Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Overall i try to field warriors almost every other game but they never seem to pay off. They are one of my favorite models but my experience with them has been fairly poor. I have tried just about anything with them but for how expensive they can get it seems to me that they die to easy to bolt gun fire.
I was just thinking of running lots of warriors maybe a few groups of 9 as mini dakkas but for the points i might as well take a tyrant...
3 warriors - twin linked devourer, +bs +str +save - 114 points
1 tyrant - twin linked devourer X2 - 91 points
They both have an equal number of shots, same bs, and same str shots.
The warriors have more 2 wounds total but less 2 toughness and a lower save.
The tyrant is a monsterous creature and also is fearless.
Am i missing something or are the warriors weaker for more points..
Edit: Per - Splata
Warriors have 6 attacks 9 on a charge
Tyrant has 3 attacks 4 on a charge.
Last edited by chrono10; October 29th, 2008 at 04:44.
In my games, I run the same Tyrant, and the same warriors, but I also run a CC set of warriors. In a sense, my tactic is to use the fast moving hormagaunts and the infiltrating genestealers to hold over the enemy units in combat just long enough to move the rest of the army across the field. I am often faced with the same uselessness of my warriors, but then again I do not come to expect much of them in the first place. To me, their primary function is to provide synaspe and to be able to waste a few units shooting phase if they really want to waste their lascannons on my warriors instead of my Fex's or my Tyrant, more power to me.
Its all about what you expect each unit to accomplish. Im sure every army has at least one unit who is expected to die every game, regardless (Like Tau Ethereals )
Damn the greenbeans! -East of Eden
Black Templar W.I.P
It's really difficult to talk about the effectivness of one unit type when the nid army is meant to function as a whole. I've had units be the "MVP" of a game but not make a single point from kills.
With that said, my warriors do very well. They are a good "middle teir' shooting unit. Decent CC unit, but expensive when built that way. The function of my warriors is usually mobile synaptic cover/support. I never field them as a front line unit anymore. I usually find that my opponent is too busy worrying about the fexes, tyrants and gaunt swarms to consider the warriors to be a high priority.
With the current game edition, I only beef up BS and STR. +1 save is pretty much useless when you can get a 4+ cover save in almost every situation.
My experience with warriors was generally "better" in 4th edition, because there was no drawback to splitting them down into small 3-man "dakka" units of twin-linked devourer warriors.
Coupled with a much larger army composed of 17 force selections (including 3 squads of 2 raveners, 6 squads of 10 spinegaunts, a flyrant and a guarded tyrant, and 3 sniperfexes), it was not very reasonable for most opponents to expend much firepower on warriors without risking leaving something else alive ... and so the warriors were very often able to completely decimate enemy infantry squads before ever taking any fire.
With the advent of killpoints, they become a more questionable inclusion, though I still field a squad of 9 (instead of 3 squads of 3). The rationale for me is that as long as I can keep them covered up, 9 warriors is a pretty hard nut to crack without a lot of concentrated firepower, which means they aren't an easy kill-point. Additionally, they can still provide a giant Synapse bubble, and can contest objectives if necessary.
The first warriors I used in this format in 5th edition all carried twin-linked deathspitters, but I stopped doing that almost immediately due to cheese and time factors. In one of my early games using them, with the new "resolve all blast hits before causing any casualties" rule, I caused 90 S6 hits to a squad of 30 orks in one round of fire from 9 warriors. This subsequently caused IIRC the statistical 75 wounds, and wiped the squad out in an orgy of blastiness. It's entirely inappropriate, in my opinion, for any one squad to require THAT long to fire and resolve 9 different blast markers on a potentially enormous number of models ... now granted, the fool had all his orks bunched basically on top of each other, which is why I was hitting on average 10 at a time with a 3" blast template, but still ... it was stupid.
Now I use them as twin-linked dev warriors again, in a 9-man squad, and they do alright.
The thing to remember is that with the advent of killpoints, warriors become a pretty viable target ... mostly b/c they're fragile ... at best a 4+ save, with 2 wounds, and only T4, plus they cost a lot of points ... so you're either going to have a few (easy kill) or a ton (worth killing due to their points investment). My 9-man squad comes out to 315 points.
Nids & Guard
GMail = MVBrandt
I've had some mixed success with warriors. I find they are much more resilient with extended carapace. Then getting them into combat helps loads as well. A 4+ save in the shooting phase isn't overtly impressive. In CC on a model with 2-3 rending attacks a round it's stronger.
As I've stated before i run really expensive warriors. It's been a learning process to keep them out of the way of anti-infantry heavy weapons, which take them to pieces. Deathspitters have done pretty well for me, if I can line up a volley they wound well enough to cause some pain, even to marines. Haven't tried scything talons yet, I run Bioplasma and rending claws instead. Since I face primarily heavy-infantry armies, hitting first and hitting hard is important. (That and I just REALLY like bioplasma)
Then there have been the times where my warriors get stuck dead in front of a chaos dread w/ TL Autocannons, or something along the same lines (high S AP4 many shots) this is ALWAYS how my warriors get killed, since they're a prime target for such weaponry.
My $.02 is that your warriors should ALWAYS have a cover save of 4+ in 5th edition 40k. More things provide cover, and even your own gaunts being in the way give them a cover save. Hence, spending anything on a 4+ armor save is a questionable move, esp. since you need to spend more points on troops than ever before.
Just a note.
Nids & Guard
GMail = MVBrandt
Ya i agree but in this example i was trying to make the two choices as close as possiable in stats to compare points
even if i take away the save the warriors are - 105 and the tyrant is 91
and as far as i can see the tyrant is still a much better choice point for point
Firstly warriors are also fearless (synapse, mute point).
So we have a discrepancy of 14 points. This is true.
There are a few points to look at where those points are going.
1) Warriors have a larger area of synapse under your control
2) Warriors May be taken in multiple slots, HQ Elite Fastattack (not sureif i really count that last one, FA warriors are a waste IMO)
3) Warriors more CC attacks. Many more attacks on the charge.
4) Tyrant has much better defense, will lose wounds slower to small arms.
5) Warriors are much better at defense against large arms like lascannons as they get cover saves and 'gotoground' (said as fast as possible while simulatiously ducking).
6) Tyrants are MC's and are great can-openners + save negators
7) Large amounts of MC's looks powergamey (Speculative)
My opinion on it is that yes Tyrants are better, becoming much better with a couple of upgrades that make it 121 points but the versatility of warriors and the fact that they can be slotted into anywhere in a list is quite invaluable. Warriors are also much better against very heavy arms due to cover saves and the like.
I would take a Tyrant (or two) for my HQ slots, but Elite choices are where the Warriors shine. So, the next question: Elite Fex or warriors.
My vote is on the warriors for their versatility (and they are more fun on the board) although I will usually have at least 1 elite fex in there.
Dear Game Developer,Caps-Lock, its like cruise-control for AWESOMENESS!
Rock is cheese, Paper is just fine
WWP and other Dark Eldar how to
oh hai bois, long time no see. Back at librarium after 4 years!
warriors are about the most flexible nids unit and form the backbone of any strong army, you can practically take them as 'troops' if i had i my way (and not my wallets way) id be taking as many as i could each game.
shooting: great, you can give them any bioweapon and practically any biomorph you want and no two have to be the same. like to see that kind of flexibility in a marine squad. a combo i found is good is devourers and deathspitters. S4 4shots twin link reroll wounds, you have two or three in a squad and one or two death spitters for taking out the more distant stuff + armour even (glance 12 if you take +S)
Combat: absolutely freaking awesome, my four warrior squad can take out a 5 man terminator squad on the charge. termies deap striked, i charged 12", 19 attacks total hit 3s wound 3s and one guy with rending. had no chance.
for combat i would recomend leaping then your choice of combat biomorphs, depending on what points you have spare. then scything +scything or better would be scyth + rend, here take 6 invuls.
ive only got 8 warriors, 4 combat and 4 ranged. my ranged currently have twin link death spitters but they cost 40 pnts each basically, so twin link is not worth it. against guard or ork though it would ruin their day. even marines now that partials count as fulls and that blast scatters not just roll to hit.
idealy i would be taking twice as many warriors, or even more if i had some wings.
if i had 20 warriors i would be more then happy, id magnet their weapons and just go nuts with different combos. Just by knowing what race your opponent is you can pretty much tailor your warriors to beat them every time, and now with the new rules and wussy cover saves galore all it takes is alittle bit of tactics and you can beat anyone.
then youve got your gaunts, lictors, biovores..... mwa ha haaaa
Last edited by nid kid; October 29th, 2008 at 04:13. Reason: someone couldnt count :P
Compared with shooting only in mind, HT is probably better of the two. But, as already said, 3 Tnid warriors give a better synapse spread, and note they should always get the 4+ cover save in 5th edition.
But since most things are already said, I won't bother you with reading the same info over and over again
Tyranids Win / Draw /Lost 
Daemon Hunters Win / Draw / Lost