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.

For all the comments about tyrants not being so great, I dont think I agree.

Compare a tyrant+1 guard to a trygon. The tyrant, with no options, is 30 points more, but gets the all important 'no argument' 4+ cover save. A 4+ save for 30 points is a steal in my opinion.

Then, look at the upgrade options. First, is the effects of hive commander. Would you pay 25 points to be able to outflank that tervigon, and also get +1 to reserves? If you answer yes, then thats just another reason to take the tyrant over a trygon.

What about the shooting... would you trade 6 s5 shots for paroxyn and life leach, which both auto hit? I think so!

Then there is old adversary. 6 inch bubble of preferred enemy? Well it makes dante in the BA army AMAZING, and while yes it only has 6 inches on the tyrant, he is also a bigger model than dante. Plus, reroll to hit is a bigger force multiplier for the cc oriented tyranids than the cc, shooting, and mech hybrid BA. Thus again, worth 25 points.

So in the end, sure your HT+guard is now 280 points. BUT, for the 80 extra points over the trygon, you get a large number of force multipliers. You trade fleet, but thanks to the run rule it only really means you lost a d6 inch move, and because paroxyn is so amazing even if you did have fleet, you are unlikely to use it if paroxyn is in range.

BTW, I see Paroxyn as a supremely defensive power--I honestly think it adds very little to your offensive capability. IE, to make a terminator unit 12 inches out, that you know will be charging you, WS1, means that now they wont be successfully charging almost anything--5 thss termies are unlikely to take out even 10 gants on the charge turn, including no retreat wounds. If they are a shooty unit, well needing 6's to hit will pretty much negate that units shooting.

Hey, hope I'm not too late for the party.

So far in my playtesting with Nids, I have found that this basic 1000 point core works well for me:

Hive Tyrant - Heavy Venom Cannon, Old adversary, leech essence, paroxism

1 Tyrant Guard

3 Zoanthropes

3 Hive Guard

Deathleaper

10 termagants

tervigon - cluster spines, Catalyst, Onslaught, Toxin Sacs

What to take from there seems somewhat problematic.

The harpy I have found is great for taking side shots at tanks, and getting on to high terrain fast for popping open topped guard nastiness, such as medusas. It's problem becomes that is dies fast once the enemy realizes the sort of threat that it is.

The Tyrannofex I had almost written off, but I am now finding like many of those in this thread that it is not for heavy vehicle hunting, but taking down lighter but still problem causing vehicles.

Trygons have also gotten solid results, but I'm stuck on whether they are best used on their own, or to support my battle line as it meets the enemy. I'm also not sure if the prime is worth it over the reuglar.

I'm very wary at this point on mycetic spores. They seem great, but in game die when someone looks at them funny, and in annihilation give out kill points like candy on Halloween.

A unit to make sure to avoid is the Doom of the Malan'tai. INAT FAQ or not, it's just bad. I wrote a rant about it for Stelek's site, the slimmed down version is that it will rarely, if every make it's points back, and burns an elites slot you will need for something else.

sirisaacnuton:

Actually, it's interesting that you mention the problem of exploding vehicles. If only there was a way of preventing that... Well, you'll never be able to explode a closed-top vehicle with a Heavy Venom Cannon.

Here's what you do. Surround a Rhino with troops, using running in the shooting phase, and then pop it open using Venom Cannons and Heavy Venom Cannons.

Just my 2 cents. I definitely feel you about the lack of an ability for throw-away units like Termgs and Rippers to fight hard targets, but is the answer to buff the little guys or bring in some muscle?

You made some valid points.

I think one thing in the Hive Tyrants favor is his survivability. The problem I have with putting Genestealers and/or Warriors in a ground pounding list like mine and Shep's is that it is too easy to allocate sufficient firepower to take them out.

The first thing I think of when building a list that has any sort of ground section, is what would my opponent's first targets be. And taking that into consideration, what synergies have I build into my list to mitigate shots on those units.

I don't know about you, but my area is finally catching on to ignore cover blasts. I field the Thunderfire Cannon myself, and every IG opponent I face has at least one high str. ignore cover gun.

When I face those armies, I am finding that my Hive Tyrant can reach enemy line relatively unscathed because most guns that would be directed towards him are more concerned with Zoanthropes and Tervigons.

One thing I think is worth testing is Boneswords on the Tyrant Gaurd.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nurglitch wrote:sirisaacnuton:

Actually, it's interesting that you mention the problem of exploding vehicles. If only there was a way of preventing that... Well, you'll never be able to explode a closed-top vehicle with a Heavy Venom Cannon.

Here's what you do. Surround a Rhino with troops, using running in the shooting phase, and then pop it open using Venom Cannons and Heavy Venom Cannons.

So the blast can scatter unto my own troops, no thank you.

Better to surround and pop with Hive Guard since there is no question that the transport is not getting a cover save.

Nurglitch wrote:sirisaacnuton:

Actually, it's interesting that you mention the problem of exploding vehicles. If only there was a way of preventing that... Well, you'll never be able to explode a closed-top vehicle with a Heavy Venom Cannon.

Here's what you do. Surround a Rhino with troops, using running in the shooting phase, and then pop it open using Venom Cannons and Heavy Venom Cannons.

Assuming that the central hole stays over the vehicle, I still have to pen (decent odds probably, but even against a Chimera it's only 50/50 against front armor), and then a 1/6 chance to destroy it. Never mind it only has about a 50% chance to stay on the vehicle (depending on size), that I could hurt my own guys with it, and depending on the size of the vehicle it may get cover saves from my Stealers that are surrounding it to kill the guys inside.

I'd like my odds for it a lot better if the gun were, say, S10, 2 shots, -1 on the table (or even S9 2 shots) instead of a single blast.

But the whole idea of surrounding the vehicle in the first place came about in a discussion about armies that try to bring the fight to the opponent whether than trying to field a shooting army with enough tank-killing power. If I could reliably pop open transports when I have Stealers or Rippers nearby, I could just blow it open and then assault the guys inside and not have to worry about destroying them on the emergency disembarkation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mahu wrote:

Just my 2 cents. I definitely feel you about the lack of an ability for throw-away units like Termgs and Rippers to fight hard targets, but is the answer to buff the little guys or bring in some muscle?

You made some valid points.

I think one thing in the Hive Tyrants favor is his survivability. The problem I have with putting Genestealers and/or Warriors in a ground pounding list like mine and Shep's is that it is too easy to allocate sufficient firepower to take them out.

The first thing I think of when building a list that has any sort of ground section, is what would my opponent's first targets be. And taking that into consideration, what synergies have I build into my list to mitigate shots on those units.

I don't know about you, but my area is finally catching on to ignore cover blasts. I field the Thunderfire Cannon myself, and every IG opponent I face has at least one high str. ignore cover gun.

Not even a little bit around me. I'm finding my Tyrants and Swarmlords are being ravaged by AT shooting (mostly Vendettas and ML's). Now those things also put a hurting on Warriors, but I find that if the HT or Swarmlord goes down or isn't present, those guns focus on Hive Guard/Zoanthropes, Tervigons, or Carnifex/Tyrannofex (depending on the rest of the makeup) rather than going after Warriors. But no, I haven't seen cover-ignoring stuff at all. I'm quite sure I wouldn't want to see a Colossus staring me down.

If the enemy want to concentrate fire at my Hive Tyrant, I welcome it,

Not only am I getting Coversaves from the Tyrant Guard, I am pulling fire away from the portions of my army that really matter.

I would try Zoanthropes and see if your Hive Tyrant is still getting picked on.

DevianID wrote:For all the comments about tyrants not being so great, I dont think I agree.

Compare a tyrant+1 guard to a trygon. The tyrant, with no options, is 30 points more, but gets the all important 'no argument' 4+ cover save. A 4+ save for 30 points is a steal in my opinion.

Then, look at the upgrade options. First, is the effects of hive commander. Would you pay 25 points to be able to outflank that tervigon, and also get +1 to reserves? If you answer yes, then thats just another reason to take the tyrant over a trygon.

What about the shooting... would you trade 6 s5 shots for paroxyn and life leach, which both auto hit? I think so!

Then there is old adversary. 6 inch bubble of preferred enemy? Well it makes dante in the BA army AMAZING, and while yes it only has 6 inches on the tyrant, he is also a bigger model than dante. Plus, reroll to hit is a bigger force multiplier for the cc oriented tyranids than the cc, shooting, and mech hybrid BA. Thus again, worth 25 points.

So in the end, sure your HT+guard is now 280 points. BUT, for the 80 extra points over the trygon, you get a large number of force multipliers. You trade fleet, but thanks to the run rule it only really means you lost a d6 inch move, and because paroxyn is so amazing even if you did have fleet, you are unlikely to use it if paroxyn is in range.

BTW, I see Paroxyn as a supremely defensive power--I honestly think it adds very little to your offensive capability. IE, to make a terminator unit 12 inches out, that you know will be charging you, WS1, means that now they wont be successfully charging almost anything--5 thss termies are unlikely to take out even 10 gants on the charge turn, including no retreat wounds. If they are a shooty unit, well needing 6's to hit will pretty much negate that units shooting.

Valid points. I just dunno. The Trygon has a longer threat radius...you can't discount Fleet. Sure, when making the initial approach, they move at the same speed. But when it comes to actually charging (particularly if your opponent is trying to stay away) having a potential 12" charge range (and a median 9-10" charge) can sometimes be huge. Also, the Trygon has the additional mobility of Move Through Cover, which can sometimes make a difference.

Also, the Trygon has more high quality attacks. All at S6 instead of just 4 or 5, and all ignoring armor and rolling 2d6 for pen. Allowing the Hive guard to ignore armor requires the Bonesword (15 more points iirc, putting that unit up to 95 points higher than the Trygon). The Trygon always gets to reroll, including against vehicles, and since all of its attacks are MC attacks, the Trygon is much more dangerous against vehicles or vehicle squadrons.

I totally agree that Proxysm is very strong, and best used defensively. On the other hand, I'm massively underwhelmed by Life Leach. Using it means no Paroxysm or other power, and d3 S3 hits are too unreliable to be counted on to do anything, particularly compared to a couple of the other powers. I'd take the Trygon's shooting over Leach most of the time.

All in all, a Tyrant + 1 Guard does compare favorably to a Trygon, but it also clocks in at almost 50% more points (particularly if you give the Guard a Bonesword so that the unit's offensive capability rivals the Trygon's). At that point, you're looking at a points difference so extreme that 2 Tyrant + Guard are about the same as 3 Trygons. When comparing the Tyrant unit to (essentially) 1.5 Trygons, I think a lot of the Tyrant's advantages disappear.

Now I haven't tested this build of Tyrant at all, so I could be totally wrong. I just feel like the Tyrant is underwhelming for its point cost. It has the potential to be awesome and do a lot of really useful stuff, it just seems like its options and abilities are not costed at a level to make it competitive with other options for the available points. But I'm certainly open to being proven wrong. I've been thinking about doing some tests with 2+ Trygons, starting on the table to blitz forward and try to engage. I'll try your Tyrant + 1 Guard some in place of a Trygon and compare the results and how they play. Haven't really considered comparing the HT + Guard on a 1-to-1 basis against the T6 W6 options, but it makes sense to compare them. I will admit that I've wanted Ancient Enemy a lot in my builds, I've just never really been able to justify the points necessary to get a Tyrant and Guard. I don't want to pay 255 points for Ancient Enemy, so I need to see some evidence that the Tyrant pulls his weight outside of the Preferred Enemy. I'll let you know if the results swing me around to your way of thinking. And if you have any big successes with him, I'd love to see a batrep!

I am really really excited... I haven't been able to throw dice in anger in way too long for my tastes, but I've got a game scheduled tonight. Its not versus a gunline, but its against an army that will outshoot me and will be mechanized.... Nash's orks...

I will DEFINITELY batrep it, as I am actually cautiously optimistic about my list.... You can reserve judgement till after the new batrep, or you can critique it now, but know that it is completely locked until after the game...

tyranid prime with dual boneswords

3x zoanthropes in mycetic spore
3x zoanthropes in mycetic spore
8x ymgarl genestealers

24x hormagaunts with toxin sacs
9x genestealers with toxin sacs
9x genestealers with toxin sacs
9x genestealers with toxin sacs
8x ripper swarms with toxin sacs and tunnel swarm

tyrannofex with rupture cannon and cluster spines
tyrannofex with rupture cannon and cluster spines


I will, of course, decide specifically what my deployment plan is based on the mission, my opponents army, and who got first turn. But a typical deployment would be the tyrannofexes synapse covered by the tyranid prime, and the tyranid prime joining the 24 hormagaunts. Those hormagaunts would protect the t-fexes, should there be something scary enough and fast enough to worry about, and they are also responsible for capture and control home objectives.

The genestealers can deploy 18" away in aggro mode against gunlines with poor anti-infantry, like space wolves, pending I get first turn of course. And they can all outflank or be dormant should I lose first turn to a shooter, or should I play against a flamer heavy army.

Big unit of rippers will just land somewhere, take a 3+ cover save, provide cover to other things, provide distractions, prevent vehicle from turning by being just outside of 1" from their flanks (I, and every other nid player NEEDS to start enforcing pivots prior to moving, and not allowing pivots that bring vehicles within 1" of any nid. Pivots are allowed to push units that have assaulted vehicles around, but not to enter within 1" of new units)

But most importantly, this list functions totally well as off-table reserves. Outflank/dormant/deep strike for the stuff that needs to be "out there" and the stuff that walks on is either objective claiming or shooting a 48" range gun. This means that if I lose first turn to vendettas, I will get first shot on them, they'll have to deploy not knowing if I'm going to reserve out against them, and so they'll be on-table when my t-fexes and zoanthropes show up.

On paper, this list can handle nasty gunlines at least moderately well with some practice, and I think with the ridiculous amount of toxin sacs I should be able to take on things that are trying to chop me up.

hopefully we can move this discussion to the new batrep.... I'll post a link to it here when its up, which will be late tonight.

I look forward to your results, Shep. Your new list is similar to my current test list (top of page 9), albeit with the extra 150 pts and Hormagaunts instead of the Termigants I'm trying.

We'll have to share thoughts on the Ymgarl. Even in games where I'm going first, I think I prefer them dormant, just for the disruption effect: my enemy is often left assuming that they are dormant in one or two particular pieces of terrain, and this influences their initial deployment and turn 1/2 behavior significantly.

I'm trying to arrange a game against mech eldar tonight; I'll batrep it as well, should it occur.

Janthkin wrote:We'll have to share thoughts on the Ymgarl. Even in games where I'm going first, I think I prefer them dormant, just for the disruption effect: my enemy is often left assuming that they are dormant in one or two particular pieces of terrain, and this influences their initial deployment and turn 1/2 behavior significantly.

To be totally honest, I hate this unit on paper. So many if's and but's. Can be hard-countered by infiltrators, not really an anti-tank unit, no frag grenades... but I just keep hearing from everyone who has touched them about how they are bucking expectations and performing very well. that definitely buys them at least a pair of test games.

Janthkin wrote:I'm trying to arrange a game against mech eldar tonight; I'll batrep it as well, should it occur.

Ooh, that would be huge to get that game in. Something with that kind of speed would be very... illuminating.

To be totally honest, I hate this unit on paper. So many if's and but's. Can be hard-countered by infiltrators, not really an anti-tank unit, no frag grenades... but I just keep hearing from everyone who has touched them about how they are bucking expectations and performing very well. that definitely buys them at least a pair of test games.

In the few games I tried them, I liked them. Charging Vehicles with the +1 strength option helped them preform a little better then standard stealers, though they die to Heavy Flamers just the same.

Just remember, you don't have to (and probably shouldn't) tell your opponent where they are hiding, so they can be a great disruption element.

hopefully we can move this discussion to the new batrep.... I'll post a link to it here when its up, which will be late tonight.

I am stoked to see your next test result. I will Batrep as soon as I can myself.

Mahu wrote:

To be totally honest, I hate this unit on paper. So many if's and but's. Can be hard-countered by infiltrators, not really an anti-tank unit, no frag grenades... but I just keep hearing from everyone who has touched them about how they are bucking expectations and performing very well. that definitely buys them at least a pair of test games.

In the few games I tried them, I liked them. Charging Vehicles with the +1 strength option helped them preform a little better then standard stealers, though they die to Heavy Flamers just the same.

Just remember, you don't have to (and probably shouldn't) tell your opponent where they are hiding, so they can be a great disruption element.

Also remember that you choose their dormant terrain AFTER deployment.

Shep wrote:(I, and every other nid player NEEDS to start enforcing pivots prior to moving, and not allowing pivots that bring vehicles within 1" of any nid. Pivots are allowed to push units that have assaulted vehicles around, but not to enter within 1" of new units)

I'm not sure I follow here. What's the benefit of preventing a pivot? Trying to make it so they have to move combat speed to reorient hull-mounted weapons? The only vehicles I ever see pivot without any kind of moving are generally things like a LRBT trying to get its sponson and hull-mount aimed, and those things are usually pretty far away, so have good fire arcs anyway. Or am I missing something?

sirisaacnuton wrote:

Shep wrote:(I, and every other nid player NEEDS to start enforcing pivots prior to moving, and not allowing pivots that bring vehicles within 1" of any nid. Pivots are allowed to push units that have assaulted vehicles around, but not to enter within 1" of new units)

I'm not sure I follow here. What's the benefit of preventing a pivot? Trying to make it so they have to move combat speed to reorient hull-mounted weapons? The only vehicles I ever see pivot without any kind of moving are generally things like a LRBT trying to get its sponson and hull-mount aimed, and those things are usually pretty far away, so have good fire arcs anyway. Or am I missing something?

Well, its not a massive benefit, but it can set up some close combat vehicle destruction...

If I have a line of ripper swarms that are lined up parallel to your chimeras right side, at 1.00000001" away, then the chimera can not pivot to the right or the left. This also mean the vehicle can not pivot 180 degrees to move backwards. technically speaking, the vehicle can now only move forward. if there are also some rippers 1" away and in front of him, his only legal move would be a tank shock. Forcing a tank shock would also prohibit any future pivoting, as you may not pivot after completing a tank shock. this could easily prevent a hull heavy flamer from getting lined up on a genestealer unit.

Now, as I have just picked through this section of the rulebook, and its still fresh in my mind, then I can cover some of the counter-arguments to this. Firstly, some might say that pivoting is not actually movement... and therefore you may pivot to be within an inch of an enemy model, and there is a passage in the rulebook that states clearly that pivoting is not movement. However, pivoting or not, no vehicle may do anything to itself that would make it occupy the same space as another model... this is an immutable rule of 40k. So even then, pre-tank shock, you can control the amount of maneuverability that a tank has. If, of course, you allowed your opponent to pivot to within 1" of enemy models, which would be a kindness to him/her.

The only other counter-argument comes in the form of the 'successive turns' paragraph under assaulting vehicles. The paragraph allows vehicles to pivot even while contacted by enemy models. The player is supposed to pick up the vehicle, pivot above the models, and then displace the enemy models that will be contacted by the vehicle as it gets set down. The models may be replaced in base to base contact.

Now this rule does not seem to apply to units with models near vehicles. it references specifically, "these models" (that have previously assaulted a vehicle and are in base to base contact with it.)

Allowing a vehicle to freely pivot during its movement phase, displacing any models it feels like displacing, is just ridiculous and grossly advantageous to mechanized armies. i doubt anyone who wasn't in the middle of a close game would agree that vehicles should just get to pivot with absolutely no restriction, at any time during the movement phase...

in this way, you can encourage enemy vehicles to either remain stationary, or move forward only, perhaps even tank shocking. This is the kind of control that could keep a truckload of flamer templates off of your genestealers for a couple of turns. At least in theory. And probably after some rules arguments from players less familiar with the rules...

But vehicles are allowed to pivot freely as they move, so in the example of the Rippers right by the Chimera (to the side, not in front), if the Chimera is trying to line up a hull heavy flamer, could it not just roll forward 2 or 3 inches to where it's further from the Rippers, then flame?

I can see the point you're making, and it's something I never considered. Particularly with having models both right up to the side as well as slightly in front of, forcing a tank shock in order to be able to move, it seems useful. But in the abstract, if all you're doing is trying to keep a vehicle from pivoting, it seems practically impossible to keep it from making any pivot at any point during its cruising speed move. At some point won't its side get clear and then you've gained no benefit, other than now you're in a line for the flamer (since you had been parallel to the vehicle side)?

sirisaacnuton wrote:But vehicles are allowed to pivot freely as they move, so in the example of the Rippers right by the Chimera (to the side, not in front), if the Chimera is trying to line up a hull heavy flamer, could it not just roll forward 2 or 3 inches to where it's further from the Rippers, then flame?

I can see the point you're making, and it's something I never considered. Particularly with having models both right up to the side as well as slightly in front of, forcing a tank shock in order to be able to move, it seems useful. But in the abstract, if all you're doing is trying to keep a vehicle from pivoting, it seems practically impossible to keep it from making any pivot at any point during its cruising speed move. At some point won't its side get clear and then you've gained no benefit, other than now you're in a line for the flamer (since you had been parallel to the vehicle side)?

I'm perfectly fine with a chimera going cruising speed. No flamer for them... And as to the rippers being in base to base... you don't have to be in base to base to line a chimeras front and side, imagine a 1" space between each base. It won't be a great flamer target itself.

What I'm really getting at with this discussion is that nids have only two slots containing consistent armor busters, and the heavy slot armor buster is very cost prohibitive. What we all need to do in order to get over the hump against mech is to find the ways in which we can disadvantage mechanized armies without trying to build a gunline list... the gunline list just isn't there...

But what is there, in copious abundance, are cheap, fairly durable, and very fast units, that can't technically "kill" a vehicle. They can annoy, block, control, and threaten the occupants of said vehicles. And hopefully that is enough.

Well, its not a massive benefit, but it can set up some close combat vehicle destruction...

If I have a line of ripper swarms that are lined up parallel to your chimeras right side, at 1.00000001" away, then the chimera can not pivot to the right or the left. This also mean the vehicle can not pivot 180 degrees to move backwards. technically speaking, the vehicle can now only move forward. if there are also some rippers 1" away and in front of him, his only legal move would be a tank shock. Forcing a tank shock would also prohibit any future pivoting, as you may not pivot after completing a tank shock. this could easily prevent a hull heavy flamer from getting lined up on a genestealer unit.

Now, as I have just picked through this section of the rulebook, and its still fresh in my mind, then I can cover some of the counter-arguments to this. Firstly, some might say that pivoting is not actually movement... and therefore you may pivot to be within an inch of an enemy model, and there is a passage in the rulebook that states clearly that pivoting is not movement. However, pivoting or not, no vehicle may do anything to itself that would make it occupy the same space as another model... this is an immutable rule of 40k. So even then, pre-tank shock, you can control the amount of maneuverability that a tank has. If, of course, you allowed your opponent to pivot to within 1" of enemy models, which would be a kindness to him/her.

The only other counter-argument comes in the form of the 'successive turns' paragraph under assaulting vehicles. The paragraph allows vehicles to pivot even while contacted by enemy models. The player is supposed to pick up the vehicle, pivot above the models, and then displace the enemy models that will be contacted by the vehicle as it gets set down. The models may be replaced in base to base contact.

Now this rule does not seem to apply to units with models near vehicles. it references specifically, "these models" (that have previously assaulted a vehicle and are in base to base contact with it.)

Allowing a vehicle to freely pivot during its movement phase, displacing any models it feels like displacing, is just ridiculous and grossly advantageous to mechanized armies. i doubt anyone who wasn't in the middle of a close game would agree that vehicles should just get to pivot with absolutely no restriction, at any time during the movement phase...

in this way, you can encourage enemy vehicles to either remain stationary, or move forward only, perhaps even tank shocking. This is the kind of control that could keep a truckload of flamer templates off of your genestealers for a couple of turns. At least in theory. And probably after some rules arguments from players less familiar with the rules...

Ah, you are now beginning to understand why I think rippers are good. You summed up my reasons for me...LOL. Rippers bases will be annoying for your opponent...one way or another.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

What I'm really getting at with this discussion is that nids have only two slots containing consistent armor busters, and the heavy slot armor buster is very cost prohibitive. What we all need to do in order to get over the hump against mech is to find the ways in which we can disadvantage mechanized armies without trying to build a gunline list... the gunline list just isn't there...

But what is there, in copious abundance, are cheap, fairly durable, and very fast units, that can't technically "kill" a vehicle. They can annoy, block, control, and threaten the occupants of said vehicles. And hopefully that is enough.

Hopefully, more bug players begin to understand this. It isn't about making a bug gunline...it's about disrupting your opponents gunlines with super cheap and completely disposable units to force them out of their armored phalanx formations...and to make them move their firepower...thus reducing it.

Shep, hate to say this ,but there seems a little problem with vehicle moving rules.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/281216.page

Shep wrote:
Big unit of rippers will just land somewhere, take a 3+ cover save, provide cover to other things,

Can swarms provide a cover save..? I forget but it raised a red flag in my brain pan.

Yeah, just not monstrous creatures.

As a contribution to the thread in general, a buddy of mine is testing Nids, and he's one of the best players I've ever run across, so when he says he finds something effective, I tend to give it some weight.

He said he's finding that running 3 Trygons across the board (no deepstrike) is really effective. Others have mentioned it in this thread a few times, so here's another proponent of them.

He runs a unit of 3 Venomthropes to either draw early fire from the big MC's, or else to give a cover save to the Trygons if they shoot there. Said that the MC's can get into the opponent's lines surprisingly quickly, particularly thanks to fleet. I'm going to test the build, or at least the 3 running Trygons. I'll post up if I have any success with it. Because I think I've reached the same conclusion of Shep that the gunline just isn't there.

Yeah, the funny thing about that to me is that the reason Shep was going for Tyranids was because he wanted an army that played differently than his IG gunline and the first thing he builds is... a gunline ;-)

New batrep is up...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/281366.page#1367298

Go, Go nids!!!

Just want to say this is some of the best discussion on Dakka I've read, really great stuff, keep it coming! I'm going to be playing some horde orks and mech orks against my friends nids soonish, and will try to contribute afterwards.

Somnicide wrote:Yeah, the funny thing about that to me is that the reason Shep was going for Tyranids was because he wanted an army that played differently than his IG gunline and the first thing he builds is... a gunline ;-)

The gunline aspects are mainly coming from anti-tank firepower. Assaulting a transport is suicide.