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.

Can someone post stats for their effectiveness against Meq and others please.

I dont know if they are just weaker or thoroughly ineffective with the new proposed rules.

Why would they be ineffective? With the new rules, any infiltrators with scuttlers will be able to come on the sides of the table via reserves, and rending works the same in close combat now as before, just with less vehicle killing power. And now the Broodlord's unit will be able to run, even if they can't fleet per se.

4ed vs MEq

1/6 rend + (1/2 normal hit *1/2 wound *1/3 fail save) = 0.25 avg MEq kills per attack ( 0.75 on charge)

5ed MEq

(2/3 hit * 1/3 normal wound * 1/3 failed save) + (2/3 hit* 1/6 rend) = 0.19 avg MEq kills per attack (0.56 on charge)

However Feeder Tendrils become very useful as now preferred enemy gives rerolls to hit. Thus they improve chance of rends and greatly enhance the inevitable gaunt screen.

5ed with tendrils

(8/9 hit * 1/3 normal wound * 1/3 failed save) + (8/9 hit* 1/6 rend) = 0.24 avg MEq kills per attack (0.74 on charge)

Gaunts w/ preferred enemy
3/4 hit * 1/3 wound * 1/3 failed save = 1/12 MEq kills per attack. Which is identicle to the per hit kills of a marine.

I think a combo of tendril genestealers and gaunts will be pretty damn effective.

Also, give broodlord tendrils and the retinue gains back the efficiency they lost in 5ed for only 3 points. Not too shabby, considering they can flank as well.

Yep, the reduction in effectiveness of rending claws should be more than counter-balanced by the ability of stealers to finally be SCREENED again (hooray) by 5 point Spinegaunts or 7 point Scuttling Spinegaunts.

How has rending been reduced? The book I saw still had a 6 to hit making an automatic wound with AP2, only being reduced effectiveness against vehicles, by getting an additional d3 rather than the 6 from the initial roll. How are they that much worse?

Yeah I was originally thinking genestealers would be over priced with the rending change. But with screening back and the addition of flanking it is probably a good thing rending was toned down a bit.

Every rumor (and the doc I've seen) states it is a 6 to wound that causes AP2 autowound, not 6 to hit.

Why did they nerf rending anyway, punish players with assault cannon?

Also the new screening rules, can you screen multiwound monsters (Warriors, Raveners).

Orlanth wrote:Why did they nerf rending anyway, punish players with assault cannon?

Also the new screening rules, can you screen multiwound monsters (Warriors, Raveners).

I think that's about it (the Assault Cannon). Also, I wouldn't be surprised that if in the new codex Necrons all have rending weapons and the current version of rending would be waaaaaaay to powerful for that.


5th edition just may usher in the Nid horde army renaissance with screening gaunts backed up by warriors and stealers.

I wonder if genestealers get an advanced version of rending, the old rules, to cover for their high price. Maybe they will become minimum sized units to provide tendril support for massed hormagaunts and ablative spinegaunts.

Its a bit frustrating I have just about completed my new nids. The core is 3x10 genestealers (carapace), 20 termagants, 20 hormagaunts and 6 rippers. with 2 raveners (rending), 2x3 winged warriors (talon and rending), 4 foot warriors (deathspitters and talons), 2 dakka fex lite (my non cheesy variant with talons and devourers), 2 Zoanthropes and a winged tyrant. All I am missing now is my Trygon.

Should I model my rending claw raveners and winged warriors back to talons?

Have I anything like enough Gaunts?

If my army is truly hosed I my have to cancel my 'fair' carnifex plan and take devourer spam after all.

EDIT: Sorry, big oops writing my list out earlier.

I think you've just been blessed by these new rules (if they turn out to be what we've seen).

The only thing you need to do is by more gaunts for your screen. You really will be able to play a warrior heavy army a heck of a lot easier now.

And as for abandoning rending claws, hell no! They still allow you to hurt AV11-13 vehicles (AV14 if you take toxin sacs) and they still provide you statistically with more MEQ kills than an extra regular attack.

I think the only thing you need to consider is whether to take the +1 WS upgrade, as it really matters now to get the extra hits in against WS4 opponents (to maximize the amount of 'to wound' dice you roll).

Thanks for the help Yakface.

I took both +1Ws and I on my winged warriors to go before rank and file Meq. What I left out was the toxin as I was mainly relying on rending.
Toxin is now needed I suppose

My footslogger warriors are 'naked' they are there to rpovide small blast to prevent the opponent from getting 'free' clustering of troops and as survivable marching synapse.

My tyrant is also 'naked' 2x talons and wings. I didnt use upgrades becuse they cost a lot and a winged monster should be able to choose its own targets (it also has 3 or 6 winged warriors as retinue). Sure the upgrades are good against IC's but stealers were my IC killers, the flyrant slaughtered rank and file.

Will this need to change, are stealers still good enough IC killers?

Orlanth wrote:
Its a bit frustrating I have just about completed my new nids. The core is 3x10 warriors (carapace), 20 termagants, 20 hormagaunts and 6 rippers. with 2 raveners (rending), 2x3 winged warriors (talon and rending), 4 foot warriors (deathspitters and talons), 2 dakka fex lite (my non cheesy variant with talons and devourers), 2 Zoanthropes and a winged tyrant. All I am missing now is my Trygon.

That army sounds like it will actualy be good in 5th edition rather than the warrior duck shoot that it currently is in 4th. Just run the termagants up front (give them scuttling perhaps) with the hormagaunts on a different side. Have your now screened warriors come up right behind them and lay waste to your enemy. How can you go wrong?

I think that's about it (the Assault Cannon).

I dunno, if they are changing the assault cannon to 30 points and 1 a unit then I can't see it being the uber weapon in 5e even with old rending version (and with new rending I may goto 5 point hevy flamers all around).

I think it has more to do with assault units like stealers, DC and whatnotnot being more difficult to take down before they get to assault. More genestealers get into assault, the more rends you are gonna get.

Plus, agree they can now give Necrons rending instead of gauss, as well as give all snipers the autowound without upseting balance too much.

Phoenix wrote: How can you go wrong?

Oh quite easily, by being careless with what I type.

It was supposed to be 3x10 genestealers, not warriors. I didnt notice because having ten warriors in an army is still considered a lot nowadays.

When you start talking about Genestealers I can't help but think about how decent Stealers will be with scuttlers coming in from the short table edges.

Should be nice to get objectives and take out targets.

I would love to see nid horde return. Zilla is so not fun to play and some of my most entertaining games were against my friend who was the 3rd ed. 'nid king.

5th edition has me considering a nid horde. I'd love to model and paint up a Godfex for the fun of it, and it might work okay with the Run rule. And I love forgeworld's flyrant, so that would be in there. Apart from that, 16 feeder tentacle genestealers (8 with a broodlord, 8 behind a screen) some leaping CC warriors with all the cool upgrades, and 4 boxes worth of Gaunts should set me up for some fun games, at relatively low cost, with relatively few metal models. It's very attractive because I love the look of 4th edition nid models and the rumoured changes make my favourite configurations cosmetically also tactically viable.

Is there any limit of how far up a board edge you can bring on your scuttling stealers.

If there isn't IG have no chance, all those guardsnmen taking up so much room they touch the sides, and stealers enter straight into assault, without losing casualties on the way. No way a large basic infantry army can survive this.

And GW want us to use more infantry....

Gun line tau should be easy pickings too. But hey I'm not complaining.

Don't forget feeder tendrils are now mandatory equipment for stealers. The net effect of the rending nerf + the prefered enemy buff was a 1pt feeder tendril tax on stealers and thus denying them the ability to take plasma grenade flesh hooks. It would have been very sweet to have both.

But... But the feeder tendtril head is so ugly!! I much prefure the implant attack head....

Aduro wrote:But... But the feeder tendtril head is so ugly!! I much prefure the implant attack head....

You dont need it on every steraler, just one or two.

Also its Cthulhuesque rather than ugly per se. Once you appreciate Lovecraft (or the Gret Old Ones) you will understand.

Wrong Orlanth the entire brood must take it.

If you only give the trait to ever other brood, guess which ones will be targeted first? Also if your broods are more than 2" apart the non tendril brood loses preferred enemy. Basically it only makes sense to buy feeders for everyone.

However there is no rule stating that the cthulu head has to be feeder tendrils. I plan to declare the tongues of my regular stealers are feeders, if all the stealers are the same its perfectly legal at least at the Hall of Heroes level.

Aduro

Just declare the implant attack head to be feeders. There is no rule stating which head is which or what a feeder tendril has to look like.

Russell wrote:Aduro

Just declare the implant attack head to be feeders. There is no rule stating which head is which or what a feeder tendril has to look like.

this is a little on par with saying my lascannons are now heavy bolters, but I feel your pain. I actually like the tendrils. I would in fact like them on every model in my brood. however GW saw fit to only include one per brood. I guess I should break out the green stuff and see what kind of monsters I can make.

I like the tendrils on the Lictor head, but the Genestealer ones are just too Zoidberg for me. Wonder what it would cost to bitz order a bunch of lictor heads...

Russell wrote:Wrong Orlanth the entire brood must take it.

I am discussing the model, not the brood profile. You only get one feeder tendril head in the genestealer box. GW will not expect you to get a feeder tendril head for every stealer in your brood. Just one or two for WYSIWYG. If they thought otherwise they would have supplied additional heads like they provided additional arms.

Its not a 'heavy weapon' equivalent either, a Vindicare cannot pick out the feeder tendril stealer as he is a representational model, if he does for some reason remove the feeder tendril model from its place, and then use the feeder tendril model to replace another stealer in the brood.

You may if you wish give every stealer feeder tendril heads but GW imagery of genestealer broods do include some with feeder tendril heads and others without, obviously this can only mean it the presence of some feeder tendril heads indicates that the brood has the feeder tendril ability.

Russell wrote:Aduro

Just declare the implant attack head to be feeders. There is no rule stating which head is which or what a feeder tendril has to look like.

Well page 39 of the Tyranid codex does clearly indicate which head is which. To use the implant attack head would justifiably be considered 'confusing' and unfair, though most friendly games opponents wopuld be Ok with it so long as you pointed out what was what beforehand, and reminded them in game if appropriate.

On the modeling tendril heads...

WYSIWYG is about communication.

Communicate what upgrade the unit has, versus units that don't. Several models in the unit with FT heads of some sort should do this. Point these out to whoever you are playing, and that should be fine.

Anyone getting on your case about every model not having FT heads of some sort is just trying to hassle you.

There are plenty of occasions where a unit may have an upgrade that was paid for, that there isn't a standard, or even clear way to model for.

I don't intend on changing the heads on all of my genestealers. I am not a fan of the feeder heads, but I will make a few to help remind my opponent what the deal is.

That is the thing to keep in mind. Modeling like this is a visual aid, nothing more.

Aduro wrote:I like the tendrils on the Lictor head, but the Genestealer ones are just too Zoidberg for me. Wonder what it would cost to bitz order a bunch of lictor heads...

Yup. This has been my problem as well, but I never came up with that way of phrasing it! Perfect.