|
|
Post by impefex on Aug 14, 2020 10:00:29 GMT
How are we going to field these little buggers this edition?
It seems due to the update to blast weapons, we may no longer be able to create list with large squads of gants. Do you guys think we have to field them in squads of 9 with only fleshborers?
If so, what does this mean for devilgants? Can we get away with fielding blobs of 30 packed full of devourers, or will this be too pricy for the risk of them being blown to bits.
Would love to know everyone's opinion, I have a few boxes that I've yet to glue guns on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iryan on Aug 14, 2020 11:19:15 GMT
How are we going to field these little buggers this edition? It seems due to the update to blast weapons, we may no longer be able to create list with large squads of gants. Do you guys think we have to field them in squads of 9 with only fleshborers? If so, what does this mean for devilgants? Can we get away with fielding blobs of 30 packed full of devourers, or will this be too pricy for the risk of them being blown to bits. Would love to know everyone's opinion, I have a few boxes that I've yet to glue guns on. You cannot field squads of 9 (well, you can, but they would be undersized and so would have many drawbacks). But blast weapons are probably not going to be as big of a problem as you fear, because people won't be running that many of them.
Regarding devilgants, one thing I like to note is that while borergants went up 25% in price, devilgants only went up 12.5% (since the devourer stayed the same), and a 50/50 mixed unit went up 16.7%.
If you want to run full devilgant units, doing so as strategic reserves or with a tunnel-bomb can work, they are too squishy to march over the open field. But whether that is worth it depends on your local meta. If you just want cheap objective campers, you can just take minimum size squads of borergants, which also makes it easier for them to hide behind or in terrain. If you want them to start on the board but want to have some punch to them, a large unit of 15:15 or 20:10 mix might work.
A small 5:5 unit gives you 20 shots in 10 wounds for 70 points... not sure how worthwhile that is, since this will only kill 4~5 guardsmen, and that is if you get within 12'' without advancing.
|
|
|
|
Post by yoritomo on Aug 14, 2020 12:01:58 GMT
If you are worried about the new blast weapon rules then:
A) Tyranids may not be the right army for you
B) 40K may not be the right game for you
Tyranids have always been an army that you pick models up by the handfuls. You either accept this, or you do excessive things to keep your chaff alive and you lose the game. The sooner you accept this fact the sooner you can grow as a Tyranid player
As for how we take termagants in 9th edition? The same way we took them in 8th edition, nothing has changed for them. In order for a gaunt to be successful (and I use that term loosely) it must be purposeful built for what you want it to do. If you want something to sit on the objective than you are going to want something as cheap as possible. If you expect them act offensively then they need weapons that can reach the enemy and deal decent damage. If you are going to pod them in then you need enough of them to effect the battle the turn they arrive. If you are going to march them up the table than you need enough of them so that they can take casualties and still be combat effective.
None of this has changed since 8th edition.
On a more theoretical note; as the base cost of the gaunt goes up, the better it becomes to put an expensive gun on it. As the cost of the gun goes up, it gets better to keep the gaunt at the base cost. But this is theory, it is better to purchase your gaunt practically with thought of their application.
|
|
|
|
Post by waЯu on Aug 14, 2020 12:21:25 GMT
Run them cheaply, in units of 10 without upgrades
I haven't played anything but Orks in 9th yet, but I image their role in my army will be to reach out and touch objectives.
I feel as though giving them any sort of damage potential gives the opponent double the incentive to shoot at them, and I'd much rather they be left alone to clock up points whilst my big bugs make targets of themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by mattblowers on Aug 14, 2020 12:34:13 GMT
Tyranids have always been an army that you pick models up by the handfuls. You either accept this, or you do excessive things to keep your chaff alive and you lose the game. The sooner you accept this fact the sooner you can grow as a Tyranid player I accept NOTHING!! (Except for the superiority of the hive mind.) There is no such thing as accepting losses. It's just part of the biomass cycle of life. |
|
|
|
Post by dranzyl on Aug 14, 2020 14:00:50 GMT
My guess qould be that since the relative resiliency of the gaunt went down with the introduction of blast rules, cheap and cheerful will be the way to go.
Unless blasts prove a non issue or your local meta proves reluctant to field them or you have a specific game plan in mind (tunneling them in to clear screens or something).
|
|
|
|
Post by Iryan on Aug 14, 2020 14:15:37 GMT
People are going to avoid blast weaponry on their vehicles/monsters so that they can still shoot into combat. And with the prevalence of elite units with multiple wounds, soon further increased by other marine factions going to 2W, the kind of blast weapons that would be the bane of gaunts are unlikely to be common in general. And Aggressors would melt horde infantry regardless of whether or not they get the blast bonus.
|
|
|
|
Post by killercroc on Aug 14, 2020 14:15:58 GMT
My two cents on this matter would be that blast looks scary but in reality it isn't also it's easily worked around.
Why it looks scary but isnt: All blast does now is guarantee a certain number of hit rolls against the target unit, it doesn't do more damage or any extra effects other than a higher potential number of shots. As it stands, most blast weapons are either fairly weak (S3/4 w/ no AP) or fairly strong (S7/8 AP -2/-3) in cases of the weak blast it's not going to remove all that many gaunts in the first place and in cases of the stronger blast yeah it'll remove gaunts but if someone is shooting a Battlecannon at gaunts and not a Monster that's a win, lose the 0-6 5 point gribblies in exchange for keeping wounds on your 100+ point big bug.
As it can be worked around: There isn't a huge incentive to take max units in a squad now. As it stands you already know who's going first so there is no more roll-off giving a bonus to whoever set up their army faster. So taking as many models in as few of a squad as possible isn't something to consider. And short of one secondary mission playing gaunts in 3 squads of 10x vs 1 squad of 30 plays to your advantage, you can cover more area, hold more objectives and block more lanes of enemy approach. The gaunts are gonna die no matter what you do but now they're scoring you points every turn and slowing your opponent. So while blast is better against squads of 11+ models there isn't any reason for you to take them as such, and spreading them out also makes filling large detachments easier as well.
[EDIT]
Also in some way you do make them more survivable. Most units that are geared towards killing infantry typically overkill light infantry. If there is an enemy unit that can comfortably kill 15 gaunts then you give yourself an advantage in taking 3 squads of 10. Sure they'll kill a squad but in my experience most people won't split fire if it's risky because they're rather overkill a unit by a little than fail to kill a unit at all. For example a 10 man Intercessor squad with bolt rifles next to a Chapter Master and a lieutenant, which are in almost every semi-competent marine list, will on average kill 14 gaunts when rapid firing. That will kill a squad of 10 sure but also half kill a squad of 30. Now the Marine player could split fire but if he needs to kill units doing so runs the risk of failing to kill a single squad with one unit, meaning they'll have to allocate resources in the form of bullets from another squad to finish off what one squad could have done if they focus fired. Taking multiple minimal squads can actually make more models survive in good situations.
The only case I'd say take full size squads of Gaunts is if you're equipping them with Devourers and putting them in a Trygon tunnel or Outflanking them. All 30 if in one tunnel or it's only 1 CP to have 30 armed with Assault 3 S4 guns show up on the side of the board to drop a huge number of shots.
|
|
|
|
Post by yoritomo on Aug 15, 2020 2:23:48 GMT
Run them cheaply, in units of 10 without upgrades I haven't played anything but Orks in 9th yet, but I image their role in my army will be to reach out and touch objectives. I feel as though giving them any sort of damage potential gives the opponent double the incentive to shoot at them, and I'd much rather they be left alone to clock up points whilst my big bugs make targets of themselves. I disagree with this assessment. Not so much because he's wrong, but because it is closed minded. There is certainly a place for cheap gaunts, and they aren't terrible a holding objectives. But with everyone wanting alternate army builds and more options, it seems foolish to me to shut down options that we already have. Tyranids have always been an army that you pick models up by the handfuls. You either accept this, or you do excessive things to keep your chaff alive and you lose the game. The sooner you accept this fact the sooner you can grow as a Tyranid player I accept NOTHING!! (Except for the superiority of the hive mind.) There is no such thing as accepting losses. It's just part of the biomass cycle of life. Well yeah. They die, we dump them into the digestion pools, they come back as more gaunts. The sooner you accept them as casualties the sooner you can spawn more gaunts. My two cents on this matter would be that blast looks scary but in reality it isn't also it's easily worked around. Why it looks scary but isnt: All blast does now is guarantee a certain number of hit rolls against the target unit, it doesn't do more damage or any extra effects other than a higher potential number of shots. As it stands, most blast weapons are either fairly weak (S3/4 w/ no AP) or fairly strong (S7/8 AP -2/-3) in cases of the weak blast it's not going to remove all that many gaunts in the first place and in cases of the stronger blast yeah it'll remove gaunts but if someone is shooting a Battlecannon at gaunts and not a Monster that's a win, lose the 0-6 5 point gribblies in exchange for keeping wounds on your 100+ point big bug. As it can be worked around: There isn't a huge incentive to take max units in a squad now. As it stands you already know who's going first so there is no more roll-off giving a bonus to whoever set up their army faster. So taking as many models in as few of a squad as possible isn't something to consider. And short of one secondary mission playing gaunts in 3 squads of 10x vs 1 squad of 30 plays to your advantage, you can cover more area, hold more objectives and block more lanes of enemy approach. The gaunts are gonna die no matter what you do but now they're scoring you points every turn and slowing your opponent. So while blast is better against squads of 11+ models there isn't any reason for you to take them as such, and spreading them out also makes filling large detachments easier as well. [EDIT] Also in some way you do make them more survivable. Most units that are geared towards killing infantry typically overkill light infantry. If there is an enemy unit that can comfortably kill 15 gaunts then you give yourself an advantage in taking 3 squads of 10. Sure they'll kill a squad but in my experience most people won't split fire if it's risky because they're rather overkill a unit by a little than fail to kill a unit at all. For example a 10 man Intercessor squad with bolt rifles next to a Chapter Master and a lieutenant, which are in almost every semi-competent marine list, will on average kill 14 gaunts when rapid firing. That will kill a squad of 10 sure but also half kill a squad of 30. Now the Marine player could split fire but if he needs to kill units doing so runs the risk of failing to kill a single squad with one unit, meaning they'll have to allocate resources in the form of bullets from another squad to finish off what one squad could have done if they focus fired. Taking multiple minimal squads can actually make more models survive in good situations. The only case I'd say take full size squads of Gaunts is if you're equipping them with Devourers and putting them in a Trygon tunnel or Outflanking them. All 30 if in one tunnel or it's only 1 CP to have 30 armed with Assault 3 S4 guns show up on the side of the board to drop a huge number of shots. This is certainly an option. If you've got the extra FoC slots than by all means, split up your gaunts. Just remember that additional patrols, battalions, and brigades cost command points now. I certainly wouldn't waste command points to get more troop slots so that you can reduce your exposure to blast weapons. And let's face it, you're probably going to want some of your troop slots for things like genestealer. Depending on how many gaunts you plan on bringing you could run out of troop slots quicker than you think. I think the bottom line here is that we need to see how the meta shakes out before we can really plan for blast weapons. Personally I don't think it does us any good to be scared of them, but I do understand why some of you are concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by infornography on Aug 19, 2020 17:58:25 GMT
My feel is that taking a drop squad of 20 or 30 devilgaunts is still a good play as long as you plan for them to have one glorious turn of enemy infantry decimation with the shoot twice strat and then expect them to promptly die.
I have seen this tactic devastate bubblewrap, objective holders, and even some midfield menaces, often all at the same time. 180 S4 shots is a LOT of firepower! Yeah, they WILL be focus fired into oblivion on your opponent's next turn but for one glorious shooting phase they will make their presence felt! And then they will distract most of if not all of the enemy's anti-infantry firepower for a turn. That is another thing to consider. Yes they WILL die. Possibly in one shooting round and probably on turn 2, but in the process they will distract a ton of firepower that would otherwise have caused problems for your genestealers and warriors and objective holders. It takes dedicated effort to wipe out 30 wounds of anything (unless they are space marines fielding nearby aggressors, but seriously, you can't plan around a unit that is a hard counter for everything and is clearly undercosted).
|
|
|
|
Post by kazetanade on Aug 19, 2020 18:05:32 GMT
It's called Super Flyrant or OOE on Aggressors. 4+ to wound Transhuman doesn't matter if you reroll everything then bitchslap him once more on death.
Aggressors are good generalists but they aren't any sort of be all end all. They're actually really susceptible to dying to stray laacannons.
I think Termagants with Devs don't have play this edition because boots are tany elites with 2+ sv and T5. 90, 45 hits, 15W, less than 3D dealt. 2cp to double that.
|
|
|
|
Post by infornography on Aug 19, 2020 23:00:15 GMT
Termagants are not effective against elites. They ARE effective against most troops. If you are shooting them at aggressors then you are either desperate or lack an understanding of statistics. Their preferred targets are anything T4 or less, the lower the better. They totally annihilate eldar, tau, cultists, guardsmen, sisters, skitarii, orks, etc. Space marines are a challenge but not a waste to shoot into. Custodes, SM bikes, and gravis are problems and should only be your target as a last resort.
Yes I realize current meta is mostly Custodes, SM bikes, and gravis, and in those match ups your best bet is to swarm toward objectives and huddle up in terrain and hope to outscore your opponents. Devs are wasted there, but against the majority of armies, these units are incredibly powerful. I guess if your local meta has been taken over by FOTM Space Marine and Custodes players, you should leave these little guys on the shelf, but if your locals are bringing their usual space elves, angry ladies, and fish people, I would seriously consider taking these guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by purestrain on Aug 19, 2020 23:38:40 GMT
Termagants are not effective against elites. They ARE effective against most troops. If you are shooting them at aggressors then you are either desperate or lack an understanding of statistics. Their preferred targets are anything T4 or less, the lower the better. They totally annihilate eldar, tau, cultists, guardsmen, sisters, skitarii, orks, etc. Space marines are a challenge but not a waste to shoot into. Custodes, SM bikes, and gravis are problems and should only be your target as a last resort. Yes I realize current meta is mostly Custodes, SM bikes, and gravis, and in those match ups your best bet is to swarm toward objectives and huddle up in terrain and hope to outscore your opponents. Devs are wasted there, but against the majority of armies, these units are incredibly powerful. I guess if your local meta has been taken over by FOTM Space Marine and Custodes players, you should leave these little guys on the shelf, but if your locals are bringing their usual space elves, angry ladies, and fish people, I would seriously consider taking these guys. we talkin cheapo FB or Devs? because its not really that bad to shoot into agressors with the +1 wound strat, wouldnt call it meta, but it can help bridge the gap. |
|
|
|
Post by yoritomo on Aug 20, 2020 1:28:18 GMT
I wouldn't call either of them effective against elites.
|
|
|
|
Post by ausnid on Aug 20, 2020 2:33:22 GMT
Something that hasn't been discussed here is the anti-infantry firepower that a devourer represents. If we are expecting to see more cheap ob sec troops across the table - e.g. small units of gretchin, cultists, guard, etc, is there an argument that the devourer load out allows you an opportunity to clear these opposing troops off objectives etc? As noted, wont help against say a 5 man unit of space marines, but directing hive guard/exo shooting against these light troop targets is obviously overkill, so does the dev gant provide some capability in this area? Or is the low range too much of a problem?
|
|
