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.

DevianID:

I did qualify the example of $20 being preferable to $6 where you consistently prefer more to less. Please pardon me of that wasn't clear.

What I'm describing is weighting one's expectations with what might actually happen. If the object of a particular roll is to kill a tank, as you say, then clearly 17% to kill it is superior to 5% chance. But I'm not arguing that you want to be able to kill the tank four more times than necessary, I'm arguing something else, I'm arguing shorter odds in total, not just shorter odds on average.

What I'm describing is being prepared for getting lucky. You won't always get lucky. In fact, on average you will not get lucky, you will get the average. You will also get unlucky. However, if you are prepared for getting both lucky and average, then you have a leg up on those people who are only prepared for the average and are not sufficiently positioned to exploit good luck.

DevianID wrote:While I think CKO is borderline trolling, Nurglich I have to agree with him that your math is off--though not due to lack of experience.

Constantly changing a thread about playtesting into a math war is trolling.

DevianID wrote:PS: to CKO, using numbers, as long as they are correct numbers, is by far the better estimation of usefulness.

You make it seem as if you can figure out which unit is better by using a calculator, knowing the average or probability of something happening is not useful when you only care what happens during 2-3 shooting phases.

Mahu I think you didnt win any of your games because you are trying to win with tyranids in the shooting phase.

(Nurg I apologize seems like I was a bit to harsh)

But nurglich, the math you are using does not, in any way I can measure, help you estimate lucky (burst) results! The d6 versus d20 illustrates this. Yes, 20 is more than 3 times better than 6, but 6 is infinitely better than 0, and you are more likely to get a 6 than a 20.

Your example still fails to qualify why a 1 in 20 chance of getting $20 is better than a 1 in 6 chance of getting $6. You mention that $20 is more than $6, but that statement has no value in determining the d20 vs. d6 example, as the 2 are, ironicly, unrelated without a THIRD statement (such as saying that you must get $20 with 1 roll, thus the 1 in 20 is the only option that can produce the outcomes you desire)

Also, please see the edit that the 2x scytal fex will expect more hits on a 6+ than the claw/scytal fex. That math is solid. What qualifier are you adding that invalidates the math?

For how many people use the Killa Kan strat. I just don't like it...

DevianID:

The point isn't to estimate lucky results. That's absurd. The point is to be prepared for lucky results.

A 1 in 20 chance of getting $20 is better than a 1 in 20 chance of getting $6 because, while their expected value is the same, $20 > $6. In other words, when the expected value is identical, you're left with the expected utility of each result obtaining, in which case $20 > $6. I've taken pains to point out the statement that commensurates these values. Let me put it like this: Rational agents consistently prefer more to less.

What I'm trying to say, and maybe you can help me out here, is that instead of trying to predict what is likely to happen, you should be prepared for whatever happens.

So I'm not trying to say that a Carnifex with two pairs of scything talons is less reliable than the Carnifex with a pair of scything talons and a pair of crushing claws. Quite the opposite, actually. I'm saying that the Carnifex with the crushing claws is slightly less reliable, but will leverage good luck better. So there's no qualifier that invalidates the truth of two pairs of scything talons being more reliable in producing hits, but there is a big hefty qualifier about crushing claws being more effective when they do hit.

Do you see the difference here? Two pairs of scything talons are more efficient, but a pair of crushing claws is more effective (and commensurately costly). In a game like Warhammer 40k where the difference can be a single dice roll, any strategy predicted on reliability without regard to potentiality is going to hang-string you.

That's why I've put the weighted expected value in this thread, because I've noticed that Shep and Mahu have put an emphasis on reliability in their lists, which is pretty much what always happens when a new codex comes out. People see the new list, pick the most reliable units, and then get some considerable mileage out of them. It's unsurprising because those units will be reliable. However this is a satisficing strategy, going with reliability at the expense of maximizing.

In terms of what seems to be going on with their play-testing experiences, they are reliably getting beaten. With previous codexes the reliable units were quickly identified and used as a hammer until people clued into what they reliably did, and then stepped out of the way. In this codex the reliable units aren't overwhelming anyone. I guess it's because people are used to 5th edition by now, and their instincts have finally adjusted so there's no stupid mistakes that let one army composition overwhelm all opposition (like the Lash of Submission, or the Seer Bike Council, or Nob Bikers, etc).

But considering how many army compositions depend on reliability, and considering the armies that have been showcased on here, I think it's worth exploring high-risk and high-reward strategies rather than reliabilist strategies.

Again, I get what you are saying. BUT, in regards to your high risk high reward as it pertains to the scytal/claw fex, remember the reward is always a dead vehicle. THUS, you are advocating higher risk and higher cost for SAME reward, aka the 2 scytal expects more hits than the claw fex, but in both cases the payoff is identical--namely the vehicle is destroyed. Thus, to continue the d6 vs d20 example applied to a carnifex, the reward for rolling max on either dice is [money]. Thus, if you are looking for more reliable [money] then the 1d6 option is much better, as we dont care about the maximum amount of [money], just what is more likely to result in getting any [money].

As to the OP, as the math discussion has potentially brought us off topic, in my testing games (using real world experience!) I have been using zero heavy support options in 1850 games. I feel that I gain much more threat to the enemy--armored vehicles or otherwise--with genestealers than any heavy support or fast attack option can give me. As I also have troop choices to spare, and the swarmlord AND a hive commander tyrant starting on the board for guarenteed +2 to reserves, the stealer's ability to outflank is boosted.

Yes, the stealers can get flamered/boltered/whatevered; however thanks to infiltrate they can be spread out to reduce template damage, and can start with ½ in terrain almost all the time.

So IMHO including some kind of stealer shock might be a good idea to try out in place of the big bugs in these testing games.

Edit-- to Mahu, if you found yourself versus razorback spacewolves, how do you think the zoan's would have fared compared to the hive guard? I see more razorback/rhino lists than termie raider lists, so my playtesting is pretty much exactly counter to yours.

Good point, my area does tend to lean on the side of spamming big high quality assault units and playing pretty aggressively with the exception of our IG players of course. So my experience against the fabled "critical mass" list is limited.

However, I would imagine that my theories will still hold true. The whole reason I prefer the Zoanthropes is because they put your opponent in the difficult position to either shoot thier high strentgh weapons at the Zoanthropes and pray to get past the save and insta-kill them or try and put pressure on the TMCs and take the damage the Zoes can spit out.

Remember, I still have a unit of Hive Guard in the list, so that may provide another distraction as well. Needless to say, a critical mass list needs to have spot on target priority and pray they do enough damage. And I don't think Razorback spam armies can play the game of attrition like the Tyranids can, because most of the eschew any sort of assault element for cheap small squads so they can get more Las-plas Razorbacks on the table.

I dunno, most critical mass lists can put 12 Razorbacks on the table, so it would be an uphill battle for the Zoanthropes, but I should be able to take out at least 3 a turn, and then I am assault 5 man squads of grey hunters and tactical marines with gaunts.


Here is the new list after playtesting:

Hive Tyrant w/ Lashwhip-Bonesword, Scything Talons, Ancient Enemy, Life Leach, Paroxysm, Armored Shell = 255

3 Tyrant Guard = 180

-Elites-

3 Zoanthropes = 180

3 Zoanthropes = 180

3 Hive Guard = 150

-Troops-

10 Termagaunts = 50

10 Termagaunts = 50

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

-Heavy Support-

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Total = 1995

DevianID:

Yes, the reward is a dead vehicle, but the numbers I crunched for the cruising Land Raider the reward is parsed as hits. You'll get more hits on a reliable basis from the two pairs of scything talons, but you'll get almost as many hits on a reliable basis from a pair of crushing claws, and more hits when you're lucky. In terms of dead vehicles, the crushing claws will see more of them, because the hits themselves need to be translated into penetration (a wash) and damage results, the more the better (remember that Destroyed (wreckage) results can occur from cumulative damage effects).

I agree with you whole-heartedly about the lack of Heayv Support. I've worked up some lists with minimal Heavy Support here.

I think the emphasis on Heavy Support is just another symptom of trying to fit the Tyranid army in the molds of other armies, particularly Imperial Guard: that of reliable Heavy Support.

I think that Genestealers, and similar units, emphasize the value of the weighted expected value - they're not reliable: they're vulnerable and expensive, but their capacity for rending makes the most of their potential.

Nurg, not to continue the math side discussion too much, but I think the biggest downside to your point is thus: You correctly state that the potential for good luck is greater with CClaws (which boils down to the fact that if they both roll all 6's to hit, the cclaw fex is better), but you fail to account for why the once every 100 games the cclaw fex does very slightly better than a scytal fex, that slight performance increase is worth 25 points?

Basicly, you have to PAY for an option that, 99 times out of 100, is WORSE at a stated mission. Ill tell you flatly, for competetive testing, the option that excels 99 times out of 100 is the best option.

Now, if you added another qualifier, then you would have a point. For example, if you are planning on using the fex not to hunt land raiders (my stated mission, as non-raider vehicles can be better dealt with via other critters, and vehicles is what my nids have trouble with) but to hunt nob bikers, and you were stacking the claw fex with a tyrant for paroxyn and perferred enemy, then YES, the cclaw fex far exceeds the scytal fex in expected results point for point.

With that metagame qualifier in place, then I would agree that the cclaw fex is better than a 2scytal fex, as while I dont have to metagame versus nobs in my area, if you do in your area then the cclaw fex is a great buy. With that qualifier, I would also recommend the swarmlord and dual bonesword warriors as alternates to the fex.

Edit: As an aside, I disagree with the new stock stealers being unreliable, vulnerable and expensive. Infiltrate makes them one of the only units in the nid book 99% able to assault on turn 2 (multiple botched fleet and difficult terrain rolls, with move through cover no less, are the only thing that could prevent a turn 2 assault), with a potential turn 1 charge if the stars align. This directly translates into very reliable results by turn 2. Meanwhile, a deepstriking trygon for example, has to roll a 2+ minimum on turn 2 to assault by turn 3. In my opinion, the trygon is unreliable. As for survivability/vulnerability, my metagame is mainly versus spammed vehicles with spammed antivehicle attacks. To this end, stealers get cover easier than MCs, are the fastest thing around thanks to infiltrate, have the cheapest points per wound on a creature that can kill a rear 10 armor vehicle, AND have the most attacks at the highest WS and init.

Mahu I like your list. If I was to build a "ground and pound" army mine would look something like yours (though I absolutely hate the idea of the tyrannofex for no reason). But how would you make it viable in 1500 pts while retaining the amount of firepower you have? As I see it this is a great build at 2k, but effectiveness is drastically reduced when changing to a lower points level when compared to IG.

(though I absolutely hate the idea of the tyrannofex for no reason)

The Tyrannofex is a two fold creature. The idea of it is to move forward shooting it's rupture cannons at anything that is fast and has decent firepower (like Valkries, Land Speeders, etc.) hoping at the very least to stop their fire power, and by turn three, when you have busted some transports, to start laying down big blasts and rending flamer templates. They are not there for Land Raider busting. That is a lesson I leaned the hard way, they are there to have a decent long range gun that can kill the mobility of your opponent.

For example, in my game versus an IG gunline, I conentrated their firepower on the two Vendetta's I faced off against. In a round of shooting, I destroyed one and weapon destroyed the other. Taking the firepower from 6 Lascannons to 2 really helps this list.

I have found that most of my opponents have ignored it in favor of going after the Zoanthropes and the Tervigons. As long as the Tyrannofex is alive and giving cover to my Tervigons, I am happy with it.

But how would you make it viable in 1500 pts while retaining the amount of firepower you have? As I see it this is a great build at 2k, but effectiveness is drastically reduced when changing to a lower points level when compared to IG.

First off, if your area is not playing 1850 - 2000 point games, you are really missing out. 2000 is preferable because the game is pretty balanced at that level, in a way that you can have the "core" of any decent army list and then the additional room of anything you would like. If you are concerned about 1500 point level armies, start talking to your area about upping those levels. Trust me, once you go 2000 you never go back.

Having said that though, the core of my army list is two units of Zoanthropes giving cover to two T-fexes, who in turn give cover to two Tervigons, set up like this.

---------------------------Gaunt Screen---------------------------
---------+Z+-----+Z+----Hive Tyrant----+Z+-----+Z+--------
----+Z+----*T-Fex*---TG ---TG---TG----*T-Fex*----+Z+------
----------*Tervigon*----HG ---HG---HG----*Tervigon*----------

Now, the first to go would probably be the Hive Tyrant, as at 1500 his Ancient enemy ability is not as needed since you will probably not face as many hammer units. We can fulfill the HQ requirement with a Tyranid Prime that can join Zoanthropes or what have you. That still leaves us over, so we have to make the tough call when it come to the elite choices. The option is to remove one from each squad, or drop one altogether. I would lean towards dropping one from each squad to keep things consistent.

So the 1500 point version of the list would be:

-HQ-

Tyranid Prime w/ Deathspitter, Pair of Boneswords, Adrenal, etc. = 105

-Elites-

2 Zoanthropes = 120

2 Zoanthropes = 120

2 Hive Guard = 100

-Troops-

10 Termagaunts = 50

10 Termagaunts = 50

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

-Heavy Support-

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Total = 1495

Mahu, your list is fairly decent, but still lacks anything that can dominate in the assault phase. I agree with CKO, your list is still trying too hard in the shooting phase. Like I said on Saturday, your list is on the right track, but I still feel you'd be better served with some form of fast harassment unit...or some type of unit that requires a massive effort to remove. Otherwise, by turn 5-6 your army runs out of gas so to speak. If you can't lock up your game by turn 4, your list suffers.

The assault unit I want the most is to put 18 Genestealers back on the table, but I am struggling to determine what to drop to get them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I could drop the Hive Guard altogether, a Tyrant Guard, and Armored Shell on the Tyrant to get 18 Genestealers on the table.

So the list would look like:

Hive Tyrant w/ Lashwhip-Bonesword, Devourers, Ancient Enemy, Life Leach, Paroxysm = 210

2 Tyrant Guard = 120

-Elites-

3 Zoanthropes = 180

3 Zoanthropes = 180

-Troops-

10 Termagaunts = 50

10 Termagaunts = 50

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

9 Genestealers = 126

9 Genestealers = 126

-Heavy Support-

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Total = 1992

Dev:

Suit yourself.

With the open elite slot, I'd put Ymgarls in there instead. They can appear...then charge and wreck something before they die. Your 18 stealers will never make a combat IMHO. Outflanking is an option, but not one that will produce instant results like Ymgarls can. Otherwise, I'd do hormagaunts, or rippers.

Mahu wrote:The assault unit I want the most is to put 18 Genestealers back on the table, but I am struggling to determine what to drop to get them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I could drop the Hive Guard altogether, a Tyrant Guard, and Armored Shell on the Tyrant to get 18 Genestealers on the table.

So the list would look like:

Hive Tyrant w/ Lashwhip-Bonesword, Devourers, Ancient Enemy, Life Leach, Paroxysm = 210

2 Tyrant Guard = 120

-Elites-

3 Zoanthropes = 180

3 Zoanthropes = 180

-Troops-

10 Termagaunts = 50

10 Termagaunts = 50

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

Tervigon w/ Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin, Adrenal, Cluster Spines = 210

9 Genestealers = 126

9 Genestealers = 126

-Heavy Support-

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Tyrannofex w/ Rupture Cannon, Thorax Swarm w/ Shreddershard Beatles, Cluster Spines = 265

Total = 1992

Mahu, you are working the same angle I am, and I get what you are saying about the zoans... I am going to try that. I still feel like we are ice skating uphill however...

Captain K is going from the other angle. And I half agree with him... However, every army in 40k needs to shoot if they are playing in a mechanized metagame. You don't have to be a gunline, but you can't just charge vehicles to kill them.

Mechanized lists have been getting way more wins than they should against CC armies on this one simple exchange that they force. Mech armies say "I'll trade you my rhino for your genestealer unit." And pure CC armies say, "Ok."

Is it ok to charge a predator, a land raider or a vendetta? Yes, of course, those are 'units' unto themselves. Is it ok to charge a chimera or a rhino? No way. You are too bunched up and too close to the unit inside and nearby units. There isn't a single 50 point CC unit in the game that can kill a moving transport, so its never a good trade.

When the rhino or chimera is part of a short range tactical list, then you can wait on those vehicles, they don't really need to die until they make a move for objectives. By then your mid and short range anti-armor has no range considerations at all.

But when those vehicles ARE the gunline, and they are on the 5" line, tearing you apart, the game breaks down a bit. Laserbacks, chimeras, hydras, vendettas, typhoons... what motivation do they have to move towards you at all? Objectives that they can swiftly move to on the last few turns of the game. In order to rip open the scoring rhino or land raider against the "other guys" we need hive guard and or zoanthropes, so we can charge or shoot devourers into the unit inside. But unfortunately, those hive guard and zoanthropes get annihilated before they can contribute to killing the gunline.

So I made this list when i got sick of IG...

prime
zoanthropes in pod
zoanthropes in pod
deathleaper
shooty warriors in pod
shooty warriors in pod
shooty warriors in pod
shooty warriors in pod
dakka fex in pod
dakka fex in pod
dakka fex in pod

That solved the gunline problem, they HAVE to reserve out against me. (you can try a game where you don't reserve against this list with a gunline if you want to feel good about the nids). But now, the guy that took demons, land raiders, Even a lash/oblit list... these guys get to eat your lunch... I'm not sure I want to have a bad game against that group, as they are very numerous.

CaptK... you and I were talking earlier about a CC focused list that could still take on a gunline, probably from reserve... maybe some of those warriors are genestealers? I'd like to see anything you've been working on or thinking about.

And someone mentioned the lack of CC versus gunlines. Vehicle based gunlines don't really have the luxury to move a lot of vehicles combat speed, so a t-fex in position or crushing claw tervigon for that matter can rip up the hit on 4+ tanks, even a furiously charging termagant unit can stack a bunch of shakens on them.

With the kind of shooting that Mahu and I are working with, we can slow down and outfight the tactical choppy lists, so more CC isn't necessary. The problem I'm bumping in to, is that our shooting is getting instantly neutralized by the gunlines....

I have been thinking about dumping all but the t-fex shooting, and maybe one zoanthrope unit, and focusing more on resilient fast CC, but I don't know where to start with that.... I'll come back with more once I'm free, but does anyone else have any thoughts?

I was thinking that it might be something to set aside points for small annoyance units, like a brood of ten Gargoyles, or even tunneling Rippers with Adrenal Glands. Use them to block escape routes from transports while Genestealers and Warriors do the heavy lifting.

In general I think maximizing the number of units that the Tyranid army takes is a good idea, so that enemy units waste firepower trying to take them out. It's not that hard to take out a unit of thirty Termagants, for example, but it's harder to take out three units of ten: so there's some of the value of a Tervigon, with the other value being all the bonuses and enhancements, but Tervigons are themselves so expensive and if the math on another thread is correct then you can simply buy more Termagants and other stuff for the same cost.

Mahu, you are working the same angle I am, and I get what you are saying about the zoans... I am going to try that. I still feel like we are ice skating uphill however...

I tend to agree that there's too much thinking in: "how many shooting units can I cram into a list", vs. "how do I literally, swamp the mech player with too many targets."

Captain K is going from the other angle. And I half agree with him... However, every army in 40k needs to shoot if they are playing in a mechanized metagame. You don't have to be a gunline, but you can't just charge vehicles to kill them.

Agreed. However, the shooting should be at units that you know will be a problem 3 turns from now...not necessarily at that moment. Target priority is key. Judicious use of Onslaught and Catalyst can really work for you here. If you can close the distance with the T-Fexes, suddenly their shooting becomes more important. The same goes for other bug shooting units. I haven't played as tyranids in 5th, but I understand that they need to break up the gunline first...that means disrupting it by sending in units that create problems for the gunlines ability to redeploy/ move their fire power.

But when those vehicles ARE the gunline, and they are on the 5" line, tearing you apart, the game breaks down a bit. Laserbacks, chimeras, hydras, vendettas, typhoons... what motivation do they have to move towards you at all?

This gets to my point. I think that the tyranids have units that can force a players hand to either move towards you, or shift their focus. I've been a huge advocate of rippers with tunnelers. 9 bases runs you 108pts. Dirt cheap for 27 wounds. Drop them into cover near the center of the table (say about 6-7 inches from their deployment zone) and suddenly you have a unit that can disrupt the opponent. It's 27 wounds to burn through. Sure they are vulnerable to blasts, but that means to get rid of them, they are pouring their blast into a 108pt unit. If they are in cover...they still are taking a superior save. If they really want them dead they'll have to chase them with flame templates...which draws in the units towards you. That makes the distance you need to cover to get into their lines smaller. If the rippers succeed in surviving then they can be used to box in tanks, etc. give them furious charge and they become even more dangerous. The concept is dumping large amounts of wounds into your opponents lap and challenging them to deal with it somehow.

CaptK... you and I were talking earlier about a CC focused list that could still take on a gunline, probably from reserve... maybe some of those warriors are genestealers? I'd like to see anything you've been working on or thinking about.

See above. My thoughts are with massive amounts of cheap gak that literally clogs the gunline into forcibly moving...one way or another. One unit I don't think gets enough praise is the Ravener. When they are doped up on Catalyst and Onslaught, they are definitely a force to be reckoned with(lookout rhinos). Most people seem to be taking two Tervigons anyways. Walking Tyrants need a third guard. In all the test games vs. Mahu's list this was always an area of weakness. The HT simply cannot hold out when the game isn't locked up after turn 4. Suddenly it then dies and the Tyranids fold like a house of cards. In most cases, having that extra guard could have helped in the outcome of the game.

With the kind of shooting that Mahu and I are working with, we can slow down and outfight the tactical choppy lists, so more CC isn't necessary. The problem I'm bumping in to, is that our shooting is getting instantly neutralized by the gunlines....

The shooting is definitely working on slowing down things. Mahu's problem as of late is that if the game can't get locked down by turn 4, he doesn't have the oomph left in his remaining units to win the game. They get quickly isolated and taken out. That is why I am advocating some form of an "F. You" unit that is only in your list to disrupt the movement, or commitments of your opponent. That to me is: Gargoyles, Ymgarls, Rippers. They all have their strengths and weaknesses, but if they allow your phalanx another turn of shooting..all the better.

I have been mentioning it, but I think it bears restating. The IDEAL F-U unit is genestealers imho. Deep striking ANYTHING that is meant for cc is not gonna work. You are looking at a turn 3 assault, if your reserves come in. That leaves your enemy with nothing better to shoot turn 1 and 2 than your endgame units like the hive guard.

Infiltrating 'stealers, on the other hand, provide on-the-board threat on turn 1, and the enemy will always be within 18 inches max, thus a corner deployment wont save them. At 14 points, they are the cheapest unit that can kill av 10 rear vehicles. And while they dont have a great chance at hitting on a 6+, unlike shooting attacks that leave a vehicle stuned or immobed but otherwise alive, if charging stealers stun or immob a vehicle, then they will crush it the next turn when auto hitting unless they are dealt with extreme predjuce.

As an aside, if you charge a vehicle and stun or immob it, go to ground if they shoot at you. Since you are in base contact, you will still swing into the transport in the enemies turn.

Plus, the nice thing with stealers is that they are not limited to merely a shock role. With built in infiltrate, they can outflank when that is preferable. As scoring units, they can hang back on a home objective without need of synapse babysitting thanks to LD 10, or advance where lesser units like a fex might have to hang back due to instinctive behavior.

Gargs are a nice option in the new codex, but as they lack a way to pen av10, mech armies can largely ignore them in their threat calculations. Same goes with hormagants and ripper swarms. Warriors and Raveners, while they possess some decent abilities, suffer greatly from the s8+ antivehicle/nob metagame. You pay 2-3 times as much as a stealer, but still in effect have the same survivability, with no outflank or infiltrate skill.

DevianID wrote:I have been mentioning it, but I think it bears restating. The IDEAL F-U unit is genestealers imho. Deep striking ANYTHING that is meant for cc is not gonna work. You are looking at a turn 3 assault, if your reserves come in. That leaves your enemy with nothing better to shoot turn 1 and 2 than your endgame units like the hive guard.

Infiltrating 'stealers, on the other hand, provide on-the-board threat on turn 1, and the enemy will always be within 18 inches max, thus a corner deployment wont save them. At 14 points, they are the cheapest unit that can kill av 10 rear vehicles. And while they dont have a great chance at hitting on a 6+, unlike shooting attacks that leave a vehicle stuned or immobed but otherwise alive, if charging stealers stun or immob a vehicle, then they will crush it the next turn when auto hitting unless they are dealt with extreme predjuce.

As an aside, if you charge a vehicle and stun or immob it, go to ground if they shoot at you. Since you are in base contact, you will still swing into the transport in the enemies turn.

Plus, the nice thing with stealers is that they are not limited to merely a shock role. With built in infiltrate, they can outflank when that is preferable. As scoring units, they can hang back on a home objective without need of synapse babysitting thanks to LD 10, or advance where lesser units like a fex might have to hang back due to instinctive behavior.

Gargs are a nice option in the new codex, but as they lack a way to pen av10, mech armies can largely ignore them in their threat calculations. Same goes with hormagants and ripper swarms. Warriors and Raveners, while they possess some decent abilities, suffer greatly from the s8+ antivehicle/nob metagame. You pay 2-3 times as much as a stealer, but still in effect have the same survivability, with no outflank or infiltrate skill.

I still haven't gotten around to trying to commit to genestealers....

At 2k points, what would you say your target number of genestealer units would be. Just tell me the number you think I'll learn the most from, and I'll build a list around it and batrep it....

I'm actually really curious about something like this...

prime

3x zoans in pod

3x warriors venom cannon
10x genestealers
10x genestealers
10x genestealers
10x genestealers
10x genestealers

t-fex
t-fex
t-fex

Warriors to keep the t-fexes under control, prime to toughen up the zoanthropes (and to make charging them not an option for anything non-cc dedicated) and genestealers to be "something to deal with" for gunlines.

thins you can't theory hammer are what kind of save my genestealers are going to be getting, and how easy it will be for my opponent to just kill 50 genestealers...

I dont really like that list. The warriors seem out of place, and you have no stacking math hammer for the non-mech spam games where you need to deal with lots of infantry. Ironically, the naked stealer is not a good answer to massive infantry in my playtesting.

At 2k, I would run 2 tyrants with a guard each, 9 elite shooters (mix between hive guard and podded zoans depending on prefrence), a tervigon with some gants, and maybe 3x12 stealers. The gants become super with tyrant and tervigon support, so you can kill infantry armies on the cheap, and if one of the tyrants is a swarmlord you get a guaranteed +2 to reserve and the ability to reroll your outflank side with the stealers and the tervigon, should outflanking be the best option. I am a firm believer in running also, if that helps, and I also dont like using MCs to cover other MCs, as I want all the MCs as close to the line as possible Because that sample list only has 3 MCs, and only the tervigon doesnt get a save from gants, I would spawn with the tervigon early if the enemy is likely to focus fire on it, to ensure you have more gants for the gant screen.

As an aside, because I dont think I mentioned it earlier. The Broodlord is actually a useful upgrade in some matchups. Not because he himself is good, but because he allows for some pretty nasty would allocation garbage. Basicly, as a 3 wound t5 4+ save beasty, while he makes you less killy point for point, he also makes it so any big attack like a 15 burna battlewagon flaming your stealers will almost never finish the squad in 1 go. If you trade 12 naked stealers for 8 stealers and a broodlord, it takes on average 108 hits from flamers to one shot your squad--this number expands to hundreds and hundreds of bolter shots/counterattacking space wolf attacks at s4 if your in cover. Even versus eldar seer council with doom, you need 36 effectively twin linked heavy flamer hits to finish the squad. Thus, a single broodlord, by careful wound allocation, can be a great force multiplier.

DevianID wrote:I dont really like that list. The warriors seem out of place, and you have no stacking math hammer for the non-mech spam games where you need to deal with lots of infantry. Ironically, the naked stealer is not a good answer to massive infantry in my playtesting.

At 2k, I would run 2 tyrants with a guard each, 9 elite shooters (mix between hive guard and podded zoans depending on prefrence), a tervigon with some gants, and maybe 3x12 stealers. The gants become super with tyrant and tervigon support, so you can kill infantry armies on the cheap, and if one of the tyrants is a swarmlord you get a guaranteed +2 to reserve and the ability to reroll your outflank side with the stealers and the tervigon, should outflanking be the best option. I am a firm believer in running also, if that helps, and I also dont like using MCs to cover other MCs, as I want all the MCs as close to the line as possible Because that sample list only has 3 MCs, and only the tervigon doesnt get a save from gants, I would spawn with the tervigon early if the enemy is likely to focus fire on it, to ensure you have more gants for the gant screen.

Ok, now I'm seeing that you might not have gone up against a gunline with the severe face melting that i have had the displeasure of facing recently. One unit of tyrant and guards has proven too slow to get into the fight, gets ignored early, then taken out just before they influence the game, two would be so cost prohibitive that the rest of my list would have trouble standing upright against that firepower for even one turn.

I don't have any concerns about 'foot infantry armies'. because i don't know which of those i would have much problem with, hive tyrant or not... Outflanking tervigon has tempted me before, If i could make a tyrant work for me I'd love to run that.

And as for having MCs behind other MCs, when the kind of shooting I have been facing comes your way, you start looking for 4+ saves whenever and wherever you can get them. Without a 4+ save 3+ armor MCs fall over dead to long fang/typhoon fire or mass autocannon fire.

I would still encourage you to try my list out. The combination of turn 1 stealer pressure, with all the reserve options available, and a solid MC+gant+elite shooting core makes for a pretty versatile force.

By the way, I would include THSS termie armies and fatecrusher as foot infantry armies. I actually had a good game versus fatecrusher, drawing him in objectives despite some below average dice performance on key units.

prime

3x zoans in pod

3x warriors venom cannon
10x genestealers
10x genestealers
10x genestealers
10x genestealers
10x genestealers

t-fex
t-fex
t-fex

That is close to what I was thinking when I get around to making some t-fexes. Once I am done playing with an all reserve gambit army I was looking at running something like this at 2k

Tervigon, catalyst

2x Zoanthropes in pod
2x Zoanthropes in pod

8x Genestealers
8x Genestealers
8x Genestealers
8x Genestealers
8x Genestealers

20x Gargoyles, adrenal glands
20x Gargoyles, adrenal glands

T-fex
T-fex
3x biovores

At least for my local meta I can see this doing pretty well.

DevianID wrote:I would still encourage you to try my list out. The combination of turn 1 stealer pressure, with all the reserve options available, and a solid MC+gant+elite shooting core makes for a pretty versatile force.

By the way, I would include THSS termie armies and fatecrusher as foot infantry armies. I actually had a good game versus fatecrusher, drawing him in objectives despite some below average dice performance on key units.

Sure, I'll give it a shot.... What weapon set-up does your non-swarmlord tyrant have?

nice

I was running Lash whip and bone sword+scytal, as I also had old adversary. Had been strongly considering just plain twin scytal for vehicles though, but felt the threat of multiwound critters was too great in my metagame.

for DevianID's list ,how about put wings on HT and then give him some guards, by INAT you can leave the guards as you wish or just let opponent kill the guards instead, so the guards provide cover save and suck up hits early game and then the HT jump in to fight, that way HT can make some real impact if he survived after first couple turns.

I like all the talk about Genestealers - definitely my fav unit.

Anyone care to sharpshoot this 2000 point list?

Tyranid Prime Swords, talons
Tyranid Prime Swords, Deathspitter

60 genestealers with adrenal glands 3 units of 20 each with a Broodlord with Talons

6 Warriors with Deathspitters in a pod - one Prime goes with them
6 Warriors with Deathspitters in a pod

30 Termagaunts - one Prime goes with these.

I thought Jankin said he tried the all stealer list and he said it didn't work so well?