 12" movement. IMO I'd rather drop SH/GC movement down to 9" actually to close that gap. GW seems to think movement values must be in 6" intervals... The MC is a great unit type, it is just GW gave GMCs everything and charged them almost nothing for it. Free FNP(150% durability in most cases), 12" move, Poison Resistance, ID resistance, Stomp, and most GMCs aren't paying what they should for a lot of these abilities.

I've already given most of the ground MCs some kind of buff(cost reduction) while most of those "good" MCs now cost more.


GW keeps making faster and faster units and better and better guns, but the core of the game is still moving 6" or buying a transport. This gap is causing serious issues especially coupled with Maelstrom.


I would not expect GW to fix TMCs int he new dex, they failed to cost MCs appropriately for the last couple of editions and have a habbit of undervalueing wings and overvalueing a ground MC chassis. Don't expect this to change anytime soon.

Haha yeah, I feel like the consensus around the GW offices is that "T6 W6 AS3+... that's a tough mother!". And just forget about the fact that they threw in a bunch of high strength low ap shooting -_-

It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

Spoletta wrote:
It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

It takes 5 unbuffed missiles sides. Also a Riptide beats it in close combat. For 5 points more than a Dread Knight you are getting a slow MC that loses to most other MC's in close combat, and has a fraction of the damage output. I'm still not seeing it.

A dread knight does everything a Haruspex does better and cheaper. Why would I ever look at a Haruspex as a good usage of points in that context?

Spoletta wrote:
It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

Grav is a major design mistake. Internally and externally. The Salvo and giving to relentless platforms was just insulting.

Spoletta wrote:
It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

Even at 135 points the Haruspex wouldn't get taken - walking melee MCs with no shooting or force multipliers just don't have enough use in games even with the errata from Zagman taken into account.

Look at the FW giant chaos spawn for example, I've never seen it used in any of the battle reports I've read on dakka despite it being a super cheap MC at a fairly uncontested slot (chaos daemons heavy support) and only 80 points.

For reference, in comparison to the Haruspex it's stats are;

Pros
+1 WS
+D6 attacks resulting +2 attacks on average
Rage
+3 LD

Cons
-1 W
- 1 SV
- 1 S & Armourbane
- Acid blood
- Grasping tongue

tag8833 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

It takes 5 unbuffed missiles sides. Also a Riptide beats it in close combat. For 5 points more than a Dread Knight you are getting a slow MC that loses to most other MC's in close combat, and has a fraction of the damage output. I'm still not seeing it.

A dread knight does everything a Haruspex does better and cheaper. Why would I ever look at a Haruspex as a good usage of points in that context?

You are way off saying a a Riptide bests it in close Combat.

Riptide has 3 attacks, hits on 4s, wounds on 4. .75 Wounds
Haruspex has 3 attacks, hits on 3s, wounds on 3, and generates additional attacks. .88 Wounds through 5++ 1.14 Wounds after additional attacks.

Meaning on average the Haruspex heals more wounds than it receives. The Haruspex is Fearless and averages winning combat, with a Higher initiative it also is likely to seep the Riptide. The Haruspex wins even if we assume the Riptide gets its NovaShield every round.

The riptide is the worst CC MC in the game and a Haruspex (a dedicated CC MC) barely beats it, what odds are there of it actually causing enough wounds to force a sweep? If a riptide has FNP then even with additional attacks it only causes 0.76 wounds!

It is all moot anyway as a Haruspex would never catch a riptide to get into CC in the first place

tag8833 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

It takes 5 unbuffed missiles sides. Also a Riptide beats it in close combat. For 5 points more than a Dread Knight you are getting a slow MC that loses to most other MC's in close combat, and has a fraction of the damage output. I'm still not seeing it.

A dread knight does everything a Haruspex does better and cheaper. Why would I ever look at a Haruspex as a good usage of points in that context?

Actually it takes exactly 6.
48 missiles, 24 at S7 and 24 at S5. TL BS 3 means 18 hits for each. 12 Wounds from S7 and another 6 from S5. 18 wounds at 3+ is exactly 6 wounds...or i'm mistaking something and the Haruspex is 5W?

The fact that it gets owned in meele doesn't mean that the concept of slow walking meele MC is wrong, just that the stats are.

Haruspex is 5W

Terror from the Deep wrote:The riptide is the worst CC MC in the game and a Haruspex (a dedicated CC MC) barely beats it, what odds are there of it actually causing enough wounds to force a sweep? If a riptide has FNP then even with additional attacks it only causes 0.76 wounds!

It is all moot anyway as a Haruspex would never catch a riptide to get into CC in the first place

And even using just base cost cost the Haruspex is 3/4 the Riptides cost. With FNP its under 2/3 cost. It still wins and under most circumstances will come out of the combat with more wounds than it started with. More times that not a Haruspex that had 3-4 wounds left would come out of combat with a Riptide or most units with more wounds than it started with. Whether it sweeps the Riptide or not, it will win the combat, usually come out fully healed or with more wounds than it started with, and does it and is quite a bit cheaper.

Though getting a chance to look at the Haruspex a bit closer it does need something more. I don't know if I want to give it 4 Attacks or if I wan't to drop its price down to 120, or give it 6 Wounds. Any one of those would put it right where it needed to be. My initial price point of 135 was still a bit high after a 25pt discount.

 Zagman wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

Spoletta wrote:
It all depends on the cost.
The Haruspex at 135 would be taken. It is a significant investment in terms of firepower to get rid of it.

If i can force a target that requires you to focus fire with a good chunk of your army for a total cost that is 7.2% of my army then it's ok.

Things don't necessarily need to remove enemy models to be useful in a game.

Edit: The problem is not in the high strength, an haruspex survives 6 missilesides firing at it. The problem is grav, which IMHO is a design mistake.

It takes 5 unbuffed missiles sides. Also a Riptide beats it in close combat. For 5 points more than a Dread Knight you are getting a slow MC that loses to most other MC's in close combat, and has a fraction of the damage output. I'm still not seeing it.

A dread knight does everything a Haruspex does better and cheaper. Why would I ever look at a Haruspex as a good usage of points in that context?

You are way off saying a a Riptide bests it in close Combat.

Riptide has 3 attacks, hits on 4s, wounds on 4. .75 Wounds
Haruspex has 3 attacks, hits on 3s, wounds on 3, and generates additional attacks. .88 Wounds through 5++ 1.14 Wounds after additional attacks.

Meaning on average the Haruspex heals more wounds than it receives. The Haruspex is Fearless and averages winning combat, with a Higher initiative it also is likely to seep the Riptide. The Haruspex wins even if we assume the Riptide gets its NovaShield every round.

That is possibly true on paper but not in game. The Riptide is significantly faster than the Haruspex. The Haruspex's bonus attacks only happen if it gets the charge, and only in the 1st round. Here is the rule:


Because the riptide is faster, the Haruspex probably won't get the charge. If we assume the Riptide is charging it means the Riptide has to shoot at the Haruspex. So it is going to looking something like this.

Riptide nova changes invul (if fail it jumps away onto terrain), and Tau shooting takes the haruspex down to 1 wound so it dies to either overwatch or 1 round of combat where the riptide swings 1st.
Riptide shoots. SMS does 0.33 HBC does 0.67 wounds. IA does 1 wound. So Best case for the Haruspex, it is down to 4 wounds when the riptide charges.
HOW: 0.17 wounds. Haruspex goes 1st. 3 Attacks. .44 wounds. Then the riptide swings. 1 Wound.
Next round of combat. Haruspex does .44 wounds to the riptide. Riptide does 0.75 back.

Now comes the Riptides 1st real risk. It has to make a Nova charge. If it makes it, it wins after 3-4 more rounds of combat. If it fails, then it might have to make a leadership test. If it fails that leadership test it could be run down. Otherwise it wins that combat.

There is one complication to that, not factored in. The Haruspex can get wounds back via this rule:

That is why the Riptide usually just dances around the Haruspex until it is down to 1 wound.

A Riptide is better at shooting than CC, so it usually doesn't want to mix it up with a Haruspex. But if it does, it tends to come out on top. I've lost several Haruspex's to riptides in CC, and I can only remember 1 time when a Haruspex killed a riptide, and it double teamed it with a carnifex. I don't think a Riptide is a great comparison to a Haruspex, because it is a shooting platform, that is why I pushed the dread knight comparison. A Haruspex is definitely a CC unit, just not a very good one against many things.

One thing to note about the Haruspex is that its base cost isn't what it actually costs. It will always take Adrenal Glands. It needs fleet so incredibly badly to accomplish anything, plus furious charge ups it to S8 on the charge which makes it a serious threat to crisis suites.

ETA: Riptides generally beat flyrants in CC as well. Because usually the flyrant is down to 2 wounds by the time of the assault (1 for what made it take grounding, 1 for being grounded).

My mistake, The Haruspex does not gain additional attacks beyond the charge. It doesn't tchange that you were wrong when you said it is worse in CC than a Riptide, it isn't. In fact it is quite a bit better in CC.

How many times do I have to say, vaccuum direct comparisons are of little use. Having a Haruspex and a Riptide square off against each other in a Vaacum tells us little. But, on a battle field when the Haruspex will devour any Tau unit it assault, usually sweeping them in a single turn it has far more other targets. It also controls a large area of the board despite being slow and does require a large amount of firepower to put down.

Both units have uses. In CC the Haruspex wins, its cheaper and it will win the combat eventually most of the time. Once you don't assume always having a 3++ up or that the Riptide has every advantage, not being wounded, wounding the Haruspex, getting the charge... not failing its Nova, etc. Haruspex benefits from Adrenal Glands, it does not need them. Fleet is very helpful, but needing S8 to take otu Crisis is a joke, the Haruspex does that and sweeps the squads(barring drone I4) easily and generally heals for the effort.

You cannot assume the Riptide always has its 3++ up. You can't always assume the Riptide has the charge. You can't always assume the Haruspex is the biggest threat. Also, by turn 3 the Haruspex can effectively threaten the entire back of the board with assault, meaning the Riptide will either be pinned against the board edge, or forced to move towards other threats. The table is not infinite in size. Sure, one on one the Ripide will just dance away and kill the Haruspex, it'll kite it around the board and shoot it to death. Awesome, that vacuum scenario tells us nothing about balance. Good thing we don't just have Riptides and Haruspex on open infinite tables. We play games. The Haruspex will gladly assault a Riptide given the chance, or anything else it gets in range meaning the entire Tau army was redeploying due to the threat of a single model.

I guarantee I've played Riptides more than you've played against them and not once do I every recall them winning a combat against an MC opponent... well that is a lie... once I doubled out a DP thanks to being stubborn with an attached BuffCommander in 6th... and I did assault and sweep another Riptide thanks to having Farsight attached in 6th...


And did you miss the part where I said the Haruspex is still overcosted, or needs another boost? It went from 160, 175 with Adrenal Glands to 135/145 already, a 16% discount already, which helped but wasn't quite enough.

The Dreadknight isn't a fair CC comparison as it is pretty much one of the best CC MCs in the game and excels at killing other MCs.

I don't care if a Riptide has a chance of finishing off a 1W Hive Tyrant.... that is such an obscure vaccuum example it doesn't matter. The Riptide also has very good odds of being swept by the Hive Tyrant. Hits on 5s, wounds on 4s, even with the charge it averages .66 wounds with its 4 attacks, .5 wounds if it doesn't have the charge while the Hive Tyrant averages .88 wounds through a 5++ and 1.1 on the charge. If the Hive Tyrant wins, it is virtually assured to sweep the Riptide.

 Zagman wrote:
I don't care if a Riptide has a chance of finishing off a 1W Hive Tyrant.... that is such an obscure vaccuum example it doesn't matter. The Riptide also has very good odds of being swept by the Hive Tyrant. Hits on 5s, wounds on 4s, even with the charge it averages .66 wounds with its 4 attacks, .5 wounds if it doesn't have the charge while the Hive Tyrant averages .88 wounds through a 5++ and 1.1 on the charge. If the Hive Tyrant wins, it is virtually assured to sweep the Riptide.

I'm pretty confident that I'm played Hive Tyrants more than you've played against them, and I can count on 1 hand the number of times that a dakka flyrant killed a riptide in CC. I would estimate that I've lost at least 30 flyrants to riptides in CC. I know this isn't an isolated experience because it is a regular discussion among Tyranid players how often Flyrants get killed in CC by Riptides. Often the Riptide Tarpits it, and is joined by additional riptides or suites, but even without that the fact that flyrants generally have 2 or less wounds, and riptides generally have 5 when the combat happens is why the wounds per round isn't very convincing. A riptide with LD 9 is not likely to get swept by a Tyrant who is generally going to win combat by only 1 wound. If the Tyrant wins then the Riptide still has a 72% chance of making its leadership. I'm thinking back to when I last swept a riptide. The last 2 riptides I swept was multi-assaulting 2 of them with a Riptide and a crisis Suite team that included buffmander and some drones. I've swept riptides quite a number of times using multi-assaults involving suites, drones, or firewarriros. Gargoyles, and Orks pull it off occasionally. Never done it with a flyrant, unless you count the Skytyrant formation in multi-assaults, and I don't think I've ever done it without a multi-assault. If you've got some trick that allows your riptides to get swept all of the time fill me in.

You critique me for considering things in a vaccuum and then insist that out of context math tells you more than realistic gameplay scenarios. For instance, if you assume that a Flyrant is getting charged without 1st getting grounding you are creating such an unlikely scenario that it is a pretty poor basis for drawing a conclusion.

tag8833 wrote:

 Zagman wrote:
I don't care if a Riptide has a chance of finishing off a 1W Hive Tyrant.... that is such an obscure vaccuum example it doesn't matter. The Riptide also has very good odds of being swept by the Hive Tyrant. Hits on 5s, wounds on 4s, even with the charge it averages .66 wounds with its 4 attacks, .5 wounds if it doesn't have the charge while the Hive Tyrant averages .88 wounds through a 5++ and 1.1 on the charge. If the Hive Tyrant wins, it is virtually assured to sweep the Riptide.

I'm pretty confident that I'm played Hive Tyrants more than you've played against them, and I can count on 1 hand the number of times that a dakka flyrant killed a riptide in CC. I would estimate that I've lost at least 30 flyrants to riptides in CC. I know this isn't an isolated experience because it is a regular discussion among Tyranid players how often Flyrants get killed in CC by Riptides. Often the Riptide Tarpits it, and is joined by additional riptides or suites, but even without that the fact that flyrants generally have 2 or less wounds, and riptides generally have 5 when the combat happens is why the wounds per round isn't very convincing. A riptide with LD 9 is not likely to get swept by a Tyrant who is generally going to win combat by only 1 wound. If the Tyrant wins then the Riptide still has a 72% chance of making its leadership. I'm thinking back to when I last swept a riptide. The last 2 riptides I swept was multi-assaulting 2 of them with a Riptide and a crisis Suite team that included buffmander and some drones. I've swept riptides quite a number of times using multi-assaults involving suites, drones, or firewarriros. Gargoyles, and Orks pull it off occasionally. Never done it with a flyrant, unless you count the Skytyrant formation in multi-assaults, and I don't think I've ever done it without a multi-assault. If you've got some trick that allows your riptides to get swept all of the time fill me in.

You critique me for considering things in a vaccuum and then insist that out of context math tells you more than realistic gameplay scenarios. For instance, if you assume that a Flyrant is getting charged without 1st getting grounding you are creating such an unlikely scenario that it is a pretty poor basis for drawing a conclusion.

The problem is your "real world scenario" involved the Tau player devoting considerable resources to ground a Tyrant, and charging in or being charged while virtually unhurt. It is not a fair assessment.... because we can not assign values to what happened to that point. What did the Flyrant accomplish prior to that... etc. Putting a Riptide in a ideal situation and a Flyrant in a non ideal situation is not a fair comparison.


My trick to getting Riptides swept in CC.... getting them into combat with virtually anything.... and having only 3 Attacks at WS2/1 and LD9. My Riptides have lost far more combats than they've won. Occasionally they have survived longer than they should have or are useful to tarpit some units, but they've never wracked up anything productive in CC. And being in CC virtually ensures they aren't being effective. I've had Riptides swept by naked assault marines... that I charged. Shot 5 ASM, killed 2, charged in, killed one, two rounds of combat later I was swept by the two marines that were left.

Lost 30 Flyrants to Riptides in CC?? Are you kidding me? No way I believe that. Even if you lost one per game, that is still 30 games... only way that could happen is if Tau was your regular opponent and you played multiple games per week. Even even if Tau was 1/4 of your games, and you lost a Flyrant in CC in every single game.... that is still averaging 2 games every week and require 1/4 of those games to be against Tau, and for a Flyrant to lose CC vs a Flyrant in CC every single game. I think 30 is a wild exaggeration.

 Zagman wrote:
The problem is your "real world scenario" involved the Tau player devoting considerable resources to ground a Tyrant, and charging in or being charged while virtually unhurt. It is not a fair assessment.... because we can not assign values to what happened to that point. What did the Flyrant accomplish prior to that... etc. Putting a Riptide in a ideal situation and a Flyrant in a non ideal situation is not a fair comparison.

If a dakka Flyrant is charging a riptide, it is because it was grounded. The Tyranid player may have initiated the charge, because a Burstide is far more effective shooting at Tyranids than a Dakkaflyrant is shooting at Tau.

 Zagman wrote:
Lost 30 Flyrants to Riptides in CC?? Are you kidding me? No way I believe that. Even if you lost one per game, that is still 30 games... only way that could happen is if Tau was your regular opponent and you played multiple games per week. Even even if Tau was 1/4 of your games, and you lost a Flyrant in CC in every single game.... that is still averaging 2 games every week and require 1/4 of those games to be against Tau, and for a Flyrant to lose CC vs a Flyrant in CC every single game. I think 30 is a wild exaggeration.

I am a prolific player. In a normal week I play 5 games. 1 Tuesday (tourney prep), 3 Saturday (General Gaming / RTTs), 1 Sunday or Friday (Campaign). Tau is definitely 20% of my opponents with 3 local tau players being prolific, and Tau being a pretty common faction at RTTs. I actually tracked my opponents for 3 months at the start of the year. It was a little more than 50% Tau and Eldar. More Tau at RTTs more Eldar at GTs, I find. I started playing Orks in March, and now I alternate between Orks and Nids. Prior to that Tyranids were my primary army. The 3rd most common army I've played in 40k is Tau, but I play that primarily to tourney prep my team, so we are talking maybe 15 games ever.

My estimate of 30 goes back to 6th edition when I started Tyranids. In 6th flyrants got shot to death more often rather than living long enough to be assaulted. Against my most common Tau opponent I tend to get CCed by a riptide every other game or a little more often. Any chance I get, I always try to Tarpit his skyfire burtstide with ECPA, so I initiate lots of those charges. It is rare to lose 2 flyrants to riptide CC in a single game, but it does happen. I can only remember losing 3 once, and it was a fluke because they all 3 grounded on the same turn right next to riptides. Our lists change depending on what tourney we are prepping for, but I almost always run 3 flyrants, and he almost always has a skyfire burtstide with ECPA, and 2 Ion tides. Against other tau opponent's I usually limit myself to 2 flyrants or less, but they've played me enough to recognize that Riptides are an effective killer of flyrants in CC, and I generally realize that Flyrants are an effective tarpit of riptides, and give me one of my few opportunities to ever kill one. I figured I lost a flyrant to a Riptide in CC roughly every other week. There have been Roughly 75 weeks since Jan of 2014, so I rounded down to 30, because I wasn't running as many flyrants back then. I've definitely lost a Flyrant to CC vs a Riptide twice in 2 weeks. Though one was a demo game where I was talking a new player through it, and had to convince him to charge. Like you, he had taken a look at the stats and concluded that a Riptide was no match for a flyrant, and he would be right, except flyrants are so good at helping you kill them via grounding and perils.

I'm still waiting for that mythical beast of sweeping a riptide with a flyrant. Never happened yet, but I always hope for it. I've definitely won combat for a round, but generally the flyrant is entering with 2 or fewer wounds, and the Riptide is full wounds, because there is no reason to shoot at a riptide while other things remain, and so he only gets 2-3 rounds of CC, and almost always loses the last one. It still usually makes sense for me to charge. I don't care about losing flyrants if I win the game, and usually wins against Tau require me to Tarpit a Riptide.

Here is a Typical example of how flyrants play. I took 3 to a tourney today. In game 1, I lost the 1st one to perils, grounding, and getting assaulted by a Dread Knight. I lost a 2nd in assault to a strike squad when I landed to score an objective. In game 2, I lost all 3 on the ground turn 1 to 54 scat bikes. In game 3, I lost 1 shot out of the sky (grounding took the last wound), and 1 was grounded and assaulted and killed by flash gitz.

3 games. 7 of a possible 9 dead flyrants. 3 of them died to assault, 2 of them after failing a grounding. It is how the unit works. Typically I lose a lower percentage of my flyrants, but typically I lose a majority of them to assault, and don't get alpha struck off the table. It was a team event, no Tau in Attendance. (game 1: 30 Scat bikes + Grey Knights, Game 2: 54 Scat bikes, game 3: 24 Scat bikes + Orks).

I also had 2 crones in my list. I lost 5 of 6 possible. 2 to alphstrikes before they got airborne, and 2 when they landed to score objectives (1 shot, 1 Killed in assault by an Autarch), and 1 shot out of the air.

Ok let's tackle the issue of the walking MC. I'd do something like that.

An MC to be useful in the game needs at least one of the following three:

1) Ranged firepower (no less than 24")
2) Mobility
3) Durability

Point 3 is what is actually lacking.

I'd go for the following:

1) Haruspex to 6W and built in Adrenal glands. Covers the hybrid role. Reasonably mobile, reasonably durable, a short ranged attack and some tricks once in CC. For 135 can see play.

2) Carnifex to 95 points base. Add an upgrade for 20 points that increases R by 1. Either you build him for slow durability and get a 115 point model at R7 3+, or you build him with long ranged options and keep him at R6.

3) Heavy venom cannon to Assault 2. Heavy spine cannon to AP4.

4) Toxicrene to 6W and i still think that it should be reduced in price.

5) Regeneration cost depending on the host, after all it's efficacy varies a lot with the model.: Carnifex 10 points, all the 6W 3+ MC 15 points, TFex 25 points.

In addition, Ghazghkull and all other models in his unit that are equipped with mega armour lose the Slow and Purposeful special rule(which is conferred by wearing Mega Armour) and gain the Relentless Special Rule instead."

Just want to confirm, is the change from S&P to Relentless during the WAAAGH only or at all times if you field Ghaz as the warlord?

Edit:

Also, I know this errata isn't suppost to cover Forgeworld, but I'm wondering if you could do an off the cuff fix for "Cybork Slashaz" from Dread Mob

Currently they are as Nobz, except cybork bodies are mandatory and they cannot take warbikes, and they pay 5 points each to roll on a special table at the start of the game . They can still take a painboy due to being released before the new edition, which I preseume would be removed (though it would make sense going on fluff - they were made by painboys after all)

Roll a d3 on the random cybork slasha table at the start of the game to determine what they get;

~Turbo Killaz; Fleet, Move through Cover, Hammer of Wrath. Running and charging causes a dangerous terrain test.
~Tinboy Brute: +1 Toughness but Slow and Purposeful
~Short Circuit: Select either of the above, but each turn roll a d6 - on a 1 it cannot do anything for the turn.

I'm presuming just make them 19pts instead of 30, which is essentially the new price of Nobz + the difference between Nobz and Slashaz, though I don't know if that random table is worth 5ppm

LighthouseM and I got in a test game using the BRB, Tau, and Tyranid erratas. 1850 points and just used Crusade mission to keep it simple. We both tried to bring "normal" competitive lists without changing too much for this game, just to see what the differences would be to lists that you would have been seeing before. Writeup complete.

Abridged Batrep
Army lists (approximate)

Summary Batrep

@tag
I don't understand how you've never swept a Riptide in CC with a Flyrant if they've ended up in CC often enough. The Hive Tyrant averages more damage per turn, and it should take two turns for the Riptide to deal a wound to the Tyrant, whereas the Tyrant most likely deals 1W per turn. Every round of combat the Flyrant wins there is a 28% chance of that the Riptide fails its LD and its I2 vs I5 means there is something like a 92% chance that the Tyrant sweeps the Riptide. Tyrant should either tie for win most rounds of CC, and masically 1/4 wins should sweep the Riptide. I have absolutely no explaination as to how you've never swept them. Or how your Flyrants are being grounded and assaulted to readily.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:
Ok let's tackle the issue of the walking MC. I'd do something like that.

An MC to be useful in the game needs at least one of the following three:

1) Ranged firepower (no less than 24")
2) Mobility
3) Durability

Point 3 is what is actually lacking.

I'd go for the following:

1) Haruspex to 6W and built in Adrenal glands. Covers the hybrid role. Reasonably mobile, reasonably durable, a short ranged attack and some tricks once in CC. For 135 can see play.

2) Carnifex to 95 points base. Add an upgrade for 20 points that increases R by 1. Either you build him for slow durability and get a 115 point model at R7 3+, or you build him with long ranged options and keep him at R6.

3) Heavy venom cannon to Assault 2. Heavy spine cannon to AP4.

4) Toxicrene to 6W and i still think that it should be reduced in price.

5) Regeneration cost depending on the host, after all it's efficacy varies a lot with the model.: Carnifex 10 points, all the 6W 3+ MC 15 points, TFex 25 points.

I believe its Durability/Cost whcih is the main issue. I think just dropping the Haruspex down to 120pts will be enough. The Carnifex at 100pts isn't bad, maybe it could be a few points cheaper. Uptting Toughness and adding new options isn't what I really want to be doing, but for some MCs repricing with T7 would have been good.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dakkamite wrote:

In addition, Ghazghkull and all other models in his unit that are equipped with mega armour lose the Slow and Purposeful special rule(which is conferred by wearing Mega Armour) and gain the Relentless Special Rule instead."

Just want to confirm, is the change from S&P to Relentless during the WAAAGH only or at all times if you field Ghaz as the warlord?

Edit:

Also, I know this errata isn't suppost to cover Forgeworld, but I'm wondering if you could do an off the cuff fix for "Cybork Slashaz" from Dread Mob

Currently they are as Nobz, except cybork bodies are mandatory and they cannot take warbikes, and they pay 5 points each to roll on a special table at the start of the game . They can still take a painboy due to being released before the new edition, which I preseume would be removed (though it would make sense going on fluff - they were made by painboys after all)

Roll a d3 on the random cybork slasha table at the start of the game to determine what they get;

~Turbo Killaz; Fleet, Move through Cover, Hammer of Wrath. Running and charging causes a dangerous terrain test.
~Tinboy Brute: +1 Toughness but Slow and Purposeful
~Short Circuit: Select either of the above, but each turn roll a d6 - on a 1 it cannot do anything for the turn.

I'm presuming just make them 19pts instead of 30, which is essentially the new price of Nobz + the difference between Nobz and Slashaz, though I don't know if that random table is worth 5ppm

That is anytime Ghaz is in the unit. So MA is a go with him around.

That is pretty much exactly how I would price them.

Cytharai wrote:LighthouseM and I got in a test game using the BRB, Tau, and Tyranid erratas. 1850 points and just used Crusade mission to keep it simple. We both tried to bring "normal" competitive lists without changing too much for this game, just to see what the differences would be to lists that you would have been seeing before. Will be doing a writeup in this space soon.

That is awesome, definitely link the writeup and give me your thoughts about the pre and post errata games. Thanks!!!

Batrep completed in my previous post.

 Cytharai wrote:
Batrep completed in my previous post.

How did this game compare to other similar games between you two? How did the Errata impact the game in your opinion?

Thanks again!

 Cytharai wrote:
I put a lictor in the tau deployment zone near his missilesides, guiding that mawloc in to kill 2 missilesides and clearing just enough room to show up on the board. The other lictor comes in next to my malanthrope to guide the other mawloc into the crisis suits. This mawloc strips 4-5 wounds off the squad, failing to kill the commander or clear enough room to come in.

A minor note, the rule lictors use to guide in Mawlocs:

Pheromone Trail
If a friendly unit from Codex: Tyranids arrives on the battlefield via Deep Strike, it will not scatter so long as the first model in the unit is placed within 6" of a model with this special rule. Note that the model with the Pheromone Trail special rule must already be on the table at the start of the turn for this ability to be used.

I asked our local TO how he ruled this, and he said that at the time when something arrives from reserves it's considered to be "on the table" for any other stuff that comes in after it (obviously houserule/interpretation). I actually forgot that lictors had this special stipulation, so I'm unsure if he would have said the same in this case. In the past I've only run unguided mawlocs, so this was also a derp on my part. (I haven't played much 40k lately, the Eldar release literally made me box up my Iyanden and put them in the garage).

The game itself went ok I thought. Flyrants in the air with a good roll on Iron Arm are REALLY durable, flyrants without iron arm on the other hand are pretty easy to kill. I probably would have included more warp charges in there somewhere to ensure the big buffs could go off unopposed, but then again that's effectively more points invested in the flyrants. I've never really had a huge problem with riptides.... flyrants can somewhat ignore them, and cheap bugs laugh at getting blasted with S8 AP2, though they do make my raveners and warriors sad in the pants. Mawlocs were still good value for the points, though if they lose their guidance systems (especially relevant since I didn't start my lictors on the board), they wind up very hit and miss. The missilesides are always a problem, just so much high strength shooting. Melta crisis suits being hemmed in and chased down by spore mines was a lesson in futility. Certainly didn't help me that those kroot came on and murdilated my biovores, though I don't really know what I could have done besides reserving them. Still think that regen is a never take on flyrants, two of them died in single rounds of shooting, and the last remaining flyrant lived thanks to iron arm more than regen. I do want to try out the errata again, this time running something that is not the traditional triple/penta flyrants and see how it goes, especially because I love my burrowing bugs

I'll poke Lighthouse to see if he can add his post-game thoughts.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just as a side note, one of the really nice things about this errata is that I get to look at the nids again, and not feel like I MUST play them a certain way if I want them to have a chance at not getting slaughtered. That by itself has gotten me back into wanting to play 40k.

With Flyrants at 4+ Tau skyfire becomes their worse nightmare . Regen is not going to do much on them.

I'd like to ask you, if you could play something more land based next time, maybe trying out the prime and our horde/semi horde options.

If this errata made playing a land based semi horde with MC support and maybe 1 or 2 FMC this would make nids awesome to play, both with and against.

Oh yeah, I have gaunts numbering in the hundreds... horde is definitely an option. It will be something land based next time I play.

Spoletta wrote:With Flyrants at 4+ Tau skyfire becomes their worse nightmare . Regen is not going to do much on them.

I'd like to ask you, if you could play something more land based next time, maybe trying out the prime and our horde/semi horde options.

If this errata made playing a land based semi horde with MC support and maybe 1 or 2 FMC this would make nids awesome to play, both with and against.

They definitely are the hard counter, I'm curious how the Flyrants stack up against other armies. I mean, Tau are pretty much the one army that can hard counter Flyrants with ease. Regen is probably not worth it on them now.

I agree, something more land based would be awesome, you should be able to put a much more formidable Hord/GroundMC army on the Table. Heck, for half an 1850 army you can put like 7MCs on the table and have nearly a 1000pts left over for little bugs. Its definitely better than it was before, but the real question is it viable.

Cytharai wrote:Oh yeah, I have gaunts numbering in the hundreds... horde is definitely an option. It will be something land based next time I play.

It would be great to see!

Finally was able to give zaghammer Orks a go today.

10 boyz + 10 boyz
codex Stompa
2x bikerbosses with klaws, cybork, etc
Nob bikers and warbikers
3 Kans and a Deff Dread
lootas and some lobbas

The extra hull point def helps Kans and dreads be noticeably more survivable against most AT weapons (not Melta etc) - however they were still rather lackluster units and extremely poor compared to what else I could get for those points and HS slots.1 Dread, 3 Kans is 230 points, for which I could get over 15 lootas. In fairness this is a problem with a) walkers and b) slow CC units in general, and could be beyond the scope of this errata to try and fix. I don't know if I'd have paid 30pts/each for Big Shoota Kans let alone 50, and we didn't even use the cowardly grot nonsense.

The Stompa points decrease was rather noticeable. Need more games to know if I think its too much. Definitely dominated our game a fair bit, but it did have a bit of bs going on - stealth from warlord table + cover = a pretty tough monster unit even without a KFF, repairs or void shields

Nob Bikers made a comeback for the first time in like 18 months and its things like this that make me really enjoy the errata lists you've put up. No invulns still hurts them, but at 34pts each (before cybork, which isn't quite as mandatory but still nice) they are at least affordable enough to not really worry about it. They beat face in melee like before, however one S10 fist will destroy them - I lost four to a dreadnaught in one combat round (which, to my credit, I only charged to see how it would do - knew it would end pretty badly!).

I felt like cybork was too expensive for what it did (34pts is nice, 39 points is expensive for NBs), even when stacking with a painboy. However they need more testing against non- S10 AP2 opponents. In all honesty though I don't know what we can do vs such weapons if our army theme is "lol no invulns for you", and outside of dreadnaughts I don't think theres *that* much S10 AP4 ignores cover type weapons to worry about - but maybe thats just naive optimism talking.

New mob rule didn't come up as my boyz never did anything. Don't need to even use it to know its a massive improvement over the original.

Cheers for all the hard work mate

 Dakkamite wrote:
Finally was able to give zaghammer Orks a go today.

10 boyz + 10 boyz
codex Stompa
2x bikerbosses with klaws, cybork, etc
Nob bikers and warbikers
3 Kans and a Deff Dread
lootas and some lobbas

The extra hull point def helps Kans and dreads be noticeably more survivable against most AT weapons (not Melta etc) - however they were still rather lackluster units and extremely poor compared to what else I could get for those points and HS slots.1 Dread, 3 Kans is 230 points, for which I could get over 15 lootas. In fairness this is a problem with a) walkers and b) slow CC units in general, and could be beyond the scope of this errata to try and fix. I don't know if I'd have paid 30pts/each for Big Shoota Kans let alone 50, and we didn't even use the cowardly grot nonsense.

The Stompa points decrease was rather noticeable. Need more games to know if I think its too much. Definitely dominated our game a fair bit, but it did have a bit of bs going on - stealth from warlord table + cover = a pretty tough monster unit even without a KFF, repairs or void shields

Nob Bikers made a comeback for the first time in like 18 months and its things like this that make me really enjoy the errata lists you've put up. No invulns still hurts them, but at 34pts each (before cybork, which isn't quite as mandatory but still nice) they are at least affordable enough to not really worry about it. They beat face in melee like before, however one S10 fist will destroy them - I lost four to a dreadnaught in one combat round (which, to my credit, I only charged to see how it would do - knew it would end pretty badly!).

I felt like cybork was too expensive for what it did (34pts is nice, 39 points is expensive for NBs), even when stacking with a painboy. However they need more testing against non- S10 AP2 opponents. In all honesty though I don't know what we can do vs such weapons if our army theme is "lol no invulns for you", and outside of dreadnaughts I don't think theres *that* much S10 AP4 ignores cover type weapons to worry about - but maybe thats just naive optimism talking.

New mob rule didn't come up as my boyz never did anything. Don't need to even use it to know its a massive improvement over the original.

Cheers for all the hard work mate

Awesome, glad you got some use and enjoyment out of them! Very useful feedback.

Haven't been on too much lately. Life has been a bit hectic, the release schedule and ridiculous formations are making the logistics of continually errating things problematic. Also I've been working on my own futuristic skirmish wargame.

Hey Zaggy props to you for doing this and to those who helped contribute. I have a couple semi radical changes to propose for orks.

-Rather than changing mob rule back to where the entire army is essentially fearless how about giving all ork transports something like this:
'Ramshackle- ork transports are crude contraptions held together by bandaids and duct tape. While more prone to breaking down temporarily, ork vehicles lack the sophisticated fiddly bits of other races and never suffer explodes results.'

Hear me out.. pseudo fearless was fine last edition but not always in character IMO and it still doesn't address the changes to explodes damage which still largely invalidates mechanized ork warfare. Thats a shame. This version of ramshackle largely addresses that problem including for smaller units that can embark (non bikes/jumps). Meanwhile large mobs don't really care too much about mob rule. I am aware this isn't as strong as the current change is for infantry but overall I feel its better. Just a thought. Oh but keep the bosspole as errata'd.

-Deff rolla- bring back the former glory. S10 d6 hits when ramming. Its ork melta. Plus Bwagons without deff rollas is like eldar without dresses. (yes I meant naked.. and wrong)

-Nauts- instead of tweaking the cost and such on the stompa just make these LoW.. mini SH walkers. Compare to imperial knights. They still aren't good honestly but that makes them a little better. Keep assault vehicle if you will but don't give these ramshackle. Grot gunners would be a nice bonus but I suppose people who don't like FW wouldn't like that much. Oh but either way at least make the deffstorm mega shoota AP 3 and/or twin linked. That gun makes me laugh-cry everytime I see a player expect it to do something. Silly geedub.

Anyway you've caught most of my other gripes with the dex and thanks again for your efforts.

I must say, I like all of the changes for the Tyranids that you proposed, except the Hive Tyrants. I feel perhaps give him an additional wound, have him cost 160 base, and keep wings at the same price they are now. The fact that Devourers with Brainleech Worms are 20 points and they can only take one nerfs the Flyrant already.

Hey Zag, thanks for all the effort you've put into this

Just a couple of thought with regards to Orks:

1) In the old fluff, Killa Kanz used to be piloted by Orks rather than grots, and this is what my army has been themed around for years - any thoughts of changes or options to bring this idea back?
Or at least getting rid of the stupid leadership rule : /

2) I miss not being able to take 'Eavy armour' on my Nobz that are leading regular boyz - to show that they are the best and toughest. How about putting the option back in at say 5 points? I'd probably eat 10pts just to have the option back : /

3) Cybork body - I'd like to see this back as a 5+ feel no pain -but maybe have it so that it can't be made any better by stacking effects.

4) Ramshackle/Armour plates. I think it would be better served to have it ignore the hit completely (maybe on a 6). The ramshackle rule (downgrade to glancing on 5 or 6) really does nothing when trukks can get glanced to death in no time at all.

Just my thoughts - cheers!

@All the suggestions

Zag's idea here was to fix the codex with minimal changes. Adding Ork pilots or no-explodes to vehicles etc goes outside the design philosophy stated in the original Errata thread.

... That said I think we could make an exception for eavy armour on boss Nobz. I can't believe thats not a thing any more, such gak game design right there - we already get utterly neutered as an assault army by challenges, a 4+ save for these chumps is the least we should have.