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.

Siphen wrote:
Most of the common Tyranid lists I've been seeing lately have included a few units that don't make much sense to me. I was hoping someone could explain why they're popular choices and/or how they really work.

1. The big one is the Mawloc. I ran this unit with the 5th edition book and was always disappointed. Obviously, the Mawloc is much better now - it ignores cover, it's cheaper, and it can even hit twice. However, the way that the unit functions is still the same...namely, deep strike on top of another unit and hope you don't scatter. Despite the decrease in cost, you're still spending a decent amount of points (and a valuable heavy support slot) on something that will only hit its target 1/3 of the time.
I don't see the appeal in something so unreliable (not to mention it's not effective against vehicles or even good in combat).

2. Hormagaunts without any upgrades. This one I can sort of understand. The basic cost went down AND the cost of toxin sacs went up. However, I feel like naked Hormagaunts don't have enough damage output to even be considered a threat. Against T5 or T6 targets, a full unit of 30 naked Hormagaunts will only cause 1-2 wounds. As a fast tarpit, they're not terrible (although I think Gargoyles are infinitely better).

Most importantly, where does the Tyranid damage come from? Naked Hormagaunts, naked Gargoyles, Venomthropes, Zoanthropes, Tervigons, Termagants, and Mawlocs are all seen in Tyranid lists now. None of these units will deal massive (or reliable) damage to the opponent. Of course, you don't have to destroy the enemy to win the game...but is that how all these Tyranid lists work; tarpit the enemy and hope they can't kill enough models before the game ends?

1. Lictors. Mr. unreliable suddenly becomes a whole lot more reliable.

2. Naked Hormagaunts are cheap, you can get 60% more hormagaunts if you run them naked, thats HUGE. You're right that they don't have damage output against T5 or T6 targets, but thankfully those targets are usually 10% of an army, and you have things like Carnifexes, Trygons, Hive Tyrants, Warriors, etc. etc. to handle those problems.

The Mawloc does a better job of killing whatever it comes in under than before. This is huge for contesting objectives and eliminating scoring units, imo.

As for Hormagaunts, I think they are going to do well this edition as a fast tarpit. Run a 20 man unit for 100 points to tie down something in combat for a round or two, to give another, slower, threat a chance to make it into combat and finish them up. They won't be cleaning up lots of enemies without their toxin sacs, but they are so cheap and expendable.

A triple TFC list with no heavy weapons? yeah, he deserves to be eaten. Contrary to popular opinion, SM's do have access to heavy weapons other than grav cannons. It's true.

The wording of Burrow places the mawloc back into ongoing reserves, so it'd be mighty strange if you couldnt reemerge. Otherwise you'd literally only burrow to ostrich your head into the ground!

The Gravturions tie up a lot more points in the heavy slot. And Tau/Eldar love to obliterate them from 30"+. Which they can, unless you make them ever more expensive with a tanking IC.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:
A triple TFC list with no heavy weapons? yeah, he deserves to be eaten. Contrary to popular opinion, SM's do have access to heavy weapons other than grav cannons. It's true.

Bad ones on bad platforms.

streamdragon wrote:30 Horms vs Space Marines

90 attacks (WS3 v WS4 = 4+ to hit)
45 hits (S3 v T4 = 5+ to wound)
15 wounds (marines w/ 3+ armor save)
5 dead marines on average

This assumes no casualties from shooting or overwatch (fairly unlikely), the marines are not in cover (because Horms can't get assault grenades), and Horms getting the charge (which is not unlikely).

So your 150 points of Horms kill off 70 points of Space Marines under absolutely ideal circumstances.

But those Hormagaunts will hold up those Space Marines for ages, as they will do for most units. I still think Hormagaunts with Toxin Sacs work well. I used them in the last book and they were ok, but they've got a lot better with the added survivability from the Venomthrope's cover bubble. And when you run into a high-toughness list, such as Wraith heavy Eldar, as I did the other day, they really are just brilliant.

As for Mawlocs, I'm waiting to try out the Deathleaper + 2 Mawlocs combo. I think it could work reasonably well, and sounds like great fun to play. If I get a game in soon, I'll let you all know my thoughts.

 The Shadow wrote:

streamdragon wrote:30 Horms vs Space Marines

90 attacks (WS3 v WS4 = 4+ to hit)
45 hits (S3 v T4 = 5+ to wound)
15 wounds (marines w/ 3+ armor save)
5 dead marines on average

This assumes no casualties from shooting or overwatch (fairly unlikely), the marines are not in cover (because Horms can't get assault grenades), and Horms getting the charge (which is not unlikely).

So your 150 points of Horms kill off 70 points of Space Marines under absolutely ideal circumstances.

But those Hormagaunts will hold up those Space Marines for ages, as they will do for most units. I still think Hormagaunts with Toxin Sacs work well. I used them in the last book and they were ok, but they've got a lot better with the added survivability from the Venomthrope's cover bubble. And when you run into a high-toughness list, such as Wraith heavy Eldar, as I did the other day, they really are just brilliant.

As for Mawlocs, I'm waiting to try out the Deathleaper + 2 Mawlocs combo. I think it could work reasonably well, and sounds like great fun to play. If I get a game in soon, I'll let you all know my thoughts.

The hormagaunts will probably win against tac marines.

Most of the common Tyranid lists I've been seeing lately have included a few units that don't make much sense to me. I was hoping someone could explain why they're popular choices and/or how they really work.

1. The big one is the Mawloc. I ran this unit with the 5th edition book and was always disappointed. Obviously, the Mawloc is much better now - it ignores cover, it's cheaper, and it can even hit twice. However, the way that the unit functions is still the same...namely, deep strike on top of another unit and hope you don't scatter. Despite the decrease in cost, you're still spending a decent amount of points (and a valuable heavy support slot) on something that will only hit its target 1/3 of the time.
I don't see the appeal in something so unreliable (not to mention it's not effective against vehicles or even good in combat).

Number one reason is providing threats. Relatively cheap but must kill threats that will require a good chunk of an army to put down. When I used them this weekend they forced my opponent to bring his wraithknight over to deal with them, letting my carnifexes off the hook for two turns.

Number two reason is meta. Tau can't user interceptor before the attack goes off. A lot of armies like to use little deck chairs, which do not want to deal with a mawloc whether it hits or not (it can always run and contest, for example). A lot of armies use gun-bases which mawlocs either get smacked (even on a scatter you could still hit something with some of these armies) or they have to deploy differently (see below).

Number three reason is forcing your opponent to deploy a particular way. So you deployed your pathfinders and broadsides on the board edge? Awesome they are now out of position turn 1 and even on the board edge they are still a threat that has to be dealt with. Or in order to camp the board edge you have to creep over onto the board edges (opening up options for outflankers).

2. Hormagaunts without any upgrades. This one I can sort of understand. The basic cost went down AND the cost of toxin sacs went up. However, I feel like naked Hormagaunts don't have enough damage output to even be considered a threat. Against T5 or T6 targets, a full unit of 30 naked Hormagaunts will only cause 1-2 wounds. As a fast tarpit, they're not terrible (although I think Gargoyles are infinitely better).

Like above they provide threats if taken in large enough numbers. That 3" run gives them a good shot at a turn 2 assault forces your opponent to deal with them. Also the 3+ run makes them great at late game objective grabs

Most importantly, where does the Tyranid damage come from? Naked Hormagaunts, naked Gargoyles, Venomthropes, Zoanthropes, Tervigons, Termagants, and Mawlocs are all seen in Tyranid lists now. None of these units will deal massive (or reliable) damage to the opponent. Of course, you don't have to destroy the enemy to win the game...but is that how all these Tyranid lists work; tarpit the enemy and hope they can't kill enough models before the game ends?

Tyranids will never be a tabling army, not in 6ed anyways. You have to play to the objectives and use pressure and board control to win games -- usually by the skin of your teeth. Well atleast Tyranid armies featuring these units you listed will probably play that way. The 9 carnifex list is much more of an agressive, kill the crap out of your opponent style list.

Martel732 wrote:
The Gravturions tie up a lot more points in the heavy slot. And Tau/Eldar love to obliterate them from 30"+. Which they can, unless you make them ever more expensive with a tanking IC.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MWHistorian wrote:
A triple TFC list with no heavy weapons? yeah, he deserves to be eaten. Contrary to popular opinion, SM's do have access to heavy weapons other than grav cannons. It's true.

Bad ones on bad platforms.

In what universe is the Tri-Las Predator (Dirt cheap at 145 pts) a "bad platform"?

Because the predator hull kinda sucks. It has to sit still to fire all those weapons as well. AV 11 sides don't help much, either.

It's not always about damage output as you say, as in the case for the Mawloc, he doesn't have to hit but he's a very big threat to consider and the threat alone can be powerful.

Can't speak for the Hormagaunts, haven't felt any urge to try them this codex mostly for the issues you speak of and yes, Gargs are perfect for tarpitting.

The damage output comes from a mixture of shooting and combat, you'd be surprised how much output there is with multiple dakka MC setups plus 30+ Gants 20+ Gargs, Mawlocs...

I suppose that in this edition Tau are supposed to be our measuring stick, sure. but even Tau are not going to destroy a hundred bodies before combat happens. What if the bugs go first and kill off or pin marker lights for example? Or deploy properly and utilize terrain that prevents Line of Sight? Mathhammer is all well and good, but terrain and strategy are things too. Let's list the things that Triptide doesn't have the ability to kill at will, at least on paper. Except for Screamerstar, I'm hearing crickets.

Marines are just fine. What they are not is poorly designed- no unkillable Death Star or poorly balanced force multipliers. Tau are a corner case and frankly have every advantage the game can throw at them. Sadly they make up a lot of the competitive meta. I play good players for fun, so maybe perspective's skewed.

But I could definitely see a lot of competitive players tabled or trounced by a Tyranid list built 'wrong' as far as conventional wisdom dictates. I guess what I'm saying is that there are a lot of potential builds in the Tyranid book that would be termed 'Ringers' in sports speak, looking bad but being surprisingly powerful. Hormagaunts are a big part of one such list. I suspect that what will happen is it's never going to see competitive play, but competitive players are going to get curb-stomped by the 'bad' units on occasion in casual games and get ornery about it.

From a tau perspective naked hormagaunt are more scary than buffed ones. You can run twice as many naked hormagaunts as buffed ones and naked ones kill firewarriors, kroot, and pathfinders just as easily. Having twice as many of the naked ones means you are more likely to get them across the board and they can hold up a riptide or crisis team well enough, you don't need to kill them just stop them from shooting. Same is pretty much true for eldar too, all those t3 don't need poison and you can bog down a wraith knight well enough.

 The Shadow wrote:

streamdragon wrote:30 Horms vs Space Marines

90 attacks (WS3 v WS4 = 4+ to hit)
45 hits (S3 v T4 = 5+ to wound)
15 wounds (marines w/ 3+ armor save)
5 dead marines on average

This assumes no casualties from shooting or overwatch (fairly unlikely), the marines are not in cover (because Horms can't get assault grenades), and Horms getting the charge (which is not unlikely).

So your 150 points of Horms kill off 70 points of Space Marines under absolutely ideal circumstances.

But those Hormagaunts will hold up those Space Marines for ages, as they will do for most units. I still think Hormagaunts with Toxin Sacs work well. I used them in the last book and they were ok, but they've got a lot better with the added survivability from the Venomthrope's cover bubble. And when you run into a high-toughness list, such as Wraith heavy Eldar, as I did the other day, they really are just brilliant.

As for Mawlocs, I'm waiting to try out the Deathleaper + 2 Mawlocs combo. I think it could work reasonably well, and sounds like great fun to play. If I get a game in soon, I'll let you all know my thoughts.

Again, I was doing the average math for an absolutely ideal situation for the hormagaunts. It is extremely unlikely such a scenario would actually occur in game. Gaunts have a max charge range of 12". 12" is also the rapidfire range of Bolters. So the gaunts will have to be in rapid fire range, without the ability to charge, for at least 1 turn. It is either a terrible or statistically impossibly unlucky general that doesnt manage to kill off some of your gaunts before they charge. Especially bolter marines, whose shots are wasted shooting at things bigger than gaunts. Then you have overwatch, which should statistically kill off another few gaunts, with each lost gaunt reducing your attacks by 3.

So again, my math is for ideal and nonrealistic circumstances for the hormagaunts. For instance, it completely ignores the existence of TFCs, which have a firing mode that Ignores Cover, wounds on 2s, pierces your 6+ armor, and is barrage 4.

 greyknight12 wrote:

Siphen wrote:

Against T5 or T6 targets, a full unit of 30 naked Hormagaunts will only cause 1-2 wounds. As a fast tarpit, they're not terrible (although I think Gargoyles are infinitely better).

Remember that most of your opponent's models are not T5 or T6, unless they are running heavy nurgle or a bunch of daemon princes. Alot of people have at least a few crisis suits, firewarriors, necron warriors, space marines, or dire avengers in their army, and against those types 3 attacks at I5 and S3 (each gaunt) on the charge is still pretty effective.

If the gants have poison they can obliterate high toughness units.

 Dozer Blades wrote:

 greyknight12 wrote:

Siphen wrote:

Against T5 or T6 targets, a full unit of 30 naked Hormagaunts will only cause 1-2 wounds. As a fast tarpit, they're not terrible (although I think Gargoyles are infinitely better).

Remember that most of your opponent's models are not T5 or T6, unless they are running heavy nurgle or a bunch of daemon princes. Alot of people have at least a few crisis suits, firewarriors, necron warriors, space marines, or dire avengers in their army, and against those types 3 attacks at I5 and S3 (each gaunt) on the charge is still pretty effective.

If the gants have poison they can obliterate high toughness units.

Riptide has 2+ save, T6, W4 and WS2.
4 wounds x 1/6 = 24 wounds needed to kill it.
24 wounds x 4+ to wound = 48 hits needed.
48 hits x 3+ to hit = 72 attacks needed
72 attacks / 3 per gaunt = 24 Horms required to kill a riptide in 1 round.
24 * (5ppm + 2ppm for TS) = 168 points of Hormagaunts.

Again, absolutely ideal situation.

I'm not sure people are getting just how easy gaunts can be to get in there. You'll see it someday and be shocked. Trust me. Move through Cover, Fleet and Bounding Leap to run at +3 inches is frankly ridiculous. They work almost as well as in 3rd/4th ed now (when they were 6" move, fleet d6" and 12" charge, all with MTC). Turn one is a dash for cover or blocked LOS with a total move of 9" plus a rerollable d6 that ignores terrain, then they have a 6" move and a 2d6" charge either die of which is rerolled. In Hammer and Anvil it isn't always going to get them there but it very often does otherwise. 15" + 3d6 with rerolls that ignore or mitigate cover is a big deal. And the marines will eat some supporting fire from the big bugs on the way. Like I said, in a vacuum on a flat, featureless table math hammer is all well and good, but they are almost as good as beasts as far as taking advantage of speed and cover. Gaunts force your opponent to make unfavorable decisions on target priority if used correctly, and if (when) they hit they only need to tarpit for a turn or two to ensure that there's a sizable LOS blocking/ cover providing fight in a bad spot for your opponent. I've been beaten probably twice by Marines in dozens of games with Nids through four editions. A lot of that was with tactical use of Hormagaunts and even Genestealers. I've never run a Flyrant, Tervigon, tunneling monstrous beastie, or a million other auto-includes to mitigate their supposed crappiness either. Don't sell the little killers short, they are very good.