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.

 tetrisphreak wrote:
I think the hot money is on "Transport-o-fex".

Cargofex. The Hive MInd taught them proper defensive driving techniques.

Dont know if i like the supposed shadow in the warp changes. I really like them rolling the 3d6

The minus 4 I think is ALOT better...

Most of them being ld10, -4 means they need to roll less than average to cast the power !

 Rotary wrote:
Dont know if i like the supposed shadow in the warp changes. I really like them rolling the 3d6

The 3d6 won't change - guaranteed. It's one of the two strongest psychic defenses right now, and both of those are in 5th edition codexes.

I could see the -4 ld. Most are ld10, becoming ld6 means they fail it just over half the time, which is slightly better than 3d6 vs ld10 anyway.

I was honestly expecting them to just make Shadow in the Warp an area effect buff to Deny the Witch rolls. They did something similar to Runes of Warding.

I'm going to buy some of these.

GW must want to sell more pyrovores, updating them so that they don't need to get super closed to used their flamer.

 gorgon wrote:
Well, the Cerebore is a transport in the fluff (a burrower, IIRC). It's also important to note that unlike the Exocrine and Malefactor, the Cerebore isn't a classic Epic unit -- I believe it's first appearance was in the CCG. So that'd get around the studio's issues with using the Epic names.

If we do get a Cerebore, it'll be interesting to see how it operates. The obvious rules interpretation of its fluff would be to have it operate much like a drop pod, which seems like territory already covered by spores. Perhaps spore-like delivery combined with Mawloc-like entry effects? Who knows?

I think it's very likely that you can consider this to be a drop pod that starts on the field and has legs...think tervigon for any kind of unit that can currently be podded...but you only get one birthing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TechMarine1 wrote:
GW must want to sell more pyrovores, updating them so that they don't need to get super closed to used their flamer.

I want GW to sell more pyrovores...the model is awesome!

 ductvader wrote:

 gorgon wrote:
Well, the Cerebore is a transport in the fluff (a burrower, IIRC). It's also important to note that unlike the Exocrine and Malefactor, the Cerebore isn't a classic Epic unit -- I believe it's first appearance was in the CCG. So that'd get around the studio's issues with using the Epic names.

If we do get a Cerebore, it'll be interesting to see how it operates. The obvious rules interpretation of its fluff would be to have it operate much like a drop pod, which seems like territory already covered by spores. Perhaps spore-like delivery combined with Mawloc-like entry effects? Who knows?

I think it's very likely that you can consider this to be a drop pod that starts on the field and has legs...think tervigon for any kind of unit that can currently be podded...but you only get one birthing.

I was hoping I could finally use my cerebore, but I am betting it is too big...

Killme304 wrote:
I could see the -4 ld. Most are ld10, becoming ld6 means they fail it just over half the time, which is slightly better than 3d6 vs ld10 anyway.

Except the extra chance of causing a perils.

Rotary wrote:Dont know if i like the supposed shadow in the warp changes. I really like them rolling the 3d6

They only needed to roll 3, 3, and 4 to pass most times, which is basically average. I can't count how many times Grey Knights players confidently fired up their force weapons, or stacked the strength-buffing powers because it's still pretty simple to roll 10 or less on 3d6.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Rotary wrote:
Dont know if i like the supposed shadow in the warp changes. I really like them rolling the 3d6

The 3d6 won't change - guaranteed. It's one of the two strongest psychic defenses right now, and both of those are in 5th edition codexes.

I think it will change. I think GW wants the psychic powers to become a stronger part of the game (not like...Purple Sun OP or anything), and we will soon see no armies with the ability to say "no" passively. I also expect the Space Wolves Rune Staff to change to reflect this.

rigeld2 wrote:

Killme304 wrote:
I could see the -4 ld. Most are ld10, becoming ld6 means they fail it just over half the time, which is slightly better than 3d6 vs ld10 anyway.

Except the extra chance of causing a perils.

I've never had an opposing psyker actually get hurt from perils. Never. Bad luck I guess, but that was never a selling point of SitW for me.

Being as Runes of Warding wasn't just nerfed, it was drug out back, beaten, shot, and buried in a shallow grave, I wouldn't hold out much hope of SitW not getting a major, major nerf.

Bloodhorror wrote:
The minus 4 I think is ALOT better...

Most of them being ld10, -4 means they need to roll less than average to cast the power !

It almost makes more sense to force the opponent to add +4 to their psychic check roll wouldn't it? Still giving them the same chance to fail plus making them risk perils more often like shadows is known for in fluff and game.

nidsNguard wrote:

Bloodhorror wrote:
The minus 4 I think is ALOT better...

Most of them being ld10, -4 means they need to roll less than average to cast the power !

It almost makes more sense to force the opponent to add +4 to their psychic check roll wouldn't it? Still giving them the same chance to fail plus making them risk perils more often like shadows is known for in fluff and game.

I thought in the fluff SitW was not prone to causing perils do to the fact the tyranids blot out the warp. There are stories of people trying to communicate with the hive mind going crazy but thats something entirely different then trying to summon warp lightning.

Based on rumors it's not about being psychically in tune with the warp...tyranids aren't connected to the warp...

It's about about scaring the p*** out of opposing psykers. It's about making Eldrad run around at LD 6 and only passing 42% of the time opposed to the near 50% it used to be.

GW's not been making psychic that much stronger...they've been more or less streamlining the rules.

Tyranids as they seem to be evolving as a codex are not at all about being psychic...they appear to be anti-psychic/anti morale. As it currently stand s there are so many things in the tyranid book that reduce, modify, or mess with LD...I have built entire armies based on making my opponent run away.

This is the path I see GW building.

The Great Devourer is to be feared.

It's not the same chance to fail.

Normally on Ld10 2d6, the chance to fail is 11.1%
On Ld10 3d6, the chance to fail is 50%
On Ld6 2d6, the chance to fail is 58.3%

Under this Ld-4 ruling, it's a strict buff if you only care about them failing their psychic test. It only gets worse for them as they have lower innate Ld or maybe if the Death Leaper gets to keep its leadership reducing ability.

 brassangel wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 Rotary wrote:
Dont know if i like the supposed shadow in the warp changes. I really like them rolling the 3d6

The 3d6 won't change - guaranteed. It's one of the two strongest psychic defenses right now, and both of those are in 5th edition codexes.

I think it will change. I think GW wants the psychic powers to become a stronger part of the game (not like...Purple Sun OP or anything), and we will soon see no armies with the ability to say "no" passively. I also expect the Space Wolves Rune Staff to change to reflect this.

I meant won't stay - sorry. I agree with you.

rigeld2 wrote:

Killme304 wrote:
I could see the -4 ld. Most are ld10, becoming ld6 means they fail it just over half the time, which is slightly better than 3d6 vs ld10 anyway.

Except the extra chance of causing a perils.

I've never had an opposing psyker actually get hurt from perils. Never. Bad luck I guess, but that was never a selling point of SitW for me.

In 6th they don't get any saves so perils is worse. I've killed a few psykers from Shadows (even caused a wound on Eldrad).

I don't know about any one else but the challenge weapon thing one bone swords is disheartening. Dose that mean that you can't use the weapon at all unless you are in a challenge? I hope not I usuall made one unit of my warriors with lash whip and bone sword to hunt terminators. Maybe it just means they have to issue a challenge, I really hope so I know everyone hated our only weapon that negates armor saves I guess it shouldn't surprise me that they would try to find a way to get rid of our only weapon that gets through 2+ save.

 BlackRaven1987!! wrote:
I don't know about any one else but the challenge weapon thing one bone swords is disheartening. Dose that mean that you can't use the weapon at all unless you are in a challenge? I hope not I usuall made one unit of my warriors with lash whip and bone sword to hunt terminators. Maybe it just means they have to issue a challenge, I really hope so I know everyone hated our only weapon that negates armor saves I guess it shouldn't surprise me that they would try to find a way to get rid of our only weapon that gets through 2+ save.

Termagants gets through a 2+ save...with gusto.

I think it means that it's going to be mean in challenges. There is no weapon I know of that's challenge only...

You can count on it being AP3...GW's been turning all swords into AP3 except on big things...might retain force or ID capabilities...or it might get a new effect entirely.

GW's been hunting down the 2+ sv recently though with Eldar and now Marines.

Well i'm hoping that it negates armor, but in a challenge it gets the Instant Death rule.

 ductvader wrote:

 BlackRaven1987!! wrote:
I don't know about any one else but the challenge weapon thing one bone swords is disheartening. Dose that mean that you can't use the weapon at all unless you are in a challenge? I hope not I usuall made one unit of my warriors with lash whip and bone sword to hunt terminators. Maybe it just means they have to issue a challenge, I really hope so I know everyone hated our only weapon that negates armor saves I guess it shouldn't surprise me that they would try to find a way to get rid of our only weapon that gets through 2+ save.

Termagants gets through a 2+ save...with gusto.

I think it means that it's going to be mean in challenges. There is no weapon I know of that's challenge only...

You can count on it being AP3...GW's been turning all swords into AP3 except on big things...might retain force or ID capabilities...or it might get a new effect entirely.

GW's been hunting down the 2+ sv recently though with Eldar and now Marines.

I honestly hope that you are wrong about ap3 the bone sword is our only ap2 equivalent weapon save using a MC. While that is effective at times we all know the plight of the MC. That and it would take away from the feeling of eliteness that warriors have.

Based on that guys' track record, I wouldn't get too bent out of shape about that rumor.

Goresaw wrote:Being as Runes of Warding wasn't just nerfed, it was drug out back, beaten, shot, and buried in a shallow grave, I wouldn't hold out much hope of SitW not getting a major, major nerf.

I don't think it's a nerf. Runes of Warding was WAAAAAYYYY too good before. With psychic powers playing more of an important role in 6th edition, it would have been twice as powerful. There would be no reason for everyone who can take a Farseer (allies, etc) not to. That's not good for the game. Right now, some people ally Space Wolves, or continue to play as-is for the same reason. It's about permitting ways to defend against powerful things, while allowing those things to still remain powerful. If that makes sense... For example: we want to see more anti-aircraft, but nothing too reliable or else there's no reason to play fliers. People basically want a 5 point upgrade that's range 72" S10, AP1, Lance, Skyfire, Armorbane, Heavy 6, on a platform that attaches to squads, can't be focus-fired upon, can split fire among multiple targets, and has a 2+++ save with It Will Not Die.

That's kind of how Runes of Warding would have been against psychic powers if it were left in tact. It should be "warding" it's people against psychic energy, which it now does. Runes of Warding is now fair, not nerfed. It was just over-powered before. Plus, Eldar got plenty of goodies in the rest of the army to more than make up for that change.

BlackRaven1987!! wrote:

 ductvader wrote:

 BlackRaven1987!! wrote:
I don't know about any one else but the challenge weapon thing one bone swords is disheartening. Dose that mean that you can't use the weapon at all unless you are in a challenge? I hope not I usuall made one unit of my warriors with lash whip and bone sword to hunt terminators. Maybe it just means they have to issue a challenge, I really hope so I know everyone hated our only weapon that negates armor saves I guess it shouldn't surprise me that they would try to find a way to get rid of our only weapon that gets through 2+ save.

Termagants gets through a 2+ save...with gusto.

I think it means that it's going to be mean in challenges. There is no weapon I know of that's challenge only...

You can count on it being AP3...GW's been turning all swords into AP3 except on big things...might retain force or ID capabilities...or it might get a new effect entirely.

GW's been hunting down the 2+ sv recently though with Eldar and now Marines.

I honestly hope that you are wrong about ap3 the bone sword is our only ap2 equivalent weapon save using a MC. While that is effective at times we all know the plight of the MC. That and it would take away from the feeling of eliteness that warriors have.

Boneswords will probably be AP3. I would bet on that. It isn't a big deal though. There really weren't a ton of armies fielding 2+ save units anyway. Maybe a single unit of Terminators (which shouldn't get hacked to bits by Warriors anyway)? Our MC's will still be AP2, and there are more armies getting AP2 weaponry in the shooting phase now. Tyranids aren't about armor penetration - they are about forcing a billion saves. They kill under the weight of their masses. The new codex will likely reflect this in a way that's more accurate. We don't NEED an AP2 sword, and the rest of the army will likely be buffed in some way. Every 6th edition codex has so far, so losing AP2 on a single bio weapon will hardly cripple the army. As an aside, learning to play a new way isn't a bad thing either.

No i agree learning a new play style is fun and I am sure that there will be plenty of new shiny in the codex I would just be a bit disappointed I always interpreted the fluff as warriors being pretty elite like creatures oh well.

If boneswords become AP3, I think its possible that Rending Claws will be the preferred weapon for warriors.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
If boneswords become AP3, I think its possible that Rending Claws will be the preferred weapon for warriors.

Depends on the points cost of both Warriors and Boneswords.

I still don't get why people act like there are boatloads of armor save 2+ units running around that Warriors HAVE to be dealing with. AP3 means you absolutely slaughter every infantry in the game, short of the absolute hardest ones from Elites or HQ slots (which are all more expensive than Warriors anyway).

 BlackRaven1987!! wrote:
No i agree learning a new play style is fun and I am sure that there will be plenty of new shiny in the codex I would just be a bit disappointed I always interpreted the fluff as warriors being pretty elite like creatures oh well.

They are pretty elite creatures. AP3 is elite; especially for Troops choices. Their stat-line and equipment (including an AP3 bonesword) would make them all but the killiest Troops choice in the game. They would wade through Space Marines, Orks, Eldar Guardians and Aspect Warriors, Tau infantry of all flavors, IG infantry, Sisters, Necrons...

They don't need to reliably reduce Terminators to powder to be elite. Is that all some of you guys run into or something?

 brassangel wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
If boneswords become AP3, I think its possible that Rending Claws will be the preferred weapon for warriors.

Depends on the points cost of both Warriors and Boneswords.

I still don't get why people act like there are boatloads of armor save 2+ units running around that Warriors HAVE to be dealing with. AP3 means you absolutely slaughter every infantry in the game, short of the absolute hardest ones from Elites or HQ slots (which are all more expensive than Warriors anyway).

Its mostly cause warriors are essentially the Terminators of Nids (powerful, good at both shooting and assault, expensive, hard to kill (uness your opponent has a lot of S8), so naturally we wan themt to do well against actual terminators. If rending stay 5 pts to the bonesword's 10, I can easily see most people taking them instead.

CSM Terminators aren't more expensive than Warriors.

It's not that they HAVE to be dealing with heavy infantry; it's that that was the only niche the current codex gave them. In 5e, Genestealers were just plain better (and so were Raveners). In 6e, just drown whatever it is in poisonous 'gants and/or Gargoyles, until one of the big bugs can spare a few minutes to come over and smash it.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 brassangel wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
If boneswords become AP3, I think its possible that Rending Claws will be the preferred weapon for warriors.

Depends on the points cost of both Warriors and Boneswords.

I still don't get why people act like there are boatloads of armor save 2+ units running around that Warriors HAVE to be dealing with. AP3 means you absolutely slaughter every infantry in the game, short of the absolute hardest ones from Elites or HQ slots (which are all more expensive than Warriors anyway).

Its mostly cause warriors are essentially the Terminators of Nids (powerful, good at both shooting and assault, expensive, hard to kill (uness your opponent has a lot of S8), so naturally we wan themt to do well against actual terminators. If rending stay 5 pts to the bonesword's 10, I can easily see most people taking them instead.

But they aren't the Terminators of Nids. They are Troops choices, and mid-range Hive Nodes. They have great stat-lines, and will kill most infantry faster than Terminators will. The trade off is, they can't defeat a TH+SS unit of Terminators; but nothing really can without spending way more points. Tyranids are supposed to be squishier, not harder. Tyranids are about volume of attacks, not incredibly power-fueled, armor-obliterating precision strikes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Janthkin wrote:
CSM Terminators aren't more expensive than Warriors.

It's not that they HAVE to be dealing with heavy infantry; it's that that was the only niche the current codex gave them. In 5e, Genestealers were just plain better (and so were Raveners). In 6e, just drown whatever it is in poisonous 'gants and/or Gargoyles, until one of the big bugs can spare a few minutes to come over and smash it.

CSM Terminators come standard with power weapons (AP3), yes? You have to pay points to give them anything else, and they are also in the Elites slot. Warriors are Troops.

The current codex didn't give them any niche. They were just bad in the current codex... because the current codex is bad. Tyranid Warriors are stuck in an awkward place, I agree, but they still slaughter pretty much every other Troops choice in the game. We get to throw gaunts and Gargs at Terminators, so I'd say that's a pretty fair trade.

And seriously, there aren't enough Terminators on the field for the AP2/AP3 discussion to matter. Tyranids have so many more ways of dealing with Terminators that Warriors can triple or quadruple their points by eating the rest of the infantry an army normally fields. Do you really field Warriors solely to take on Terminators one-on-one? That's a pretty bad strategy if you do. Especially when, as previously stated, gaunts + any MC will do that with ease.