Are Termagants over costed at 6pts

[parzaius]

Jul 12, 2023 16:45:29 GMT yoritomo said:

Better how? Do they need a 3+ save? Or Ap-4 fleshborers? Or a rule that says you can’t come within engagement range of a termagant?

I think the real question here is not “Are termagants overcost?” but “What do I expect my termagants to do?” I’d you expect your termagants to kill anything then they will be overcost until GW literally make them fart lightning. If you expect them to win you games then they are priced about right. In fact I wouldn’t be surprised to see them go up to 7ppm at the next 6 month point adjustment.

The fallacy here is the idea that tyranid units need to earn their points back. Stop thinking like this. Tyranids do not win games by earning their points back, they win by scoring victory points and denying their opponent victory points.

When we look at termagants this way they are actually a very good unit.

The first thing you want from your termagants is to max out the number of units you take. This means taking six units thanks to the battle line keyword. Many tyranid players struggle to come up with 60 termagants, and very few have over 120 termagants; which makes the drop to a 20 man unit size academic for the most part. But if you need more you can always use hormagaunts or gargoyles for just a few points more.

The second thing you want from your termagants is to secure objectives. Termagants are OC 2, which means 10 have an OC value of 20 (around par for most battleline units) and 20 termagants have an OC of 40. What has an OC value greater than 40? A warlord titan? Point being they are one of the top dogs for OC.

The third thing you want from your termagants is to not give up victory points. Sadly the are lacking here. As long as GW rewards killing thing this will always be a weak point with termagants. Though I would point out that it takes a deceptive amount of shooting to kill 20 termagants.

The last thing you want from your termagants is to be in the way of your opponent’s units. This does a couple of things. It dictates where your opponent can deep strike his units. It also prevents him from assaulting high value targets with his best units. The can also box your opponent out of objective markers and clog movement lanes. All that was in previous editions. Now they have an ability to move around in your opponent’s movement phase. This makes them even better as the termagant’s enormous footprint now move around in reaction to what your opponent does. Most people just think this allows them to back away from a potential assault, but it also lets you move more bodies in to contest an objective, or more fully screen a unit from assault, or get in the face of a enemy unit a force an assault they don’t want to make. I literally could not have chosen a better ability for the termagant if I tried.



So if you think termagants are over cost then you are either not playing them correctly or are just looking at their down sides while ignoring everything positive about them (or both). And that’s okay. If termagants don’t work for you then don’t play them. We have plenty of other options to choose from. You could try nidzills or a warrior list, both of those are viable armies. Don’t get stuck playing units you don’t like.

Let me requote this with bold for emphasis:
"That means they either need to be better (get the -1 AP back)"

I'd also like to address just one point real quick:
"The fallacy here is the idea that tyranid units need to earn their points back. Stop thinking like this. Tyranids do not win games by earning their points back, they win by scoring victory points and denying their opponent victory points."

I don't like that. I don't like buying into the modern take on the faction that says "Nids must be feeble and toothless and you should just play around the fact that you're playing more for less and just swallow the pill because bugs lol." Tyranids are huge, monstrous alien-dragon-beasts from beyond the stars. Termagants fire huge beetles that dig through flesh and bone in seconds and are, themselves, also tyranid lifeforms that are being micromanaged by a consciousness larger than the milkyway galaxy. The bugs are the ammo. The termagant is the size of a large, predatory cat, with extra legs and a frickin' space gun. When did people decide that meant "must be feeble and weak"? And why should Space Marines get double health and triple attacks, but barely increase in cost while the baseline units for other factions get jack-all? It's an embarrassment to say that it should take 108 pts worth of termagants to kill 17.5 points of space marine.

If you buy into the "lol bugs" meme, you've lost the soul of the fluff. And I'd rather be mad at what we're given than content but buying into the Flanderization of the faction.

[yoritomo]

Are you sure you wouldn’t be happier playing an imperial faction Parzaius? Everything you’ve posted since the 10th edition rumors started has been “Look at how good the imperium stuff is!” And “Space Marines are super OP!” If you like how good they are you should play them. You should have fun playing the game, not be bitter about how other armies do.

Jul 12, 2023 20:11:06 GMT parzaius said:

It's an embarrassment to say that it should take 144 pts worth of termagants to kill 17.5 points of space marine.

This is why you will never think termagants are worth their cost. Yeah, now you think -1 Ap on fleshborers will be enough, but people thought they were overpriced with the -1 Ap last edition. I don’t think giving termagants-1Ap will make you think termagants will be worth it.

You need to come to grips with the fact that termagants are not supposed to earn their points back. They are supposed to earn victory points instead. How many points would you spend to earn a victory point?

[Iryan]

The termagants are literally supposed to "drown the enemy in bodies", they are dangerous because no matter how many you kill, you will not prevent them from overrunning the world. What does that mean? It means that they are supposed to be doing exactly what they do on the tabletop. If you have a big swarm, you can swamp the battlefield with bodies and whatever the mission is, your opponent cannot kill you fast enough to prevent you from accomplishing your goals, whatever the mission's flavor says this goal may be.

Yes, of course they are not supposed to be actually harmless. But in the lore, literally every faction is over the top and overpowered. Would termagants be absolutely horrifyingly dangerous to a regular human? Sure, and if you look how they stack up against even well-trained regular human infantry (i.e. IG guardsmen), this holds totally true. But if you look at how good termagants' anti-regular-infantry weapons are at killing elite, multiwound infantry (i.e. not specifically what their weapons' primary purpose is), then you will notice that the unit is not terribly efficient at killing them. But they are not useless at that job either. If you have devourer termagants vs. intercessors, assuming access to cover for both and ignoring any further buffs and synergies on either side... point-for-point, the intercessors are better at killing the termagants than vice versa, but not by as much as you'd think (4.5 p/p vs. 5.5 p/p).

Termagants' performance on the tabletop is as fluff-appropriate as anyone else's units, and they have a job that they do well enough to be worth their cost.

[yoritomo]

My apologies if my last post seemed harsh. I didn’t have much time to say what I wanted to.

I want everyone to think about this for a second. If GW is constantly buffing marines without increasing their point cost, what does that say about marines? It tells me they suck. And, as someone who’s played the game since 1997, I can attest to the fact that marines have sucked for the better part of 25 years.

Do you realize all the things GW has done to make marines “good”? Remember Armor of Contempt? GW had to change the rules of the game mid edition just to make marines playable. Some of the veterans here may remember the marine’s formation in 7th edition that let marine armies start the game with 350 more points than their opponent. Think about it, marines were so bad they had to be spotted 350 points.

Asking why marines keep getting “free” upgrades just point out how bad marines have been.

What about termagants? In the 25 years I’ve played the game termagants have worked exactly as advertised. Sure, there have been editions where the hormagaunt was better, but even then the termagant remained a solid choice. From 4th to 7th edition I maintain that the termagant with devourer was the best troop choice in the game (though I recognize this is a viewpoint few people share).

Comparing the evolution of the marines to the evolution (or lack there of) just shows why they are not over cost at 6ppm.

[mattblowers]

Jul 12, 2023 23:53:58 GMT yoritomo said:

My apologies if my last post seemed harsh. I didn’t have much time to say what I wanted to.

I want everyone to think about this for a second. If GW is constantly buffing marines without increasing their point cost, what does that say about marines? It tells me they suck. And, as someone who’s played the game since 1997, I can attest to the fact that marines have sucked for the better part of 25 years.

Do you realize all the things GW has done to make marines “good”? Remember Armor of Contempt? GW had to change the rules of the game mid edition just to make marines playable. Some of the veterans here may remember the marine’s formation in 7th edition that let marine armies start the game with 350 more points than their opponent. Think about it, marines were so bad they had to be spotted 350 points.

Asking why marines keep getting “free” upgrades just point out how bad marines have been.

What about termagants? In the 25 years I’ve played the game termagants have worked exactly as advertised. Sure, there have been editions where the hormagaunt was better, but even then the termagant remained a solid choice. From 4th to 7th edition I maintain that the termagant with devourer was the best troop choice in the game (though I recognize this is a viewpoint few people share).

Comparing the evolution of the marines to the evolution (or lack there of) just shows why they are not over cost at 6ppm.

Your points are all spot on. You also have to compare to all other choices. Termagaunts are not overcosted at 6 points. I always compare to other cheap troops and termagaunts are fairly good when compared. IG infantry squads are nearly the same stat line and cost half a point more per model. Cultists are half a point less and are only 1 OC with a worse save, but their output can be buffed pretty high. Termagaunts are just fine. I think the only gripe is that devagaunts aren't as good as they used to be. You could take stock gaunts for half the points with very low output or double the points for devagaunts with 3x the output but died just as easily. I have over 120 stock gaunts and over 120 devagaunts. A huge blob of them is always hard for your opponent to shift. Plus they have typically been a 6+ save. I'm mainly playing GSC right now because I spent a fortune on the army and they have been non-competive for a while.

I disagree on Space Marines (let's dump all power armor marine branches together) being bad though. At least one branch has been top tier in every edition since 5th. The end of 7th was ruled by power armour as was the end of the 8th. They are never trash. Their biggest impact on the meta is they are the army of choice for noobs which tanks their win rate.

[parzaius]

Alright, this happens pretty much every time I start posting on this forum for any length of time: somebody goes out of their way to pop into every thread I post on with an "ACTUALLY you're wrong and Tyranids are supposed to suck," so let me just get this out and then I'm out again.

- Are you sure you wouldn’t be happier playing an imperial faction?

No. I play this game for the fluff and the fluff alone. Marines are the worst sort of power fantasy bull that you can possibly imagine. They win every battle and they're the biggest and the bestest and their players buy the most models so they get more support than anybody else because the company that makes this game has sold off any vague hint of game balance for maximum returns.

The reason I always bring up imperial factions is that they are the BASELINE for all other factions. I could grab a bunch of examples from other factions, but who cares about those. The marine statline is the basis that all other stat lines derive from. Are tactical marines good? Not really! There are WAY better units in 10th edition. The fact that the baseline is so undercosted and ISN'T good is the whole problem. Everything needed to be scaled way up and it really wasn't. Which makes low cost stuff like termagants overcosted - they suck on ice but even compared to the garbage that scoops them, like Infernus marines, they're hardly the worst offenders.

- Termagants are comparable to other low-cost units.

The most obvious examples are Imperial Guardsmen and Genestealer Cult Neophytes. And guess what? They're NOT! Both of those units get special and/or heavy weapons, which are the very last models to die in the unit. So even if the rest of the unit can't do anything with its lasguns, the lascannons/mining cannons CAN do things. And both of those have actual faction rules! Orders to get more accurate shooting or recursions to make them have to wipe the unit several times to keep the cannons off their elites.

Meanwhile, termagants have... slightly better leadership! Which exists solely as a bandaid for the leadership weakness baked into the faction. Great! Amazing! It does nothing to help them kill anything. And guess what the Tyranid faction is lacking in the edition of "put characters into units to make the unit better"? Oh that's right: characters you can put into units to make the unit better. In fact, Commissars provide Old Synapse now, AND old Feel No Fear. Good thing that the Tyranid faction strength is Ld, right? Oh wait. With no buffs, no leaders, and no special weapons, that 6 points is way, WAY worse than it is for Guard or GSC. And that's why Termagants are overcosted.

- Termagants never make their points back and aren't supposed to.

Wrong. Termagants in 2nd edition were 6 points. Marines were 30. Termagants could easily make their points back. In 3rd edition, you could morph the squad for better stats or synapse, both of which would make them punch to the proper weight class. In 4th edition, you could take proper tools and there weren't the glut of "pick up whole units and throw them in the garbage" that modern editions have. Heck, even in 8th, you could take Devourers, with double shooting and take out 7.5 marines from a single squad. Termagants haven't been eternally useless like people pretend they are.

But it doesn't even really matter what termagants can or can't do, or even their points. It's a systemic issue that permeates the whole faction. Tyranids are weak. They're REALLY weak. The way to win isn't to play the game, but to play the points. And that's awful. Their faction weaknesses (low range, low strength, low AP, low damage) have always been there, but their faction strengths (high WS, high Initiative, high wounds, high speed, Ld invulnerability) have all been watered down and/or totally removed. They're a faction with NO strengths and a laundry lists of failings, and simply can't go toe to toe with anybody anymore. I don't know when all of ya'll started playing this game, but I've been playing since 2nd edition, and the degree to which nids have degraded from one edition to the next is heartbreaking.

- Asking why marines keep getting “free” upgrades just point out how bad marines have been

I can't even fathom where this mindset comes from. Bell of Lost Souls has posted tournament placements every week since 8th edition came out. Every single week has had Marines or Marine Soup as the single most played faction. And for 75% of weeks, they've ALSO been the winning-est faction. Every other faction may have its time in the sun for a handful of notable events, but Marines and Marine-adjacent factions have dominated for the last 3 editions, at least. And any time they risk getting crowded out by the latest egregious case of Codex Creep? Oh look, here's the SECOND marine codex of the edition! Or brand new bonus rules that carry with them zero cost! Or flat stat buffs, again with no cost! Or a slew of supplemental books, again with no cost!

Like, what does GW have to do to convince you that they are appealing solely to marine players at the cost of any appearance of internal balance? That marines don't have a 90% win rate at all times is solely because they are every little kid's brand new army, so the overwhelming majority of 0-4 players are running some flavor of marine for the very first time.

[yoritomo]

I don’t know what response I can give that will not end in another rant. So all I will say is this: as long as your standard is making its points back termagant will never be worth the points you pay for them, no matter how much they cost.

I have laid out my arguments and said my piece. Do with it what you will.

[piersonsmuppet]

Funnily enough, Tyranids are a fairly strong faction after the balance fixes and swarm play is a big reason why. Terms and Gargs are the driving force behind why it works, so to say we are weak and can’t go toe-to-toe is a bit of a misconception.

[yoritomo]

People forget that termagants were pretty good in 9th edition. Yeah, they were overshadowed by the clearly overpowered warriors. Still, if you committed to the small game termagants would put in some work.

[dkng]

After the Warrior (over)nerf in late 9th I’ve been playing Termagants with Tervigon and was always super happy with them. And when they killed something - pure joy They were superb for pushing for the central objective and they arguably still are. Sadly the biggest drawback right now is that the Termagants + Tervigon combo is so much weaker - they no longer provide Look out Sir for the big mama and Deadly Demise is so much worse. But droves of them without the Tervigon are still very much viable. I’m glad to have over 60 of them and am looking forward to use them in 10th.

[N.I.B.]

I don't think Termagants have been 'good' in that sence since the first appearance of the Tervigon when they had her passive aura buffs and spawning/healing - 5th ed? Especially the short Biomancy period.
The jury is still out on 10th ed Termagants, but they have been decent action monkeys/speedbumps/objective campers in two of my games so far, Endless Swarm is the key.

[goodbrood]

Sooooo, I guess the takeaway is that I should finish all these termagants I inherited?

[mattblowers]

Jul 13, 2023 3:17:25 GMT parzaius said:

Alright, this happens pretty much every time I start posting on this forum for any length of time: somebody goes out of their way to pop into every thread I post on with an "ACTUALLY you're wrong and Tyranids are supposed to suck," so let me just get this out and then I'm out again.

Paranoid much? Yori is a very level headed member that reasonably laid out a response to the question from his perspective. The title of the OP is a question.

No. I play this game for the fluff and the fluff alone.

Great! Then the points are unimportant to you. Have your buddy run IG squads frontline backed up by some terminators and tactical squads and you bum rush him with 500 bodies of the troops of your choice that can keep respawning. If you can overrun a certain objective by a set time, you win. If he can stop you, he wins. Fluffy as hell and no one cares about points. You can simply use the index cards.

It's a systemic issue that permeates the whole faction. Tyranids are weak. They're REALLY weak. The way to win isn't to play the game, but to play the points. And that's awful. Their faction weaknesses (low range, low strength, low AP, low damage) have always been there, but their faction strengths (high WS, high Initiative, high wounds, high speed, Ld invulnerability) have all been watered down and/or totally removed. They're a faction with NO strengths and a laundry lists of failings, and simply can't go toe to toe with anybody anymore. I don't know when all of ya'll started playing this game, but I've been playing since 2nd edition, and the degree to which nids have degraded from one edition to the next is heartbreaking.

Where to start? I think with some reflection you'll find that was a tad hyperbolic and a bit rose-colored-glasses-ish. I'm a wargamer of 40ish years but have only played Tyranids since sometime in the 4th/5th. In the time I've played them they have gone through the normal fluctuation of suck and strength, just like every other faction in 40K and every other game. Tyranids were the army to beat in 9th edition after our codex dropped. We were insanely overpowered and had the highest win rate in 40K by a wide margin. Flyrant spam was very strong in 6th, 7th, and 8th. Tervigon x3 was very strong in the 5th. Monster mash carnifex spam was an elite list in 4th. Saying we "simply can't go toe to toe (sic) with anybody anymore" is demonstrably false.

That marines don't have a 90% win rate at all times is solely because they are every little kid's brand new army, so the overwhelming majority of 0-4 players are running some flavor of marine for the very first time.

We agree here on one thing at least: noobs keep Space Marines win rate supressed in the meta. But now were no longer talking about whether termagaunts are worth 6 points, are we? This thread has run pretty far off the rails.

[infornography]

Ok, I think everyone is a bit too heated here and I can easily see both sides of this argument.

Termagants' role now is pretty much to "play the mission". Does that mean they are effective and worth their points? Yes. But for several editions (except for the time after our codex dropped late last edition) we have had to "play the mission" to win. Parzaius is right that we have had a ton of our offensive tools stripped from us edition to edition. The core of Warhammer 40k has always been the combat. "The mission" wasn't even really a thing until ... I think it was 6th or 7th edition? Having fairly mobile mass bodies helps tremendously in achieving victory through points. But it is also pretty unsatisfying for a lot of players when we increasingly cannot compete when we play to the core of the game.

Other factions usually find a balance between killiness and ability to play to the mission, but Tyranids seem to have a hard time with that. Either we have too much killing potential (our last codex release in 9th) or we have too little and can only win by playing to the mission. Ultimately I feel like this shouldn't be as hard as GW makes it out to be. Just a glance through our current index just smacks of an absurd degree of lack of care or effort to establish internal balance. Units are laughably out of line with their points and potential. And that is completely disregarding external balance which is similarly laughable.

Long story short, we are in a good place if your only concern is the question "Can Tyranids Win?" We are not in a good place for many players if the question is "Are Tyranids Fun?"

[piersonsmuppet]

Well a model being worth the points and a model being fun are very different things. Currently, Terms are effective for 6pts played in a way some find unfun. However, some also enjoy the positional aspect of the game, board control, and playing to the mission; so using fun factor makes for a poor objective analysis of if a model is over/under costed.