Saturday, January 11, 2014

Tyranids...Why you so fail?


The Tyranids are out and the gaming community is quite polarized in terms of it either being total utter garbage or thinking that "it isn't so bad." Well, having played Tyranids competitively since before the year 2000, back when 2nd edition was transitioning into 3rd, I think I know a thing or two about how to play/win with Nids and why they were so good before and why they are so bad now...Yes, I believe the new codex is so utterly and completely bad I wand to scream and below are the reasons why I think GW totally and completely got Nids wrong-AGAIN.


This is my take on why nids struggle in 6th and why the past few books have been bad and possibly why GW just doesn't "get it" when making new army books for certain armies... 

For starters, Tyranids were my first army and I started playing them back before anything had a proper codex when 3rd just came out (the 3rd BRB had army lists for every army to build stuff from). So I am no stranger to 40k or Tyranids. 

That said, I saw Nids go from an army that can handle any other army and do well to a codex that just pales in contrast to just about every other one and one that will be hard pressed to win any competitive events. 

One of the biggest problems Nids face now is that they were always a close combat army at the core and as assaulting has become less effective, Nids in general have also become less effective. There is a direct correlation between how powerful Nids have been and how powerful CC was in each edition (just like with Orks). 

Furthermore, Nids rely on cover and terrain to get by and get in close to deliver their shooting and charges. With the changes to cover and terrain, thing are just easier to shoot dead than ever before and with Ignores Cover being SO prevalent now (which is a GARBAGE game mechanic to have so readily available for so many armies), Nids just lack the survivability to get in close where they want to be. 

Therefore, an army that has always been a consummate close combat army that now has to compete in an edition where combat is of minimal import and where an army that has traditionally relied on cover and terrain where both are either meaningless or have a very limited utility...Tyranids are hamstrung from a very fundamental level and need some extra rules or oomph to compensate for these limitations and inherent weaknesses.

Certain rules that will make CC units fast enough or resilient enough to reliably get into combat and effective when they get there are essential for an army like Tyranids. The previous and current codex simply do not have rules or stats in place to facilitate this. 

Furthermore, since we currently play in an edition where shooting is the primary way to remove units and cause damage, Tyranids needed effective shooting options to compete with other armies but they simply don't. For example, their ranged anti-tank is virtually non-existent because Hive Guard, Zoantropes and the limited number of shots from a Tyrannofex/Heavy Venom Cannons either can't be spammed to the point of being effective or have too short a range. Don't get me started on their complete lack of reliable AA! 

As an example, an army with just 1-3 Las Cannon shots will probably not kill more than a few vehicles in a game compared to an army with 6-10 which will prob kill a much greater number of vehicles (bonus because those armies likely have access to Prescience which Nids don't have access to). Nids simply lack the number of high strength shots at a decent range to take out opposing vehicles which will be able to kite anything with a gun in a Nid army. Furthermore, NOTHING in a Nid army has skyfire except for the Flying MCs and even then, the only options are a Flyrant with S6 shooting (laughable against most flyers) or a Crone which is a flying paper bag of flaming dog poop that has more survivability issues than Steven Hawking in a UFC match... 

As I mentioned above, Nids are primarily a CC army in their core army design so their shooting must necessarily be mediocre to compensate for their awesome CC focus...however, since they are no longer the CC army of doom they used to be (Stealers used to just flat out ignore armor for crying out loud!) and how CC is weaker in general this edition-Tyranids really should have had their shooting capabilities buffed to make them able to hold their own against other armies absent any buffs to survivability/CC that they still sorely need and didn't get. 

Therefore, the failure in the new codex is multi-faceted because since the "design team" was building the army on a faulty foundation, the structure and meat of the codex must necessarily have problems as well. 

1.) Nids needed buffs to resiliency in the form of improved stats/saves or rules to ensure they can get into combat or range to do something other than die horribly. They simply did not get them. 

2.) Nids needed better shooting to have a way of meaningfully dealing with Vehicles at range as well as SOME way to deal with flyers in a meaningful and reliable way. They simply lack any way to handle flyers outside of a few overpriced and underpowered units. 

3.) Anything that got "cheaper" didn't actually get cheaper...they were either waaay overcosted to begin with and finally got priced to what they should have been in the previous codex (and should actually be cheaper than they currently are) or the upgrades necessary to make them effective went up in points so they actually got more expensive. 

4.) Some things either stayed the same points cost or got more expensive for no good or justifiable reason along with nothing being done to address glaring problems in their stats, rules, utility or effectiveness. 

With all of that said, nids are a failure now and it's really sad because GW could have done so much with them (and every other army TBH). We are able to overlook the failures of certain other codecs because they have many varied and playable units/builds. Nids have none.

15 comments:

  1. I agree with everything you have said. I've been playing nods since the transition from 2nd to third, and I can honestly say this is the most disappointed I have ever been with a codex.

    I will still paint, model and play tyranids because I just love the poor dumb bastards.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Indeed, I almost started 40k with space marines but was instantly attracted to Tyranids because they were the most utterly alien out of any other race and I really like ants (give me a discovery/national geographic special on ants any day!).

      I will still play them but I am really sad that warriors are not what they should be-Warriors are my favorite aspect of the army.

      One fun thing I always enjoyed was the mass shooting from devourers so I'll probably have an army with some flyrants, devilgaunts galore, dakkafexes and some venomthropes.

      Delete
  2. Eldar are my first army, but Tyranids have been a great contrast for me and I've enjoyed playing them for a long time, but I'm not sure I can even count playing them as fun after this, while there are many units in the army, many are undesirable, or when aiming for victory, unusable. We needed some flair this time round quite frankly, and GW yet again have failed to deliver. I agree with the article and the comments, not much else to say really, is there?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Right now, I think that Tyranids are not an army that aims at throwing a super-powerful death star in your face. I think that they are meant to outlast the opponet, as their troops are insanly cheap. I mean, 40 points for a Termagant brood is even less that a Cultist unit, and you even get better guns for it. There is no reason to run Tervigons right now, just run tons of little guys for far less points.

    With the rest of the points you can get big bugs or other threats so your scoring units don't get focussed as much. 40k is a objectives game 5 out of 6 times and if you can hold the objectives, no matter how much you lose, you win the scenario after all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. better guns? rly? 12" inch guns are "better"? .... even grots are better than those termagaunts -.-

      Delete
  4. I have heard that warriors are terribad from so many places, and i dont really see it. Their bain is s8 shooting, that is the only thing that makes them less effective. I feel like most armies have less strength 8 shooting than they used to. Sure a riptide can mess warriors up but what can't a riptide squish? obviously eldar dark reapers would squish them as well but i kinda feel that anytime the reapers are shooting at warriors and not hive tyrants is a win win in my book. i think they are a necesarry unit in order to have enough synapse to get through a game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Warriors are actually vulnerable to anything and everything lol... Seriously, any amount of attention they get is be news :(.

      Delete
  5. i disagree, they are 10 points per wound and have a 4+ save come with a reasonable gun and make all of the units in your army within 12 inches fearless. how many books would kill for something like that?

    ReplyDelete
  6. i feel that if you are trying to take them as close combat beasts you probably take them in larger groups but if you are trying to make them with a ranged focus they should probably be in small groups so as to take as many venom cannons as possible. i think you are going to be maxing out your troop choices as a tyranid player.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I still think warriors needed some changes to help them out but we are welcome to disagree on that point. Regardless, when I try making lists, I still feel as though things are too expensive-warriors and stealers should have been cheaper (and warriors got more expensive considering thier options generally got more expensive).

      I do agree that nids will tend to max out on troops-I think an extra force org slot in each category would make Nids A LOT better-3 HQ options would open up so many more options for nids!

      Personally, I know I want to have death leaper because of the -d3 ld penalty which can really benefit your army in terms of gimping opposing psykers and I think he offers us a nice objective denial model.

      I also want a prime somewhere in there to join a gaunt unit for easy to hide synapse or to join a venomthrope brood to tank for them. Finally a Tyrant as an HQ or two is always solid-all the slots ultimately feel too tight and limiting.

      Delete
  7. I agree the hq feels very tight. not taking a tyrant sounds crazy to me, but your right death leaper sounds so usefull for the reasons you already stated. but not knowing which choice you like better is sort of a good thing. maybe? we dont want to look at a book and just be able to pick the best build in the first few seconds I think it stings so bad because they used to not compete with eachother. I also agree that a prime is probably the most survivable of the hq choises. but i dont think it is anywhere near as killy as a tyrant can be. of course the sky is the limmit on how much you can spend on that. i dont know that i think wings are a better way of keeping a tyrant alive. tyrant guard got cheaper this eddition as well so i think they should be tested out before they are dismissed. anyway i love talking about this stuff. good luck with all your hive mind endeavours

    ReplyDelete
  8. What I feel Tyranids could use to be more competitive is some resiliency. Sounds ironic for an army that can spam a lot of T6 wounds. Just 1 simple change could make the army much, much better. Forget about the Doom. Forget about Ymgarls. Forget about Biomancy. Just 1 simple change to their current codex would be enough to make them pretty competitive. The "fix" for the new Tyranids that I recommend would be.....

    ReplyDelete
  9. All monstrous creatures have It Will Not Die

    ReplyDelete
  10. Nope.

    Just make Catalyst the Primaris instead of Dominion and bugs will be pretty good.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I say bring back the genestealers! they were the cherry on top with a broodlord back then. But the nerfing, oh god the nerfing. Sorry space marine and chaos space marine fanboys, since you complained so much that nids were top for CC we lost our ownage, screw you.

    ReplyDelete