PDA

View Full Version : Importance of the Tyranid FAQ



Vepr
15-01-2010, 16:39
The more I look it over the more I think this new dex will be made or broken with the FAQ. Right now I would not call it a good dex but it is not a bad one either it just has a lot of questions surrounding so many new units. Rulings on CC weapons, Acid Blood, the Mawloc, Prime with units in a pod, and the Doom among others could either make this a decent dex or mediocre dex. I don't remember a codex in recent memory that had so many questions pop up so fast. I know a decent FAQ is important to every codex but this one seems to be in need of it more than any other recent codex.

SPYDER68
15-01-2010, 16:43
Mawloc Ruling.. no big deal.. there are other good options

Nid close combat weapons is probly the biggest.

Acid blood with lash whip ? i dont see it as that big, big bugs will mostly die from shooting.


Doom isnt even that good, and id be amazed if he effected units in transports.


At most he will get 1 high strength shot off, then 1 hit of str 8 (which ever army has lots of) and hes gone.

This dex isnt sup par.. its balanced and a very usable dex.

Vepr
15-01-2010, 16:47
Mawloc Ruling.. no big deal.. there are other good options

Nid close combat weapons is probly the biggest.

Acid blood with lash whip ? i dont see it as that big, big bugs will mostly die from shooting.


Doom isnt even that good, and id be amazed if he effected units in transports.


At most he will get 1 high strength shot off, then 1 hit of str 8 (which ever army has lots of) and hes gone.

This dex isnt sup par.. its balanced and a very usable dex.

The ruling on the Mawloc could make it useless and even worse if a lictor is around.

Acid Blood ruling could actually make the Pyrovore useful and other units like the fex just a little nastier.

The doom is not bad especially against foot sloggers but if he could cripple one or two units in transports so our anti tank could concentrate on other vehicles he becomes very valuable.

Would you call this dex good right now? I am not talking about power units etc just a good dex like IG or Orks.

Bassline
15-01-2010, 16:49
Mawloc Ruling.. no big deal.. there are other good options

Nid close combat weapons is probly the biggest.

Acid blood with lash whip ? i dont see it as that big, big bugs will mostly die from shooting.


Doom isnt even that good, and id be amazed if he effected units in transports.


At most he will get 1 high strength shot off, then 1 hit of str 8 (which ever army has lots of) and hes gone.

This dex isnt sup par.. its balanced and a very usable dex.

Expect poor necrons with only there heavy having a S8 (well S9) shot what misses so much for its points value and other better things in heavy for them

SPYDER68
15-01-2010, 16:50
Id say its a good dex, and so far i enjoy its unit choices.

Its not strong like IG and orks. but its on a decent average.

Its not that big of a deal if mawloc ends up useless, it can just go into the useless unit catagory just like other codex's have.

besides, Trygon ? yes please.

Vepr
15-01-2010, 16:53
The book isnt bad.. but its not good.

Ok, not trying to call you but you said this in another thread.

Honestly I would not put this dex up with IG and Orks but like I have said I would not call it bad.

SPYDER68
15-01-2010, 16:57
Yep.

IG and Orks are good.
Space wolves are good

Marines, Nids, and others arent bad, but still good and fun list, they just struggle vs the 2-3 high end competetive armies.

Cheese is a food, not an army.
Codex's arent Overpowered to me, some are just newer and work better in 5th. (codex Creep?)

IG is mass shooty.. amazing transports and lots of good choices.. to me.. that is a good codex. Its well written, and many different unit selections.

ehlijen
15-01-2010, 21:29
Even if the Mawloc ends up not being able to aim to come out directly underneath enemy models, you can still place it right next to them and either hope for a good scatter or catch part of the unit under the template.
That might even be better in some cases: Use it to bunch units up more closely before hitting them with other blast weapons rather than spreading them out and putting a friendly unit smack in the middle.

Far more crippling is the (clearcut and loopholeproof) fact of how easy it is to hide out of his reach on terrain heavy boards. Ruins (either higher floors or low ceilings on the ground floor), dense forests with unremovable trees, concrete tank traps with gaps to small to put him between, intact buildings, there's just so many places where you might not be able to put the model and thus would therefore trigger a mishap even with his fancy rules.
Now some of these even make sense: things that would entail significant concrete bracing in the ground are probably hard to dig through, tunnellers popping into existance on bridges or upper floors is just silly etc. These things probably need discussing before the game.

hendybadger
15-01-2010, 23:54
I know this is a little off topic but, what is the problem with the Mawloc rules?

chaos0xomega
16-01-2010, 00:07
I've tabled space wolves players, I've tabled IG players, and well... haven't played 5th edition orks yet, but I'm pretty sure I can table them too. The new nid book is fine, if you actually play with it a bit, you can find that you can still very happily powergame with it.

catbarf
16-01-2010, 00:10
I know this is a little off topic but, what is the problem with the Mawloc rules?

The Mawloc seems designed to DS into enemy units and damages them when it burrows up, but by RAW there is a possibility that you are not allowed to intentionally DS into enemies, rendering the main attraction of the Mawloc a gimmick at best.

hendybadger
16-01-2010, 00:16
The Mawloc seems designed to DS into enemy units and damages them when it burrows up, but by RAW there is a possibility that you are not allowed to intentionally DS into enemies, rendering the main attraction of the Mawloc a gimmick at best.

It seems fine to me. Exactly what phrase is the concern?

ehlijen
16-01-2010, 00:20
The problem is that you're meant to put the model down on the table where you aim to deepstrike before rolling for scatter. If enemy models are in the way, you can't 'put it down on the table' there, implying that you can't pick that spot as a deep strike target.

Please see my previous post as why I don't think that's the actual problem with the Mawloc either way and how it can still do its thing either way.

hendybadger
16-01-2010, 00:22
It doesnt say anything about putting the model down. It only mentions the template.
Even says at the end to replace the template with the Mawloc.
Just cant seem to see the problem here

ehlijen
16-01-2010, 00:23
Not in the Mawloc rules, in the deep strike rules, sorry.

hendybadger
16-01-2010, 00:25
The wording of a Codex always trumps the wording of the rule book. So I am going by the phrase about placing the Mawloc after the template. Imagine the blast as a pre-deepstrike action/phase

Shadowfax
16-01-2010, 00:26
hendybadger, go read the 10 page thread in 40K Rules instead of hashing out the debate again in here.

hendybadger
16-01-2010, 00:28
Apologies. Didnt look there before I saw the point in this thread. So was just wondering. Ill just play as I see the rules