Uses for a non-Swarmlord walking Tyrant?

[riverzora]

Wondering what the best (if any) load out for a walkrant is nowadays. The pros being that it can be safely flanked by many Tyrant Guard, and is cheaper than Swarmy...

Range focus -
Stranglethorn and twin Deathspitters
Double twin deathspitters

Melee focus -
Double ScyTals (pricy option)
Double Rending Claws (budget option)
Rending Claws and Boneswords (mid cost option)

Mixed -
Stranglethorn with Rending Claws
Deathspitters with Rending Claws

[able]

The problem with double ranged is that it has next to no CC (no thresher tail, unlike the fex), and the guard are only CC. A stranglethorn tyrant doesn't even want to be in 18" (12" behind your devilgants can put it far out of bolter range), so the deathspitters seem expensive bling that I don't think will see much use. An enemy unit can shut down it's cannon by getting it into CC, so I would rather have a better CC option. Shoot, charge, and try to kill it in 2 fight phases so it doesn't interfere with your shooting seems a better way to deal with a threat than a little plinking away. You could send the guard to CC it alone, but then they leave the tyrant vulnerable to fire.

I don't think I would give a shootyrant guard. It can keep out of range of most fire, and stay in restricted sight line positions quite far behind our lines while still synapsing. The stranglethorn is not a heavy weapon, so staying out of heavy fire should not damage our offense too much. It is a juicy target, but tyrant guard rapidly add up, and I would rather have another cannon tyrant than 6 guard that I am trying to keep out of combat.

A double rending claw tyrant works out at ~15pts a wound, where guard work out at ~12. Between the invulnerable save on the tyrant, (please do not swear) melee from the guard, and smites/denys, I think you are probably better with more tyrants for pure melee either.

I also think it depends who you are facing. Against orks, devourer rending claws is worth considering, as you don't want to be in combat and the ap is a little redundant.

[Iryan]

In my opinion hive tyrant dedicated to babysitting your artillery (i.e. your exocrines and biovores) would want to go with stranglethorn cannon + rending claws. As was mentioned, the extra dakka from the deathspitters would frequently not come into play. Meanwhile, for a protector role, you definitely want to be able to assault something that has deep-struck or flown into your backline. Plus, the claws are simply the cheapest choice. Putting a malanthrope in that position is probably still better though, unless you are playing power level I suppose.


I was wondering myself about how sensible (or not) it would be to spam double-claws walking tyrants. ~15p per well-protected wound, capable of putting a good hurt on basically anything but the chaffiest chaff, able to cast 2 supportive powers (or smite) and deny just the same, while still having enough movement to keep up with anything in your army aside from fliers and raveners...

Sounds good to me on paper. The question is what kind of stuff you would pair a group of 3~5 walkrants with in your army. Lots of hormagaunts? Possibly lots of genestealers, with a single broodlord in the middle? Other range-impaired monsters like toxicrenes?

[Jbizzy]

Is the double claw (2 sets of claws) just to save on points?

[cypheon]

Jul 13, 2017 21:35:22 GMT Jbizzy said:

Is the double claw (2 sets of claws) just to save on points?

Yes.

[meavar]

But is a few shots of devourers/deathspitters not worth the tiny cost?
It is only a 10% increase in cost. It is 6 shots. Even assuming you only shoot once that is damage roughly of another turn of CC against any nonmarine army. against marines you need 2 rounds of shooting.
So unless you really are into cc every round (both your round and your opponents round) it should be roughly worth it. Now I doubt you will be in combat with all of them every cc phase, which means it will be more then 10% of your total damage. Additionally it gives a slight boost in adaptability: you can shoot the melee stuff(orks)/ stuff on top op buildings (which you cannot acces)/ shoot fast evasive armies that are hard to get to melee to (eldar).
Against marines I understand the double rending, against nearly everything else the small price increase seems to be worth it, simply because getting into melee while not hard is also not always the best option.

[Hive Bahamut]

Unfortunately GW hasn't come to the basic conclusion that you need to have incentive to use a unit. Why not Extended Carapace back for the Walkrant? Rulez iz hard..

Unless it is the Swarmlord, I imagine you can justify the cost for wings on every Tyrant. When it walks, it literally just becomes a smart Carnifex, with a stupid (magic 10) number of wounds.

I have mulled over anything to not spam Flyrants if using at all, and I have nothing.

Backfield? Malanthrope/Warriors/Prime/
Midfield? Zoanthropes/Trygon Prime/Zoanthropes?Tervigon
Forefield? Swarmlord/Broodlord

Poor fella must be so tired from 3 editions on those wings. Extended would have been a welcome return. Especially with TGuard losing T6, for god knows whatever reason.

Also, Welcome to the Hive Meavar!

[nintendofilo]

I think the only great thing about a non-swarmlord tyrant is that he can actually hide and take cover, those damn huge wings make mine pretty much the target of all the enemy cannons. I guess it's good they target him instead of the nastier bits in the army but still...

[inferno]

I can't see ny use for them beyond satisfying nostalgia. Would be fun if HVC/BS+LW Walkrant was the badass he was in 2nd.

[Iryan]

So, I just today learned that you can only cast every non-smite power once per turn, across your whole army. That makes the use of multiple low-cost tyrants muuuuuuch worse since they won't be able to spam catalyst and horror as powerful support abilities.

I actually feel like Tyranids might be the army most hurt by this rule, since the other psyker-heavy armies have access to multiple disciplines and thus different named powers, or can do nothing but spam smite in the first place. Meanwhile, most our HQ units are psykers, and just by using them we run into that limit.

Sadpanda.

[killercroc]

Jul 15, 2017 16:06:57 GMT Iryan said:

So, I just today learned that you can only cast every non-smite power once per turn, across your whole army. That makes the use of multiple low-cost tyrants muuuuuuch worse since they won't be able to spam catalyst and horror as powerful support abilities.

I actually feel like Tyranids might be the army most hurt by this rule, since the other psyker-heavy armies have access to multiple disciplines and thus different named powers, or can do nothing but spam smite in the first place. Meanwhile, most our HQ units are psykers, and just by using them we run into that limit.

Sadpanda.

It hits us and eldar the most since those are the two armies that can actually get a lot of psychic focus. I really dislike their decision to make each power attempted once per round. I mean I can see why, to cut down on the bloat of too many psykers casting too many powers all over. But lets face it, why would you ever let armies with multiple psykers in multiple FoC slots actually use their powers? That would only be reasonable. It's my main reason for disliking Zoans. They cannot shoot, suck in melee so all they have is psychic, and at 40 points a pop in a unit of 3-6 only getting one power/smite a turn is just stupid. The cost to damage output makes them almost unusable.

[kazetanade]

Jul 15, 2017 16:41:01 GMT killercroc said:

Jul 15, 2017 16:06:57 GMT Iryan said:

So, I just today learned that you can only cast every non-smite power once per turn, across your whole army. That makes the use of multiple low-cost tyrants muuuuuuch worse since they won't be able to spam catalyst and horror as powerful support abilities.

I actually feel like Tyranids might be the army most hurt by this rule, since the other psyker-heavy armies have access to multiple disciplines and thus different named powers, or can do nothing but spam smite in the first place. Meanwhile, most our HQ units are psykers, and just by using them we run into that limit.

Sadpanda.

It hits us and eldar the most since those are the two armies that can actually get a lot of psychic focus. I really dislike their decision to make each power attempted once per round. I mean I can see why, to cut down on the bloat of too many psykers casting too many powers all over. But lets face it, why would you ever let armies with multiple psykers in multiple FoC slots actually use their powers? That would only be reasonable. It's my main reason for disliking Zoans. They cannot shoot, suck in melee so all they have is psychic, and at 40 points a pop in a unit of 3-6 only getting one power/smite a turn is just stupid. The cost to damage output makes them almost unusable.

Codex. CODEX. WAIT FOR THE CODEX!

[killercroc]

People say wait for the codex every year, never have I once gotten a codex and gone "Damn, this fixes everything!" I'll bet you more than anything by the time we eventually get our codex it won't even address the issues in the army, we'll get some warloard trait, relics, hive abilities maybe but not viable units. I don't think it's in GW's power to be that competent.

[gigasnail]

Lol faction is in the best spot it's been in since 2008. WE NEED VIABLE UNITS GAIZ!!

Sheesh. I know the (please do not swear) is far from perfect but...come on.

[kazetanade]

Jul 15, 2017 16:52:30 GMT killercroc said:

People say wait for the codex every year, never have I once gotten a codex and gone "Damn, this fixes everything!" I'll bet you more than anything by the time we eventually get our codex it won't even address the issues in the army, we'll get some warloard trait, relics, hive abilities maybe but not viable units. I don't think it's in GW's power to be that competent.

I'm actually talking about having more psychic abilities for our psykers to use.

Jesus, give people an inch and they demand a foot.