Wh40k 10th Edition Tyranids Index

[sairence]

17 minutes ago, TrawlingCleaner said:

 

 

Step1) Stick 3 in reserves

Step 2) Deep Strike in the middle of the board

Step 3) Drop 12 of these a turn:

Step 4) Block your opponent in their deployment zone and away from objectives

Step 5) Profit

 

Strategic reserves doesn't let you deep strike ;-)

[Karhedron]

12 minutes ago, TrawlingCleaner said:

 

 

Step1) Stick 3 in reserves

Step 2) Deep Strike in the middle of the board

Step 3) Drop 12 of these a turn:

Step 4) Block your opponent in their deployment zone and away from objectives

Step 5) Profit

 

Alas being in Strategic Reserves does not grant the Deep Strike Ability.

 

However I can't seem to see any rules preventing you from putting a Spore Cyst in a Tyrannocyte to achieve the Deep Strike. There may be something in the Core Rules that prevents models with Movement 0 using Transports but I can't see it at the moment. I am sure this is not legal but it would be utterly bonkers if you pulled it off.

 

[Toxichobbit]

1 minute ago, Indy Techwisp said:

I've had another look through the datasheets.

Didn't Tyranids previously have a lot of anti-psyker stuff?

Where'd all that go?

 

I wouldn't say a lot, but they had some. Their main anti-psyker was shadow in the warp, which is now a battle shock influencing ability. And if I remember correctly one of the Hive Fleets had some anti-psyker abilities, stuff like a Stratagem & Warlord trait. 

[ZeroWolf]

Is the spore cyst a monster though? Only monsters and infantry get to ride in the tyrannocyte

[DemonGSides]

2 minutes ago, Toxichobbit said:

Every player I know who "plays things they think are cool" is disappointed with this edition. So no, it's not factually untrue. It doesn't apply to everybody, but that goes without saying. Unless of course you are saying that my and others opinions and feelings are factually untrue? I have no idea where you got the idea that I was dismissing anybody who disagreed with me. I don't remember telling anyone that their opinion was incorrect.

 

You didn't state it as an opinion, that's why you're getting push-back.  You stated the fact that Builders for Cool will be bummed, and Builders for What's good will be happy.

 

2 minutes ago, Toxichobbit said:

I don't need to justify my disappointment. It's an opinion & emotion. I was expressing it, because that's what forums are for.

 

Then why post at all?

 

2 minutes ago, Toxichobbit said:

I find it amusing that you're saying that I'm dismissing other's opinions and factually incorrect, then proceed to tell me where character and depth should come from, as if you are the authority on it and anybody who gets character and depth a different way is wrong.

 

You won't answer anything besides saying you're disappointed so you're not really providing much to work with on this DISCUSSION FORUM.  I would gladly pick apart, factually, your problems, but every time I do, you shift goal posts and throw out an appeal to emotion.

 

"I AM DISAPPOINTED"  "Okay, why?"  "I don't have to justify anything to you."

Ok?  Go get a B&C blog, no one wants one way conversations here.

[Chaplain Mollusc]

1 minute ago, ZeroWolf said:

Is the spore cyst a monster though? Only monsters and infantry get to ride in the tyrannocyte

It has the MONSTER keyword, yes. No idea how it would disembark with zero movement...

[Toxichobbit]

1 minute ago, ZeroWolf said:

Is the spore cyst a monster though? Only monsters and infantry get to ride in the tyrannocyte

 

Yeah, it is a monster. When they first introduced Tyrannocytes & Sporocysts in 6th, there were all kinds of funky rules interactions. You could put Tyrannocytes in Tyrannocytes like Matryoshka dolls . They got it fixed though, so I'm sure they'll fix this to limit the more outlandish passengers that a Tyrannocyte can currently take.

[Indy Techwisp]

Just now, Chaplain Mollusc said:

It has the MONSTER keyword, yes. No idea how it would disembark with zero movement...

 

Just... gets placed directly next to the spore?

The spore flies off afterwards doesn't it, so you just leave the move 0 thing where you left it.

[Arikel]

1 hour ago, acrozatarim said:

 

Yeah, what I mean is that they are called out as specific separate models/champions but they don't seem to do anything extra. No special rules, no special stats, so they''re effectively just an extra neurogaunt model.

In case no one mentioned this yet, if you put a relic enhancement into a squad when playing crusade, it goes on the squad champion model.

[Kallas]

3 minutes ago, Chaplain Mollusc said:

It has the MONSTER keyword, yes. No idea how it would disembark with zero movement...

The rules for disembarkation don't interact with a model's Movement characteristic: you place the disembarking models within the distance specified, and then they act as normal (either able to move if the transport hasn't; or not able to move if the transport has).

 

However, double checking the rules for disembarking, there isn't any allowance for models with bases that literally cannot fit: so a Spore Cyst (or the aircraft I mentioned earlier) would not be allowed to disembark.

Spoiler

When a unit disembarks from a Transport model, set it up on the battlefield so that it is wholly within 3" of that Transport model and not within Engagement Range of any enemy models. If, for any reason, a disembarking model cannot be set up, that model’s unit cannot disembark. 

I think the only way to get them out would be for the transport to be destroyed and to trigger Emergency Disembarkation. Not sure there are many units that can embark on transports and not be able to fit wholly within 3", but I guess Tyranids make it a fun game of 'read the rules more to see where it breaks' 

[Kastor Krieg]

Hm, jeanstealers lost a tick of AP and 4++ inv in melee. Gained 2+ WS. 

Lost the ability to get 4+ saves at the cost of 1" of movement, lost the ability to climb walls... Eh. 

They seem really... plain :(

 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Kastor Krieg

[Kallas]

Just now, Kastor Krieg said:

Hm, jeanstealers lost a tick of AP and 4++ inv in melee. Gained 2+ WS. Hmmm...

Don't forget, they're 2W now as well!

[Kastor Krieg]

2 minutes ago, Kallas said:

Don't forget, they're 2W now as well!

Good point, didn't notice that. But I'll miss the ability to climb walls :(

[TrawlingCleaner]

34 minutes ago, danodan123 said:

 

A fun idea, but how would you deep strike it still?

 

I got ahead of myself! It's SR not DS, it could've been a cool idea!

[Arikel]

38 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

No points?

From what I gather, points for everyone will be in the munitorum field manual that will be updated regularly , not on the cards themselves.

[Toxichobbit]

3 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

You didn't state it as an opinion, that's why you're getting push-back.  You stated the fact that Builders for Cool will be bummed, and Builders for What's good will be happy.

 

 

Then why post at all?

 

 

You won't answer anything besides saying you're disappointed so you're not really providing much to work with on this DISCUSSION FORUM.  I would gladly pick apart, factually, your problems, but every time I do, you shift goal posts and throw out an appeal to emotion.

 

"I AM DISAPPOINTED"  "Okay, why?"  "I don't have to justify anything to you."

Ok?  Go get a B&C blog, no one wants one way conversations here.

 

Oh come on . I started off my sentence with "I think it's often connected to the differences in players..." That makes it pretty clear that I am expressing an opinion, not a fact. The only thing I'm stating is that it's what I think, not what's true. And I'm also acknowledged that it doesn't apply to everybody in the same sentence, so nobody should be assuming that I am applying it to everybody.

 

That said, I honestly don't think I need to outright state that what I said was an opinion. It's safe to assume that none of us are omnipotent so huge sweeping statements like that are going to be a combination of anecdotal experience and opinion. There is no way that I could know what every player who plays for cool enjoys, nor what every player who plays more competitively enjoys. Stuff like this never applies to anybody, it doesn't dismiss anybody else's opinion or experiences. 

 

There's some miscommunication here. I wasn't saying I don't have to justify anything to you. That was a reply to you saying that I was trying to justify my disappointment. As I said, it's an emotion, it doesn't need justifying. Justifying is proving that something is right, that it's valid. That doesn't apply to emotions (most of the time). I don't have to justify why I'm disappointed, but I will happily explain it, if you'd like? I have no problem talking about it and discussing different opinions, Though to keep it on topic, lets just stick to the Tyranid stuff (I'm happy to talk about the rest of 10th elsewhere if you'd like).

[acrozatarim]

I don't think haranguing toxichobbit to argue with why they feel disappointed is going to be worth anyone's while, really. If folks are feeling disappointed, you can't debate the disappointment away, even if you disagree with the whys and wherefores.

[Toxichobbit]

1 minute ago, acrozatarim said:

I don't think haranguing toxichobbit to argue with why they feel disappointed is going to be worth anyone's while, really. If folks are feeling disappointed, you can't debate the disappointment away, even if you disagree with the whys and wherefores.

 

Ty :) But it's cool, I don't mind a discussion on my reasons for feeling disappointed. I'm open to having my mind changed, as long as it's in good faith, respectful & we all read what other people say without making assumptions. Possibly in a different topic or PM's so we don't send this one off on a tangent.

[DemonGSides]

16 minutes ago, Toxichobbit said:

 

Oh come on . I started off my sentence with "I think it's often connected to the differences in players..." That makes it pretty clear that I am expressing an opinion, not a fact. The only thing I'm stating is that it's what I think, not what's true. And I'm also acknowledged that it doesn't apply to everybody in the same sentence, so nobody should be assuming that I am applying it to everybody.

 

I'm not the only one who didn't understand what you were saying, considering multiple people responded to you why you were wrong.  Don't make sweeping generalizations and people won't assume you're making sweeping generalizations.
 

16 minutes ago, Toxichobbit said:

That said, I honestly don't think I need to outright state that what I said was an opinion. It's safe to assume that none of us are omnipotent so huge sweeping statements like that are going to be a combination of anecdotal experience and opinion. There is no way that I could know what every player who plays for cool enjoys, nor what every player who plays more competitively enjoys. Stuff like this never applies to anybody, it doesn't dismiss anybody else's opinion or experiences. 

 

Which is why people pushed back and gave you examples contrary to your sweeping generalization.

 

2 minutes ago, Toxichobbit said:

Ty :) But it's cool, I don't mind a discussion on my reasons for feeling disappointed. I'm open to having my mind changed, as long as it's in good faith, respectful & we all read what other people say without making assumptions. Possibly in a different topic or PM's so we don't send this one off on a tangent.

 

I literally asked you why you were disappointed and what things were sacrificed to make you disappointed, and you didn't engage.

[Karhedron]

1 hour ago, Kallas said:

The rules for disembarkation don't interact with a model's Movement characteristic: you place the disembarking models within the distance specified, and then they act as normal (either able to move if the transport hasn't; or not able to move if the transport has).

 

I think it might also be covered by the following bit (emphasis mine).

 

Quote

Units that disembark from a Transport model that either Remained Stationary this phase or has not yet made a Normal, Advance or Fall Back move this phase can then act normally (make a Normal move, Advance, shoot, declare a charge, fight, etc.) in the remainder of the turn. Such a disembarking unit cannot choose to Remain Stationary.

 

Disembarking units cannot remain stationary and a model with Movement 0 cannot move so you could argue that the contradiction means you can't put a Spore Cyst in a Tyrannocyte. I do agree that looking for these weird edge cases is important otherwise someone will try to break things.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Karhedron

[Blight1]

I will miss the advance and charge on genestealers. 

 

Overall I'm optimistic about this edition and I know a lot of my local players were getting rules fatigue so this should help them.

One thing I dislike about the homogenizing of weapon options is that GW is wildly inconsistent in how they do it.  Tyrant guard have full weapon options and warriors do not despite having incredibly similar loadouts.  Same thing happened with CSM where they had some units with lightning claws and some with two maelific weapons.  Same modeled weapon but very different rules.  It's an inconsistency that gets to me.

Still excited to see all the armies and to get some games in.

Will be having a Tyranid mirror match today using 9th ed points to try this all out.

[Guest Triszin]

Tervigon

Tyrannofex 

 Exocrine

 

Excellence

[Toxichobbit]

32 minutes ago, DemonGSides said:

 

I literally asked you why you were disappointed and what things were sacrificed to make you disappointed, and you didn't engage.

 

So you did. Sorry. I completely blanked on that sentence somehow.

 

I'm just going to try to stick to Tyranids, so this is at least somewhat on topic. It's difficult to vocalise some of it, hopefully I'll be able to explain clearly, but if you want any clarification on anything just ask. Maybe explaining how we played will be the best way.

 

Our games in 9th were all Crusade. What we really enjoyed was developing our armies, customising characters & to a lesser extent, units. Almost like an RPG. Things like giving a Marine character a relic bolt pistol, even though it was terrible, was just fun to make him a bit more unique & have a different, customised bolt pistol to everyone else. Or another player giving his Saim-Hann Autarch the relic laser lance because he'd converted up a cool model that fitted it perfectly. Often we'd choose relics for the lore behind them as much as for how cool they felt. We'd roll random psychic powers, random warlord traits, random battle traits, random weapon upgrades. Anything that could be random, was. It wasn't about customising to make the best combination, it was about creating something that was unique, both model and rules wise. Like having your own special character. And all that randomness lead to some truly weird combinations that we'd have never considered normally. Plus, rolling on random tables is just fun. Will you get something characterful that fits, or something weird where you can flex your imagination to come up with a bit of lore behind it? Will it be a good combination, or will you end up with an incompetent dullard who fumbles around the table? Honestly, the weird & (competitively) bad combinations were often the most exciting to us. It was the most fun we'd had with 40k in the last decade and a half, at least.

 

Now, I'm not blind to the previews. I've known that there was going to be a big reduction in customisation. I've accepted that and somewhat come to terms with it. Even so, it really sucks that if we choose to play 10th (which we'd like to do, because cool new models) we either have to house rule the crap out of it, or just accept that the thing that had us so enthusiastic for 40k is gone. I was, perhaps naively, hoping that when we saw the full datasheets some of the interest would be put back in. But reading the Tyranid datasheets, they just feel so bland. None of the enhancements feel exciting. The characters,, while not awful, feel very samey. For example, if I use Tyranids in our next Crusade and our other Tyranid player does, we're both going to have very similar Hive Tyrants, very similar Broodlords, identical melee Warriors.

 

By all rights, I should be more excited about this edition than previous ones, because I love Tyranids & I really enjoy customising Marines. My favourite part of the lore has always been the Tyrannic Wars. It captures that Aliens/Starship Troopers feeling that I really enjoy. So Leviathan, model wise, is pretty much a perfect release for me. I'm excited about the models. I'm excited about the lore. I like the core rules. But the unit datasheets, visually seeing the lack of customisation (rather than just reading about it), seeing stuff like Primes & Neurothropes being rolled into units as a special rule ... for me, it's a huge downer on this release.

 

Hopefully the Crusade rules and the Codexes will bring some of that excitement back.

[Xenith]

52 minutes ago, Triszin said:

Tervigon

Excellence

 

Bit dissapointed that it's gone from 2d6 to 10, to average 5 gaunts per turn now, but hopefully it will come down in points enough to be worthwhile. Statwise it looks ok!  

[SkimaskMohawk]

@Toxichobbit I think the difference in players is more when they started playing 40 instead of how they like to build lists.

 

Back in the days of 3rd and 4th you were able to actually fine tune your nids to a given role with their biomorphs, and create that "hyper evolved to solve a problem". The freedom of biomorphs and the need to excel in certain roles has been a bit lost to time; now 40k is all about taking "the best™" weapon that solves every possible problem. 

Edited June 8, 2023 by SkimaskMohawk