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.

I'm wondering how people get along with tyranid warriors these days? I know there save isn't as good as it used to be along with shooting, but they're got 3 wounds and can get cover. I was thinking of taking 6 for a long lasting synapse unit and giving them all deathspitters, I'd then screen them with two units of 15 termagants. My list would look something like this:

hive tyrant - wings and other stuff

2 x hive guard

2 x hive guard

2 x zoanthropes w/ pod

6 x warriors w/ deathspitters

15 x termagants

15 x termagants

20 x hormagaunts

20 x hormgaunts

1 x trygon prime

1 x trygon

1 x trygon

Thoughts on warriors only would be great I can split my list into two flanks if I do take them one with fast moving assault the other walking fire power.

You have to ask yourself, what are they bringing to the table and what else could I get for the points?

Those 6 warriors are 210 points. They are synapse. They have 3 wounds each.

Shooting: They get 18 shots at BS3, meaning 9 hit, and 6 wound T4 units -> 2 marines killed.

Combat: They get 24 attacks on the charge. 19 will hit, 9.5 will wound. That's 3 dead marines. Here lies a major problem with them...great you killed 3 marines, except, not including any other attacks back, at this point all it takes is a single powerfist attack to hit in order to tie combat. Blood Angels/Wolves/CSM get 2 attacks each, hitting and wounding on 4's, meaning 9x2 (attacks assuming full 10 man strength) * 0.5 (hits) * 0.5 (wounds) * 0.5 (saves) = 2.25 unsaved wounds, meaning you lost combat by 2, and take yet another wound...which is another dead warrior. Now with only 4 warriors, no charge benefits...it's not looking good. And this is assuming the warriors dont get shot.


For 210 points you could get 26 fully upgraded gargoyles/poison hormagaunts/etc. who are all going to do better in combat (and gargs can shoot better). But you lose synapse.

Personally, I think if youre going to go warriors, go bonesword/deathspitters. This is 45 points a model though, so it doesnt come cheap. At less than 2000 points...after a Hive Tyrant and Anti Tank (and Tervigons if you get them), youre really not looking at many points left over. The only way I would use them is if I had lots of 3+ saves on the board and by dropping the Tyrant for an Alpha Warrior and using those saved points on warriors.

they have the same problem as last edition IG ogryn, T4 3 wounds, then they get shot with a missile launcher or hit by a power fist and it ruins your day.

I've not tried this yet, but I would basically only take them in an army where they were among the weakest units.

So, your army can have any of

Any HQ choices
Warriors
Raveners
Shrikes
Lictors
Hive Guard
Zoanthropes
Deathleaper
Monstrous Creatures (any)

That way, anyone using missile launchers or power fists to ID your Warriors/Raveners/etc. isn't using them against your MCs, etc. So you get the most out of those 3 wounds.

when the people who play nids against my marines usually has 2 units of 9 warriors (8 warriors +1 warrior prime)

he usually runs a tervigon(?) with regen- the thing that makes gaunts.

so basically i cannot kill enough of anything

i love the warriors, for 220 points you get 6 warriors, with deathspitters and a venom cannon, for 100 points you add in a tyranid prime with lashwhipe bonesword and a deathspitter, now theyre all ws6 bs4, with some power weapon punch.

Night Lords wrote:You have to ask yourself, what are they bringing to the table and what else could I get for the points?

Those 6 warriors are 210 points. They are synapse. They have 3 wounds each.

Shooting: They get 18 shots at BS3, meaning 9 hit, and 6 wound T4 units -> 2 marines killed.

Combat: They get 24 attacks on the charge. 19 will hit, 9.5 will wound. That's 3 dead marines. Here lies a major problem with them...great you killed 3 marines, except, not including any other attacks back, at this point all it takes is a single powerfist attack to hit in order to tie combat. Blood Angels/Wolves/CSM get 2 attacks each, hitting and wounding on 4's, meaning 9x2 (attacks assuming full 10 man strength) * 0.5 (hits) * 0.5 (wounds) * 0.5 (saves) = 2.25 unsaved wounds, meaning you lost combat by 2, and take yet another wound...which is another dead warrior. Now with only 4 warriors, no charge benefits...it's not looking good. And this is assuming the warriors dont get shot.


For 210 points you could get 26 fully upgraded gargoyles/poison hormagaunts/etc. who are all going to do better in combat (and gargs can shoot better). But you lose synapse.

Personally, I think if youre going to go warriors, go bonesword/deathspitters. This is 45 points a model though, so it doesnt come cheap. At less than 2000 points...after a Hive Tyrant and Anti Tank (and Tervigons if you get them), youre really not looking at many points left over. The only way I would use them is if I had lots of 3+ saves on the board and by dropping the Tyrant for an Alpha Warrior and using those saved points on warriors.

That's all very true, though Warriors like all units have weaknesses and that's I.D, but that doesn't make them bad.

Gargoyles have the same ballistic skill as warriors so shoot the same

Ian Sturrock wrote:I've not tried this yet, but I would basically only take them in an army where they were among the weakest units.

So, your army can have any of

Any HQ choices
Warriors
Raveners
Shrikes
Lictors
Hive Guard
Zoanthropes
Deathleaper
Monstrous Creatures (any)

That way, anyone using missile launchers or power fists to ID your Warriors/Raveners/etc. isn't using them against your MCs, etc. So you get the most out of those 3 wounds.

My army is pretty much like that. I'd use them to synapse the termagants and use them as a bullet shield while I have 4 monstrous creatures 2 fast assault units and anti tank units floating around.

kill dem stunties wrote:i love the warriors, for 220 points you get 6 warriors, with deathspitters and a venom cannon, for 100 points you add in a tyranid prime with lashwhipe bonesword and a deathspitter, now theyre all ws6 bs4, with some power weapon punch.

I'd take deathspitters along with rending claws and toxin sacs which makes them a bit cheaper than boneswords and gives them re-rolls for the rends and they can tackle monstrous creatures if needed

mercer wrote:

That's all very true, though Warriors like all units have weaknesses and that's I.D, but that doesn't make them bad.

Gargoyles have the same ballistic skill as warriors so shoot the same

No, theyre not bad because they have some powerful abilities. Opportunity cost, however, is what a list maker should be thinking about, and sometimes quantity is better than quality.

As for the shooting:

210 points = 26 fully upgraded gargoyles. 26 * 0.5 * 0.5 = 6.5 wounds.

210 points of warriors. 18 *0.5 * 0.67 = 6 wounds.

Fully upgraded gargoyles shoot better.

You don't need fully upgraded gargoyles though as it adds nothing to shooting. All it does it make the points up. Though gargoyles don't add synapse and more disposble for both players. Also those 26 shots are only causing .5 of wound more.

I sometimes like to run a squad of 4 or more Warriors with boneswords or bonesword/lashwhip. Give one a Barbed Strangler for some long range firepower and wound allocation shenanigans. Then add a Prime to take hits from S8/S9 weapons to avoid instant death.

If you add toxin sacs, you can kill an entire Tactical Squad before they get a chance to swing. It's an expensive unit and fragile to S8+ weapons yes, but if you have enough MCs these usually draw fire instead.

The prime is T4 thanks to the units majority toughness so it can be I.D.

I'll be taking a single unit of 5 with deathspitters, rend claws and toxin sacs and I'll use two units of interweaved termagants to give cover.

No, when checking for ID you see if the wound inflicted on the model is 2x its toughness, majority toughness is when they roll to wound you.

You sure? I'll take your word for it.

mercer wrote:You don't need fully upgraded gargoyles though as it adds nothing to shooting. All it does it make the points up. Though gargoyles don't add synapse and more disposble for both players. Also those 26 shots are only causing .5 of wound more.

You take a fully upgraded unit of gargoyles because theyre one of the best units in the book. Theu outshoot, outassault and outlive warriors for the most part.

My point is the upgraded gargoyles don't add nothing to shooting so comparing upgraded gargoyles to warriors shooting in pointless; just use normal gargoyles. They only outshoot because they have more shots, in fact it's the gargoyles which come out the worse as they have more shots but only get .5 wound better, that's why warriors are better shooting at least

I think it's pretty much a shining example of bad internet forum advice to argue for one unit over another that operates differently, fills a different role, and exists in a different part of the org chart, especially in an army as reliant on unit interdependencies as Tyranids.

If you're going to argue Gargoyles over Warriors, why not Biovores over Ymgarls? Rippers over Primes?

That's a very good point gorgon.

In smaller games (1000-1300) I try and run atleast 15 warriors and a prime divideing em up into three units of 5 with deathspitters. The prime gets rending claws to deal with armour and thats about it. Now against shooty non Leman Russ armys this list owns, due to the fact that 45+ wounds on the table is just a pain to deal with and coupleing that with whatever points i have left over I spend on a Carnifex it makes for a mean woundspam list. In larger games i would leave the 15 at home and take 6 or so as a stray leman russ or vindicator shot will ruin your day and pay for his points.

Also dont forget that 4 attacks on the charge with WS5 and Talons is better than alot of oposing troop choices, so i would much rather have 1 warrior than 6 guants.

mercer wrote:My point is the upgraded gargoyles don't add nothing to shooting so comparing upgraded gargoyles to warriors shooting in pointless; just use normal gargoyles. They only outshoot because they have more shots, in fact it's the gargoyles which come out the worse as they have more shots but only get .5 wound better, that's why warriors are better shooting at least

Please tell me this is a joke post? Hmm, why not just take 5pt termagaunts then? They shoot the same!!

The point is you can take 26 fully upgraded gargoyles for the same amount of points, meaning you get a unit that still shoots better while being better in assault.

gorgon wrote:I think it's pretty much a shining example of bad internet forum advice to argue for one unit over another that operates differently, fills a different role, and exists in a different part of the org chart, especially in an army as reliant on unit interdependencies as Tyranids.

If you're going to argue Gargoyles over Warriors, why not Biovores over Ymgarls? Rippers over Primes?

This post is the perfect example of how the internet forum community doesnt understand the concept of opportunity cost.

What exactly do Warriors with Scything Talons (or did I read rending claws which now bumps them up to 40 points) with deathspitters bring to the table that gargoyles dont?

-They both have AP5 weapons.
-They both have the same range for shooting.
-Neither have power weapons.
-Gargoyles have 26 wounds (or 30 if rending claws on warriors) compared to 18.
-Gargoyles cannot lose 1/6th of their unit to one shot, or their entire unit to blast templates.

In addition:

-Gargoyles give cover saves to MCs
-Gargoyles are far more likely to get the charge
-Gargoyles are far more maneuverable
-Can Deepstrike

However, Warriors have synapse and score, this is their advantage. Problem is there are lots of units that can do that already (Ex. Tervigon) and do it better.

Now, if the unit was Warriors with Boneswords, then you couldnt compare them to gargoyles because they fulfill a different role. Warriors would be specialized in killing marines & terminators as well as any unit with multiple wounds (Nobs, other Warriors).

However, as is, the Warriors really bring nothing and are wiped off the table extremely easily. Theyre not even good support units in assault because a couple of power fist shots will send combat resolution -6 in the other direction, meaning an additional 5-6 of each of your small critters are going to die when it comes time for fearless tests.

Biovores, Genestealers, etc. are absolutely nothing like gargoyles or warriors. Terrible comparison. Please learn how opportunity cost works before posting again.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

Old Man Yarrik wrote:
Also dont forget that 4 attacks on the charge with WS5 and Talons is better than alot of oposing troop choices, so i would much rather have 1 warrior than 6 guants.

I would rather have 52 attacks hitting on 4s (even assuming no tyrant nearby making them preferred enemy) at Initiative 5, rerolling 4+ to wound than 24 attacks at WS5 hitting on 3s rerolling 1s at initiative 4 anyday.

Gargoyles also make a great escort for Pommy, if you have a ravener model w/ wings lying around LOL. Seriously though, don't put the parasite anywhere near b2b with a powerfist. I learned the hard way and lost him in one hit once...

Night Lords wrote:

mercer wrote:My point is the upgraded gargoyles don't add nothing to shooting so comparing upgraded gargoyles to warriors shooting in pointless; just use normal gargoyles. They only outshoot because they have more shots, in fact it's the gargoyles which come out the worse as they have more shots but only get .5 wound better, that's why warriors are better shooting at least

Please tell me this is a joke post? Hmm, why not just take 5pt termagaunts then? They shoot the same!!

Dude you're missing the entire point. Gargoyles and completely different to warriors, the point isn't about shooting it's what they do.

You say upgraded gargoyles are better shooting, like I keep saying that makes no odds because adrenal glands and toxin sacs don't affect shooting. Gargoyles only cause .5 wound more yet fire more shots, that's not good. Warriors actually have more range because deathspitters or devourers are 18" + 6" movement while fleshborers are 12" + 6" movement. Also deathspitters are S5 not S4 like the fleshborers, and they fire 3 times the amount of shots. In regards to combat you won't get all 26 gargoyles in combat range but you would all warriors, so the warriors would probably do better. Warriors are also synapse creatures, gargoyles are not.

So I'm starting to think perhaps yours in the joke posting suggesting something else what doesn't do the same job (synapse) and can only shoot and be in combat marginaly better. Warriors and gargoyles have very very different roles, one is synapse support assault and shooting the other is to act as a bullet shield, tie up units and flank attack with short ranged fire power.

mercer wrote:

Night Lords wrote:

mercer wrote:My point is the upgraded gargoyles don't add nothing to shooting so comparing upgraded gargoyles to warriors shooting in pointless; just use normal gargoyles. They only outshoot because they have more shots, in fact it's the gargoyles which come out the worse as they have more shots but only get .5 wound better, that's why warriors are better shooting at least

Please tell me this is a joke post? Hmm, why not just take 5pt termagaunts then? They shoot the same!!

Dude you're missing the entire point. Gargoyles and completely different to warriors, the point isn't about shooting it's what they do.

You say upgraded gargoyles are better shooting, like I keep saying that makes no odds because adrenal glands and toxin sacs don't affect shooting. Gargoyles only cause .5 wound more yet fire more shots, that's not good. Warriors actually have more range because deathspitters or devourers are 18" + 6" movement while fleshborers are 12" + 6" movement. Also deathspitters are S5 not S4 like the fleshborers, and they fire 3 times the amount of shots. In regards to combat you won't get all 26 gargoyles in combat range but you would all warriors, so the warriors would probably do better. Warriors are also synapse creatures, gargoyles are not.

So I'm starting to think perhaps yours in the joke posting suggesting something else what doesn't do the same job (synapse) and can only shoot and be in combat marginaly better. Warriors and gargoyles have very very different roles, one is synapse support assault and shooting the other is to act as a bullet shield, tie up units and flank attack with short ranged fire power.

Oh my...

Why is this so difficult to understand? Upgraded/Non upgraded, it doesnt matter! The point is upgraded gargoyles STILL shoot better even though theyre upgraded for assault. That's to show how weak the warrior shooting is (and for the last time, Im not talking about ballistic skill or how many shots they get each - it is irrelevant. Point per shot is the only thing that is relevant.). How in the world are MORE shots bad?? Any ork player with shoota boyz would absolutely laugh at this argument.

Once again, gargoyles have the same range. Do you know what a gargoyle is? It's jump infantry. Meaning they move 12". 12" move + 12" Shoot = 24"! Same as the warriors except they get to assault an extra 6".

I already took into account S5 shooting and the # of shots. 26 S4 shots > 18 S5 shots for T4 and below (aka the most common units).

Once again, Gargoyles are not "completely different" from warriors.

-They both have AP5 weapons.
-They both have the same range for shooting.
-They are both designed to kill infantry
-Neither have power weapons.
-Neither have anti tank capabilities (both are S4 charging a tank)

And there are much better options for synapse over warriors.

You can use Warriors, as I truly do not care what you do with your list. I just post to help those that want to consider an analysis of different units with actual arguments behind them (like knowing a gargoyle moves 12"

It's marginally better, they get .5 wound. Hardly anything to shoot from the roof tops is it? My point is you keep saying upgraded gargoyles, who cares if they're upgraded they still shoot the same. So, gargoyles actually shoot worse when you think about it. They get 26 shots compared to 18 so 8 more but only manage to score 6.5 wounds instead of 8; therefore gargoyles are worse at shooting on the basis of the wounds they score for the number of shots

No I don't know what gargoyles are. I must missed those in my codex and missed the 20 models of them I used to have flapping around...

What I want is discussion on warriors not different units, my army lacks synapse and adding gargoyles doesn't add this at all. Oh, yeah sorry I made a mistake because I'm human and tend to make mistakes, I guess you don't? After all you do suggest taking another unit which I didn't ask about

Thanks for your input.

Thats .5 wounds more from gargoyle shooting without a prime attached yes?

What about with?