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.

Hollismason wrote:People keep talking about how Venomthropes are crap but I really like them. Also, they are infantry so you can put up to 3 in a squad. That's pretty awesome because you can also put a Alpha Warrior wit them.

It also backs up Tyranid warriors with defensive grenades.


Here's your combo though. Death Leaper + venomthrope. With a Podding army thats pretty nifty.


Havng actually sat down and read the codex its pretty awesome with lots and lots of viable builds even if he Carnifex did get the shaft which was disappointing.

What does Deathleaper need a Venomthrope for? He's already hard enough to shoot with his essential "Nightfighting" rule. Following it up with a 5+ cover save is nice too, but it seems a bit overkill, IMO. The defensive grenades and the difficult terrain-assault thing is also nice, but who in their right mind would assault Death Leaper with anything less than an Assault Terminator Squad or a Command Squad. I would much rather have those Venomthropes giving their bonuses to Termagants and Warriors, but maybe I'm missing something . . .

Darth Bob wrote:

Hollismason wrote:People keep talking about how Venomthropes are crap but I really like them. Also, they are infantry so you can put up to 3 in a squad. That's pretty awesome because you can also put a Alpha Warrior wit them.

It also backs up Tyranid warriors with defensive grenades.


Here's your combo though. Death Leaper + venomthrope. With a Podding army thats pretty nifty.


Havng actually sat down and read the codex its pretty awesome with lots and lots of viable builds even if he Carnifex did get the shaft which was disappointing.

What does Deathleaper need a Venomthrope for? He's already hard enough to shoot with his essential "Nightfighting" rule. Following it up with a 5+ cover save is nice too, but it seems a bit overkill, IMO. The defensive grenades and the difficult terrain-assault thing is also nice, but who in their right mind would assault Death Leaper with anything less than an Assault Terminator Squad or a Command Squad. I would much rather have those Venomthropes giving their bonuses to Termagants and Warriors, but maybe I'm missing something . . .

I agree, i'd rather have them buffing my gants from getting assaulted by super CC units.

Units within 12 inches roll one less dice than normal for their terrain check add that with the Venomthropes Toxic Miasma and the dangerous terrain check units within 6 have e to take in order to assault a unit.


Basically if the Venomthropes and Deathleaper are near each other and in cover the opponent has to roll 1 less dice to assault and has to roll for dangerous terrain.

It makes it a really dificult unit to get rid of unless you shoot at it.

Hollismason wrote:Units within 12 inches roll one less dice than normal for their terrain check add that with the Venomthropes Toxic Miasma and the dangerous terrain check units within 6 have e to take in order to assault a unit.


Basically if the Venomthropes and Deathleaper are near each other and in cover the opponent has to roll 1 less dice to assault and has to roll for dangerous terrain.

It makes it a really dificult unit to get rid of unless you shoot at it.

Still doesn't seem worth it. Why would you do anything other than shoot Deathleaper? The beast is WS9, St 6, I7.

Plus Venomthropes aren't terribly durable. So if you shoot it rather than 'Leaper he'll lose most of the benefits. Again, I think the Gaunts and Warriors could benefit more. Hell, even Zoanthropes, since they're almost worthless if they get tied up in assault.

It get's even more bizzare when you realize you can have a Alpha warrior join the Deathleaper and gain stealth.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
edit:
Oh and an Alpha Warrior can join a squad of Venomthropes and arrive in a pod with them.


Honestly out of All of the HQs I like the Alpha Warrior the best. 80 points comes with some antipsyker ability and has some nifty stuff like a Cheapo regenerate, Boneswords and lash whip etc... the fact that he is infantry and not a monstrous creature really benefits the tyranids greatly.

Alpha warriors can't join Deathleaper.

Usually how fast is the shipping on preorders direct from GW in the US? How long do I have to be kept waiting???

I was told that I would be getting mine on the 16th up here in Canada dunno bout the south but im pretty sure its the same thing.

Well I'm not to the south of Canada, more westerly, but that still answers my question well enough!

everyone should get their stuff the 16th, thats the international date i thought.

airmang wrote:Alpha warriors can't join Deathleaper.

Yeah he can, the deathleaper has no restrictions on stuff joining it, its a unique infantry and is actually not a special character. The alpha warrior is just infantry and independent character.


This is why people are all like Ah man Venomthropes suck, no they dont stick an alpha warrior with them to deal with CC etc.. and you have a pretty kick ass little unit. The Alpha also has t5 so that helps as well.

Hollismason wrote:

airmang wrote:Alpha warriors can't join Deathleaper.

Yeah he can, the deathleaper has no restrictions on stuff joining it, its a unique infantry and is actually not a special character. The alpha warrior is just infantry and independent character.


This is why people are all like Ah man Venomthropes suck, no they dont stick an alpha warrior with them to deal with CC etc.. and you have a pretty kick ass little unit. The Alpha also has t5 so that helps as well.

Independant characters can't join units that always consist of a single model, unless the other model is also an independant character. So Deathleaper cannot join any other unit, and no independant character can join Deathleaper. You can indeed join Venomthropes, but if that is worth it is up for you to decide.

With the new codex, you can join a unit of Carnifex to borrow their T6 against shooting though.

Hollimason is right. DL is an infantry squad of one model. Only restriction on joining squads is that MC's cannot join other units, MC or not.

Alpha is an IC, not an MC. DL is an infantry unit, even if he is one model he is a unit of infantry.

Under rules Lysander can join himself to Marneus Calgar to form a unit of 2 characters.

Why you'd want to join an Alpha to a DL is beyond me as that just cripples the DL more than benefits him. Alpha attached to 3 regular lictors could be fun but I can think of better squads for the Alpha to join.

Edited....

NM, Holli is wrong. An alpha cannot join a DL. Could still join a lictor brood so long as it was 2 or 3 lictors, though again not really the best place for him.

Fateweaver wrote:Could still join a lictor brood so long as it was 2 or 3 lictors, though again not really the best place for him.

Note that an IC could still join a single model unit, as long as the unit does not always consist of a single model. As a brood of Lictors or Carnifexxes can consist of 1-3 models, an IC can easily join a single one with only one model in it. Of course, the Lictor presents a different problem, as they always need to start in reserve, and an Alpha Warrior can't deep strike. You can of course join the Alpha Warrior to a brood of Lictors after deployment and after the Lictors have appeared.

Hey, quick fact-check: What's the range of The Shadow in the Warp?

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.

..? So you're army consists of four people? I hardly see why you would have a hard time just using a broodlord outside of a squad then if you're not playing in a competitive or unfriendly format. As for my being trollish, forgive me for noting that a single moved slot is hardly the invalidation of an army that hasn't existed for a decade anyway.

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.

I started out of the third edition rulebook playing tyranids. Y'know, back over a decade ago WHEN THAT ARMY HAD ALREADY BEEN CUT. So forgive me for being unsympathetic. As for my grasp of tactics, I haven't posted in a tactics thread in roughly a year (they would always come down to comparisons against tourney builds, and unless they were those builds they would always be judged unfairly) and most of my musings here have been on the mathammer related to the current metagame and the effectiveness of winged warriors and the difficulty inherent in killing tyrannofexes. None of which I'm incorrect on. So I'm not particularly certain what you're talking about.

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".

Well if he was already using four players to create a "counts as" list and was already using counts as units in that list I don't see how using a broodlord as a "counts as" in the new edition codex is any different.

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.

A genestealer cult isn't a tyranid army. It's a human army with some hybrids, a few genestealers and a patriarch. Its best accomplished by just using stealers and broodlords in an IG list. Something you couldn't do legally before and something you still can't now. So I don't see how things have changed for him.

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.

Thank you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

His point is still valid. A gun that shoots 20 shots, even at BS 3, has a better chance at effectively damaging smaller or more well spread out units than does a flamer template. The flamer template shines against large numbered and closely spaced units.

It's also significantly better at damaging armor 10 vehicles, and those shots are supported by either more shots or a second flame template. The tyrannofexes power lies more in it's ability to be a consistent though low end ranged threat that is exceedingly difficult to silence, to the point where it is no longer worth the effort. It's a "safe investment" in a book of very expensive glass cannons.

And it's a moot point either way since anyone taking a Tyrranofex will upgrade to the S10 Capsule Cannon. The other two weapon options can be adequately simulated by much cheaper units.

Zoanthropes and hive guard are much better at heavy tank and transport popping, so I doubt everyone will rush for the capsule canon. The Tfex is in kind of an odd place in the codex, it's not a bad unit, but it's overshadowed by better anti infantry options and better anti tank.

Nurglitch wrote:Hey, quick fact-check: What's the range of The Shadow in the Warp?

12"

I got to take a look at the dex today. It looks really good. All the new units seem neat. I was pretty happy w/ lictor (what I was curious about the most).

My only gripe: am I missing something or do tyrant guard not stop the hive tyrant being a shooting target? He can join them like an independent character, but he's still monstrous and they're still infantry.

Kind of disappointing, seeing as how the entire fluff entry seemed to be dedicated to how they soak up wounds.

He's part of the unit, so you can choose to allocate wounds however you wish among the unit. Him being a monster or not doesn't change that. Now in combat, since he's joined to the unit like an IC, it would imply that he can still be singled out in combat by things in B2B with him...but no, not for shooting. You'd be hard-pressed to hide his unit thanks to his size, but he can still toss shooting wounds on them, just like any other IC joined to a unit.

The rules about MC that Shieldwall had in the last codex were a reference to rules from a previous game edition. Now it doesn't matter.

spinach_chin wrote:I got to take a look at the dex today. It looks really good. All the new units seem neat. I was pretty happy w/ lictor (what I was curious about the most).

My only gripe: am I missing something or do tyrant guard not stop the hive tyrant being a shooting target? He can join them like an independent character, but he's still monstrous and they're still infantry.

Kind of disappointing, seeing as how the entire fluff entry seemed to be dedicated to how they soak up wounds.

In the unit description of the Tyrant Guard it says that the Hive Tyrant can join them and counts as an independent character model. And if you look at the rulebook you will see that independent character models cannot be singled out via shooting.

That's from the german codex.

Greets
Schepp himself

Actually, he does seem to be on to something:

Base Rule Book, page 49:
Independant Characters that are monstrous creatures can always be picked out as seperate targets, unless they've joined a unit of monstrous creatures or a unit with special rules that offer them protection.

Now, RAI is most likely that a Tyrant in a unit of Guard can't be singled out in the shooting phase. What would be the use of the Shieldwall rule and the Tyrant joining the unit if the Tyrant is still a seperate target in all cases? Heck, joining would only make you lose Go to Ground.

But RAW, I dunno, the 4E version of Shieldwall specifically said the Tyrant couldn't be singled out, and there's no mention of that in the new rule (in the German codex at least, haven't seen the English one yet). I guess this is going to be another one of those points that is going to have endless discussion untill a Errata/FAQ comes out in a few months. *sigh*

This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

Redemption wrote:Actually, he does seem to be on to something:

Base Rule Book, page 49:
Independant Characters that are monstrous creatures can always be picked out as seperate targets, unless they've joined a unit of monstrous creatures or a unit with special rules that offer them protection.

Now, RAI is most likely that a Tyrant in a unit of Guard can't be singled out in the shooting phase. What would be the use of the Shieldwall rule and the Tyrant joining the unit if the Tyrant is still a seperate target in all cases? Heck, joining would only make you lose Go to Ground.

But RAW, I dunno, the 4E version of Shieldwall specifically said the Tyrant couldn't be singled out, and there's no mention of that in the new rule (in the German codex at least, haven't seen the English one yet). I guess this is going to be another one of those points that is going to have endless discussion untill a Errata/FAQ comes out in a few months. *sigh*

Ugh, well, I skipped the part about monstrous creatures because I thought they simply don't count as ICs. Unsure if shooting protection is RAI then.

Greets
Schepp himself

Got my nids stuff today
5 Days early! Only got a Trygon and the new book but im very happy because im off work for 2 weeks from today


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So who else got theres today?

Ah, that must be a benefit to living in the UK. I don't suspect to get mine until much later.

Darth Bob wrote:This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

That is they way rules read however.
That said, the CC weapon issue is somewhat avoided as I read it -- none of the CC weapon upgrades are really special close combat weapons, nor do they have to be "used" to get the effects.
The Tyrant Guard issue I saw as I read the book, and seems either an oversight or extra bad nerf.

Another fun part is again coming back to "Is there a double in a set of three" issue, for SitW.

According to GW everyone should get theres on or before the 16th, not sure if that applies to the US as well but I dont see why not

kirsanth wrote:

Darth Bob wrote:This debate is about as stupid as the "you have to choose one weapon in CC" debate. Why would they call them Tyrant Guard if they can't guard the Tyrant...really? It's common sense people.

That is they way rules read however.
That said, the CC weapon issue is somewhat avoided as I read it -- none of the CC weapon upgrades are really special close combat weapons, nor do they have to be "used" to get the effects.
The Tyrant Guard issue I saw as I read the book, and seems either an oversight or extra bad nerf.

Another fun part is again coming back to "Is there a double in a set of three" issue, for SitW.

I'm 99.9% positive its an oversight. There is almost no benefit in taking Tyrant Guard if they are unable to do their job as guards. Games Workshop is not that stupid, they want money, and they know that if they made the ruling for Guard to not be capable of guarding the Tyrant, no-one would by guard model anymore, because there would be no point, especially with their raised point cost and unchanged statline.

Not quite sure what you mean by the last sentence, elaborate?

SitW causes perils on a pair of 1's or 6's, rolled on three dice. IIRC that is the wording

If three are rolled, is that a pair?
This comes up occationally in Eldar discussions.

Wow, that is silly. there is a pair in a set of three, so that seems pretty cut-and-dry to me. I guess you would really have to be a WaaC player to try and argue that one.