PDA

View Full Version : What is the general opinion on the new Tyranid codex?



laserkatten
04-10-2005, 12:04
Hey guys.
After a two year break from 40k hearing about the fourth ed rules has made me want to get back in the game. I am now looking into starting a new army from scratch(for the fourth time). The race i want to play the most is the Eldar but considering that their current codex is lacking in my opinion combined with the fact that they will be getting a revamp next year makes me want to wait a year before getting an Eldar army.

Anyhoo, i am currently looking to get an army to hold me over until the Eldar release and im interseted in the ones that have codei that are adapted to fourth ed.

My question is, is the new Tyranid codex balanced and well rounded? Do people enjoy playing with and against the current incarnation of the nids?

Thnx for any replies.

Amon Ra
04-10-2005, 12:07
Well apart from the complaints/arguements on Instinctive behaviour and how it acts in regards to Carnifexs (which you can now take 6 of) and Lictors, its a well rounded codex.

Highly recommended out of the 4th ed codexes, esp if you want to play xenos!

Str10_hurts
04-10-2005, 12:11
Very balanced and the 6 fexes army isent near as devestating as it looks on paper its rather verry dificult to play with.

My only problem is, the overkill devourers on MC these days, but its ok. Love the new nid dex!

BaronDG
04-10-2005, 12:18
I played a very enjoyable game against them this weekend. They seem to be balanced but we didn't have any monstrous creatures so I can't speak for those. I was playing deamonhunters without grey knights, assasins, deamonhosts or anything but storm troopers and inducted guard. Fun!

My opponent usually plays marines and he was "refreshed" by the Tyranids. ("What do you mean they don't hit on 3+? I thought everybody hit on a 3+! They wound on 3+ don't they?" And finally "Well, I always get an armour save don't I?")

Penitent
05-10-2005, 04:12
Well, its currently the only non-SM codex out there. so your choices are limited.

The general opinion is that it is at once powerful, while still being balanced and fun to play with/against.

There should be plenty of nice surprises for anyone who is only familiar with the 3rd ed Tyranid codex.

azimaith
05-10-2005, 05:20
Somewhat dissapointing drop in close combat abilities.
Dissapointing drop in customizability, both things cherished about tyranids.

And many models still not made worthwhile (or made worthless), gargoyles, hormagaunts, ect.

zealousheretic
05-10-2005, 06:21
Somewhat dissapointing drop in close combat abilities.
Dissapointing drop in customizability, both things cherished about tyranids.


Drop in CC ability? Drop in customizability?

I don't know which codex you're using, 'cuz it's nothing like mine. Unless these things are code for talking about the loss of rending rippers and hive nodes; to those I say good riddance.

Hormagaunts aren't worthwhile? News to me, mine are one of my favorite and most effective units.



The 4th edition 'Nids are a good, fairly balanced army, and lots of fun. Most of the units are viable, and there's a lot of customizability and options for them.

Dvalin
05-10-2005, 06:42
Hm. As a Tau player, I'll say that they're giving me one hell of a headache. The fairly low dispersion and quantity of AP2 weaponry in the Tau list means that tooled up Carnifexes -- when also fielded with Tyrants and Zoanthropes -- tends to leave me in dire need of more firepower. Mechanized Tau just can't provide enough AP2, it seems like, so I've been forced to go static to increase my volume of firepower. ;/

Str10_hurts
05-10-2005, 09:46
Hormagaunts are the first thing that should die on a battle field...now how can they be crap?

de Selby
05-10-2005, 11:07
I think it's a great codex. It's exagerating a bit to say that marines and nids are your only options, it'll be years before most of the 3rd Ed. codices get a 4th ed. revamp.

The production values and overall 'feel' of the niddex are great; better than the marine dex in my opinion.

I was pleased to see hive nodes go. There are plenty of great options in the new codex, and a great deal of variability in the different kind of lists you can field. There are some unresolved rules questions, but what else is new?

The models are mostly great. Not too keen on the broodlord (I plan to build one up from a basic genestealer at some point) or the tyrant guard, but the new 'fex and tyrant (if posed and painted properly, not like the studio versions) are JG masterpieces. The battleforce is the best 'army in a box' deal for 40k IMO.

Scythe
05-10-2005, 11:49
I really like the new incarnation of the Nids. The 3rd edition codex was really limited if you wanted an effective army, especially in 4th edition rules. It all came down to a few effective broods back then, and 2/3rds of the codex was never used. This has changed, with almost every brood being usefull in some way. That, and a lot of extra options in the weapons/biomorphs department, have hooked me again on the Nids, after my initial 3rd edition army was collecting dust. The new dex is nice, has a lot of options, but is not too overpowering in my opinion. For unprepared opponents, the new dex might have some surprises, but a Tyranid army still has some very big weaknesses which people can exploit. It's only a shame Biovores are quite useless in the new dex...

Exterminatus
05-10-2005, 12:17
The new 'dex sucks.

Wiseman
05-10-2005, 12:59
i love the codex, i bought it just for a read and it convinced me i will start a nid army this year

Negafex
05-10-2005, 15:24
i got it and i must say its an awesome dex. good art, balanced army, and a pretty good painting section. also earlier in the thread it mentioned a problem with lictors,fexs, and instinctive behavior. i beleive that both the fex and lictor are fearless so they are immune to it, if i am wrong however let me know cause i dont have the dex infront of me right now

Bloodknight
05-10-2005, 15:39
It´s far more enjoyable to play against them than against MEq of all sorts. The list is well rounded and you actually have to sort out the danger factor of each unit. The Nids also became far more versatile with the new codex. There are actually Genestealers and Termagaunts back on the field.

zealousheretic
05-10-2005, 15:41
i got it and i must say its an awesome dex. good art, balanced army, and a pretty good painting section. also earlier in the thread it mentioned a problem with lictors,fexs, and instinctive behavior. i beleive that both the fex and lictor are fearless so they are immune to it, if i am wrong however let me know cause i dont have the dex infront of me right now

It's a matter of debate.

I'd say until it gets FAQed (which might not be for a while) just agree on an interpretation with your regular opponents. I'm inclined to say that Lictors shouldn't have to test; they're supposed to operate alone, miles ahead of the battleline for days at a time, it doesn't make sense for them to have problems behaving without Synapse nearby. Carnifexi I could accept; I can easily see a 'fex being big, tough, strong, and stupid.


I love the new 'dex, it made a lot of units viable that weren't in 3rd edition, and took out a lot of the (frankly ridiculous) stuff that everyone took, like hive nodes and rending mutants (most of the time when someone claims that the codex has less customization, they're talking about the mutant rules, which were abused to high heaven); hopefully Tyranid armies will be less cookie-cutter now.

aushlo
06-10-2005, 00:05
The new codex is excellent. There wasn't much wrong with 'nids back in the last edition, at least not much you couldn't get around, and most everything is now better. If anything, I think they're maybe on the overpowering side vs. marines. But it's an army that when played right will usually annoy the crap out of the other guy (no shooting or moving again for you!). I personally think 'nids got a boost when the list didn't much need one, but I seem to be in the minority there.

Bronco Johnny
06-10-2005, 02:04
Observations:

It still takes a lot of finesse to reliably win against a powered armor army with the Nids.

Points costs for the basic monstrous creatures went up needlessly with no real gains in performance (except the Hive Tyrant getting higher initiative).

Shooting is A LOT better, the termagaunt is actually a useful model.

All the fancy Carnifex upgrades are a points sink in a lot of games.

Overall I'd say it is a lot better than the old one but the fact that we had FAQ questions on the first day shows that the thing wasn't developed like it should have been. It could have been so much better. I sure expected better but I guess the marine codex was right in front of it in development (grumble).

azimaith
06-10-2005, 02:44
Drop in CC ability? Drop in customizability?

I don't know which codex you're using, 'cuz it's nothing like mine. Unless these things are code for talking about the loss of rending rippers and hive nodes; to those I say good riddance.

Loss of weapons beasts mainly. No acid blood ect. No more rending hormagaunts :).



Hormagaunts aren't worthwhile? News to me, mine are one of my favorite and most effective units.

They're a gaunt with one more WS and 6 inch better charge for more than double the cost of one spine gaunt. They are expensive cannon fodder, any gun I fire at them will tear them to tiny little pieces and mildly compentent troops, or space marines will rip them apart in close combat.




The 4th edition 'Nids are a good, fairly balanced army, and lots of fun. Most of the units are viable, and there's a lot of customizability and options for them.
Most are viable, true. Gargoyles, spore mine clusters, and hormagaunts really aren't. They are either to expensive, too weak, or too impractical. Alot of the creatures in the previous edition have problem as well, lictors namely, who don't survive against space marines generally, a single round of combat.

The Tyranid codex went under a mass simplification, some good, some bad, and they became far more shooty than previously.

zealousheretic
06-10-2005, 04:55
They're a gaunt with one more WS and 6 inch better charge for more than double the cost of one spine gaunt. They are expensive cannon fodder, any gun I fire at them will tear them to tiny little pieces and mildly compentent troops, or space marines will rip them apart in close combat.


They're a gaunt with one more WS, one more attack, the ability to assist 3" instead of two, and a 12" charge, for the price of two spinegaunts. That, collectively, is worth the points in my book.

Shooty gaunts are cannon fodder. Hormagaunts, in my experience, are perfectly servicable against most infantry. Even against marines, I'm usually pleased with their performance.

Yes, they're fragile, but their speed tends to make up for this; they almost always get a charge in before taking significant losses. It's not a matter of targeting priority, it's a matter of range; hormagaunts can pretty consistantly make combat without the enemy having a chance to rapid fire them.




Most are viable, true. Gargoyles, spore mine clusters, and hormagaunts really aren't. They are either to expensive, too weak, or too impractical. Alot of the creatures in the previous edition have problem as well, lictors namely, who don't survive against space marines generally, a single round of combat.


Gargoyles were insanely cheap for their abilities in 3rd ed; I think they're still damned good; the only reason I don't field them is because I don't have the cash to buy the models, or the patience to work with them (the models are notoriously fragile). Spore mine clusters are dirt cheap and not without their uses. They're not game breaking, but they're also only 30 points or so. You can throw any amount of lies, damn lies, or statistics at me; my experience remains that hormagaunts are a great unit.

Nobody ever seems to hear me when I say this, but Lictors are a support unit. They are not supposed to destoy entire tac squads single-handedly, they're supposed to charge in to add rending and preferred enemy to gaunt units, or to go after things like Basilisks.

leopard_nz
06-10-2005, 05:19
To be honest I dont really like the new codex. I prefer the first set of rules.

Scythe
06-10-2005, 07:21
Most are viable, true. Gargoyles, spore mine clusters, and hormagaunts really aren't. They are either to expensive, too weak, or too impractical. Alot of the creatures in the previous edition have problem as well, lictors namely, who don't survive against space marines generally, a single round of combat.


Mah, hormagaunts aren't that bad. They are expensive and fragile, but speed counts for a lot in a Nid army. I don't really use them in the role to devastate opponents lines. More to keep them busy until those broods who can really crush them arrive. And with the WS and I upgrade, they are fairly decent even against marines. Only problem is synapse; if they lose combat out of synapse range, they're pretty screwed.

Gargoyles were horribly underpriced in the previous codex. Now they are average. Not bad at all, since they are still your fastest unit on the board, but not great either with 1 T3 wound at 12 pts. The main reason why noone uses them is their models, which are simply a pain.

Agree on spore mine clusters tough. They are pretty useless, together with Biovores.

Bronco Johnny
06-10-2005, 10:20
The way I use hormies is to advance them through cover if at all possible and let my opponent sweat them and shoot them up while the other gaunts advance.

And, as someone said, their biggest problem is outrunning synapse. Synapse in general is a real problem in this codex since the loss of hive nodes. IMO they should have given synapse to a few more of the medium units.

And spore mines and biovores are useless crap. I have no idea what the codex writers were even thinking when they came up with that stuff.

Ravening Wh0re
06-10-2005, 13:00
And, as someone said, their biggest problem is outrunning synapse. Synapse in general is a real problem in this codex since the loss of hive nodes. IMO they should have given synapse to a few more of the medium units.


They couldn't do that because then Warriors would be neglected. It was purposely done to encourage the takeup of warriors. Also the reason why synapse allowed no instant kills.

I like the new codex. I think the Tyranids got stronger, but more streamlined. No more confusion in units and crazy mutations.

x-esiv-4c
06-10-2005, 13:13
Most of it is great. I don't like the idea of the broodlord. It seems like another GW injection into an already good idea.

zealousheretic
06-10-2005, 14:33
The broodlord is cool, it's the genestealer patriarch except not. I appreciate the nod to 2nd ed.

Bronco Johnny
06-10-2005, 14:48
They couldn't do that because then Warriors would be neglected. It was purposely done to encourage the takeup of warriors. Also the reason why synapse allowed no instant kills.

I like the new codex. I think the Tyranids got stronger, but more streamlined. No more confusion in units and crazy mutations.


Warriors were neglected in the third edition because their rules sucked. They aren't any better now. The difference is you HAVE to take them. I believe they went up in cost slightly (???) with the only offset being the fact that they can't be insta-killed. Something that is of very limited value.

Warriors are still dead meat when they face heavy bolters or any other AP 4 weapon. And that was their problem in the last codex. They cost a lot and are dead meat as soon as you turn a medium weapon on them because they simply aren't durable. Add the fact that the brood sizes are small as well as the fact that they are slow and you come up with a terrible unit IMO. But guess what, now we are forced to take them because we don't have enough synapse.

Typical GW baloney, lets sell some models but let's not take the time to think things out and develop a unit, let's just cut the hive nodes so you HAVE to have warrior models. The fix for warriors was simple. They needed to be Toughness 4 (5). If that stat was applied they'd be perfect. They would be a little more resilient to heavy bolter and bolter fire, just as dead against Autocannons and krak missiles and just a wee bit tougher in close combat. I will never understand why they didn't do this. And I sure as hell don't understand why their cost went up when they didn't really gain a thing. It baffles me just like the points cost increase for the basic Carnifex. Makes no sense whatsoever, the unit is no more valuable now than in the last codex. I'd love to see what goes on in these development sessions.

Hlokk
06-10-2005, 15:13
I quite like the new codex, it seems GW is pushing the whole "Customisable Army" thing to a whole new level.

The biggest improvement, IMO, is the carnifex, which is now probably one of the coolest units in the game.

My biggest problem with the codex is the spore mines as a fast attack choice. As far as I am concerned, these should always be launched from a biovore and not deployed at the start of a battle. Also, Im not a big fan of gargoyles, simply because they are a bit fragile. (Both the models and the rules). I also dont like the fact that warriors cant be instant killed by S8 weapons. There was always something about imagining a big bug going splat that did it for me.

Bronco Johnny
06-10-2005, 15:20
Now that I think about it, I believe the base cost of the warrior went down by 2 points but then the talons cost more. Maybe someone could enlighten us, as I do not have the codex with me at the moment.

Mad Doc Grotsnik
06-10-2005, 15:30
Not being funny, but even since Advanced Space Crusade (remember that? Around 15 years old that gem!) Heavy Bolters have ALWAYS been the bane of Tyranid Warriors!

But Tyranid Warriors are a support unit. Whether it's keeping your lessers in line, giving fire support (surprisingly effective!) or adding a lot of clout to a critical HTH sesh, Warriors are there to support the rest of your army. When combined with Raveners, they are deadly. The Raveners get the bonus of no instant kill, and the Warriors get the bonus of not being highest priority!

And it's not GW Baloney. Tyranid Warrior always have been, and always should be, the staple of ANY Tyranid force. It was the introduction of the frankly idiotic Hive node that caused Warriors to fall by the way side. Warriors are mental hard when used in combination with other units!

Alkony
06-10-2005, 16:07
Warriors are way too fragile for their cost. In 3rd ed. I rarely fielded them because they'd get shot up first thing leaving me with just a Tyrant in the back for Synapse. 4th ed isn't much better, plus now I have a better Synapse option.

I give Synapse to my Zoanthropes, pretty much always, now. The ability to take an additional psychic power for 'Thropes is a wonderful thing. Synapse creatures with a 2+/6+ save. I usually field 2 on the flanks and then have my winged Tyrant head up the center so I get full coverage on the board.

Spore mines as Fast Attack are wonderful, at least for me. I hate what they did to Biovores in 4th ed, but at least I still get to use the Spore models. I don't own any Raveners or Gargoyles (low cash flow) and actually having a Fast Attack option that doesn't cost lots of points (like winged Warriors or Rippers) is great. I've managed to take out some very annoying units and a vehicle or two with these. They're very handy for targeting units that are even out of range of Barbed Stranglers/Venom Cannons.

Over all, the new codex is pretty good. There are some things I miss from 4th ed before the new codex, though (like my dual VC Carnifex:evilgrin: ).

Bronco Johnny
06-10-2005, 18:09
Not being funny, but even since Advanced Space Crusade (remember that? Around 15 years old that gem!) Heavy Bolters have ALWAYS been the bane of Tyranid Warriors!

But Tyranid Warriors are a support unit. Whether it's keeping your lessers in line, giving fire support (surprisingly effective!) or adding a lot of clout to a critical HTH sesh, Warriors are there to support the rest of your army. When combined with Raveners, they are deadly. The Raveners get the bonus of no instant kill, and the Warriors get the bonus of not being highest priority!

And it's not GW Baloney. Tyranid Warrior always have been, and always should be, the staple of ANY Tyranid force. It was the introduction of the frankly idiotic Hive node that caused Warriors to fall by the way side. Warriors are mental hard when used in combination with other units!

No, GW wishes it would be the staple of any Tyranid force but the warrior isn't. Look at the armies people are playing. People now take warriors because they have to, nothing more, nothing less at least that is how it is where I play. It certainly could be a different situation on your end. As someone pointed out, you now have one other choice for synapse outside of an HQ unit and that's the zoanthrope. Just because people have to use a unit to make an army viable doesn't mean it's a good unit, that's just necessity at work.

I do like that idea about the raveners though, I have yet to use them at all in the new codex, have they been very effective for you?

azimaith
07-10-2005, 03:23
Heres how i'm seeing it now.
Hormagaunts. Expensive cannon fodder. Against a (tactical) marine 10 hormagaunts charging 10 space marines will get about 15 hits, then about 5 wounds, then the marines will fail about 2 wounds at best. Those 10 hormagaunts then are struck back, hit for 5 hits, 3 wound, and no made saves. Hormagaunts being fast will likely be out of synapse range and flee as well. Those hormagaunts cost you about 120 points, the space marines (completely basic) cost you about 150 points. So unless one squad of 10 hormagaunts can kill at least 8 space marines they can't make their point value against them. (Next turn 14 attacks, 7 hits, 2 wounds, no failed saves, hit back for 8 hits, 4 hit, and 2.64 wounds made *more likely 3* on the hormagaunts, with crap save, still no saves made, and so on and so on).

Unless a squad can either:
1: Make back their points value in combat.
2: Allow another unit to make their points value.
They are not good.

Now if you want to see what a real assaulter can do, 120 points of raveners, (Better save, 2 wounds, and 3 models.) Charge a squad of 10 space marines. 10 hit 1 rends, 4.5 of the other attacks wound. Marines fail 1.53 (more than half a chance) or 2. Thus the marines take 2 or more likely 3 unsaved wounds. The marines strike back for (assuming the marines beat the .53 of the probability, less than half, by a little.) with 8 marines. 4 hits, 2 wounds, and no saves (or possibly one, its close). Raveners have 2 wounds so they lose one. The marines will lose this combat (more than likely) but stick around. In my opinion raveners stand a much better chance in close combat, plus raveners are just as fast as hormagaunts are. I'd rather pack genestealers and gaunts over horma's any day.

Warriors, ap4 bait, 2 wounds it nice and all but they just plain aren't that durable. Expect to lose them, but as a tyranid, unless your hugely dependant on synapse don't worry about it that much.

zoanthropes strike me as a better synapse creature, but thropes take a heavy support, unlike the relatively little used elites.

Gargoyles, expensive models, expensive units for gaunts with wings, if they weren't pewter I would think more about getting an insanely fast assault army using them as tie ups, until then, give me ripper swarms/gaunts. Bioplasma and fleshborers make a kind of useless addition to gargoyles.

Biovores... who really wants them? They just plain aren't good artillery compared to what you can take in heavy support.

Fast attack spore mines are ridiculously expensive They as much as it costs a biovore to be fully armed for an entire battle but are only one use. Plus your opponent gets victory points.

As for lictors, they're a high point cost support unit whose support abilities are immensely reduced by fighting particular armies, space marines or low tank armies render them impotent.

Spectre
07-10-2005, 04:09
I really like the new codex. The new models are fantastic, the hive tyrant and especially the carnifex got me back into the game after a 2 year absence.

The only thing I miss are the biovores. I used to love how they worked – The hive mind saw fit to impart me with an uncanny ability to guess ranges, as seems to have happened to a lot of old school nid players.
The new barrage system is a little pants, but I’ve adapted.

A totally flexible main list is great – you never used to be able to use mutable genus in RTT’s here so I never really played with it.
4+ save on the genestealers is fantastic.
Lictor deployment is massively improved, and the firepower is much more rounded. And an invulnerable save, even a small one is great to see.
Having been born and raised a nid player, I’m chuffed with the new ‘dex.

[quote]Heres how i'm seeing it now.
Hormagaunts. Expensive cannon fodder. Against a (tactical) marine 10 hormagaunts charging 10 space marines will get about 15 hits, then about 5 wounds, then the marines will fail about 2 wounds at best. Those 10 hormagaunts then are struck back, hit for 5 hits, 3 wound, and no made saves. Hormagaunts being fast will likely be out of synapse range and flee as well. Those hormagaunts cost you about 120 points, the space marines (completely basic) cost you about 150 points. So unless one squad of 10 hormagaunts can kill at least 8 space marines they can't make their point value against them. (Next turn 14 attacks, 7 hits, 2 wounds, no failed saves, hit back for 8 hits, 4 hit, and 2.64 wounds made *more likely 3* on the hormagaunts, with crap save, still no saves made, and so on and so on).[quote]

I think your application of math is a little off on this…
I wouldn’t really expect Hormagaunts to run par to marines model for model. Their points cost is different and the units are designed with totally different roles in mind.

A fairer match up would be 160 points of hormi’s vs aproximatly 160 points of marines.

Combat is simultaneous, going on averaged statistics, Hormi’s get 48 attacks, 24 hits, 8 wounds and 2.6 marines fail their save. Marines all get to hit back with 11 attacks including a sergeant (depending on how many are in btb, hormi’s can take advantage of the fact that they get 3” assists) 5.5 hits, 3.6 wounds, .6 saves for 3 dead hormagants. Not fantastic, but that’s why I don’t take basic hormagants. Following those averages, the hormagaunts are going to tie up the marines for a while, so imagine how much they could irritate a devastator squad.

I tend to take 14 point hormagants. 168pts, 12 models, vs 10 marines. They’re striking first, so any marines they kill don’t get their attacks back. Only 36 attacks, but 24 hits, 12 wounds, and 4 dead marines. If you’ve got your hormagants in a good position, perhaps only 2 or three of the 6 remaining marines can strike back.

Even if they all get their attacks, 7 attacks, 3.5 hits, 2.3 wounds, .38 saves, for around 1.9 dead hormagants. Things are right back in the hormagants favour…

And 160 points of raveners… would really rock the kazbah.

Warriors – I take in equal or greater proportion to raveners. I really like them. The whole, can’t be insta killed thing is great. 4+ sv keeps them alive longer under bolter fire – you’ve just gotta be sensible with your positioning. Not everyone can be a marine with a 3+ save, so doing something than standing in clearings and charging over open ground is a good idea.

Shinzui
07-10-2005, 06:42
By far the new codex is the most balance I've seen, shooting, close combat all have improved though some areas have become really bad for their points, other areas just leave me scratching my head.

The only real main problem I have with the new codex is it's really hard to have fast synapse. The only 2 things which can keep hormagaunts in synapse range are winged warriors and the crappy winged warriors.

My small problems.

Raveners are really expensive for that they do. Same cost as 2 genestealers but far inferior when compared to the no brainer 4+ save upgraded genestealers which trade far more survivability for a slower charge range.

Biovores are really bad - Points cost, damage ability, everything.

It would've been better for creatures in synapse range were immune to all instant death rather that only from weapons twice their toughness. Might've made up for their really expensive base points cost.

Lictors, great now I've gone to forget making them appear to watch them scatter within 1" of a unit they were ment to kill and die......

Major improvement but they just need to tweak a few units a bit, but definately a good job.

Overall
7/10

Best imprvovement: Genestealers with Fleet and 4+ Saves.
Worst improvement: Without number (nice background wise but stupidly implemented and high point cost).

Suggestion: Increase synapse range to 18" or provide an upgrade, fix lictor deployment.

azimaith
07-10-2005, 09:53
I really like the new codex. The new models are fantastic, the hive tyrant and especially the carnifex got me back into the game after a 2 year absence.

The only thing I miss are the biovores. I used to love how they worked – The hive mind saw fit to impart me with an uncanny ability to guess ranges, as seems to have happened to a lot of old school nid players.
The new barrage system is a little pants, but I’ve adapted.

A totally flexible main list is great – you never used to be able to use mutable genus in RTT’s here so I never really played with it.
4+ save on the genestealers is fantastic.
Lictor deployment is massively improved, and the firepower is much more rounded. And an invulnerable save, even a small one is great to see.
Having been born and raised a nid player, I’m chuffed with the new ‘dex.

[quote]Heres how i'm seeing it now.
Hormagaunts. Expensive cannon fodder. Against a (tactical) marine 10 hormagaunts charging 10 space marines will get about 15 hits, then about 5 wounds, then the marines will fail about 2 wounds at best. Those 10 hormagaunts then are struck back, hit for 5 hits, 3 wound, and no made saves. Hormagaunts being fast will likely be out of synapse range and flee as well. Those hormagaunts cost you about 120 points, the space marines (completely basic) cost you about 150 points. So unless one squad of 10 hormagaunts can kill at least 8 space marines they can't make their point value against them. (Next turn 14 attacks, 7 hits, 2 wounds, no failed saves, hit back for 8 hits, 4 hit, and 2.64 wounds made *more likely 3* on the hormagaunts, with crap save, still no saves made, and so on and so on).[quote]

I think your application of math is a little off on this…
I wouldn’t really expect Hormagaunts to run par to marines model for model. Their points cost is different and the units are designed with totally different roles in mind.

A fairer match up would be 160 points of hormi’s vs aproximatly 160 points of marines.

Combat is simultaneous, going on averaged statistics, Hormi’s get 48 attacks, 24 hits, 8 wounds and 2.6 marines fail their save. Marines all get to hit back with 11 attacks including a sergeant (depending on how many are in btb, hormi’s can take advantage of the fact that they get 3” assists) 5.5 hits, 3.6 wounds, .6 saves for 3 dead hormagants. Not fantastic, but that’s why I don’t take basic hormagants. Following those averages, the hormagaunts are going to tie up the marines for a while, so imagine how much they could irritate a devastator squad.


You can't get 48 attacks with 160 pts of hormas




I tend to take 14 point hormagants. 168pts, 12 models, vs 10 marines. They’re striking first, so any marines they kill don’t get their attacks back. Only 36 attacks, but 24 hits, 12 wounds, and 4 dead marines. If you’ve got your hormagants in a good position, perhaps only 2 or three of the 6 remaining marines can strike back.

Even if they all get their attacks, 7 attacks, 3.5 hits, 2.3 wounds, .38 saves, for around 1.9 dead hormagants. Things are right back in the hormagants favour…

And 160 points of raveners… would really rock the kazbah.

Warriors – I take in equal or greater proportion to raveners. I really like them. The whole, can’t be insta killed thing is great. 4+ sv keeps them alive longer under bolter fire – you’ve just gotta be sensible with your positioning. Not everyone can be a marine with a 3+ save, so doing something than standing in clearings and charging over open ground is a good idea.

I'd rather take 160 pts of raveners any day, same speed, nastier in close combat. Hormagaunt troops slots are better filled with fodder gaunts and genestealers. And my math is off, I accidently overcharged the hormagaunt side 2pts. And of course I didn't mention that many space marines squads have a hidden sgt with a Pfist hiding to beat down unwary swarms. Hormagaunts still need to get by that too.

Warriors, expensive, better replaced with zoanthropes for synapse purposes. I sometimes keep a squad of warriors around to back up my tyrant and fex'es with str 6 blast templates. But one our two squads of hbolters and it will hose those expensive nid's don't to nothing. If you get em in a building, great, if not... well prepare to hurt.

Of course this is all relative to how I play nids, fast and hard hitting with one big arsed hurrah. (Well at least part of the time.

Bronco Johnny
07-10-2005, 15:07
I think he is using 16 basic hormies, that would be 48 attacks on the charge.

For 160 points, how many Raveners can you get? Four? I guess their save, toughness and initiative would be better and they could have a rending attack. But on the downside you'd only have 8 wounds in that unit and only get 24 attacks on the charge if you had claws and talons on them. On average you should get four rending wounds which is more than the 16 hormies would do. Interesting idea that I probably need to try.

warwizard_99
07-10-2005, 17:12
I really enjoy the re-write. I picked up 'Nids at the release during 3rd, when they re-worked the models, but only played for a brief time. IMO, they were un balanced during that codex. This 'dex is much better, retains the customizing that the previous book had, and improved on it.

Is much improved.

azimaith
08-10-2005, 02:51
I think he is using 16 basic hormies, that would be 48 attacks on the charge.

For 160 points, how many Raveners can you get? Four? I guess their save, toughness and initiative would be better and they could have a rending attack. But on the downside you'd only have 8 wounds in that unit and only get 24 attacks on the charge if you had claws and talons on them. On average you should get four rending wounds which is more than the 16 hormies would do. Interesting idea that I probably need to try.
5 on the charge mind you, and thats with rending claws. Raveners also have 1+ strength on hormagaunts so they would more. The important thing is raveners strike before space marines, can deny armor saves, and can wound at least half the time which hormagaunts can't do. They also benefit from a 10 leadership which means if they are far less likely to get scattered if they lose combat, which hormagaunts will likely do against space marines. Less synapse dependance ect makes them one of my favorite units.

Alkony
08-10-2005, 07:15
The only real main problem I have with the new codex is it's really hard to have fast synapse. The only 2 things which can keep hormagaunts in synapse range are winged warriors and the crappy winged warriors.
You're forgetting winged Tyrants and the Broodlord. With Infiltrate, the Broodlord can be close to the front line to "catch" the on-rushing gaunts as they leave the range of the walking Tyrant or Zoanthropes.

Scythe
08-10-2005, 10:29
On the warrior discussion; it's true that warriors are not that survivable, but they are good enough if used with care. keep them in cover, and make sure the opponent has plenty of other things to worry about when shooting his heavy bolters, like stealers, raveners, and even basic gaunts. However, the main boost warriors got in their new incarnation is effective ranged bio-weapons. Practically every ranged weapon is improved. Devourers are deathly with a range of 18" now and S4 with reroll to wound. Barbed stranglers are very nasty. You pay 15 pts for a S4 ordnance template which causes pinning, and it has a range of 36" as well. Venom cannons remain very usefull as anti-light tank and transport weapon, something nids usually miss. Warriors now provide some decent and badly needed fire support for Tyranids, which makes them a lot better.

azimaith
08-10-2005, 12:11
Its important that tyranid players remember that as in the codex, basically everything you have is "cannon fodder" we tend to get too attached to our units and annoyed when they die, when in the whole theme of things, all tyranid units are mean't to be expendable. The game only last 6 turns, whats important is that they do what they need to do to win the game in those 6 turns. Unfortunately for Tyranid players the rules are very skewed toward 3+ save armies as all the points are tallied up on living units and units over 50%. Because of this its easy to deny tyranid players immense chunks of victory points by spraying down squads to below half toward the end of the game. Bad tyranid saves make it simple to do. If tyranids had a mob up type of rule or the like they would be far more effective in the game because then all the disparate tyranid units you always have at the end of the game could still count for something. Until then units that have solid sticking power (Carnifexes, and to a lesser degree hive tyrants) will far overshadow units with low sticking power that are not in cannon fodder roles. (Low sticking power like tooled up Hormagaunts, *warriors* lictors, biovores.)

Mad Doc Grotsnik
08-10-2005, 18:11
So, 160 points worth of Hormies pull down 2, possibly 3 Marines (45 points) and lose 3 models, worth 30 points. The Hormies have won that combar on points, by slaying 50% more than their enemy. And they are worthless?

And don't forget, Warriors are Elites, and only really competing with the 0-1 Lictor for those slots.... Thus, you can pretty much always have 2 slots outside of HQ for Synapse. Take a Tyrant, Broodlord and Warriors, and you've got as close to an impenetrable Synaptic web as your going to get.

Anyways, you asked me about Raveners. Sadly, I don't have a Tyranid army, but I can imagine this working out quite well. Would work best in a mid range force (as in model size, not necessarily points!) where nothing is particularly unkillable, but everything is certainly deadly. Genestealers, Warriors, Raveners, Carnifex (1 or 2!) Zoanthropes and Broodlords seem the order of the day. The Warriors (who might be given wings to keep up perhaps?) extend the synaptic web onto the Raveners, and also provide an alternate target to the rather fragile Raveners. By arming the Raveners with Death Spitters, you also get the option to shoot with surprising force should you wish to deepstrike. If thats not your particular bag, I'd definitely go without. Broods of 6, with Talons, Claws and Spitters weigh in at a hefty 300 points. Pricey, yes, but at least those Death Spitters mean they can shoot whilst closing. And for Orks and Imperial Guard, those shots will be woesome indeed!

zealousheretic
08-10-2005, 19:04
On the warrior discussion; it's true that warriors are not that survivable, but they are good enough if used with care. keep them in cover, and make sure the opponent has plenty of other things to worry about when shooting his heavy bolters, like stealers, raveners, and even basic gaunts. However, the main boost warriors got in their new incarnation is effective ranged bio-weapons. Practically every ranged weapon is improved. Devourers are deathly with a range of 18" now and S4 with reroll to wound. Barbed stranglers are very nasty. You pay 15 pts for a S4 ordnance template which causes pinning, and it has a range of 36" as well. Venom cannons remain very usefull as anti-light tank and transport weapon, something nids usually miss. Warriors now provide some decent and badly needed fire support for Tyranids, which makes them a lot better.

Yep. My Tyranid warriors are primarily fire support; I have some assaulty warriors, but I'm becoming increasingly aware that anything they can do, Raveners do better and cheaper. Only thing I can really expect from assaulty warriors is to keep the Gaunts in synapse.

Devourers are downright brutal now, and my opponents have learned a new respect for my Barbed Stranglers.

I like my warriors, field them, and normally feel like they pull their weight. The fact that the models are still some of the best in the range helps my decision a lot, but their performance on the tabletop is still normally pretty decent.

Uchiha Sasuke
08-10-2005, 19:19
Yeah, Warriors are good and have their uses as do raveners also i really do love my hormies mainly because their speed and their effectiveness at taking out hordes of troops.

Grand Warlord
08-10-2005, 19:49
I really like the new codex ... still can't afford to make an army ... but someday.

yohanes13
08-10-2005, 19:50
well my carnifex army of doom does anyway 2 tyrants and 6 carnies +2 lots of 3 rippers in a 1500pt army (drool)

aushlo
08-10-2005, 20:22
My 'nids usually play like this:

Turn 1 Hormogaunts have started out of LOS. Broods in the 10-12 model range. They advance, hug cover or stay out of LOS. Stealers advance, keeping low, Gaunts with devourers do the same. Two warrior squads armed with Deathspitters and VCannons move up, trying to stay in cover, offering fire support. Broodlord and retinue infiltrate to cause headaches. A Carnifex and/or Tyrant moves up, smacking anything they can see with big guns, maybe pinning if they're lucky. Two or three 'Thropes with warp blast, hanging with warriors, do the same. Pair of lictors in the wings.

If they go first, they usually don't get shot much if they're deployed properly. Minor losses occur, nothing too damaging.

By turn two, two or three hormogaunt units have hit forward units, they have an even chance against most shooty squads (no, don't caharge the assault squads). Warrior, Gaunt, MCritter and Thropes have glanced, blown up and killed enough stuff to start the other guy worrying. If I'm lucky, a Devastator squad has now taken a charge by one or two lictors, and is unable to bring their big guns to bear. Sometimes a gaunt squad breaks, but it's falling back toward guys in cover so often gets some. More often they stay put.

Turn three, the gaunts are almost gone, the Broodlord and retinue, and other Stealers are in combat, most transports are dead, the assault units have been mostly ripped apart by big 'nid guns, and the MCritters are looming too close. By turn three or four, the other guy's usually a shambles. The devourer-gaunts claim ground and offer supporting fire, the warriors are outshooting what's left, the Fexes and such close for the knockout.

I'm sure lots of folks have lots of ways to kick the crap out of this style. Indirect templates will beat it up pretty good. But it's never happened. I've lost a few, but pretty consistently (80-90%) win via wipeout or darn close. Man, don't sell perfectly servicable units short- every unit in the 'dex is at least decent, but it's a list that needs to be used right, units in concert, to win. Warriors are only crappy if used wrong, same with hormogaunts or any other unit. Marines have only very rarely been any kind of problem-if you aren't beating them with 'nids, either your opponents are really good, or you're missing a beat somewhere. Dark Eldar and 'Nids are really similar-fragile, but potent. In the right hands, they'll pretty much take all comers.

azimaith
08-10-2005, 20:53
You do know lictors can't start on the board in this rule set... right? Or do you mean lictors in the wings as "in reserves."

Xhalax
08-10-2005, 23:09
As a n00b to the nid and their rules, I like it. Lots of nasty gribbly things to play with. That and some much better models (I know it's not quite to do with the codex, but still).

True there are some cool things that were in earlier codex books that sounded very good which weren't included...but for the most part I like it.

Love the newer fluff in it too about Kryptman.

Shinzui
08-10-2005, 23:26
You're forgetting winged Tyrants and the Broodlord. With Infiltrate, the Broodlord can be close to the front line to "catch" the on-rushing gaunts as they leave the range of the walking Tyrant or Zoanthropes.

I didn't forget winged tyrants, if you notice I mistakenly said Winged Warrior and crappy winged warriors. A mistake on my part it should read as "winged tyrant and crappy winged warriors.

Broodlord will work some of the time but it's hardly a good solution.

hivefleetcarrion
09-10-2005, 05:03
the way everyone is bagging warriors+ spore mines+ hormagaunts+lictors i must be very lucky with them

every game i have play since new dex cam out have resolved with zoanthroap being killed first enemy turn(saves wounds on big mcs and othr squads) and, generally rest of army moving up slowly and then unleashing hell. while not likeing the broodlord model+fluff, i must say if it reachs combat, it usually kills nearly everything in hth with it(i tool it right up to be a character killer). when the lictors(if they do) and spore mines come in on 2nd turn, usually dev squad or super pimped up assault squads are hit(2 groups of 3 acids mines wrecks havok on they type of squads, espically followed by a lictor charge if possible).

ravangers take firepower away from warriors( whit is also a good thing since they are tooled up as character killers) with carnifex(if taken) and winged ht draw attention away from everything else

biovores are still good, acid mines are much more usefully now, and posion and frag were too dam powerfully in 3rd.

i would like to see the synapse rule relation to lictors and carnies worked out, but i say the codex is excelent compard to 3rd ed. its good thats there lots of background and that they got rid of the mutable part in the old codex, it was fun but to much effort trying to make sure everything was correct, most of the units can easily be changed as it is

Strictly Commercial
09-10-2005, 06:36
I say, who cares if hormagaunts kill a single enemy model? Or a lictor? These models excel at one thing, and they do it well. They tie up shots. If my horms or lictors get no kills, but survive (the unit as a whole, that is), I consider them to have done their job, and any kills they get are a bonus.

Believe me, I could care less if my horms lose a combat to a devastator squad because as long as they are fighting them that is a round the squad is stuck not shooting. That's a free six inches plus fleet movement toward them the genestealers don't have to pay for in whatever passes for nid blood (ichor, maybe?). So, they are worth taking, because on average your stealers are going to make up for any losses the horms take in points of dead enemies.

I hope this makes sense. This is about as coherent as I can be when I'm up past my bed time.

Scythe
09-10-2005, 19:07
Yep. My Tyranid warriors are primarily fire support; I have some assaulty warriors, but I'm becoming increasingly aware that anything they can do, Raveners do better and cheaper. Only thing I can really expect from assaulty warriors is to keep the Gaunts in synapse.


Which is indeed their primary role, synapse. Second is fire support in my opinion. If you want a combat brood, get Raveners or Genestealers. Warriors have a handy advantage over Raveners tough; access to that nice 4+ save.

mattjgilbert
09-10-2005, 20:46
I read through it for the first time the other day. It seemed pretty good to me. Decent background stuff and a nice army list. I couldn't see anything broken in it but playing it (or against it) is the test.

Thoume
09-10-2005, 21:21
Before I begin; Yay! 100th post!

I like the new codex. Although much has not changed unit wise (except the inclusion of the Broodlord), the way they've made biomorphs part of the main list instead of a seperate army list altogether is great, as you can mix different upgrades in seperate broods without having a species limit like in the old one.

What I find funny is how warriors are more inaccuate than gaunts (without enhanced senses). I'm sure there could be a reason for this background-wise but none come to mind. Warriors with two devourers however are my favorite configuration atm; 4 twin-linked shots with re-rolls on misses and wounds.

Even if I gave them extended carapace, they'd still get shot up big time by massed fire, so it may be worth taking lots of them, about 9-18 I guess. Testing 3 in a 500pnt game was not much of a test at all, they all seemed to get destroyed in about 2-3 turns. Good thing they're cheaper now (well, excluding upgrades, which I'll be keeping to a limit)

I do aim to have a 'middle-weight' army. Shame that you can't put warriors into the heavy support slot anymore, although you can take them as HQ, Elites and Fast Attack. 8 broods of warriors with two ripper swarms? It's got to be good... :)

Mad Doc Grotsnik
10-10-2005, 00:16
I must just add the extended carapace for Warriors is very much a necessity!

In my experience, AV4+ is a real pain to get past. Heavy enough to shrug off most small arms fire, yet not quite heavy enough to demand real heavy stuff. And the mid-range weapons typically have something better to shoot up. And in combat, well, your saving 50% of wounds, which is no bad thing. Especially after your opponents attacks have been suitably whittled away from the Warriors!

cailus
10-10-2005, 06:01
Many players place too much emphasis on kill ratios and statistics. A unit does not have to kill its worth in points in order to be useful.

Armies have to work as a co-ordinated whole with each unit playing a role in the overall strategy.

The unit of 16 hormaugaunts will not necesarily chew up 160 points of Marines. They will lose some models to shooting, while the Marines will do the same from shooting Nid units such as warriors. The Gaunts will charge the marines in order to prevent them from firing their lascannon into the Carnifex. Charging in with the Hormies could be some rippers in order to stack the outnumbering ratio against the Marines and also because of the huge number of attacks generated by these units.

Tactics is what the game is about. I have never focused on kill ratios and desgining optimal units, yet I win about 60% of the games I play (though I haven't played Nids in a while - bloody Tau and now bloody Orks). Out of the 40% I lose, 5% would be due to to tactical blunders on my behlaf, 5% to atrocious luck and 30% would be to opponents who use superior tactics.

Chaplin Unitas
10-10-2005, 06:05
Tyranids are as awesome as any new army can be ....priovided that they have a new army and a new codex. Prediction: every subsequent army will be better. That's super GW. Buy the new army to stay competitive.

azimaith
10-10-2005, 07:07
Many players place too much emphasis on kill ratios and statistics. A unit does not have to kill its worth in points in order to be useful.

Armies have to work as a co-ordinated whole with each unit playing a role in the overall strategy.

Theres no argument co-ordination is important.



The unit of 16 hormaugaunts will not necesarily chew up 160 points of Marines. They will lose some models to shooting, while the Marines will do the same from shooting Nid units such as warriors. The Gaunts will charge the marines in order to prevent them from firing their lascannon into the Carnifex.

This is then only useful if the carnifex scores at least an extra 160 points because of it. Otherwise your going to lose when it comes to tallying victory points. If it prevents your fex from getting below half and plopping down on the objective for 400 some odd points, fine.



Charging in with the Hormies could be some rippers in order to stack the outnumbering ratio against the Marines and also because of the huge number of attacks generated by these units.

None of this will help if the enemy player gorges himself of VP's thanks to nid fodder being charged in and outscores you however. Besides, marines only take extra wounds from being outnumbered if they lose combat, then are outnumbered at least 2-1 (1 extra hit, 3/1 2 extra ect) and then they get their 3+ save against it.



Tactics is what the game is about. I have never focused on kill ratios and desgining optimal units, yet I win about 60% of the games I play (though I haven't played Nids in a while - bloody Tau and now bloody Orks). Out of the 40% I lose, 5% would be due to to tactical blunders on my behlaf, 5% to atrocious luck and 30% would be to opponents who use superior tactics.
Tactics include victory point denial and force composistion. Unless you can score the units being used for fodder in VP's, they have wasted you points.

Scythe
10-10-2005, 11:06
Before I begin; Yay! 100th post!

I like the new codex. Although much has not changed unit wise (except the inclusion of the Broodlord), the way they've made biomorphs part of the main list instead of a seperate army list altogether is great, as you can mix different upgrades in seperate broods without having a species limit like in the old one.

What I find funny is how warriors are more inaccuate than gaunts (without enhanced senses). I'm sure there could be a reason for this background-wise but none come to mind. Warriors with two devourers however are my favorite configuration atm; 4 twin-linked shots with re-rolls on misses and wounds.

Even if I gave them extended carapace, they'd still get shot up big time by massed fire, so it may be worth taking lots of them, about 9-18 I guess. Testing 3 in a 500pnt game was not much of a test at all, they all seemed to get destroyed in about 2-3 turns. Good thing they're cheaper now (well, excluding upgrades, which I'll be keeping to a limit)

I do aim to have a 'middle-weight' army. Shame that you can't put warriors into the heavy support slot anymore, although you can take them as HQ, Elites and Fast Attack. 8 broods of warriors with two ripper swarms? It's got to be good... :)

I've always found it very strange as well that gaunts are better shots as warriors. I hoped to see them with a base BS of 3. Oh well, it was not to be. Middle-weight Tyranid armies quite suffer from the fact that they have tons of synapse creatures, but don't really need them. Thing is, you usually but warriors for their synapse to keep gaunts in line. In a middle-weight army, this is hardly an issue, making warriors less effective overall wise. Same, but true, sadly enough.