Talk:Warhammer 40,000/5th Edition Tactics/Tyranids

Why is this one of the most detailed articles on 1d4chan? Or actually why is it so srs? There are some lulz, but I feel it's really at the standard of lulz the rest of the internet has, not /tg/

Butthurt neckbeards having a skub war basically. Feel free to trim it. These are just supposed to be tactical summaries. People reading this own the codex(or are thieves about to be liquidated by a GW kill team), they don't need to include every bit of crunch. On the flipside this isn't crossfire and nobody wants to hear people argue back and forth in the entries about what is and isn't the best. --Petro 01:46, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Harpies

Personally, I am partial to Harpies. Mostly as they offer range which most other Tyranid anti-tank weapons don't have. They may not kill vehicles (though it still is possible), but they will keep them stunned or shaken, making it easier for your close combat monsters (like Trygons) to get in and tear stuff up, or for your Hive Guard and Zoanthroapes to move in and finish stuff off. Most importantly, they aren't competing with Zoanthroapes or Hive Guard, or any of the Heavy Support elements. Like many other issues, there are FAQ concerns about whether wings provide cover to nearby models, but a local consensus here is that while wings do not count for determining if you have TLOS to a target, they block LOS to stuff behind it; assuming it is FAQ'd so, this would mean that you could run Harpies behind a Gargoyle wing and acquire cover if need be. While not fantastic at assault, Sonic Screech is worthy of mention, if only for halving the initiative of enemy units; although this is seldom an issue due to the high Initiative value many Tyranids have, it does come into play now-and-then. Oh, and it's the codex's third unit with Frag Grenades (lol). 68.209.172.164 00:17, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Formatting

I think it helps to write a little more formally. Acecdotes about "what I did once" are not really tactical advice. Also, the format of designating roles and list building advice for each individual unit is good, but I'm going to go ahead and move that stuff to the list building section since that's kind of what it is. The overview section provides a very general overview, then the list building sections recommends ways of using the models as an integrated part of an army. 24.225.105.14 25 May 2010

Maybe for unit overview, use "common uses include this", then have the unit configurations under the listbuilding section? Also, the list-building section would be best to place "Which units work together alongside each other" more than anything else. Explain why Hive Guard and Trygons isn't as proper as Hive Guard and Tyrannofexes, etc.MagicJuggler 22:10, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I suppose we can list common uses in the unit overview section, but maybe that would be a good thing to put in the tactics section? It's an overview of general uses for each unit, but it's also advice on how each unit is used tactically, so you could really go either way. Maybe we can just do a separate bit on each model in the codex for list building? Taking your example, under Tyrannofex we could write about how its high strength weapons lets it take on the zoanthrope role, so it should be fielded with hive guard at higher point games, but we can also include some details about what biomorphs it can take and how those biomorphs can be used. Then the tactics section would be tricks you can pull and designs that can be worked towards, such as an all deep strike army that comes in reliably enough to be viable. 24.225.105.14 26 May 2010

It is kind of a pain to work on this thing, frequently finding that somebody has completely re-written my work into something more cluttered and prone to grammar errors, especially when the re-write is not actually saying much of anything more than what I originally covered. If my thoughts seem pessemistic sometimes, it's fine to change that. Got an extra idea for the model? Go for it. Want to add in a couple sentences explaining that, although Tervigons are used for troops 95% of the time, in large games or in genestealers armies some people use them for HQ? That's not really helping in making this a decent project because we can already see that Tervigons are HQ models in the previous section. And why the fuck is it nobody writes up an entire analysis of the unit until I've done it, only to completely replace the one I wrote? Write about something I haven't covered yet, for fuck's sake. Don't just completely re-write my work pointlessly.

From what I can see with the latest erasure of what I've written, the only real addition to this thing is listing psychic powers for the Tervigon, but the explanation is a massive paragraph when roughly three sentences should suffice. If you want to go into detail about ways to use the powers on the army, that definitely goes in the tactics section without any question. List building is complicated - you need to know what you want to do with the models - but that doesn't require an onslaught of opinionated and otherwise useless tidbits of trivial information for each creature. Hell, if you want to write an entire entry, instead of changing everything I did, why don't you guys tackle one of the models that isn't as absurdly common? Take that guy with the Harpies, for instance! That was a good catch with the frag grenades and a fairly helpful contribution in general. 24.225.105.14 14 June 2010

How to generally equip the Tervigon belongs in there. One common player mistake to sink as many points as possible into all the Crushing Claws, Regeneration, Acid Blood, and other upgrades for the purpose of pretending the Tervigon is a melee monster. As for the Tervigon being an HQ instead of a Troop, this by definition would fall under army-build. Likewise, the psyker powers are a subset on how to equip a Tervigon.

Every subtle nuance of the models is not necessary to commit to writing. "Don't over-equip" is a general rule to be followed by all armies, and it's a mistake that can be perpetrated by any player. If it starts getting listed in every model entry as essential information, soon you've got a lot of wasted space. Think of it this way: imagine trying to give a written overview on the basics of boxing to somebody who wants pointers for either learning or improvement. Simple advice would be, "Power comes from the hips, so rotate your body and keep your feet planted on the ground." It's something you can read and think about. However, start rambling about what gloves to use, which stances are preferred for certain kinds of competition, whether or not the person should wear shoes, and whether a person should try to train for speed or strength, and soon you've got information overload. Your stance, gloves, and whatever are all related to the individual and what they want from their boxing training, and it's hard to gain anything when there's too much to remember or take into consideration.

"Tervigons are used most frequently as Troops" is simple. It's fine. Anybody with a Tyranid codex probably already knows that, and odds are they already know what biomorphs are available to it as well. Somebody without a codex can see the basic purpose of the Tervigon, however, and they don't need to sort through all the bullshit chaff of what some guy thinks their individual biomorphs are best. You can't write people's lists for them. These are their armies, and good list building only takes a player so far anyway. If you think people are getting demolished because they're equipping Tervigons with crushing claws, maybe you should write a tactic on using them better so that other people can get some ideas on how to win when they do that. In any case, the Tervigon doesn't need that much elaboration since it's one of the new mainstays of the Tyranid codex, and they aren't so complex that most people can't figure them out pretty easily. Just write what the unit is typically used for, a few basics about the equipment, and then move on to another model. Our readers aren't three year-olds - they can fill in some of the blanks on their own. 24.225.105.14 15 June 2010

Fair enough, though considering some gamers...just kidding just kidding. "A good list doesn't win games, but a bad list does." What we need more of are VASSAL diagrams, or more general-purpose articles outside the Tyranid one, so we don't have to elaborate on what Torrent of Fire is for example.