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.

Quick question,

I read through the carnifex tactica, and i know that pure CC carnies are a bad idea...  I also looked at the carnie conversions on GW's website, and thought the two whip carnifex was a neat looking idea.

Assuming that it is a big enough game where I won't lament the possibly wasted points, how effective would it be.  With only +1 WS or TM, it counts as elite, but both make it heavy.  Either way with T6, and all models in base to base losing 2 attacks, can it reasonably tie up power-fists?  Would addin thornback and symbiotic rippers be worthwhile way to hunt fearless units?  Has anyone tried it?

 

Just wondered before I started working on a conversion.

I personally think it'd be a bad idea. I have a pure 1500pt godzilla army, which consist of 2 tyrants, one with wings, 2 gunfexes, and mixed gun/cc fex for the heavy slots, forge world ripper swarm bases for troops, 2 dakka fexes and a CC fex, which I went againts the norm by having it in my list.

If I were to change anything, I would change 2 of the fexes, the first would be the gun/cc heavy fex and the other would be the cc fex. In the few games that I have played, he has done nothing except for grabbing a table quarter and objectives in those games. Other than that he has seen NO action.

The next game I will play, I will try to center him on the board and run him up the middle, hopefully I'll encounter something or someone, if not I forsee a future where I but a couple of more kits to make another Dakka fex and another gun fex.

That's just my 2 cents...if you like a model proxy it first, then if it works for you, go for it. That way you don't have a cool model which sucks butt. I have 1 such model, my cc fex. It looks awsome, but has done nothing for me yet.

Chappy P!

PS: I'll try to post some pics of my army soon. if your interested.

Pics would be good...

 

I friend of mine stored his 'nids at my place since he never played at college...  I haven't heard from him in about 6 months though, and that is post graduation, so i am beginning to assume I have inherited them, so I am looking to make things mine.  He has a good supply of most everything, but only has a second edition tyrant and carnifex...  hence my road to expansion, and trying to make it cool looking.

Check out the Tyranid online FAQ. Two Lash Whips on the same model have no additional effect, so yes this would be a terrible idea.

The guys who converted that model made some rules assumptions that were later proved wrong by the FAQ.

To be fair, the question in the FAQ addresses multiple models with lash whips, not one model with 2 lash whips. Since lash whips apparently stack from multiple models, I don't see why they wouldn't from a single model. Most models can't fire two guns either.

Having said that...its still a horrible idea. You'll be converting up a very cool looking model that will either die or accomplish nothing in every game.

I agree with Cent about the FAQ question/answer.

You are right, it will be great for hunting fearless units, so who is going to let you get close to their fearless units with it?

A CC fex is a tricky proposition, and really needs something to go and 'snag' a target so the fex can catch up, with a Zilla list, you don't have anything like that.

interesting idea, coredump - has anyone tried tag-teaming a fast tar-pit unit (ripper swarms maybe?) and a cc fex, the tar-pit unit simply throwing themselves at top speed at a juicytarget and holding it in combat until the cc fex arrives? I can see it working sometimes, but I suspect an opponent could disrupt it fairly easily once they worked out what you were doing...

Posted By Centurian99 on 04/26/2007 9:06 PM
To be fair, the question in the FAQ addresses multiple models with lash whips, not one model with 2 lash whips. Since lash whips apparently stack from multiple models, I don't see why they wouldn't from a single model. Most models can't fire two guns either.

Having said that...its still a horrible idea. You'll be converting up a very cool looking model that will either die or accomplish nothing in every game.

Well, looking at the wording for the lash whip there is no indication that multiple Lash Whips would provide any additional bonus:

"Models in base contact with a creature equipped with a lash whip lose one attack in each Assault phase."

So you check to see if an enemy model is in contact with a creature equipped with a lash whip and, if so, it loses one attack for that Assault phase.

The FAQ only changed one thing: That multiple creatures with Lash Whips do stack together. There still isn't any evidence that two Lash Whips on a single model would do anything more than reduce a model's Attacks by one.

 

 

Well, not functioning like I expected certainly would be a downer...  I guess I shouldn't have assumed that GW wouldn't have put something up if it wasn't legal.

Oh well, still have a gunfex and a dakkafex to build first, I'll keep pondering #3.

Yakface: I can't agree with you (a very rare occurrence) on this one. The lash whips on two separate models have the same rules as the lash whips on a single model. A strict reading of the rule would say that no matter how many lash whips are in play, a model may only lose one attack. We know that is incorrect from the FAQ, therefore the rule must be read differently than it is actually written. The FAQ shows us that you reduce by 1 per lash whip in base contact, and I don't see a limiter that would exclude carnifexi.

This also has the advantage of giving meaning to all parts of the rules; i.e. you can under the rules take two lash whips, so that option must be given meaning if at all possible. (i.e. choose the interpretation that gives rules meaning, where possible)

I must say that strictly speaking (and I know this technicality was a rules writing oversight!) the rule on lash whips is utterly useless here: you will note the rule states "Models in base contact with a creature equipped with a lash whip lose one attack in each Assault phase." A two-lash whip Carnifex does not fall under that rule; it is not equipped with "a lash whip"; it is equipped with more than a lash whip; it has two. I have seen rules interpretations hinge on smaller points than that before!

A unit with a casualty from a pinning weapon, has to make a pinning test. If the carnifex has 2xTLdeathspitters, is there only one pinning test?

And from the premise of ruling in the least advantageous manner.... I would still allow it, since a fex with 2 lash whips will almost alway be less advantageous.

Never interrupt your opponent when he's busy making a mistake, some wise man once said. Bring on the Whipfex!

Posted By yakface on 04/26/2007 11:08 PM

 There still isn't any evidence that two Lash Whips on a single model would do anything more than reduce a model's Attacks by one.

 

I can't say I'm overly bothered about the issue given how many times I've encountered the it (0).  But I'd have to disagree on that point.  The FAQ is evidence that multiple lash whips reduce A multiple times.  The FAQ answered a question specifically about multiple models, and therefore cannot be taken as having refuted the proposition that 1 model with multi whips don't count, but the fact that multi whips in that circumstance count is evidence that they would count on 1 model as well. It might be considered weak evidence, but it is evidence.

Of course evidence does not make proof.

Posted By coredump on 04/27/2007 10:50 AM
A unit with a casualty from a pinning weapon, has to make a pinning test. If the carnifex has 2xTLdeathspitters, is there only one pinning test?

 

Given Deathspitters aren't pinning weapons I'd say no, there isn't only 1 pin test, there are zero.

Well, I didn't mean to start such a debate on a minor issue.

 

In regards to functionality on the table, it isn't to uncommon for us to play 3-5k point games, and use 7, 8, or 9 turns as the base instead of 6, so given that the whip-fex would only make it into lists that were that big would make it a bit more successful.

 

Also, the blood angels player would be obligated to charge whatever i put in front of him, at least for another month or two, only place i might use it in a small game is if I know ahead of time he is bringing the vampires and not his IG.