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.

tag8833 wrote:

 syypher wrote:
1) Why don't I need a screening unit jy2? It seems like there are things out there that we just can't deal with without putting TOO much attention to. Like Wraightknights, Dreadknights, Ctans etc. Like I said before guys, our meta is really competitive stuff. I see a lot of tri-WKs, Ctans etc. By what I've read on this thread and other tyranid forums, the best way we can deal with those things are just tarpitting them down for as long as we can.

A screen and a tarpit are different things. I think what he meant is that the gargoyles provided enough of a screen that you didn't need the Gants. He is probably right, but I would encourage you to get a few games under your belt before being too definitive on these things. JY2 has a very specific play style that tends to involve a more maneuver based finesses. I play a style that might be called "Threat neutralization" I'm much more aggressive, most likely to my detriment, though I am very, very successful in my local meta.

 syypher wrote:
2) @jy2: Why reduce the Termagants to 10 instead of just swapping them out with a DS Ripper unit? Is it so they can provide some cover turn 1?

His suggestion is probably a good one. The thing is, a unit needs to reach a certain lethality threshold to be worth spending additional points on. 5 Devourers do not get it quite there. 10 Devourers might.

 syypher wrote:
3) @pinecone77: Why Hormagants over Termagants?

Strat_N8 gave the most consice summation of the differences between Rippers, Terms, and Horms I've seen in a long, long time. He is 100% right.

 syypher wrote:
4) TBH, and this is just by reading the forums... Is the best way to really deal with Ctans, Wraightknights, Imperial Knights etc. just to tarpit them? In the past I've usually played the "top tier" codexes and for my targets that were a high priority, I could usually find some way to shoot or melee it to death. I'm having a hard time figuring out the puzzle for Nids in how to deal with "tough" targets. Like the ones I listed. T9 3+ 4++ Ctans... T8 3+ Wraightknights... IKs... it just seems TOO overwhelming. A lot of our LFGS will take 3-4 IKs and 2-3 WKs on a regular basis. I have NOTHING against it and I like fighting hard armies... but I don't know what tools best to use in our codex. Thoughts?

The most threatening thing a Wraith Knight or Ctan will ever see is a squad of 20 Hormagants with Poison. Imperial Knights are another matter. Best way to take them out is Flying Circus. Flyrants and Crones can down a Knight, remaining fairly safe while doing so. Carnifexes are good at finishing it off in assault, but because Knights are faster, it is hard to pull it off. The main thing to remember is Knights have trouble scoring. You don't need to kill the knights to win. Just out score them. Also remember that you don't have to play A-Holes. There is supposedly a guy in my area who plays 5 Knights. I've never met him, but I'm told he only plays kill points, and won't do any other mission type. Because of this I'm pretty sure no one has ever agreed to play him more than once. A certain type of player is not fun to play against.

I don't have 20 Poison Gaunts in my TAC list, so when I see things like a Wraith Knight, I tarpit them when I can. Gargoyles work good for this. If I run into Knights, I surround them without assaulting with things like Gargoyles. It takes away their greatest asset (mobility). Tarpitting them doesn't work as well as Wraith Knights, but their shooting isn't the scariest thing in the world for most Tyranid lists. An alternative options is to bring out The Tyranid LOW.

Thank you for the follow up responses. Very insightful.

I still have a bit of hesitation with the last question and responses I've been getting. Sometimes you can't choose to not play them, like in a tournament setting where you expect people to bring tough lists. I can definitely see a unit of 20 Gargs tarpitting down a Wraithknight fairly easily, but what if they bring 2 or 3? How do you deal with the rest as they attempt to ID you Fexes and Mawlocs each round ~___~ (Played this in a recent game borrowing a friends Nids models and it was really scary every round he shot at them...)

 Strat_N8 wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

 syypher wrote:
Do you guys like Harpies? If so why?

Harpies can be situationally useful against Ork Green Tide or Guard blob. Otherwise they are not very good. Even in those favorable matchups, crones are often going to be better because they ignore cover.

Stock I'd somewhat agree, but what about the Heavy Venom Cannon variant as a TAC choice? The HVC is arguably more reliable than Tentaclids against vehicles (both are going to be glancing things to death, but the HVC is more accurate, multiple use, and scores pens easier for debilitating effects/disabling quantum shielding) and can be turned against infantry without sacrificing too much utility.

HVC isn't as good as you think. It can strip up to one HP a turn. Crone is doing that with VS, and Crone is ignoring Cover. Tentaclids are only for turns when the crone is out of position, flying vehicles, or very high armor (13 & 14). HVC isn't good against armor that high. You've only got a 33% chance of glancing AV14. Tentaclids have a 42% chance. Against anything AV12 or below, you should have devourers to take care of it. HVC is not your solution there either. HVC's main purpose was to Pen stuff and hope for a 6. Now that a 6 doesn't kill, they are not so good.

BTW, that is one of the 7th edition nerfs that hit the Crone. And don't kid yourself about vector strike. D3+1 S5 AP:3 ignore cover auto hits did much more against most things than a S4 AP:4 Large blast that scatters. Marine Bikes for instance, feared the vector strike of a Harpy, but not its Spore bomb.

Another nerf the affects the harpy in 7th is the change to Jink. If it Jinks, the Harpy can do very, very little. The Crone, on the other hand can still vector strike (its primary attack), and also snapshoot a tentaclid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 syypher wrote:
I still have a bit of hesitation with the last question and responses I've been getting. Sometimes you can't choose to not play them, like in a tournament setting where you expect people to bring tough lists. I can definitely see a unit of 20 Gargs tarpitting down a Wraithknight fairly easily, but what if they bring 2 or 3? How do you deal with the rest as they attempt to ID you Fexes and Mawlocs each round ~___~ (Played this in a recent game borrowing a friends Nids models and it was really scary every round he shot at them...)

If they bring 3 Wraith Knights, they have an enormous amount of points in those models. Kill everything else, and you will usually win that game. I don't think I've ever lost to an opponent who brought 3 Wraith Knights, though I did lose to a 2 Wraith Knight list that beat me mainly because the war walkers made 4 of 5 cover saves, and then killed my dakka Flyrant in the air on turn 1. I had the game won on turn 5, because a squad of 3 Hormagants were tarpitting a wraith knight on top of an objective. But it finished them on Turn 6. I still had a chance if my Carnifex had made a 10" charge on 2 Wraith Guard, I would have won.

Another nerf the affects the harpy in 7th is the change to Jink. If it Jinks, the Harpy can do very, very little. The Crone, on the other hand can still vector strike (its primary attack), and also snapshoot a tentaclid.

That hasn't really changed.

tag8833 wrote:

 N.I.B. wrote:
Maelstrom is the main (only) reason as to why so many Tyranid players are going with Rippers as their troop units of choice. As mentioned, the ability to deepstrike onto forward objectives without need of synapse babysitting, is STRONK! I run 4x3 Rippers in my 2k lists, and they always deliver. Maelstrom (with slight adjustments) are becoming the go-to way to play in both tournaments and casual games in my area.

I prefer Gargoyles for screening duties, but sometime I include a cheap Termagant screen instead, as a complement to the Rippers.

I don't think you are correct. Maelstrom is not great for rippers because they have about 50% chance to net you 1 point and then die. Eternal war is much better. They net you more points, and you can hide them out of LOS and then jump out on the last turn. I think it is the fact that I play Maelstrom almost exclusively that has me convinced that rippers are a bad choice. People that play Eternal war or modified eternal war (Like BAO scenarios) find rippers to be not terrible.

Hormagants are the troop of choice for Maelstrom, hands down.

Check your math, it's way higher than a 50% chance. First it's the 'hits' on the scatter die, then if you do scatter it's the average scatter distance minus the width of the Ripper base that you place on the objective side of the scattering base, minus the average running distance in the shooting phase, and minus the 3" radius you need to be inside of the objective. I've yet to fail to score with Rippers, after deepstrike + running.

And saying 'then die' is just internet hyperbole. First, after you score the objective, the mission card is discarded which normally means the immediate incentive for your opponent to kill the unit is lost. But since each objective can come up twice, they sometimes get a double-dip on the spot. At the very least, since there are objectives like 'claim more objectives than your opponent', and 'claim all objectives'.
Sometimes you place objectives inside terrain, which help Rippers survive. And Gants die just as easy.

The advantage of the Rippers is that they don't need synapse - granted you already are on the objective. If not, you need them to not IB so they can move there in that crucial last turn, thus you need synapse and then you'd be better off with Hormagaunts anyway, since they move faster and provide screen and a bit of cc punch.

Rippers grab those objectives out on the fringes from turn 2 better than any other Tyranid troop choice. And they don't need babysitting to deliver.

Can Harpies still make bombing runs if it has Jinked? I have 135 points left in my current 1850 list and I'm wondering whether it's a worthwhile investment to accompany the Biovores (Living Artillery) and Flyrants.

EDIT: Are Tyranid Shrikes/Warriors viable? I could fit in a group of three Shrikes with Boneswords...not ideal but it does fill out the points, unsure on what to take.

 N.I.B. wrote:

Spoiler:

tag8833 wrote:

 N.I.B. wrote:
Maelstrom is the main (only) reason as to why so many Tyranid players are going with Rippers as their troop units of choice. As mentioned, the ability to deepstrike onto forward objectives without need of synapse babysitting, is STRONK! I run 4x3 Rippers in my 2k lists, and they always deliver. Maelstrom (with slight adjustments) are becoming the go-to way to play in both tournaments and casual games in my area.

I prefer Gargoyles for screening duties, but sometime I include a cheap Termagant screen instead, as a complement to the Rippers.

I don't think you are correct. Maelstrom is not great for rippers because they have about 50% chance to net you 1 point and then die. Eternal war is much better. They net you more points, and you can hide them out of LOS and then jump out on the last turn. I think it is the fact that I play Maelstrom almost exclusively that has me convinced that rippers are a bad choice. People that play Eternal war or modified eternal war (Like BAO scenarios) find rippers to be not terrible.

Hormagants are the troop of choice for Maelstrom, hands down.

Check your math, it's way higher than a 50% chance. First it's the 'hits' on the scatter die, then if you do scatter it's the average scatter distance minus the width of the Ripper base that you place on the objective side of the scattering base, minus the average running distance in the shooting phase, and minus the 3" radius you need to be inside of the objective. I've yet to fail to score with Rippers, after deepstrike + running.

So I figure they scatter too far to run back or mishap about 15% of the time. They score 1 point, and then manage to survive about 10% of the time. 25% of the time, you either don't have a card for rippers to score, or you've already got units in place to score whatever objective rippers end up scoring. The other 50% they do what you want them to, score 1 point and then die. Its not a scientific calculation, but I have run rippers in quite a lot of games against quite a lot of opponents, so I've got a pretty good feel for their capabilities.

 N.I.B. wrote:
Rippers grab those objectives out on the fringes from turn 2 better than any other Tyranid troop choice. And they don't need babysitting to deliver.

I always try to group the objectives closely in the middle of the table. It gives me the most chance to utilize my slow, short range MC's like Carnifexes. It almost never benefits my opponent more than me, and this might be because my meta is obsessed with gunlines. If an objective is far out on the edge, it is a good bet that my opponent doesn't have much controlling it, so I'll just kill what is there and put a non-obsec unit on it. If it is in my opponent's backfield, and well defended, Rippers aren't going to do me much good anyways. Perhaps against an assaulty death star, I might spread them out a bit more, but I rarely see those sorts of lists.

 N.I.B. wrote:
And saying 'then die' is just internet hyperbole. First, after you score the objective, the mission card is discarded which normally means the immediate incentive for your opponent to kill the unit is lost. But since each objective can come up twice, they sometimes get a double-dip on the spot. At the very least, since there are objectives like 'claim more objectives than your opponent', and 'claim all objectives'.

I run an army without many soft targets. Rippers give my opponents a soft targets without support from the rest of my army. The only time I have ever seen units of rippers survive on the table for more than 2 turns is when they have no objectives to claim, and so they just hide behind terrain. That isn't internet hyperbole, that is 30+ games with rippers in my lists. I also see a good amount of MSU. A small unit can kill rippers without compromising the firepower of the rest of its army.

 N.I.B. wrote:
Sometimes you place objectives inside terrain, which help Rippers survive.

Generally I don't. If my opponent wants to score the objective, I want to have fire lanes on his scoring unit.

 N.I.B. wrote:
And Gants die just as easy.

Not even close. 1) a min squad of gants have an extra wound. 2) a squad of gants is large enough to congaline into cover and out of line of sight. 3) a Squad of gants is more often in the range of support like venoms. 4) a squad of gants is usually backed up by heavies who are better target, while a squad of rippers is usually off on its own. 5) S6+ IDs rippers. Flamers, and blasts do double damage. There is a ton of S6+ out there. This is a myth that looks reasonable on paper, but when you start testing it in actual games, you will see the difference. Ask yourself the question, How many times have I lost 1/2 of a squad of rippers? How many times have I had Rippers with 1 - 3 wounds left come up big for me later in the game?

 syypher wrote:

 jy2 wrote:

 syypher wrote:
Oh... I really didn't know or understand the sources thing until now when you guys explained it. Makes sense though thanks for explaining it.

1) So even with the Malanthrope out people are still leaning towards the Zoans?

2) I haven't modeled the Termagants yet so is Fleshborers the better choice for the non-devourer ones?


I've edited the 2nd list with your guys suggestions. What do you think of it now? Kind of fear that my "tarpits" are no longer very... tarpit worthy...

Hive Tyrant (Dual TL Devourers BLW + Egrubs + Wings)
Hive Tyrant (Dual TL Devourers BLW + Egrubs + Wings)
Malanthrope
Malanthrope
Ripper Swarm + DS
15 Termagant Brood (10 Fleshborers + 5 Devourers)
14 Gargoyles
Hive Crone
Carnifex + Dual TL Devourer BLW
Carnifex + Dual TL Devourer BLW
Carnifex + Dual TL Devourer BLW

Living Artillery Formation:
Tyranid Warrior Brood (+Venom Cannon)
3 Biovore Brood
Exocrine

Malanthropes are far superior, even in smaller games. There is never an occassion not to take them unless you are playing really small games (i.e. 500-pts or less) or you want to go psyker-spam.

Fleshborers or spinefists are almost the same. Spinefists are better against lower toughness models and flyers. Fleshborers are better against higher toughness models and vehicles (for hitting rear armor). Frankly, I normally run fleshborers as I use my FMC's to take out other flyers and I have plenty of anti-horde weaponry (and also because all of my gants were modeled with fleshborers from previous editions).

With regards to your list, your really don't need a screening unit. The only reason why I took screening units before were to protect my tervigons in my previous lists. Everything else I view as sacrificial. I really don't care if my opponent assaults my carnifexes or whatever. I'll just spread them out so that if my opponent wanted to assault them, it would just take his assault units out of position. As for mobile cover, well, gargoyles work well enough for that.

I recommend the following changes to your list:

Reduce the number of termagants to 10 and take out their devourers. Then increase the number of gargoyles. If you are looking for a purely screening unit, then I'd recommend swapping out the gargoyles for hormagants.

Everything else is good.

Thanks everyone! Got a couple questions though that spawned from that now though...

1) Why don't I need a screening unit jy2? It seems like there are things out there that we just can't deal with without putting TOO much attention to. Like Wraightknights, Dreadknights, Ctans etc. Like I said before guys, our meta is really competitive stuff. I see a lot of tri-WKs, Ctans etc. By what I've read on this thread and other tyranid forums, the best way we can deal with those things are just tarpitting them down for as long as we can.

2) @jy2: Why reduce the Termagants to 10 instead of just swapping them out with a DS Ripper unit? Is it so they can provide some cover turn 1?

3) @pinecone77: Why Hormagants over Termagants?

4) TBH, and this is just by reading the forums... Is the best way to really deal with Ctans, Wraightknights, Imperial Knights etc. just to tarpit them? In the past I've usually played the "top tier" codexes and for my targets that were a high priority, I could usually find some way to shoot or melee it to death. I'm having a hard time figuring out the puzzle for Nids in how to deal with "tough" targets. Like the ones I listed. T9 3+ 4++ Ctans... T8 3+ Wraightknights... IKs... it just seems TOO overwhelming. A lot of our LFGS will take 3-4 IKs and 2-3 WKs on a regular basis. I have NOTHING against it and I like fighting hard armies... but I don't know what tools best to use in our codex. Thoughts?

"Hello, my name is pinecone, and I am a Hormagaunt lover" The reason I like Hormagaunts as screening units is that they are Fast, so they seldom hold up the big bug. And they are surprisingly durable, because all the fire goes at the Big Bug, so they often arrive in good condition. And as weak as they are, they still rawk if you can get a charge home. Its always about synergy with Nids.

So I look at a list, and see a "Bug star" of Twin Dakkafexen, Hormie screen, and a Malanthrope.(or a Zoey+ Veno. ) Make sure you have a second (and third) threat and you can win games. About the only "giantkiller" we have is Boneswords. The reason I so feverously market Electro-bug Hives is that we have so few answers for AV, and Haywire is a Big help. Vector striking is still a fair answer as well.

tag8833 wrote:
HVC isn't as good as you think.

Not so much good, just flexible and usable if mounted on a Harpy. Being a S9 blast with good range it can basically be used against anything, allowing it to plug holes in one's arsenal in game turn-by-turn (albeit perhaps not as effectively as more specialized weapons). On the Harpy at least it is also probably the most accurate high strength weapon in the codex, which also adds a bit of utility.

tag8833 wrote:
It can strip up to one HP a turn. Crone is doing that with VS, and Crone is ignoring Cover. Tentaclids are only for turns when the crone is out of position, flying vehicles, or very high armor (13 & 14).

On the other hand, a HVC Harpy can start stripping hull points from the first turn onward and can continue to attack targets every turn it is on the board. The Crone first has to get close enough that it can pass over the target and then it has to spend a turn to bring itself back around for another pass.

tag8833 wrote:

HVC isn't good against armor that high. You've only got a 33% chance of glancing AV14Tentaclids have a 42% chance.

Fair enough, though out of curiosity how does the math look if the roll to hit is factored into the odds of successfully scoring a glance? I've generally had poor results throwing Tentaclids at ground vehicles, mostly due to half the shots missing.

tag8833 wrote:
BTW, that is one of the 7th edition nerfs that hit the Crone. And don't kid yourself about vector strike. D3+1 S5 AP:3 ignore cover auto hits did much more against most things than a S4 AP:4 Large blast that scatters. Marine Bikes for instance, feared the vector strike of a Harpy, but not its Spore bomb.

I admittedly haven't really used the Harpy's vector strike much at all, as most of our opponents are Xenos rather than Marines so the bombing run has generally been more destructive (more hits). Still a fair point.

Also as an aside, the Spore Cysts only scatter D6'' rather than 2D6''. I don't see any reason the Harpy can't use its BS to reduce the scatter, so at most the blast will go 3''.

tag8833 wrote:

Another nerf the affects the harpy in 7th is the change to Jink. If it Jinks, the Harpy can do very, very little. The Crone, on the other hand can still vector strike (its primary attack), and also snapshoot a tentaclid.

Actually I'd consider the Jink change a small buff, since it disabled the Harpy in 6th as well. Now when it jinks it gets a ruins-equivalent cover save for its trouble (2+ if near a Malanthrope/Venomthrope). Also unlike the Crone, the Harpy has a real reason to try to get in close combat in the form of its -5 Initiative penalty (huge help vs things like Knights that otherwise get to swing before Carnifexes), so it can actually make use of the change that allows Jink to be used in both flight modes.

 Strat_N8 wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

HVC isn't good against armor that high. You've only got a 33% chance of glancing AV14. Tentaclids have a 42% chance.

Fair enough, though out of curiosity how does the math look if the roll to hit is factored into the odds of successfully scoring a glance? I've generally had poor results throwing Tentaclids at ground vehicles, mostly due to half the shots missing.

That is factored in for the tentaclids. They hit 1/2 of the time. The glance 5/6 of the time. 1/2 * 5/6 = 5/12 = 41.6666%. It is really, really hard to calculate the chance to hit with a blast weapon because of scatter distance. Since the Harpy is Twin linked, I just assumed it hit 100% of the time. In reality it would be less. Hitting every times, you glance 1/3 times against AV14. So 1/3 or 33%

tag8833 wrote:

Another nerf the affects the harpy in 7th is the change to Jink. If it Jinks, the Harpy can do very, very little. The Crone, on the other hand can still vector strike (its primary attack), and also snapshoot a tentaclid.

Actually I'd consider the Jink change a small buff, since it disabled the Harpy in 6th as well. Now when it jinks it gets a ruins-equivalent cover save for its trouble (2+ if near a Malanthrope/Venomthrope). Also unlike the Crone, the Harpy has a real reason to try to get in close combat in the form of its -5 Initiative penalty (huge help vs things like Knights that otherwise get to swing before Carnifexes), so it can actually make use of the change that allows Jink to be used in both flight modes.

Are Hormagaunts worth using and if so, what should you equip them with? Naked,AG, TS or both?

EDIT: Would Shrikes be ideal to accompany them?

tag8833 wrote:

tag8833 wrote:

Another nerf the affects the harpy in 7th is the change to Jink. If it Jinks, the Harpy can do very, very little. The Crone, on the other hand can still vector strike (its primary attack), and also snapshoot a tentaclid.

Actually I'd consider the Jink change a small buff, since it disabled the Harpy in 6th as well. Now when it jinks it gets a ruins-equivalent cover save for its trouble (2+ if near a Malanthrope/Venomthrope). Also unlike the Crone, the Harpy has a real reason to try to get in close combat in the form of its -5 Initiative penalty (huge help vs things like Knights that otherwise get to swing before Carnifexes), so it can actually make use of the change that allows Jink to be used in both flight modes.
I didn't spell that out all of the way. In 6th, when the Harpy Jinked, it could still vector strike and do respectable damage, or land and assault something to contribute in that way. In 7th, a Harpy vector strike is a pretty poor replacement for its offensive power. I always assumed that it could not drop bombs on the turn it jinked, but I don't think I ever looked it up to check. If so, then it isn't as much of a nerf.

Hmmm... its weird that you are arguing with yourself, but regardless, I don't think its safe to say the jink is in any way a buff to Harpy because it allows it to jink the turn before CC... last edition, it didn't have to wait a turn at all and could just swoop straight down into combat, so having to jink the turn before is undeniably a nerf, if still usable.

Would this list work for a 1850 tournament? Or would it require re-working? Trying to make Shrikes work and I am restricted to two sources only.

Hive Tyrant, Wings, Twin-Linked Devourers x2
Hive Tyrant, Wings, Twin-Linked Devourers x2

Hormagaunts x15
Hormagaunts x15

Malanthrope

Shrikes x3 - Boneswords/LashWhips, Toxin Sacs
Shrikes x3 - Boneswords/LashWhips, Toxin Sacs
Gargoyles x12

Carnifex x2 - with Twin-Linked Devourers x2

Living Artillery Formation - Venom Cannon

Bastion

Malanthrpe would go inside the Bastion and provide a large bubble for Shrouded and Synapse.The Hormagaunts would screen the Big Bugs while the Gargoyles screen the Shrikes and give them cover saves. Thoughts?

Malanthrope done!

What are people's opinions on #? As they are T5 with regen, is one enough?

Also, I have previously taken 1 venom and 1 zoay as support units but now with the inclusion of the malan- does anyone even need to consider these two?

I know zoeys are a little different to venoms, being invunlerable physic, synaspe lampshades but...considering their performance in the many games I've played with them, I feel as if it might be time for them to take the bench.( they always fail to get powers off.)
Anyone agree?

double post - sorry mod!

 Wilson wrote:
Malanthrope done!

What are people's opinions on #? As they are T5 with regen, is one enough?

Also, I have previously taken 1 venom and 1 zoay as support units but now with the inclusion of the malan- does anyone even need to consider these two?

I know zoeys are a little different to venoms, being invunlerable physic, synaspe lampshades but...considering their performance in the many games I've played with them, I feel as if it might be time for them to take the bench.( they always fail to get powers off.)
Anyone agree?

Looks good! I'm still waiting on my Malanthropes so I haven't played any games with them yet, but the number you run depends on your list. I'm working towards a dakkafex heavy list with Living Artillery (with 2 flyrants of course) so I'll probably run 2. They aren't as useful in skyblight lists IMO.

 Chaplain Sam wrote:

 Wilson wrote:
Malanthrope done!

What are people's opinions on #? As they are T5 with regen, is one enough?

Also, I have previously taken 1 venom and 1 zoay as support units but now with the inclusion of the malan- does anyone even need to consider these two?

I know zoeys are a little different to venoms, being invunlerable physic, synaspe lampshades but...considering their performance in the many games I've played with them, I feel as if it might be time for them to take the bench.( they always fail to get powers off.)
Anyone agree?

Looks good! I'm still waiting on my Malanthropes so I haven't played any games with them yet, but the number you run depends on your list. I'm working towards a dakkafex heavy list with Living Artillery (with 2 flyrants of course) so I'll probably run 2. They aren't as useful in skyblight lists IMO.

I've completely given up on skyblight, I'd much rather go for LAN if I'm going to run a formation.
The fact that malanthrope a can qiute comfortably move up the board makes me want to take 2 but the points....

You do not want to take 2. That's like 200 pts thrown away in a lot of match ups, to make some other 200 pt MCs 1/3 more durable in others. 1 is enough, accept that it's an investment that is going to die, make it a cost effective trade off or if it isn't, you only wasted 100 pts. You don't need to throw any more points trying to secure this cover save, take another Carnifexes instead, or Warriors if you want Synapse.

For the most part, I agree. It is an easy trap to load up on support units, its like taking too many upgrades on a unit.

The malanthrope, however, can provide more than shrouded. It also provides synapse, does a decent job in CC, and can provide PE once an enemy is unit is destroyed, and can issue/accept challenges.

The value in taking 2 comes down to how many other units/models it will be benefiting, and which of its traits you really need.

 Wilson wrote:

 Chaplain Sam wrote:

 Wilson wrote:
Malanthrope done!

What are people's opinions on #? As they are T5 with regen, is one enough?

Also, I have previously taken 1 venom and 1 zoay as support units but now with the inclusion of the malan- does anyone even need to consider these two?

I know zoeys are a little different to venoms, being invunlerable physic, synaspe lampshades but...considering their performance in the many games I've played with them, I feel as if it might be time for them to take the bench.( they always fail to get powers off.)
Anyone agree?

Looks good! I'm still waiting on my Malanthropes so I haven't played any games with them yet, but the number you run depends on your list. I'm working towards a dakkafex heavy list with Living Artillery (with 2 flyrants of course) so I'll probably run 2. They aren't as useful in skyblight lists IMO.

I've completely given up on skyblight, I'd much rather go for LAN if I'm going to run a formation.
The fact that malanthrope a can qiute comfortably move up the board makes me want to take 2 but the points....

My initial instinct was the same as yours. I was leaning toward two, and I've been proxying them in my list. I am wondering if 1 would be better. I'm going to keep playing 2 until I lose a game, and then I'll switch to one and see how that works. The advantage of 2, is that they allow me to spread out much more. Having a wider deployment helps quite a bit. Before I was running 2 Zoeys and 1 Venom (in a box), and that forced me to cram everything into one section of the DZ. With 2 sources of shrouded, I can have 2 strong positions with my larger screens / tarpits located between them being double covered by shrouded so that they can't lose it when they loose a few models. Also Malans give up first blood quite a bit harder than Zoeys.

I've got a question for those who face top tier marine lists. The marine players in my area are in looooooove with the Thunderfire cannon. Many lists are starting to include 2 of them. They have the power to evaporate my tarpits, but I find that I don't need tarpits generally against marines. It makes them feel good on turn 1 or 2 when they've killed 1/2 of my models, but they still get tabled on turn 4 or 5 once my big guys get down to business. Is there a marine build that I need a tarpit against?

Sort of, not really. Bikes can cut through a pit unless its big enough, and they can always hit an run making it a futile prospect. Drop pod alpha's only matter for screening purposes, otherwise its just another blob of marines. The Grav star can usually just try to GoI out of a tarpit.

SHUPPET wrote:You do not want to take 2. That's like 200 pts thrown away in a lot of match ups, to make some other 200 pt MCs 1/3 more durable in others. 1 is enough, accept that it's an investment that is going to die, make it a cost effective trade off or if it isn't, you only wasted 100 pts. You don't need to throw any more points trying to secure this cover save, take another Carnifexes instead, or Warriors if you want Synapse.

Good point. I think the first malanthrope is a given if you have a lot of units on the ground. A second one isn't always a waste of points though. Whether or not you choose to include a second depends on the rest of your list. For example if your only other synapse is a unit of warriors from LAN and Flyrants, I'd take 2.

coredump wrote:For the most part, I agree. It is an easy trap to load up on support units, its like taking too many upgrades on a unit.

The malanthrope, however, can provide more than shrouded. It also provides synapse, does a decent job in CC, and can provide PE once an enemy is unit is destroyed, and can issue/accept challenges.

The value in taking 2 comes down to how many other units/models it will be benefiting, and which of its traits you really need.

I agree, especially your last point.

Ive always used Gargoyles on their flying bases, but if Im going to use them in my tourney army I need to rebase them. Does everyone just put them on terminator size bases, is that the accepted size?

 Iechine wrote:
Ive always used Gargoyles on their flying bases, but if Im going to use them in my tourney army I need to rebase them. Does everyone just put them on terminator size bases, is that the accepted size?

Why would you need to rebase them? Are the flying bases not legal at the tournament or something? If you do, they should be on the small infantry base.

Why do you need to rebase them?

To answer both, Im trying to make my army 'look nice' and also have a display board feel that would be better accomplished by them being on bases instead of the clear stands.

Ive never seen them rebased on small infantry bases, thats much smaller than what they come with.

BTW Im on vacation and thats why I havent just gone and measured them, Im not THAT lazy.

 Iechine wrote:
To answer both, Im trying to make my army 'look nice' and also have a display board feel that would be better accomplished by them being on bases instead of the clear stands.

Ive never seen them rebased on small infantry bases, thats much smaller than what they come with.

BTW Im on vacation and thats why I havent just gone and measured them, Im not THAT lazy.

If we're talking about Gargoyles, infantry bases should be close to the same size. 40mm are nearly twice as big. Compare them to scourges(jump nfantry with an infantry base), or jump pack marines. All come on infantry bases, and are the same size as a gargoyle. 40mm are for terminators and warriors.

But, have you seen the size of regular gargoyle bases? much larger, Im looking to avoid MFA.

 Iechine wrote:
But, have you seen the size of regular gargoyle bases? much larger, Im looking to avoid MFA.

I've got 20 gargoyles that I purchased used from ebay. They are on small infantry bases instead of flight stands. I hate it for a number of reasons. #1 is that with a diameter so Small, they fall over at the smallest tremor of the table. If you want to put them on bases that aren't flying bases I suggest you get non-GW bases, because small infantry are too small. 40mm (Warrior / Terminator) bases are too big. Find something in between closer to the flight stands that come with them.

You could nearly put them on w/e size base. The size of the model and it's wings make the size of the base sort of irrelevant. You're not going to be able to pack them in any closer with a small base.

 Iechine wrote:
But, have you seen the size of regular gargoyle bases? much larger, Im looking to avoid MFA.

Yes, I have twenty of them! If I remember right they're the same size as a regular infantry base- although I think the old metal ones had a slightly larger base than they have now. Otherwise I don't know where you're getting the idea that they're so huge. As infantry, they should be on infantry bases if you aren't using the flight stands they come with. You could also just base the flight stand base. They take primer/paint/glue just fine.

I'll post a size comparison when I get home.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Well, I stand corrected! It seems the flying base is between the two base sizes.

I think you'd be best off either leaving them be, or basing the flight bases to avoid calls of shenanigans.