|
Post by Kwodd on Jul 20, 2013 4:56:13 GMT
Fleshborer hive and dessicator larvae.
|
|
|
Post by WestRider on Jul 20, 2013 5:46:31 GMT
if you're making unit choices on 'it looks cool' instead of how effective it is, then why are we having a tactics discussion on how to use anything? Because there are still better or worse ways to use it. There's a difference between "I want to use this because it looks cool and I don't care about winning" and "I want to use this because it looks cool. How can I do so while minimally harming my chances of winning?"
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Jul 20, 2013 8:04:53 GMT
And there are also units that *can* be competitive if used in the correct list, or used in a specific manner. This explores that.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Jul 20, 2013 8:25:27 GMT
so, where are you going to put 250 points of tfex in a competitive list?
edit: to be clear, i'm not trying to be facetious. where would you put 250 points (assuming spray tfex) in a 1500, 1850, and 2000 point list? what are you giving up? how are you keeping it alive? gaunt screen + FNP from tervigons or support biomancy users should make it a real pain in the ass to kill, but 250 is a big chunk of change. that's a flyrant, a CC kitted tervigon + its gaunt tax, two full units of biovores, a trygon prime, etc. much less, how would you work in a pair of them? i don't like to run one of anything, there are too many ways to kill high value single model targets.
it's 250 points of a unit that can be tarppitted by two squads of gaunts (or cultists. or guardsmen. or anything fearless/stubborn, really) charging at the same time (one will surely be obliterated by the overwatch) and held there pretty much the rest of the game.
|
|
|
Post by Squire on Jul 20, 2013 9:40:14 GMT
i don't play tournements, but i do play to kick the snot out of whomever i'm playing. if you're making unit choices on 'it looks cool' instead of how effective it is, then why are we having a tactics discussion on how to use anything? use it because it looks cool and have fun. no one's disputing that it's a cool model (well, some folks actually did hate it with a passion when it came out, but i was kind of fond of it, fond enough where my tervigons are magnetized to change to a tfex if they suddenly stopped sucking), and no one cares what you're playing with when it's understood it's a fluffy game. continuing to argue 'hey, it's not so bad' when it clearly is second tier isn't particularly insightful, either. The part about why we're having the discussion has been answered, and I agree that it is a second tier unit. it's 250 points of a unit that can be tarppitted by two squads of gaunts (or cultists. or guardsmen. or anything fearless/stubborn, really) charging at the same time (one will surely be obliterated by the overwatch) and held there pretty much the rest of the game. It can be tarpitted but the onus is on the nid player to avoid letting that happen. I wouldn't let it ever be beyond charge range of a tervigon and its gaunts so if something does manage to charge it (easier said than done) there should be at least some termagants coming in to help out the following turn. As you said, the t-fex's own shooting is a nice last line of defence against tarpitters, but it could also be walking up the table behind a line of termagants and one thing that isn't usually a problem for us is GEQ blobs. As for the rest of your post (which wasn't aimed at me) I wouldn't put it into a list aimed at competitive play. If I was going for the best list possible with our codex I wouldn't be able to justify the cost.
|
|
|
Post by Hive Bahamut on Jul 20, 2013 21:34:15 GMT
It's just priced to prepare us for the next codex. Carnifex and Tyrannofex are overcosted, and even though the Tyranno was new the other half of its kit is very useful. I suspect we will see a considerable price drop and possibly some sort of shiny new use for his guns, because nobody is going to hack apart their Tervigons, and seeing as we made pseudo-Tervi's with Carnifex.. Sounds like a profitable experience for GW.
|
|
|
Post by rpricew on Jul 20, 2013 21:41:54 GMT
@ Gigasnil: I agree with you that the Tfex is rubbish most of the times. To try and answer your question of where do you put him in a 1500 point, 1850 or 2K is simple. You drop one of your more competitive units like a Trygon/Devilfex or a Tervigon/Gant unit to fit him in. Sounds crazy, I know! Why would I want to do this. I'll tell you... simply because you need the added durability of the 2+ armor.
I mostly only play in 2K games and like to run between 4-5 Tervigons in my list. I run them at 220 points with a 50 man Termagant unit to make them scoring. What I'm noticing is there are a lot of AP3 weapons out there that run/shoot in and make quick work of my Tervigons/Trygons because I'm relying on a 5+ cover/FNP roll to save. It's mostly the Missile Launchers and the abundance of Str 7 that seems to be everywhere. The odds of rolling 1-2 is way more than just rolling a 1. LOL!
I know that the TFex isn't any more survivable (arguably less so) than an Tervigon to Plasma/LasCannon/Melta since those weapons ignore the armor as well, but a charging TFex running up the field directly at your opponent's base is definitely something to be dealt with. Even if your opponent re-deploys to ignore the beasty, then they are probably moving towards a more killy unit. I've been experimenting with Armored Tyrants, Tfex and Tervigons as a Monstrous Creature rush to really put the pressure on my opponent.
It's a tactic that quickly will get an opponent flustered when you start making all of those 2+ saves which means your scoring units are living longer and better equipped to be around when the game ends. The only players that I have had trouble with are the new Eldar "Distort" weapons, and people who are crafty enough to just focus down the Tervigons/Gants first. These people are kiting the big beasties and killing troops to bank on the win. To answer, I just send in the TFex/Tyrants into their own troops (usually around turn 3-4) and try to give it right back.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Jul 21, 2013 1:14:25 GMT
you can't really count on your opponent being retarded. taking out more effective units to put less effective units in is not a recipe for success. i was running a shelled tyrant and a spray fex at 1200 points this morning and only a single tervigon, i did fine. i was also playing my 12 year old son and he was playing orks. it's not something i would have brought to a real game, because it's not that good of a setup.
|
|
|
Post by coredump on Jul 21, 2013 2:45:34 GMT
Whether a unit is 'more effective' or 'less effective' is really only determined on a game by game basis. It will depend (partly) on your list, your opponents list, mission, terrain, objectives, your playstyle, opponent playstyle, and just plain luck.
When building a list, you try an pick units are are "more likely" to be effective, or ones that are "easier/simpler" to make effective. The liklihood of a Tfex being more effective than any other unit, will depend on your list, playstyle, tactice, etc. For example, if you already have 2 tervifexes, and a couple of units of Yealers, you really don't need the CC capability of a Trygon Prime; it may be more beneficial to have the shooting and resilency of a Tfex. Likewise, if you tend to face things that rely on cover saves, like the DE Beastpack, the Tfex becomes more likely to be the more effective choice.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Jul 21, 2013 5:36:49 GMT
i had a small novel and erased it. we're going in circles. if you're not 1) list tailroing for xenos foot or 2) facing new players that make bad target prioroty decisions or 3) your local meta has so many xenos players you're more likely than not going to face them half the time (and are willing to have it do not much for the first 3 turns, though it is hell on wheels if left to flame xenos or IG objective campers if it's not just focus fired down) or 4) playing flufflists, then it's a 2nd rate choice and there's not much else to add.
if you're doing any of these 4 things, then enjoy your tfex because he's a lot of fun in these situations.
|
|
|
Post by WestRider on Jul 21, 2013 6:12:01 GMT
Or, in my case, I'm a better player than most of the people I get to play against. I spend more time studying the game and figuring out how best to play it. And if I bring an optimized list and my best play, I will wreck face most of the time.
But tabling people gets boring, so I play sub-optimal lists, using Units that I like aestheticlly, but are mediocre-to-bad rules-wise, to handicap myself. But I still want to be bringing my A-game on the table, in the game itself, so I like to work out how best to use those sub-optimal Units when I'm bringing them.
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Jul 21, 2013 8:25:57 GMT
i'm often in the same boat; i could basically field whatever and still roflstompinator the guys i usually play with. the third list i was using today with my son (who is like on his 5th game, ever) would also destroy my usual opponents and it's nothing special (prime with 5 BS/LW warriors, 5 warriors w/ BS, two units of two biovores, 5 ravenors. and two units of 3 HG). the list i played before was 1 terv, 1 shelled tyrant, and 1 tfex with some gants and HG, likewise it would destroy my normal opponents. we had fun, and it was a nice way to pass the day.
this doesn't stop me recognizing that a good player would take these lists apart, and doesn't stop me wanting to help people here maybe ease some of the growing pains in learning how to play bugs. give people the caveats up front 'you know these units are fun units to play but this isn't going to fly against more experienced players.' a good number of people on these boards just care about having fun with their friends, and that's great. however every time we have someone asking about warriors, carnifex, lictors, harpies, the tfex, or even (god help us) pyrovores, we have basically this same discussion.
|
|
|
Post by Squire on Jul 21, 2013 9:45:40 GMT
It's a fair point that some people won't be aware of the imbalance of our codex and perhaps not experienced enough to see that some units simply aren't worth their points cost when compared with other units that do the same thing. I sometimes take for granted that everybody on here has read infonography's guide and already knows when they're selecting a t-fex that it isn't on par with stuff like trygons, tervigons and dakka flyrants. Or, in my case, I'm a better player than most of the people I get to play against. I spend more time studying the game and figuring out how best to play it. And if I bring an optimized list and my best play, I will wreck face most of the time. But tabling people gets boring, so I play sub-optimal lists, using Units that I like aestheticlly, but are mediocre-to-bad rules-wise, to handicap myself. But I still want to be bringing my A-game on the table, in the game itself, so I like to work out how best to use those sub-optimal Units when I'm bringing them.This is my approach too. I think there's a lot of satisfaction in making mediocre units work and winning (or at least having competitive games) without trying your hardest. My last army I was active with were a fairly fluffy Word Bearers 1500 list in 4th ed (3.5 codex), and they had a glaring weakness to be taken advantage of by any opponent with a bit of firepower and knowledge of summoning/possession. Typically a third of the army were to be summoned, with a Keeper of Secrets relying on the old possession rules. It wasn't even a fast army, so if the opponent focused shooting on the unit with the obviously possessed unit leader they could have prevented the greater daemon ever hitting the table. Furthermore, if they could kill icon bearers they could control where the other daemons came onto the table. I don't remember anybody attempting to exploit that. The one loss I recall was against Eldar starcannon spam and I was tabled before getting anywhere near him- so there's no knowing if he was even aware of daemon summoning. With nids I'm going to assume most players know our capabilities even less than they knew how CSM with daemons worked, so if the gaming groups here are anything like those I used to play with there's no way I'll need a competitive list. Better to keep things fun so I don't become an opponent people are reluctant to face
|
|
|
Post by gigasnail on Jul 21, 2013 21:02:49 GMT
good luck with that?
|
|
|
Post by Davor on Jul 22, 2013 2:26:46 GMT
you can't really count on your opponent being retarded. Been a while since I really been on, but back now every day even though I don't comment. Please don't use the word retarded. It's one of those words that sets me off. I have a disabled daughter, and I find this word has no bearing in "todays language". It demeans me, and my daughter. So when my daughter plays this game with me, how am I suppose to take this statement then? I know no malice was intended, but just saying.
|
|