|
Post by purestrain on Aug 7, 2020 11:20:52 GMT
A lot of these could be argued to go one tier higher or lower... I would put Pyrovore one step higher, for instance, but Tervigon should be at least two steps lower. Which is quite sad but true. The tervigon is hard capped for use in narrative/open play styles, such was the fate of lictor last edition. Its cost/benefit ratio is insanely off balance unless they have some kickass rules coming for it in 9th.
|
|
|
Post by killercroc on Aug 7, 2020 14:22:59 GMT
Well I think were you put things on the chart depends on how you grade them. Are you grading the single model and its stats/wargear? Are you grading it in a squad? Do you consider army synergy? Do you compare it to what other armies get? Matched play or narrative play? etc.
Like for the Pyrovore I think it's actually a sold unit. Cheap cost, 10" assault flamer, bites decently hard, lots of wounds and a decent save, and explodes like a vehicle for mortals. Low points cost but slightly slow across the board but not so much so it's unusable. The downside of the Pyrovore is the unit size, 1-3 means they really do not benefit from getting a pod. If these guys were 3-6 then we'd be talking, pod out and 6D6 heavy flamers and then a charge after that with some hard core kinky biting. The other downside is practically no army synergy. No aura buffs from characters, the one strat tied to them isn't all that good and while they could use some of the other generic Tyranid strats they're almost always going to be more useful on another unit. Why shoot twice with 3 heavy flamers when you can shoot twice with 6 Hive guard or 30 dakkagaunts?
I'd say Pyrovores on their own are solid but when looking at everything as a whole they're less so. Not to mention they're so darn expensive!
|
|
|
Post by No One on Aug 7, 2020 14:58:20 GMT
There is also one nerf on venomthrope as daisy chain of large units is not allowed in 9e now Units of 6+ models need to have each model in 2” coherence of another 2 models now It totally is. It's just risky and/or worse. But you can still daisy chain, just shorter if you don't want to risk death ( 30 gaunt example), or still go max coherency for most of the squad if you've got a plan ( 10 or 18).
|
|
|
Post by phenatix on Aug 7, 2020 16:37:07 GMT
thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/54159/venomthropes-malanthro?q=VenomthropeTook awhile to dig. Unfortunately no graphs or charts, just essays, and apparently it's my maths so I'd take it with a lot of salt cuz I'm bad at maths. The basic idea is that it costs you 90pts to bring a unit of 3, and 1: they're easy to remove and 2: it's more effective to remove the threat unit straight unless you have the capability to kill a big chunk of the enemy's army, at which point you need a big unit to survive being shot and hence doubling the minimum threshold for when it becomes a good idea to shoot them. With our army being primarily squishy to their respective counter units, being out of sight was the best form of defense and obsoletes the venomthripes. Edit: gaunts are one of the exception because that's a statistical wounds game with a tonne of homogenous "threats", where the difference between losing 4 and losing 6 actually makes a difference to the long game without a marked decrease in your ability to play your strategy. I took a look at the thread and I just can't agree with the conclusions. If you can force your opponent to shoot at a unit that is not critical to your winning the game (not ObSec, doesn't have strong killing power), that is a win. You are, even temporarily, diverting fire away from your important units that win you the game. Look below for standard Bolt Rifle (3+ to hit, S4, AP-1) vs Leviathan Termagants, Zoanthropes, and Warriors with Enhanced Resistances: But wait, they will be so overbuffed, rerolling everything! Potential weaknesses: If the opponent has no shooting, Venomthropes do nothing. Conclusions: A unit of 3 Venomthropes is 99 points, and your opponent is forced to shoot them off first or suffer inefficient shooting vs the rest of your army. Example ObSec Army List: ++ Battalion Detachment 0CP (Tyranids) [101 PL, 11CP, 1,998pts] +++ Configuration +[Reference] Discipline: Hive Mind: Smite [Reference] Extensions of the Hive MindBattle-forged CP [12CP]Detachment CPGametype: Matched Hive Fleet: Leviathan + Stratagems +Progeny of the Hive [-1CP]+ HQ +Neurothrope [4 PL, 95pts]: Power: Onslaught, Power: Smite, Resonance Barb Tyranid Prime [6 PL, 85pts]: Adrenal Glands, Boneswords, Deathspitter, Warlord + Troops +Termagants [9 PL, 150pts]. 30x Termagant (Fleshborer): 30x Fleshborer Termagants [9 PL, 150pts]. 30x Termagant (Fleshborer): 30x Fleshborer Termagants [9 PL, 150pts]. 30x Termagant (Fleshborer): 30x Fleshborer Termagants [9 PL, 135pts]. 27x Termagant (Fleshborer): 27x Fleshborer Tyranid Warriors [13 PL, 297pts]. Adaptive Physiology: Enhanced Resistance . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior (Bio-cannon): Boneswords, Venom Cannon . Tyranid Warrior (Bio-cannon): Boneswords, Venom Cannon . Tyranid Warrior (Bio-cannon): Boneswords, Venom Cannon Tyranid Warriors [13 PL, 297pts]. Adaptive Physiology: Enhanced Resistance . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior: Boneswords, Deathspitter . Tyranid Warrior (Bio-cannon): Boneswords, Venom Cannon . Tyranid Warrior (Bio-cannon): Boneswords, Venom Cannon . Tyranid Warrior (Bio-cannon): Boneswords, Venom Cannon + Elites +Venomthropes [5 PL, 99pts]. 3x Venomthrope: 3x Toxic Lashes Zoanthropes [12 PL, 270pts]: Power: Catalyst, Power: Smite . 6x Zoanthrope: 6x Claws and Teeth Zoanthropes [12 PL, 270pts]: Power: Smite, Power: The Horror . 6x Zoanthrope: 6x Claws and Teeth ++ Total: [101 PL, 11CP, 1,998pts] ++Created with BattleScribe Notes: I did not look at monsters, or the effects of more anti elite/tank weapons. x-axis represents the amount of target units killed, not wounds - Termagants W1, Zoanthropes/Warriors W3 y-axis represents efficiency as - (points of units killed [+ Venomthropes' cost, if any])/(avg shots to kill that many)
|
|
|
Post by kazetanade on Aug 7, 2020 18:58:54 GMT
Erm. Not wanting to rain on your parade, but I dont think anyone is contesting that Venomthropes force the enemy to suffer "inefficient" shooting vs the rest of the army. My point back then was that, knowing that shooting the unit straight will produce better results than if you divert shooting into the Venomthrope to clear the buff in the first place, why shoot the venomthrope if you already have the firepower to remove the important unit?
Bellator's point was that at some point, the enemy shooting into us will kill an amount, and because of the damage reduction we get from -1 to hit, eventually we will have saved from missed shots, the equivalent points of other models to what we pay for the Venomthrope (eg: to put it in context of your charts, I am looking at Leviathan warriors, you basically have saved 90pts of warriors once he's killed 9 warriors). If they keep on shooting past this, the venomthrope is basically creating value for you by saving more than its points worth of warriors from dying.
My point of contention, and where we disagreed, is whether this is enough for Venomthropes to be good (my contention was no, and they should have had a buff to their utility to actually force enemy units to want to focus your venomthrope first rather than ignore it. Bellator's point was that they needed to be tanky or cheaper so that when they were focused they would be harder to remove, thereby gaining even more value since you waste a fair share of the enemy's shooting to kill them. It's one of those North vs Northeast moments where our train of thought is kind of in the same direction but taking different angles).
I think Gaunt carpets and Invul spam are two list archetypes that dont care, since both are designed around the goal of maximizing staying power at whatever cost. Since there is literally no loss of unit effectiveness or list win condition from any single particular unit dying, it's really just about increasing the statistical wound count and hence you get the situation where venomthrope buff becomes really really good. Contrast this vs say, a 20/40GS list that also has 1 SL, 2 Flyrants, 6HG, and 1 or 2 Exocrenes. Venomthrope defense buff is pretty negligible since they can take out whatever it is they want to by ignoring the venomthrope, and each unit lost is a big blow to the list functionality.
|
|
|
Post by phenatix on Aug 7, 2020 19:59:41 GMT
If we are talking about straight buffing Venomthropes, then sure I'd be down for it. I particularly liked the part in your thread about Zoanthrope/Venomthrope scaling. It is atrociously bad, with Zoanthropes seeing massive power spikes going from 3 to 4/5 models, then to 6 models. Venomthropes also have bad scaling - really each unit should be more along the lines of buff 1 @ 1-2, buff 1+2 @ 3-4, buff 1+2+3 @ 5-6. In general I would just like to see more incentive for Tyranid armies to take big units. Both Termagants/Hormagaunts should get some kind of buff for 11-20 models, then again 21-30. Monsters could alternatively use a "critical mass" type of buff, such as -1 to hit or -1 to wound if within 6" of 2+ additional monsters (not necessarily the same datasheet), or something of the sort. With every marine unit getting +1A in melee with any charging involved at all, it wouldn't be unreasonable for the Carnifex's +1 to hit and 4+ to deal 1 MW on the charge becoming army wide monster rules. I've also always felt that the shadow in the warp was so underwhelming. The hive mind is supposed to be this overwhelming psychic blackout, yet has little effect on the tabletop. Marines got Primaris to better align with their fluff abilities, give xenos some toys too . All of that said, I took a look at Genestealers right now and was actually quite surprised... No buffs: Chapter Master + Lieutenant doom squad: So one thing I did not originally think of is that the efficiency doesn't change Leviathan/not - which makes perfect sense because 6+++ is just a flat reduction of the AVG damage they take per shot. That said, I am surprised how few Genestealers you would need to cover for 3 Venomthropes to be worth it, from my point of view. Also impotant to note that you'd probably run Kraken/Behemoth, and therefore the Venomthropes themselves would be even squishier, not to mention the difficulty they would have actually keeping up with Genestealers running up the board. I am content to agree they are not super worth it for less wound-spam oriented armies. Otherwise, I think including 3 is not a terrible idea.
|
|
|
Post by dranzyl on Aug 7, 2020 20:33:54 GMT
With the recent points changes it might be worth it recalculating break point efficiency of venoms.
|
|
|
Post by tallthor on Aug 7, 2020 22:28:16 GMT
A lot of these could be argued to go one tier higher or lower... I would put Pyrovore one step higher, for instance, but Tervigon should be at least two steps lower. Which is quite sad but true. I got a lot of people talking about it on the Warhammer Tyranids page on Facebook, some pretty interesting opinions.
|
|
|
Post by phenatix on Aug 7, 2020 23:11:20 GMT
With the recent points changes it might be worth it recalculating break point efficiency of venoms. All the charts I've posted are using current points values. I took warriors to be 33 points/model because that's what it averages out to with 2x deathspitters, 1x venom cannon, 3x boneswords. The values haven't changed much, and the argument seems more philosophical than anything. Is it worth spending points to heavily incentivize (control) where your opponent shoots first? I think it can be, especially if you are going for an endurance type list. Anything more elite probably not. It could be technically "efficient" for large groups of Genestealers, but it would realistically be a lot more difficult to keep them actually in the Venomthrope's range.
|
|
|
Post by kazetanade on Aug 8, 2020 5:01:34 GMT
From a practical play standpoint, a venomthrope can "breakeven" if it's covering 2 units of max Genestealers, theoretically, but if I've lost 2 units of Genestealers I'm in serious trouble and am at risk of a wipe already. The correct play is then to make sure they cannot be shot, hence venomthrope isn't part of the plan unless loads of ignore los.
For it to make a practical on table difference to your win/lose ability, I think we're talking 80 or 100 Genestealers, or minimum 60 at least - 900 points sunk in.
|
|
|
Post by Iryan on Aug 8, 2020 7:22:26 GMT
Protecting 2 units of Genestealers with Venomthropes seems like a mathematically unsound thing to do. Just like reroll-auras are force multipliers for damage, to-hit-penalty-auras are force multipliers for durability.
You do not surround your reroll aura guy with things that do very little damage in shooting and melee, you put it next to your biggest baddest guns. Because getting an extra 17% of an already big number is better than an extra 17% of a small number. Likewise, you do not use the -1 to hit aura to protect things that are squishy, you use it to make durable stuff even more durable. Because if you take something that takes 100 shots to kill and increase those shots by 25%, that is a bigger benefit than doing it for a unit that takes only 50 shots to kill.
This is, of course, assuming that the thing giving the beneficial aura cannot be removed easily. For Malanthropes that would be a given, but for venomthropes that would depend on terrain.
|
|
|
Post by kazetanade on Aug 8, 2020 7:30:53 GMT
Iryan In which case it's even worse on MCs, since MCs take less anti tank shots in general to kill than it takes Bolters to kill a GS squad, and today there is more anti-tank on the table than there is anti-infantry. Hence, the only viable units for Venimthropes to cover are Flyrants and Zoeys (both of which I approve of highly). Or 180 gaunts. 😂😂😂 *Take with salt
|
|
|
Post by Iryan on Aug 8, 2020 7:45:42 GMT
Iryan In which case it's even worse on MCs, since MCs take less anti tank shots in general to kill than it takes Bolters to kill a GS squad, and today there is more anti-tank on the table than there is anti-infantry. Hence, the only viable units for Venimthropes to cover are Flyrants and Zoeys (both of which I approve of highly). Or 180 gaunts. 😂😂😂 *Take with salt You know that you need to weigh in the power and associated points cost of each shot, you silly goose.
But giant gaunt blobs are indeed a good thing to protect with venomthropes, especially because it makes it easier to have part of the blob in range of the aura without exposing the 'thropes...
|
|