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.

Nomnomifex wrote:

The Bad:

-Genestealers, rippers, and pyrovores are still abysmal. Raveners, warriors, and lictors still aren't viable.

The Questions:
-No mention of an expanded force organization chart or taking another tyranid detachment?
-No mention of not being able to take fortifications?
-Nothing about whether melee weapon effects stack (boneswords and rending claws namely)?

The Bad:
Warriors are going to have to be taken and will see the table a lot more. Not because they are good, but because IB tables are so bad. Running the numbers and backfield objective holders comes down to Genestealers or Warriors. At least warriors can provide backfield synapse and a unit of 3 (with a few upgrades) will only run you about 100pts.
Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

Answers:
No expanded force org that I have seen or detachments, but the Vanguard supplement is coming out so so that may change.
I still have no idea on the fortifcation either. Heading to the NA Battle Bunker to get answers during their Nid day rollout.
Melee weapons effects no longer stack =/

 Gloomfang wrote:

Nomnomifex wrote:

The Bad:

-Genestealers, rippers, and pyrovores are still abysmal. Raveners, warriors, and lictors still aren't viable.

The Questions:
-No mention of an expanded force organization chart or taking another tyranid detachment?
-No mention of not being able to take fortifications?
-Nothing about whether melee weapon effects stack (boneswords and rending claws namely)?

The Bad:
Warriors are going to have to be taken and will see the table a lot more. Not because they are good, but because IB tables are so bad. Running the numbers and backfield objective holders comes down to Genestealers or Warriors. At least warriors can provide backfield synapse and a unit of 3 (with a few upgrades) will only run you about 100pts.
Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

Answers:
No expanded force org that I have seen or detachments, but the Vanguard supplement is coming out so so that may change.
I still have no idea on the fortifcation either. Heading to the NA Battle Bunker to get answers during their Nid day rollout.
Melee weapons effects no longer stack =/

Anything that used to stack say "Acid Maw" now replace all the normal attacks. Not seeing CC biomorphs as really worth it.

barnowl wrote:
Just discovered that a Carnie can get S9 ap- 6" assault 2 guns. Flesh hooks might be a little more useable that first expected.

Other weapon improvements that have been looked over:
The strangle web went from laughable to merely sucks.
All the throrax swarms got better.
Fleshborer hive got a 6" range boost

The Carnifex can't take Flesh Hooks. He can take Spine Banks, but they're 8", Assault 1, S8 Ap-. Which is still not bad for 5 meagre points.

 Gloomfang wrote:

Nomnomifex wrote:

The Bad:

-Genestealers, rippers, and pyrovores are still abysmal. Raveners, warriors, and lictors still aren't viable.

The Questions:
-No mention of an expanded force organization chart or taking another tyranid detachment?
-No mention of not being able to take fortifications?
-Nothing about whether melee weapon effects stack (boneswords and rending claws namely)?

The Bad:
Warriors are going to have to be taken and will see the table a lot more. Not because they are good, but because IB tables are so bad. Running the numbers and backfield objective holders comes down to Genestealers or Warriors. At least warriors can provide backfield synapse and a unit of 3 (with a few upgrades) will only run you about 100pts.
Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

Answers:
No expanded force org that I have seen or detachments, but the Vanguard supplement is coming out so so that may change.
I still have no idea on the fortifcation either. Heading to the NA Battle Bunker to get answers during their Nid day rollout.
Melee weapons effects no longer stack =/

I imagine there will be an FAQ soon with a yes of no about the stacking. Since it wasn't included in the last codex, but in an FAQ.

Eldercaveman wrote:


Most of this has been said already, the one thing I did pick up that you said about the Trygon Prime, they only had 12 shots before hand.

I had never noticed that containment spines was an upgrade of bioelectric pulse and not a separate weapon, thanks for that haha.

Nomnomifex wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:


Most of this has been said already, the one thing I did pick up that you said about the Trygon Prime, they only had 12 shots before hand.

I had never noticed that containment spines was an upgrade of bioelectric pulse and not a separate weapon, thanks for that haha.

It's a common mistake.

Better late than never I guess!

 Gloomfang wrote:

The Bad:
Warriors are going to have to be taken and will see the table a lot more. Not because they are good, but because IB tables are so bad. Running the numbers and backfield objective holders comes down to Genestealers or Warriors. At least warriors can provide backfield synapse and a unit of 3 (with a few upgrades) will only run you about 100pts.
Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

Answers:
No expanded force org that I have seen or detachments, but the Vanguard supplement is coming out so so that may change.
I still have no idea on the fortifcation either. Heading to the NA Battle Bunker to get answers during their Nid day rollout.
Melee weapons effects no longer stack =/

I think zoanthropes will be better options for synapse than warriors, theyre now only 50 pts each and the elite section is less crowded for most lists now. 3+ invuln and a solid anti tank/anti marine ranged weapon for only 20 more points than the standard warrior. They should be able to hold back while bigger synapse (flyrants or tervigons) move up.

Nomnomifex wrote:

I think zoanthropes will be better options for synapse than warriors, theyre now only 50 pts each and the elite section is less crowded for most lists now. 3+ invuln and a solid anti tank/anti marine ranged weapon for only 20 more points than the standard warrior. They should be able to hold back while bigger synapse (flyrants or tervigons) move up.

Thought about them, but they can't hold objectives. Also I don't really want to waste an elite slot on a unit that will probably not do to much other than baby sit my biovores and any objectives. Also they are not able to fire overwatch when charged and they suck at CC.

But not being able to hold objectives was the deal killer for me.

Altruizine wrote:

The Carnifex can't take Flesh Hooks. He can take Spine Banks, but they're 8", Assault 1, S8 Ap-. Which is still not bad for 5 meagre points.

It says str 3 for spine banks, only flesh hooks is str user.

Eldercaveman wrote:

Nomnomifex wrote:

Eldercaveman wrote:


Most of this has been said already, the one thing I did pick up that you said about the Trygon Prime, they only had 12 shots before hand.

I had never noticed that containment spines was an upgrade of bioelectric pulse and not a separate weapon, thanks for that haha.

It's a common mistake.

Better late than never I guess!

Actually, you were playing it wrong. The Containment Spines section says "A Trygon Prime uses the following profile when firing it's Bio-electric Pulse" and then depicts the Containment Spines profile. In other words, a Trygon Prime can never fire the normal 6-shot Bio-electric Pulse. As soon as he tries, it becomes the Containment Spines profile.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nomnomifex wrote:

Altruizine wrote:

The Carnifex can't take Flesh Hooks. He can take Spine Banks, but they're 8", Assault 1, S8 Ap-. Which is still not bad for 5 meagre points.

It says str 3 for spine banks, only flesh hooks is str user.

Yeah, you're right. My brain shifted the 8" over into the Strength column.

 Gloomfang wrote:



Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

He becomes T4 due to majority toughness ruling.

busby wrote:
Shuppet, I think Joyboozer was making a joke.

I guess I should have written "SARCASM!"

 SHUPPET wrote:

 Gloomfang wrote:



Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

He becomes T4 due to majority toughness ruling.

He's only T4 when rolling to wound. He still does not get ID from S8/9 Weapons.

 Zande4 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

 Gloomfang wrote:



Also Raveners are a LOT more viable (at least one unit of them) do to now having an upgrade character that can tank the S8+ shots. We have lost most of our disruption options so I think I'll be trying out a unit to see how it goes (primarily because I am trying Deathleaper in my first list as well.)

He becomes T4 due to majority toughness ruling.

He's only T4 when rolling to wound. He still does not get ID from S8/9 Weapons.

Oh nice

Don't think it makes a differnce tho that mean he soaks up 2 wounds for 85 points and from that point on every model in the unit is alpha killed by S8 or higher

 SHUPPET wrote:


He becomes T4 due to majority toughness ruling.

The point isn't that it is harder to hurt him, its that he will lose a wound rather then remove an entire ravener from the brood. Lower level stuff you LoS (or try) onto the other members. I always hear people say raveners suck because they are T4 and a krak missile will kill one in one shot, so here is a way to take a few without 30+ points per wound dispersing.

Worth trying at least.

Edit: Ninja'd. Still we have to start someplace, might as well start here. And those 3 wounds he has are saving 30pts per wound and represents 3 Dev shots or 5 CC attacks, so I guess he is worth his points to the brood. And he can challenge (unless I am misreading) so that helps with hidden PFs as well.

Every wound he takes costs as much as another ravener so he does nothing to mitigate the effects of missiles. Not so sure that he is worth his points at all

Hello, first time poster here, I got the codex today.
In 5th edition, I've commonly used a minimum brood of 3 Raveners with Rending Claws and Spinefists, I liked their agility and cheap weight of firepower due to their decent base attacks, couple that with reroll 1s when hitting in melee and rending, they were good at destroying infantry and their small brood size let them hide out of LoS well.
I was looking at the Ravener Brood's profile in the new codex, and I'm just in shock at why they would be gutted like this.

I put Spinefists on my Raveners as they brought the weapon to full potential, and I thought they were a decent sidegrade to Devourers, losing strength and range but gaining Twin-linked and AP5.
Spinefists on Ravs have now been lowered to 3 points, but is that 2 point difference worth an entire Twin-linked shot? Losing an attack has actually made my Raveners worse at both shooting and melee at the same time, why is this attack nerf even necessary? Ravener's melee ability has already been lowered simply by losing rerolls (mostly 1/3 chance of missing now), furthermore, what reason is there now to take 2 sets of scything talons; when for just 5 points you get rending and AP5?

I was surprised to see the Red Terror, as I've wanted to use his model properly for ages, but without Scytal rerolls the poor guy just falls flat on his face. Really, he has nice stats; but he needs to hit all of his base attacks in order to use his special rule (the tail attack doesn't count for number of hits), after your great feat of not screwing up, your probably high priority target is allowed to take their invuln save. Why bother, then? Wouldn't you get as far if not more by whacking them with the (albeit poor) normal attacks? You already have hit with 4 of them, after all.. His only real use is a meatshield and higher Ld (which is stupidly important now) for the brood he joins.

Don't even get me started on Ripper Swarms.

Can somebody confirm something for me? I have yet to get hold of the new codex but a friend informs me that Stealers have Rending Claws, however, they aren't listed as having two pairs of them despite being modelled with them as standard and therefore would not get an attack bonus. What's the dealio?

Got the book, read through it and here's my first impressions review:
http://www.talkwargaming.com/2014/01/codextyranidsreview.html

And yes, Genestealers are listed as having "Rending claws" (as in just the one set) despite having 4 arms on the model. I expect that to be an FAQ topic at some point.

 ClockworkZion wrote:
Got the book, read through it and here's my first impressions review:
http://www.talkwargaming.com/2014/01/codextyranidsreview.html

And yes, Genestealers are listed as having "Rending claws" despite having 4 arms on the model. I expect that to be an FAQ topic at some point.

Thanks for the confirmation. A clear oversight, I shall be playing them as +1 attack for the time being!

I just leafed through the Codex, and in my impression it's like the Chaos one: take the terrible, terrible previous book, make some random changes, take out whatever was passably decent before, add flyer and oval base monster, call it a day.

OK everyone, since the codex is now officially out and this thread is 160+ pages, I think its time for a lock.

There are already several threads in the 40K general discussion forum about the codex, so feel free to continue your conversations in there!