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.

Flat Damage 3 for the Scything Talons seems nicely reliable.

https://www.goonhammer.com/codex-tyranids-10th-edition-the-goonhammer-review-2/

Why did none of them show the points for the Haruspex

Goonhammer doesn't even seem to know which points to use using 2 souce at same time. Doh

I do like the QR code idea.

Granted it’s assuming you have a suitable device to hand, but in the grand scheme of things, that’s a reasonable assumption.

Certainly means you don’t need to worry if you’re using the most up to date points.

Well Assimilation Swarm seems kinda fun. Eat your problems away!

Although it is bit on weaker side as you are limited model wise.

Doubt big changes to points though. Most of datasheets same and codex points decided well before 10th released so accuracy of points had no data so short of change for sake of change datasheets that didn't change shouldn't be changing all that much if any.

The whole termagaunts having support weapons "1 in 10" I expected. It's very "AoS" style and I get it, but I also hate it on two fronts.

1) It kind of devalues the special weapons as being special

2) It very much messes with Leviathan sets because they don't have those weapon options and chances are those special upgrade sets will be a nightmare to get from places like ebay.

That said honestly they don't sound gamebreaking so having bare termagaunts without them or bare devourergaunts is unlikely to cause issues and you never know GW might decide to start charging points for them next edition.


I actually like the subtle change away from "Xenos claws and teeth" because Xenos is used for all non-human factions, not just Tyranids. There are also multiple other tooth and claw monster attacks out there, so having a unique name that fits tyranids I think is a small, doesn't affect the game; but neat change.

Devalues? So would you prefer fixed amount per squad regardless do you have 10 or 20? That would favour msu when it's already hard to justify non-msu. Or every model should be able to get one?

tneva82 wrote:
Devalues? So would you prefer fixed amount per squad regardless do you have 10 or 20? That would favour msu when it's already hard to justify non-msu. Or every model should be able to get one?

It devalues the concept in the sense that they are better weapons so you'd always take them because there's no downside nor cost in taking them. It's in line with "no points upgrades" in that you have no reason not to take a better weapon unless you just don't have a model for it.

I'd still prefer they were special in the sense of being a choice to take or not.

Again I don't think they are game breaking or going to massively change the performance of blocks of gaunts

While ago I wrote to GW about Rippers being 3-6 when Leviathan and CP gives only 2 bases. My recommendation was 2-6 but 1-3 is also good.
It is also nice that Raveners can change their Thorax weapons for a better save.

The 1-3 is irritating as it's basically every army will be 3x1 as bare minimum and it's good for rather boring reason. Like every army would include 3x anything that's 15 pts. Rule of unit practically irrelevanT

In fairness I don't mind something like rippers being almost an auto-include for the army. It's very thematic that no matter the type of army (swarm, mixed, zilla) it would have swarms of little rippers all over the place consuming things.


Most armies do end up with "this thing is basically a toolbox/cheap/cornerstone" type units that will appear in almost all armies. The only time that's really an issue is when

1) It happens to so many units that it nullifies army composition choices and pushes out all the other options

2) When the unit is "auto include" purely because its so insanely effective that it vastly overwhelms any other choices.

Ergo its not just cheap enough to squeeze in or a good solid choice ,but just broken as heck

15 pts is bonkers cheap though. There isn't any other unit for the role that competes for role. And most armies don't have 15 pts unit(not model. Unit) that can score so many vp's.

Rippers thematic, lone ripper swarms at corner sitting doing actions less so.

I see 'points' haven't changed. *sigh*

And this book really feels like they made new detachments to emphasise the new miniatures.

 Shadow Walker wrote:

My PDF of the Tyranid Index is in alphabetical order. I'm glad this book isn't.

Having the leaders in one spot rather than the Tyrant, Flyrant and Swarmlord all in different parts of the book is a good thing.

I noticed Barbgaunts are up by 5 points. Winters said the Harupex was 120, which is 5 less thsn now. Carnifex still 125.

Anyone know if the Screamer Killer has come down to a cost where it's worth taking? Toxicrene is still somehow 200 points, so I doubt it.

Looks like I oopsie whoopsied on buying so many termagants/rippers already. Was hoping that the special weapons would be one per 10 or one per 20 so I could spread them around, not one of each per 10. Knew that wasn't how it was going to be, but I was hoping. Luckily none of them seem worth angsting over.
But rippers!? I was concerned about how I was going to get 18 ripper swarms at reasonable prices to max out my options without ending up with a hundred extra gaunts I would never use. Now I don't need to worry about stripping the ones I was using to test paint schemes because I can't even use all that I already have. Dropping the minimum unit size to 1 is bonkers, but I do like that it's giving people options to use up the last few points that they otherwise wouldn't due to 10th's essentially static unit sizes and free unit upgrades. That's nice, and something I'd like to see repeated in other armies - just in a slightly different fashion. Being able to field an independent unit for so cheap seems too abusable.
Instead, I'd like to see them as unit attachments. For example, pull armorium cherubs (and other models that are basically just tokens) out of their current squads into their own dedicated units with stats and make them FOLLOWERS with the same basic attachment rules and unit restriction lists as LEADERS (only they don't conflict with a unit already having a LEADER and they're removed from the table if the unit they're attached to is destroyed). Would give players an easy way to spend their leftover points, field cute mascots, and stay in theme, all without putting extra units on the table. Rippers aren't one-use tokens like most mascots, but I could see them following the same basics - let them attach to any Gaunt unit, but then give them a high OC value so they have a purpose (or leave them as is - perhaps nullifying enemy OC is sufficient). Maybe even allow multiples to attach to the same unit.

Thing is with editions only 3 years apart it could all change with 11th. GW might go insane for going back to points costs on everything and suddenly it all flips head over heels again.

So whilst it might not be the most efficient for 10th edition; it might balance out long term.

I don't regret my investment in Leviathan stuff, it will never be as cheap again.

I don't regret getting 12 Leapers!

Thems things is fun.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:


Anyone know if the Screamer Killer has come down to a cost where it's worth taking?

From what I remember from the Naomi's video I posted above, it is 5 points cheaper.

 Overread wrote:
Thing is with editions only 3 years apart it could all change with 11th. GW might go insane for going back to points costs on everything and suddenly it all flips head over heels again.

So whilst it might not be the most efficient for 10th edition; it might balance out long term.

I don't regret my investment in Leviathan stuff, it will never be as cheap again.

I agree 100% with this. Editions and rules come and go while models stick around for much longer.

Leviathan was such a good deal and still is since people can still get it.

This release is full of nice minis and I will get them all eventually but theres no rush I have years ahead to get them.

tneva82 wrote:
Goonhammer doesn't even seem to know which points to use using 2 souce at same time. Doh

Points will only become official when the app updates next week I think? I'm not counting on them just yet.

Looks like a great release - I like all of the new minis but I'll take my time adding them to my existing collection. Might sculpt/kitbash the new special weapons for termagants to try them out first.
Haven't ordered anything yet but I'll probably get the book and one of the lictor types to paint up, still have my second Leviathan set to build too and extra Leapers. from Goonhammer -it looks like there are some cool options. What struck me was they mentioned a few things not making sense - enhancements which didn't really have any good critters to apply them for- maybe this is future proofing for a new character release over the edition cycle- like the Red Terror.

Loads to build, paint and use in the meantime.

 silverstu wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Goonhammer doesn't even seem to know which points to use using 2 souce at same time. Doh

Points will only become official when the app updates next week I think? I'm not counting on them just yet.
.

You never use pdf points NOW and codex rules do you?

Goonhammer uses pdf points unless unit doesn't exist in which case use points in codex...

That's...convoluted. And why they would think pdf points for index would supercede later released codex points no idea...but that's what they did with example lists. Rather than use all points from codex.

"For both of these, I’ve used the points values from the Munitorum Field Manual where they exist, and the Codex where they don’t"

tneva82 wrote:

 silverstu wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Goonhammer doesn't even seem to know which points to use using 2 souce at same time. Doh

Points will only become official when the app updates next week I think? I'm not counting on them just yet.
.

You never use pdf points NOW and codex rules do you?

Goonhammer uses pdf points unless unit doesn't exist in which case use points in codex...

That's...convoluted. And why they would think pdf points for index would supercede later released codex points no idea...but that's what they did with example lists. Rather than use all points from codex.

"For both of these, I’ve used the points values from the Munitorum Field Manual where they exist, and the Codex where they don’t"

Because they are betting PDF would have been written after the the book went to print. Which to be fair I'd take the same bet. The these days the points given in codexs literally aren't worth the paper they are written on.

So you are saying that the pdf we are using with index with index rules and without any new units is actually codex points?


Guess admech points are codex points as well then

Also funnily enough codex has nerfs to index while points lower so if you use index points you get double nerf of weaker rules and point hikes.

Funny that. Points changing when datasheet changes.


And would be 1st time ever to use point costs for different product.

Anyway no rule supports using points from 2 sheets mixing&matching so youu use indet sheetyou use completely. Don't plan using norn emissaries then

And gt's system is use latest. Which one is latest? Codex.

tneva82 wrote:
So you are saying that the pdf we are using with index with index rules and without any new units is actually codex points?


Guess admech points are codex points as well then

Also funnily enough codex has nerfs to index while points lower so if you use index points you get double nerf of weaker rules and point hikes.

Funny that. Points changing when datasheet changes.


And would be 1st time ever to use point costs for different product.

Anyway no rule supports using points from 2 sheets mixing&matching so youu use indet sheetyou use completely. Don't plan using norn emissaries then

And gt's system is use latest. Which one is latest? Codex.

What an odd to pick a fight on, logistics says the revised pdf with points was edited more recently than the points printed in the codex. They'll be closer to reality for sure.

Index were made first. Codex later. Logic dictates codex points are newer which actually is supported by buffed units getting increases and nerfed decreases.

And there's not been updates to index point costs yet.

But as long as you stick to one source fine. Can't mix&match to your desires. So if you use index points use it. Don't take anything from codex or you are cheater.

SO, new edition less confusing rules wise?

tneva82 wrote:
Index were made first. Codex later. Logic dictates codex points are newer which actually is supported by buffed units getting increases and nerfed decreases.

And there's not been updates to index point costs yet.

But as long as you stick to one source fine. Can't mix&match to your desires. So if you use index points use it. Don't take anything from codex or you are cheater.

You actually can't prove the index was written first, but besides the point, indirect and Tower units have had point adjustments due to a reaction to live meta.

You don't need to be a clairvoyant to see that the points pass on the 2nd week of September will conveniently align with the nids book.

All that aside when the book tells you to scan a qr code to geothermal latest points, which ten points at the current pdf, the two are in conflict.

But this is a pre-release copy so it's not a surprise it's happened.