Does GW just hate Tyranids?

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.

**Caminoman**

Whether it's new rulesets, models, or showcased miniatures, GW always seems to show the poorer side of Tyranids. What really made me realize this are the recent Tyranid showcases on GW's website, including their March 15th "Flickr Thursday" which included a Tervigon which wasn't on par with the other models included in the post by any standards, as well as the March 14th "Rorschach Test" article, highlighting a Tyranid army painted by Phil Kelly.

Now I know there are far better examples of well painted Tyranids, worthy of being displayed on GW's website, but why in the world doesn't GW use them?? They seem to pick around the best choices, which IMO reflects poorly on the army as a whole. If GW is showcasing beautifully painted Space Wolves then why not some top notch Tyranids? Granted they did include the superbly painted pink Tyranids done by Ben Hodges, but for the most part I don't think Tyranids get enough love from big ol' GW.

Is this light GW's casting on Tyranids decreasing their popularity? Because a few of my friends have even read the articles posted by GW and became more interested in Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Dark Eldar (just to name a recent few) from the paint job alone.

**Dark Apostle 666**

Thing is, Tyranids are quite hard to paint to a high quality, the models have limited distinction between flesh and chitin, in my experience.
A Marine will sadly, often look better than a Tyranid, even when painted by the same person.
There are exceptions, I've seen some amazing Nids in the gallery, but as a general rule...

**kylaxi**

I don't think gw hates nids, tbh i just bought a lot of nids. I even plan on buying a lot more. Weak or not the nids are cool.

**Caminoman**

Well it's just saddening when I see tons and tons of marines, guard, eldar, DE, and orks painted to such a great standard by incredible painters, yet only a tiny handful of them have ever uploaded well painted tyranids. Is there something that just deters great painters from painting great 'nids?

**Kroothawk**

1.) I like Phil Kelly's painting scheme, simple but effective.
2.) Phil Kelly's army is in Nottingham, so easy to present. Also Phil Kelly is a prominent game developer, adding to the interest in his army.
3.) There are worse painted armies presented. I dislike most colour schemes by the 'eavy Metal team.
4.) I like the current tyranid Codex. A dream for modellers and veterans because of the diversity of units, most of them a nod to old OOP models (Exocrine, Malefactor, Spinegaunts, Mycetic Spore, Bone Sword Warriors). It lacks some OTT power creep rule gimmicks of Mat Ward Codices, but I don't miss those. You have more interesting builds with this Codex than with the previous one, so definitely an improvement.

**Isengard**

1) the Kelly nids are poorly painted. Fine for a tabletop game but as a showcase no. They are a quick painting job, a single coat of black on the carapace with a slathering of gloss varnish judging from the pictures. They are also hard to make out the detail on so the pictures don't serve well as an illustration for people to actually see the range.

2) Nids are not hard to paint, if you have a modicum of skill. Marines are easy to paint as they tend to be in one basic colour and the detail is fairly simple. I am a notoriously picky painter and I end up painting every individual tooth on mine.

3) I like the nid codex. I also think the model range is superb, the trygon is the model which lured me back into 40K in the first place. All the new nids are simply excellent figures full of character and different to all the other armies. The codex has a decent variety of units and I have won as many as I have lost. The thing I think is worst is the lack of customisability of many nids. Many are vanilla units you get the basic package without any options. Given the infinite ability of the Hive Mind to customise its organisms I think this is a bizarre oversight.

**Winterkit**

The Nid codex has it's problems. The fluff way underpowers them (Possibly The Worf Effect, possibly just the fact that the fluff seems to be leaning more towards the Imperium right now), and the rules don't exactly help on this.

I've seen very few 'official' paint schemes for the Nids I actually like, so I can see where you're coming from. I find the nature-inspired ones are often the most effective. But that's personal preference in the end. :/

I think Nids are easier than most to paint up to a tabletop standard, but harder to take much further than that. That may well be the problem.

**kb305**

Caminoman wrote:Whether it's new rulesets, models, or showcased miniatures, GW always seems to show the poorer side of Tyranids. What really made me realize this are the recent Tyranid showcases on GW's website, including their March 15th "Flickr Thursday" which included a Tervigon which wasn't on par with the other models included in the post by any standards, as well as the March 14th "Rorschach Test" article, highlighting a Tyranid army painted by Phil Kelly.

Now I know there are far better examples of well painted Tyranids, worthy of being displayed on GW's website, but why in the world doesn't GW use them?? They seem to pick around the best choices, which IMO reflects poorly on the army as a whole. If GW is showcasing beautifully painted Space Wolves then why not some top notch Tyranids? Granted they did include the superbly painted pink Tyranids done by Ben Hodges, but for the most part I don't think Tyranids get enough love from big ol' GW.

Is this light GW's casting on Tyranids decreasing their popularity? Because a few of my friends have even read the articles posted by GW and became more interested in Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Dark Eldar (just to name a recent few) from the paint job alone.

maybe the painters are tired or the gw painters are used to painting armour plates. (marines, necros, eldar,dark eldar, tau) it's mostly just armour plates. tyranids need a different approach with like slime effects and all kinds of different crap. not every painter is good at painting every different thing ya know?

**-Loki-**

IIRC, Tyranids were, before 5th edition, one of GW's better selling xenos ranges and their books were always powerful until now (2nd editions Tyranids were obscene, 3rd they were good, 4th they were obscene again, 5th they dropped the ball).

It's just a bad edition for the bugs. They got a sub par codex from the worst codex writer GW has lacking super powerful stuff in an edition of super powerful stuff. They are also smack in the middle of an edition that emphasises people playing their weakness - meching up. Sales are likely slowing a bit this edition because of these two major drawbacks.

I'm sure they'll want their good selling armies to sell well again, and we'll see Tyranids back to normal in 6th edition. Though right now, they're not terrible, they're mid-teir.

As other said about painting them, they're easy to paint to tabletop standard thanks you washes, but taking them further is very hard due to the organic nature of the models. You know how most people have trouble painting faces well? Tyranids are like a whole model that is a face. And a whole army of those models.

**ZebioLizard2**

Seeing as they are the only Xeno's codex to get a Codex each edition. I'd say they are doing fine, they just got cruddance as a writer.

**Sasori**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Seeing as they are the only Xeno's codex to get a Codex each edition. I'd say they are doing fine, they just got cruddance as a writer.

Yeah....

I think Tyranids are pretty hard to paint to a good standard as well. I could paint a Marine much easier, and it would look better than a standard Nid unit.

It's a lot easier to paint tanks, than TMC IMO as well.

**Isengard**

This is fascinating, I came back to 40K with nids and I have enjoyed painting them and find them intuitive and perfectly manageable. A lot of it comes down to patience and subtlety with flesh. For example the way the tervigon red flesh is done in the current WD is a great example. It looks good but is time-consuming and subtle. For a character type model I will basecoat, wash, rebasecoat, wash, highlight, wash, highlight again and then add detail. You need layers to get flesh to look right.

**GreatGunz**

Caminoman wrote:Whether it's new rulesets, models, or showcased miniatures, GW always seems to show the poorer side of Tyranids. What really made me realize this are the recent Tyranid showcases on GW's website, including their March 15th "Flickr Thursday" which included a Tervigon which wasn't on par with the other models included in the post by any standards, as well as the March 14th "Rorschach Test" article, highlighting a Tyranid army painted by Phil Kelly.

Now I know there are far better examples of well painted Tyranids, worthy of being displayed on GW's website, but why in the world doesn't GW use them?? They seem to pick around the best choices, which IMO reflects poorly on the army as a whole. If GW is showcasing beautifully painted Space Wolves then why not some top notch Tyranids? Granted they did include the superbly painted pink Tyranids done by Ben Hodges, but for the most part I don't think Tyranids get enough love from big ol' GW.

Is this light GW's casting on Tyranids decreasing their popularity? Because a few of my friends have even read the articles posted by GW and became more interested in Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Dark Eldar (just to name a recent few) from the paint job alone.

They don't hate their own product. I'm sure their best to make that product as attractive as possible. But it's a company run by people and sometimes people screw up. Or then again, tyranids might not be as highly prioritized as some other armies because it doesn't have as many fans. Every company has to make decisions about what to do with their limited resources. So anyway no they don't hate bugs or bug players.

**TheSneak109**

I have a friend who, although he admits he personally doesn't hate 'Nids, has accepted that GW hates 'Nids. Granted, he's also pretty jaded about GW in general (price mark-ups, failcost, terrible and OP codices, etc.)

I've just got into 40k over the past few months after inheriting a second hand 'Nid army from a friend. I've put a lot of work into refurbishing them and have gotten several new models as well. Personally, I can understand the frustration of 'Nid players at their mediocre codex. However, I still find them very fun to play at my LFGS - having my share of absolute victories and crushing defeats.

However, I would like to think that we'll see some positive changes in 6th edition, so I'm keeping my hopes up.

**AnUnearthlyChilde**

I don't think GW "hates" the Tyranids. Personally I think the Codices have been consistent through each edition, it's the comparison to other books as they are released that makes them seem worse. Codex creep at it's finest/worst. GW is in the business of making money, and tbh, they will do anything for the systems to make sure they keep making them piles of lovely cash.

I'm going to continue loving the Tyranids, and maybe one day I will actually finish my army before the release the next book, and the next book and the next book... etc etc...

**ifStatement**

GW don't hate nids. Just like two years ago GW didn't hate Dark Eldar. For an example of what GW hates look at squats.

**-Loki-**

AnUnearthlyChilde wrote:I don't think GW "hates" the Tyranids. Personally I think the Codices have been consistent through each edition, it's the comparison to other books as they are released that makes them seem worse. Codex creep at it's finest/worst.

Only if you consider the 5th edition codex by itself. You're right about codex creep though - 2nd edition Tyranids are the book that introduced the concept of codex creep for a lot of people. It was downright brutal to be opposing. 3rd edition, while not as bad, was still a good codex. 4th edition introduced Nidzilla. and even outside of that, it was a very powerful book. 5th edition is the first real stinker.

As for hating them, that's just silly. it's a model range they are actively expanding. If they hated them, they'd drop them.

**AnUnearthlyChilde**

ifStatement wrote:GW don't hate nids. Just like two years ago GW didn't hate Dark Eldar. For an example of what GW hates look at squats.

That was a financial attempt at moving 40K away from it's fantasy comparisons of "space dwarves" Nids are unique within the systems thankfully ^_^

**-Loki-**

AnUnearthlyChilde wrote:
ifStatement wrote:GW don't hate nids. Just like two years ago GW didn't hate Dark Eldar. For an example of what GW hates look at squats.

That was a financial attempt at moving 40K away from it's fantasy comparisons of "space dwarves" Nids are unique within the systems thankfully ^_^

It was actually because no one at the studio could work up the enthusiasm to move them to the more grimdark 2nd edition. Basically everything in rogue trader was Warhammer Fantasy in space, but they moved them completely to sci fi with 2nd edition. They could have done squats too, but no one in studio could work up the enthusiasm to do the book. It's not because they hated them (they probably hate them now due to all of the questions they get asked), they just couldn't get enthusiastic about the project.

**Deadshot**

Sometimes I think so. My conspiracy theory on the topic.

It all started with the battle for Maccragge. Tyranids put the hurt on The Ultramarines. Calagar was.nearly killed and the Godly First Company destroyed. Operational strength <50. Who are GW's poster boys?

Then at Ichar 4 the Ultramarines were again badly mauled and this time Kraken gad time to kill Cdaftworld Ilyanden. It was about this time when Ultrasmurf defeats against the nids was stopped being recorded. Ever notice how Hive Fleet Leviathan has not fought the Blue Boys yet? Even though, with this Codex Deviant Tyranid Fighting Company, they would be best after the deathwatch? Convenient that the Arch Arsonist of Charadon attacks now? So the blue bells...er...Blue Boys. Don't have to fight nids anymore.

If they made it easy to kill nids they would lose complete meaning, and tyranids are needed which is why they are not removed altogether. But it were hard the marines would take heavy casulties and possibly be wiped out.

In the battle for maccragge starter, marines could hardly win the campaign. GW decided to try something new and outnumbered and OUTPOINTED the marines. And on top of the 246 nid points they got the respawn points.

Then they make the nids wait 2 years as you say. Most players have converted Tervs yes. These are now too small because of the GW kit and GW tourneys won't be permitted. Therefore if they want tervs in tourneys they'll need to.buy more. This discourages people to buy less nids. Price hikes too. Once a product or army falls below a certain purchase rate GW will say...

"You obviously don't want tyranids so we don't need to.keep or make more"

And there is my conspiracy theory. Obviously it is not perfect but there it is...

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also. The WD describes a dual between Kraken Swarmlord and Calgar ened in Calgar's victory. Wait what?! Swarmlord is respawned with knowledge of Calgar and yet loses? Not only was that never in the fluff, and written for the biggest nid promotion in years, but completely backward.

Then they assign the codex to someone who has no passion for them

**AnUnearthlyChilde**

Everything with GW goes in phases, currently they seem to be pushing elitist armies that rely heavily on finecast models... call me a cynic, but it's all about the money.

**ifStatement**

-Loki- wrote:
AnUnearthlyChilde wrote:
ifStatement wrote:GW don't hate nids. Just like two years ago GW didn't hate Dark Eldar. For an example of what GW hates look at squats.

That was a financial attempt at moving 40K away from it's fantasy comparisons of "space dwarves" Nids are unique within the systems thankfully ^_^

It was actually because no one at the studio could work up the enthusiasm to move them to the more grimdark 2nd edition. Basically everything in rogue trader was Warhammer Fantasy in space, but they moved them completely to sci fi with 2nd edition.

Squats were in 2nd ed. They had cards in the box set and pages in codex imperialis. They just wanned away with less and less support.

The move to total grimdark picked up full momentum in 3rd ed.

**SDFarsight**

ZebioLizard2 wrote:Seeing as they are the only Xeno's codex to get a Codex each edition. I'd say they are doing fine, they just got cruddance as a writer.

Indeed. I would have said Dark Eldar were the neglected race, but they've got a nice new codex. The Tau on the other hand; apart from their innitial expansion they are always getting smacked-about in their fluff like somekind of galactic redshirt, powergaming is the only gaming as they can't affored not to (though you could say that's just part of the Tau's strategic gameplay) and their unique characters are limited and arguably underpowered.

Though I guess the truely neglected races are the Squats or Hrud.

**Experiment 626**

I don't think it's so much that GW hates 'nids, but rather 'GW goofed up big time and made nids hate 5th edition!'

5th is all about mechhammer with a dash of meltahammer thrown into the mix. Guess what? 'Nids don't have transports or meltagun-like options, so they stink big-time because the core rules are so badly skeewed against them! (as a Daemon player, I sympathise with you guys because we're very similar in that regard!)

I think once 6th rolls around and GW likely makes the current mechfest/melta-mayham far less efficient, the bugs will start to regain some of the stolen limelight as an army that's to be rightly feared.

Now, if you want to know an army that GW has a real hate-on for right now, look at Chaos! Not only did the chaos marines get one of the outright worst books in GW's history, but every recent FAQ update has done more and more to nerf the few decent things left in an already bland as all feth book.

Not to mention, they released Daemons as the first 5th ed book, and then decided about 5 months later that 5th ed should be all about transports which they conviently 'forgot' to give to the warp gribblies...

**SDFarsight**

AnUnearthlyChilde wrote:
ifStatement wrote:GW don't hate nids. Just like two years ago GW didn't hate Dark Eldar. For an example of what GW hates look at squats.

That was a financial attempt at moving 40K away from it's fantasy comparisons of "space dwarves" Nids are unique within the systems thankfully ^_^

Chaos Deamons?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Experiment 626 wrote:I don't think it's so much that GW hates 'nids, but rather 'GW goofed up big time and made nids hate 5th edition!'

5th is all about mechhammer with a dash of meltahammer thrown into the mix. Guess what? 'Nids don't have transports or meltagun-like options, so they stink big-time because the core rules are so badly skeewed against them! (as a Daemon player, I sympathise with you guys because we're very similar in that regard!)

I think once 6th rolls around and GW likely makes the current mechfest/melta-mayham far less efficient, the bugs will start to regain some of the stolen limelight as an army that's to be rightly feared.

Now, if you want to know an army that GW has a real hate-on for right now, look at Chaos! Not only did the chaos marines get one of the outright worst books in GW's history, but every recent FAQ update has done more and more to nerf the few decent things left in an already bland as all feth book.
Not to mention, they released Daemons as the first 5th ed book, and then decided about 5 months later that 5th ed should be all about transports which they conviently 'forgot' to give to the warp gribblies...

But all units can run in 5th ed, which is great if you're the sort of army that wants to get in close to the enemy...like nids.

And I thought that the Orks codex was sort of a herald of 5th ed.

**AnUnearthlyChilde**

Experiment 626 wrote:I don't think it's so much that GW hates 'nids, but rather 'GW goofed up big time and made nids hate 5th edition!'

5th is all about mechhammer with a dash of meltahammer thrown into the mix. Guess what? 'Nids don't have transports or meltagun-like options, so they stink big-time because the core rules are so badly skeewed against them! (as a Daemon player, I sympathise with you guys because we're very similar in that regard!)

I think once 6th rolls around and GW likely makes the current mechfest/melta-mayham far less efficient, the bugs will start to regain some of the stolen limelight as an army that's to be rightly feared.

Now, if you want to know an army that GW has a real hate-on for right now, look at Chaos! Not only did the chaos marines get one of the outright worst books in GW's history, but every recent FAQ update has done more and more to nerf the few decent things left in an already bland as all feth book.
Not to mention, they released Daemons as the first 5th ed book, and then decided about 5 months later that 5th ed should be all about transports which they conviently 'forgot' to give to the warp gribblies...

Thankfully Chaos are getting new books come 6th ed, with separate books for daemons, legions and lost and the damned.

I'm also hoping machhammer has a dampner put on it come next ed too. I don't think Tyranids suck, but they just aren't the best. tis a shame as well :(

**happygolucky**

When painting nids (as I have learned) you usually drybrush like it nobody's business, now if you have the patience for them cool, but sadly the majority in GW team in Nottingham Dont, therefore the schemes are good (better than mine) but IMHO they wont put the passion in it.