User talk:Angry Pirate

From 1d4chan
Jump to: navigation, search

Doomsday Ark vs Heavy Destroyers[edit]

Just because T9-10 barely exist doesn't mean they shouldn't be mentioned, there's no real reason to not mention them given that Apocalypse does exist. I agree with you that I neglected the survivability of the ark vs the destroyers so thanks for adding that, and I also agree about the more aggressive playstyle with destroyers. However I think it's definitely worth highlighting the fact that the DA has only D3 shots fully charged as I believe that's the main disadvantage of the unit (i.e. if it had D6 shots for example it would be much more effective, and if you really need something dead the ark is not reliable. A comparison could be made with admech onager dunecrawlers whose neutron lasers are also D3 however they don't cost 203 points each, plus a successfully wounding attack does minimum 3 damage). Imulsion (talk) 22:45, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Un´tan[edit]

  • Actually, at the time of said battle both the wargear section and the Immortals own section showed that Gauss blasters were rapidfire. Their own profile still shows it as having rapid fire. So those were the rules played with, since that is what was written and their effectiveness and contributions have thus been measured with that rule in mind.. Now you can change that rule If you think it is too strong, however based on the games I had with them they preformed fine with rapidfire, and would probably not have been as good without it. -Un'tan

Also the wargear page have been updated sometime after those battles listing Gauss blasters as heavy 1. Again, I played with the rules that were written at the time of the battle. -Un'tan

  • Alright my bad, I will consider eliminating one or the other to remove this kind of mistake. As for the Immortals I think that belongs in the discussion page of the Angry Dex.
  • This is not something I wanted to bring up on the angry codex, but I am curious of your opinion on the Obelix. I feel it is not nearly worth it's point cost. Hardly any weaponry, a rule mostly concearning flyers, sure it is durable and If inactive gets an inv save. But, it doesn't do anything. Nothing worth 600 points at least. Kinda feel the same for the Tesseract vault, almost same shooting as all the other shards but more durable. 5th edition trancendants and valuts were fun weren't they? Costly, but so many different useful powers. Anyway, the obelisk always felt very lacking to me, what is your opinion?
  • It´s 300 pts, though I must admit that I agree that 600 pts is far too much... I geuss the best comparison would be to that of a monolith. It´s durability is more or less directly proportional to the monolith, which I think is about fitting. Now it has two upsides and one downside as far as defence goes, it gets immediately blown up by a 6 on the D table, on the other hand it doesn´t have a 2/6 chance of blowing up when penetrated by an AP 1 weapon and it cannot be assaulted. The sleeping sentry can be ignored for the purpose of balance IMO. Now for special abilities I would say the Monolith is better for its price, in most cases, but against things like DE their day is ruined, until they bring it down that is. Finally it´s weaponry, it´s obviously a lot worse against infantry and hard vehicles, but on the other hand it is a lot more effective at destroying light-medium vehicles. I suppose I could specify that the Orbs work like turret mounted weapons so they have a 270 degree arc rather than a 45 degree arc? (This is how I´m planning on playing it). The Tesseract Vault on the other hand is a bit more complicated. It´s a T C´tan + 250 pts for the shell. I believe the C´tan´s main focus is on melee because of its stomp. It can´t do melee while caged, which drastically decreases it´s offense. On the other hand you get to pick exactly the powers you need. While it still only fires two weapons, it now has a choice between 6 quite powerful weapons and it can have Skyfire. It lacks the straight up firepower which its cost would normally demand and in exchange it has a swathe of choices. Sure a normal corkscrew is best at opening and a dagger is best for carving wood, but corkscrews are terrible at carving wood and you need to be fairly skilled to open bottles with a dagger. The C´tan attacks the shell rather than shooting at your guys, maybe it should only inflict the hit when it has taken wounds like the Rampaging God special rule, but I will leave that to after testing has been conducted. Which leads me to my conclusion: I haven´t tested the Tesseract Vault because I haven´t gotten around to transporting it and I haven´t finished building my Obelisk because I have been spending too much time on codices. Furthermore I am trying to get my group used to bigger models, hopefully I´ll get them to start playing 2500 pts, so I have points for both my super-heavies and more than just 50 infantry.
  • 300 right, however it is still a very boring unit. It is a sturdier monlith without a main gun or the utility of the eternity gate. It's tesla spheres are all one shot each. Tesla, but still one one shot each. And at most 3 can fire at the same target in a turn. That is barely anything. Yes it is a super heavy and thus sturdier, but it does nothing. A 300 point box. Its gravity pulse is barely worth mentioning. But I honestly don't know what to do about it. I don't see any utility or firepower in it to make it superior to a monolith. It can maybe do some damage to a couple of av12 vehicles, but that is it. And it is a superheavy. Out of all superheavies the obelisk is possibly the worst. Also the Tesseract vault, superheavies are often armed with a lot of weapons, enough to shoot down armies in many cases, and the powers of the C'tan is basic stuff compared to the weapons of superheavies even If one gets to choose which to fire. Powers of the C'tan in general is a pretty silly concept. The angry codex gave it at least the logical upgrade to roll first then decide target, but it is still... Not really impressive. For monsterous creature it is nice, superheavy? no, not much. Not even any massive blasts, hellstorm templates or apocalyptic barrages of any kind. Neither of them feel like a super heavy. A model so expensive both on points and money should be fun.
  • I feel like you are confusing superheavy with titan. Superheavy only makes a vehicle resistant to the vehicle damage table. Superheavies certainly don´t have firepower to win overpower armies, maybe in the fluff, but then so does a monolith... The old Monolith certainly had no chance against anything but SMs in the open, the new one even less. The Macharius ´Vulcan´ from IA Apoc 2 has 6 HP AV 14/13/12 3 Heavy Stubbers (glorified bolters) and a Vulcan Mega Bolter - 15 (30 if stationary) S 6 AP 3 shots at 400 pts. Now it might reduce anything w. Sv 3+ or worse to dust, but it has no anti-tank weaponry and gets destroyed far more easily than an Obelisk at 300 pts. It´s not like the Reaver Battle TItan from IA Apoc 1 is anything to wish for, while it boasts a nice weapon arsenal of 6 S D (Small) Blasts and 2 S D Large Blasts, it only has 18 HP and 4 Void Shields at 1450 pts. Void Shields are a joke, they can easily be dealt with by medium strength weaponry before the D weaponry fire and take out the Titan. Because of its humongous number of HP it suffers the full effect of D weapons, which admittedly is the only effective way of taking it out besides CC. Titans are just made for a different game IMO, lumping all superheavies together is a mistake IMO. There are 300-600 pt superheavies which I think belong in the LOW choice and then there are titans which I honestly don´t think belong on a 6 by 4 foot table. The Obelisk is surprisingly the exact same width and height as a Monolith, it´s slightly taller so it doesn´t really warrant a higher number of HP than it currently has. It´s simply isn´t an apocalypse unit, it´s just a slightly bigger Monolith with a different ability and different weaponry. It only makes sense that it´s the weakest of all superheavies as it is the cheapest as well. I also want to say that I have nerfed all Knights, so you shouldn´t compare the Obelisk to those. As for the ££££/$$$... I don´t even know what to say, at least you get a Transcendent C´tan in the package. I can´t just make a unit´s power level based on its $-price. If you want to spend less money for more points I recommend you scratch build a superheavy, I´ll make some balanced rules for it if you make a completely new one or I´ll reconsider the balance and abilities of the unit if you decide to build one of the existing relics of the apocalypse. Angry Pirate (talk) 19:03, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Well Said. Though I feel sad that the obelisk is still so, lackluster. I want it to be a fun unit, a bigger slightly Scarier monolith, but it doesn't have Much to make it on par in terms of utility. An opponent could Ignore the obelisk and it wouldn't make too much of a difference. Oh well. At least maybe give it a few more tesla shots. Maybe twin linked. Twin linked tesla is fun.

Also, I might just take that Challange to scratchbuild a Necron superheavy/titan. Could be a fun side project. There was one Necron titan in the lore, I don't remember exactly but it was gigantic. Might take some ispiration from that. Anyway, I might just build that. Not gonna happen over night though. -

Curious[edit]

  • How are you doing Pirate? Haven't heard anything from you for a while, and I am quite curious what you think about 8th edition. 8th has a lot of interesting changes, and some rather odd changes. But I am curious what you think.
  • Pretty good. I've played a little bit of 8th edition. It seems pretty good, but I did like Angry Necrons better. I don't like the snowballing effect that continous healing has and some units seem bad, that might just be me though. I've stopped the angry initiative because 8th edition is good enough and I'm hopeful that problems will get cleaned up over time rather than be left to rot and fester. I've begun making a format of the 8th ed factions that looks like 7th edition, but I've only finished Necrons so far. I've checked your contributions so it's not that I don't care but I can see you've been buisy.
  • That is nice to hear. I am surprised with how many reasonable changes have been made. In terms of balance at least. In terms of options and fluff, I much prefer Angry edition. I would like to see what you are working on, my group has talked about how the ideal currently would be 8th edition rule set with an Angry Edition codex. Hopefully more options will come in the actual codex, and personally I want Cryptek harbingers to come back and custom shards among other options. The sequential reanimation was a surprise to me, but so far it is a fair compensation for loss of the feel no pain of last edition, an odd nice mix. I need to test it more myself though. There are some units that aren't very good. Ordenance in general was a bit nerfed which didn't help the Doomsday arc. Scarabs, are not good for dealing any damage, and I have run a few games with them now. But, they deny deep strike territory, hold objectives, distract and shield characters well enough to be useful for point filling. Which is something. Tomb blades are a bit overcosted from what I have played as well. Destroyers don't deal quite enough damage for their point cost. Then there is the monolith. Which is oddly frail. For its point cost I could see it having a rule similar to the one in 3rd, at least Quantum Shielding or something. The trancendant shard as well is... I could go on. But for the most part things aren't too bad and not much is overpowered. Except flayed ones in Nigth Scythes, who could have seen that coming, and the Gauss Pylon. However, until the actual codex hits I am fairly happy, it is only of that one is odd and there is no sights of fixing it that I would see another angry edition be worthwhile. Perhaps "Disgruntled Edition" since there isn't quite as much to be angry about. The only thing I would really want now is to have Crypteks from angry implemented in 8th edition, which I may wanna try. I am heading off to play a 2600 pts game today, partially Silver tide army with 60 warriors, I wanna see just how viable they are. I'll share my findings.
  • https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ggm-sG3LCTH7q9biovLLITvTN1R_2yE26U_e8QZFx8w/edit?usp=sharing
I think I'll fix it up and print it out when I get my new pc, there is a ton of lag when I work on Google Docs with my current machine. While I agree that unique C'tan, random C'tan powers and Harbingers would all be nice, I'm just really glad that they seem to care about the rules for once. Who knows, the game might get broken in a month or two. My gaming group is going to be playing with a soft highlander format with no more than two of any one unit to encourage more diverse lists, but I don't really think there is any spammy army beyond possibly a flyer list that will break the game, and even that I'm sure gets countered by lists with lots of long ranged anti-vehicle firepower.
I tried out the Deceiver + Obyron combo and got smashed because I forgot about the counterattack stratagem and used my first attack to attack something that could hardly even attack back. Good luck with your list and try not to be an idiot like me. Angry Pirate (talk) 05:45, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I played and my list contained three full warrior squads, Nightbringer, Destroyes, Illuminor Szeras, ghost arc, monolith and A Tomb Sentinel. Tomb Sentinel was an excellent distraction unit, and Szeras, even if he insisted to buff all my warrior's Strength, turned out to be a valuable asset. Scarabs escorted The Nightbringer and he stared two squads of eldar bikers to death. Warriors didn't do much, except survive, they were good at that, and with Szeras buffs managed to wreck a venom. Monolith also did surprisingly well, cripling tanks and cleaning up a couple of models thanks to split fire. Spyder is overcosted for what it does, but is fine. Scarabs did durvive enough to do their job. Regular destroyers dealed with meq well and the anti tank of monolith, szeras, tomb sentinel and one Heavy destroyer was enough for the game, and the game included a baneblade. Leman russ and ordenance desperately need buffs. The game went well, and it ended with a Necron victory. I think ressurection is a bit much at the moment, pondering on if Crypteks instead allowed units to roll for previously killed models, instead of giving the plus 1. Obyron doesn't seem that good anymore honestly, except for the nemezor combo. I really wanna try Flayed ones personally. Giving scarabs reanimation and guardian protocals seems a bit excessive. Though seems interestig.
I would lien to mention I am also just happy this edition is as good as it is, I want costum shards and crypteks, but I am happy with what we have so far


About Codex Rising Sons[edit]

Hey Pirate. Looked into your comments on the Rising Sons Codex and will take them to heart. - Ben (talk) 21:28, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

I wish you and your project the best of luck. Angry Pirate (talk) 04:32, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Kedzuliy[edit]

  • Hey Pirate, i just wanna ask u about mutations, i do understand that there is no easy way to mastermind them, without loosing competetive play.
So i wanna ask: do u have any ideas how to use it for testing purposes, like in progression cost, when upgrade cost bases on currect unit stat, or maybe some draft's.
I wanna ask u about one biomorph, that can change everything, yea it was snake body.
How do u/your community think about giving option to get snake body for more creatures or maybe for any creature, like other biomorphs with dynamic cost, but instead of just x/X it can be based on creature... not stat, but toughness owerall.
i do ask all of this cause i do playtest a game with my friends, and i do find that im chet a bit with my creatures, cause i do upgrade my fexes with snake body, made 3 of them cost over 200 points... and at the end we got pretty fun game. I do play against angry furry and angry gardsman (3k aliens, 1.5k furries, 1.5k guardsmans). We pla custom sitie scenario, with 2 obj in every deploy and 2 in the middle. Game finishes at turn 5, on the table we got someshere near a 1k of total unit cost, and UMIES do won with 33/27.
ofc. 1 game wasnt shou anything but if u do have any ideas how to use those things i pretty like to see them and test with my friends.
am sore aboot englush i maek.
  • Hey, mutations isn´t impossible and I think I am going to implement them, the thing that made them not work was the ability to take multiple biomorphs at once. Everything in warhammer compounds in effectiveness, changing a heavy bolter marine from BS 4 to BS 5 has a larger impact than changing a normal bolter marine from BS 4 to 5.
I haven´t developed a price system for figuring out what is fair, but if you want to go ahead and test it with your friends I have a useful tip. Try and find a price where you can see yourself making a competetive army with two of the creature. For example Eldar Jetbikes with scatter lasers are so good for their cost that you rarely only take 2, you either take 0 or 4-6 units. A Dark Eldar Archon on the other hand is somewhat pricy, but you do need an HQ choice so you take 1, but never 2. So when you think of a cost you think something should have, take 2 in your army and ask yourself
"Would my army be better with only 1 or none of this option/unit?" If the answer is yes then your unit needs a lower price.
"Would my army be better with maybe 3, 4 or maybe even 6 of this unit/option" If the answer is yes then your option/unit is too powerful and needs to cost more points.
"Would I ever take this unit without this option?" If the answer is that you sometimes take it under certain circumstances and sometimes you don´t under other circumstances (a snake body might be good against a defensive army so you can reach them and bad against and offensive army which is going to come over to you anyways) then you have found the right cost.
There are no perfect costs, there is a range of costs which are going to have different degrees of being worth it under different circumstances. The most important thing is that your unit is good at something and bad at other things.
Another thing is that you should ALWAYS ask your opponents for permission to bring stuff, if your opponents are fine with playing with fanmade codices I´m sure they´ll be fine with you trying out some rules you made yourself. 200 pts sounds a little high, which is good, when making rules for your own army you should make them a little underpowered and then steadily make them stronger. When making rules for your opponents it´s better to make them a little overpowered and then steadily make them weaker.
Don´t worry too much about the english mate, I´m not a native English speaker either. I do recommend you change your browser to google chrome and use the auto correct feature. Firefox might have it as well but I´m not too sure. - Pirate


  • Greetings, again.
So i do test the snake body biomorph, i do use it like 20 points upgrade with some downsides, -1 to armour penalty, and +10 to armor mutation cost, armour upgrade cost 40(by default). And without armour save upgrade fexes looks much differently, they become more risk-reward units, cause they get lower in defence but their offense skyrocketed.
And i doo think right now about making 2 options for Stonecrusher ramshields, when 1 of them cost lower but do take hand slots and second one cost twice more and do have some penalties for toughness or armour mutations, but leave your hands free, like IA fexe's right now.
So i only wanna ask u about already snake like creatures, like trygon's and mawlock's they defenetly need some snake body upgrade analog, but i have no idea how to call it...
Oh, right, almost forget to say about spine fists and heavy spinefists. Without taking arm slots it was too good, for 15 points its cost.
oops, forgot to log in when writing it :)
  • I just researched snakes a bit, I found out that snakes actually aren´t that fast at all. It´s not really a surprise I just hadn´t thought about it earlier.
It seems the primary reason snakes don´t have legs is so that they could either swim better or burrow more easily.
Big creatures have little strength in their legs meaning they can´t take many steps per hour, but their large legs mean they still get somewhere. When a creature doubles in height, width and length its weight does not double, rather it gets eight times as large (2*2*2=8). It´s legs however do not get 8 times as strong, this is why creatures such elephants are so slow. Giraffes are still pretty fast because they are fairly slim compared to horses meaning their weight only goes up by 4 per doubling of height and length since they don´t get any broader than a horse.
Small creatures have a lot of strength in their legs but they can´t take enough steps per hour to make up for the fact that their steps are so small. What this does mean however is that creatures such as ants can carry many times their own body weight.
Finally we have the in-between creatures who can take medium long steps and can make a medium amount steps per hour. The way it works out is simply that creatures somewhere between dog size and horse size are the fastest creatures, barring flying creatures but that´s a whole other subject.
What I´m trying to say is that giving Carnifexes an option to go faster because they get a serpentine body doesn´t make much sense. Rather a special rule like Deep Strike would make more sense. So while it would be an interesting unit mechanically, the laws of physics don´t allow for these rules to exist. - Pirate
  • So, may be it will be possible to add in mutation's? Like... Hedgehog limbs, that lowers models armour and leadership, but giving more speed and blue carapace?
  • How about making an alternate strain option which is an alternate to taking a normal mutation? Or do you think that it is necessary that there is an option to not only make it into a hedgheg but also give it +1 Str/WS/whatever?
I just wanted us to agree that a snake body isn´t logical. We could allow for a rollafex which wouldn´t require any conversions, but rolling isn´t seen in the animal kingdom for a reason, it would most likely only work on roads. What it could do would be allow you to move flat out 6" instead of D6" when outside of terrain, but moving 12" while rolling makes little sense IMO.
Next option is for the Carnifex to have 4 legs and 2 arms, this would make a decent amount of sense but it requires a pretty hefty conversion for it to work. Making an option for playing with ultralisks is however a pretty neat idea. The thing is that if the option is just a little too good, I´m effectively forcing people to proxy or make a difficult conversion, which might just end up looking like shit.
I´m actually starting to doubt whether mutations are a good idea because you have to keep track of it somehow... Ugh. - Pirate
  • I do agree with u, it was harder then it sounds, but already i am do talk about not an unique mutation, but biomorph that multiple units can take. Cause trygons/mawlocks/haruspexes looks much funnier to play with it, cause u get more opportunities and u get smashed pretty hard if u wont give them any other save option(look, ap4 everywhere!), but maybe i should decrease toughness instead of armor...
So, whut im trying to say, this upgrade should be like toxic blood, that change monster inside, lowering his weight, changing his behavior, and improving leg musculature. Maybe some creatures actually have couple variations, like mines, but with different stats, it was much harder to produce, butt, it will be more fluffy, and srsly more interesting by mean of gameplay.
So if we accept that idea we need to find how to show what type of unit did we place on the table. And if with fexes we can be pretty lazy and just associate fex type with fex head, for other units this shit was not work. So lets imagine that we have base unit and 3 upgrades, let it be... tuffa-fex shoota-fex runa-fex.
Why did i even offer that idea, cause those upgrades not just stat improves, those upgrades give a unique rule for models that using it, like "gonna go fast" when if the model want moove 12 inches throu entire turn it will loose 1 leadership(or any other penalty), cumulative, and it can be only refiled after mooing 18 in the owning player turn, shoota upgrade take your ballistic skill or even shooting range if upgraded model moves, tuffa model cant be joined by any unit and cancharge throu its own units, hurting them and things like that.
So if we doo use shoota-fex, we do show it, by adding some gun tentacles(u know, those things for second hand, that hold gun) from his hand base to his neck, or maybe back, and add some random bits on his legs, representing stronger base for standing still(aka tau cosplay)
For tuffa-fex we can add some bits on the unit arms, body, legs, that strange one shit, that looks like shoulderpad with spike, but too big or too small for it, for some models we can even use carnifex alternate carapace.
Now the hardest part, runna-fex. So there we have pretty low opportunities, cause we cant show lighter weigh of model, we cant show different musculature's work, most thing we can doo is just add some scrotum's on da leg's/tails of those creatures, representing some doping injectors.
Ofc, roller-fex sounds stupidly funny, but ill better believe in rolling gaunts, making them banenling analog, cause mines so fucking slow... - Keddzuliy
  • I´m having a hard time seeing how something like additional hind leg strength and a slightly different internal structure can yield a 60% increase in speed, Fleet is a very reasonable rule which wouldn´t increase speed too much. I frankly cannot find a fluffy option that allows for a monstrous creature to be as fast as a beast.
Trygons and Mawlocs are even worse, even with stronger tails or some such thing it wouldn´t make sense to make them a ton faster.
I´m afraid I might not be able to help, I´m in the business of making rules for the different factions and the models they have, making rules for models that don´t exist isn´t exactly what I´m trying to do, even if your idea is cool. - Pirate
  • Greetings, once again. So im thinking about adding some spices to synaptic creatures(yea, "gonna go fast" cant leave me), basic idea is giving synaptic creatures abilitie to focus all his powers on 1 single unit, loosing all the synapse range and overcharging/exhausting that one creature they focus on(ofc that effect cannot affect another synaptic creature or gargantuan)and if he do so, hat creature can double 1 of its actions sacrifising it in the next turn, like buffing with it a unit of termagaunts giving them 2 round of shooting, without splitfire, will disable theyr shooting pfase in the next turn, giving a fexes double moove mran, that in the next turn they can only run to moove themselves, etc.
So, while giving the unit great increase in the currect turn mean they will be less usefull in the next one, it was looks like "oh shi" button and it should be it.
Maybe it should be available after mutating synapse for creatures, to make it more pricey, cause loosing 18 synapse sounds much more disappointing, but still gives a great buff.
Im thinking about applying it on run/move/attacks/shooting. But if we doo so we need to think about some restrictions further, like "unit that use to shoot twice this turn cant run at the same turn" and something like "creatures with bounding leap special rule cant use double run, but still can move twice".
If u doo have any free time to think about it please do it. And if somehow u doo like that idea, and it will be fluffy enough tell me. - Keddzuliy
  • Overcharing of a unit is already represented by the Hive Mind´s Control power "Unstoppable", which, similarily to your suggestion, increases a model´s performance in one turn at the cost of performance in the following turn.
I could change the Onslaught power to allow one of the following:
- Run twice the following Shooting phase-
- Run in the following Shooting phase and charge in the following Assault phase.
- Run and shoot or shoot and run in the following shooting phase. 
- Gain the Relentless special rule until the end of the turn
Althought with that I don´t think it´d be neccessary to have a punishment in the next turn, although you could have a leadership test or the unit cannot act in the following shooting phase.
This does achieve the goal of having something that allows your units to go faster, but it relies on you getting the power.
I´ve been thinking about implementing a system that allows psykers to buy the powers they want instead of rolling for them, with this it would be possible to somewhat reliably double run key units. - Pirate


  • That sounds great, but when im think little bit more about opportunity to have synapse management mechanics im start thinking how to execute it without creating overpowered beasts, or an GW genestealer.
so i do try it that way: at the start of your turn, after reserves comes in, but before u start rolling on instinctive behaviour table, your synapse creatures can focus on 1 non synapse unit inside theyr synapse range, providing synapse only for that creature it focused on, if u doo so that creature/unit will get double it IB bonus, and count as rolling 6 on IB table, but ignoring result of 4-5.
So we got interesting mechanic for synapse creatures, but i dont know should it be base abilities or an upgraded one. and 3 stealth's wasnt sounds that great, i think it should be like shroud+stealth or just +1 cover twice.
And a main downside is that for now i can add a synapse creature in every non monstrous unit by spending just 40 points. Even without that upgrade it sounds 2 good, maybe i am wrong but, this guy wasn't sound fluffy at all, he looks like a comissar hormagaunt(and thats pretty fun thou). i understand placing tyranid prime in a unit, he was pretty expensive for reasons of just synapse, but he can slice thru delicious biomass of mrines with only a bonesword.
So the things im trying to say: tyranids already have ALOT of synapse that u can maintain under the Bee Gee "staying alive" song, tyranids prime "lite" is an unit for a unit, we need to rework him or just disable for now because there is tyranid primes that more fluffy, more balanced and optional, we can work with tyranids synapse that spreads on 2-3 tables around u to make other units perform little better, yea double action only for synapse loss is pretty big.
so, how do it sounds for ya ^_^ - Keddzuliy
  • I´m not sure if I´ve stressed this clearly enough but the current angry Tyranid dex is not meant to be played with, I don´t consider it any better than official codex in terms of balance.
The codex was not written by me, the original was written by a number of other users over on this page. I just copy pasted all of it to use as a template for my own work.
I could implement your ability and I will consider either making it a purchasable upgrade or a basic rule. - Pirate
  • Greetings, again. So like i say earlier, we got pretty fun time playing angry codeces, and for now i only wanna ask about default psychic powers, is there some plans to change them?
rebalancing ot just remaking some of them can be pretty usefull, cause for now we got rerolls from devinations, invis, and rarely some biomancy bonuses. So maybe we use invis as that: "when determining to hit roll against invis target yours model weapon or ballistic skill become 1.".
maybe i do miss the place where RB magick was redone already, if so, can u link it?(please) - keddzuliy
  • Hey sorry about misspelling your name.
Which army was specifically strong with invisibility? To me it seems like it was the Librarius Conclave and the Seer Council that made psykers OP.
Even if you take 2 Librarians at level 2 you only have a 55% chance of getting invisibility. Psychic shriek and shrouding are both fairly good, but the rest of the discipline is trash.
One thing to remember when playing against a list making use of invisibility is the investment made into being able to pull it off. 2 ML 2 Librarians are 190 pts and not only do they not guarantee you the power you want, there is also the fairly large chance that you don´t get it off, at least not every turn.
While it does suck that psychic powers in general are bad and that only a few of them really stand out. I feel the investment you need to make is so large that you don´t need to nerf the few OP powers, because otherwise it simply isn´t worth it to take psykers at all.
I´m not entirely sure if I want to redo the powers, but if I will it´ll be after CSM, Eldar, Tyranids, Grey Knights, Orks and Inquisition because psychic powers to me seem like a fair investment at the moment. - Pirate
  • Greetings, so we do couple testings again and... well... run+charge isn't the thing that tyranids should have commonly in basic psychic powers pool. Beside gartantuan creatures, that just fucking large as hell, when u see how other creatures charge throu 20" on 1 turn... its wasn't right.
So how is it carni charge throu 20 inches? Pretty easily, look: 6"moove+d6 run(with possible crusader and fleet)+d3 for high fleet+2d6 charge(with fleet again) +d3 and we got medium 6+4+2+7+2=21" possible charge for a first turn. That was impossibly strong if u think about creatures that charges u, 10/2, possible WS7(WS4 OOE + 6 spell HM Control) that fat as hell unit and he drop down billion atacks, that can have fully rerollable or with armourbane.
And i wasnt even talk about hormi, that can charge fully throu 24 inches with mediocre roll, or 33 inches if u manage to roll 5 sixes in a row.
Last one: Putting OOE in kexes can sound pretty fun, but for real it was hardest tank u can possibly find, imagine: he joins 3 fexes with T mutation, so unit gets T7 majority, u give him W mutation and ram shields, and maybe u will spend 18 points for a 5+ invul, and now u had 6 wounds, with toughness 7, armour 2, inv 5, 4+ fnp, that can be buffed to 3+ with psyker, and all shooting that this tank gets, will have -1 str penalty.
Well, pretty soon im gonna change OOE because his power in kexes unit was over 9000, i will change "Onslaught" power part of "run then charge" to "run twice" thats will be the first part.
For last part i wanna ask u: dont u think about limiting biomorph count per model? We thinking about changing main mechanics of biomorphs and giving every creature 3 slots for biomorphs, something like head\body\legs, where hands already taken by weapons. And there we have to think about whut biomorph we should put on whut part of creature to make them viable, not just putting all defences in body and offences in head+legs but split them... for now i do start writing that list, if u enjoy that idea i will show it for ya after couple days. With pleasure, Keddzuliy
P.S. maybe i should ask u all of those little questions somewhere else?
  • Crusader does not add D3" to your run and charge distances, it only increases your chance of catching your enemy after they fail their leadership test. Crusader has no effect on charge distance but does allow you to roll an additional dice when running and discard the lowest of the two rolls. So your average run distance with Fleet and Crusader is roughly 5" (8" for Hormagaunts). Making your average charge distance roughly 19" (22" for Hormagaunts). This is a long charge and might be abusable but I'm not sure if it's as bad as you make it out to be. SM currently have fairly reliable ways of making 1st turn charges with their new electromancy powers in their new angels of death supplement.
I could put a hard cap on number of biomorphs, but assigning biomorphs to bodyparts would be a mess. I don't think I've gotten to looking at the points, hopefully that should make you less susceptible to wanting all the things. An other option would be to add secondary/tertiary costs for when you have at least 1/2 other biomorphs.
The talk page of the Alien codex would be better, especially if you could cut your inputs into little bits and put them under appropriate heading like "====Old One Eye====".
  • I know that crusader wasnt give u additional d3 to run and charge mooves, Hive fleet tactics Gorgon does.
Oh, and almost forgot to ask u about changing "outfit" of named characters like OOE, Swarm Lord, Death leaper, i do understand why did they get acces to mutations, hive fleet can recreate them and give them little bit different mutations, but full acces to biomorphs and sometimes even acces to different veapons(yea, OOE again) sounds strange for me.
  • I hadn't thought of that combo. I guess the power is too strong because of 7-10" run moves.
I agree that it is somewhat weird, but Tyranid uniques are always going to be a bit strange. Theoritically there shouldn't really be anything stopping you from replacing all Carnifexes with OOEs. I think the current version makes sense from a Tyranid standpoint, but at the same point it somewhat removes the purpose of unique models that being recognizable characters from the fluff with a specific set of rules and wargear, but that isn't really what Tyranid uniques are anyway so I think it's fine. - Pirate


Hellfire Shells redundant for Deathwatch[edit]

  • The talk page seems broken so I'll have to do the old cut and paste.
The Deathwatch got to keep Special Ammunition in this edition while Sternguard lost theirs. This most likely won't change for their codex.
-Valvatorez
  • Deathwatch need two more stratagems then since they also don't have a chapter specific one yet. Feel free to make ones. Angry Pirate (talk) 12:39, 25 December 2017 (UTC)