PDA

View Full Version : My Crush on Tyranid Warriors



Pink Horror
21-01-2009, 10:47
I am a Chaos player at heart. My favorite models, for a long time, have been the overly spiky Chaos terminators. I like the little metal ones. I like the bigger plastic ones. But I have always had a "thing" for another race...

I thought the 2nd edition Tyranid warriors looked pretty neat. They were freaky and a little less like the Alien movie than they are now, I think. There was a character to them. They were a little more human and a little more oddball all at once, compared to the modern Tyranids. But I love those modern ones, too, and the warriors are still my favorite Tyranids. If they were Troops, I'd have an army of them with nothing else. It doesn't matter what their stats are to me, except for the fact that my entire army would be multiple-wound, non-monstrous creatures. That is a niche I like.

So, I'd just like to say everything great about the old, neglected Tyranid Warrior. My man-alien-crush is not going away anytime soon:

* Three army slots! I wish they were all five, but for now, I can be glad to have the warriors as HQ, Elite, and Fast Attack.

* Immunity to Instant Death. Well, this isn't so great any more, because everyone is now getting the Eternal Warrior label. The great idea that was meant to bring huge characters down to size is now completely ignored by all of them. But, as long as all those chumps get all their wounds, the simple Tyranid Warrior can get his, too. You're stuck hitting each one twice, which effectively makes shooting missiles at them overkill.

* Lash Whips. You can spread around these little toys to really mess up the plans of a variety of creatures. I am most found of their ability to gang up and neutralize a character, while also sucking attacks away from anyone else in the fight.

* Bunches of attacks. Most Warriors have multiple shots and multiple attacks up close. None of them are individually that great, but they should pile up. They do not get the most bang for your buck in offensive power, but they can help thin out a horde.

* Individual weapon choices. Every Tyranid Warrior in his brood can be different from his pals. There are seven regular weapons to choose from, along with the single big gun you get to pick. This makes the warrior brood unique in the tyranid list for not being a group of clones, and they are pretty rare in the whole game, too.

* The result of individualized weapons. With nine different types of model in one unit, you could theoretically take 9 wounds of damage without losing a model, because they can be spread out in this rare situation. All of the quirkiest parts of wounding in 5th edition converge in the warrior squad (which is why they are given as an example in the rulebook). Combined with ignoring instant death, you have the best unit at creating wasted wounds in the game.

* The illustration! I am not beyond enjoying a creature that looks like it has a giant death penis in the rulebook!

MistaGav
21-01-2009, 11:04
There's some pretty good ideas in there. The individual weapon choice is a good idea but I have a feeling people would get really confused working out attacks if you have a right mix of different abilities. It would pan out a bit like the Deathwing Termies and Crisis Battlesuit methods.

I think they should be given the option for troop choices personally but limit the amount per squad so say 6 in a squad for troops. That way you have a bit more troops to score with and a bit more emphasis on the whole horde aspect of tyranids.

Kymmerus
21-01-2009, 13:04
I know the joy that is Warrior Lovin'... I think they're a great model! I'm on a mission to be able to deploy the maximum number (72) in an army. (I'm at 54 now I believe)

As far as gameplay goes I enjoy the shooty variants quite a bit. The new template rules for the death spitter can make them into template dropping horrors, and kitting a full squad out with twin linked devourers can produce a frightening number of shots, though at a price.

IrishDelinquent
21-01-2009, 14:55
I am in total agreement with your love of the humble Tyranid warrior. I think that an army filled with the 72 warrior maximum (for normal FOC lists anyways), with a few lesser troops, would be pretty tough to deal with. Your opponent couldn't even get a shot at your gaunts without your mass of warriors giving them a cover save, and the Warrior's poor BS would be negated by sheer numbers.

Angelwing
21-01-2009, 15:04
I think that an army filled with the 72 warrior maximum (for normal FOC lists anyways), with a few lesser troops, would be pretty tough to deal with. Your opponent couldn't even get a shot at your gaunts without your mass of warriors giving them a cover save, and the Warrior's poor BS would be negated by sheer numbers.

Whilst the image in my head is good, I dread to think of the size of the opposition army at this points level. All those guns are going to smash the warriors to bits. I would also put those gaunts in front of the warriors to give the warriors the save. They are more valuable!

Any how, yes warriors are great. I myself have 7 rogue trader metals, 14 2nd ed plastics, 13 2nd ed metals, 6 3rd ed plastics with wings and 3 3rd ed plastics on foot. (I think...)

Ubermensch Commander
21-01-2009, 16:23
Haha I am sure you and the Tyranid Warriors will make a great couple(s). If the idea sounds like fun, do it. Although outside of this thread I have head T. Warriors are somewhat subpar and I have not seen them used to great affect. To be fair though, I have only seen a few used at a time.

The_Outsider
21-01-2009, 16:45
Tyranid warriors are the reason synpase ignores instant death (well, ravenors as well).

Mostly the only problem with warriors is their cost, they need to get some of their weapon options a bit cheaper and you are good to go - the mid size creatures are the real strength of the tyranid list.

Kymmerus
21-01-2009, 17:16
Whilst the image in my head is good, I dread to think of the size of the opposition army at this points level. All those guns are going to smash the warriors to bits. I would also put those gaunts in front of the warriors to give the warriors the save. They are more valuable!

Oh yes its an idea made for large scale or apocalypse games... Practically fielding them in large numbers is likely to end up with the opposing player scraping warriors off their boots...

I've got about 16K pts in Nids all told including 300+ gaunts (I'm still working on painting it all... "Can't sleep gaunts'll eat me... can't sleep gaunts'll eat me..." :cries:) so the large number of warriors should make fielding the mess possible for a strong synapse net, plus has the warriors backed up with all manner of nasty gribblitude..

Gimp
21-01-2009, 17:19
I really like them as well.

Thinking of having a horde nids army just for them.

3 units of 4 Warriors with sythes, rending claws, leaping and +1 to save

then a bunch of other little things :)

Flying Toaster
21-01-2009, 17:23
I just read the title and was wondering how you could love a genderless bug?

mughi3
22-01-2009, 09:02
The warrior is probably the most malleable and least used nid unit.

The main thing that scares people is how expensive they get when you tool them up.

Back in 3rd edition i made a flying nid warrior army for my wife at 1,850
http://i70.photobucket.com/albums/i112/mughi3/nidarmy1.jpg

Now with running and immunity to instant death leaping CC warriors with increased WS, initiative, bio plasma, rending claws, talons and carapace armor are indeed a sight to behold. They can also go shooty to with many weapons options and an increased BS.

Many people will say take out the synapse creatures first, which is true in most cases when fighting nids, but what do they do when 90% of your army are synapse creatures.
:evilgrin:

Putty
22-01-2009, 09:37
seasoned nid players don't use warriors for competitive armies because they are only 4+ armor save and BS 3 max.

and they are expensive. (model and point wise)

when you are looking at the carnifex, a strength 9 TMC with armor save 3 + base unit... the warrior pales in comparison.

however, the warrior is a good unit to use for those "funner" lists and it is alternate HQ choice.

but if i want assault monsters, genestealers are better and cheaper imho.

Sleazy
22-01-2009, 09:51
one of the best plastic kits out there the warrior, it just looks so cool.

I have recently painted 16 of them, I know people rag on their rules but I still intend on fielding them all.

Pink Horror
22-01-2009, 17:00
If the goal is to kill a horde, a group of warriors has to dish out more damage, point-for-point, than a carnifex. The carnifex also gives any unit full of missile launchers or lascannons something to shoot. I am not saying that the warriors are the best unit in the army on paper, but the guys are usable, and I'd rather put my favorite miniatures on the table than be another nidzilla clone. I believe most "seasoned" and "competitive" players find a formula that works, and are then reluctant to stray. For example, NFL coaches simply copy each other 99% of the time. They could lose their jobs quickly if they try something new that drastically fails. With the changes to wound allocation in 5th edition, warriors are the only creatures on the tyranid list that benefit. It is something to consider. BS 4 is a 33% boost over BS 3. That is not something that is essential.

Are genestealers really cheaper now? A BS 3 warrior is as tough as a genestealer, with two wounds, and also a synapse creature. Both have ST 4 and 2 attacks. The stealer has better WS (for that 33% bonus some of the time). The genestealer has Rending and does not have to buy any weapons. They are both 16 points. But, rending is much, much worse now. So, add 10 points or so to each warrior for equipment. Now, for 10 points compared to a genestealer, you get:

* +1 Wound (and no instant death)
* Shooting, either 4 S3 shots or 2 S5 shots with wound re-rolls, or the cheaper ones have 2 S4 shots with hit re-rolls (that's a 50% boost).
* Extra attacks or lash whips

Of course, these are the stealer's advantages:
* Rending
* WS and I (good for running someone down after the assault)
* Troops choice

Though, because one is troops and one is elite, they are not competing for shots. I would have some stealers, too, though gaunts fulfill basically the same battlefield role for half the cost. I'd want to have an army that makes my opponent want to exchange his big guns for more men. People have mentioned the "not enough bullets" problem with the orcs. A team of warriors and gaunts puts a bunch of wounds on the table, too, and they can kill a bunch of orks. I also would not want a Carnifex against a squad of boyz. That S 9 is not going to kill many orks because the fex does not et enough attacks in a turn. That power klaw will get your monster off the table pretty fast. A warrior is 14 points and a fex is 85: of course one fex beats one warrior. But, a team of warriors can lash the fex (or if they can get to him, the klaw) and slowly beat the squad into submission, or at least tie it up so more attacks can charge in.

Also, every wound on the Carnifex or any other tyranid brood sticks. In wraparound situations, wound allocation is very advantageous for the warrior unit, because one guy can take both missiles, for example. But let's compare a simpler situation with the stealers: cause 4 wounds to a stealer unit, and they lose 4 guys worth of attacks. Cause 4 wounds to a warrior unit with different weapons on everyone, and now 4 guys have one wound each.

ReveredChaplainDrake
22-01-2009, 18:40
First of all, nothing in the Tyranid codex is good against Orks. Nothing. (Well, maybe Boomfexes and that's it.) So you can put that comparison to rest. Second of all, what the Warriors gain in "resiliency" to the Power Klaw, they lose in vulnerability to the Boyz. T6 Carnies are wounded literally half the time and have a better save, while T7 Fexes are just plain immune to everything but the Klaw.

Warriors lose out because of the Rending nerf. When Rending worked on the hit, 38-pt Warriors w/ Initiative, Armor, Leaping, Talons and Claws were some of the best fighters in the game. Now that Rending works on the wound, Warriors have been relegated to anti-MEQ glass cannons, and have to be hiked up to 45 pts or more to be competitive against the average type of unit.

Also, Warriors lose out when Synapse becomes unimportant. Genestealers have far surpassed Gaunts in damage and effect. Even with nerfed Rending, Scuttling, Feeder Tendrils, and 5th ed Combat Resolution make up for this. The only thing Gaunts do is hold objectives and die. Genestealers take objectives and kill. Thus, if Gaunts aren't important, why use sub-standard units?

Let it be known that I don't play Nidzilla. I swore that if I wanted to play a shooty army, I'd play Tau. I've since put my money where my mouth is with an excess of 2500 pts at my disposal.

Pink Horror
22-01-2009, 20:29
I prefer to roll lots of dice and have lots of wounds, instead of putting all of those upgrades on everything. I admit, I haven't played as modern Tyranids, but I would prefer to keep my warriors under 30 points each and have a lot more of them. Nothing is going to handle Orks well, but some units still do it better than others. I'm not going to throw my hands up in the air, declare Orks unbeatable, and ignore them.

Most armies have plenty of basic weapons that are S4, so I do not see why T7 is so great.

All of those better units cost a lot more than what they replace. A stealer is better than a gaunt, but I can have a heck of a lot more gaunts. Pretend I'm clueless and explain how equal points of stealers kick the butt of regular gaunts with fleshborers. I think you left something out. Stealers and gaunts both die practically the same.

Let's do a comparison:

What sort of stealer do you take? You seem to like upgrades, so I'll give you a couple: tendrils and talons. That's 21 points sitting on 1 wound, with a 5+ save. Sure, you could have the carapace, but I'm not going to see what happens when they get shot, so why pay for it?

Well, I'll just go ahead and take those spinegaunts in the book. I get 4: 20 points. You can have the extra point. So, I can have 6 genestealers or 24 spinegaunts. It does cost a lot less to scuttle the stealers - 18 points for them versus 48 points for my gaunts. There are advantages to having less models. But which unit is really better at taking an objective? What do they do to the typical marine in the turn they assault?

Genestealers
6 X 4 = 24 Attacks
24 * 8/9 = 64/3 Hits
64/3 * 1/2 = 32/3 Wounds (32/9 Rend)
64/9 * 1/3 = 64/27 Failed Saves
~ 6 Wounds

24 X 2 = 48 Shots
48 * 3/4 = 36 Hits
36 * 1/3 = 12 Wounds
12 * 1/3 = 4 Failed Saves (Just from shooting...)

24 X 2 = 48 Attacks
48 * 1/2 = 24 Hits
24 * 1/3 = 8 Wounds
8 * 1/3 = 8/3 Failed Saves

~ 6.5 Wounds

It looks like the gaunt charge is slightly superior. The stealers have the advantage of not losing nearly as much effectiveness after the charge. The gaunts have the advantage of not losing nearly as much effectiveness after a death.

I like both units. I like how feeder tendrils benefit everyone. I like how implant attacks makes a unit like stealers into Nob or Carnifex killers.

You're still comparing a monstrous creature with a base 85 cost to my simple warriors who cost 14 points each before weapons. Alright. Say I spend 25 points each on the warriors, and you take a stripped-down, 100 point carnifex. You have 4 wounds at T6. I have 8 wounds at T4. The big winner here, for you, is that armor save. Against regular attacks, I take 4x the wounds but I only have 2x the wounds (and losing combat as a fearless creature won't help, either). But they sure dish it out better! Let me see what sort of weapons I get on 100 points of carnifex - okay, I'll give you the talons so you have 4 attacks. I probably have 10. Against the non-MEQ, I'd rather have more attacks, even it is to only give me a fighting chance against superior foes such as Orks.

This is a fundamental difference between more bodies and more concentrated power. Against those regular attacks, the carnifex has the advantage. But, the four guys look a whole lot better when they are fighting against something that hits very hard, like a power fist. The take the hit about the same: maybe the T7 fex forces a 3+ instead of a 2+ (a 2+ is only 25% better anyway). In either case, each hit is likely to cause a wound to either creature, but there are twice as many wounds all together on the cheaper guys. After the 4th wound, you either have a dead fex or one wound each on 4 guys (thank you 5th edition!).

This is a game of rock-paper-scissors. When everyone is putting more and more weapons in their armies that are good at splattering one big thing, it eventually pays to have a bunch of little things. But then, the typical tactical marine is pretty good at killing a bunch of little things.

Anyway, I only claimed warriors are good enough. You're not auto-losing for using them. I do not have the experience to claim that they are usually the best choice, but I can claim that in some limited, contrived situations, they are better than the typical Tyranid choices.

Note: with the way feeder tendrils, pursuit, and the basic splitting of attacks work, genestealers + gaunts should work better than just gaunts or just stealers. There is a non-linearity at play. Combined arms are surely the best approach.

Hulksmash
23-01-2009, 01:00
I have to disagree with nothing in the tyrannid book being good against orks. Anyone here regularly field a 6 man warrior unit w/+1 ST, deathspitters, and talons w/1 Barbed Strangler? For a mere 191pts you get 5 st6 small blasts and a st4 big blast. That is just nasty against orks, especially horde orks that the template will scatter onto no matter how bad you roll :) I personally play w/6 MC's (1 Dev. Tyrant and 5 Carnies), 2xunits of the above warriors, 88 small bugs and 7 ripper bases at 2k and I have to say it's ridiculously shooty and nasty.

HsojVvad
23-01-2009, 01:12
What's stoping you from making this army? As you said and others have said you can have a max of 72 of them. That is no small number. I would assume you are playing for fun, and not to win so why is it stopping you? You don't want troops? Get 2 X Rippers, and your troops slots are dealt with. Or get some 'Stealers too.

Funny a 'Nid army with plenty of synapse, but non needed if rippers or 'stealers are being used. LOL.

I want to do this one day, but I lost my job, so buying anything is no on hold.

Pink Horror
23-01-2009, 01:25
The only thing stopping me is I want to work more on my Chaos army first. That is why it remains just a crush. The Tyranid Warrior is my forbidden love, for now.

I already own several warrior models, by the way. I just wish I had the time and effort to get them in game shape. Also, I have to decide on what would really compliment them. I believe gaunts look like better troops on paper, but I cannot throw out everyone else's opinion about that. Game experience matters, too. With all those synapse creatures, I really should have gaunts, but then I have to decide which kind. I cannot just throw a bunch of different ones in a pack like the warriors. They are meant to be uniform. I'll probably have a few with indiscriminately customized weapons, who could blend in with any sort of gaunt, to stand in the back and die first.

mughi3
23-01-2009, 08:52
the funny thing is i fought a nidzilla list with stealers and i took them to the mat with my warrior army. sure they are spendy on points but in the end they are effective. take stealers as troops and load up on warriors. ;)

I got rid of my old list but from memory a tooled out CC warrior has
.3 base attacks at initiative 5, strength of 5, WS of 5 and rending, +1 bio plasma attack at strength 6 initiative 10. a 4+ save, flesh hooks(frags)and leaping.

5 attacks on the charge in all X9 warriors max per brood....
is 45 attacks, 9 of which strike before almost everything else in the game save some eldar. i don't care if they are terminators, your likely to win that engagement.

willydstyle
23-01-2009, 09:14
the funny thing is i fought a nidzilla list with stealers and i took them to the mat with my warrior army. sure they are spendy on points but in the end they are effective. take stealers as troops and load up on warriors. ;)

I got rid of my old list but from memory a tooled out CC warrior has
.3 base attacks at initiative 5, strength of 5, WS of 5 and rending, +1 bio plasma attack at strength 6 initiative 10. a 4+ save, flesh hooks(frags)and leaping.

5 attacks on the charge in all X9 warriors max per brood....
is 45 attacks, 9 of which strike before almost everything else in the game save some eldar. i don't care if they are terminators, your likely to win that engagement.

But how many points is that unit? Granted that a unit that can win a CC against a foe with few casualties is often worth the points, if you have to sacrifice other units in your army to field it it may not be worth it. Of course sometimes taking a super unit just for fun is great too :)

The_Outsider
23-01-2009, 09:34
Psst, don't say this too loudly, but minus a few issues tyranid warriors are one of the best units in the game - they are let down by the issues in question.

willydstyle
23-01-2009, 09:42
The barbed stranger/death spitter squad that an earlier poster mentioned sounded really solid, especially with the scything talons making them decent in CC as well.

ReclecteR
23-01-2009, 10:49
24 X 2 = 48 Shots
48 * 3/4 = 36 Hits
36 * 1/3 = 12 Wounds
12 * 1/3 = 4 Failed Saves (Just from shooting...)


I might be missing something here and if I am then I'm sorry, but normal spinegaunts get 1 shot each, not 2, so they would cause 2 failed saves, assuming all 24 are within 12" of the target (which is pretty unlikely, but not impossible).

As for warriors, I have nothing against them. Have always fielded them and will continue to do so if they fit the theme/playstyle/look i want to go with for my army. Have also never played Nidzilla, so I won't comment on pro's and con's of each, though they appear to be pretty obvious.
And as already mentioned, the trick to warriors is to find that fine line between being too expensive and effectiveness.

Sleazy
23-01-2009, 10:53
I usually run a a couple of 5 warrior units of 4 deathspitters and 1 venom cannon, with sything talons on all. It seems to do well and takes a lot of killing.

I then have a unit of 3 with sything talons and devourers and a unit of 3 with sything talons, rending claws and modelled to show extended carapace and loadsa other upgrades, they usually get my opponents attention and die before reaching his lines but act as a great distraction. Remember whilst he is concentrating on the warriors that CC-fex is getting closer!

HsojVvad
23-01-2009, 16:02
The only thing stopping me is I want to work more on my Chaos army first. That is why it remains just a crush. The Tyranid Warrior is my forbidden love, for now.

I already own several warrior models, by the way. I just wish I had the time and effort to get them in game shape. Also, I have to decide on what would really compliment them. I believe gaunts look like better troops on paper, but I cannot throw out everyone else's opinion about that. Game experience matters, too. With all those synapse creatures, I really should have gaunts, but then I have to decide which kind. I cannot just throw a bunch of different ones in a pack like the warriors. They are meant to be uniform. I'll probably have a few with indiscriminately customized weapons, who could blend in with any sort of gaunt, to stand in the back and die first.

Just remember if you are going to have 72 warriors, that is alot of points. Lets just say each warrior is 30 points. ( I can't find my codex, so I can't remember if this is too much or too cheap) that is 2160 points right there. That won't let you much room for troops, well depending on point cost game. I guess your opponent would have more fire power at that point cost game, but if you don't care for winning, the that should be an awsome fun game to play just for the sake of it. At a 3000 point game, that only would leave 840 points for troops. I am not shure that would be enough to have alot of troops for Gaunts.

But go for it, I will one day, but I guess when I get around to it, 5th edtion codex, or 6th edtion codex (just in case 5th editon dosn't come out for Tyranids) will come out before I get to it, and the rules might change and we might not be able to do it anymore.


Psst, don't say this too loudly, but minus a few issues tyranid warriors are one of the best units in the game - they are let down by the issues in question.

In quiet voice: what is the issue in question?

decker_cky
23-01-2009, 17:36
If you're taking warriors, take at least a few good units of spinegaunts to screen them.

I'm a fan of extra scything talons rather than rending on my warriors, particularly if I have a good amount of genestealers in the army (as genestealers are a much better deal for rending attacks). Dual scything talons and bio plasma combine for a very hitty unit. To make it more versatile, make one of the talons into a deathspitter and you throw out a lot of killiness.

Megad00mer
23-01-2009, 17:43
I stopped using Warriors during 4th edition. Too expensive and way too fragile to be of any use.

Well recently I decided to give them another shot as I've always loved the models and felt no proper Tyranid army is complete without at least one brood of Warriors. I took a brood of 4 Warriors armed with Scything Talons and Deathspitters. They wiped a 5 man Terminator Squad in one round of shooting. Yes it was extremely lucky but now I take them every game. They almost always preform well for me. Next game I'm going to also try a brood of 4 CC Warriors and see what happens.

5th edition has really made Warriors a great unit. The new blast template rules mean even with BS2, a Deathspitter armed Warrior has a good chance to hurt something with a Str 6 blast, and the new 4+ cover screen and running rules make CC Warriors scary again. Well worth taking IMHO.

Pink Horror
23-01-2009, 20:12
I might be missing something here and if I am then I'm sorry, but normal spinegaunts get 1 shot each, not 2, so they would cause 2 failed saves, assuming all 24 are within 12" of the target (which is pretty unlikely, but not impossible).

Thank you, Mr. ruin all my fun... that's what I get for doing math late at night with a list I do not solidly have memorized yet. I kept passing fleshborers and spinefists around as assault 2 in my head, because that's what the are on the warriors: the only unit I really thought about so far. Anyway, the big difference for me is 4x the wounds. Taking up space and getting shot is usually all I need half my troops to do. I'll admit, if I need a unit to focus on something else instead, I'll look at stealers.

I am not planning on a 72-warrior army, by the way. That's someone else.

I notice that many people's warrior layout is to have all the same weapon choice. That is fine for 4th edition, but this is 5th. The multiple-wound creatures finally do not have to lose whole models first, as long as you have different weapons. I think warriors should really take advantage of that.

ReclecteR
27-01-2009, 01:19
Thank you, Mr. ruin all my fun...

No worries :p. But you're right, the big difference is the extra bodies.
I also think your individually armed warriors idea is worth investigating, as long as they can still perform as well at the cost as basic, normally armed ones can.

HsojVvad
27-01-2009, 02:45
Devourers have 2 shots though, mabye that is what you were thinking of. They are 18" and they are a 2X weapons. Nice on Warriors, you get 4 shots then.

Tehkonrad
27-01-2009, 07:58
Warriors are definetly in my top 3 alien race sculpts

Pink Horror
27-01-2009, 09:28
No worries :p. But you're right, the big difference is the extra bodies.
I also think your individually armed warriors idea is worth investigating, as long as they can still perform as well at the cost as basic, normally armed ones can.

I'm really big into piling on the wounds, so I doubt I would add much more than the BS (+50% hits is too good to ignore on a unit loaded with guns).

I think rending, talons, and the whip all have their place in the unit. I also think they should combine devourers with deathspitters. That gives 6 combinations of warriors. The cannon or strangler makes it 7. That covers the typical shooty units. Smaller groups give you more wraparound potential. Here's a scenario that should play out often:

10 Marines shoot you at over 12". Let's say you have carapace or cover, and ignore special weapons. They can often cause 4 wounds. Well, you have 5 different warriors, so one on each. You do not really care which ones: a spitter/whip and devourer/talons take a wound each after saves.

Now A unit of devastators shoots at you, with 4 missile launchers and some bolters. They get 3 missile wounds and 3 bolter wounds. Hooray, wrap-around! The spitter/whip takes 2 missiles, because you are fighting against shooty marines and he already has a wound. Another missile goes on someone with no wounds, hurting him though he stays alive. Two guys might take their first wounds, and the other wounded guy might die. It's 50/50, but most of your firepower is still alive.

Compare that to 5 devourer/talons or whatever group of clones. The first volley kills one for sure. Down to 4 already. Two missiles then kill another one, so you're at 3. There's still 1 wound and 3 4+ saves left - you will probably have 2 warriors left standing. That is a lot less firepower, even if they had the most shots and stabs when the unit was full. I would rather try to have as many attacks as I can get when I have my turn to retaliate.

Ablative wounds are nice to have, but the only good way to do that is not to load up on the biomorphs. Most of them are nice but unnecessary, and I believe they are meant to make you waste your points. So, take the armour if you expect to spend several turns in close combat, take the BS if you have many guns, and take the S if your guns need the extra power, but be careful. In all my days of playing these games, I value bodies and speed the most. I like to think, what could I do with 4 warriors for 90 points? All those extra features do not thrill me.

mughi3
27-01-2009, 10:38
Pink that may be true if warriors are an add on to your overall army. when they are the bulk of your army you actually do need all those upgrades to make them truly effective. in 1,850 i had 21 tooled out CC warriors, had i not taken the thropes, flyrant and a full kit heavy dakka fex i could have easily had over 30(closer to 40) CC themed leaping warriors. then consider they are immune to instant death, can run, leap, are synapse and better than most marine characters in CC.

Your effectively looking at 60-80 models(not counting your troops) worth of fearless butt kicking power in at 1,850. so you still get your nid horde army, it's just in multi-wound better performing models.

alphastealer
27-01-2009, 11:45
As a tyranid player I love the idea of warriors. Sadly though GW have seen fit to make them too expensive and have limited their upgradability. This is the main unit that needs to get fixed in the next codex edition.

As far as cc goes, even if you fully upgrade the warrior he will not be nearly as effective as a genestealer for similar points. The stealer can reroll hits or wounds..can fleet and scout/outflank. So the stealer is by far the better cc tyranid organism.

Shooty. A dakka tyrant can out shoot a similar costed warrior brood. He has a better save, better toughness...actually all of his stats are at least 1-2 values better.

Synapse support. The Tyrant with guard can last a lot longer, so can Zoanthropes with synapse and their 2+ save.

As far as 24 small blast templates go, 3x Zoa can fire 3x S5 AP3 templates at 24 range. 3 Warriors can fire at 24 but at S6 AP5 at the same BS as the Zoa.

I used to play 2-3 warrior broods, now I play 2x tyrants and 3x zoanthropes instead. They do their jobs better than the warriors and cost less overall.

Warriors need a decent points reduction in base cost and biomorph upgrades in order to be a mainstay in the tyranid army...which according to the fluff they should be! Right now they are used as often as lictors...the second tyranid unit in need of a revamp.

Pink Horror
27-01-2009, 14:05
Lictors are terribly boring and appear overpriced - I cannot defend them. But can't the warriors blend with stealers to give everyone re-rolls?

I think warriors are meant to be among other troops. They do not do any one of those jobs the best, but they do all of them okay, and take more damage than most of the competition, too. Much of this analysis seems to think that whatever is dishing out the damage will not get shot. Think about how cheesy the Nob Bikers are, and skim off a little of that cheese to hand to the warriors. I think staying close to 100% after losing half their wounds, compared to what would happen to stealers, is being overlooked here.

I understand the Tyrant is better for the points: what does the typical dakka build cost? But there is a maximum. In that HQ slot, you can only put 12 shots, right? There is a ceiling on what you can spend. If your army needs more shots, paying a slightly higher price, that comes with much more survivability against heavy weapons like lascannons (but that could be killed by small arms, I understand...), could be a decent use for an HQ slot. The guard make the Tyrant much more expensive with no extra shooting power. The Zoas compete with the carnifex for slots. Warriors can use elite and fast attack slots, which have little competition.

Everything that beats the warriors on one ability is worse than the warriors on another. Nothing is just outright better.

Three zoas are the most I can take in a slot, and they compete with the big fex. Three warriors are the fewest I can take in their slot, and they only compete with cost-limited fex and the lictor.

Most of why I am thinking about warriors now comes from the meta-game. People like heavy weapons. They are worthwhile against many armies, including many tyranid builds. Unfortunately for the tyrant, a lascannon cannot usually tell the difference between the tyrant and the warrior. It knocks a wound off either of them just as well. Actually, there is a difference. If more than half the warriors are just standing in a crater, or have a thin unit of gaunts in front, they get a 4+ save, but a tyrant needs to have half the actual model hidden from view.

Given the importance of the big guns, and how expensive they are, I would like to have an army that turns every big, expensive gun into a bad purchase. Tyrants and zoas do not do that for me. Stealers hit harder but do not shoot and cost more per wound. These other units are all great at the things you say they can do, but they do not have the same combination of abilities to fit what I want my army to do.

decker_cky
27-01-2009, 18:19
The stealer can reroll hits or wounds

This one isn't the best argument, since you can use the stealers to support other combat units and spread around the rerolls.

Warriors can now have good shooting and good combat by taking S6 deathspitters at BS2 and scything talons and bioplasma. They're pretty cheap, useful, and provide synapse. No need for armour, or really even any of the WS/BS/I upgrades (though improving WS or I or giving them flesh hooks is worth it if you have the points spare).

Killboss
18-04-2009, 02:50
I would recomend going for about 3-4 units of 16 gaunts in your army (spine-fleshborer ratio is up to you, i would go half and half if doing 4 units.) Give them scuttlers and without number. With this, you can get a pretty good advance on the enemy and when he blows your gaunts up (leaving the warriors unharmed) you can feel good that they come back AND your warriors are not touched AND when the gaunts return, they can secure your home objective in the procces (however, if its anihilation i woud outflank (or you could not risk scuttlers at all). Then open fire.

And i only just realised i am about 4 months late...... great