Why Tyranid Shrikes are better than Tyranid Warriors

[Gleipnir]

Shrikes have same profile as Warriors save one is Jump Infantry with armor 5+ and the other is Infantry armor 4+ w/ access to all the same biomorphs and upgrades

Considering that you are likely using them to move your synapse forward and relying on Cover as much as possible until you get into melee, and the fact that they are far more likely to die from being hit by Krak Missiles and Meltas which ignore armor 4+ as well, why wouldn't you select the option that is more mobile and capable of jumping behind or over LoS blocking terrain?

[daboarder]

dies to bolters for 30+ pts.......

[Gleipnir]

yes is wounded by Bolters but still has 3 wounds, and if you are using them behind intervening models for cover herding gaunts and fexes forward, are Space marines really going to charge forward to get within bolter range of shrikes likely putting themselves under 18" of the swarm?

Most units you would see Deep Striking are packing Combi Meltas, Cyclone Missile Launchers or such anyhow

[jifel]

A shrike takes as many bolter shots to kill as a Space Marine, for twice the points. Also, it loses scoring next to a warrior. Whatever you're advancing can be kept in line by a Tervigon, Prime, Flyrant or Zoanthrope, all better than Shrikes. Regardless of their options, Shrikes shouldn't take them. They're so expensive as it is, and we have better assault units. If I were to take Shrikes, it would be Rending Claws and flesh hooks perhaps, but I frankly might drop the hooks.

[Captain Bubonicus]

They have exactly the same problem as Tyranid Warriors:

They're too damned expensive for what they do.

[Sly]

Why would you ever take Shrikes other than for cool miniatures? There are better units for forward Synapse, there are better units for rear Synapse (starting with StrangleWarriors), and there are better units for assaulting or fire support. And, most of all, why not take scoring Warriors instead?

[Mr Mystery]

Shrikes can indeed by jobbed by three bolt rounds, which statistically is te same required to drop a Marine.

But they cannot be jobbed by any less than those three Bolter rounds. A marine can.

They are also more survivable against anything with AP6 or AP-. Against AP3, or Power Swords and Power Axes and rending and Warscythes etc, they are also more survivable.

Ain't numbers wunnerful?

[Kryczek]

I wouldnt say they were better as both have uses in this new dex.

I agree with strangler warriors for backing up gaunts but shrikes are good for backing up gargoyles.

[Halollet]

One thing I don't get.

Why are you leaving a highly mobile unit out in the open to get shot to death by bolters?

Surround them with hormies or gargoyles and they'll get their 5+ save meaning you'll only die 16.7% faster then regular warriors. Regular warriors still die pretty fast, I'm just sayin' there shouldn't be that much difference. For that 16.7% faster death rate they get jump packs and all the benefits included. The lack of scoring stinks, but if people are saying that warriors die by sneezing at them, then why rely on them for objective securing? I think that's what the OP was getting at.

I think they have their place but defiantly not for all armies. If you're going horde and you have filled your troop choices with hormies and termies you'll need something to keep up with those hormies who could move 15" every turn! Shrikes would be a good idea then!

Mind you, in that situation the shrikes will probably be eating the lascannons.... maybe not the best plan, but would be fun to play!

[Theik]

I don't really see how this argument holds any water. One if a troop choice, the other is a fast attack. It's like saying saying that saws are better than hammers at cutting wood and then looking like a retard trying to hammer a nail into wood with one. Shrikes can't hold objectives, warriors can. Warriors can't jump, shrikes can. They're both in completely different slots, so it really doesn't matter, you can simply take both, eat your cake, have it too and spread synapse around like it's candy.