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.

Thanks for the info guys. I'm coming to Tyranids with an IG player's mindset, so forgive me.

odorofdeath wrote:Thanks for the info guys. I'm coming to Tyranids with an IG player's mindset, so forgive me.

With IG you have 2 - 3 turns of glorius shooting before things go sour. With tyranids things go sour for 2 or 3 turns before you have a complementary snack.

Niiai wrote:
I do not see how any of these arguments are better if they are aplyed to a tervigon that also cost around 195 points. The argument "they will get shot and instant killed" is not a good argument seing how that same shot would take off a wound of your MC. Dimineshing returns? Yes, by the time there are around 2 warriors left. Tervigons cannot fight at all.

I don't know what you're trying to say.

For ~300 points I'm taking a MC every time, unless I'm taking Genestealers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

odorofdeath wrote:Thanks for the info guys. I'm coming to Tyranids with an IG player's mindset, so forgive me.

Questions are great. I enjoy different perspectives on the bugs' units - makes me think a little bit

I usually run my warriors with just deathspitters, scything talons, and a barbed strangler, and they do alright for themselves. I tend to keep them in cover when possible, and usually toss a prime with dual boneswords in them as well.

They're not amazing, but they do make for a pretty stable synapse unit that claims cover more easily than MCs.

SBG wrote:
I don't know what you're trying to say.

For ~300 points I'm taking a MC every time, unless I'm taking Genestealers.

I think you are missing my point. Why are you paying 300 points for a MC? My point is that you should start to think of warrior's in the same way you think about MC's. If you spend 195 point on a tervigon or 195 points on 6 warriors with a venom cannon you are baysicly buying a 6 wound model. The both take 6 suksesfulled missiles/melta shots/powerfists to take down. When you spend 270 points on 6 warriors with lashwhip and bonesword you are spending 270 points on a 6 wound MC from your oponents perspective.

It is the same with hulksmash's argument of ravaners vs trygons. They both take 6 S8+ to put down from acros the table. I am asking you all to take a shift in thinking when talking about the tyranid armie.

Warriors only have 3 problems:

1: they do not get 2d6 vs armour.

2: In the tyranid codex they are in the same slott as the tervigon who fights a bit worse, but who cab cast feel no pain on other units.

3: The "multi model MC" has a big problem vs blast markers.

If you're comparing Warriors to a Tervigon, you need to say the Tervi is 245 minimum to account for the 50 points of gants.

rigeld2, those gaunts are not bad. The tervigon do not cost 245 it costs 185 or 195 (I do not remember.)

The point is that you need to think or ravaners and warriors the same way you think of MC's. You are bying hit points your oponent shoots at. A hiveguard is 25 points per hp, a warrior is 30. (It has 3 wounds but it dies to a rocket launcher/melta just the same, so in practice it is one wound.) A Trygon is 33 points per HP.

To take it as a troop choice, you must pay a minimum of 50 points before you can buy the Tervigon. And really, the 50 points spent on gants is only worth it because of the Tervigons.

The only reason I take Warriors is for cheap durable Synapse. They're durable enough while hiding in cover that it takes some effort to clear them out... and the Hive Guard they're providing Synapse for means the other player can't ignore them.

The problem with warriors is the T4 with all the S8 weapons that abound. (melta, long fang ML spam, etc.)

You have a few ways to mitigate the problems. Warriors with a Prime. The prime has T5 so if hit with a single S8 or S9 weapon they can absorb the wound. The other is to have them as a CC followup to gaunts or stealers so that they can get the 4++ cover save. The other is to make extensive use of cover on the board. That of course is hit/miss depending on the objectives and battlefield layout.

While none is awesome, a mix of warriors can be effective. Sadly due to the many reasons you have stated, they cannot be the sole choice of the army.

I used a double talon/poison sac layout with a prime and it was somewhat effective. Although we are not talking termie-killers.

Niiai wrote:rigeld2, those gaunts are not bad. The tervigon do not cost 245 it costs 185 or 195 (I do not remember.)

The point is that you need to think or ravaners and warriors the same way you think of MC's. You are bying hit points your oponent shoots at. A hiveguard is 25 points per hp, a warrior is 30. (It has 3 wounds but it dies to a rocket launcher/melta just the same, so in practice it is one wound.) A Trygon is 33 points per HP.

You are simplifying it too much. There are a lot of other factors that you haven't taken into account. For example a Trygon is T6 and has a 3+ save. Warriors are T4 and have a 4+ save. Bolters damage Warriors, but for the most part bounce off a Trygon. Also look at combat capability. Warriors without Boneswords and Lashwips will have trouble vs MEQ's in cc and can barely scratch armour. Ok against hordes if there are no hidden PF's in there. Trygons will chew through armour and MEQ's but get bogged down by hordes.

There are a host of other things as well. I would not compare a Warrior brood to an MC. They do completely different things.

30 points for bare unit with 3 wounds that can get killed instantly by a 10pt rokkit.
Or worse, a 10pt TL Rokkit thats shooting them on turn 1 (damn koptas)

Honestly, the biggest thing preventing me from me from trying them out is the fact that I'd have to manually get some BS/LWs for them. Serious pain the behind. Coupled with the lack of models for the Tervigon and Tyrannofex... seriously GW?

odorofdeath, build Tervigons from Carnifexes.

I have tryed lists with one and two Tyrannofexes. You max need one. The problem is that while it shoots decently, it does not multi task so very well. At best you are looking at turn 1 and 2 shooting at a tank, turn 3 and 4 flame and blast template something. It is not worth 250 points for that. But you do need to build Tervigons.

Do not use warriors with lash whips and boneswords. At 45 per model it is to mutch to die to a 25 point longfang. If you wanne use warriors, then keep them cheap.

Lukus83, I agree that I am oversimplefying. However I disagree with your estamate that they chew through marines with 3 attacks and WS3. I have used Tervigons and Tyranofexes in CC and I am not so impressed.

While it is true that bolters are better vs T4 4+ than T6 6+ they have to take out 3 wounds for each wound they deal on the Trygon. And a hidden powerfist is hard for both of them.

What tervigons do good though is to take the big squad of termigaunts keep it 6" away for the moast of the game, and before a charge make a tail so that when you charge a unit they have FC and 4+ poison. Also throwing feel no pain on a unit before it charges is good. Or thoring feel no pain in trygons. (Feel no pain negates multilaser, heavy bolters, autocannons and missile launcher.)

In moast other cases (at least when I use it) I throw feel no pain on a unit and my oponent just shoots something else.

I wasn't comparing the Tervigon as that's a pretty inconsistent argument to make. The 2 serve completely different roles. Tervigons buff other units (and do it really well), while Warriors do nothing that something else can't do. Warriors are meant to be all-rounders but you pay the price for them. Why bother when you can get better specialized options? More dakka? Take dakka gaunts. More specialized cc options? Take Genestealers or a Trygon.

I guess IMO Warriors are pretty much useless.

I agree on that Lukus. They are bad-ish. But complaining that they instant die is a mute point when you are paying the same amount of points per wound as you do with MC's.

Niiai wrote:I agree on that Lukus. They are bad-ish. But complaining that they instant die is a mute point when you are paying the same amount of points per wound as you do with MC's.

I like to view them as genestealers on steroids. They are slightly more resilient and definitely can be setup in a bad-ass kind of way. But never expect them to take on termies or stand up to S8+ fire.

The fact that they are vulnerable to ID is the whole point. You pay a lot of points for their multiple wounds, yet it is negated very easily and they lose combat capability each time they lose a model. You pay for the wounds on a MC as well, but you lose no combat capability and thanks to their high toughness cannot be ID'ed by S8 or more (unless it's a Harpy).

Also consider large blasts (of which IG has plenty). 1 can kill off 2 or 3 warriors per wound, but that same template will only do a single wound to an MC.

@DAaddict

If you view them as Stealers on steroids, then why not just use stealers? They get more benefit from FnP since they are single wound models and you can get more than 3 Stealers for the price of 1 kitted out warrior. So you are getting more wounds per point and not wasting efficiency. Genestealers also have Fleet, Move Through Cover and Infilitrate. Significantly more efficient.

It's very simple, in the current Nid codex, Warriors don't get to dance. Anything they can do, some other unit can do better for less points. They don't add enough to excel in any area.

They are at best a decent forward synapse anchor unit. A shame, for so lovely models.

T5, 2W - that's how they should be.

Lukus83 wrote:The fact that they are vulnerable to ID is the whole point. You pay a lot of points for their multiple wounds, yet it is negated very easily and they lose combat capability each time they lose a model. You pay for the wounds on a MC as well, but you lose no combat capability and thanks to their high toughness cannot be ID'ed by S8 or more (unless it's a Harpy).

Also consider large blasts (of which IG has plenty). 1 can kill off 2 or 3 warriors per wound, but that same template will only do a single wound to an MC.

@DAaddict

If you view them as Stealers on steroids, then why not just use stealers? They get more benefit from FnP since they are single wound models and you can get more than 3 Stealers for the price of 1 kitted out warrior. So you are getting more wounds per point and not wasting efficiency. Genestealers also have Fleet, Move Through Cover and Infilitrate. Significantly more efficient.

Agreed, they are very situational and I would not use them without a prime. The side benefit of using them is they are synapse and synapse that are troops. I just think the all warrior list is doomed to failure. OTOH, a unit of warriors that hit on 3's rerol to hits and reroll to wounds will clean out MEQ and TEQ quite nicely while providing a bubble of synapse.

I personally don't see them as Synapse Troops a benefit. It makes them a target. Added to that they are extremely points heavy and it's a win/win for your opponent.

They do have nice abilities I will give you that, but getting them into a position to use those abilities is nigh on impossible as long as you are playing a worthy opponent.

Lukus83 wrote:I personally don't see them as Synapse Troops a benefit. It makes them a target. Added to that they are extremely points heavy and it's a win/win for your opponent.

They do have nice abilities I will give you that, but getting them into a position to use those abilities is nigh on impossible as long as you are playing a worthy opponent.

They have a purpose and synapse can be one of them. For instance, I could build a list consisting of Trygon Primes and warriors. I need the warriors to hold my hoard under synapse until the trygons show up from reserve. Because they are relatively cheap in comparison to other synapse options, I can say get a unit of 9 warriors that has a frontage of over 20" meaning my synapse bubble will go from 1 or 2 12" radius circles to somthing like a 24" x 44" oval of synapse. If I don't go nuts on outfitting them, they can be a target that will absorb enemy fire until my two Trygons show up.

They have their purposes but they are not the most efficient when viewed from any one perspective (cost vs firepower; cost vs CC ability; cost vs synapse) but they can be a flexible tool in your arsenal. They, however will never be the one-size-fits-all answer to everything. They may be capable of that but then they will cost l@ 50 pts each and then your susceptibility to S8 instant death will undermine you.

I f tyranid warriors werent troops they would never be used.
A totally redundant unit, looks good though, shame :(

Give Warriors Eternal Warrior and Assault Grenades and you've magically turned them into a good unit that people would actually use. I really think taking these two abilities away from Warriors was a huge oversight in the current Tyranid codex.

That being said... the only reason Warriors are "bad" is because of the Meta. They can't punch vehicles (which are everywhere) and they suffer Instant Death (which is everywhere)

There is a ridiculous amount of S8 spam that is out there and available to all the Imperial codexes. I play Orks, and Warriors definitely are still a concern for me. Sure, I can "spam" Rokkits, but I don't freaking hit with them and they're only a 24" range!

MCs/Warriors for nids are not a big deal for the good codices. GK will force weapon them, DE darklance spam, SW...not even funny how much s8 ap3 they pack, BA, IG pies and melta.

Murrdox wrote:

There is a ridiculous amount of S8 spam that is out there and available to all the Imperial codexes. I play Orks, and Warriors definitely are still a concern for me. Sure, I can "spam" Rokkits, but I don't freaking hit with them and they're only a 24" range!

I wouldnt rate warriors too high against Orks, they dont usually pack enough attacks to go through boyz before powerclaw kills them.

Warriors are 'ok' at low point levels where the S8 spam isn't so prevalent.

In higher points levels, I can see the point of using dakka warriors, but that's about it.

The bonuses of warriors (IMHO)? - you can get lots of 18" dakka at reasonable strength, plus a long range weapon (pref the strangler) to lay down some early fire support. The only other way of getting a weapon with that sort of range is Biovores (more expensive, less wounds) or an MC (more expensive, generally other preferred armaments to a weapon with excess 24" range)

You also get a scoring unit that can sit on midfield objectives and a) provide fire support, b) not be easily shifted by anything in the opposing army

Oh, and they can get cover saves.

The minuses (IMHO)? - Been said to death - ID, not great at any one thing.

But what really happens in game (again - IMHO and experience)? - Does your opponent really waste is S8 spam on your warriors who have cover saves and aren't fantastic at any one thing? or does he aim for your Hive Guard, Tervigons, Hive Tyrant, Trygon or what ever else you may have in your army first? The reality is, your warriors shouldn't be a target priority for your opponent until mid to late game, when hopefully you've destroyed a lot of their S8 spam.

Now don't take this the wrong way - I agree that there are definitely better units in the dex than warriors, but they're not so under powered to be a completely useless unit that you should never use. *Cough* Pyrovore *Cough*

Anyways - just my 2c

Movac wrote:MCs/Warriors for nids are not a big deal for the good codices. GK will force weapon them

Hello Clueless.

N.I.B. wrote:

Movac wrote:MCs/Warriors for nids are not a big deal for the good codices. GK will force weapon them

Hello Clueless.

You think he's wrong? Oh, you're going to bring up SitW vs force weapons. See, there's this thing called a banner that makes the force weapon activation auto-succeed.

That however, means he has 1 less |FW in the squad and isn't using other powers. The Mastery LVL 2 and 3 guys stillm need to take SitW for Might of Titan, Quicksilver, Cleansing Flame, Heroic Sacrifise, and Hammerhand.

Whenever I've faced tyranid warriors, they died right away from my shooting and never even made it to combat. The three wounds is really nice, but they are too easily instantly killed in my opinion to be truly worth their points. guants would be a better choice for points since it takes much more firepower to take out 7 6pt t3 guants then 1 three wound t4 warrior.