The first tournament results are in, and Tyranids are not the worst of the worst, and in fact are being reported as on par with other codices, namely Space Marines. The results come from the recent Tshift tournament in Seattle, from two different people on two different sites.


I read both of these sites, Blood of Kittens and Frontline Gaming, and I am not going to go into their analysis of Tyranids after this tournament. Instead I am going to post up the lists they shared and give you the links, so that you can see the success they had, and their opinions after hitting it hard up against a strong Tau/Eldar meta in Seattle.

So here are the two lists, and the links to the sites where you can read more about their reports.

Tasty Taste and his report on the Blood of Kittens
http://bloodofkittens.com/blog/2014/01/21/tits-tournaments-competitive-tyranid-results/
Hive Tyrant: Twin-Linked Devourer with Brainleech worms x2, Hive Commander, Wings
Hive Tyrant: Twin-Linked Devourer with Brainleech worms x2, Wings
Tervigon: The Norn Crown
Hormaguant Brood: x2 18-man
Termagant Brood: 30-man with x25 Devourers
Zoanthrope Brood: 1 x 2
Venomthrope Brood: 1 x 1
Mawloc: x 3
Aegis Line with Comm Relay
= 1750 pts

Jeremy's list and his report on Frontline Gaming
http://www.frontlinegaming.org/2014/01/21/the-french-overlord-takes-nids-to-tshft/
2 Flyrants with 2x TL Devourers and Wings
30 Termagaunts with Fleshborers
1 Tervigon with Regen
20 Termagaunts with Fleshborers
1 Zoanthrope
1 Venomthrope
2 Harpies with TL Heavy Venom Cannons
2 Mawlocs
1 Tyrannofex with Acid Spray and Regen



The key here is not necessary their lists, but what they said about their games in the tournament. Tyranids are not going to be the bottom of the heap competitive army that so many people are fearing it is. Take a look at their reports.

90 Comments:

  1. Actually I think they're comments are more telling than the results, they both did alright in the results sections, but both of them felt very hamstrung by the codex.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The only real hamstrung feeling I got from their comments was TastyTaste's comment about the lack of a long range threat. I for one like the fact that the other guy went 3-0, all of which were "nail bitters". Maybe not what a dedicated tournament player wants to see, but those results are more favorable to a player like me, non-tournament focused, than a blowout.

      Delete
    2. Um Tits for Tournaments was overall positive, even calling Biomancy and stuff Crutches. He did say that nids are harder to play than Tau and Eldar, and I think that's the biggest issue with this edition:
      Not that all codices suck, but that Tau/Eldar is to easy to play, making them over powered. If anything need a change is those two, not every other codex.

      Delete
    3. "Overall, I like playing the Nids, not because I find their codex particularly good but because I find them challenging and they were exactly what I thought they be. You have no room for error in this codex."

      Delete
    4. I have read the 2nd guys battle reports and it looks like although he played extremely well, he got extremely lucky game 1 and on game 3 he was playing someone who didnt know how to use his list and what tyranids did.

      I am sorry, but finding 2 people who have done well at a tournament does not mean the codex is good or half good

      Delete
    5. My complaints about the nids were that there seems to be a lot of units that aren't really fun or very good, not that there weren't effective units buried in there. So army lists will find one or two decent builds and you won't see much variety.

      Look at those lists: both had 2 Flyrants, 30 termagants, tervigon, mawlocs, a venomthrope, zoanthropes. The differences are that one took an extra zoanthrope, hormagants, a mawloc and defences; the other took extra harpies, termagants and tyrannofex.

      I suspect Flyrants, zoanthropes, venemothropes and defences will become fairly standard in a lot of armies (I like Harpies too) and I suspect defences will be a big thing with the venomthrope.

      If biomancy was a crutch what will people think about venomthrope/defence in a lot of armies?

      Delete
    6. The comments are indeed more telling than the results. But their conclusions are quite uplifting and clearly not taking the same line than all the naysayers.

      Here's Nick's résumé: 'Tyranids take a lot more skill than Tau or Eldar, but the rewards I feel are greater. Against armies like Tau and Eldar forcing them to deal with threat after threat means they cannot deal with the most important thing in your army: Troops. I look forward to playing Nids more and see what folks come up with this already unappreciated codex.'

      And Jer and Max here essentially said they liked playing them. It seems Pavlov's dogs can stop slobbering for good, doesn't it?. So what do you want, people? An excuse from GW for not fawning on each and every opinion holder?

      Delete
    7. Oh, and Barry, did you actually read what Nick, Jer and Max wrote about the Tyrants' performance at TSHFT? Quite the opposite of what you're suggesting, good sir.

      Delete
    8. I did indeed. I'm not sure what you mean, could you elucidate?

      Delete
  2. But, but, but, that goes against the narrative... So you're telling me that actually playing the army has garnered different results than the people just complaining on how bad and under-powered it is? Imagine that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These two players finished 51st and 52nd out of 55. The OP should do some fucking research and post a retraction for this piece, as the title is a fucking lie. Jeremy and Nick are the two authors linked. Find there results here: http://bloghammer.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/TSHFT-Open-2014-40K-Indi.pdf

      Delete
    2. Actually, if you look at the majority of complaints (or most of the ones from me, and other experienced gamers) none of my complaints about the nids were that they were under-powered.

      It was that the book was dull, un-inspired and felt rushed.
      The artifact and powers are bland, and many units are just terrible (note warriors and stealers are not in those lists).

      And other units are auto-include (note the flyrants with TLBL).
      I know I can win games with the book - its just not a good book. The last several codexes had tons of inspiring options and a lot of strong builds (i.e. you can still win with tau not spam riptides....).

      The nid book is not bad, its just not good....and that, is bad.

      Delete
    3. Both of the players in question only played on the first day, so only 3 of the 5 games, and the overall ranking is a composite battle/paint/sports score, which anyone with the new nids will suffer from as I'm willing to bet they did not find the time to paint up (in my case) the 6 new MCs they bought the previous saturday. In Jeremy's case, he won all three of the games he played in, and I finished with 80 out of 100 possible battle points, good for 9th place before being dragged down for having a bunch of black-primed, unbased models on the board.

      Delete
  3. I was also one of the new Nid players at TSHFT this past weekend, and also did quite respectably with them (better than I ever did with the old book at that event, actually) at 3-1-1. I had wins against Space Marines, Chaos Marines, and Ben Cromwell's CSM/Black Legion flying circus list, and tied against a Tau player on turn six, and would have had a full 20 point win if the game had ended on turn five. The loss came to the overall winner, a DE/Eldar player with massed venoms with nightshields and ravagers backed up by a wraithknight on a board totally devoid of LOS-blocking terrain, which is just about the worst matchup nids have, this edition or last. Overall not disappointed with how the new book is shaping up so far.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Max you should post your list too!

      Delete
    2. That would be relevant, wouldn't it? The list (bravely brought without time to playtest at all) looked a little something like this:Nids 1750 - Max Betich

      HQ:
      Hive Tyrant -230
      -Wings, Two Sets of Twin-linked Devourers w/ Brainleech Worms
      Hive Tyrant -230
      -Wings, Two Sets of Twin-linked Devourers w/ Brainleech Worms

      Troops:
      Genestealers x5 -70

      Genestealers x5 -70

      Termagants x30 -120

      Tervigon -195

      Fast Attack:
      Hive Crone -155

      Hive Crone -155

      Heavy:
      Exocrine -170

      Exocrine -170

      Tyrannofex -185
      -Acid Spray, Shreddershard Beetles

      Delete
    3. Was going for a kind of MC-threat-overload, where I had 7 MCs, 4 of which were flying, that I could jam down the opponent's throat without really having to worry about their long-term survival, as unlike with the old tervigon spam, none of them were scoring, and I wasn't relying on them to hold up the rest of my army, and by the end of the event I felt it had performed pretty close to what I had intended. The crones seemed like they had a couple uses with twinlinked skyfire, and high-powered vector strikes (and to be honest, I like how they look), and I reasoned the fragile statline I could somewhat compensate for through redundancy and saturation, which I think is a pretty big selling point for the new book. Plasma shooting was a novel thing to have, and I wish nids had an easy way to get access to another heavy slot, as I think after playing the list a couple times a Mawloc or possibly two would probably work better with the list than one of the exocrines, though being able to reach out and threaten a riptide without having to get into close combat with it sure was a nice feeling. I also really liked being able to use the Tfex now, as he makes great durable threat to guard/xenos scoring units, and a lovely objective holder in Big Guns. Kept a single tervi despite all the nerfs because it's still a 6-wound scoring MC that can make other scoring units when needed, but it was very much a backfield objective holder as opposed to a versatile midfield unit like in the last codex. The two tiny stealer squads were a halfhearted attempt to up the number of scoring units, despite their relative fragility, because they were cheap, not synapse-dependant, and I figured they could use their special deployment options to access distant/unguarded objectives if the opportunity presented itself, which actually worked out a couple times. Overall pretty happy with it, especially as it's essentially just a first-draft list, and I think there's definitely some hidden potential in the nid book waiting to be found.

      Delete
    4. Ah, and sorry about including the point costs, was just a straight copy-paste from the document I'd written up. Feel free to delete it if that's a problem, and I can post up a point cost-free version later.

      Delete
    5. Max, you took 'Stealers and the sky didn't come falling? But, but the internet know-it-alls DECIDED they are not to be taken! How dare you!

      Cheers for having fun and proving the naysayers wrong, much appreciated!

      Delete
    6. Hmmm 2 flyrants with t/l devourers and 30 termagants and a tervigon. Is that going to be the basis of all lists?

      Delete
    7. Nice work mate, much respect.

      Delete
    8. Barry, did you expect anything less? Troop Tervigon and Devourer Flyrants were always powerful, new Codex didn't change that one bit.

      Delete
    9. That's kind of the point. I did expect it and that's the problem.

      Also, the codex certainly has changed how powerful tervigons are - that's why these lists need one but don't have two.

      Delete
  4. It's good to hear. I'm always amused by the reactions to new codices, good or bad. It's easy to get caught up in these early reactions. I actually like the new nids codex and I hope that it's the flavour of those still to come. I am an Eldar player, but I actually agree with TheAurgelmir that it is the Tau/Eldar codices that are causing the problem.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for this post. I feel vindicated after all of the comments regarding my first impression of the new dex. These guys are playable and can win!

    ReplyDelete
  6. While it isn't the most competitive of events, it's worth noting that at Throne of Skulls at Warhammer World last weekend, the Tyranid players got the highest average score. That's pretty decent considering this was a tournament with Revenants and Transcendent C'Tans playing.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I would like to see a list that doesn't rely on 2 flyrants or any tervigons to do well...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really wouldn't say that the lists "relied" on two flyrants at all. They took them, sure, but they didn't sound like carried the army in any way.

      Delete
    2. Andreas below is right, you could save 40 points and get a Prime but you lose wounds, strength, toughness, WS and two levels of psychic powers. The other Tyranid HQ aren't able to compete with a Hive Tyrant either and now armoured shell is gone ...

      The reason for so many fly rants with twin linked is because we don't have invuln saves and I guess a toughness of six doesn't compensate enough. Also without any kind of assault grenade, we can't effectively assault into cover so there is little point making a CC HT, for that we have a super expensive SW.

      Delete
    3. with regards to assaulting into cover, we now can spam "the horror" and if they're pinned we dont get the initiative penalty. only around a 50% chance of working on standard marines, but useful nonetheless, especially when supporting a brood of 30 hormagaunts

      Delete
    4. correction, only 50% chance of working, after casting, denying, sitting around twiddling your thumbs for a turn.....

      Delete
  8. But thats exactly the problem:
    Obviously there are 1 or 2 builds that work but as it seems now "playing against nids" means playing against
    -1-2 Flyrants with TL devourer
    -2-4 Venomthropes
    -60 gants
    -1 crone
    -1 exocrine

    The problem isn't that one can't make ONE list that's competitve. The problem is that you really can ONLY make ONE list that'll work. And even those won't do too well (especially once the meta has adapted)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh yeah sorry, mix in 1-2 tervigons.

      The key IS in the lists they were using.

      Delete
    2. That really doesn't seem fair at all. Couldn't you say that all armies have a couple of units that stand out in every slot?

      Additionally, the lists above didn't all include Exocrines, Crones, or 60 gants.

      Delete
    3. I think that's Quatsch, good Sir. We will see how things go but to make such broad a statement so early after the new codex dropped doesn't seem to be a smart move. People are simply used to play Tyrants that way because that was the 'approved' way of kitting them out in the last book. As Max already pointed out, he didn't even playtested his list for TSHFT. The more gamers will try and test, the more variation will come through.

      Delete
    4. @King George....I agree...both players used them in the tournament with less than stellar results....being brand new to 40K, I too heard/read all the "bad news" and was a bit apprehensive as to what to expect with the new dex, especially after dropping a small fortune on my first army...I for one really dig the Nids and believe there will be several approaches/lists that will reveal themselves the more I play them...also, getting top shelf insight from tournament players helps me immensely in learning tactics and strategies. Thx!

      Delete
  9. Replies
    1. Three? I've got a pair of Flyrants for HQs, the Tervigon is a troops choice courtesy of the 30-man termagant unit.

      Delete
  10. Ahh sorry didn't see the termagant unit. I'm off to throne of skulls in Nottingham in March any advice?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm a fan of the big bugs, for one because using a bunch of monstrous creatures is the reason I picked nids, but also because of the way the new synapse rules work, I'm not too hamstrung if they're caught outside the radius of the tyrants or the tervi; in fact, one of the Exocrines rolled up preferred enemy from the synapse table at just the right time and shot a heldrake (or possibly a Daemon Prince, hard to keep them straight in a game where there were 10 fliers and FMCs between the two of us) out of the air. Really though, I'd say just give whatever you think looks good a shot, as I'm not quite sold on what the absolute best choices are going to be yet. Who knows, maybe one of the Leviathan supplements coming out will actually be useful for nids.

      Delete
    2. @Max. Would you have used an extra Flyrant and an extra heavy support slot if there had been a Tyranid supplement book to ally with?

      Delete
    3. Would have almost certainly squeezed in a Mawloc in heavy support, not sure if I would have decided to put a third tyrant in, as that almost certainly would have taken away from some other aspect of the list. The ruling up to the last minute before the tournament was that the new book would not be allowed to ally with itself, which is something this event had previously allowed the old book to do, so that was how I was approaching it during list building. That decision was reversed very last minute, but I wasn't even made aware of it until showing up to the event.

      Delete
    4. Thanks for the info, cheers.

      Delete
  11. I've never been concerned with the competitiveness of the new book, but more the internal balance. Many of the units in the book just aren't worthwhile at all, which is bad codex design.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think internal balance got better with this edition tbh. I may not like the way they went about it but it is still better, I.e. they nerfed Zoans and HG and buffed pyros and lictors, shame about Haruspex. They allow mixed units of warriors and which is better but protecting them with a Prime is more expensive (neutral). Fast attack is broadly similar except the flyers stick out above the shrikes and raveners but The Red Terror can protect, Stealers are still to fragile and Heavy Support got better across the board.

      Delete
    2. The worth of a unit is entirely subjective on personal opinion and how you play, not really decided by a broad sweeping statement.

      Example: "Rippers are useless" - they're not, they're one of the few units that can deep strike with 9 wounds base and then put out ~12 re-rollable spinefist shots. Some people would rather put the points into scoring Troops but why have 100% scoring Troop choices when the enemy is free to shoot them up unmolested? A good placement of Rippers forces target priority assessment. Hit the new Rippers and risk being assaulted next turn or fire on the approaching main force? That's their use.

      Many of the units have a use, it just takes a shift in tactics sometimes to let a lesser-taken choice shine.

      Delete
    3. "A good placement of Rippers forces target priority assessment. Hit the new Rippers and risk being assaulted next turn or fire on the approaching main force? That's their use."

      The problem with this argument is that you could replace "Rippers" with pretty much any other unit the codex there.

      Good placement of any unit force target priority assessment.

      Hit the new Gargoyles/Raveners/Trygon/Mawloc/Shrikes/Genestealers/Lictors/Warriors/Flyrant/etc. and risk being assaulted next turn or fire on the approaching main force?

      Delete
    4. But none of those are as cheap when deep striking.

      Delete
  12. I'm fed up of hearing people bitch about tau. Sort your sh#t out! Stop hugging cover and get up the board!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol! I am finding tau useless against my IG fire line after I wipe out all of his pathfinders and skyrays, so that he has very few markerlights left. Then my 2+ cover saves behind the aegis work brilliant. Last time I forced tau to go up the board instead of me...

      Delete
  13. Hooray, our bland and uninspired codex full of nerfs and useless units has a monobuild that can do well at small tournaments (provided you abuse the ambiguous Terror from the Deep and Ongoing Reserves rules), I ask you why, as a non-tournament player, this somehow makes the new Tyranids okay?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because people were complaining that 'Nids aren't 'competetive'. They just won two competitions, thus by definition they are competetive (or at least more so than thought, time will tell).

      Which units are 'useless'?

      Delete
    2. A lot of people were complaining about more then just competitiveness. The codex felt lazy with little change to units that needed it. I'd still say that lictors, pyrovores, deathleaper and old one eye (due to other more essential HQ choices), etc have little use. I agree some of the less competitive choices can be used like warriors, rippers, genestealers, etc but you are definitely paying a tax when using them. I complained a lot because of this internal balance and the fact that a lot of previously know issues didn't seem to be attempted to be fixed. I also wanted a book that would shift the meta which I don't think this one will as much as I would have liked against psycher heavy lists. These lists still heavily depend on shooting which is disappointing for an assault army. I'm also still upset about the removal of 4 units

      Delete
    3. They didn't win any competition. The title of this article is very misleading.

      Both players were at TSHFT and scraped by some narrow wins but didn't rank very high. Best Tyranid player ended up 24th out of 55 over all. On battle points alone, one guy ended up 11th.

      In fact the only army present that performed worse than Tyranids were Space Wolves.

      Delete
    4. ^ this comment by Antario a million times over

      Delete
    5. Antario - didn't the one who was 11th only attend day one so didn't finish 11th?

      Delete
    6. Barry, you are correct. He went 3-0 day 1 but that still only put him in 11th, behind people that had losses day 1

      Delete
    7. Big Pee Eff - I think that, removal of some units aside, Tyranids got pretty much exactly the same treatment as everyone else: a bunch of dropped costs, some new units, some expensive things, some new weapons, warlord traits, a few new army-wide special rules and a nicely presented book. Technically they got exactly the same as all the other 6E books so far and I didn't hear much complaining about most of those being lazy; it's not lazy, it's just the template.

      Personally I'm a bit of an optimist in some cases and when it comes to unit roles I really do think that all units are designed with a role in mind and most are capable. Deathleaper, for instance, is pretty much the ultimate HQ for support and trolling. -3Ld for an enemy character on top of the -3Ld for Shadow (good luck with that)? Deep strikers not scattering? Only ever hitting it on a 6 and immune to templates and blasts? Sounds quite alright to me, add to a unit of 'Stealers, position a Venomthrope between him and them, put behind cover with Leaper hanging out front in the breeze. 2+ cover save and their HQ point-man can't be targetted with a hopeful scatter-blast , he gets a 4+ cover save in the open and yeah it's a lot of points but the threat of assault from that unit is immense. Flesh hooks on the HQ means he gets 6 WS9 attacks on the charge at I7 into cover, wounding most infantry on a 2+, rending and that should thin out the target to prevent the 'Stealers getting hit hard so more of them get to finish the unit off at the last stage. Both unpopular choices, both serious assault units if you can get them there, both work as a force multiplier for the other when used together.

      I'm pleased that the new codex is leaning more towards shooting than the previous book; the whole edition is more of a shooting game than the previous was. This book is the same as the others - a basic codex that can be built on. It's the first part, there should be more stuff to come, especially with GW's weekly releases if they can get models done for the removed units...

      Delete
    8. I guess I feel like other books had more change when something was clearly broken. Eldar got massive changes to all their existing units. Space marines didn't need as much, so they got new units. I felt Nids should have been in the eldar category since there was only one viable build. When a lot of clearly broken elements were left in tact, I felt cheated. Deathleaper would be great, but we are ham-stringed severely by synapse and most feel that a non synapse HQ isn't a good choice. If we could get allies, my comments about him would be very different

      Delete
    9. I feel your pain about the lack of external options though. I'm hoping that there's a 'Stealer Cult supplement in the works that allows access to some IG (or Tau, it does happen in the fluff) options or maybe a Kraken book with the Parasite of Mortex as that got a direct mention. Everyone's got a supplement so far apart from Daemons, I can't see 'Nids getting left out...

      Delete
    10. Mauler, with all due respect, isn't that exactly the point? I feel a bit shafted as a 'nid player that the codex isn't what I hoped it would be, and I wasn't hoping for OP or a win button. It wasn't even templated like you suggest: many things did get cheaper, but they also got worse (scything talons, loss of attacks, main artillery support unit lost a point of BS, now need 2 sets of weapons for additional weapon bonus, and the change to crushing claws). I can't think of another codex that had similar hits they had to take. On top of that we have assault only units that have no way to mitigate the assault through difficult terrain initiative hammer. Hoping for supplements to provide any sort of fix is a pipe dream. If it is in the plan, then I feel cheated by paying $50 for a codex that they knew was incomplete and want to charge me for that.

      Delete
    11. I wouldn't be surprised if Tyranids got left out, they already got left out of Allies, rulebook powers, non-FMC Skyfire, the ability to shoot gun emplacements and emplaced weapons (although we can now that the FAQ is no longer official, wouldn't be surprised if that changes though), Eternal Warrior, invulnerable saves, 2+ armour, long-range anti-vehicle/heavy infantry, assault grenades, helpful army-wide special rules, deployment options, getting a decent 6th ed codex...

      Delete
  14. Did you all read there wasn't a jetseer or screamerstar in the room? Listen the nid dex is fine for "fun" "fluffy" "non-competitive" games but it will always struggle against players who know what they're doing.

    The negative comments have been from a competitive tournament point of view where players want all codexes to be on an even standing. If that is not you then these opinions are not of importance to you & you shouldn't worry about it too much.

    Yes it would be much better if the power level of Eldar, Tau, & possibly Daemons were brought down to a level on par with others. But we all know that GW would never take proactive steps like that & the community would never accept any independent attempts to balance it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The dex isn't even good for fun/ fluffy games. The lists that people are citing as examples of tyranids "not being as bad as the Internets say" are boring and kinda un-cinematic. Running duplicate HQ's is lame. I liked tyranids for their close combat power and units like warriors, trygons and the swarmlord have been neutered for no reason. Do you like Classic walking tyrants rather than the ugly flying double devourer ones? Well too bad they have been made worse. Liked podding warriors? Now you can only walk them slowly into missile launchers and see them break their boneswords on artificer armour. Fun stuff. They still mention pods in the fluff and feature them in the art though.. so yeah this codex is reeeally great for forging narratives...

      Delete
    2. Yeah, my custom built pods collecting dust on the shelves are insulted by the artwork still being included but the removal of the entry. We know why they did it, but it doesn't just hurt CH, it hurts the players, something GW has near the bottom of their priority list ATM.

      Delete
  15. I have had a great deal of success with the new codex as well. I have won 3 games against GK,SM and Eldar. I have lost once to IG. Its by far better than the last codex.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same here actually. I've only played with it twice and not against tournament lists (casual fun games are my thing) and my nids beat face both times. I was surprised, I like the new codex but I did think it was on the weak side. I utterly devoured an iron hands army and a daemons army. Only had to take one instinctive behavior test between both games too. Synapse isn't hard to maintain if you do it right.

      Delete
  16. Wow the mono build people saw before the book even dropped. I'd like to see someone make the top 10 without dual flyrants and mawloc spam. This is the problem with the book everyone is complaining about. Even more mono build than the last.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Now if we could just get rid of this thinking that battle points are worth more than wins it'd look even better. ..

    ReplyDelete
  18. I too think the players thoughts offrr more insight thsn theirmlists or how the games went. I read the FTG report yesterday and just re read it and what sticks out (which many people here seem to be missing) is that the Jeremy recognizes that they arent as good as they should be. People forget that he finished day 1 undefeated yet not even in the top 10 (he was 11 I believe) and had been pushed out of the top by people that had losses. Thst doesnt bode well. Moreover I feel some people are forgetting he didnt go to day 2 and by his own admission knew even if he had he wouldnt have placed well. He tells us his games were all really close, narrow wins, which while fun and exciting, dont lend themselves to doing well overall in a tournament setting. People need to stop trying to apologize for this lackluster codex which is looking like it more an more has one build that can do ok (as others have said)

    ReplyDelete
  19. Here's my thing - why does anyone even care what other people think of the codex? If you think its crap and don't find it fun, then get off the internet and play something else. No one is making you play Nids.

    And if people find it fun, and challenging, and are enjoying the new models and units - leave them to it. What you think does not matter to the world. I'm so sick of the negativity of the internet. Create your opinions, and move on.

    I like the book, I'm having fun with the book, and I've created some fluffy lists that are a riot to play for both myself and my opponent. And don't even get me started about the modeling and painting portion of the Tyranids - by far the most beautiful range in my opinion, and a blast to put together and convert.

    Now please go on telling me why I'm enjoying the wrong army.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's nothing wrong with how you're extinct and suing your army. People are complaining about the relative lack of internal balance, variety of competitive choices, and overall competitiveness in a tourney environment. If you don't play in tourneys and just play fun, fluffy games with your friends, than the criticisms aimed at the codex don't pertain to you, so dont take them so personally

      Delete
    2. God I hate typing on my iphone and tablet. Thst firdt sentence should read "collect and using your army"

      Delete
    3. Nick Powell, are you saying that I'm not allowed to play with my hundreds of pounds worth of Nids if I think the codex is crap?

      I'm not sure that you are the boss of me. And you say what I think does not matter, why do you think your opinion is worth writing about?

      I personally find different opinions about codexes, etc, to be rather interesting and would encourage people to have a discourse, something you seem to abhor for some reason.

      Delete
  20. What's worng with mono buiild? Are all those people complaining about mono build blind to see tau and eldar are also mono build? Autoinclude units you see in every list include Boradsides, riptides, buff Commander, jetbikes, wave serpents and Wraithknights. Does that mean that both codex are bad?
    Really, there's no limit to the complaining and whining on the Internet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you complaining and whining on the internets about people complaining and whining LOL?

      If so, you are correct - there is no limit!

      Delete
    2. When I decided to start Eldar instead of the new 'nids (after canceling my pre-order) my first rule was; 'no wave serpents, wraithkinghts, jetbikes, or warp spiders.'
      It's still a more fun book to use than the 'nid one ;_;

      Delete
    3. The difference is that semi-competitive Eldar and Tau builds are full of options, while Tyranids are still mono-build.

      Delete
  21. I am glad you posted these. It is a reality check for all those ranting. The bottom line is that Nids ARE competitive, maybe not top tier, but competitive.

    Two questions for the community in regards to these reports...

    First, when he says he "bubble wrapped" his MCs with gaunts...are they enough to give cover in 6th? It is about a 50/50 chance depending on who I play. Hormagaunts more likely than Termagaunts.

    Second, when his opponent redeployed his Mawlocs after a deep strike mishap, could they not redeploy them onto Tyranid units?

    Thanks again for the links. Very instructive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mishap rules for the 'Misplaced' result prevent your opponent from placing your model(s) within impassible terrain or on top of friendly/enemy models, so no chaining Mawloc attacks from mishaps. Though the tyranid player is completely allowed to initiate Terror from the Deep on his own guys if he feels like it.

      Delete
    2. Do the rules for Misplaced prohibit placement onto models? it sez only impassible terrain...and the Mawloc's special rule allows placement onto models. this is the quandary. or is this an issue of BRB taking precident over a codex? thanks max.

      Delete
    3. Terror from the Deep happens before placing the model, with the "Misplaced" result your opponent is placing the model and thus misses the timing when it comes to choosing to use Terror from the Deep.

      Delete
  22. All I've got to say about Nids and the people complaining is... Boohoo, sorry your army isn't easy to play like Space Marines (the introductory army).

    I'm glad to see this though. Glad to see that nids are doing decent in the tournament scene, even though I have no interest in that type of play style.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. a) From what I've seen Space Marines aren't easy to play well.

      b) Hard to play is not one of my complaints, these are my complaints:
      - I will never field over half the codex because of how terrible they are, just like last edition.
      - The only Troops worth fielding are Termagants and Tervigons, just like last edition.
      - Tervigons went from having good synergy with Termagants to punishing you for having Termagants anywhere near them.
      - Most of the good units are all in one section, just like last edition (the difference being that it's now Heavy Support instead of Elites)
      - We have sharply reduced flexibility when it comes to psychic powers
      - The removal of Ymgarl Genestealers and Mycetic Spores completely invalidates an entire Tyranid playstyle.
      - Close combat Tyranids have been nerfed even more than they were by the arrival of 6th edition, invalidating another Tyranid playstyle.
      - Competitive Tyranid lists are mono-build, just like last edition.
      - They unnecessarily nerfed Trygons, Tyranid Primes, the Swarmlord, Hive Guard, Hormagaunts & Gargoyles
      - Other armies have army-wide special rules that reward you and help to expand your tactical and list building options, ours severely punishes and restricts us, and creates an obvious and exploitable weakness in much the same the Necrons Phase Out rule did in their previous book
      - Most of the fluff is just copy/pasted, with one new bit added
      - They still keep fluff entries of the units they removed in the book, which feels like they're taunting us
      - They did nothing to address our lack of allies
      - The rules in the codex are sloppily written, full of grammar mistakes.

      Delete
  23. One thing I'd like to point out is that TSHFT allowed 'Nid players to take an allied detachment if they wanted....and all the more respect to these two players for sticking to their guns.

    All I hope is that the interest by TOs to be flexible with 'Nids might lift the dataslate ban for the three upcoming Leviathan 'slates (assuming they are even worth taking...).

    ReplyDelete

 
Top
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...