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 am preparing for copious amounts of plastic surgery.

Tevigons: gaunts for the guant god

I believe that at one time, Genestealers were a completely different army than Tyranids, then GW decided to thrust them together. I would prefer to have the Genestealers and cultists as a completely different force, but what can you do. I also still wish that the Orks could have Cyboars and Madboys.

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

Please stop trolling you trollish troll.

Shuma is one of those guys who started playing 40k last year and thinks he knows all the backstory, when most times he hilariously doesn't get the game. I also suspect he barely plays, thus reinforcing his armchair-general take on tactics.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

Not trying to be mean or rude so please forgive me if I am. But pray tell how is he going to do it? The person wants to use the Tyraind codex. He wants to use an army that is old. The only choice he had was to do what he is doing now. So how is it his fault it's not so "Fluffy" as you say it is? He probably even knows it's not "Fluffy". For him, it's GW just making it harder for him to play an army that he wants to play and army that was playable along time ago. Shure he could do what others have done, and use the Ork Codex or the IG codex and use "counts as" but I am guessing he dosn't want to use "counts as".

Hey give him some credit, he wants to keep using the Tyraind codex no matter what. Yes he could have a more stronger army by going "counts as" but he wants to keep it as Tyranid as he can. Unless you think Genestealers shouldn't be Tyraind to begin with.

Defiler wrote:

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

Please stop trolling you trollish troll.

Shuma is one of those guys who started playing 40k last year and thinks he knows all the backstory, when most times he hilariously doesn't get the game. I also suspect he barely plays, thus reinforcing his armchair-general take on tactics.

Davor wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

Not trying to be mean or rude so please forgive me if I am. But pray tell how is he going to do it? The person wants to use the Tyraind codex. He wants to use an army that is old. The only choice he had was to do what he is doing now. So how is it his fault it's not so "Fluffy" as you say it is? He probably even knows it's not "Fluffy". For him, it's GW just making it harder for him to play an army that he wants to play and army that was playable along time ago. Shure he could do what others have done, and use the Ork Codex or the IG codex and use "counts as" but I am guessing he dosn't want to use "counts as".

Hey give him some credit, he wants to keep using the Tyraind codex no matter what. Yes he could have a more stronger army by going "counts as" but he wants to keep it as Tyranid as he can. Unless you think Genestealers shouldn't be Tyraind to begin with.

Actually according to his profile he has been playing the game since 98..... Also, i really think its you guys who are being the trolls not him. I actually agree with what he said, you can't play a genestealer cult list with the current or future codex. you can play a tyranid vanguard list, which i think is what the OP was trying to say.

Sneezypanda wrote:Actually according to his profile he has been playing the game since 98..... Also, i really think its you guys who are being the trolls not him. I actually agree with what he said, you can't play a genestealer cult list with the current or future codex. you can play a tyranid vanguard list, which i think is what the OP was trying to say.

Very well said. And the good news is that gargoyles are vanguard organisms, and lo and behold there is a gargoyle independent character HQ choice.

Shuma may troll at times, but he is 100% right.
A stealer cult is usually a 3/1 ratio of humans who worship nids and hybrids.
Units like pure's are rare in them and not seen often.
Also, the new or previous dex isnt really any good to represent them.

Better off using a guard dex to make such lists.
Shame there isnt an official one, but just like life, GW is a bitch.

I've never had a problem with using human figures to represent Cultists, counting as any of the gaunt variants - either holding boring old human weapons (counting as some believable nid equivalent) or more fluffily holding actual nid weapons grafted onto their arms.

I can just see the scene at the cultists' secret headquarters: "Our glorious day of revolution has arrived, brothers, our allies have landed! Now everyone line up over there for a free gift. Stop sceaming, Brother Bob, it's only an alien parasite, the pain goes away as soon as its mind control tendrils reach your brain - see?"

hmmm, I wonder if spore pod MSU army would work... small units that don't count for KP but still shootings S6 shots? might work here....

I remember second edition Genestealer cult army I think thats the last time they were represented with a actual list. Also, you had to paint them i believe purple.

SWPIGWANG wrote:hmmm, I wonder if spore pod MSU army would work... small units that don't count for KP but still shootings S6 shots? might work here....

If you mean Mycetic Spores (Landing Spores), they're Monstrous Creatures so they're not exactly small, they do count for killpoints, and the S6 shots which suffer from a 6" range and a low Ballistic Score.
If you mean Sporemine Clusters, they don't have S6.

Yeah translations for the spore pod rules were scetchy, some thinking they didn't count for KPs but it seems pretty clear they are simply non-scoring but would still count as KP.

And I think he means small as in the units that are in them are low model count in order to spam pods. Also the pods can take twinlinked deathspitters or blast weapons, which are less affetced by the BS2 and range from 18-24". More of an FYI though, as his idea is built on a faulty premise.

winterman wrote:Yeah translations for the spore pod rules were scetchy, some thinking they didn't count for KPs but it seems pretty clear they are simply non-scoring but would still count as KP.

Aye, correct. The 'Living Bomb' rule Sporemines have specifies they're disregarded for all mission objectives (e.g. holding objectives, killpoints etc). Mycetic Spores are indeed non-scoring, but still count for KPs.

And I think he means small as in the units that are in them are low model count in order to spam pods. Also the pods can take twinlinked deathspitters or blast weapons, which are less affetced by the BS2 and range from 18-24". More of an FYI though, as his idea is built on a faulty premise.

Note that a Mycetic Spore has to shoot at the closest enemy though. As the Spore's passengers can't assault the turn they arrive, (large) blast weapons may do harm than good if you happen to land very close to an enemy unit; they could easily scatter back onto the pod and it's ex-occupants.

That's the big problem I found when testing the Spores...a lot of times I had much better targets than what I had to shoot at. Like the side of the next Battlewagon instead of the front of the closest, or at the Trukk right beside it.

All in all, my big complaint with the new stuff done with the codex is that some of it just doesn't make sense. The Tyrannofex is a particular example. It has an option to pay points to "upgrade" it's Hellhound gun (essentially) to a 20 shot weapon at S4 AP5 with a range of 12". Ok, but wait...average rolling with his BS3 means 10 S4 hits at something 12" away...you could get close to that many hits from being able to put a flamer template oriented anyway you want within 12". And even if you get more hits with the S4 gun, a few extra hits don't make up for S4 AP5 versus S6 AP4 ignoring cover. Unless something was mistranslated (and it'd be hard to mistranslate the range numbers or S) then that weapon option doesn't even make sense. There's no reason to bother with it.

Or crushing claws. Putting Crushing Claws on a Carnifex gives it +d3 extra attacks...ok, slightly better than what it used to do. But wait, since you're dropping a pair of Scything Talons to take it, you're swapping out 4 attacks rerolling all misses for 6 attacks (on average) only rerolling 1's. Considering the WS3, it'll almost never be hitting on better than 4's (other than if the Tyrant gets off the WS1 power), so the loss of the rerolls to 2's and 3's completely offsets the extra attacks. If you roll a 1 on your d3, you're actually worse off than you were with 2x ST. With a 3 on it you're better, but with a 2 it's a marginal change, certainly not worth the point cost of the upgrades.

Those are the things that bother me about the codex. There are little random things here and there that just don't make sense...like no one even gave any thought to actually playing these units.

The 20 shot gun would be good for killing DP's and GD's. Sure you need 6's to wound but you could kill or severly cripple a DP with those 20 shots. A single flamer isn't going to do a whole lot to a DP or a GD.

It's like the Punisher for IG. Crappy at killing mobs of infantry but better than the other variants at picking out single models.

Except at BS 3, that is only 10 hits against a DP/GD, 1.6 wounds, and depending on 3+ or 4++, that is .80 or less failed saves. So I don't see this hurting MC either.

What's the math against Ogryns? I'm too lazy (and yes people do take them contrary to the majority of WAACer's)

Against Ogryns, 10 Hits, 5 wounds: If no cover, that is 5 auto fails (Armour 5+) or 1.67 dead Ogryns. If they have a 4+ cover, then that is 2.5 failed saves or .83 dead Ogryns.

If we are using the template weapon against a unit of 5 Ogryn, then I don't see why you couldn't get 4 hits with a template. 4 Hits equates to 3.33 wounds with no save allowed or 1.1 dead Ogryn.

Neither one seams very impressive to me in this scenario.

Fateweaver wrote:What's the math against Ogryns? I'm too lazy (and yes people do take them contrary to the majority of WAACer's)

One dead Ogryn. And you're in assault range after you shot once.

wyomingfox wrote:Against Ogryns, 10 Hits, 5 wounds: If no cover, that is 5 auto fails (Armour 5+) or 1.67 dead Ogryns. If they have a 4+ cover, then that is 2.5 failed saves or .83 dead Ogryns.

If we are using the template weapon against a unit of 5 Ogryn, then I don't see why you couldn't get 4 hits with a template. 4 Hits equates to 3.33 wounds with no save allowed or 1.1 dead Ogryn.

Neither one seams very impressive to me in this scenario.

10x S4 vs T5 != 5 wounds, so even less impressive. :p

Demogerg wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Im still /sadface over the loss of broodlord as an HQ option. My genestealer cult fluffly army is nerdraging.

Your genestealer cult was never fluffy if all it had was genestealers and broodlords. Thats not how cults operate. The cultists and worshippers far outnumber the purestrain genestealers in a genestealer cult. You're better off using IG to represent a genestealer cult as they exist in the fluff.

and my genestealer cult is a 4 player team army consisting of 2 players with IG, one with nothing but genestealers and broodlord, and a third player with hybrids counts as gaunts.

This arguement over who was right and who was wrong over the fluffy-ness of my army is a moot point when one considers that I have taken into account the ratio of humans to hybrids to purestrains.

and that the army only had one aspect of "counts-as" in the element of gaunts as hybrids.

The entire point of my arguement is that the Broodlord is no longer an HQ, and that makes me a saaaad panda.

Demogerg wrote:This arguement over who was right and who was wrong over the fluffy-ness of my army is a moot point when one considers that I have taken into account the ratio of humans to hybrids to purestrains.

and that the army only had one aspect of "counts-as" in the element of gaunts as hybrids.

The entire point of my arguement is that the Broodlord is no longer an HQ, and that makes me a saaaad panda.

Couldn't you just use a Broodlord model as a count-as Alpha Warrior with a pair Boneswords and Rending Claws, and attach him to a unit of Genestealers? Compared to the 4E Broodlord, you'd have a slightly different statline, and the only big things you'd loose is Infiltrate and that he can be singled out in combat. But you gain the ability to capture objectives and the ability to cause Instant Death.

Couldn't we drop this discussion.

I heard that the US preview copies are in the store now. Any clarifications on how Hive Guard functions concerning denying cover saves from terrain and special wargear. Anyone able to post the exact wording of the entry?

Before I start ripping all the arms off my nids, can someone tell me if gaunts with devourers are still viable in the new codex or is the point cost not worth it.

Also how do devourers work on carnifex? is 2 twin-linked devourer still an option worth taking or is it now more in favor of heavy venom cannon?

Redemption wrote:

Couldn't you just use a Broodlord model as a count-as Alpha Warrior with a pair Boneswords and Rending Claws, and attach him to a unit of Genestealers? Compared to the 4E Broodlord, you'd have a slightly different statline, and the only big things you'd loose is Infiltrate and that he can be singled out in combat. But you gain the ability to capture objectives and the ability to cause Instant Death.

Its going to work out that way actually, I just hate doing a Broodlord "Counts-as" when there is a Broodlord option in the codex, feels dirty. I'm usually a 100% WYSIWYG player. Hence the nerdrage/sadface/sadpanda/facepalm/KHAAAAAAAN!!!!

sirisaacnuton wrote:That's the big problem I found when testing the Spores...a lot of times I had much better targets than what I had to shoot at. Like the side of the next Battlewagon instead of the front of the closest, or at the Trukk right beside it.

All in all, my big complaint with the new stuff done with the codex is that some of it just doesn't make sense. The Tyrannofex is a particular example. It has an option to pay points to "upgrade" it's Hellhound gun (essentially) to a 20 shot weapon at S4 AP5 with a range of 12". Ok, but wait...average rolling with his BS3 means 10 S4 hits at something 12" away...you could get close to that many hits from being able to put a flamer template oriented anyway you want within 12". And even if you get more hits with the S4 gun, a few extra hits don't make up for S4 AP5 versus S6 AP4 ignoring cover. Unless something was mistranslated (and it'd be hard to mistranslate the range numbers or S) then that weapon option doesn't even make sense. There's no reason to bother with it.

Or crushing claws. Putting Crushing Claws on a Carnifex gives it +d3 extra attacks...ok, slightly better than what it used to do. But wait, since you're dropping a pair of Scything Talons to take it, you're swapping out 4 attacks rerolling all misses for 6 attacks (on average) only rerolling 1's. Considering the WS3, it'll almost never be hitting on better than 4's (other than if the Tyrant gets off the WS1 power), so the loss of the rerolls to 2's and 3's completely offsets the extra attacks. If you roll a 1 on your d3, you're actually worse off than you were with 2x ST. With a 3 on it you're better, but with a 2 it's a marginal change, certainly not worth the point cost of the upgrades.

Those are the things that bother me about the codex. There are little random things here and there that just don't make sense...like no one even gave any thought to actually playing these units.

carnifex swings asuming 4+ to hit as not alot of stuff out there is ws 7+

2x scything 4 attacks = 2 hit 2 reroll = 3 hits 75%

1 scything one other = 4 attack = 2 hit + 2 misses re roll 1's = 2.16 hits

1 scything 1 crushing = base 4 = 2.16 hits + 2 crushing = 1.08 = 3.24 hits.


looks like scything crushing nets you .24 hits a turn more.

Before I start ripping all the arms off my nids, can someone tell me if gaunts with devourers are still viable in the new codex or is the point cost not worth it.

They seem much better to me then they are now but YMMV. The cost of a dev-gaunt is the cost of a current spinegaunt x2. Devs on gaunts (and warriors for that matter) are 18" S4 AP- A3 and force a -1 to morale test for casualties.

Also how do devourers work on carnifex? is 2 twin-linked devourer still an option worth taking or is it now more in favor of heavy venom cannon?

They (and tyrants) get an upgraded version of the gaunt/warrior one. S6 AP- A6 twinlinked and -1ld thing. Two of those is still an option. It is definitely improved over the current, but the whole package sure costs a lot more. It isn't a no brainer option like now, but it has its uses.

Thanks for the quick reply back. I'm think i like where the gaunts are going these days. I figure for the carnifex i gotta rip half of them off and try a heavy venom canon/ MC devourer combo. though I'm sure the point costs now will put me way over my usual 2000pt limit.

For the Warriors, do you take a heavy weapon 1 per brood or 1 for every 3 warriors? and then devourer vs deathspitter for the rest?

Okay, everyone say it with me "Termagant, Hormagaunt".

Not gaunt, or gant, or Termigaunt, or whatever other abortion of language you can come up with...

Nurglitch wrote:Okay, everyone say it with me "Termagant, Hormagaunt".

Not gaunt, or gant, or Termigaunt, or whatever other abortion of language you can come up with...

well, I have 20 Termygauntz that disagree with you. /trolled lol