PDA

View Full Version : Popularity of the Tyranids



Comrade Penguin
20-09-2011, 15:46
Let me start by saying that this is not a thread asking how competitive the tyranids are so let's not open that can of worms. I was wondering how strong the playerbase is (if there still is one) and how GW now views this army.

Most of you know that the nid veterans are not pleased with this incarnation of our army. Out of the four nid players at my local game shop, three of us have shelved our armies and started working on others. The only remaining player is a bit young and just getting started with the tyranids. From what I have heard from other players and through my travels to other game shops this seems to be a general theme amongst tyranid players.

I am sure by this point GW has noticed the discontent amongst the tyranid players. Even if they don't view online forums they certainly must have noticed that sales for the bugs are down in comparison to other non-marine armies. Hell they probably have a warehouse full of pyrovores sitting around somewhere:p

So this begs the question: What is GW doing about this? Just recently we have received rumors that IG will be getting yet another wave of releases. My memory isn't what it used to be but I'm pretty sure they have gotten 2 waves of splash releases since their codex launched. This leaves nid players scratching their heads. What about the tervigons and spore pods? If GW noticed that tyranids are currently unpopular why wouldn't they release units that would significantly help the army. I am pretty sure that I would jump back in if they released spore pods.

And finally, what does the future look like for our beloved bugs? If sales are bad GW, in its infinite wisdom, could interpret this as a lack of interest in the army. Consequently, they may put nids on the back burner for years like they have done with DE and necrons.

So tyranid (and non-nid players):
How do you feel the army is fairing in terms of sales and popularity? Do you still run your bugs on a regular basis? What do you think GW has in store for the nids in the future?

mightymconeshot
20-09-2011, 17:19
I feel like they completely changed the feel of the army from being a horde to a more DE style play. A come from every angle and overwhelm. It is probably getting new players but not many old ones.

Nids were my second army and I used to play them fairly regularly as I ran a first early second invasion style. Now they only come out to be used to introduce my friends to the game.
I feel like they are going to get another release but not till the cash cow that is IG stops. Maybe a post holiday one or spring. I hope they will not be put on the back burner as to me it is one of the more iconic armies out there. But with GK and Sisters and DE all getting new dex some army does need to go back there.

Souleater
20-09-2011, 17:29
At the local game shop Nids make up half of the Xenos armies. MEQ about for about two thirds of armies overall.

I've only seen one new Dark Eldar player since their new codex.

Vampiric16
20-09-2011, 17:34
I still play my nids. I love everything about them, the models, the fluff, even the rules.
Ok, a fair few things in the latest codex didn't make sense, but I can live with that.
On the upside, I can finally field a real horde thanks to the points decrease in hormagaunts and gargoyles. I can dish out the hurt at range with the new hive guard and tyrannofex, basically a tyranid tank.
You won't see me ditch this army anytime soon.

GrogDaTyrant
20-09-2011, 17:45
I feel like they completely changed the feel of the army from being a horde to a more DE style play. A come from every angle and overwhelm. It is probably getting new players but not many old ones.

That also happened to Orks... just not to the extreme that the Nids experienced.

Most of the veteran Ork players looked at the new codex with a very "meh... this is it?" attitude, and subsequently felt like they were making-do with what's been given. The playstyle changed from powerhouse CC army that nobody wants to go near, and more into a strikes-last versatile army, that requires CC to reliably deal with AV 13+.

The players who are 'most happy' with the new Ork codex, tend to be the new players.

I think the main difference though, is that the Nid codex was designed quit a bit worse, and the Ork veterans are a (very) tenacious lot who are quite used to making do with what little they've been given.

Comrade Penguin
20-09-2011, 18:16
The players who are 'most happy' with the new Ork codex, tend to be the new players.


This is what I see with the nid codex. Most of the most enthusiastic nid players are those who started with the 5th ed codex. Those of us who own spinegants, flyrants, sniperfexs, and ranged warriors are pretty annoyed by GW's nerf of the old units. People tell us to adapt, but they never had to rip bolters off their marines or lasguns off their guardsmen.

Dreachon
20-09-2011, 18:26
At my local clubs, Nids beeing hardly played or selled there, still boxes from their orignal release last year are on the shelves, not a very good sign if you ask me.

The fact that sofar nothing is heard of the supposed 2nd wave is also to me another bad sign.

Rated_lexxx
20-09-2011, 18:26
That also happened to Orks... just not to the extreme that the Nids experienced.

Most of the veteran Ork players looked at the new codex with a very "meh... this is it?" attitude, and subsequently felt like they were making-do with what's been given. The playstyle changed from powerhouse CC army that nobody wants to go near, and more into a strikes-last versatile army, that requires CC to reliably deal with AV 13+.

The players who are 'most happy' with the new Ork codex, tend to be the new players.

I think the main difference though, is that the Nid codex was designed quit a bit worse, and the Ork veterans are a (very) tenacious lot who are quite used to making do with what little they've been given.

What the new ork codex gave me was options to not have to play green tide CC, while at the same time I can still play it the old school way.

The biggest draw back to CC with ork is the no retreat rule but this is all for another thread I suppose.

I think the problem with nids is two things...there not marines. Laugh if you want but marines get a lot more love then other armies.

There also not a top army. There still good but when you see a 12 year old kid stomping people with GKs it makes you think why play this.

Finn
20-09-2011, 18:31
I agree with Vampiric in that I feel like I can now field an actual horde...but I feel a bit like the special child in the room when I do so, given the focus that was given to Tervigons, Trygons (for which I feel even MORE miffed, since I sculpted a Gargantuan-sized one (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172263)), and so forth. And the Doom just pisses me off, because I refuse to use him but he's so ridiculously good. So...there's that.

And my Hive Tyrants/Carnifexes/Warriors? Just forget about those guys. Feels like the core of my army was invalidated either through nerfs or points hikes to the edge of "not worth taking".

Lastly, and perhaps this is most important, I was just getting into the swing of a sculpting style/rhythm to build creatures from IA and new versions of the old Armorcast models when the book dropped and killed my enthusiasm. So I have a bunch of base parts, for which money was dished out, for sculpting projects that I have no desire to complete.

No, I'm not bitter at all. Nids were my first, and I still love the paint scheme I have on them, but I haven't played them in an organized setting since...I can't even remember. As for my group, there are/were 4 of us who played the bugs at the time the codex dropped. My buddy and I stopped playing them after testing a handful of new builds and finding we didn't like the flavor. Another guy didn't play very often, but stayed faithful to the army (for the record, he still uses the same units - stealers, broodlord(s), horms, fexes, and a tyrant). And the last guy liked to play both competitive and fun, and found himself shelving a lot of his painstakingly converted winged minis while modeling up a couple Tervis and pods and fielding Doom. It's his only army, and he's unhappy with feeling forced to use certain units or be irrelevant.

And then there was one guy who picked up his old bugs off the shelf because he got excited about sculpting Tervis and Tyrannofexes. So I guess GW is kind of 3-for-5 there.

GrogDaTyrant
20-09-2011, 18:48
What the new ork codex gave me was options to not have to play green tide CC, while at the same time I can still play it the old school way.

The biggest draw back to CC with ork is the no retreat rule but this is all for another thread I suppose.

For me, it's the 'always strike last', No Retreat, and inability to catch any unit that flees from combat. Morale is also substantially worse now, for everything other than Boy mobs and Stormboyz.

Without derailing too much, you could get plenty of options with the Orks prior to their current codex, as well. The KOS list gave you all the Speed Kult stuff you needed, and was quite a bit better than what the current one lets you do. And the Clan rules allowed for some amazing variety by just tweaking a few things. I fondly remember running my Shoota-horde Deathskulls, with their large numbers of Lascannons, Autocannons, and KFFs. It performed exceedingly well, in the era where people believed CC was the only way to run Orks.



There also not a top army. There still good but when you see a 12 year old kid stomping people with GKs it makes you think why play this.

That is a very good point, sadly... Much of 5th ed has become what I've termed as 'Gimmick Edition'. There's plenty of no-brainer armies and lists, that a dead-monkey could use effectively. Armies like Tyranids, and to a lesser extent Dark Eldar, require much more work and thought to make effective.

I think that the biggest problem to Tyranids however, is not the codex itself... But rather the FAQ they received. Certain things like the Doom practically begged for a nerf or at least a points adjustment. But other FAQ rulings (like Shadow of the Warp) was nothing more than a swift kick for no apparent reason. I do have grumbling with parts of the codex, notably how expensive the Carnifex and Tyrannofex are, as well as (yet again) making it questionably worthwhile to include Lictors. But I think the real setback to their performance was in the FAQ rulings.

Dreachon
20-09-2011, 19:09
But I think the real setback to their performance was in the FAQ rulings.

Don't forget the rather odd ruling against having a prime with warriors in a single pod.

Threeshades
20-09-2011, 19:15
I am clinging on to my nids as hard as i can but I really don't like the way they play right now. I whip them out every now and then to see if something works and then later put them back into the shelf disappointed that it doesn't.
I love the models and fluff for nids, and I am a general fan of swarm races like these (compare Xenomorphs, Zerg, Arachnoids, ants etc) that's why I refuse to let go of them.

Comrade Penguin
20-09-2011, 19:22
I am clinging on to my nids as hard as i can but I really don't like the way they play right now. I whip them out every now and then to see if something works and then later put them back into the shelf disappointed that it doesn't.
I love the models and fluff for nids, and I am a general fan of swarm races like these (compare Xenomorphs, Zerg, Arachnoids, ants etc) that's why I refuse to let go of them.

I am in the same boat as you on this. I've been trying new things as well. Usually about once a month I'll pull out my nids and proxy up some units to try new things, but I have met nothing but disappointment. If you stray too far from the tried and tested tervigon/hiveguard spam you soon find yourself outclassed by even slightly competitive lists. I usually shove my tyranids back under bed in disgust after these games.

Macragge
20-09-2011, 20:26
I can offer a slightly different perspective, as a player for over 13 years, yet a relative newcomer to the Tyranids, as I started a small collection about 6 months before the 5th ed codex arrived.

What I like is the ability to flood the table with minis, and to be totally honest, I quite like the rules for *most* of the codex entries. However, I am in agreement that in order to actually have a nearly competitive army you tend to have to conform to a specific build. Fortunately, it's one that I'm moderately happy to field, but I'd like to have more competitive variety.

Couple that to the ever illusive second wave of models... yes I could convert a Carnifex into a Tervigon, but I don't want to, it's not my bag.

I get the general feeling from the 5th ed Tyranids Codex that it was a little too rushed, and Robin Cruddace got a bit too carried away with certain aspects, which is a shame, because I actually quite liked his previous incarnation of the Guard Codex (Again, slightly carried away in certain aspects though).

I feel on the whole that the codex was designed with too much focus on specific units and rules that have no real place in the Tyranid genre, thus avoiding some of the fundamental aspects of what makes the Tyranids what we all consider they should be, in fear of the end result being a little too boring to the newcomer, which is a real shame.

I'll only close on a slight positive in saying that I still think this edition's codex IS an improvement on the last, and I don't think the 'Nids have ever had a codex which I've felt is really right for them.

Okuto
20-09-2011, 21:54
I don't think it's a good sign when you go into your local store and find nid boxes with their old pricetags on them....

though it's ok cause the chaos marines stock still have the old artwork and old prices....

Vipoid
20-09-2011, 22:17
In my gaming group of friends, I'm now the only one who uses tyranids. One other person used to use them, but now they've been shelved completely, in favour of GK.

I think the main thing wrong with the codex is that it was written by Robin Cruddace, who appears to have been using some sort of costing system that makes sense only in his on mind. It took into consideration neither the mech-heavy metagame, nor the abundance of S8 weapons (most frequently rockets). Then DE and GK were released, and hurt us even more.

Essentially, I'm usually left with the sad choice of making a moderatly competative but dull army, by ignoring about 80-90% of the codex, or using units I like (or liked in 4th edition, and am trying desperatly to like in this one), with the unfortunate knowledge that they will diminish my chances of victory.

Had I the funds to buy a different army, I would probably try collecting DE, and use my nids less frequently (though I'd be reluctant to shelve them altogether). As it stands, however, my only other army is Necrons, which I shelved last Christmas. Nids at least have some options, whereas I find necrons incredibly dull and absolutely no fun to play.

As an aside, I think I get the most enjoyment out of my nids when playing relatively small games (500-750 pts). It seems the range when I can get the most out of my creatures, and when my opponent will usually lack the necessary firepower to easily take out my Prime/warriors/MCs or whatever else I decide to use.

teheuax
20-09-2011, 22:56
In my gaming group of friends, I'm now the only one who uses tyranids. One other person used to use them, but now they've been shelved completely, in favour of GK.

I think the main thing wrong with the codex is that it was written by Robin Cruddace, who appears to have been using some sort of costing system that makes sense only in his on mind. It took into consideration neither the mech-heavy metagame, nor the abundance of S8 weapons (most frequently rockets). Then DE and GK were released, and hurt us even more.

Essentially, I'm usually left with the sad choice of making a moderatly competative but dull army, by ignoring about 80-90% of the codex, or using units I like (or liked in 4th edition, and am trying desperatly to like in this one), with the unfortunate knowledge that they will diminish my chances of victory.

Had I the funds to buy a different army, I would probably try collecting DE, and use my nids less frequently (though I'd be reluctant to shelve them altogether). As it stands, however, my only other army is Necrons, which I shelved last Christmas. Nids at least have some options, whereas I find necrons incredibly dull and absolutely no fun to play.

As an aside, I think I get the most enjoyment out of my nids when playing relatively small games (500-750 pts). It seems the range when I can get the most out of my creatures, and when my opponent will usually lack the necessary firepower to easily take out my Prime/warriors/MCs or whatever else I decide to use.
But atleast necrons are being updated here very soon, where nids dont have one in sight for awhile. Theres your silver lining.

Finn
20-09-2011, 23:05
In my gaming group of friends, I'm now the only one who uses tyranids. One other person used to use them, but now they've been shelved completely, in favour of GK.

I think the main thing wrong with the codex is that it was written by Robin Cruddace, who appears to have been using some sort of costing system that makes sense only in his on mind. It took into consideration neither the mech-heavy metagame, nor the abundance of S8 weapons (most frequently rockets). Then DE and GK were released, and hurt us even more.

Essentially, I'm usually left with the sad choice of making a moderatly competative but dull army, by ignoring about 80-90% of the codex, or using units I like (or liked in 4th edition, and am trying desperatly to like in this one), with the unfortunate knowledge that they will diminish my chances of victory.

Had I the funds to buy a different army, I would probably try collecting DE, and use my nids less frequently (though I'd be reluctant to shelve them altogether). As it stands, however, my only other army is Necrons, which I shelved last Christmas. Nids at least have some options, whereas I find necrons incredibly dull and absolutely no fun to play.

As an aside, I think I get the most enjoyment out of my nids when playing relatively small games (500-750 pts). It seems the range when I can get the most out of my creatures, and when my opponent will usually lack the necessary firepower to easily take out my Prime/warriors/MCs or whatever else I decide to use.

Indeed, I think Nids could build an "OK" force for Kill Team.

nedius
20-09-2011, 23:13
To answer the original post question - what GW are doing about what is a percieved widespread dissatisfaction with nids, is to do nothing.

Im 90% sure the reason we've not had a second wave was that they realised how poorly the new codex was ultimately recieved, and that after initial sales of the big new beasts, I think sales must have spiraled downwards pretty quickly.

Once they realised that this was not going to be a strong release, there was no desire to throw fuel onto a fire that they could see wasn't going to re-kindle. So, they held them back. That way, they save themselves some work - next time they need some filler release, they've got the nid stuff on tap.

as for the future, if the rumors that the nid codex was written with 6th ed in mind, then I think that they will release the 2nd wave to tie in with 6th, when the 'codex will make sense' or some such.

Which is pretty shabby, if you ask me. Gw clearly realised they had not made a success of the nids, and basically left them to rot and moved onto more successful releases. They probably actually blame us - the players - for not buying more, rather than themselves for a poor release.

Actually, that might not be true. I could not believe that GW are not aware of the reception nids got. But, then how do you explain the FAQ? Oh, people aren't happy - I know, let's make it WORSE! I just don't get it.

Comrade Penguin
21-09-2011, 00:45
@nedius

I think you hit the nail on the head when it comes to GW's opinion of tyranids and their playerbase. GW probably does blame tyranid players for giving the new codex bad word of mouth and for poor profits. The have a history of downplaying the internet community, including deleting the forum that used to exist on their website. When people began complaining about their product they must have assumed that it was the internet culture. Unfortunately that disgust for the new codex could be found in the local game shops, and the customers voted with their wallets. They don't understand that if you make a poor product, it simply won't sell as well as the better products you make.

As to Cruddace, I think he should go back to LotR or some other game system. He seems to have no concept of proper points costing. Guard get dirt cheap chimeras and special weapons that can be spammed for incredibly WAAC lists. On the other hand you have the laughable carnifexs, pyrovores, and lictors. These creatures should all be at least 20 points cheaper for what they do. And finally you have the new SOB codex, which nerfed the faith system yet kept most of the points the same. Let Ward and Kelly write the books from here on please.

PostinDirty
21-09-2011, 06:42
I am in the same boat as you on this. I've been trying new things as well. Usually about once a month I'll pull out my nids and proxy up some units to try new things, but I have met nothing but disappointment. If you stray too far from the tried and tested tervigon/hiveguard spam you soon find yourself outclassed by even slightly competitive lists. I usually shove my tyranids back under bed in disgust after these games.

heh, going for the complete opposite of hive guard/tervi spam has given me a better win ratio, but there's no point going on at length about that - its fairly well established that the all-reserves list does pretty damned well as far as nid armies go.

ironically, i picked up nids because i wanted an army that was more forgiving than my dark angels. this was just before the latest codex so i was a bit miffed at having to adapt so much, just as i started to get into the swing of things. having said that, i rolled with it and managed to get some utility from the army despite the cries of foul coming from the internet. even now i find that its an easier army to use than space marines, with the exception of a few match-ups.

end of the day, in my area i see more nid armies as far as xenos are concerned, and people play decent games with them. but this still comprises of only a handful of players, new zealand being as small as it is, so they fail to capture a decent consumer base here. i'd imagine trends are very different elsewhere.

MrCarbohydrate
21-09-2011, 07:52
It's entirely possible that it's down to being a newer store, and therefore newer players, but, man, the last time I went to this place, there were 12 players. 2 IG, 2 Space Marine, 1 Eldar, 7 Tyranids.

Portland is like the twilight zone for everything, including 40K apparently.

IcedAnimals
21-09-2011, 08:07
I just have to ask why would GW give nids a second wave when the models aren't selling already. People stopped playing nids and stopped buying what models were out because of the codex. Releasing new models for units that still suck does not make GW money.

The last army released also had a ton of models to release that had nothing to do with the imperium. If GW made the models for the nids second wave before they realized they would never sale, they are just waiting for a slot with relatively little else they can put them in. And unless the necron codex quadruples the number of different models/units I actually expect that codex to have relatively few release waves which should leave room for a second nid release.

Angelwing
21-09-2011, 09:35
I can't comment on how popular nids are as my gaming community is quite small. We have one other occasional nid player who has a small force.
I still use mine as my main army, still pick up additional models from ebay and I have recently rebased all of them.
The book was unexpected and when read through felt rushed with too many 'eh?' moments. However, I adapted and used 'counts as' where appropriate and continue to field whatever I want.
The FAQ was very strange, and a couple of rulings have been ignored within my group as they are a bit silly.
The lack of a second wave release is a bit disappointing. It's fast approaching 2 years since the last stuff (finecast rerelease withstanding...).

Plus points: New models, options to field old models 'officially' (spike rifles, stranglewebs), 5th ed compliant codex.
Minus points: Rushed non play tested codex, silly FAQ, lack of second wave models, poor price structure that discourages multiple units.

Balerion
21-09-2011, 09:59
as for the future, if the rumors that the nid codex was written with 6th ed in mind, then I think that they will release the 2nd wave to tie in with 6th, when the 'codex will make sense' or some such.

Let's try to keep things straight. As far as I'm aware, that was never an actual rumour, at least not one tied to anybody with even a shred of credibility. It was, rather, the speculation of a few anonymous posters based on the public rumours about 6th edition.

Let's not let GW off the hook for the lousy Tyranid codex with a revisionist history slant about how it was "designed for 6th edition". Several other codexes came out after it that were clearly meant to thrive in 5th edition. GW has never demonstrated a track record of seeding upcoming edition releases several slots ahead in the release cycle. The idea that the Tyranid codex is designed for 6th is flat out absurd ************.

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 10:16
But atleast necrons are being updated here very soon, where nids dont have one in sight for awhile. Theres your silver lining.

That's true, but a) updated codexes frequently change the central theme of the army, so I might end up not liking necrons anymore. b) Remember - we're using the GW idea of 'soon', which can be up to about 4 years. :p

chromedog
21-09-2011, 10:32
People tell us to adapt, but they never had to rip bolters off their marines or lasguns off their guardsmen.

I have never had to rip boltguns off the marines or lasguns off the guardsmen.
I have used the same marines since 3rd ed, and a chunk of the remainder go back to RT. None have had weapon swaps over the years. None. A bolter is a bolter is a bolter.

My guard uses a combination of RT, 2nd ed and 3rd ed+ troopers.
The lasguns may have changed their look, but the lasguns are still lasguns.

I'm one of the ones who have "sucked it up" and adapted - but my armies made it easy by not going with the more "out there" options.

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 10:47
Let's try to keep things straight. As far as I'm aware, that was never an actual rumour, at least not one tied to anybody with even a shred of credibility. It was, rather, the speculation of a few anonymous posters based on the public rumours about 6th edition.

Let's not let GW off the hook for the lousy Tyranid codex with a revisionist history slant about how it was "designed for 6th edition". Several other codexes came out after it that were clearly meant to thrive in 5th edition. GW has never demonstrated a track record of seeding upcoming edition releases several slots ahead in the release cycle. The idea that the Tyranid codex is designed for 6th is flat out absurd ************.

To be honest, I really can't see why any tyranid players would want to believe this rumour. If true, it would imply that not only have we had to endure this atrociously-written codex all through 5th edition, we'll have no chance of getting a new one in 6th edition. :cries:

Chainaxe07
21-09-2011, 11:07
Hi all,
well, not a nid fan myself (i dont like the concept, and hate most of the models).
I have to say, however, in my gaming club we have no less than 6 nid forces, more often than not backed up by forgeworld creepies.
This is just about the number of new dark eldar (before the new codex we only had 1...), and not much below orks and craftworld eldar (or chaos and IG, actually).
Its twice as much as tau, not to mention necrons.
Not bad for brainless giant bugs from the galactic nowhere.
so, are you sure they are not popular? If you compare them to anything but marines, they seem to be holding their own pretty darn well, imho. Unexpectedly so, i may add.

-Loki-
21-09-2011, 11:16
so, are you sure they are not popular? If you compare them to anything but marines, they seem to be holding their own pretty darn well, imho. Unexpectedly so, i may add.

It depends entirely on the area. Honestly, I'd say the competitiveness of the area breeds different levels of interest in them.

Dorn's Arrow
21-09-2011, 11:18
I have never had to rip boltguns off the marines or lasguns off the guardsmen.
I have used the same marines since 3rd ed, and a chunk of the remainder go back to RT. None have had weapon swaps over the years. None. A bolter is a bolter is a bolter.

My guard uses a combination of RT, 2nd ed and 3rd ed+ troopers.
The lasguns may have changed their look, but the lasguns are still lasguns.

I'm one of the ones who have "sucked it up" and adapted - but my armies made it easy by not going with the more "out there" options.

You mean 'out there' options, like Termagants using the default weapon they came with which is now a 1pt upgrade?

ghoulio
21-09-2011, 11:28
I remember reading somewhere that the 5th ed Tyranids are only above Sisters of Battle and Necrons in terms of 40k sales now which is saying something because they USED to be one of the best selling Xenos armies.

For me I am a long time Tyranid player (started in 2nd ed) and have painted 2 different 4000+point armies and until we get either a MASSIVE Errata/FAQ or a new Codex all together I won't be playing this army. I have put in well over 50 games and played in 9 tournaments with the new book and I have done fairly well (keep in mind I havent played a game against DE or GK). My army is sitting in storage, and that is where it will stay.

People keep talking about how they wish the 2nd Wave for models would come out and I personally just 100% don't see the point until we get better rules. Another thing is that literally every single Tyranid Player I know has just converted all their own versions of the models to be released, so it is a big case of too little, too late.

I remember when the 4th ed Tyranid Codex came out and thinking how awesome that book was. They streamlined the 3rd ed book, fixed some of the main issues (things like Genestealers not having fleet of foot) and made a very fluffy, fun to use book. That codex's only real mistake was allowing Carnifex's to be taken as elites (which always really bothered me and it was something I never did). This book 100% DIDN'T need a complete tear down and re-write. What the 5th ed codex should of been was an updating and streamlining of the rules (ie. removing altering stats and variable weapon strengths), adding in some new fun and interesting units that filled the gaps and to have some of the existing units get point changes (MCs were slightly too cheap and little gribblies were too expensive). I think I can safely say that is what Tyranid players wanted. Instead long time Tyranid players just got the middle finger as all the 4th ed throw backs got significantly worse and there was such an obvious push towards almost making us buy the new models as they were so much better then the current ones. This is even to the point of making us re-buy/re-arm our Termagants to flesh borers since spine fists are now more expensive.

The only reason I am even in the hobby anymore is because Xenos players got literally the exact opposite of Tyranids in Dark Eldar. The old time player base was treated with a huge amount of respect as all the older units got better and were brought in line with the newer ones. All the rules in the book make complete sense, with tonnes of flavorful/competitive options and all the player's choices are based on player preference and not a gimped list which is filled with obvious/dubious choices. I love playing this army and will be happy to play it for years to come until the old Nids can be dusted off and brought out of retirement with the release of their next rule-set.

le_quack
21-09-2011, 11:48
I played nids in the 3rd edition

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 13:40
This book 100% DIDN'T need a complete tear down and re-write. What the 5th ed codex should of been was an updating and streamlining of the rules (ie. removing altering stats and variable weapon strengths), adding in some new fun and interesting units that filled the gaps and to have some of the existing units get point changes (MCs were slightly too cheap and little gribblies were too expensive). I think I can safely say that is what Tyranid players wanted. Instead long time Tyranid players just got the middle finger as all the 4th ed throw backs got significantly worse and there was such an obvious push towards almost making us buy the new models as they were so much better then the current ones. This is even to the point of making us re-buy/re-arm our Termagants to flesh borers since spine fists are now more expensive.

Whilst I agree that the 4th edition rules needed streamlining, I don't think that necessarily required the complete removal of variable-strength weapons and stat-increases. In fact, you could argue that that's exactly what we got in the 5th edition codex - and look how it turned out.

Personally I believe that one of the main problems was that Cruddace was obsessed with streamlining the codex, at the expense of all the diversity that's so iconic of the tyranids. I think that, rather than removing the stat-upgrades altogether, it might have been better to assign them into a few different groupings, centered on a particular trait (speed, resilience, etc.).

mightymconeshot
21-09-2011, 14:55
The book really just looks like a codex designed to sell new models. It doesnt really look streamlined to me but rather cobbled together. I feel like the new weapon list just made it much more difficult as there is alot more special rules you have to remeber. The old codex was not that hard to figure out. Before it was more along the lines of okay my gaunts are strength 3 and it shoots at my strength so 3. If you can not add/subtract one or two in about 3 4 secs as you pick up dice and announce it to who your playing with then well you shouldnt really be in the game.

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 15:15
The book really just looks like a codex designed to sell new models. It doesnt really look streamlined to me because most of the time in the old codex but rather cobbled together. I feel like the new weapon list just made it much more difficult as there is alot more special rules you have to remeber. Before it was more along the lines of okay my gaunts are strength 3 and it shoots at my strength so 3. If you can not add/subtract one or two in about 3 4 secs as you pick up dice and announce it to who your playing with then well you shouldnt really be in the game.

To me it seems designed to sell 2 new models - the trygon and the hive guard. I can't say (with a straight face at least) that the codex was designed to sell the pyrovore, and I don't think any other new models have been released.

I really don't see the problem with the old weapon system. Yes, their strength could vary, but only between games. You could easily include the strength of each weapon in your army list, should either you or your opponents prefer it.

I have to say though, I don't think the new weapon list made things any more difficult, because (much like the codex itself) most of it can be safely ignored and won't hamper your army in any way.

Ventus
21-09-2011, 15:53
ghoulio - +1, couldn't agree more.

Ref the OP, I cannot see GW releasing new nid models if nid sales are low and because of the time lag that has allowed so many to convert models which would result in many not wanting to fork out outrageous prices for new kits. If GW had already produced new nid model kits and have them sitting in a warehouse than it might be just waiting for the right moment.

Even though I feel that GW should have released kits for most of the models and biomorphs (eg warrior wings/swords/lash whips), part of me hopes that GW will not release a tervigon or T-fex kit. That part of me naively hopes that a codex rewrite in a couple of years will see these creatures 'squatted' as I dislike them both (the carnifex should have filled the T-fex anti-tank role and the tervigon concept - a walking birthing chamber in a battle - is absurd and the execution was poor (why can spinegaunts not be spawned - oh yeah they had to be more expensive than termagants so that veteran nid players might be forced to buy more gants boxes), etc.

To increase sales and make the codex work much better GW needs to release a proper and detailed errata/FAQ to fix the old FAQ and fix many of the rules/stats/costs that are prohibitive in making a variety of effective builds. Unfortunately GW does not give me reason to hope. I wouldn't be surprised that if 6th edition does come out next year that they will release an errata for each army, but the errata will leave out many areas that need adjustment and screw up areas that didn't. I could see with 6th edition that GW releases a nid errata to fix a 5th edition problem that now has no bearing or use in the new version of the game.

jason_sation
21-09-2011, 16:09
According to rumors, the reason you haven't seen much from the bugs, is due to the new Demiurg in the upcoming Tau Codex. The Squats are returning and squatting the bugs!

Megad00mer
21-09-2011, 17:08
Overall, I'd imagine Tyranid popularity is at an all time low. Unfortunately, it seems that GW's response to this ultimately makes the Tyranids even more unpopular.

The reasons why Tyranid players view this Codex as crap has been discussed to death in tons of other threads, so I won't list specifics, but suffice it to say, even when the book was first released in Jan '10, Tyranid players were for the most part, unhappy. Still the codex was somewhat usable. It seemed rushed, and unfinished in areas but most were confident that a comprehensive FAQ would fix the codex enough so that Tyranids could at least be viewed as a solid, balanced mid-tier book.

Six months later, GW finally released the FAQ and it took an already struggling army and kicked it soundly in the naughty bits. That was the straw that broke the Carnifex's carapace. At that point, many Tyranid players shelved their armies, and those players who wanted to start Nids but were waiting for the FAQ to fix the problems decided to spend their money on other projects. 4 months later, I think Dark Eldar saw a large portion of that unspent "bug money". Tyranid sales which were stuggling before, soundly tanked.

Now GW could have responded by fixing the FAQ (or proof-reading/play-testing the damn thing before putting it up) and releasing some desperately needed models the codex is still missing to this day. Even one of these two moves would have helped Tyranid sales dramatically. But no.

GW's response to an army that isn't selling is to not bother with it. To focus on newer shinier projects that they feel have a better chance to make money. Look at Dark Eldar. They sold exceedingly well and as a result there's been like 6 waves of models at this point. It's not a bad move business wise, but it does alienate and anger a certain portion of their customer base. Dark Eldar now have a complete Court of the Archon range, while Tyranids are still missing core models.

It's a catch 22. The more GW ignores Tyranids the less popular they become. The less popular Tyranids become, the more GW will ignore them.

Here's hoping that 6th edition makes things better. 5th is a bust for the bugs.

GrogDaTyrant
21-09-2011, 17:17
I have never had to rip boltguns off the marines or lasguns off the guardsmen.
I have used the same marines since 3rd ed, and a chunk of the remainder go back to RT. None have had weapon swaps over the years. None. A bolter is a bolter is a bolter.

...

I'm one of the ones who have "sucked it up" and adapted - but my armies made it easy by not going with the more "out there" options.

Not all armies have had the luxury of doing that. Besides the obvious point of having to tear off the arms of termagaunts or warriors, I'd like to bring up another example. Imagine building an 'Ard Boy themed army, consisting of 3 full squads of 20. Let alone Tankbustas where only 3 models had Rokkits, Lootas modeled on IG weapon-team bases, or even Skarboyz. It's not fun to have standardized unit selections suddenly change, or become a 0-1 option, or cease to exist altogether.

Bonzai
21-09-2011, 17:25
I can kind of see the thought process behind the new codex... kind of. What were the biggest complaints about the 4th edition codex?

1. A lack of Anti-tank.

2. Carnifex'es were too good, and made Nid zilla almost a default competative list.

So what did they do? Toned down the fexes, and threw in the Trygon to fill in the slack. Then for anti-tank they threw in the Tyranofex, Hive Guard, changed up the Zoanthrope, and I am willing to bet that they toyed with the idea of giving the Pryrovore a melta shot (suddenly the model and rules make sense when you think about it). After that they did some stream lining and price modifications, threw in the Tervigon thinking it would make all the horde people happy, and called it a day with a job well done.

The end results were:

1. The people who had invested heavily into Carnifex'es were unhappy.

2. The design shift from 4th to 5th went from being open ended to stream lined, which made another segment of the player base unhappy, and invalidated many models weapon selections.

3. The Horde players were unhappy, because althought the price was reduced on many models, Synapse in general became more expensive. That, and they felt compelled to include tervigons in their army.

4. The player base that was used to playing on auto pilot with Nidzilla lists was unhappy, as they had to adapt, change their list, and learn to actually play and learn the nuances of their army.

5. The anti-tank is an improvement, no question. However it is focused mostly in the Elite slots, making it not as diverse and wide spread as it could be.

5. The codex had a rushed feel to it, with several sloppy rules right ups, and the FAQ actually prevents Nids from doing what other armies are freely able to do.

6. No second wave in a timely fashion.

7. An over all nerf on some key abilities. Such as no assault grenades, no eternal warrior, and synapse actually making units fearless, where before it gave the benifit with out the drawback.

8. Terrible internal codex balance.

9. Some of the next few codex releases completely nullify a large portion of the nids strategy (Init 6 force weapons, ranged poison weapons, anti-deep strike zones, etc...).

10. Units that had problems in the previous dex, were not really addressed (lictors).

Is it any wonder why people are pissed? Now that they have their codex, how many years will they have to wait for a new one? Yeah, I can't fault an angry Nid player.

That being said, I will probalably play mine more when Necrons come out, at least till most of the Necron bandwagoners move on. ;)

Kijamon
21-09-2011, 17:27
I don't get why Tervigons haven't been made yet?

Most armies would feature 1 if not 2 and they seem rather large in the drawing in their codex entry.

GW hates profit

Threeshades
21-09-2011, 17:55
I can kind of see the thought process behind the new codex... kind of. What were the biggest complaints about the 4th edition codex?

1. A lack of Anti-tank.
True enough


2. Carnifex'es were too good, and made Nid zilla almost a default competative list.

So what did they do? Toned down the fexes, and threw in the Trygon to fill in the slack. Then for anti-tank they threw in the Tyranofex, Hive Guard, changed up the Zoanthrope, and I am willing to bet that they toyed with the idea of giving the Pryrovore a melta shot (suddenly the model and rules make sense when you think about it). After that they did some stream lining and price modifications, threw in the Tervigon thinking it would make all the horde people happy, and called it a day with a job well done.
Carnifexes never were too good. They were just too exploitable by giving them double devourers or a Venom/Strangler combo (the latter of which by the way provided excellent anti-tank) at rather low costs and the rule that you could take them into Elites.
For any close combat or mixed range and CC build the costs were completely justified.

Funny enough I think having more different monstrous creatures wasn't a bad idea it seemed logical for tyranids to have a variety of monstrous creatures equal to the variety of vehicles of other races, but every one of them dwarfing carnifexes, after all they had been built up to in previous codices and even the fluff of the current one, was ridiculous. And the fact that they not only out-size but also outperform Carnies was a punch in the face.


The end results were:

1. The people who had invested heavily into Carnifex'es were unhappy.
So was anyone who just genuinely loved carnifexes, like me. I only had three of them and they weren't even the shooty configurations everyone else seemed to use.


2. The design shift from 4th to 5th went from being open ended to stream lined, which made another segment of the player base unhappy, and invalidated many models weapon selections.

3. The Horde players were unhappy, because althought the price was reduced on many models, Synapse in general became more expensive. That, and they felt compelled to include tervigons in their army.
Also other units apart from synapse that you need are too expensive.


4. The player base that was used to playing on auto pilot with Nidzilla lists was unhappy, as they had to adapt, change their list, and learn to actually play and learn the nuances of their army.
Couldn't say anything about that, since I never played that style, because I was always a horde player.
But seriously if the nuances of the army are blacking out the many overpriced/underperforming/useless options and unit, that's a pretty good reason to be dissatisfied.


5. The anti-tank is an improvement, no question. However it is focused mostly in the Elite slots, making it not as diverse and wide spread as it could be.
The anti-tank "improvements" were sloppily tacked on, they could have easily made venom cannons into a viable anti-vehicle option, but instead they were reduced to near complete uselessness as normal venom cannon, or extremely sub par choice in the form of a heavy venom cannon, and as a replacement we got hive guard and tyrannofexes.


5. The codex had a rushed feel to it, with several sloppy rules right ups, and the FAQ actually prevents Nids from doing what other armies are freely able to do.
Agreed.


6. No second wave in a timely fashion.
That's because the nids don't sell anymore after they messed them up. Compare Dark Eldar, who were extremely well received and they got wave after wave and now the only missing model is the Void Raven.


7. An over all nerf on some key abilities. Such as no assault grenades, no eternal warrior, and synapse actually making units fearless, where before it gave the benifit with out the drawback.

8. Terrible internal codex balance.
Now we're on the same page. :D


9. Some of the next few codex releases completely nullify a large portion of the nids strategy (Init 6 force weapons, ranged poison weapons, anti-deep strike zones, etc...).
....armies thoroughly armed with armor-bypassing instant death weaponry.


10. Units that had problems in the previous dex, were not really addressed (lictors).
Hormagaunts got better for their cost, but most stuff if it had issues before just got worse. Such as the removal of Eternal Warrior and trade of by an extra wound on Warrior class nids, which with the abundance of power fists and other instant death close combat just made them even worse.


Is it any wonder why people are pissed? Now that they have their codex, how many years will they have to wait for a new one? Yeah, I can't fault an angry Nid player.

That being said, I will probalably play mine more when Necrons come out, at least till most of the Necron bandwagoners move on. ;)
I detest both "bandwagonism" and the opposite notion thereof. Play your armies, wether people think you only have them for the "new and shiny" syndrome or not. You know why you have them and there is nothing wrong with it.

I'm intrigued by the advent of the new necron codex, i want to see if they might allow for sort of a mechanical monster army theme (like tomb stalkers, spyders (just less ugly), wraiths and others) rather than just the mechanical undead theme, because I would like that and seriously consider an army like that.



I don't get why Tervigons haven't been made yet?

Most armies would feature 1 if not 2 and they seem rather large in the drawing in their codex entry.

GW hates profit

As I've said before, nobody buys nids anymore, so although among those who do still play their nids a Tervigon model would be immensely popular (not considering those people who have already accomodated for their necessities by converting all their now useless carnifexes for this hypothetical situation), the target crowd would still be too small to waste time on at this point. GW at this point would probably make better profit by just releasing a new codex tyranids without any accompanying model releases.

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 17:58
3. The Horde players were unhappy, because althought the price was reduced on many models, Synapse in general became more expensive. That, and they felt compelled to include tervigons in their army.

Well, whilst prices have gone down for homogaunts and gargoyles, gaunts have actually gone up in price. You used to get spinefist models (which haven't changed) for 4pts/model, which was reasonable. The new ones cost 6pts/model, which is just stupid. Furthermore, although fleshborer gaunts are the same price, their weapons no longer get to reroll failed 'to wound' rolls, which can make a lot of difference. Finally, I think one of the main things that makes nid hordes so difficult to play, is that (unlike ork hordes) they're useless against the mech-heavy armies of 5th edition.



5. The anti-tank is an improvement, no question. However it is focused mostly in the Elite slots, making it not as diverse and wide spread as it could be.

I'm not so sure tbh. We certainly have good mid-range anti-transport firepower, in the form of hive guard. Zoanthropes can also provide decent clos-range anti-tank firepower (although being a psychic power, it's hardly reliable). However, our long-range anti-tank firepower has got a lot worse, following the nerfing of the venom cannon. Considering that nids already have rather obvious ways of dealing with tanks when up close, I'm not sure I'd really class this codex as an improvement, in terms of anti-tank weapons.

Threeshades
21-09-2011, 18:05
Well, whilst prices have gone down for homogaunts and gargoyles, gaunts have actually gone up in price. You used to get spinefist models (which haven't changed) for 4pts/model, which was reasonable. The new ones cost 6pts/model, which is just stupid. Furthermore, although fleshborer gaunts are the same price, their weapons no longer get to reroll failed 'to wound' rolls, which can make a lot of difference. Finally, I think one of the main things that makes nid hordes so difficult to play, is that (unlike ork hordes) they're useless against the mech-heavy armies of 5th edition.

You got your numbers mixed up. Spinegaunts were 5 points, Fleshborer-gaunts 6 points. Fleshborers went down a point losing power immensely though with the disappearance of living ammunition.
Spinegaunts went up one point with no benefit. Right now on basis of mathhammer Fleshborers and Spinefists are equally powerful but fists are still more expensive. Either way Termagants are and were too expensive for their actual use. The only thing making them worthwhile at the moment is the inclusion of a Tervigon that provides them with shenanigans like virtually free toxin, adrenalin and counter attack.


I'm not so sure tbh. We certainly have good mid-range anti-transport firepower, in the form of hive guard. Zoanthropes can also provide decent clos-range anti-tank firepower (although being a psychic power, it's hardly reliable). However, our long-range anti-tank firepower has got a lot worse, following the nerfing of the venom cannon. Considering that nids already have rather obvious ways of dealing with tanks when up close, I'm not sure I'd really class this codex as an improvement, in terms of anti-tank weapons.

I agree, but I still think that Hive Guards wouldn't have been necessesary as an addition to the pool of units if simply venom cannons had recieved decent rules to take care of such things.

Balerion
21-09-2011, 18:08
GW's response to an army that isn't selling is to not bother with it. To focus on newer shinier projects that they feel have a better chance to make money. Look at Dark Eldar. They sold exceedingly well and as a result there's been like 6 waves of models at this point. It's not a bad move business wise, but it does alienate and anger a certain portion of their customer base. Dark Eldar now have a complete Court of the Archon range, while Tyranids are still missing core models.

While the facts you mention cannot be disputed, I think it's important that we don't appear to hold this against the Dark Eldar in any way, shape or form. After all, they had to sit and live with their obsolete 3rd edition codex while we were getting multiple updates (all of which were somewhat earlier than expected/ necessary, IIRC). They deserve their 67 waves, whether or not they are profitable business decisions. ;)

Threeshades
21-09-2011, 18:14
While the facts you mention cannot be disputed, I think it's important that we don't appear to hold this against the Dark Eldar in any way, shape or form. After all, they had to sit and live with their obsolete 3rd edition codex while we were getting multiple updates (all of which were somewhat earlier than expected/ necessary, IIRC). They deserve their 67 waves, whether or not they are profitable business decisions. ;)

Nobody in their right mind holds this against Dark Eldar, or even GW. They have to make money in order to exist. And Dark Eldar surely deserved some love.

de Selby
21-09-2011, 18:16
More DE models is welcome as far as I am concerned, I just wish nids got as much love.

While the new codex has obvious problems (I tend to agree with a previous poster that they should have tweaked the last codex, not started again from scratch. Same problem as chaos, but at least not as bad as that), it includes a few new things that I really like. I just wish more of them had models.

When I play at all I still play tyranids. My mixed-up horde was impractical in the last edition and it's about the same now. However I'm not buying tyranids at the moment because there's nothing new to buy.

Finn
21-09-2011, 19:09
More DE models is welcome as far as I am concerned, I just wish nids got as much love.

While the new codex has obvious problems (I tend to agree with a previous poster that they should have tweaked the last codex, not started again from scratch. Same problem as chaos, but at least not as bad as that), it includes a few new things that I really like. I just wish more of them had models.

When I play at all I still play tyranids. My mixed-up horde was impractical in the last edition and it's about the same now. However I'm not buying tyranids at the moment because there's nothing new to buy.

I actually think the Tyranid book was a harder shafting. At least Chaos players could use the models they already had, albeit without as many special rules as before, to make viable armies.

Hive Guards might not have been a necessary addition to the book, but I feel like they fit and fill a role that, even with the previous Venom Cannon, was empty. I still detest the addition of Tervigons and Tyrannofexes. I can live with the addition of the Trygon, but it irks me given its Gargantuan Creature origin.

As for the 4th edition book's lack of anti-tank...yeah, it lacked ranged anti-tank firepower. You were pretty much forced to take Zoanthropes, and sure it's a psychic power but the unreliable part is the rolling to hit, not the psychic test. Nids were always about needing to bust tanks up close, while shaking them with repeated venom cannon (or deathspitter/barbed strangler hits). And it's not like it was hard to get in combat, either: Stealers assaulting vehicles is pretty commonplace (even before fleet), and it was even easier with Raveners and winged Tyrants. I would've liked something like allowing models with flesh hooks to re-roll to-hit rolls against vehicles as they latch onto it while moving, or something.

The addition of Hive Guard as a second option, for those who didn't want to roll with the CC vehicle killing to use, is why I feel like they could've fit in a more sane 5E codex. Them, and Spore Pods. They could've/should've just added those two units to the army list and been done with it, while fixing some other issues ;).

In other news, I've always hated how Tyranids have this supposedly harmful Shadow in the Warp thing. Either make it work how it should actually work, or don't include it at all. If the Hive Mind creates such an enormous presence in the warp that it blocks enemies from suffering from Perils but makes it harder for them to pass their tests, then Tyranids shouldn't suffer Perils either. Logically, the belligerent Warp entities are either blocked out by the Hive Mind or they aren't. Pick one.*

*Clearly it was kept as a balance issue. They should have gone for consistency and adjusted for the advantage in points.

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 19:17
As for the 4th edition book's lack of anti-tank...yeah, it lacked ranged anti-tank firepower. You were pretty much forced to take Zoanthropes, and sure it's a psychic power but the unreliable part is the rolling to hit, not the psychic test.

That depends - try using a zoanthrope as anti-tank when you're up against a Farseer with runes, or a librarian with a hood. Suddenly that psychic test seems a lot harder to pass...

Megad00mer
21-09-2011, 19:18
While the facts you mention cannot be disputed, I think it's important that we don't appear to hold this against the Dark Eldar in any way, shape or form. After all, they had to sit and live with their obsolete 3rd edition codex while we were getting multiple updates (all of which were somewhat earlier than expected/ necessary, IIRC). They deserve their 67 waves, whether or not they are profitable business decisions. ;)

I agree 100%. However, it would be nice if Tyranids received even an inkling of the love and attention Dark Eldar have gotten.

Problem is the 5th edition Tyranid release was headed up by a guy who admittedly knew very little about them, and didn't like them very much. It was obviously just a job to him.

On the other hand, Dark Eldar was headed up by Phil Kelly and Jes Goodwin. Two guys with so much love and enthusiasm for the project that it practically oozes out of every model and rule.

I hope GW looks at these two extremes in the future and learns something from it.

Bonzai
21-09-2011, 20:04
Carnifexes never were too good. They were just too exploitable by giving them double devourers or a Venom/Strangler combo (the latter of which by the way provided excellent anti-tank) at rather low costs and the rule that you could take them into Elites.
For any close combat or mixed range and CC build the costs were completely justified.
.

Kind of my point. The fact that they were so customizable and could be an elite choice, kind of made them a no brainer in many lists, especially since they were such an important source of anti-tank.



Funny enough I think having more different monstrous creatures wasn't a bad idea it seemed logical for tyranids to have a variety of monstrous creatures equal to the variety of vehicles of other races, but every one of them dwarfing carnifexes, after all they had been built up to in previous codices and even the fluff of the current one, was ridiculous. And the fact that they not only out-size but also outperform Carnies was a punch in the face.


I agree 100%. I have no problems with Trygons out performing the Carnifex in assault. I have no problem with the the T-fex having the heavy Dakka. IMHO, what they should have done is made the Carnixex with a 2+ save and maybe FNP. Carnifex should be the toughest of the non-gargantuan nids. They are supposed to be living battering rams, and they should act like it.



Couldn't say anything about that, since I never played that style, because I was always a horde player.
But seriously if the nuances of the army are blacking out the many overpriced/underperforming/useless options and unit, that's a pretty good reason to be dissatisfied.


All I'll say is that I saw a lot of auto pilot Zilla lists. No real tactics, not real finess. Played the same way, everyday, regardless of who or what was in front of them. Not to offend anyone in particular, but it was played by the same sorts who jumped on Double Nob Biker, Thunderwolf Calvary, and now GK lists. Once they lost their "I win" button, instead of re-learning the codex, or coming up with a scratch list, many simply jumped ship for the new power codex.



I detest both "bandwagonism" and the opposite notion thereof. Play your armies, wether people think you only have them for the "new and shiny" syndrome or not. You know why you have them and there is nothing wrong with it.

I'm intrigued by the advent of the new necron codex, i want to see if they might allow for sort of a mechanical monster army theme (like tomb stalkers, spyders (just less ugly), wraiths and others) rather than just the mechanical undead theme, because I would like that and seriously consider an army like that.

Lol, I often tease the nid players here that the reason that they took out without number, was that they were planning on giving it to Necrons as the new "We'll Be Back" rule. Lord knows they have about done everything else they could to alienate the Nid players. :eyebrows:

I may switch up to Nids for a while, simply to break up the monotony of Necron vs Necron battles. We have a sizable number of hard core bandwagoners. Combine that with the players who own Necrons but had shelved them, and those who used to play them and may take them up again, and I have a feeling that there will be a huge amount of Necron armies springing up. So I may take a hiatus from them, play my Nids, and wait for some variety to return. To me half the fun is different armies squaring off against each other. The variety in units and tactics keeps things fresh. I once saw two fully painted Ultramarine armies square off in a tournament once, and to me that was the saddest thing ever.

Finn
21-09-2011, 20:11
That depends - try using a zoanthrope as anti-tank when you're up against a Farseer with runes, or a librarian with a hood. Suddenly that psychic test seems a lot harder to pass...

True, but honestly I never really had a problem killing tanks once I was that close.

Aside from Falcons. Hated those things in 4th. Absolutely ruinous to a Nid army with a scatter and shuriken cannon. Aside from those and backfield support tanks, there weren't any nuts too tough to crack.

For the backfield fire support tanks, there were outflanking stealers or at least Hive Tyrant with venom cannon to shake them lots.


I once saw two fully painted Ultramarine armies square off in a tournament once, and to me that was the saddest thing ever.
They were sparring, clearly. That or they were fighting in some kind of Highlander version of 40k-verse - there can be only one!

Eldartank
21-09-2011, 20:14
I've always loved my Turanids, even if the rules currently aren't the best. The models are just so cool. And when you consider that they now have rules for many of the Tyranids in the Deathwatch and Dark Heresy Roleplaying Games (both RPGS are 100% compatible), I can still have lots of fun with them. In the Dark Heresy/Deathwatch RPG's, the Tyranids, Hive Tyrant in particular, are downright brutally nasty. I can have lots of fun terrorizing my gaming group with them.... ;)

DCLXVI
21-09-2011, 20:26
I had, at the least, a 3k Nid army - never did Nidzilla, more of a horde player. I didn't like the 'feel' of the codex when it came out - it seems like they went all out to nerf existing models so people would buy the new ones (all you have to do to make a Tervigon guys and gals, is to buy a Trygon and Carnifex and fit them both together!)
All I bought was a Trygon and 5 Plasma Hatcher toys for 20 to use as spore pods. I had a couple of games with what I had but I waited for the FAQ before deciding what to do with them and once it came out they went in a box and haven't been out since.
+ The Prime can't ride with the only unit he can buff?
+ You can't drop a spore pod empty? (Even though it makes more sense to drop one of these MC armed-to-the-teeth living creatures without anything in it than a Space Marine Pod)
+ The Astronomican blocking, planetary system cutter offer that is the Shadow In The Warp can't penetrate a couple of inches of metal on a tank?

I think the correct expressions are WTF? and *meh*

TheLaughingGod
21-09-2011, 20:37
Frankly, I dont know that nids got worse. Just that some loud nid players told everyone they did, and welcome to the internet.

Balerion
21-09-2011, 20:38
I've always loved my Turanids, even if the rules currently aren't the best. The models are just so cool. And when you consider that they now have rules for many of the Tyranids in the Deathwatch and Dark Heresy Roleplaying Games (both RPGS are 100% compatible), I can still have lots of fun with them. In the Dark Heresy/Deathwatch RPG's, the Tyranids, Hive Tyrant in particular, are downright brutally nasty. I can have lots of fun terrorizing my gaming group with them.... ;)
Are Lictors actually scary in that game?

I swear, no joke, it would be a serious comfort to my soul to know that they're the deadly bastards they ought to be in some system, somewhere.

Threeshades
21-09-2011, 20:59
Frankly, I dont know that nids got worse. Just that some loud nid players told everyone they did, and welcome to the internet.

I wouldn't say they got worse per se. Not by much anyway, but their previous codex was dated and hardly playable in the current metagame so everyone was yearning for a new dex and when GW finally churned one out it was basically just as dated on its very release date. A huge letdown, as it did little to fix any issues, and for each problem that got fixed they also came up with a new one. And then there was the big fat middle finger GW printed into a pdf file and uploaded it to their site under the title of "Codex Tyranids FaQ v5.0"

Bonzai
21-09-2011, 21:47
I had, at the least, a 3k Nid army - never did Nidzilla, more of a horde player. I didn't like the 'feel' of the codex when it came out - it seems like they went all out to nerf existing models so people would buy the new ones (all you have to do to make a Tervigon guys and gals, is to buy a Trygon and Carnifex and fit them both together!)
All I bought was a Trygon and 5 Plasma Hatcher toys for 20 to use as spore pods. I had a couple of games with what I had but I waited for the FAQ before deciding what to do with them and once it came out they went in a box and haven't been out since.
+ The Prime can't ride with the only unit he can buff?
+ You can't drop a spore pod empty? (Even though it makes more sense to drop one of these MC armed-to-the-teeth living creatures without anything in it than a Space Marine Pod)
+ The Astronomican blocking, planetary system cutter offer that is the Shadow In The Warp can't penetrate a couple of inches of metal on a tank?

I think the correct expressions are WTF? and *meh*

Yup. Those rulings floored me. Psychic hoods can affect vehicles, but shadows can't? Marine IC's can ride in a drop pod, but a Prime can't? They deliberately errata and nerf the Trygon tunnel, which is already kind of wonky, and then put out the DE WWP which can do all the things that the FAQ specifically says that the trygon tunnel can't.

Finn
21-09-2011, 22:06
I wouldn't say they got worse per se. Not by much anyway, but their previous codex was dated and hardly playable in the current metagame so everyone was yearning for a new dex and when GW finally churned one out it was basically just as dated on its very release date. A huge letdown, as it did little to fix any issues, and for each problem that got fixed they also came up with a new one. And then there was the big fat middle finger GW printed into a pdf file and uploaded it to their site under the title of "Codex Tyranids FaQ v5.0"

I'll agree that the 4E codex wasn't so great towards the end there, but it wasn't suffering from ineffective units/weapons/rules so much as slightly overcosted gribblies and units...and with elite Genestealers (that died only slightly less, but to the same type of weaponry) as the only other option for Troops, it could get a little rough.


Are Lictors actually scary in that game?

I swear, no joke, it would be a serious comfort to my soul to know that they're the deadly bastards they ought to be in some system, somewhere.

I would also like to know. I'll ask my bud with the rulebook and find out...

Also, when I first started playing with the 4E book, I just glanced at the Lictor statline and thought it was unchanged, given that all the major numbers looked the same and the points stayed the same. It wasn't until the second or third game that I realized they'd dropped down to 2W...and all of a sudden he wasn't worth it, as you just can't survive the turn you pop out with only 2W. With 3W, at least he had a shot and was worth taking. Can't we just have the 3E Lictors back? :p

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 22:15
I wouldn't say they got worse per se. Not by much anyway, but their previous codex was dated and hardly playable in the current metagame so everyone was yearning for a new dex and when GW finally churned one out it was basically just as dated on its very release date. A huge letdown, as it did little to fix any issues, and for each problem that got fixed they also came up with a new one. And then there was the big fat middle finger GW printed into a pdf file and uploaded it to their site under the title of "Codex Tyranids FaQ v5.0"

Indeed. Aside from a lot of unnecessary streamlining and nerfing, Cruddace paid absolutly no attention to the mech- and rocket-heavy metagame, meaning the standard builds for most armies were already perfectly suited to dealing with nids.

To be honest, I think the codex might not have been quite so badly recieved, if the next releases (SW, DE and GK) hadn't all been equipped with weapons that seemed specifically designed to crush an already-underpowered and underperforming codex.

PostinDirty
21-09-2011, 22:32
To me it seems designed to sell 2 new models - the trygon and the hive guard. I can't say (with a straight face at least) that the codex was designed to sell the pyrovore, and I don't think any other new models have been released.
venomthrope? :)

and plastic ravs and gargs, but i guess you're talking only about totally new units

Vipoid
21-09-2011, 22:38
venomthrope? :)

Hmm, I hadn't really considered the venomthrope. Obviously the codex is meant to sell it, but I don't think it's shoved in your face as much as the hive guard or trygon.



and plastic ravs and gargs, but i guess you're talking only about totally new units

Yea, I wouldn't really say that this codex sells those much better than the last one - especially with regard to the Ravners.

Dorn's Arrow
21-09-2011, 22:51
Hmm, I hadn't really considered the venomthrope. Obviously the codex is meant to sell it, but I don't think it's shoved in your face as much as the hive guard or trygon

I think it would be if games were played like the designers seem to play them, i.e. with light mech/hybrid armies. The Venomthrope is amazingly good for its role, but that role is anti-infantry focused in a codex where there's no shortage of that and in the FoC slot where Nids have the least wiggle room. The idea I've seen for 'thropes and Pyrovores to be unit attachments of some kind would solve those problems in a heartbeat and make them (Venomthropes anyway) fairly strong options.

Panzer MkIV
22-09-2011, 01:19
Well, I was the only Tyranid player in my store for a long time although we got a couple of new Tyranid players after the 5th edition codex hit. But these players have dropped the army after a few tries and moved on to pastures anew.

I've shelved my army as well untill a few months ago when I started my own revison of the codex as seen here (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=310309) (shameless plug :p )

I even bought some Pyrovores after I got the approval from some friends to use the revised list:eek:

PostinDirty
22-09-2011, 01:29
Hmm, I hadn't really considered the venomthrope. Obviously the codex is meant to sell it, but I don't think it's shoved in your face as much as the hive guard or trygon. the trygon maybe, its hard to ignore an MC of its size. but i don't think GW deliberately shoved hive guard in our faces. apart from the obvious utility the unit has with its rules, it gets about as much face time and mention as the other elite units.



Yea, I wouldn't really say that this codex sells those much better than the last one - especially with regard to the Ravners.
i get the impression gargoyles do a lot better, having a plastic kit along with being heavily disounted pts-wise seems to be the reason i see them included in several people's lists. and usually they're included in at least numbers of 20
so they got to have modest sales figures

Comrade Penguin
22-09-2011, 03:42
Hive guard felt pretty forced if you ask me. The unit is so good at such a great price that is very hard to ignore. Factor in the mech heavy meta we have right now and who wouldn't jump on something like that? GW made sure they were especially attractive by outlawing sniperfexs, nerfing venom cannons, and introducing the vastly overpriced and overrated tyrannofex. 2 BS 4 str 8 shots that require no line of sight mounted on a T6 unit would be good in any army, but it really shines in an army that has very limited options for ranged anti-tank.

Either GW high ups or Cruddace himself decided to push the newly released units to the detriment of the classic units. The new trygons, hive guard, and gargoyles are better than their counterparts (carnifexs, hive tyrants, and gants). Granted venomthropes and ravenors are average, and the pyrovore is... well the pyrovore, most of the emphasis of this codex was on new pricey units.

Finn
22-09-2011, 03:47
Gargoyles would have sold at least decently if there had been plastic models with the last book as well. I would've used them myself, instead I felt forced into taking Raveners. Not that I was complaining, because I loved those too.

PostinDirty
22-09-2011, 04:37
Hive guard felt pretty forced if you ask me. The unit is so good at such a great price that is very hard to ignore. Factor in the mech heavy meta we have right now and who wouldn't jump on something like that? GW made sure they were especially attractive by outlawing sniperfexs, nerfing venom cannons, and introducing the vastly overpriced and overrated tyrannofex. 2 BS 4 str 8 shots that require no line of sight mounted on a T6 unit would be good in any army, but it really shines in an army that has very limited options for ranged anti-tank.

Either GW high ups or Cruddace himself decided to push the newly released units to the detriment of the classic units. The new trygons, hive guard, and gargoyles are better than their counterparts (carnifexs, hive tyrants, and gants). Granted venomthropes and ravenors are average, and the pyrovore is... well the pyrovore, most of the emphasis of this codex was on new pricey units.

that isn't so much shoved in our faces by the codex, as it is by us as consumers of the game and models.

i'm just pointing out that there's no overt action on the part of GW to promote the unit above any other. it just becomes obvious people will use it because of it's rules.

Gir
22-09-2011, 05:08
Say what you want about nids power, but 5 tervigons protected by vemonthropes is really hard to deal with, especially when nid player refuses to roll double (His record is 214 spawned termagants in game).

silverstu
22-09-2011, 09:14
One point about the fear of tyranids languishing in the realms of the forgotten- I doubt this will happen- purely on the basis that the 2 men behind the successful relaunch of the DE are also big 'nid fans.
I still love the little buggers- I admit I no longer play anymore, but I still collect- the models we got in the release are great. The gargoyles in particular are a great wee set- beautiful little models and they really sqeezed a lot onto the frames. I love the trygon, haven't got round to getting the plastic ravs- the price point is a bit off putting. I loved the wider range of critters they added in this codex- I think it's added alot. The carni never should have been the only big MC in the list- although equally it shouldn't have lost it's place in the codex. I think, purely from a model point of view, a second wave with a couple of new big creatures could go down very well as they would really enhance the visual dynamic of the army.

Vipoid
22-09-2011, 10:17
i'm just pointing out that there's no overt action on the part of GW to promote the unit above any other. it just becomes obvious people will use it because of it's rules.

I disagree. Hive Guard and Trygons may not be literally shoved in our faces (at least as far as the actual codex is concerned). However, both have been made such that they fufil their battlefield roles far more efficiently than any other units in the codex. They're highlighted by the fact that everything else in those roles have been made worse.

Threeshades
22-09-2011, 10:30
Hmm, I hadn't really considered the venomthrope. Obviously the codex is meant to sell it, but I don't think it's shoved in your face as much as the hive guard or trygon.



Yea, I wouldn't really say that this codex sells those much better than the last one - especially with regard to the Ravners.

Frankly Gargoyles now are awesome. Termagants that get jump packs, and diluted retro-rending and are capable of efficiently obscuring normal sized MCs to the point where those can claim cover saves for just one extra point. They are actually worth their points on their own.

Threeshades
22-09-2011, 10:33
Say what you want about nids power, but 5 tervigons protected by vemonthropes is really hard to deal with, especially when nid player refuses to roll double (His record is 214 spawned termagants in game).

I would love to play against this with any modern army.
And you cannot factor lucky dice rolling into this, otherwise I can claim that Tau are totally unbeatable because i keep rolling ones when trying to penetrate his vehicles and even his devilfish score a kill with every single shot out of their burst cannons.

Vipoid
22-09-2011, 10:39
Frankly Gargoyles now are awesome. Termagants that get jump packs, and diluted retro-rending and are capable of efficiently obscuring normal sized MCs to the point where those can claim cover saves for just one extra point. They are actually worth their points on their own.

Oh, gargoyles are good now, and certainly an improvement over the last edition.

However, I think plastic gargoyles would have sold just as well if they'd been released for the 4th edition codex.

PostinDirty
22-09-2011, 12:56
I disagree. Hive Guard and Trygons may not be literally shoved in our faces (at least as far as the actual codex is concerned). However, both have been made such that they fufil their battlefield roles far more efficiently than any other units in the codex. They're highlighted by the fact that everything else in those roles have been made worse.

welp, i guess i'm thinking of this topic from the the perspective that GW's markets these units with the aim to make them sell. their intent would be to produce a product that appeals to their consumer base, leading to sales and therefore the popularity of tyranids. the 'shoving in the face' of these units to us seems to have fairly equal weighting as far as i can ascertain.

they've bungled this hypothetical intent however with only a third of their brand new units/models having rules that the majority of nid players agree as having any sort of universal viability. so the over-emphasized presence of HG and trygons is a result of us as consumers, not necessarily from any intentional action on GW's part.

there's no way they deliberately made pyrovores suck in order to not sell models.

Vipoid
22-09-2011, 13:00
they've bungled this hypothetical intent however with only a third of their brand new units/models having rules that the majority of nid players agree as having any sort of universal viability. so the over-emphasized presence of HG and trygons is a result of us as consumers, not necessarily from any intentional action on GW's part.

But there is action on GW's part. They deliberatly nerfed both the carnifex and the venom cannon (or were happy to alow Cruddace to do so), meaning the Trygon far exceeded the carnifex in CC potential, and the Hive Guard became the only reliable anti-tank with decent range.

DCLXVI
22-09-2011, 13:41
Problem is the 5th edition Tyranid release was headed up by a guy who admittedly knew very little about them, and didn't like them very much. It was obviously just a job to him.
Is he actually on record as saying that he didn't know much about them/didn't like them? If so, then they should be ashamed of themselves. Why the hell give him the job in the first place?
Mind you, stuff should have been picked up in the playtest stages, (if they actually DID any) so it's not entirely his fault.

Vipoid
22-09-2011, 13:48
Is he actually on record as saying that he didn't know much about them/didn't like them? If so, then they should be ashamed of themselves. Why the hell give him the job in the first place?
Mind you, stuff should have been picked up in the playtest stages, (if they actually DID any) so it's not entirely his fault.

I find it hard to believe that any playtesting was done on this codex (or that any action was taken as a result). Whilst that isn't necessarily Cruddace's fault, the fact that he seemingly did very little (if any) research into accurate costing of models or survivability in the 5th edition metagame *is* his fault.

DCLXVI
22-09-2011, 13:58
I find it hard to believe that any playtesting was done on this codex (or that any action was taken as a result). Whilst that isn't necessarily Cruddace's fault, the fact that he seemingly did very little (if any) research into accurate costing of models or survivability in the 5th edition metagame *is* his fault.
That's fair enough - it does seem cobbled together somewhat. For example, the Pyrovore looks like it was designed to be a new Biovore model - they probably thought they could shoehorn another slot into the army instead.

Carnage
22-09-2011, 15:22
I find it hard to believe that any playtesting was done on this codex (or that any action was taken as a result). Whilst that isn't necessarily Cruddace's fault, the fact that he seemingly did very little (if any) research into accurate costing of models or survivability in the 5th edition metagame *is* his fault.

I believe the codex WAS tested, but you have to remember that not everyone plays at the same level as us hard core people. They typically test against "beer and pretzel" gaming lists. You know, the 4 tactical squads on foot with a dread or 2, and a captain leading them style of 1500 points army. Basically the kind of lists we rip apart on the army list forums for being rife with sub-optimal choices. When you are only facing like 8 heavy weapons and 2-3 vehicles in 1500 points then Tyranids are actually really powerful, as there aren't enough guns to kill 2-3 MCs and 50 little dudes before they make combat and the anti-tank deficiencies don't matter.

This is why it's so often referred to as a "newb-hammer" army. It stomps battle force lists and flounders against tight optimized lists. GW just doesn't have testers or game designers that play at the optimal hard core tournament level and this is a perfect example of a book that suffers for it.

Another good example of this is the GK list. Fortitude isn't really that big of a deal when you only have 2-3 rhinos/razor/dreads to deal with, but park 12+ on the board and it's insanity. Nothing in the list is completely OTT by itself, but it's the interaction and synergy of multiple bonuses being stacked and exploited that makes them OTT in the current meta game.

I honestly believe that GW thought the Nids would be too powerful and would dominate....which just goes to show you that the quality of their TESTERS is crap. They need to distribute the play test codexes to the top level gamers so they can pick it apart and test it's boundaries if they ever want real balance. You can't just have the beer and pretzel gamers poke at it, as they have limited insight to the hard core side of the game.

Vipoid
22-09-2011, 15:31
I believe the codex WAS tested, but you have to remember that not everyone plays at the same level as us hard core people. They typically test against "beer and pretzel" gaming lists. You know, the 4 tactical squads on foot with a dread or 2, and a captain leading them style of 1500 points army. Basically the kind of lists we rip apart on the army list forums for being rife with sub-optimal choices. When you are only facing like 8 heavy weapons and 2-3 vehicles in 1500 points then Tyranids are actually really powerful, as there aren't enough guns to kill 2-3 MCs and 50 little dudes before they make combat and the anti-tank deficiencies don't matter.

This is why it's so often referred to as a "newb-hammer" army. It stomps battle force lists and flounders against tight optimized lists. GW just doesn't have testers or game designers that play at the optimal hard core tournament level and this is a perfect example of a book that suffers for it.

Another good example of this is the GK list. Fortitude isn't really that big of a deal when you only have 2-3 rhinos/razor/dreads to deal with, but park 12+ on the board and it's insanity. Nothing in the list is completely OTT by itself, but it's the interaction and synergy of multiple bonuses being stacked and exploited that makes them OTT in the current meta game.

I honestly believe that GW thought the Nids would be too powerful and would dominate....which just goes to show you that the quality of their TESTERS is crap. They need to distribute the play test codexes to the top level gamers so they can pick it apart and test it's boundaries if they ever want real balance. You can't just have the beer and pretzel gamers poke at it, as they have limited insight to the hard core side of the game.

Some interesting points, although I don't think GW's crap testers excuses Cruddace for such a poorly-written codex.

I think the point you made about GKs is also interesting when applied to tyranids - one of their major problems is the complete lack of synergy in the codex.

Threeshades
22-09-2011, 16:12
I believe the codex WAS tested, but you have to remember that not everyone plays at the same level as us hard core people. They typically test against "beer and pretzel" gaming lists. You know, the 4 tactical squads on foot with a dread or 2, and a captain leading them style of 1500 points army. Basically the kind of lists we rip apart on the army list forums for being rife with sub-optimal choices. When you are only facing like 8 heavy weapons and 2-3 vehicles in 1500 points then Tyranids are actually really powerful, as there aren't enough guns to kill 2-3 MCs and 50 little dudes before they make combat and the anti-tank deficiencies don't matter.

No I don't think that explains anything. Look at Dark Eldar. That's a properly balanced and tested codex. It's almost completely devoid of unusable units.

And even an extremely casual play style testing environment doesn't explain why Carnifexes compare so awfully to their peers (both within the tyranid codex and in other codexes), Pyrovores are so ridiculously expensive and the pheromone trail, trygon tunnel and other special rules simply don't work (or are so unreliable that nobody would ever use them as a strategy and thus might as well have been omitted in the first place).

Eldartank
22-09-2011, 16:16
Are Lictors actually scary in that game?

I swear, no joke, it would be a serious comfort to my soul to know that they're the deadly bastards they ought to be in some system, somewhere.

Oh yeah, Lictors are DEFINITELY nasty in Dark Heresy. I had lots of fun in one session with a Lictor constantly appearing out of nowhere and trashing the group before vanishing again. They finally got their revenge when they started making their Awareness rolls (difficult to do against a Lictor). They aren't all that hard to kill by a well-armed group, if they are able to get the drop on it. But that's the problem, being able to detect it so you can take a shot at it before is attacks you and vanishes again.

Finn
22-09-2011, 16:42
Oh yeah, Lictors are DEFINITELY nasty in Dark Heresy. I had lots of fun in one session with a Lictor constantly appearing out of nowhere and trashing the group before vanishing again. They finally got their revenge when they started making their Awareness rolls (difficult to do against a Lictor). They aren't all that hard to kill by a well-armed group, if they are able to get the drop on it. But that's the problem, being able to detect it so you can take a shot at it before is attacks you and vanishes again.

That is exactly what I wanted to hear. Them's some proper Lictors.

GrogDaTyrant
22-09-2011, 16:46
And even an extremely casual play style testing environment doesn't explain why Carnifexes compare so awfully to their peers (both within the tyranid codex and in other codexes)

The Carnifex nerf-bomb was mostly a money deal. GW made a Trygon Kit. They wanted it to sell, so the Trygon's major heavy-support competition was made sub-optimal. You frequently see this in other codices when a unit gets a brand new plastic model (often times it's a new unit, too!). Pre-existing units that won't be receiving new models, are often made 'less attractive' than the ones that are. There are some exceptions to this rule but if you look back at how many 'no-brainer' choices exist in other codices, and you'll see a trend.

Off the top of my head, Nobs, Lootas/Burnas in comparison to MANz, and Tankbustas. Prior to the current Ork codex, Tankbustas were common, Lootas were an 'overly expensive Heavy Support' choice, and Nobs were just a body-guard to the Warboss. Take Chaos as another example... granted, Possessed was a complete flounder. But the Dreadnought was actually down-graded and made less useful than before, while the Chaos Terminators got their new plastic kit. 4th ed Eldar are another example. Dire Avengers became the optimal Troop Choice. Before that, DA's were too expensive and of questionable value over Guardians. Guardians themselves were often fielded in mass (partly due to necessity), or were ignored altogether in favor of Biel-Tan's Aspect Warrior list and more effective Banshees, Fire Dragons, or Scorpions.

It's fairly common, if you look for it.

Threeshades
22-09-2011, 16:58
The Carnifex nerf-bomb was mostly a money deal. GW made a Trygon Kit. They wanted it to sell, so the Trygon's major heavy-support competition was made sub-optimal. You frequently see this in other codices when a unit gets a brand new plastic model (often times it's a new unit, too!). Pre-existing units that won't be receiving new models, are often made 'less attractive' than the ones that are. There are some exceptions to this rule but if you look back at how many 'no-brainer' choices exist in other codices, and you'll see a trend.

Off the top of my head, Nobs, Lootas/Burnas in comparison to MANz, and Tankbustas. Prior to the current Ork codex, Tankbustas were common, Lootas were an 'overly expensive Heavy Support' choice, and Nobs were just a body-guard to the Warboss. Take Chaos as another example... granted, Possessed was a complete flounder. But the Dreadnought was actually down-graded and made less useful than before, while the Chaos Terminators got their new plastic kit. 4th ed Eldar are another example. Dire Avengers became the optimal Troop Choice. Before that, DA's were too expensive and of questionable value over Guardians. Guardians themselves were often fielded in mass (partly due to necessity), or were ignored altogether in favor of Biel-Tan's Aspect Warrior list and more effective Banshees, Fire Dragons, or Scorpions.

It's fairly common, if you look for it.

That's true, I've noticed as much. Though the point still stands in regard to the other mentions. Which are only some of the many weird design choices.

Comrade Penguin
22-09-2011, 20:20
A while back I remember someone spreading that rumor about cruddace's dislike for the tyranids. This is most likely internet gossip gone rampant, but the truth remains that he put more effort into the guard codex. That thing is highly competitive with a large variety of good builds. I wouldn't be surprised if IG was his favorite army, and every army he's done since then has been an after thought or merely a job. Tyranids and SOB sure seem like the work of someone who cares nothing for the army (unlike DE, SM, IG, and orks).

Threeshades
22-09-2011, 23:08
A while back I remember someone spreading that rumor about cruddace's dislike for the tyranids. This is most likely internet gossip gone rampant, but the truth remains that he put more effort into the guard codex. That thing is highly competitive with a large variety of good builds. I wouldn't be surprised if IG was his favorite army, and every army he's done since then has been an after thought or merely a job. Tyranids and SOB sure seem like the work of someone who cares nothing for the army (unlike DE, SM, IG, and orks).

Well I heard about cruddace having problems with tyranids before anything concrete was known about the codex. Not saying that was a well founded source though.

Gir
22-09-2011, 23:24
I would love to play against this with any modern army.
And you cannot factor lucky dice rolling into this, otherwise I can claim that Tau are totally unbeatable because i keep rolling ones when trying to penetrate his vehicles and even his devilfish score a kill with every single shot out of their burst cannons.

How would you beat it? I'm seriously asking, as me and some friends need help doing it. Assume 2000pts and 150 minimum of termagant spawn (he has never spawned less then this).

althathir
22-09-2011, 23:31
Some interesting points, although I don't think GW's crap testers excuses Cruddace for such a poorly-written codex.

I think the point you made about GKs is also interesting when applied to tyranids - one of their major problems is the complete lack of synergy in the codex.

Personally I think the main culprit was GW wanting to release models, and not being to concerned about the state of the book at the time. Cruddace had a lot of good ideals they were just too rushed, it seems more like a rough draft than finished product.


No I don't think that explains anything. Look at Dark Eldar. That's a properly balanced and tested codex. It's almost completely devoid of unusable units.

And even an extremely casual play style testing environment doesn't explain why Carnifexes compare so awfully to their peers (both within the tyranid codex and in other codexes), Pyrovores are so ridiculously expensive and the pheromone trail, trygon tunnel and other special rules simply don't work (or are so unreliable that nobody would ever use them as a strategy and thus might as well have been omitted in the first place).

I think Dark Eldar really benefited from phil kelly tbh, he already had done craftworld eldar so he had a good ideal of a basepoint. Furthermore he was basically designing a new army so he wasn't pushing a few new kits as much as the more established armies tend to do.


The Carnifex nerf-bomb was mostly a money deal. GW made a Trygon Kit. They wanted it to sell, so the Trygon's major heavy-support competition was made sub-optimal. You frequently see this in other codices when a unit gets a brand new plastic model (often times it's a new unit, too!). Pre-existing units that won't be receiving new models, are often made 'less attractive' than the ones that are. There are some exceptions to this rule but if you look back at how many 'no-brainer' choices exist in other codices, and you'll see a trend.

Off the top of my head, Nobs, Lootas/Burnas in comparison to MANz, and Tankbustas. Prior to the current Ork codex, Tankbustas were common, Lootas were an 'overly expensive Heavy Support' choice, and Nobs were just a body-guard to the Warboss. Take Chaos as another example... granted, Possessed was a complete flounder. But the Dreadnought was actually down-graded and made less useful than before, while the Chaos Terminators got their new plastic kit. 4th ed Eldar are another example. Dire Avengers became the optimal Troop Choice. Before that, DA's were too expensive and of questionable value over Guardians. Guardians themselves were often fielded in mass (partly due to necessity), or were ignored altogether in favor of Biel-Tan's Aspect Warrior list and more effective Banshees, Fire Dragons, or Scorpions.

It's fairly common, if you look for it.

QFT its always been part of GW to rebalance what is effective and what isn't. For example the Carnifex got pushed very hard with the 4th edition book and alot of that was due to getting a new kit, and part of the reason the new dex received as much backlash as it did was because it reduced their roles. Hopefully the next dex has better internal balance because its a pretty crude way to generate sells.

Bestaltan
22-09-2011, 23:34
How to beat it? Focus fire down a couple of the tervigons each turn with lots of missile launchers. Force 3d6 hits against every termagaunt unit in range.

If Space Wolves......Take a couple of priests with JotWW. Free win.

Failing that, GK's with a land raider or two. Tank shock through the termagaunts, get out and assault tervigons......problem solved.

althathir
22-09-2011, 23:46
A while back I remember someone spreading that rumor about cruddace's dislike for the tyranids. This is most likely internet gossip gone rampant, but the truth remains that he put more effort into the guard codex. That thing is highly competitive with a large variety of good builds. I wouldn't be surprised if IG was his favorite army, and every army he's done since then has been an after thought or merely a job. Tyranids and SOB sure seem like the work of someone who cares nothing for the army (unlike DE, SM, IG, and orks).

I doubt he would make an army worse on purpose unless the army was considered broken like eldar or chaos. I think people assume that whoever writes a codex has more control of it than they probably do. Its foolish not to expect for GW to push newer models and giving them great rules is another way to do so, and when they want to release a force I don't think the codex writer is gonna be in a position to say "its not ready yet"

As far as guard are concerned they are one of the most expensive (if not the most expensive army) and it benifits GW for them to have a strong book.

Eighties-Matt
23-09-2011, 00:14
I dont think they're in the best spot right now. I haven't seen a Tyranid player in my workshop in literally over half a year. Even at core club, the kids just bring marine armies and guard. I haven't seen any veteran Nid players in ages, and I can kinda understand why.

Now, I have never played Nids, nor have I read the new dex, but bug players I used to see gave me the impression that it was a let down hiding behind a shiny new trygon model, some of the special rules were pointless or just complex (I remember something poisony causing issues, possibly on gargoyles?) and everyone who had multiple Carnifexes had no reason to use them anymore.

Its been ages since I've seen someone even purchase a nid model or box, play the army or anything. Even at a casual mini-tourny I went to about 3 months ago, all ages were there, and all armies were there, except nids. Hell, there was even TWO necron players. Not a bug to be seen however.

Personally I will never collect Tyranids, because they are a mindless race with a bland backstory, and I cant really relate to them, or provide them any interesting narrative when they're on the board. They're no fun, they're just destroyers, like the necrons, I cant add any commentary mid-game to keep things light. Theres no direction their story can go in. They get closer and closer to Terra. Eat some worlds on the way, whoop dee doo. Either they win the battle for the universe, or they dont. Theres no leeway in their story, and that makes them boring. Sure, there can be a bit of back-and-forth as tendrils get beaten back or destroyed, but since this is a cold, calculating intelligence driven only to consume, there can be no interesting tales of parleys, fierce duels between commanders with a bit of banter in between, unexpected alliances against a common foe, betrayals, or anything cool like that. There is simply, we have arrived. Now that we're here, you either have to kill all of us, or there is no chance of you winning.

Snore!

The codex and model sales are way down. A lot of Nid players have simply given up, or moved onto other armies. Newer Nid players are rare, because the race has little appeal. People might get lured in by the models, and those who are new to them wont mind the codex, but how can they compete with all the power-armoured poster children everywhere?

Just take a look in the army lists or xenos project logs. You wont see much tyranid content there.

Threeshades
23-09-2011, 02:29
I think Dark Eldar really benefited from phil kelly tbh, he already had done craftworld eldar so he had a good ideal of a basepoint. Furthermore he was basically designing a new army so he wasn't pushing a few new kits as much as the more established armies tend to do.

Yeah I guess it would be futile to wait for another codex of comparable quality unless either a new race is published or another one becomes as profoundly outdated as the Dark Eldar dex.

Comrade Penguin
23-09-2011, 02:30
@eighties-matt

To each his own I suppose. I love the tyranids as a theme, their background, and their models. This is probably due to my life long love of movies like Aliens and Starship Troopers. I've always enjoyed the supernatural horrors jumping out of shadows or rushing at you in endless waves of leaping critters. They have no gods or imperial ambitions, they are fueled simply by their base desire to feed. These creatures indiscriminately destroy and strip whole planets of all live, and then move on to do it again. Point is, to a certain type of player this army is very appealing. I have a friend who is working on a converted tyranid army with Alien heads because he likes the theme. It also offers an army type that has no other equivalent in 40K (big nasties with little bugs swarming at their feet). If gw had made a decent product I'm sure the tyranids could have been just as popular as DE or IG are currently.

Gir
23-09-2011, 02:45
How to beat it? Focus fire down a couple of the tervigons each turn with lots of missile launchers. Force 3d6 hits against every termagaunt unit in range.

If Space Wolves......Take a couple of priests with JotWW. Free win.

Failing that, GK's with a land raider or two. Tank shock through the termagaunts, get out and assault tervigons......problem solved.

Problem is you need a minimum of 6 missile launchers to take down a tervigon, and none of my group plays space wolves. Our Grey Knights player is very new to the game, and has very limited models and ability.

The main armies we have a Blood Angels, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar (Who beat thanks to lilith taking down over 100 termagants on her own), Chaos, Tau and a small Imperial Guard army.

mightymconeshot
23-09-2011, 04:09
Blood Angels drop some heavy melee in their face with raiders and the like. Orks lootas and nobs, Necrons um destroyers i guess. Dont really play against them. DE a razorwing or two. Chaos some oblits Tau dont know and IG Pie plates of DOOM. And if he sinks that many tervigons in points then the rest of the army should be fairly light.

Tervigons never really seemed like it was worth it for what they did. And that is a ton of models. Are you sure he has the rules right? Assuming 5 tervigons which is the max then each is putting out 30 without doubles.

PostinDirty
23-09-2011, 05:35
But there is action on GW's part. They deliberatly nerfed both the carnifex and the venom cannon (or were happy to alow Cruddace to do so), meaning the Trygon far exceeded the carnifex in CC potential, and the Hive Guard became the only reliable anti-tank with decent range.

....are we even arguing? sure there's action on GW's part, they write the rules after all. but i find it hard to believe its deliberate that they would shove hive guard in our faces over pyrovores, because they'd want both models to sell.

I'm only talking about the emphasis GW has placed on new models, not the existing ones like the carnifex- i'd expect it'd be expected GW would want to advertise new units more, simply to try and lure in all the old to make these additions to their armies, so it doesn't surprise me that fexes took a hit

Finn
23-09-2011, 13:03
Problem is you need a minimum of 6 missile launchers to take down a tervigon, and none of my group plays space wolves. Our Grey Knights player is very new to the game, and has very limited models and ability.

The main armies we have a Blood Angels, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar (Who beat thanks to lilith taking down over 100 termagants on her own), Chaos, Tau and a small Imperial Guard army.

My Chaos method has been to assault them with Berzerkers + Kharn. Murders them. Other options: assault with GGD or DP, shoot with Oblits or melta/plasma guns.

In general against that army, you should be focusing down the Tervis at any cost. Even more important as Chaos due to your low model count.

Vipoid
23-09-2011, 13:05
Problem is you need a minimum of 6 missile launchers to take down a tervigon, and none of my group plays space wolves. Our Grey Knights player is very new to the game, and has very limited models and ability.

The main armies we have a Blood Angels, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar (Who beat thanks to lilith taking down over 100 termagants on her own), Chaos, Tau and a small Imperial Guard army.

That's rather inaccurate. You need a minimum of 6 missile shots to take down a tervigon, but there's no reason why these have to be fired from the same squad, or even on the same turn.

If you tell me what army you play, I'd be happy to offer advice as to how to beat this sort of nid army.

Bonzai
23-09-2011, 14:56
Problem is you need a minimum of 6 missile launchers to take down a tervigon, and none of my group plays space wolves. Our Grey Knights player is very new to the game, and has very limited models and ability.

The main armies we have a Blood Angels, Necrons, Orks, Dark Eldar (Who beat thanks to lilith taking down over 100 termagants on her own), Chaos, Tau and a small Imperial Guard army.

Blood Angels? Depends on the style of list. MSU? You should have more than enough fire power with your predators and Las/plas razorbacks. Blood Talon Dreads (we call him "Dr. Tickle Fingers" over here), will mulch them. Librarians with force weapons can insta death them. Sanguinary priests give squads furious charge, so they can wound on 5's. Then there are good old fashioned meltas and heavy weapons.

Necrons? I run Wraithwing. 36 attacks on the charge (plus 4 from the lord), They will on average hit 24 times, deal 12 wounds, 4 will go unsaved, and the Lord is usually good for one more. Tervigon swings back, and I get to make a 3+ or 4+ inv save. It's turn it's probably dead, and the wraiths are free to hunt the next one with little damage done. If it FNP's it's self, then it may take a bit longer. Ctan will also much through them. Destroyers and weight of fire are the other methods.

Orks? Lootas, power claws, death Rollahs.... Pretty much the same things Orks use to deal with everything else.

Dark Eldar? Lol, should be able to take down Nids in their sleep.

Chaos? I use Daemon princes, defilers, Terminators, Plasma/Melta squads, Oblits, and weight of fire.

Tau? Rail guns and crisis suites are all they got unfortunately.

Imperial Guard? I recomend shooting at it. Lol, snarkyness aside, they shouldn't have a problem bringing enough stuff down on them to kill them.

Fixer
23-09-2011, 15:16
The ultimate problem with army popularity is that it's defined a lot by how powerful the army is.

Some armies and players persist because the people that use them love their models and theme but others do not. Back in 3rd ed there was a tidal wave of Black Templars players. Models that were easy to paint, a powerful list and a couple of decent models for them too.

When the new codex was released despite there being an incredible model release for them (chained models do kick ass) the original player base dwindled in a few months.

Of course when you release an army that's main appeal is power, taking away that power trashes the playerbase.

Arguably the old powergamer player base of Tyranids was lost with 5th edition.
The new Tyranid release wasn't a power list so it didn't attract a lot of new players like Dark Eldar, Space Wolves or Grey Knights are currently doing. What's more the book is so poorly written that half the new tricks simply don't work. What's more while the bulk of an old army can usually be used as a new base for a new force in an updated book, some collectors have seen effectively their entire collection confined to the display cabinet by stupid rules, poor pricing and/or making their equipped options worthless.

In the end, it's killed the Tyranid playerbase but for a handful of Xeno fans and those stubborn enough to try and make a functioning list out of what they have.

A terrible mess however you look at it. GW could fix that with a decent codex re-write which would take all of one weekend. Why they don't is beyond me, but I figure GW have been doing things the same way so long now that changing or admitting they made a mistake and then actually fixing it is beyond them.

Vipoid
23-09-2011, 22:42
....are we even arguing? sure there's action on GW's part, they write the rules after all. but i find it hard to believe its deliberate that they would shove hive guard in our faces over pyrovores, because they'd want both models to sell.

I see what you mean, although I imagine pyrovores were *meant* to be strong models - they were just held back by a combination of Cruddace's ineptitude and no playtesting.



I'm only talking about the emphasis GW has placed on new models, not the existing ones like the carnifex- i'd expect it'd be expected GW would want to advertise new units more, simply to try and lure in all the old to make these additions to their armies, so it doesn't surprise me that fexes took a hit

Again, I understand what you mean. I was just pointing out that nerfing existing models is a way to place emphasis on newer ones, without advertising them directly. It's a bit like having everyone in a line, bar one or two, take 2 steps back. The 2 that remained where they were haven't moved forward, but because the others have moved back, your eye is drawn to them.

Hmm, actually that metaphor sounded a lot better in my head, so feel free to ignore it. :p

PostinDirty
23-09-2011, 22:46
hah, its all good man, i understand the point that they would emphasize certain newer models over the older ones, and considering just how darned versatile the 4th ed carnifex was, it really was going to take the hit in order to make room for the newer units.

i just feel that heir intention was to have the pyrovore be as appealing as HG and trygons, they just failed in the attempt to do so

Bonzai
24-09-2011, 02:50
I see what you mean, although I imagine pyrovores were *meant* to be strong models - they were just held back by a combination of Cruddace's ineptitude and no playtesting.


I firmly believe that they originally gave it access to a melta shot. Look at the artwork! If you gave a Pyrovore a melta, instead of a flamer, then it makes sense and would actually be a consideration. It seems like a last minute, "OMG this is too good, lets tone it down quick before it goes to print", type thing.

Ravenous
24-09-2011, 02:55
Im 90% sure the reason we've not had a second wave was that they realised how poorly the new codex was ultimately recieved, and that after initial sales of the big new beasts, I think sales must have spiraled downwards pretty quickly.

100% correct.

Nids never met their expected numbers, blood angels hit their 6 month sales number in 3, meanwhile nids might eventually get there.

Vipoid
24-09-2011, 10:44
I firmly believe that they originally gave it access to a melta shot. Look at the artwork! If you gave a Pyrovore a melta, instead of a flamer, then it makes sense and would actually be a consideration. It seems like a last minute, "OMG this is too good, lets tone it down quick before it goes to print", type thing.

Hmm, I suppose a melta might have given it a bit more use as a cheaper alternative to a zoanthrope (which would obviously have to be podded in), although I'm still not sure it would be that useful. If it was an upgrade to a squad (essentially a nid version of a weapon-platform), it might have been a lot more useful (with a melta, not a flamer). As it stands, there's really no reason to use one over a biovore, which has a much longer range, is more survivable, can cause damage even if it misses, will almost certainly get to shoot more than once and can pin enemies.

nedius
24-09-2011, 10:58
Not to go too off discussion, but I don't like the idea of nids having the melta rule. I don't want nids to become more shooty. They're not supposed to be that. None of the stories has squads of tyranids hiding in cover taking potshots at the enemy - they're run up and eat sort of bunch.

To that extent, I'm not too fussed that there is a lack of nid ranged anti-tank. What there should have been is better delivery mechanisms for units with the CC strength to take out tanks. Trygons, Mawlocks and mycetic spores are what I image was supposed to be this.

Vipoid
24-09-2011, 11:16
Not to go too off discussion, but I don't like the idea of nids having the melta rule. I don't want nids to become more shooty. They're not supposed to be that. None of the stories has squads of tyranids hiding in cover taking potshots at the enemy - they're run up and eat sort of bunch.

To that extent, I'm not too fussed that there is a lack of nid ranged anti-tank. What there should have been is better delivery mechanisms for units with the CC strength to take out tanks. Trygons, Mawlocks and mycetic spores are what I image was supposed to be this.

I'll agree that I wouldn't object to nids having little to no long-range anti-tank, providing they got something to compensate. Unfortunatly, this is something we are currently lacking - many vehicles can obliterate huge chunks of our army at relatively long range, and having to wait till we could assault them would leave us with little left when we finally reached them. Furthermore, our MCs are all highly susceptible to heavy weapons and rockets, which can currently kill them long before they get to assault even one enemy vehicle.

I'm not saying that tyranids being more reliant on combat to destroy vehicles is a bad idea (assuming that the codex is designed for such), but I'm interested to hear your thoughts about how to overcome the current problems with that technique.

PostinDirty
24-09-2011, 12:04
well my first idea would be to start working more with the mechanic that mawlocs use. if trygons could deliver things like raveners in the way the apoc datasheet does, that'd be a start. maybe a little too imb, but i'm just chucking it out there as an idea.

the range of spore mines from 4th ed was also nice. they were a little weak, but a step in the right direction i feel. more of that sort of thing would be great, live ammunition that you bring in from reserves to DS on top of tanks and troops, costed appropriately or part of another unit's special rules (like a hive tyrant ability or something, to call down a bombardment of spores mines)

edit: these two ideas kind of illustrate the imagery i get when i think of nids; an incoming tide of CC monsters, that the enemy are trying to fend off, while their lines get tangled up by a bunch of disruption units.

mightymconeshot
24-09-2011, 17:26
I think to compensate there should be either a special rule where certain units, mainly little guys, get to hit a vehicle in close combat as if it was one step lower on the movement chart. so a vehicle that didnt move still doesnt move, a vehicle that moved 6 inches counts as not moving, a vehicle that moved 12 counts as 6. This would help hitting in close combat against tanks without changing the overall long range anti-tank. In the old codex they had eldar jetbikes being knocked out of midair so it would not be that far fetched. I would think for a start horms, stealers and rippers.

Oh and give them assault grenades of course.

and a pyrovore with a melta would make perfect sense. I mean even the picture in the book looks like a melta weapon not a flamer. A quick word change or two and the description is all fixed.

I also feel like there should be some special rule like high elves have in fantasy or something in the old dex. where you can get more elites but have it capped the type or go back to the only take one choice of 1-3. It would fix the cramming in the elite choices alot without causing any more spam. Oh and put the doom of M as a hero or an upgrade sergeant

Vipoid
24-09-2011, 17:42
I also feel like there should be some special rule like high elves have in fantasy or something in the old dex. where you can get more elites but have it capped the type or go back to the only take one choice of 1-3. It would fix the cramming in the elite choices alot without causing any more spam. Oh and put the doom of M as a hero or an upgrade sergeant

To be honest, I think the problem with the crammed elites section isn't so much the restriction (since all armies have to deal with that), it's the fact that all our good anti-tank, as well as many other good models, are located there. I think that if the codex had been done properly, we'd be spoilt for choice on several slots, not just elites. I think it would be better (no to mention simpler) to just un-nerf the venom cannon.

mightymconeshot
24-09-2011, 18:12
That would be a way but then we would have to take it on a tyrant or a fex. which does not really help us any as then we have to use 200 points for a lascannon with the BS of a guardsmen.

Vipoid
24-09-2011, 18:16
That would be a way but then we would have to take it on a tyrant or a fex. which does not really help us any as then we have to use 200 points for a lascannon with the BS of a guardsmen.

True, but then if the venom canon was to be de-nerfed, I'd assumed that it wouldn't be the only change made. One would hope that the many other galring errors in the book would also be corrected, including the terrible pricing of the hive tyrant and carnifex.

Souleater
24-09-2011, 18:26
I think pyrovores got screwed up because they wanted to make a nod towards Zoats. The Hive Guard are vaguely similar to Zoats and Pyrovores were possibly meant to be access to a template weapon in order to compenstate for a lack of assault grenades. Who knows. Well, GW, presumably.

However, They should have swapped the stats around - Given Hive Guard the template to make a tough as nails assault unit for digging enemies out of cover. Given the Pyrovore the No-LOS guns and let them hide and plink away at the enemy. I think this change would have been a much better fit for the stats/roles that GW tried to fill.

**Appended here as I didn't want to derail the other thread***


Not really. For a start, lictors shouldn't have a gun, and so shouldn't be shooting anything, regardless of whether or not they've just arrived. Cruddace gave them a gun to pretend that they could do something the turn they arrive.

Lictors could be equipped with ranged biomorphs in 2nd Edition.

One of the things that really would have helped them would have been...well the Ymargl rules....

Maybe GW just wanted to add extra units. Given how cruddy Lictors have been since 3rd Ed, I think making them useful would have effectively been givign them an extra unit.

Several of the choices seem to make no sense. Another example is the Carnifex - they have never really been that good in assault, IME. As AT or AP platforms are where they have shone since back in the day. In other words not a threat to the Trygon in anyway because the Trygon is much, much better in assault and can fleet/DS to get there faster.

But GW decided to introduce a new unit in the Tyrannofex...but then not release a model for it.

Comrade Penguin
24-09-2011, 19:15
I have to agree with every that the pyrovore was probably intended to be an anit-tank unit. It has acid dripping out of its mouth and shoots superheated plasma like stuff. The could have easily given it a chain fist equivalent and a melta blast, which would have made it useful and fun. They probably recognized that two other units (zoan and hiveguard) in elites were antitank at the last moment and switched him to a flame unit.

One thing I found rather humorous was the pyrovore's announcement article on GW's website back when the codex launched. In it GW said you could use the pyrovore models in place of the biovore models. Apparently they knew from launch these duds would not sell in their current state.

CKO
24-09-2011, 23:02
Hopefully 6th edition will make nids stronger, I believe I heard that most of the newer codexes were made with the new edition in mind.

Panzer MkIV
24-09-2011, 23:15
Hopefully 6th edition will make nids stronger, I believe I heard that most of the newer codexes were made with the new edition in mind.

That was just some wishfull thinking of some posters in the 6th edition rumour thread. Don't take such musings as facts;)

Besides, even if that's true GW released a poor codex that doesn't work well internally, externally and with 5th edition 2 and a half years before 6th edtion should hit the public at the earliest...:eyebrows:

-Loki-
25-09-2011, 03:34
That was just some wishfull thinking of some posters in the 6th edition rumour thread. Don't take such musings as facts;)

They were actually part of the 6th edition rumours, but the wording (all codices since Tyranids were made for 6th edition) could also mean the Tyranid book was the last book written for 5th edition.

Still, rumours and all.

Ravenous
25-09-2011, 05:28
Hopefully 6th edition will make nids stronger, I believe I heard that most of the newer codexes were made with the new edition in mind.

Yeah cause 5th did wonders for daemons...

Comrade Penguin
25-09-2011, 07:31
6th edition could be great if move through cover = assault grenades and they finally nerf mech. They could also get rid of no retreat shenanigans. I don't see this happening since an emphasis on mech makes Gw a boat load of money. I have also heard that the tyranid's weakness is supposed to be units in cover, which doesn't make sense but it is apparently what they settled on with this book.

Threeshades
25-09-2011, 12:26
Yeah being faced with tyranids you should be afraid of dark corners and hard to escape terrain, not feel safe there.