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.

 Therion wrote:

You can get a cover save for it all game so the invulnerable save isn't really an issue against standard armies.

Not that I consider myself part of the negative nelly contingent, but Is Tau not a standard army? Or space marines with access to perfect timing? I know I know, those are specific instances. Most of the time, it should be getting it's 4+ ruins save.
I do hope it's at least 30 inches though. If it's shooting is that good STR and AP wise, that's a huge bulls eye painted over it. No need to make it's survivability even worse by forcing you to shunt it to the front line in order to get any shots off.
It would make a pretty kickarse counter charge sort of unit. Anything attempting to charge the Nid back lines would be optimal targets for the beasty. Maybe that's more of what it's intended for.
But still would prefer 30 inches.

 Therion wrote:
I do agree though that the model looks like a giant Biovore, and I have a hard time imagining that gun firing 6 shots like a machinegun, or in close ranges at all. To me the rules aren't a problem but the model doesn't seem to fit the rules all that well. They could have made the Tyrannofex a more close range assault fire beast and let the Exocrine take over the long range shooting.

There are six smaller "openings" built into the sides of the Bio-plasma cannon on the Exocrine (three on either side). The central "opening" fires the stream as a single burst, where as the six apertures on the sides of the gun would fire the six individual shots.

Xyptc wrote:

 Therion wrote:
I do agree though that the model looks like a giant Biovore, and I have a hard time imagining that gun firing 6 shots like a machinegun, or in close ranges at all. To me the rules aren't a problem but the model doesn't seem to fit the rules all that well. They could have made the Tyrannofex a more close range assault fire beast and let the Exocrine take over the long range shooting.

There are six smaller "openings" built into the sides of the Bio-plasma cannon on the Exocrine (three on either side). The central "opening" fires the stream as a single burst, where as the six apertures on the sides of the gun would fire the six individual shots.

That is an incredibly good catch! Sharp eyes!

The rumoured changes to the FOC for Tyranids may also have some bearing on whether Exocrines are used by 'competitive' players.

About those FOC changes, do we know much about them besides being a "sort of" Allies chart, only that you're allying with yourself?

Part of me wishes that the Tyranid FOC was:

1 HQ (compulsory)
2-4 Troops
0-2 Elite
0-2 FA
0-2 HS

And that every HQ you took after the first added:

1-2 Troops
0-1 Elite
0-1 FA
0-1 HS

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
About those FOC changes, do we know much about them besides being a "sort of" Allies chart, only that you're allying with yourself?

Part of me wishes that the Tyranid FOC was:

1 HQ (compulsory)
2-4 Troops
0-2 Elite
0-2 FA
0-2 HS

And that every HQ you took after the first added:

1-2 Troops
0-1 Elite
0-1 FA
0-1 HS

I think the list of rumors that contained this, was pretty thoroughly debunked. Not to say it won't happen, just that a lot (nearly all) of those rumors seemed to be false.

I would just like to see something simple.
3 HQ
4 Elite
8 Troops
4 FA
4 HS

That would be nice.

The problem with that is it lacks any external balance. Giving people a 4th of any of those slots has never been a good idea and it doesn't scale well.

Think back to 3rd Ed. The biggest problem with things like the Iron Warrior sub-list, or the Guard Doctrine System/Marine Trait System was that they were built on the idea of giving something up in order to get +1 or something. The issue was that if you never intended to take whatever it was you were giving up you weren't actually giving anything up.

Apply the same sort of idea to that bigger FOC you just posted. Say you have no other restrictions on it - well you've just given the 'Nids a 4th of the special slots and there's no 'tax' on it like everyone else has with Allies. Ok then, so say you that in an attempt to balance it you make 4 Troops compulsory rather than 2 Troops. Great, now the list is hamstrung at lower points levels as it has to take 4 troops slots before it can take anything else.

Rules should scale. Allies mightn't be balanced due to the combinations of units that people can take, but at least the composition of allies makes sense. Tyranids getting larger as the player takes more "leader beasts" not only fits thematically, but it allows the list to function at any points level and eliminates the "Tyranids don't get allies" problem.

Can't Space Marines ally with themselves? Or BA can Ally with SM, at least.

Would simply allowing Nids to Ally with themselves be balanced?

It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

Assuming it boosts the FoC by 1 slot across the board, you could essentially field 7 FMC's (3 Flyrants and 4 Crones) alongside 12 Carnifexes, using just 2 Troop choices. Yowzer.

At 2k you can double force org anyway allowing you to take 10 flyers.

Doesn't make it a good idea however.

Which raises the question about how the new rumoured FoC works if the 'Nid's standard FoC is larger due to no allies. At 2k+ do the 'Nids get to double theirs up to 6 HQ, 8 Elite, 8 Heavy etc...?

I feel that PP did a better job of restricting units by hard capping each non-basic unit. As battles scale up you reach a limit on certain uncommon or rare models but can as as many 'troopers' as your pocket and the points limit will allow.

At the moment I am more curious about the Vanguard dataslate than the actual codex.

Did it say when the Vanguard Dataslate will release?

 RiTides wrote:
Did it say when the Vanguard Dataslate will release?

January 25 according to the retailer release sheet that was shown.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

I think it's pretty fairly balanced by the fact that Tyranids cannot take allies at all.

I understand your point, but I honestly don't see giving the Nids an extra FOC as anywhere near the power level that BB allies can do.

Edit: To clarify, I mean expanding their FOC.

Obviously what's viable and what's OP in the nid dex remains to be seen. Just 9 more days, but I'd imagine someone will get an early copy any day now.

So if old one eye comes with IWND and FNP stock, tagging him with catalyst would really make him a pain to destroy. I think he would need 5 wounds instead of 4 to be viable but at 220 points maybe not... I'll have to try him out when the codex releases.

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

I think it's pretty fairly balanced by the fact that Tyranids cannot take allies at all.

I understand your point, but I honestly don't see giving the Nids an extra FOC as anywhere near the power level that BB allies can do.

Edit: To clarify, I mean expanding their FOC.

So... everyone else is broken, so why bother even trying for balance?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

I think it's pretty fairly balanced by the fact that Tyranids cannot take allies at all.

I understand your point, but I honestly don't see giving the Nids an extra FOC as anywhere near the power level that BB allies can do.

Edit: To clarify, I mean expanding their FOC.

So... everyone else is broken, so why bother even trying for balance?

That's how warmahordes handles it, and I regularly hear how it's a much better system for competitive play.

 Kroothawk wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Just for the record, the mail order Hormagaunt and Termagant broods are 20 models each, as stated in the first post for some weeks.

Which makes a price drop if that price list is correct.

It is just a temporary token of love to retailers, so they can't sell the Tyranid standard boxes GW forces them to stock, at the one time they could sell them.

Do you have retailers that don't do 20% pretty regularly? Cause I don't. And at 20% off the standard boxes are just under 30 cents cheaper per model. Heck, 10% is still cheaper than the online deal per model.

But yeah, don't let me rain on your parade. GW is going to kill the little man with these!

 tetrisphreak wrote:
That's how warmahordes handles it, and I regularly hear how it's a much better system for competitive play.

Yeah, let's not turn this into a GW vs PP pissing contest. Please? Can we do that?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

I think it's pretty fairly balanced by the fact that Tyranids cannot take allies at all.

I understand your point, but I honestly don't see giving the Nids an extra FOC as anywhere near the power level that BB allies can do.

Edit: To clarify, I mean expanding their FOC.

So... everyone else is broken, so why bother even trying for balance?

Well, if everyone else is broken, then putting something on the same level would be balance...

To clarify, I don't think it would be OP. The fact that every other army has a BB other than Tyranids(And Necrons), Merits something be done, I don't think there is anything wrong with one extra slot for each section.

Do you in all honestly, believe that those extra slots on the FOC, would seriously unbalance Tyranids? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

I think it's pretty fairly balanced by the fact that Tyranids cannot take allies at all.

I understand your point, but I honestly don't see giving the Nids an extra FOC as anywhere near the power level that BB allies can do.

Edit: To clarify, I mean expanding their FOC.

So... everyone else is broken, so why bother even trying for balance?

Well, if everyone else is broken, then putting something on the same level would be balance...

To clarify, I don't think it would be OP. The fact that every other army has a BB other than Tyranids, Merits something be done, I don't think there is anything wrong with one extra slot for each section.

Do you in all honestly, believe that those extra slots on the FOC, would seriously unbalance Tyranids? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Remember the Iron Warriors list written by Pete Haines?

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
That's how warmahordes handles it, and I regularly hear how it's a much better system for competitive play.

Yeah, let's not turn this into a GW vs PP pissing contest. Please? Can we do that?

I was just pointing out the similarity if that system continues. If every army gets stupid broken stuff, tournament players can bounce off of each other's 2+ reroll save bullcrap. Casual players like me and my friends will just do balanced lists and have fun with it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It'd be more balanced than just increasing their FOC without any scaled restrictions.

I think it's pretty fairly balanced by the fact that Tyranids cannot take allies at all.

I understand your point, but I honestly don't see giving the Nids an extra FOC as anywhere near the power level that BB allies can do.

Edit: To clarify, I mean expanding their FOC.

So... everyone else is broken, so why bother even trying for balance?

Well, if everyone else is broken, then putting something on the same level would be balance...

To clarify, I don't think it would be OP. The fact that every other army has a BB other than Tyranids, Merits something be done, I don't think there is anything wrong with one extra slot for each section.

Do you in all honestly, believe that those extra slots on the FOC, would seriously unbalance Tyranids? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Remember the Iron Warriors list written by Pete Haines?

I did not play before 4th Edition

I assume that is from 3rd. I think it's a lot more fair that we keep in mind the current state of 40k, which is sixth edition.

 Sasori wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Remember the Iron Warriors list written by Pete Haines?

I did not play before 4th Edition

I assume that is from 3rd. I think it's a lot more fair that we keep in mind the current state of 40k, which is sixth edition.

Right, but the point was more that it did exactly what HBMC is kind of protesting against.

The Iron Warriors could sacrifice two of their Fast Attack slots for another Heavy Support slot, bringing them up to 4 FA slots. If you want to give some kind of "bonus" then there needs to be some kind of sacrifice. For some books it's the requirement to utilize two different books and Allies(which might not always be allowed), using special characters, etc.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Remember the Iron Warriors list written by Pete Haines?

I did not play before 4th Edition

I assume that is from 3rd. I think it's a lot more fair that we keep in mind the current state of 40k, which is sixth edition.

Right, but the point was more that it did exactly what HBMC is kind of protesting against.

The Iron Warriors could sacrifice two of their Fast Attack slots for another Heavy Support slot, bringing them up to 4 FA slots. If you want to give some kind of "bonus" then there needs to be some kind of sacrifice. For some books it's the requirement to utilize two different books and Allies(which might not always be allowed), using special characters, etc.

Perhaps I'm being unclear, but I feel the Sacrifice is the fact that Tyranids cannot use fortifications, or allies. Is that not enough? To me, that is a pretty major deal. Tyranids, instead of allying, just get an expanded FOC. That's your sacrifice.

 Sasori wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Sasori wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Remember the Iron Warriors list written by Pete Haines?

I did not play before 4th Edition

I assume that is from 3rd. I think it's a lot more fair that we keep in mind the current state of 40k, which is sixth edition.

Right, but the point was more that it did exactly what HBMC is kind of protesting against.

The Iron Warriors could sacrifice two of their Fast Attack slots for another Heavy Support slot, bringing them up to 4 FA slots. If you want to give some kind of "bonus" then there needs to be some kind of sacrifice. For some books it's the requirement to utilize two different books and Allies(which might not always be allowed), using special characters, etc.

Perhaps I'm being unclear, but I feel the Sacrifice is the fact that Tyranids cannot use fortifications, or allies. Is that not enough? To me, that is a pretty major deal. Tyranids, instead of allying, just get an expanded FOC. That's your sacrifice.

That makes sense to me I have to say. They do have a major drawback without Allies.

 Sasori wrote:
Perhaps I'm being unclear, but I feel the Sacrifice is the fact that Tyranids cannot use fortifications, or allies. Is that not enough? To me, that is a pretty major deal. Tyranids, instead of allying, just get an expanded FOC. That's your sacrifice.

Tyranids can use fortifications. Unless you're proposing removing that as well.

rigeld2 wrote:

 Sasori wrote:
Perhaps I'm being unclear, but I feel the Sacrifice is the fact that Tyranids cannot use fortifications, or allies. Is that not enough? To me, that is a pretty major deal. Tyranids, instead of allying, just get an expanded FOC. That's your sacrifice.

Tyranids can use fortifications. Unless you're proposing removing that as well.

They can take them but cannot shoot the weapons that most people take them for.