Bug Hunting

[Newtoncain]

I'm 0-2 Vs the new nids my friend plays.

 

The battles were 2000pts.

Battle 1 = table quarts w/ 4 locations.

I ran Chapter, 5 10 man squads (4 in Razors, 1 in Rhino), vindy, Pred, Whirl and 3 x Scout bikes.

 

He runs: hive tyrant, Tervogn x 2, Spin gaunts x 20 in Pod, 18 Dev gaunts in Pod, Doom in pod, 3 winged warriors, Zen in pod, 3 Biovoires, Ystealers, 2 groups of 5 Gen w/ Brood , 6 spore mines and 1 group of 3 rippers.

 

Crushes me, Doom is just down right nasty.

 

Battle 2-Table haves and kill points

I tweek my list: minus CM, Add Libby (Nullzone and 10-1 small pie) and 5 man CC scouts.

 

He runs close to the same list.

 

Again Doom just crushes me coming in on a drop pod.

 

So i'm off to retool my army. I'm thinking rhinos for all (no razors). Maybe buy a LLS to make him drift dropping in.

 

Basically he sets up the Hive and 2 Tervogns and Bios, Drops some mines to mess with my set up. Then deep strikes everything else. Tryant has upgrade for +1 reserve rolls = everything is in by T3.

[Gornall]

Giga... you can't have it both ways. You cite RAW as the reason for the Malowc not being able to target units and RAI as the reason for Doom's ability not being able to affect units in transports. I say you're using RAI because unless it says it is a pyschic power, it's not a psychic power. Further, units inside transports can still be measured to... just not targetted. I think the FAQ will go with RAI for both: Malowcs can target units and Doom doesn't affect guys in boxes.

[mannstein]

QUOTE (Giga @ Feb 1 2010, 04:04 PM) *

The 5th ed rulebook rules for deep strike state clearly that you deepstrike by placing a model from the unit (or the mawloc itself, in this case) on the table, and then roll scatter dice. If you can't place the model on the table (and you can't place your models within 1" of enemy models, on top of other models, or on impassable terrain), then obviously the model can't deep strike at that particular spot.

 

The DS rule is very specific: it says you can place the initial marker (thats what the model is, a marker since it has no profile or game effect until after the DS rules are comnpleted) anywhere on the table, without any specific exceptions. If the mishap table is triggered (by the DSing unit fulfilling one of the conditions mentioned after the scatter dice are rolled and the results applied) then it automatically reverts to the mawloc special rules...

 

The mawloc special rules state explicitly that it can DS onto an enemy model, which means it must be able to do so by being placed onto the enemy model at the targeting stage (any other explanation is impossible, IMO, since it is always possible to roll a hit on the scatter dice, and the DS can be placed anywhere, as per the first part of the DS rules.)

 

Conventional DS'ing units aren't actually "on" the table (or in play, for that matter) until after all rules pertaining to the DS process are complete, and therefore there is no reason to assume the mawloc is any different from that.

 

Of course, this interpretation simply follows the rules for DSing and the mawloc special rules as they are actually written.

 

Not that I actually want to get hit with it, but I simply cannot see where the DS rules prohibit targeting enemy units.... in fact, if you are twisted and hoping for a nice scatter, you can try this with conventional deep strikers... its a perfectly legal, if risky, tactic for anyone.

[Newtoncain]

How are you guys interptating the Dooms rule in the fire phase " No armor saves = yes"? , Invul saves allowed, what about cover saves ?

[Giga]

Perhaps your battles go much more according to 'plan' than mine?

There's no real plan there.

 

Just deploy the land raider in such a way that it can move to assist every part of your army in a single turn. In other words, keep the entire army within ~20" of the land raider, which is a ~40" radius. This is practical not just for terminators, but for things like rapid firing, null zone, pedro's aura, etc.

 

So, basically, the land raider is usually spearheading the entire army (though the word "spearhead" is a misnomer, since against tyranids I'm mostly sitting in one place and shooting at them while they run towards me), while tactical squads in rhinos, sternguard, dreads, bikes, etc. guard the sides, and stuff like predators, whirlwinds, etc. stays in the back and shoots.

 

The trygon CAN deep strike out of the range of the terminators by deep striking ~10 inches from my side elements (tacticals, speeders, etc.) since that'll easily put it at 25" or so from my LR, but... What's it gonna do if its standing 10" from the closest unit? I'll just move the endangered unit away in my turn and shoot the trygon. This also makes the trygon's tunnel a lot less useful.

 

 

 

 

;) Errr... This probably sounds like massive theoryhammer, but in reality it's actually quite simple and easily applicable. I can take a photo or two and post it, to show you what I mean by that deployment/movement.

I can't remember the exact wording in the codex but doesn't it specify you put down the blast template instead of the model? Anyway, its OBVIOUSLY designed for this purpose. Not allowing it is, in my opinion, just being pedantic and showing very poor gamesmanship. This 'game' is meant to be 'fun' isn't it?

You place the blast template only if the mawloc scatters on top of an enemy unit.

 

Anyway, I don't mind the entire thing, really. Just like the Doom thing, I'm sure this'll be FAQ-ed to explain that the mawloc can deep strike on top of enemy units (that's its purpose, as you said). Which means he'll be deep striking on my rhinos most of the time, which is still not such a great thing considering how expensive it is.

 

BTW, what do you guys think about units that are on above-ground floor? Does the mawloc affects them? I think not (they are far above ground, after all), but I wanna hear what people think.

Yeah 5+ isn't great but its better than nothing - especially when you haven't got much cover on your gaming table.

We usually have the normal 25-30% table covered in terrain, so getting cover saves isn't such a big deal where I play. Dangerous terrain is useful, I agree, but again, I myself rather avoid assaulting tyranids anyway, if you know what I mean. :D

There are other abilities which affect units in transports just fine.

And none of them are damaging, and the ones that are (like greater daemon summoning and serge is acting strangely) have it explicitly stated in their rule description how that works.

Giga... you can't have it both ways. You cite RAW as the reason for the Malowc not being able to target units and RAI as the reason for Doom's ability not being able to affect units in transports. I say you're using RAI because unless it says it is a pyschic power, it's not a psychic power. Further, units inside transports can still be measured to... just not targetted. I think the FAQ will go with RAI for both: Malowcs can target units and Doom doesn't affect guys in boxes.

As I said, GW will FAQ it in a month or two, sure thing. No point in arguing about it. People at my LGS don't allow Doom hitting units in transports, while mawloc is still an open discussion. As far as I'm concerned, I don't care how they're going to decide about the mawloc. Either way, it doesn't affect me much.

The DS rule is very specific: it says you can place the initial marker (thats what the model is, a marker since it has no profile or game effect until after the DS rules are comnpleted) anywhere on the table, without any specific exceptions.

It says "place one model from the unit", doesn't say anything about a marker. Also, how can you place one model on top of another model? It seems quite physically impossible, but as I said earlier, I don't care. It's not a big deal to me anyway. I'm sure it could be quite dangerous against footslogging armies though.

[Giga]

How are you guys interptating the Dooms rule in the fire phase " No armor saves = yes"? , Invul saves allowed, what about cover saves ?

Cover saves are allowed. There's no reason why they shouldn't be.

[mannstein]

It doesn't have an AP stat, and it isnt a targeted attack (it hits everything, rather than one unit which is diced for like a shooting attack) so it would appear to me to be invulnerable saves only. Until/unless it gets FAQ'ed, anyway.

 

BTW, what do you guys think about units that are on above-ground floor?

 

No: the Mawloc enters play on the ground level, as per the DS rules. The blast therefore only affects the guys on the ground floor, as per the blast marker rules.

 

It says "place one model from the unit", doesn't say anything about a marker. Also, how can you place one model on top of another model? It seems quite physically impossible,

 

It isnt, if you think about it, the mawloc for one has a huge base that can sit on top of several other minis at once... but as I said, the model placed at the start of the DS procedure is nothing more than an abstract marker, since it cannot do anything, and is not even in play until the DS procedure is completed. If the rules did not say "use a model from the unit" they would say "use a marker" or "nominate a point on the tabletop" in order to provide a point from which the unit scatters.

 

Models coming in from reserve are not "on the table" until all the rules regarding their method of entry are fulfilled, so they cannot affect or be affected by general rules until the rules they enter play by are completely fulfilled. Special rules>general rules just like codex>BRB.

[Giga]

It doesn't have an AP stat, and it isnt a targetted attack (it hits everything, rather than one unit which is diced for) so it would appear to me to be invulnerable saves only.

Nah. It inflicts wounds that are explicitly stated to ignore armor, but not stated to ignore cover or invulnerable saves. Cover saves have nothing to do with the AP stat. As far as cover saves are concerned, the AP stat doesn't exist and never did exist.

 

The low point price of the Doom of Malan'tai only confirms that Cruddance never intended it to be insanely effective, just a nice gimmick.

[The Black Watch]

Perhaps your battles go much more according to 'plan' than mine?

There's no real plan there.

Ha! I always start with a plan but it rarely pans out that way. :D

 

Just deploy the land raider in such a way that it can move to assist every part of your army in a single turn. In other words, keep the entire army within ~20" of the land raider, which is a ~40" radius. This is practical not just for terminators, but for things like rapid firing, null zone, pedro's aura, etc.

 

So, basically, the land raider is usually spearheading the entire army (though the word "spearhead" is a misnomer, since against tyranids I'm mostly sitting in one place and shooting at them while they run towards me), while tactical squads in rhinos, sternguard, dreads, bikes, etc. guard the sides, and stuff like predators, whirlwinds, etc. stays in the back and shoots.

 

The trygon CAN deep strike out of the range of the terminators by deep striking ~10 inches from my side elements (tacticals, speeders, etc.) since that'll easily put it at 25" or so from my LR, but... What's it gonna do if its standing 10" from the closest unit? I'll just move the endangered unit away in my turn and shoot the trygon. This also makes the trygon's tunnel a lot less useful.

 

:) Errr... This probably sounds like massive theoryhammer, but in reality it's actually quite simple and easily applicable. I can take a photo or two and post it, to show you what I mean by that deployment/movement.

No I get it. It makes sense and deployment is often the key to winning a battle. I usually adopt a different tactic to yours but I like that and may try it in future. B)

 

BTW, what do you guys think about units that are on above-ground floor? Does the mawloc affects them? I think not (they are far above ground, after all), but I wanna hear what people think.

I would suggest it follows the same rules for templates in ruins in the BRB. IE; one floor only.

 

We usually have the normal 25-30% table covered in terrain, so getting cover saves isn't such a big deal where I play. Dangerous terrain is useful, I agree, but again, I myself rather avoid assaulting tyranids anyway, if you know what I mean. ;)

Most of my terrain is buildings rather than area terrain. Think I need to go back to the shed! ;)

 

There are other abilities which affect units in transports just fine.

And none of them are damaging, and the ones that are (like greater daemon summoning and serge is acting strangely) have it explicitly stated in their rule description how that works.

Well, I can't summon a specific argument for that. :(

 

It doesn't have an AP stat, and it isnt a targetted attack (it hits everything, rather than one unit which is diced for) so it would appear to me to be invulnerable saves only.

Nah. It inflicts wounds that are explicitly stated to ignore armor, but not stated to ignore cover or invulnerable saves. Cover saves have nothing to do with the AP stat. As far as cover saves are concerned, the AP stat doesn't exist and never did exist.

 

The low point price of the Doom of Malan'tai only confirms that Cruddance never intended it to be insanely effective, just a nice gimmick.

I agree here. It specifically says in the entry 'no armour saves' but doesn't mention the other 2 types of save. Therefore they are allowed. This is the only real thing which can threaten the argument 'for' affecting units in transports. If you get a cover save from a wall, surely you'd get a save from a rhino? Unless of course rhino's count as 'armour' not cover'? :P

 

You're probably right about Cruddance given some of the other stuff in the codex which is really expensive and not as killy.

[mannstein]

The low point price of the Doom of Malan'tai only confirms that Cruddance never intended it to be insanely effective, just a nice gimmick.

 

Of course, and I might be a bit cynical here, they might have a massively expensive model in the works they want/need to sell lots of, so they make it dirt cheap points wise to shift units... seems to have worked for TH/SS termies and valkyries...

[Giga]

Cruddance gave units some good points costs. The only thing I feel like he has done wrong was make starting cost for hive tyrants so high. If you want a close combat tyrant, there's just no reason to take a standard tyrant over a swarmlord, it seems. Guess he anticipated the players taking swarmlord for close combat, and standard tyrant for shooting and flying.

 

Hence, the low cost of the Doom is completely out of character if we go by the idea that it can murder units inside vehicles AND deny them cover saves.

 

That means that for 130 pts, the Doom can droppod next to a couple of transports or a big orks mob, murder 10+ models by just being there, and THEN shoot a strength 10 psychic pieplate. If such a thing was intended, it would very obviously have had a vastly higher points cost.

Ha! I always start with a plan but it rarely pans out that way.

This isn't a plan. It's merely standard deployment for Steel Slayers chapter. :lol: The actual battleplan is another thing and relies on a lot of different factors.

I would suggest it follows the same rules for templates in ruins in the BRB. IE; one floor only.

Yes but, the Mawloc comes from the ground, so it strikes me as illogical that it can pop out on the ground level yet hit the 3rd floor. The way I see it, its pieplate should only affect the ground floor.

[Captain Idaho]

The low point price of the Doom of Malan'tai only confirms that Cruddance never intended it to be insanely effective, just a nice gimmick.

 

Of course, and I might be a bit cynical here, they might have a massively expensive model in the works they want/need to sell lots of, so they make it dirt cheap points wise to shift units... seems to have worked for TH/SS termies and valkyries...

 

Nah, the thing is 90pts because of the following;

 

1. It has a single power that causes D3 wounds before it gains wounds for killing enemy models. The "before" is emboldened to emphasise the way we play the game, if he is killed by 1st the extra wounds cannot save him.

 

2. Toughness 4. The thing can be instant killed rather easily in 40K despite his 3+ save and a mass of hits will cause alot of saves and we all know how that kills Space Marines. Combine this with 1.

 

3. No independent character status. Combine this with 2.

 

4. Space Marines in transports are safe early game from this beastie. In fact until it kills something that is outside the transport it will really struggle to do anything at all and get wounded for the pleasure!

 

So basically I think it is the least of the threat of Codex Tyranids. A nice bit of fun but not game breaking.

 

Anyway, the new Codex is great stuff and it's another big thumbs up from me. They have diversity and are terribly powerful in some ways, but other ways they are really going to be made to pay.

 

As a Marine player, try making a list using the new Codex and you will see what I mean. You will soon notice getting adequate Synapse cover, powerful attacking units and swift moving units, plus ranged ability and numbers to take and keep objectives all into a single list is very difficult to get the balance right.

 

I think Tyranids are going to be a list that will lean in certain directions rather than being able to do everything. Gearing up to destroy Mechanised armylists is likely since that is 5th edition now.

[Gornall]

The way I see it, its pieplate should only affect the ground floor.

 

It does. All deepstrikes into ruins arrive on the bottom floor, same way as barrages always come from above and only affect the floor they impact as they're coming down.

[Newtoncain]

How are you guys interptating the Dooms rule in the fire phase " No armor saves = yes"? , Invul saves allowed, what about cover saves ?

Cover saves are allowed. There's no reason why they shouldn't be.

 

That's how I see it to, but my opponent argues that it is not a "shooting attack" = no cover saves and it is not a pysic power = no null zone.

I can't wait for the FAQ on this one.

[Giga]

That's how I see it to, but my opponent argues that it is not a "shooting attack" = no cover saves and it is not a pysic power = no null zone.

I can't wait for the FAQ on this one.

Tell your buddy it doesn't matter if its a shooting attack or not.

 

We still get cover saves from exploding vehicles, njal's storm, exploding pyrovores, area of effect damage powers such as Nurgle's Rot, mawloc's pieplate, etc. There's absolutely no reason why we shouldn't get cover saves from the Doom's spirit leech.

 

If the designers didn't want us to have cover saves, they would've mentioned it in the spirit leech rule entry.

[Gornall]

Tell your buddy it doesn't matter if its a shooting attack or not.

 

We still get cover saves from exploding vehicles, njal's storm, exploding pyrovores, area of effect damage powers such as Nurgle's Rot, mawloc's pieplate, etc. There's absolutely no reason why we shouldn't get cover saves from the Doom's spirit leech.

 

If the designers didn't want us to have cover saves, they would've mentioned it in the spirit leech rule entry.

 

Actually, technically you only get cover saves from shooting attacks. Nothing else unless you house rule it (which a lot of people do). "If the designers wanted us to have cover saves, they would've mentioned it in the spirit leech's rule entry."

;)

 

Don't think I'm picking on you, Giga. I'm just pointing out a lot of the rule stuff I've seen with the new codex.... GW needs to write cleaner rules so we don't have to debate how they work every time a new codex comes out.

[Giga]

Actually, technically you only get cover saves from shooting attacks. Nothing else unless you house rule it (which a lot of people do). "If the designers wanted us to have cover saves, they would've mentioned it in the spirit leech's rule entry."

;)

 

Don't think I'm picking on you, Giga. I'm just pointing out a lot of the rule stuff I've seen with the new codex.... GW needs to write cleaner rules so we don't have to debate how they work every time a new codex comes out.

Ummm... I'm reading the cover save rule in the 5th ed rulebook right now, and nowhere does it say that cover saves can only be taken from shooting. It even mentions "enemy shots and flying debris" in the flavor text. Spirit leech, nurgle's rot, njal's storm etc. are different only in flavor, they're still just mechanisms that deliver wounds onto a unit. When a weapon/ability/psychic power ignores cover saves, it's ALWAYS mentioned in its entry (or its a flamer template weapon, in which case it automatically ignores cover).

 

The only reason people seem to assume you can't take cover saves from non-shooting is because cover saves cannot be taken in assault, so they assume cover saves are somehow exclusive to shooting.

[Gornall]

Actually, technically you only get cover saves from shooting attacks. Nothing else unless you house rule it (which a lot of people do). "If the designers wanted us to have cover saves, they would've mentioned it in the spirit leech's rule entry."

<_<

 

Don't think I'm picking on you, Giga. I'm just pointing out a lot of the rule stuff I've seen with the new codex.... GW needs to write cleaner rules so we don't have to debate how they work every time a new codex comes out.

Ummm... I'm reading the cover save rule in the 5th ed rulebook right now, and nowhere does it say that cover saves can only be taken from shooting. It even mentions "enemy shots and flying debris" in the flavor text. Spirit leech, nurgle's rot, njal's storm etc. are different only in flavor, they're still just mechanisms that deliver wounds onto a unit. When a weapon/ability/psychic power ignores cover saves, it's ALWAYS mentioned in its entry (or its a flamer template weapon, in which case it automatically ignores cover).

 

The only reason people seem to assume you can't take cover saves from non-shooting is because cover saves cannot be taken in assault, so they assume cover saves are somehow exclusive to shooting.

 

According to Page 21, a model is only in cover if "any part of the target model's body is obscured from the point of view of the firer..." Whenever the BRB mentions coversaves it always talks about in relation to the firer. Whether or not you want to apply that very vague term of "firer" to everything including exploding vehicles and whatnot is up to you and your playing partner. My FLGS plays it where if it's not an actual shooting ability, then it doesn't have a firer and therefore the target doesn't get a cover save.

[Giga]

According to Page 21, a model is only in cover if "any part of the target model's body is obscured from the point of view of the firer..." Whenever the BRB mentions coversaves it always talks about in relation to the firer. Whether or not you want to apply that very vague term of "firer" to everything including exploding vehicles and whatnot is up to you and your playing partner. My FLGS plays it where if it's not an actual shooting ability, then it doesn't have a firer and therefore the target doesn't get a cover save.

That's because cover saves are unique in that they require the models to be in area terrain or behind cover in order to get a cover save. 'Firer' is just a word used to describe the model using a damaging ability/firing a gun/exploding etc.

 

I mean, how else are you going to explain it? As I mentioned later, the flavor text even mentions "flying debris" in relation to cover saves, and it's quite obvious from the wording of the rules they weren't meant to be used exclusively against wounds from shooting. Whenever something does ignore cover saves (such as wounds from dangerous terrain, flamer template weapons and abilities, wounds in assault etc.) it's always explicitly mentioned in the rule.

 

 

 

 

 

Basically, similar RaW arguments against using cover saves could be made for just about any rule in 40k.

[Gornall]

'Firer' is just a word used to describe the model using a damaging ability/firing a gun/exploding etc.

 

'Firer' isn't defined in terms of 40k, so we honestly don't know what was intended. Is a Malowc "firing" when it comes out of the ground? You can make the argument both ways, TBH, so until GW FAQs it, who knows?

 

As I mentioned later, the flavor text even mentions "flying debris" in relation to cover saves,

 

Flavor text doesn't mean anything RAW-wise. However, it does make a good argument for RAI if you want to house rule it.

 

and it's quite obvious from the wording of the rules they weren't meant to be used exclusively against wounds from shooting.

 

I disagree. The word 'firer' makes it "obvious" to me that it's only from shooting.

 

TBH, the wording is vague and you can argue it both ways. I've played it both ways in tournaments and friendly games. Personally, from a pure RAW perspective, I think that unless it's a shooting attack, you don't get cover, but that's something I work out with my opponent beforehand. If I could write the FAQ, I would basically say that guys in transports are immune to anything outside the transport unless stated otherwise (Parasite) and that the Malowc can target a unit and grants no cover saves. Will that be how it turns out? Who knows? I'm just saying don't be suprised if your opponent disagrees with you until GW clears these issues up.

[Giga]

Yeh, I know what you mean.

 

Thankfully, my local metagame doesn't raise such questions, and we mostly agreed on these standard rules.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, we veered off topic.

 

What I was wondering is how people feel about tyrannofexes? I'm under the impression that staying in cover and ignoring these guys is preferable to trying to down a W6 2+ bug that stands at ~40" range and shoots. Anyone got a better idea?

[DemetriiTZ]

I've never seen anyone trying to field these en masse, but the one fellow who did use one was cooked fairly quickly with a pair of Deepstriking Obliterators, who mowed it down with rapidfire plasma over the course of two turns, handily dropping behind the cover he was using to block his front and easily baking his back.

 

Tyranid monsters basically need to be handled with overwhelming force on a single target. The major concern I see beneath the surface of this Codex, even though everyone seems to be claiming the 'Dex itself isn't all that scarifying, is a simple one: The Tyranid Codex gives a skillful player the ability to absolutely control the target prioritization game.

 

Mark my words, there are some power builds in this Codex we haven't seen yet, because they haven't been polished and implemented by people who know what they're doing. When we do start running into them, however, I predict it's going to be very tricky. I'm concerned with an army that leaves me very few options as an opponent, except to shoot whatever he chooses to present to me. The synergy in the 'Dex already rivals Eldar, and even the humble hormagaunt is frightening when he's being given preferred enemy, and sent after a squad of Marines who've just been nailed with Paroxysm.

 

Any 120 point squad which can inflict 22 wounds on the charge at I-5 is something to be leery of.

[DemetriiTZ]

As for the Mawloc issue, my personal feelings are thus:

 

You get cover saves from anything your opponent does to you that damages you (i.e., inflicts wounds) during the Shooting phase. As the Mawloc emerges during the Movement phase, I simply read the AP2 as denying all forms of armor for the purposes of "blocking" that deepstriking attack. As for Deepstriking on top of the enemy, I'm fine with that, too -- RAI is clear, even if wording on the rule is murky. I'm pretty sure, deep down, you all know a Mawloc wouldn't make sense if it came with a template you couldn't try to drop on your opponent, combined with a horrendous set of CC abilities. Don't punish your opponent because the idiot who wrote the Codex fails at sentence structuring.

 

As for the Doom.. Yeah, I'm kind of leaning towards his power not hitting people in transports, even if it isn't technically a shooting attack, and even if the unit in the transport is technically within his 6''. I could be wrong, but that's how I'd play it.

 

Just my 2 cents -- I'm not calling anyone out for not playing this way, I'm simply choosing to allow my foe to use his Mawloc as I feel it was clearly intended to be used.

[Gornall]

Yeh, I know what you mean.What I was wondering is how people feel about tyrannofexes? I'm under the impression that staying in cover and ignoring these guys is preferable to trying to down a W6 2+ bug that stands at ~40" range and shoots. Anyone got a better idea?

 

Nope... I think you hit it on the money. Short of trying to tie it up with LSS Scouts or something, I imagine your best bet is to ignore it and hope it doesn't roll hot.

[The Black Watch]

Cruddance gave units some good points costs. The only thing I feel like he has done wrong was make starting cost for hive tyrants so high. If you want a close combat tyrant, there's just no reason to take a standard tyrant over a swarmlord, it seems. Guess he anticipated the players taking swarmlord for close combat, and standard tyrant for shooting and flying.

I disagree here. The standard HT build is excellent in CC. WS8, S6, T6, W4, I5, A4! Plus everyone in base contact fights at I1 and his weapons allow no armour saves AND can cause instant death. Oh, and he can re-roll to-hits of 1. And that's before you mention paroxysm etc. What's not to like there? Yeah, the swarmlord is unspeakably good but its 110 pts more. Thats a whole Space Marine Captain! I also think twenty-odd points to upgrade to one of the big guns is not good value at BS3. I always try to play to the indivudual strengths of each unit and shooting is certainly not the HT's specialty.

 

On a personal note, I also try and avoid using the uber-characters from any codex. I like to save them for special occasions. ^_^

 

As for the Mawloc issue, my personal feelings are thus:

 

You get cover saves from anything your opponent does to you that damages you (i.e., inflicts wounds) during the Shooting phase. As the Mawloc emerges during the Movement phase, I simply read the AP2 as denying all forms of armor for the purposes of "blocking" that deepstriking attack. As for Deepstriking on top of the enemy, I'm fine with that, too -- RAI is clear, even if wording on the rule is murky. I'm pretty sure, deep down, you all know a Mawloc wouldn't make sense if it came with a template you couldn't try to drop on your opponent, combined with a horrendous set of CC abilities. Don't punish your opponent because the idiot who wrote the Codex fails at sentence structuring.

Yeah cover saves just make sense. And unless it specifically says you don't get one in the weapon entry or somewhere in the rules then how can anyone argue otherwise?

 

I wouldn't call Cruddance an idiot though. :nuke: