Maleceptor-New Strat

[axilleas]

So how do people feel about the Maleceptor as a bully distraction carnifex throwing out mortal wounds while helping keep your chosen attacking element alive? I like using ambushing tactics for the Nids, so turn 2+ has FHT and Trygon with payload pop up to put pressure where I can.

I'm hoping it will help the main body weather the storm for the first turn.

[bolzor]

Dec 31, 2019 17:01:43 GMT axilleas said:

So how do people feel about the Maleceptor as a bully distraction carnifex throwing out mortal wounds while helping keep your chosen attacking element alive? I like using ambushing tactics for the Nids, so turn 2+ has FHT and Trygon with payload pop up to put pressure where I can.

I'm hoping it will help the main body weather the storm for the first turn.

I think this will become one of our better red herrings that opponents will prioritize when they hear that they hit with D6 damage attacks and have the psychic explosion power. Perfect because these monsters are probably the least efficient thing for our opponents to shoot at.

Simultaneously, Maleceptors offer utility and versatility in that they actually can do damage if they hit certain targets. Clusters of characters and MSUs should be scared of it for its potential.

I would also totally try 2 of these guys in an auxiliary Gorgon detachment for the buff aura spell. Doesnt limit using Encephallic Diffusion either. Of course, this is only if I'm not counting on their Synapse coverage.

[infornography]

Every LGS I have ever been to plays at 2000 points standard. If you take a list to a store to play a pick up game, you take a 2k list.
As far as the argument that comp is not important, my response is why discuss efficacy at all then? There is not much to discuss if you enter every conversation with the attitude of beer and pretzels. Shutting down competitive level breakdown and analysis effectively shuts down all discussion because EVERYTHING is fine at a non-competitive level. There is only cause to get into the nitty gritty when you are looking at competitive play.

Yeah, most players don't need or care for statistical breakdowns and min max ratios etc. Those players aren't going to be on a discussion forum talking about tactics and strategies generally. What conversations would you be looking for happening without the statistical analyses? We do have the occasional fluff conversation on here but those only go so far.

I'm not trying to exclude the casual crowd, there just isn't as much cause for discussion of that level of play. If someone is asking what units are more effective or capable, they have already left the mindset of strictly casual or fluffy gameplay and are looking at the edge of competitive play. There is nothing wrong with either mindset, but competitive play generates a LOT more discussion because there is frankly a lot more to discuss.

Sorry for the rant but this idea shows up in the hive every once in a while and sometimes a reminder is needed.

[bolzor]

Yikes. Well, the reality is that each of us has a narrow, anecdotal sample set of experiences to judge the hobby, community, and player base. Not a single person here can be a final arbiter of who should be here and conversing about the game.

I think there is plenty to talk about outside of the very hard mathammer of competitive play and I like both kinds of conversations. Math and probability is interesting to me even though I do not compete or play in a competitive meta. But you can also talk about interesting rules interactions, fun unit combinations, deployment, movement strategies, experimentation, funny moments? Its a forum! By its very definition its a place to come share, learn, and discuss.

I certainly wouldn't be so hasty to invalidate anyone's participation here or call respectful contributions 'less than' others. Nobody needs to be right or prove others wrong or be gatekeeper to what is good/bad/fun in a game like 40k. Unless you work for GW or ITC event officials. Then you probably should haha

[mattblowers]

Dec 31, 2019 20:51:17 GMT bolzor said:

Yikes. Well, the reality is that each of us has a narrow, anecdotal sample set of experiences to judge the hobby, community, and player base. Not a single person here can be a final arbiter of who should be here and conversing about the game.

gigasnail is our resident arbiter, expert, and has the final say and will be sure to let you know. Other than yoritomo, who is the grand pumba boss with banning power and general forum gestapo who can and will drop the hammer. We are Tyranids and don't get a mind of our own.

sheesh: newbs.

[gigasnail]

I'm not the arbiter of anything.

But he's right. Casual play, you can and have always been able to do whatever and it's not a problem. How much feedback does someone need about their beer and pretzel list? Put that (please do not swear) on the table, roll some dice and have some beers. Have some fun. No one is going to begrudge it to you. As long as it's between consenting adults, it's hard to have fun the wrong way. Work out. Write some battle reports and take some pics, those are always good threads.

What people do need feedback on and info from other is what works and what doesn't once you step up and out onto more competitive games. It's a whole other world, and a lot of times folks are in for a rude awakening when they play their first games outside of their local clubs or close friends.

[mattblowers]

Dec 31, 2019 23:11:11 GMT gigasnail said:

I'm not the arbiter of anything.

tish, tish. You jest sire.

But he's right? Casual play, you can and have always been able to do whatever and it's not a problem.

“I’m not the arbiter but my ruling is...”

[dranzyl]

I had a chuckle when i imagined a 40k game between non consenting adults. Imagine being forced at gunpoint to play xD.

I agree on the casual/ comp divide being mainly about a natural progression of a discussion. Perhaps we as a forum could try to be a little more encouraging towards non optimized options

[killercroc]

Jan 1, 2020 16:19:55 GMT dranzyl said:

Perhaps we as a forum could try to be a little more encouraging towards non optimized options

Sounds like quitter talk to me!

[gigasnail]

Plenty encouraging towards them. Just not encouraging the ITS NOT SO BAD REALLY GAIZ reaction when folks bring up a subject that, well, really is pretty (please do not swear). See every thread on the haruspex or toxicrene ever, right up to PA where they aren't (please do not swear), they're nearly there but not quite good (i.e. very nice and great for casual, but not top table list contender).

[axilleas]

You all make compelling arguments and I agree with everyone...the new Maleceptor strat IS pretty awesome and makes the big bad brain bug an interesting dynamic on the table top. I'm glad we could all engage in such a healthy debate to the OP's topic.

[Rahab]

Dec 31, 2019 19:19:42 GMT infornography said:

Every LGS I have ever been to plays at 2000 points standard. If you take a list to a store to play a pick up game, you take a 2k list.
As far as the argument that comp is not important, my response is why discuss efficacy at all then? There is not much to discuss if you enter every conversation with the attitude of beer and pretzels. Shutting down competitive level breakdown and analysis effectively shuts down all discussion because EVERYTHING is fine at a non-competitive level. There is only cause to get into the nitty gritty when you are looking at competitive play.

Yeah, most players don't need or care for statistical breakdowns and min max ratios etc. Those players aren't going to be on a discussion forum talking about tactics and strategies generally. What conversations would you be looking for happening without the statistical analyses? We do have the occasional fluff conversation on here but those only go so far.

I'm not trying to exclude the casual crowd, there just isn't as much cause for discussion of that level of play. If someone is asking what units are more effective or capable, they have already left the mindset of strictly casual or fluffy gameplay and are looking at the edge of competitive play. There is nothing wrong with either mindset, but competitive play generates a LOT more discussion because there is frankly a lot more to discuss.

Sorry for the rant but this idea shows up in the hive every once in a while and sometimes a reminder is needed.

Sorry to derail this thread further, but I've heard this sentiment come up more than once, and I can't disagree with it more.

40K is a fundamentally unbalanced game. Even in a wholly casual environment, the power discrepancies between similarly priced units will ruin a relaxed experience if you just slap random models on the table and roll dice. I am by no metric a competitive player, but I still want to win once in a while.

More importantly, I want to try to win with the army and models I love. To do that with Tyranids, and particularly the suboptimal monsters that make up my hive fleet, I need every bit of strategy I can drum up from this excellent forum.

I've used a Maleceptor (and a Haruspex and a Tervigon, for that matter) in every Tyranid battle since the model was released. I can get away with this and still give my opponent a game because of our soft meta, but not if I play stupid, and not if the rest of my list doesn't somehow compensate for how inefficient these choices are. Some armies can roll me in the dirt with even their worst units if I don't milk my junk monsters for all they're worth.

In short: I come here for exactly the statistical analysis and tactical discussion it was claimed casual players don't need, for the sake of making my casual lists playable. I'd wager I'm not alone.

[gigasnail]

and that's cool. there are players at every level here.

people are missing the point though, like every time this gets brought up.

what doesn't help anyone and only contributes to background noise is when something is discussed, and it's clearly a benchwarmer idea/unit/stratagem/whatever and we inevitably have a couple of folks chime in with something along the lines that it's fine, it works for me, not every game is competitive/go hard or go home, why do we have to bring up competitive builds or come at every problem like it's the LVO, etc.

see my comment earlier, go check the eye rolling threads we've had in the past about those units.

[Rahab]

I've read almost every thread on the General and Tactics board since 8th dropped, and your earlier comment, Giga. I absolutely think I understand what you are saying. I also respectfully and vehemently disagree with it, by and large.

It has been said, ad nauseum, that in a casual environment you can "do whatever you want and it's fine". If by fine, you mean fun, then you can't. The game isn't balanced enough.

I did exactly what you're talking about all through 6th and 7th edition: Paint the models I like, throw them on the table, roll dice. Then put them back on the shelf as I get steamrolled by the "beer & pretzels" lists my club put together using more competitive factions.

That was disheartening for me and boring for my opponents. 8th has leveled things to a point, but still I don't stand a chance against a fluffy Space Marine list with the models I choose to run without playing smart and making some competitive concessions in my list.

No one is deluding themselves that the Maleceptor Encephalic Diffusion meta is upon us and about to sweep the LVO. That doesn't mean there's not value to be had in digging into some of the fringe "benchwarmer" strategies to be played around it.

To put it another way, I very much enjoy the "background noise" that comes out of these discussions. It helps, if not truly competitive players, then those of us that only care to be as competitive as our favorite models will allow.

I will abdicate from the ongoing derailment now. Please continue!

[mule]

I agree rehab. I have two friends who are very new to the game, have kids and limited money. One is a nid player and the other is a blood angels player. They pretty much exclusively play against each other. I've watched a few games and they're both limited on what models they can bring. The nid player is more or less stuck with a genestealer list without any hiveguard. he's got a tfex and that's pretty much it.

They've been playing for a year and a bit now and its a couple times a month and the nid player is so frustrated that he's already starting to dabble into eldar. I'd love to tell him that's a bad idea and that he should just buy the better nid units but at the end of the day if you're in the hobby to play and not paint/enjoy the models then you're not really able to do rule of cool with every army.

This was the case even before the SM buff. I mean the player makes a lot of mistakes but they both do. It just impacts the nid player much harder because if you don't use your genestealers correctly and the rest of your list is a floppy noodle well.. you can't really do much the rest of the game, our units can't really sit on the board and control the game just by being tanky. we have to use cover and we have to use los, so when there are armies and units that can scoot around the board quick or have long range LOS removal it's very hard for us to continue justifying taking things like rippers besides as fillers for CP because they can't really just sit on a objective and hold it all game while the rest of our army is in their face.

We do have options to be quite competitive. "I don't want to play that way" isn't really a valid arguement when it comes to competitive though. If you want to do well in the competitive scene you have to take the things that will enable you to do well and we can put a swarm of 350 6++ fearless bodies who get a 4++ on the charge, with a single body who can be T7 4++ with a 5++ FNP and the ability to use all of our battalion cp on just reducing damage. That's pretty competitive but it's just not fun.