|
Post by coredump on Feb 27, 2013 23:52:33 GMT
zerglord: Proof generally requires a mutually agreed upon set of assumptions according to which said proof can be judged valid or not. As a rule it's better to go from such a general set of assumptions, how to build army according to the parameters of the game, than to start with specifics such as which units to take, than it is to start from specifics and argue about whether any particular assigned value (good/bad/etc) is valid. Without a coherent theory to organize it, evidence such as battle reports is worthless. On the other hand, for whatever reason, people tend to ask "Is X good?" and rely on circumstantial evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, rather than establishing common principles first. You say there are facts as to why some units are good and some units are bad, but without In other words, an army list won't prove anything if we lack an objective (or at least inter-subjective) metric to measure it by, and where such a metric exists such army lists are redundant. I mean, I tend to get stupidly lucky in games. Posting my battle reports would do nothing except beg the question of how much success is due to luck and how much success is due to the tactics I've employed. I think it's worth pointing out that my goal here isn't to get more people to play Lictors. I don't gain anything by getting people to use Lictors. They won't suck my ovipositor just because I point out that they're useful. I don't play with anyone on these boards, or receive royalties from GW. I do, however, like to read these boards, and prefer seeing detailed technical analysis of the nuts and bolts of the game, and the Tyranid army, to reading the value judgements that other posters make without showing their work, how they move from the army list, profiles, and rules to "Unit A sucks, taking unit A makes the legally missing Jesus cry!" The more you get backed into a corner, the more words you use, and the less you actually say. In addition, you are still acting like you are the only person that knows anything, and you need to explain to the rest of us the 'proper' way to have a discussion. You feel the need to detail the 'correct steps'... of course, I never see you doing any of that until you get called out. Then it is all prevaricating and stalling... No Nurglitch, you are not the only person that knows how to have a discussion, and there have been billions and billions of discussions in the world that did not feel a need to enumerate a " mutually agreed upon set of assumptions" before beginning. YAY! Now, since your claim was: " so many people have such a low opinion of the unit, because they don't understand the armies that Lictors enhanced" You will need to illustrate how lictors 'enhance' the above list better than other choices would. What is the role of the lictors in that list, why are lictors the best choice? And please, don't just recite their abilities (again), we know the rules. Why are those rules going to be more useful to that list than other choices...??
|
|
|
Post by Geneva on Feb 28, 2013 0:00:58 GMT
- A couple hundred points spent on Lictors is worth more than a couple hundred points deliberately spent on nothing.
- If you want to field Lictors, you can. They're admittedly a unit that fits the Rule of Cool. They technically have a purpose but it isn't a very point-efficient one. Many other units achieve the same end result but better.
- Ymgarls are generally a better option as they pretty much do the job the Lictor was intended for but more efficiently.
That's all the accurate information I gleamed from this thread despite three pages of filibuster. Admittedly, I enjoyed reading through the back-and-forth banter and people can argue about the validity of internet opinion all they want but, let's face it, Lictors just aren't very good. Yes, they technically have a "use" if we're to be completely literal about the word but then again so does a quill, that doesn't mean it's a good idea to take it over a pen. In the end, you're just left with something inefficient if fancy looking. Personal preference is the only real reason to go for them.
|
|
|
Post by scrotatohead on Feb 28, 2013 0:05:35 GMT
For me it all boils down to the game you're about to play. If it's a friendly match, the only justification you need to play a model is because you want to. It matches your play style. It fits for the scenario you and your opponent cooked up. It matches the fluff you always like to field in friendly matches. Theer is no right or wrong, no good or bad.
If you're building for a tournament then that's another story, but not entirely another story. There are, as this thread reveals, relevant arguments for why one unit is better than another based on game point levels, tournament meta, and fundamentally the abilities of the unit as compared to other unit options in the FOC and/or the entire army. If you're taking a sub-optimal unit to a tournament because you think it's better than other units in spite of the overwhelming evidence, don't be upset when it fails to meet expectations. If you're taking that same sub-optimal unit because you just love it, believe in it, and somehow know how to make it work, good on you and it's not our place to criticize too strongly (as an aside, I'm hoping coredump is only giving Nurglitch a good ribbing when he says "doesn't have the guts").
Personally I'm not a big fan of the Lictor because it simply because it takes too long for it's deep strike assistance to become available, it can't do much when it shows on the board, and it's too fragile, all for points I can support. IMHO, the model should honestly be like a Special Forces sniper. Give it a nasty sniper rifle to pick off targetted models, expand it's pheramone trail range, keep it's camaflauge/shrouded ability, and nerf it's close combat/hit-and-run capabilities. That's a lictor I would field.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 28, 2013 0:18:52 GMT
you must be new here.
|
|
|
Post by Jestar on Feb 28, 2013 0:43:31 GMT
I was a huge fan of using Lictors in 5th ed when we still had the 4th ed codex. They were a great support unit for stealers (I gave my stealers flesh hooks and used the lictor feeder tendrils for preferred enemy), could assault on arrival, you could choose any terrain piece to place them, and re-rolling reserve rolls was awesome. Everything I used them for was taken away with the 5th ed codex.
It's been said so many times: Ymgarl Stealers fill the same role, in the same slot, and do it better. If Lictors were FA I might use them alongside Ymgarls, but as is? Nope.
|
|
|
Post by swarmy on Feb 28, 2013 0:52:22 GMT
It wasn't a case of this *or* that, It is always a case of this or that. We have limited points and FOC slots. You can't take everything. there is always a trade off. In this case it is even more explicit, since they are both elites. You can either take lictors, or a unit of yealers. Or in your specific case, you can take lictors and yealers, or yealers and yealers. Every time you pick lictors is it a choice between lictors *or* yealers. (And other things also, but always at least yealers. Yep the one thing that only lictors can do, is guide DS units. (Funny that nurglitch completely dismissed their one unique ability) But even that has some severe drawbacks. Either you use one lictor, which is easy to kill, or you invest 200pts to try and target a mawloc shot. And the enemy gets a turn to move away from the 6" radius of the Lictor. But yes, if you wanted to run a list heavy on mawlocs and lictors... I could see that. Really? Compare that to using 2-3 units of yealers. dude, don't pull a Nurglitch, don't start hiding behind theoretical possible what-if scenarios.... No one is talking in a vacuum, or about empty fields. I have asked both of you (though Nurglitch doesn't have the guts to respond to me anyway...) to give an example of when you are better off with Lictors instead of Yealers. Long fangs? Yealers Aegis line? Yealers. Yeah dropping a mawloc would be fun, but I don't find it likely to keep a lictor alive 6" from an aegis line full of marines. Again, anything can be used. And if you are careful about it, it may even be worthwhile. But that doesn't make it a good unit. I use Tfexes because I like to, I use OOE because I like to. And I try and work my list and tactics to make them be a benefit to my list. But that doesn't make them a good choice. Heck, a pyrovore can easily be worth it against Xenos armies, or against a bastien. Doesn't make it a better choice than Hive guard... You just stated the case where they would be beneficial: running multiple deepstrikers. The benefit of the mawloc being that it is a solid 30pts cheaper than a trygon for what essentially will likely die to an inordinate amount of anti-tank fire the minute it gets close. If you deploy exactly an inch away, and back them up with multiple units for target saturation, short of running, they won't get away from a no scatter blast. Put the edge of a blast template at the outskirts of of the 6". Unless I'm wrong about that I don't think the entire template has to be encompassed in the 6" bubble; just the edge should do. There's no argument for the points 3 groups yealers would be highly effective versus a broader spectrum of enemy units...but if we are just assessing the usefulness of lictors it would help to address that rather than just dismissively saying "take this instead." Heck, if you are using a tyrannofex you should understand the sentiment of wanting to mix up your lists to keep from running the same droll list over and over. I think anyone looking around here for any amount of time knows all the optimum unit choices in the codex because they are repeated ad nauseum in every single thread. It doesn't kill baby kittens to discuss alternative units and how to work them into a coherent list. (you'd think it does though by the backlash on these kinds of threads)
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Feb 28, 2013 3:04:15 GMT
if you're playing a friendly fluffbunny list or just looking to change things up, then none of this matters anyway. play ripper swarms and the parasite, whatever. but when someone asks 'why do i take this unit' and it's mediocre even at what it's supposed to do best and there are units that fulfill the same role better/cheaper, then that's what you should tell them.
tl;dr: lictors are a fun fluffy choice that have a couple of niche roles that have been covered already. these roles however can be performed better and on a wider range of targets by other units so there's no real reason to take them outside of fluff/fun/i like the models.
/thread
|
|
|
Post by Space is pretty big on Feb 28, 2013 13:51:42 GMT
Lictors ate my dog!
|
|
|
Post by ZergLord on Feb 28, 2013 16:10:34 GMT
YAY! Now, since your claim was: " so many people have such a low opinion of the unit, because they don't understand the armies that Lictors enhanced" You will need to illustrate how lictors 'enhance' the above list better than other choices would. What is the role of the lictors in that list, why are lictors the best choice? And please, don't just recite their abilities (again), we know the rules. Why are those rules going to be more useful to that list than other choices...?? Also, tell us how a CC army without any real shooting capability works in 6th Edition.
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Feb 28, 2013 16:30:59 GMT
You just stated the case where they would be beneficial: running multiple deepstrikers. Then you might want to be a bit more careful about what posts you agree with. What you agreed with was a wall of text designed to show how lictors were better than stealers as 'shock assault', and that using the Pheromone trail was a *bad* use for them. You now seem to be saying the opposite of that. To clarify my post; I did not say multiple deepstrikers, I was referring to the 'all-in' list with 3 mawlocs and 9 lictors. Then you are trying to utilize the lictors for the one thing they do better than any other unit; and that ability is required for getting the most out of the mawlocs. The rest of the deepstriking units really don't care about pin point accuracy, and don't need a 200 pt unit just to be a few inches closer to their target. Now, if you posted that you wanted to run 3 mawlocs; then folks would probably agree that you may want 9 lictors. (not as shock assault....) It is still debatable whether that army list will be 'useful' or not, but I am not ready to knock it until someone tries it. But... that is not what has been being asserted in this thread...not even close. Sure, that is the theory. But you have to hope that 1" is in terrain, and that the cover save will be protective enough, and that there is no one around to assault the lictors, or that the target unit isn't willing to Move and Run to get away. And even with all of that, what are you targeting with almost 400pts of Nids? Long fangs seems like the viable target, but then you can use rippers or yealers for much less. Ah, but that is the problem. Others *are* arguing that lictors are the better choice, the better 'shock assault' unit. And you have been agreeing with that assessment. (or seems like it, if I misinterpreted your statement, I apologize.) Of course you can use them, and of course there are 'reasons' to. (I said as much on the very first response in this thread). But they will always be the sub-optimal choice. You take them because you want to; but you should know there are better choices available. Read again, no one is killing kittens because you want to use lictors, they are killing kittens because Nurglitch keeps trying to claim that lictors are the better choice. (And it seemed like you were agreeing with that.) If he, or you, or anyone, simply said that they were 'good enough' and you wanted to use them to mix things up a bit.... cool beans, have at it. (Thats why I use OOE sometimes)
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Feb 28, 2013 16:34:25 GMT
Also, tell us how a CC army without any real shooting capability works in 6th Edition. To be fair, he never claimed the lictors would enhance a good list, just that there were types of lists that would be enhanced by them. Plus, I would prefer he was not given a tangent to elablorate on before answering my question and supporting his own (somewhat insulting) assertions about my (our?) understanding of the game.
|
|
|
Post by swarmy on Feb 28, 2013 17:33:21 GMT
You just stated the case where they would be beneficial: running multiple deepstrikers. Then you might want to be a bit more careful about what posts you agree with. What you agreed with was a wall of text designed to show how lictors were better than stealers as 'shock assault', and that using the Pheromone trail was a *bad* use for them. You now seem to be saying the opposite of that. To clarify my post; I did not say multiple deepstrikers, I was referring to the 'all-in' list with 3 mawlocs and 9 lictors. Then you are trying to utilize the lictors for the one thing they do better than any other unit; and that ability is required for getting the most out of the mawlocs. The rest of the deepstriking units really don't care about pin point accuracy, and don't need a 200 pt unit just to be a few inches closer to their target. Now, if you posted that you wanted to run 3 mawlocs; then folks would probably agree that you may want 9 lictors. (not as shock assault....) It is still debatable whether that army list will be 'useful' or not, but I am not ready to knock it until someone tries it. But... that is not what has been being asserted in this thread...not even close. Sure, that is the theory. But you have to hope that 1" is in terrain, and that the cover save will be protective enough, and that there is no one around to assault the lictors, or that the target unit isn't willing to Move and Run to get away. And even with all of that, what are you targeting with almost 400pts of Nids? Long fangs seems like the viable target, but then you can use rippers or yealers for much less. Ah, but that is the problem. Others *are* arguing that lictors are the better choice, the better 'shock assault' unit. And you have been agreeing with that assessment. (or seems like it, if I misinterpreted your statement, I apologize.) Of course you can use them, and of course there are 'reasons' to. (I said as much on the very first response in this thread). But they will always be the sub-optimal choice. You take them because you want to; but you should know there are better choices available. Read again, no one is killing kittens because you want to use lictors, they are killing kittens because Nurglitch keeps trying to claim that lictors are the better choice. (And it seemed like you were agreeing with that.) If he, or you, or anyone, simply said that they were 'good enough' and you wanted to use them to mix things up a bit.... cool beans, have at it. (Thats why I use OOE sometimes) I don't like how heated these things get. I wasn't trying to pick a side in some sort of forum war; I've just used the unit with some measure of success before on multiple occasions and it annoys me when people say they are unusable. We are pretty much in agreement on the assessment of them. I suppose I could have clarified that I wasn't claiming they are the clear better choice. I just wanted to make it clear, in the event a newer player read this, that they shouldn't take a sledgehammer to the unit. "Good enough" is probably a fair assessment depending on your local meta and your play style. Though, apparently you will be called a fluffbunny player, for whatever that is worth.
|
|
|
Post by Jestar on Feb 28, 2013 20:57:46 GMT
Lictor, but did it swallow her?
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Feb 28, 2013 21:03:13 GMT
I don't like how heated these things get. I wasn't trying to pick a side in some sort of forum war; I've just used the unit with some measure of success before on multiple occasions and it annoys me when people say they are unusable. We are pretty much in agreement on the assessment of them No worries. Sorry if I came across as heated with you, I wasn't at all. But you also may want to recheck what was being posted, just about everyone said they were okay, just that they were not as good as some of the other options. The problems only developed when Nurglitch kept making claims that he was unable or unwilling to provide support for.
|
|
|
Post by topaxygourouni on Mar 1, 2013 6:00:00 GMT
Hmm, noob question: What is the meaning of Lictor + Hive commander abilities stacking? Do models auto enter the field, or?
Also, how about considering a single Lictor as a points upgrade to a Mawloc to avoid scattering? Mawloc's attack from the deeps is a pretty powerful one and will kill even a bunch of terminators all together without a problem. So it's kind of important not to scatter too much. Would a single lictor help it consistently come down in turn 2 and precisely where you want it?
How about two mawlocs?
|
|