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 think it is a little soon to panic. I doubt the kid posting on Warseer is being malicious. But it does sound like he is not familiar with tyranids and not as interested as we would be in the details. Just made some observations and typed them up as he remembered when he got home.

For example if you looked at the Eldar codex stats in the back of the book you would think "Oh, Shuriken cats are unchanged" if you did not bother to read carefully and note the awesomeness of blade storm. For example it he notes that a lot of units lost attacks. But if two CC weapon set add an attack then that might not be the case. So a Trygon is A 5 now with two scything talons, so a base attack of 6. In other words no nerf. Also I really really doubt that rending claws lost rending. But gaining AP 5 with rending is great!

It may be true that in the end the codex is a real lemon. But I think now our time would be better spent trying to read between the lines of patchy information then hand wringing.

For example, if AG give fleet, then how does that stack with units that have fleet? Does it do nothing does it add something else. For example I could see a rule saying "If a unit which already has fleet takes AG then in addition to furious charge they gain X"

My home would be a special nid rule that allows running and charging. But more realistically I wonder if it will be the crusader rule.

Just remember: www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGFXGwHsD_A

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Oh and it looks like they're I2 now, making them 33% more resilient to JAWS OF THE WOLF WOLF.

Do you mean Wolf of the Wolf Wolf, the wolf cast by the wolf priest from the space wolves, that famous wolf marine chapwolf ?
They sure do like naming things after wolves .

How topical! Any forum goers who have been in a cave for the last 5 years may find this insightful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
The Synapse thing really annoys me. A Carnifex eating itself because it can't talk to momma? Sigh...

I kind of like it. It definitely gives both a positive and negative to Synapse and fits with the idea of hive mind control being important to the survival of the drones.

 pretre wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:
The Synapse thing really annoys me. A Carnifex eating itself because it can't talk to momma? Sigh...

I kind of like it. It definitely gives both a positive and negative to Synapse and fits with the idea of hive mind control being important to the survival of the drones.

Reinventing the 5th Ed Rage USR would have made more sense. Loss of control makes sense, not paranoid attack the closest thing dementia.

Yeah that doesn't make a lot of sense for it to attack itself.. Even mindless killers still go after targets..

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Hmm... what if FW ended up making the Mycetic Spore?

Would be good for FW sales.

 pretre wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
The Synapse thing really annoys me. A Carnifex eating itself because it can't talk to momma? Sigh...

I kind of like it. It definitely gives both a positive and negative to Synapse and fits with the idea of hive mind control being important to the survival of the drones.

There's a difference between making it important and "This thing will literally eat itself without supervision." The latter doesn't make sense to program as instinctual behavior.

 ductvader wrote:
Loss of control makes sense, not paranoid attack the closest thing dementia.

Except that is kind of an established sci-fi trope. Cut off the head and the body dies. Or attacks itself or goes crazy and kills everything near it.

 Kirasu wrote:
Yeah that doesn't make a lot of sense for it to attack itself.. Even mindless killers still go after targets..

As we have little idea of what these inflicted wounds actually are...I am holding out hope for "hammer of wrath"-like inflicted hits...each model strikes with one attack at strength, ap-


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:

 ductvader wrote:
Loss of control makes sense, not paranoid attack the closest thing dementia.

Except that is kind of an established sci-fi trope. Cut off the head and the body dies. Or attacks itself or goes crazy and kills everything near it.

Except that there are multiple stories of initial synapseless forces attacking planets before mama comes down...or building up tyranid forces from a few scattered remaining forces.

Mawlocs, and Raveners would never be able to get to their targets as they'd all fight amongst themselves underground...loss of synapse generally is supposed to represent to loss of synergy and coordinated plans.

We're talking tyranids here, which I personally believe is much different than generic sci-fi trope. Personal opinion there.

I think the guy who leaked the melee bio-morphs left off all the special rules for them. AP5 Rending claws with no other special rules and AP6 STs? Highly unlikely.



To clarify my position, according to the rumors, Rending Claws and STs are AP5 and AP6, respectfully. I think that they probably are but still have their normal special rules and that the special rules were just left out for various reasons.
VvVvVvV

 Kwosge wrote:
I think the guy who leaked the melee bio-morphs left off all the special rules for them. AP5 Rending claws with no other special rules and AP6 STs? Highly unlikely.

Its likely that those portions are true, I personally believe the misunderstanding comes from the lack of knowledge that tryanid ccw effects tend to stack together.

So a model with rending claws and scytals would be ap5 with rending and reroll to hit roll of 1. (as it currently stands)

I am not worried, seems like an honest mistake on the source's part.

I think it's adorable that after all this time people are still giving GW the benefit of the doubt.

Posit wrote:
I think it's adorable that after all this time people are still giving GW the benefit of the doubt.

Especially when it comes to Cruddace having any sort of input on a book.

Every new codex has winners and losers this will be no different at worst it will be another CSM with a few new over powered units and the rest will be average but fun. Just depends what you want from the codex . If you want OP competitive there is going to be broken combos in there. Face it that's always the case .

Posit wrote:
I think it's adorable that after all this time people are still giving GW the benefit of the doubt.

Look at the home-run codices that were Tau, Eldar, and to a lesser degree, Space Marines. We have all the reason in the world to believe that Tyranids would follow the trend of fun codices with useful and powerful units. I'm still not convinced this isn't true, but we won't know for sure until everyone interested has had the book and read for themselves the combos and unit synergies.

Call me naive, but i'm still optimistic that we'll get something at least as playable as Codex: Space Marines.

Personaly I get exited with each new Codex. My group spends a moth looking for them bigest Cheeze we can find and then when we finialy field the new army we just pull out lightly modified list of what we have been playing for a decade with some of the cool toys and that is about it.

As fo the Whiners

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Call me naive, but i'm still optimistic that we'll get something at least as playable as Codex: Space Marines.

Well, that won't be hard...

 ductvader wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Call me naive, but i'm still optimistic that we'll get something at least as playable as Codex: Space Marines.

Well, that won't be hard...

Maybe it's just my group isn't that META but I really liked the new Marine book, and feel like it has what it takes to win games of standard 40K.

 Anpu42 wrote:
Personaly I get exited with each new Codex. My group spends a moth looking for them bigest Cheeze we can find and then when we finialy field the new army we just pull out lightly modified list of what we have been playing for a decade with some of the cool toys and that is about it.

As fo the Whiners

Look, I'm with the optimists, and am sure we'll have fun whatever happens.

But quit with the 'whiners' talk. People have a right to their opinion, and some of those posting opinions, like NIB, have posted a lot of tactical insights in the past, without posting silly insulting gifs. Calling people whiners is being like the drama queens who get annoyed if anyone suggests Tom Kirby is less evil than Darth Vader. People have a right to their opinions, even if they differ from yours or mine. No-one has the complete picture so far, so we all have to hold our nerves.

 tetrisphreak wrote:

 ductvader wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Call me naive, but i'm still optimistic that we'll get something at least as playable as Codex: Space Marines.

Well, that won't be hard...

Maybe it's just my group isn't that META but I really liked the new Marine book, and feel like it has what it takes to win games of standard 40K.

I liked the book too...it's just, as always, very middle of the road.

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. I personally loved Cruddace's 5th Ed book, very very very, maybe too much, balanced.

Just hoping that 6th gives us some flavor back without going over the top.

 tetrisphreak wrote:

 ductvader wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:
Call me naive, but i'm still optimistic that we'll get something at least as playable as Codex: Space Marines.

Well, that won't be hard...

Maybe it's just my group isn't that META but I really liked the new Marine book, and feel like it has what it takes to win games of standard 40K.

I don't think anyone is saying that there exists a codex that is literally incapable of winning games. But it's also equally silly to deny that there are some armies that are simply better or more powerful and easy to win with.

We are suggesting, at the very least, Tyranids will not be in that group.

Well, this was depressing to wake up to. Hopefully this guy is just yanking everyones chain.

 Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Anpu42 wrote:
Personaly I get exited with each new Codex. My group spends a moth looking for them bigest Cheeze we can find and then when we finialy field the new army we just pull out lightly modified list of what we have been playing for a decade with some of the cool toys and that is about it.

As fo the Whiners

Look, I'm with the optimists, and am sure we'll have fun whatever happens.

But quit with the 'whiners' talk. People have a right to their opinion, and some of those posting opinions, like NIB, have posted a lot of tactical insights in the past, without posting silly insulting gifs. Calling people whiners is being like the drama queens who get annoyed if anyone suggests Tom Kirby is less evil than Darth Vader. People have a right to their opinions, even if they differ from yours or mine. No-one has the complete picture so far, so we all have to hold our nerves.

My problem is not with the ones complaing that unit A and B just get screwed. It was aimed at this who are quiting and puting thier armies on the shelf before the Codex has not even come out yet. I know this is normal normal, but...it gets real old real quick.

This looks to be like another CSM situation. Pretty disappointing over all.

Lots of denial about the truth ITT

Sorry friends, you've been Cruddace'ed again

The only thing I'm excited about seems to be the only thing nobody has hing new about.

here's hoping my 9 pyrovore list becomes as amazing as ever!

gorgon wrote:It sounds like some kind of funny cliche, but Tyranids have been through so many evolutions over the years that it's forced Tyranid players to become very good at adapting.

It all makes sense! GW are trying to make Tyranid players think like the Hive Mind!

Imposter101 wrote:This looks to be like another CSM situation. Pretty disappointing over all.

Meh, this annoys me as well. I remember how people were complaining about how utterly broken the Helldrake was and how CSM would kill us all. Now, "CSM are really bad".

And yes, while the changing meta does affect things, people should over-hype or down-hype a certain something. Give the codex/army book a month or two to settle. I think people slating the book writers is pretty shameful too. Someone on this thread said "oh, Matt Ward would have done a better job". I'd be willing to bet that, had Matt Ward actually written it, that same person would be complaining about it. I enjoyed the last Tyranid book, it was pretty powerful in 5th edition and had some great playstyles. Overwatch, fortifications, flyers and the inability to charge from outflank, has reduced Nids to a very mono-build book, but it's still a good mono-build, and I've used slight variations of it with success as well.

And, in regards to the new rumours, I'm not believing any of it, not until I see it. Has anyone considered the fact that, if this guy had wanted to share the new rules - the actual rules that are in the book - he would have simply taken a picture of the pages of the relevant rules? I'm not sure how quick Photobucket uploads images, but I use Imageshack and that's quick. If I'd wanted to share a book's rules, it'd be far quicker for me to take pictures of every page and upload them, rather than type them out.

Of course it is perfectly possible that it will be crap, but it is silly how many people seem to be so sure about that, based on very patchy information. I remember how Dakka was totally convinced that the Eldar were weak too, and see how that turned out.

 The Shadow wrote:



And, in regards to the new rumours, I'm not believing any of it, not until I see it. Has anyone considered the fact that, if this guy had wanted to share the new rules - the actual rules that are in the book - he would have simply taken a picture of the pages of the relevant rules? I'm not sure how quick Photobucket uploads images, but I use Imageshack and that's quick. If I'd wanted to share a book's rules, it'd be far quicker for me to take pictures of every page and upload them, rather than type them out.

Warsser is funny about posting rules on their website, so you have do thing like "unit A has the weapon profile of weapon B" to get around it

 The Shadow wrote:

gorgon wrote:It sounds like some kind of funny cliche, but Tyranids have been through so many evolutions over the years that it's forced Tyranid players to become very good at adapting.

It all makes sense! GW are trying to make Tyranid players think like the Hive Mind!

Imposter101 wrote:This looks to be like another CSM situation. Pretty disappointing over all.

Meh, this annoys me as well. I remember how people were complaining about how utterly broken the Helldrake was and how CSM would kill us all. Now, "CSM are really bad".

An army can still be powerful in a tournament yet still be a complete failure of a book. GW doesnt like tournaments, therefore we should judge the book by how decent it is overall. CSM has so many completely useless entries and yes some good ones.

In the last year of playing nids, I've encountered having to roll for IB maybe 3 or 4 times, and its usually spawned Termagaunts I'm taking chances on getting them outside where the bulk of the army is, sometimes it was unintended, but I don't generally leave feed units under vulnerable supervision, and if it is vulnerable, then I try and keep them within synapse range of 2 units...

That's a lot of games where the units are never out of synapse, other than the odd occasion any other time it can happen is when I'm getting owned, and units not attacking themselves is really not going to make a difference. If a unit is not able to go where I want it it might as well be a dead unit. (except in the 1 and only case it ran towards the terrain with the objective.)

So if I need to roll a 1, then while it's a bummer, it's never exactly great for me having the unit run off in a completely odd direction being just as useless. Game wise, impact is negligible, for me anyway.

That being said, fluff wise its stupid. Programmed ultimately to feed for the survival of the race... attacking themselves rather than the juicy SM?... Duuuh. Seems more like completely random behaviour rather than instinctive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:
Of course it is perfectly possible that it will be crap, but it is silly how many people seem to be so sure about that, based on very patchy information. I remember how Dakka was totally convinced that the Eldar were weak too, and see how that turned out.

Also this. The Eldar thread was full of nerf information and general acceptance they were going to be the worst army.

Then they played and found out the gains offset the nerfs.