Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Twoshoes23 wrote:
Essentially this is my point. If I see across the table you took a similar weapon profile to mine but know I pay cheaper for it then you it gives me a sense of the difference in the armies. Ideally there are no similar profiles due to diversity in the rule set, but we don't have that in 40k ATM. having weapon profiles that are identical between armies with just different names is what I'm advocating against here. Prolly should shut up now as I'm not a nid player, just hopeful they get the attention they deserve as being the apocalyptic bug enable that should imo be the apex evil in 40k, rising above necrons, chaos, orks and the rest.

That's naïve. What will actually happen is that that weapon will not see play except in fluffy builds or if it has sick synergy with the rest of the army, at which point you might as well switch it out for something that is more thematically appropriate.

That's exactly what is happening for fleshborer hive tyrannofexes.

And still, it has nothing to do with the original point of discussion:

I think it's hilarious that a Punisher gatling is supposedly OP, and a fleshborer hive is supposedly not worth taking.

They have the same statline,

Stating that the punishier gatling is OP compared to the fleshborer hive because one, platform included, costs about 2/3 than the other, platform included as well, while also having more range is a perfectly reasonable explanation of why people find one OP and the other one not.

The hormagaunt kit requires you to glue the two halves of the head together. Yeah, I'd really like to see a new one.

 Twoshoes23 wrote:

 Overread wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Twoshoes23 wrote:


If we make each faction equal to each other then what differentiates them anymore besides the models? The hard truth is some factions have to have worse/better options and units then others to make this game interesting.

But that's what points values are for isn't it? Not every unit should be the same, but if they are demonstrably worse then they should at least cost less points. This is like game design 101.

Units should be balanced within armies not just alone; so its no surprise that some units might have a similar role/stat line to others in a different army and yet have a very different points value. The idea being that whilst they are different one to the other; they fill a different niche within an army context.

This is the complexity of balance; units can't just be done against each other it has to be done within army context.

.


Essentially this is my point. If I see across the table you took a similar weapon profile to mine but know I pay cheaper for it then you it gives me a sense of the difference in the armies. Ideally there are no similar profiles due to diversity in the rule set, but we don't have that in 40k ATM. having weapon profiles that are identical between armies with just different names is what I'm advocating against here. Prolly should shut up now as I'm not a nid player, just hopeful they get the attention they deserve as being the apocalyptic bug enable that should imo be the apex evil in 40k, rising above necrons, chaos, orks and the rest.

Except this is nonsense in this case. The TFex isn't worth taking because it's guns are too short range to use it's other abilities. And the guns that are not too short a range have too few shots to do anything with it's midling BS. It's an expensive platform that under performs. Exocrines on the other hand have a great gun that both shoots twice ad increases it's BS to 3+ when it stands still with a 36" range and costs about the same. Why would anyone take a Tfex when they could just have more Exocrines?

The fleshborer hive is not OP because there is no way to bring it where it will ever get anything done. You won't look accross the table and see one unless you find an opponent who doesn't know any better yet or is just trying it out as a goof. The TFex in general is a non option.

I hope they fix that. Or at least make the two more distinct from one another. Honestly, the T-fex should probably be the mobile one, while the Exocrine is the artillery beast. Give them different roles and rules to match and it's all fixed...

I still want a Dactylis/Malefactor combined kit.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The hormagaunt kit requires you to glue the two halves of the head together. Yeah, I'd really like to see a new one.

I was just going to say that. I've built, at least, 200 of the little buggers. I know at least 100 more unbuilt. Those two piece heads are horrid...

It's why I got so many of the Battle for McDonald's push-fit Termagants. Single piece heads!

Shadeseraph wrote:

I think it's hilarious that a Punisher gatling is supposedly OP, and a fleshborer hive is supposedly not worth taking.

They have the same statline,

Stating that the punishier gatling is OP compared to the fleshborer hive because one, platform included, costs about 2/3 than the other, platform included as well, while also having more range is a perfectly reasonable explanation of why people find one OP and the other one not.

Not to mention, when mounted on a Vulture, there are two of them, and that thing can get to anywhere on the table in a given turn...or at least anywhere they can get a bead on and range to what they want to hit....

Being on the receiving end of that thing is demoralizing as a bug player...especially if you play lots of little bugs and don't have any Malanthropes hanging around...

 Fango wrote:

Shadeseraph wrote:

I think it's hilarious that a Punisher gatling is supposedly OP, and a fleshborer hive is supposedly not worth taking.

They have the same statline,

Stating that the punishier gatling is OP compared to the fleshborer hive because one, platform included, costs about 2/3 than the other, platform included as well, while also having more range is a perfectly reasonable explanation of why people find one OP and the other one not.

Not to mention, when mounted on a Vulture, there are two of them, and that thing can get to anywhere on the table in a given turn...or at least anywhere they can get a bead on and range to what they want to hit....

Being on the receiving end of that thing is demoralizing as a bug player...especially if you play lots of little bugs and don't have any Malanthropes hanging around...

doesnt it need 4+ to hit? does it suffer from moving and shooting?

cant wait to see what they do for nids, hopefully they are up there with the best of them

 Inquisitor Kallus wrote:

 Fango wrote:

Shadeseraph wrote:

I think it's hilarious that a Punisher gatling is supposedly OP, and a fleshborer hive is supposedly not worth taking.

They have the same statline,

Stating that the punishier gatling is OP compared to the fleshborer hive because one, platform included, costs about 2/3 than the other, platform included as well, while also having more range is a perfectly reasonable explanation of why people find one OP and the other one not.

Not to mention, when mounted on a Vulture, there are two of them, and that thing can get to anywhere on the table in a given turn...or at least anywhere they can get a bead on and range to what they want to hit....

Being on the receiving end of that thing is demoralizing as a bug player...especially if you play lots of little bugs and don't have any Malanthropes hanging around...

doesnt it need 4+ to hit? does it suffer from moving and shooting?

Yes, it needs 4+ to hit at its highest Wound bracket(8-14). It has a special rule called "Strafing Run" that grants +1 to Hit rolls against anything that does not have the "Fly" keyword.

Man, I've been reading the thread on the CWE codex and it has me salivating. If our 'dex gets the kind of point drops that the Eldar got, I'll be ecstatic.

Can I make a point as a newbie to the Tyranid family?

What I want is survive-ability and the further added ability to be a threat.

I'm not a game designer, I admit. But I can't help but wonder why our bugs don't have access to some kind of regeneration ability, and why Acid blood isn't more prevalent as an upgrade for monsters.

Also, I love my Haruspex. She is such a good monster, but WHY the feth does she hit in CC on a 4+?? It seems to me like so many of our CC models have abysmal chances to hit, and not enough attacks to compensate. Never mind that the other codex armies so far have access to a massive variety of extremely powerful stuff.

If we get points reductions, I'll be happy. But I want to see actual change among the stats. That's where the real problem is, in my opinion.

 Togusa wrote:


Also, I love my Haruspex. She is such a good monster, but WHY the feth does she hit in CC on a 4+??

Because it has a S16 attack!

If your new to nids then I just hope you missed the last few books :/
Hasn't been a great run since back when we could really tinker with upgrades on them (was mutatable genus 4th?)

Been kind of down hill since then really which is sad.
Aesthetically nids to me are one of the best armies with huge potential for models.
But sadly the rules keep killing it off.

On that note, lash whips took a beating with the nerf bat too.
So on one hand, nids warriors can take a missile now (finally!)
But on the other, their weapons are changed a fair bit too.

Either way though, with the loss of instant death to a degree, it's looking up!

I am hoping there is a generic bonus for hive fleets themselves, and a penalty to enemies within synapse range.

Like army gets 6+ wound ignores or -1 to hit like some others get, but an additional boost like a penalty to leadership for enemies within synapse range, or penalties to charge range, or even not being g able to get cover while in synapse.

Little things that make you want to get closer with synapse creatures instead of sitting back and babysitting.

Just a thought.

I would like to see hive fleet rules benefit specific subsets of units, or better yet specific biomorphs, rather than being a blanket across all units. Something like 'all devourer weapons in hive fleet shootymaggot are +1 str' or 'adrenal glands cost 0 pts for hive fleet jumpystabstab'.

I hope Tyranid traits are like Imperial Guard ones, with two parts, one for small bugs and other for the big bugs, that way they can have things like advance+charge for the small bugs and something else for the big ones, so they can be better balanced, etc...

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
I still want a Dactylis/Malefactor combined kit.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
The hormagaunt kit requires you to glue the two halves of the head together. Yeah, I'd really like to see a new one.

I was just going to say that. I've built, at least, 200 of the little buggers. I know at least 100 more unbuilt. Those two piece heads are horrid...

It's why I got so many of the Battle for McDonald's push-fit Termagants. Single piece heads!

Some day I'd like to see a complete H.B.M.C model inventory. I'm sure it's mind boggling

Best plastic termagants are the single piece ones from 2nd ed. Those things were even the right size. The current ones just need a saddle and a guardmen riding them into battle.


Automatically Appended Next Post:


These ones.

 Red Corsair wrote:
Best plastic termagants are the single piece ones from 2nd ed.

Single piece? The picture literally shows their three pieces.

Anyway, these were the best:



Look just like the current ones, but no two-piece heads.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Best plastic termagants are the single piece ones from 2nd ed.

Single piece? The picture literally shows their three pieces.

Anyway, these were the best:



Look just like the current ones, but no two-piece heads.

The tails of the Termagants are the only thing about the model that still bother me to this day. Why are all of them completely straight!?

You'd be amazed how easy that makes 'em to store.

 radarbabyeater wrote:


The tails of the Termagants are the only thing about the model that still bother me to this day. Why are all of them completely straight!?

I like it. Makes them look like they're flocking.

I like the 2nd ed ones because they're smaller and weedier. They got that whipped dog vibe. The other ones look more competent.

 radarbabyeater wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Best plastic termagants are the single piece ones from 2nd ed.

Single piece? The picture literally shows their three pieces.

Anyway, these were the best:



Look just like the current ones, but no two-piece heads.

The tails of the Termagants are the only thing about the model that still bother me to this day. Why are all of them completely straight!?

They look awesome if you bend them!

So its 2 weeks before pre-order week and 1 week from likely official news releases begin. There must be some rumours out there in the vast world of the web for us?

 Overread wrote:
So its 2 weeks before pre-order week and 1 week from likely official news releases begin. There must be some rumours out there in the vast world of the web for us?

In the year you joined this glorious board there was a N&R Tyranid thread 62 pages of wishlisting with only one new picture. I think I'm good.

 NinthMusketeer wrote:
I would like to see hive fleet rules benefit specific subsets of units, or better yet specific biomorphs, rather than being a blanket across all units. Something like 'all devourer weapons in hive fleet shootymaggot are +1 str' or 'adrenal glands cost 0 pts for hive fleet jumpystabstab'.

I'm pretty sure that wont happen. Craftworlds was the perfect opportunity for that to happen as each of the big 5 focus on a different selection of units yet only the Saim-Hann trait works in that way. On the upside Craftworlds had all 5 of it's traits useful to one type of army build or another (they were aligned with the wrong craftworlds, but all of them were good to some extent) so I'm hoping Nids continue that trend.

Just chiming in.

One part heads good. Two part heads bad.

It's not so much the additional fiddling it takes to build the unit, but that I need to do so many of them. And where the mould channels link up on some (seriously....why in such awkward areas??)

 radarbabyeater wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Best plastic termagants are the single piece ones from 2nd ed.

Single piece? The picture literally shows their three pieces.

Anyway, these were the best:



Look just like the current ones, but no two-piece heads.

The tails of the Termagants are the only thing about the model that still bother me to this day. Why are all of them completely straight!?

Real creatures like dinosaurs that have the Gant body style actually have rigid tails, not flexible ones. It's a counterweight to allow them to move on two legs, and not a tail like a snake or a dog has.

http://dml.cmnh.org/1998Mar/msg00608.html

 Overread wrote:
So its 2 weeks before pre-order week and 1 week from likely official news releases begin. There must be some rumours out there in the vast world of the web for us?

Ok here's one.

I was at heat 1 of the GT and chatted to some of the devs, who were there competing. We discussed that there's a problem with characters that have >9 wounds, in that their survivability suddenly drops away because people can shoot them, and because they degrade. Apparently the Nid players in the playtest group had been asking for their characters to have 9 wounds, to keep them from being shot. The devs didn't think that was ok, as the models were too big to have so few wounds.

So instead, you can expect to see the durability of the big guys go up, in some way. I got the impression that they'd get more wounds, but it might be something else.

Sorry to be so vague. It's interesting that they are looking at changing profiles, rather than points values.

 Symbio Joe wrote:

 Overread wrote:
So its 2 weeks before pre-order week and 1 week from likely official news releases begin. There must be some rumours out there in the vast world of the web for us?

In the year you joined this glorious board there was a N&R Tyranid thread 62 pages of wishlisting with only one new picture. I think I'm good.

Oh come on, that thread was just pure entertainment, you couldn't help but follow it....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Togusa wrote:
Can I make a point as a newbie to the Tyranid family?

What I want is survive-ability and the further added ability to be a threat.

I'm not a game designer, I admit. But I can't help but wonder why our bugs don't have access to some kind of regeneration ability, and why Acid blood isn't more prevalent as an upgrade for monsters.

Also, I love my Haruspex. She is such a good monster, but WHY the feth does she hit in CC on a 4+?? It seems to me like so many of our CC models have abysmal chances to hit, and not enough attacks to compensate. Never mind that the other codex armies so far have access to a massive variety of extremely powerful stuff.

If we get points reductions, I'll be happy. But I want to see actual change among the stats. That's where the real problem is, in my opinion.

I agree with this, I mean I still don't understand why our characters can't get 2+ armor and how they decide some of the stats, however GW has made it brutally, explicitly clear from history that they are not going to provide us with these type of upgrades, so I am holding out hope for what they seem to be providing to everybody. Our last 2 codices, were utter steaming piles of gak, so I'm hoping this one just puts us on the level of CWE, CSM, and SM (sorry AdMech players).