[Gatler]

Originally Posted by takahashikun

All a player would have to do is declare a target priority, shoot with devo squads, or pathfinders or anything else with heavy weapons, and knock out our synapse by x2 Toughness.

Yeah, I mean, you'd have to actually put them somewhere clever, like those Tau and their Crisis Battlesuits.

Things that are the size of Warriors are vulnerable to heavy weapons, and should always be vulnerable to heavy weapons. If this means you have to actually think about where you put them, well that's just too bloody bad, eh?

[Gareth]

Lord Thunder, are you still flogging this dead horse?

Seriously, look at your classic movie monster, they're always rearing up for one last final death lunge to kill the hero. They're never dead when you think they're dead.

My favourite example of this would be in AVP PS2, you can upgrade the warrior aliens, so that they're not truly dead, yet clambering along the floor, clawing their way to their victims no matter what shot them. For science fiction, this type of thing is great!

Also I was reading some heirodule fluff in AI4 and it was describing their inner skeleton and outer exoskeleton. That sounds friggin hard as nails.

[Gatler]

Originally Posted by Gareth

Lord Thunder, are you still flogging this dead horse?

Yes.

Seriously, look at your classic movie monster, they're always rearing up for one last final death lunge to kill the hero. They're never dead when you think they're dead.

This is because there's always recognizable remains, or they're like Necrons and get back up. Shoot it with a Krak missile and there won't be enough of it left to be dangerous again, no matter how motivated it is to continue fighting.

[Gareth]

Originally Posted by Lord-General Thunder

Yes.

This is because there's always recognizable remains, or they're like Necrons and get back up. Shoot it with a Krak missile and there won't be enough of it left to be dangerous again, no matter how motivated it is to continue fighting.

I disagree, but I respect your opinion. We're both entitled to our opinions, so we should agree to disagree.

We all understand your view, I mean you've explained it enough times for christ's sake. Please, no more! We get your point, we just don't agree with it.

And if asking nicely isn't good enough, I'll try plan B...

SHUT UP! :P

[khanaris]

He has every right to express his opinion, Gareth, as do you. That is part of what "agreeing to disagree" is about. You can't agree to respect someone's opinion and then try to keep them from expressing it. But I would advise a different approach to this, and that goes for you too, Thunder. If you aren't interested in playing Tyranids yourself in 5th Edition, this is probably not a good thread to be responsing to. I don't think the rules should be in the hands of someone who like the background too much, but neither should they be in the hands of someone who actively dislikes the idea.

In this case we are trying to figure out what the Tyranid archetype is, and then how it should be expressed in the rules. You guys don't agree on part of the archetype. At the end of the day, this is why I don't like allowing the background to drive the rules.

I really don't like what Instant Death has done to the game. Every multi-wound model that isn't toughness 6 is viewed as "un-viable" because of Krak Missiles. Unless the codex lets them ignore or they are a character. And even with characters, many can now simply ignore them. The jetpack and shield drones keep Crisis Suits from needing a similar upgrade, but at this point I think the system just needs to be overhauled.

[Arschbombe]

Originally Posted by Gareth

Lord Thunder, are you still flogging this dead horse?

The horse has regeneration!

[Gatler]

Originally Posted by Gareth

I disagree, but I respect your opinion. We're both entitled to our opinions, so we should agree to disagree.

We all understand your view, I mean you've explained it enough times for christ's sake. Please, no more! We get your point, we just don't agree with it.

And if asking nicely isn't good enough, I'll try plan B...

SHUT UP! :P

Well, I would, if you could demonstrate some kind of flaw in my reasoning.

That is simply what Instant Death represents: *SPLAT*

If Warriors aren't tough enough to be immune to instant death by double toughness, then they don't deserve to be immune. Seems to work well enough for everybody else, doesn't it?

If you're finding they're too fragile because of Instant Death (although why anybody would be pointing 9+ lascannons at them per turn is beyond me), then there's a few solutions:

1. Lower the cost.
2. Allow larger squads.
3. Give them a better armour save.
4. Give them an invulnerable save.

These all seem to make sense to me...

Originally Posted by takahashikun

Comparing Warriors to Crisis suits is just plain ignorant. First off Crisis suits have the option of getting very nice invul. saves along with their already nice 2+ save.

3+ save, not 2+, and I don't have to take the Invulnerable. In fact, I usually don't, except on my Commander. Not that it makes any difference here, since we are talking about immunity to Instant Death, and they won't be getting a save from Krak missiles and the like.

Secondly, Crisis suits have the very nasty ability of jumping out and jumping back behind cover, which makes their survivability very very high.

They're multi-wound models that aren't immune to Instant Death. How do they cope? By using cover, like everybody else! :shifty:

[Gareth]

Lord General Thunder you fail to remember that every single weapon in the game can hurt a warrior. Only str8 or better (or weaker str+rending) can hurt an armour 14 tank. How is that taking more punishment.

A lascannon hits a landraider, i need a 5 to glance, which then needs a 6 to take the tank out, or a 6 to pentrate, I then need a 4,5 or 6 to take it out. The bolters in the lascannon unit bounce off the landraider harmlessly.

A lascannon hits a tyranid warrior, 2s its wounded no save. The bolters in the unit can still wound the warrior. Quite clearly, the warrior is more likely to take more punishment then the above, even if it is a single wound, its unlikely the lascannon will scratch the tank.

Warriors are fragile, they die really easily - Fact.

You're using the wrong weapon to kill them. Any commander using single anti tank weapons on a brood of monsters is a nutter.

[hr]

Hit 4 warriors with a demolisher shell, and its 2s to wound. You're likely to wound all 4 which = 2 complete dead warriors. What's the problem? That's 2 warriors which can cost over 40pts each. Thats pretty fair.

[Gatler]

Originally Posted by Gareth

You're using the wrong weapon to kill them. Any commander using single anti tank weapons on a brood of monsters is a nutter.

I wouldn't be using them for that purpose anyways, but you're missing the point. The point is that I'd have to hit a Warrior at least twice with a Railgun to kill it. I can down a Monolith in one hit, but supposedly its quite reasonable for a Warrior to survive the same.

[Gareth]

Originally Posted by Lord-General Thunder

I wouldn't be using them for that purpose anyways, but you're missing the point. The point is that I'd have to hit a Warrior at least twice with a Railgun to kill it. I can down a Monolith in one hit, but supposedly its quite reasonable for a Warrior to survive the same.

You're missing my point, that a bolt gun rapes warriors and couldn't even scratch a monolith.

I don't see it that hard to believe that in a made up science fiction universe that creature twice the height of a man with an inner skeleton and an exo skeleton can get its legs blown off and still keep coming at you.

Old one eye proved a nid can survive exterminatus. Go on admit it, nids are tougher in the fluff they you'd like to believe.