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 would say he's still costed just as inappropriately except on the other side of the bat. A lot more changed than just making him one of the more expensive MCs in the army you know, and those changes were more than crippling. But if you want to run one, go for it. Better troop choice than Stealers I guess.

Polkadragon wrote:
I posted an update of my list in the "army list" section a while ago, but clearly all the active Tyranid players are located in this thread, so posting it here for some opinions.

As a reminder, I'm going to enter a 1750 tourney in November, which basically allows everything, with the exception of superheavies and Gargantuans from Forge World (regular FW is ok)

I should add that the missions are going to be very objective based, for instance the first one gives you victory points for each turn that you hold your own objective. So I might need a solid objective holder as well. With that in mind, the following list:

-- CAD
Hive Tyrant: twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; wings; electroshock grubs
Hive Tyrant: twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; wings; electroshock grubs

3 Ripper Swarms: Deep Strike
3 Ripper Swarms: Deep Strike

1 Malanthrope

5 Tyranid Shrikes: 5× scything talons; 3× rending claws; 2× lash whip and bonesword; toxin sacs; flesh hooks

Mawloc
Mawloc
Tyrannofex: shreddershard beetles

-- Living Artillery
3 Tyranid Warriors: barbed strangler
3 Biovores
Exocrine

The idea being that the Tfex holds my objective, while keeping in range of the Malanthrope of course, while the Flyrants and Mawlocs try to push my opponent off his own objective. I'm considering hiding the Shrikes near my own objective to deal with tough troops coming to contest it. One more consideration is adding a Aegis Defense Line to protect my own objective, but since the objective in my deployment zone will be placed by my opponent, I'm not sure about the timing. Do you get to place your fortification Before or After the objectives?

Anyway, I welcome all remarks on this list!

Looks a little body lite, ands the Shrikes feel a bit unsupported. But you should be able to to amek a real dent in opposing forces.

locarno24 wrote:
Hmm...

Damn it! I want my tyranid knight-analogue for Pacific Rim-style games.

Kind of bugs me that despite the 'nidzilla' phrase that's been floating around since 3rd edition, we still can't do a pure monstrous creature army.....

Sure we can, almost. With the exception of a few ripper troops and the malan (which used to be a TMC), this is my idea for an almost pure nidzilla list (with self-allies).

Dakka Flyrant - Egrubs
Dakka Flyrant - Egrubs

Malan

2x3 Rippers - Deepstrike

Dimachaeron
Harpy - TL-HVC
Hive Crone

Mawloc
Mawloc
Mawloc

Dakka Flyrant - Egrubs

3x Rippers

1849

5 FMC's and 9 TMC's total.

 NightWrench wrote:

I cannot for the life of me not understand why bugs cannot get a LoW that is a Gargantuan walker.

Why would you want a Gargantuan walker when we have Gargantuan creatures? Leave the robots to the Imperials. We have gigantic walking bio-weapons instead.

Just bring your Hierophant Bio-titan with the biomorph that causes wounds/glancing hits to enemy units/walkers in combat and you will never have to worry about those pesky Imperial Knights ever again.

It is alright, definitely WAY too expensive, but still has its uses. Most importantly of which is to produce more backfield fearless troops to hold objectives. The most idiotic change was to his backlash though, in most games I lost more gants to that than anyhing else (on the rare occasion when the terv actually dies)

 SHUPPET wrote:
I would say he's still costed just as inappropriately except on the other side of the bat. A lot more changed than just making him one of the more expensive MCs in the army you know, and those changes were more than crippling. But if you want to run one, go for it. Better troop choice than Stealers I guess.

You really can't just compare him by straight-up point costs against the other Tyranid MC's. If you do, then yeah, he seems to be over-costed. However, he is a force-multiplier that can generate free troops. No other Tyranid unit can do that. Now he isn't the must-take that he used to be, but he is still a solid choice for a primarily Tyranid ground force. I would still consider running him if I were to run a more traditional Tyranid tournament list (i.e. non-Skyblight or a non-MTO Tyranid force).

I've been running a Highlander monster mash list for a while now, not exactly optimized but tons of fun! Currently kitted for 1750 but will be bumped to 1850 and rearanged likely with the new bug coming out.

HQ
Hive tyrant, wings, x2 TL devourers, electroshock grubs
Old One Eye

Troops
x30 gaunts
Tervigon, thorax swarm: electroshock grubs

Elites
Haruspex, adrenal glands, toxin sacs
Malanthrope

Fast Attack
Crone

Heavy Support
Tyrannofex, electroshock grubs
Exocrine
Mawlock

Polkadragon wrote:
I posted an update of my list in the "army list" section a while ago, but clearly all the active Tyranid players are located in this thread, so posting it here for some opinions.

As a reminder, I'm going to enter a 1750 tourney in November, which basically allows everything, with the exception of superheavies and Gargantuans from Forge World (regular FW is ok)

I should add that the missions are going to be very objective based, for instance the first one gives you victory points for each turn that you hold your own objective. So I might need a solid objective holder as well. With that in mind, the following list:

Spoiler:

-- CAD
Hive Tyrant: twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; wings; electroshock grubs
Hive Tyrant: twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; wings; electroshock grubs

3 Ripper Swarms: Deep Strike
3 Ripper Swarms: Deep Strike

1 Malanthrope

5 Tyranid Shrikes: 5× scything talons; 3× rending claws; 2× lash whip and bonesword; toxin sacs; flesh hooks

Mawloc
Mawloc
Tyrannofex: shreddershard beetles

-- Living Artillery
3 Tyranid Warriors: barbed strangler
3 Biovores
Exocrine

The idea being that the Tfex holds my objective, while keeping in range of the Malanthrope of course, while the Flyrants and Mawlocs try to push my opponent off his own objective. I'm considering hiding the Shrikes near my own objective to deal with tough troops coming to contest it. One more consideration is adding a Aegis Defense Line to protect my own objective, but since the objective in my deployment zone will be placed by my opponent, I'm not sure about the timing. Do you get to place your fortification Before or After the objectives?

Anyway, I welcome all remarks on this list!

I actually like this list. I'm not a fan of the TFex though. He just doesn't get it done for me. What role does he fill in your army? Personally I would take out him and a Mawloc to throw in a screening gargoyle unit (they're still quite good tarpitters as well if you have a large one) and maybe some sort of assaulty threat. You could grab a Dakkafex (while not designed for assault he is still good) or a Dimachaeron if you're able. He is still a murder machine and with the shrikes your opponents would have to decide who they want to deal with, not if the will deal with him or not. I'm going to be running a similar list with some Raveners once I get my hands on more (anyone want some Wraits and have extra lol?)

 gameandwatch wrote:
It is alright, definitely WAY too expensive, but still has its uses. Most importantly of which is to produce more backfield fearless troops to hold objectives. The most idiotic change was to his backlash though, in most games I lost more gants to that than anyhing else (on the rare occasion when the terv actually dies)

Backlash can be mitigated. Just move those gants more than 6" from the tervigon or place them in terrain if possible. With the malanthrope nearby, then they can potentially get 3+/2+ cover even against the backlash.

While gants produced can be used to grab objectives, oftentimes, I play them more aggressive than that. Shoot them forwards to be screening units or to try to tie up enemy units (even 1 or 2 turns will help if they are able to tie up an enemy shooty unit). Also, each unit of gant he produces, the enemy needs to waste resources to get rid of. That means less guns against the rest of the army as they try to clear the newly spawned gants.

 jy2 wrote:

 gameandwatch wrote:
It is alright, definitely WAY too expensive, but still has its uses. Most importantly of which is to produce more backfield fearless troops to hold objectives. The most idiotic change was to his backlash though, in most games I lost more gants to that than anyhing else (on the rare occasion when the terv actually dies)

Backlash can be mitigated. Just move those gants more than 6" from the tervigon or place them in terrain if possible. With the malanthrope nearby, then they can potentially get 3+/2+ cover even against the backlash.

While gants produced can be used to grab objectives, oftentimes, I play them more aggressive than that. Shoot them forwards to be screening units or to try to tie up enemy units (even 1 or 2 turns will help if they are able to tie up an enemy shooty unit). Also, each unit of gant he produces, the enemy needs to waste resources to get rid of. That means less guns against the rest of the army as they try to clear the newly spawned gants.

The backlash is 12" now if I believe, not 6

And yeah, I am also usually aggressive with gants, but more often than not, not the ones produced by tervigons, because the rest of my army at that point is too far away for most produced squads to catch up

 gameandwatch wrote:

Spoiler:

 jy2 wrote:

 gameandwatch wrote:
It is alright, definitely WAY too expensive, but still has its uses. Most importantly of which is to produce more backfield fearless troops to hold objectives. The most idiotic change was to his backlash though, in most games I lost more gants to that than anyhing else (on the rare occasion when the terv actually dies)

Backlash can be mitigated. Just move those gants more than 6" from the tervigon or place them in terrain if possible. With the malanthrope nearby, then they can potentially get 3+/2+ cover even against the backlash.

While gants produced can be used to grab objectives, oftentimes, I play them more aggressive than that. Shoot them forwards to be screening units or to try to tie up enemy units (even 1 or 2 turns will help if they are able to tie up an enemy shooty unit). Also, each unit of gant he produces, the enemy needs to waste resources to get rid of. That means less guns against the rest of the army as they try to clear the newly spawned gants.

The backlash is 12" now if I believe, not 6

Ouch. Well, at least place them near the malan for some cover. On average (without cover) the backlash will kill about 5 gants. With 5+ Malan cover (out in the open), that means you're lose only 3 gants. A 30-gant unit can easily absorb that, even without cover.

....Backlash ignores cover now, too.

^

 tetrisphreak wrote:
....Backlash ignores cover now, too.

Where's my darn codex when I need it. Lol.

Hence why I said the worst change was the absurd change to backlash, so unecesarily overpowered AGAINST the nid player, just the dreggs

luke1705 wrote:

Polkadragon wrote:
I posted an update of my list in the "army list" section a while ago, but clearly all the active Tyranid players are located in this thread, so posting it here for some opinions.

As a reminder, I'm going to enter a 1750 tourney in November, which basically allows everything, with the exception of superheavies and Gargantuans from Forge World (regular FW is ok)

I should add that the missions are going to be very objective based, for instance the first one gives you victory points for each turn that you hold your own objective. So I might need a solid objective holder as well. With that in mind, the following list:

Spoiler:

-- CAD
Hive Tyrant: twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; wings; electroshock grubs
Hive Tyrant: twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; twin-linked devourer with brainleech worms; wings; electroshock grubs

3 Ripper Swarms: Deep Strike
3 Ripper Swarms: Deep Strike

1 Malanthrope

5 Tyranid Shrikes: 5× scything talons; 3× rending claws; 2× lash whip and bonesword; toxin sacs; flesh hooks

Mawloc
Mawloc
Tyrannofex: shreddershard beetles

-- Living Artillery
3 Tyranid Warriors: barbed strangler
3 Biovores
Exocrine

The idea being that the Tfex holds my objective, while keeping in range of the Malanthrope of course, while the Flyrants and Mawlocs try to push my opponent off his own objective. I'm considering hiding the Shrikes near my own objective to deal with tough troops coming to contest it. One more consideration is adding a Aegis Defense Line to protect my own objective, but since the objective in my deployment zone will be placed by my opponent, I'm not sure about the timing. Do you get to place your fortification Before or After the objectives?

Anyway, I welcome all remarks on this list!

I actually like this list. I'm not a fan of the TFex though. He just doesn't get it done for me. What role does he fill in your army? Personally I would take out him and a Mawloc to throw in a screening gargoyle unit (they're still quite good tarpitters as well if you have a large one) and maybe some sort of assaulty threat. You could grab a Dakkafex (while not designed for assault he is still good) or a Dimachaeron if you're able. He is still a murder machine and with the shrikes your opponents would have to decide who they want to deal with, not if the will deal with him or not. I'm going to be running a similar list with some Raveners once I get my hands on more (anyone want some Wraits and have extra lol?)

The idea is to use the durability of the Tfex as a solid objective holder. Because otherwise the list doesn't really have much units that can hold my own backfield objective(s). With the Flyrants and Mawlocs and possibly the Shrikes I should have enough to put pressure on the opponent, but I feel I need a solid backfield presence as well. If need be, the Tfex can always advance as well and possess midfield along with the Living Artillery crew.

 jy2 wrote:

 gameandwatch wrote:
It is alright, definitely WAY too expensive, but still has its uses. Most importantly of which is to produce more backfield fearless troops to hold objectives. The most idiotic change was to his backlash though, in most games I lost more gants to that than anyhing else (on the rare occasion when the terv actually dies)

Backlash can be mitigated. Just move those gants more than 6" from the tervigon or place them in terrain if possible. With the malanthrope nearby, then they can potentially get 3+/2+ cover even against the backlash.

While gants produced can be used to grab objectives, oftentimes, I play them more aggressive than that. Shoot them forwards to be screening units or to try to tie up enemy units (even 1 or 2 turns will help if they are able to tie up an enemy shooty unit). Also, each unit of gant he produces, the enemy needs to waste resources to get rid of. That means less guns against the rest of the army as they try to clear the newly spawned gants.

You mitigate backlash with Hive Commander. Outflank either the Termagants or the Tervigon depending on the situation. I've used this quite a lot, and recommend it if you must take a Tervigon. Still not a competitive build, though.

You mitigate backlash because it's treated like a shooting attack. Just keep a couple in that 12" range that you need for synapse anyway and that's all that will die.

 gigasnail wrote:
You mitigate backlash because it's treated like a shooting attack. Just keep a couple in that 12" range that you need for synapse anyway and that's all that will die.

You are a clever bastard, I never thought of that! Well done gigasnail!

 gameandwatch wrote:

 gigasnail wrote:
You mitigate backlash because it's treated like a shooting attack. Just keep a couple in that 12" range that you need for synapse anyway and that's all that will die.

You are a clever bastard, I never thought of that! Well done gigasnail!

Oh. My. God. Acceptable losses have never been easier!

I've got round 4 up over here.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/620341.page#7317074

Tyranids vs a genuine Ork Horde with a LoW super heavy tank. Things die, a lot!

Wasn't me that came up w/ that, pretty sure it was coredump over at the hive. Yer welcome though!

Don't have my codex with me, but does Backlash says that it is treated as a Shooting Attack.

 jy2 wrote:

 gameandwatch wrote:

Spoiler:

 jy2 wrote:

 gameandwatch wrote:
It is alright, definitely WAY too expensive, but still has its uses. Most importantly of which is to produce more backfield fearless troops to hold objectives. The most idiotic change was to his backlash though, in most games I lost more gants to that than anyhing else (on the rare occasion when the terv actually dies)

Backlash can be mitigated. Just move those gants more than 6" from the tervigon or place them in terrain if possible. With the malanthrope nearby, then they can potentially get 3+/2+ cover even against the backlash.

While gants produced can be used to grab objectives, oftentimes, I play them more aggressive than that. Shoot them forwards to be screening units or to try to tie up enemy units (even 1 or 2 turns will help if they are able to tie up an enemy shooty unit). Also, each unit of gant he produces, the enemy needs to waste resources to get rid of. That means less guns against the rest of the army as they try to clear the newly spawned gants.

The backlash is 12" now if I believe, not 6

Ouch. Well, at least place them near the malan for some cover. On average (without cover) the backlash will kill about 5 gants. With 5+ Malan cover (out in the open), that means you're lose only 3 gants. A 30-gant unit can easily absorb that, even without cover.

Posts like this do make a person wonder how much playing and theory crafting you've actually done with certain units, or if you are just repeating what you've seen said by a certain person or two who you think knows this game well enough to have their statements repeated.... For someone arguing a models merits so hard you obviously haven't done much playing with it.

Also, why would you assume that I am ignoring all it's abilities when I say it's overcosted? It's overcosted including, and almost BECAUSE of them... it's almost Flyrant price (in fact after giving the one we are seeing discussed the upgrades it has, it IS flyrant priced) for a unit that is most discernibly not a Flyrant, or even close in level of game impact... it's an easy thing to kill, is highly cost effective target to shoot at, and while better than the Dima, doesn't actually add much reliability, and helps secure a role our army already excels at, which is map control inside that bubble of range around out army.... you'd be better off with the points dumped into seperate units of Rippers... I will say that it's not an auto-lose unit like some others, just severely outclassed, and overpriced.

 jy2 wrote:
Don't have my codex with me, but does Backlash says that it is treated as a Shooting Attack.

says to allocate them as per a shooting attack, yes. page 48 in the codex.

Sounds to me like he just hasn't played with Tervigons in a while. Which is fair - a lot of us haven't. The synaptic backlash change was a big reason why (along with many of the other nerfs to Momma Jamma). Basically the only way to completely mitigate it is to stay in the 12"-18" range and cast dominion every turn...but we ain't got no warp charge for that!!!

@ Shuppet

I've use the tervigon a couple of times early in 7th, though it was a mainstay of my Tyranid army in the latter half of 6th. I admit that my memories of its rules are a little joggy. Nevertheless, it's playstyle is still the same as before. My opinions are both from my analysis of the unit as well as my experiences with it. Anyone that gives me advice about a unit, I always take with both an open mind and with a grain of salt until I personally have had time to run the unit itself in actual play.

Like I've said, we are not going to agree about the cost of the unit. You think it is over-costed. I think that it is priced just right. Let's just agree to disagree here. I will say this , however. I would run him in my competitive TAC Tyranid list if I were to play a Tyranid ground-&-pound type of list. Force multiplier units (FMU's) > normal units. Just don't go overboard by taking too many of those FMU's. 1 is usually all that you'll need and spamming them actually reduces the potency of your list.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gigasnail wrote:

 jy2 wrote:
Don't have my codex with me, but does Backlash says that it is treated as a Shooting Attack.

says to allocate them as per a shooting attack, yes. page 48 in the codex.

Ok, cool. Thanks!

 jy2 wrote:

Like I've said, we are not going to agree about the cost of the unit. You think it is over-costed. I think that it is priced just right. Let's just agree to disagree here.

Actually, you didn't say this at all, in any way shape or form did you even deliver this sentiment, you simply just stated your opinion and the fact that you think it's overcosted and that I'm wrong, not that "we should agree to disagree". You were the one who started this disagreement by quoting me and saying that I'm wrong, if you don't want to have this discussion, stop responding to it with counter points. :S

 jy2 wrote:
Force multiplier units (FMU's) > normal units. Just don't go overboard by taking too many of those FMU's. 1 is usually all that you'll need and spamming them actually reduces the potency of your list.

300+ points spent on zero aggression undeniably already reduces the "potency" of your list, even if you might trade it off for some scoring, that's not really inclusive in a lists "potency". Also, it's not a force multiplier in any sense, at best it's a force addition, it doesn't multiply the effectiveness of your points on the board (a.l.a Venomthrope), it simply adds a value of points between two set numbers, every turn, assuming you don't jam. So unlike a force multiplier, which will be more effective the higher level of points you go, this has quite the opposite effect of being more effective the lower value of points you go, here's some extremes, at 5000 points spawning say 50 gants in a game (random number for sake of example) isn't exactly huge consisting of a 4% buff to the total size of your army at the cost of all the negatives about him,however imagine being able to play him in 200 pt kill team, you've just given yourself a 200% army size multiplier! Force multiplier he is not, he'd actually be a force DIVIDER if his feedback was ever relevant to anything other than the own Gants he spawns. Anyway, I say force addition AT BEST, because after you've taken 120 points of a unit not worth taking on its own merits (Gants) and 200 points of a unit also not worth taking on it's own merits if we are going to look at Spawning as an added effect. you then get the payoff of spawns of Termagants (who you cannot rely on in any way including both size and amount of spawns during the duration of any given game, it's quite a massive variable), that are still just units that you wouldn't pay for if they weren't free, who do nothing but lock down the objectives in the back of your field, in both a more expensive and less reliable manner than just, buying actual Termagants would do, to say nothing of Rippers. That being said, it's the objectives on our side of the table that our army as a whole excels in taking, and doesn't really need any special investment to do so, this role is barely even relevant.

The Tervigon requires dedicating so many points into it of which you are often likely to see no return on (clog turn 1 / 2, be left with an MC who has the price speed and threat range of the already overcosted and gimmicky Dima, except isn't an actual threat to anything (except for of course it's own spawns, who are also a threat to nothing, and can achieve nothing but further securing something that would only not be getting dominated in the first place would be if you were say, playing with a 300 point deficit for picking these models in the first place ~_~), or even on a good day anywhere near as much return as you would from say, a Dakkafex and 4 squads of Rippers for a similar price. This model is bad. Feel free to "agree to disagree" if that's what you want to do, but "agre to disagree" is a term used to describe someone who chooses not further extend a debate, which means not being the person who started it with a conflict of opinion and continues to argue every response made to that conflicting opinion.

ref: tervigon. the points required alone make the unit undesirable. i'm not spending 300+ on troops without a good reason. every bit of threat has been removed from a tervigon.

What is the consensus on Troop Warriors in a competitive environment? Is there a place for them besides a formation tax, or is it just all rippers and gaunts all the time?

 SHUPPET wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

Like I've said, we are not going to agree about the cost of the unit. You think it is over-costed. I think that it is priced just right. Let's just agree to disagree here.

Actually, you didn't say this at all, in any way shape or form did you even deliver this sentiment, you simply just stated your opinion and the fact that you think it's overcosted and that I'm wrong, not that "we should agree to disagree". You were the one who started this disagreement by quoting me and saying that I'm wrong, if you don't want to have this discussion, stop responding to it with counter points. :S

What are you talking about. I think it is costed appropriately. You think it is over-costed. Therefore, we disagree, both now and much earlier in this thread. Period. BTW, I never said that you were wrong. There is no right or wrong here with regards to the units. I just disagreed with your statement that they were bad. Doesn't necessarily mean that you're wrong. It just means that I feel that they are good enough to contribute positively to the army.

 jy2 wrote:
Force multiplier units (FMU's) > normal units. Just don't go overboard by taking too many of those FMU's. 1 is usually all that you'll need and spamming them actually reduces the potency of your list.

300+ points spent on zero aggression undeniably already reduces the "potency" of your list, even if you might trade it off for some scoring, that's not really inclusive in a lists "potency". Also, it's not a force multiplier in any sense, at best it's a force addition, it doesn't multiply the effectiveness of your points on the board (a.l.a Venomthrope), it simply adds a value of points between two set numbers, every turn, assuming you don't jam. So unlike a force multiplier, which will be more effective the higher level of points you go, this has quite the opposite effect of being more effective the lower value of points you go, here's some extremes, at 5000 points spawning say 50 gants in a game (random number for sake of example) isn't exactly huge consisting of a 4% buff to the total size of your army at the cost of all the negatives about him,however imagine being able to play him in 200 pt kill team, you've just given yourself a 200% army size multiplier! Force multiplier he is not, he'd actually be a force DIVIDER if his feedback was ever relevant to anything other than the own Gants he spawns. Anyway, I say force addition AT BEST, because after you've taken 120 points of a unit not worth taking on its own merits (Gants) and 200 points of a unit also not worth taking on it's own merits if we are going to look at Spawning as an added effect. you then get the payoff of spawns of Termagants (who you cannot rely on in any way including both size and amount of spawns during the duration of any given game, it's quite a massive variable), that are still just units that you wouldn't pay for if they weren't free, who do nothing but lock down the objectives in the back of your field, in both a more expensive and less reliable manner than just, buying actual Termagants would do, to say nothing of Rippers. That being said, it's the objectives on our side of the table that our army as a whole excels in taking, and doesn't really need any special investment to do so, this role is barely even relevant.

The Tervigon requires dedicating so many points into it of which you are often likely to see no return on (clog turn 1 / 2, be left with an MC who has the price speed and threat range of the already overcosted and gimmicky Dima, except isn't an actual threat to anything (except for of course it's own spawns, who are also a threat to nothing, and can achieve nothing but further securing something that would only not be getting dominated in the first place would be if you were say, playing with a 300 point deficit for picking these models in the first place ~_~), or even on a good day anywhere near as much return as you would from say, a Dakkafex and 4 squads of Rippers for a similar price. This model is bad. Feel free to "agree to disagree" if that's what you want to do, but "agre to disagree" is a term used to describe someone who chooses not further extend a debate, which means not being the person who started it with a conflict of opinion and continues to argue every response made to that conflicting opinion.