I voted for a queue. After that, my preference would be no spawning.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

It's still a rule being considered not because it adds anything to the game or is in any way a good rule, but because of the physical models.


Note I'm not expressing any opinion about the rule, only that it should have an in game justification to exist, and not one linked oly to models. If your only reason for spawning is that you don't ink there's enough models available, then I don't think that's good enough, especially as I just recently managed to collect an entire tyranid army from eBay easily, and that includes over one hundred stands of infantry, supposedly the least available models.

To the contrary, I think spawning helps define the Tyranid list, giving it a qualitatively different feel from other CC-heavy lists. ("ere we go, ere we go").

Spawning provides a bit of mobility and surprise to a force that is otherwise fairly slow-moving yet supposedly aggressive. Further, it pushes the opponent to hit formations hard and wipe out the synapses, lest they come back.

Of course, it does seem to offend many of the more literally-minded 40k types, for whom every figure should represent something, and every 'something' should be represented by a figure.

But I think one of Epic's core design strengths is the decision that players need not track every shot or every trooper. Notionally, things occur at the individual and squad level that the player need -- and probably should -- know nothing about. Indeed, it could be argued that epic still allows too much command discretion: in theory the regimental commander's job is to order his battalions and know where his companies are. In attempting to simulate the perspective of a regimental commander, it's actually unrealistic to provide detail far below the company level. In Epic, as -- in essence -- regimental commanders, we order companies and track sections... but then we are inspired by that old meme: "drive me closer, I shall hit them with my sword."

Perhaps there's a more ingenious and elegant way of dealing with spawning. In general, though, for a regimental-level game, it does well at abstracting a particularly decentralized swarm warfare.

You're not being contrary, as I specifically didn't state and opinion other than than basing a game rule on models is a bad idea.

I do agree that spawning is a potentially cool mechanic, but for the tyranid list it's trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. If you want a horde army, you plonk a horde of dudes down, you don't invent some esoteric rule to kinda, sorta sometimes represent it. One that's hard to track and easy to boot.

I think it gives the Nids a unique flavor - it represents the fact that it's almost more of an infestation than an invasion. The Nids don't land in designated areas, form up and move out. They get randomly dropped over the entire planet, and then the synapses start gathering them up and give them some semblance of direction.

Spawning as a representation of there being lots and lots of bugs out there that you can't see is pretty cool.

All of which greater numbers from the start could represent without the need for a special rule.

If something can be represented in it's base cost and appearance, then it is always preferable over a special rule.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Greater numbers only represent greater numbers. Spawning represents the fact that there are wild nids everywhere, but they won't join the battle unless there's a synapse to gather them up.

Spawning does not offer enough to justify a special rule that increased numbers does not represent.

People just feel thay need to represent 40k when in fact, epic should be abstract rather than specific.

If you want 40k, go play 40k. If you want a larger scale battle, then one should accept abstract rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.

I know however that i am not convincing anyone. I just wonder however how many that are voting are actually looking to play with the netea list and how many are just voting because... Hence why such polls fail imo.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

45 votes? I really hope that there are at least 45 players on this board that are looking to either play the list or play against it.

I'm in favour of spawning so long as brood is heavily restricted. I really dislike the idea of carnefex's and other such beasties being ale to re-enter the game. I would like to see brood only available on basic creatures, Gaunts, H.Gaunts and Gargoyles, removing it from everything else including Raveners. I think this will also address some of the issues with Raveners as though they will still be super H.Gaunts, H.Gaunts can return to the game but Raveners can't.

I agree. If you want spawning to represent droppods then use a droppod swarm.
What actually increases the number of Tyranids on the ground are creatures like Tervigons and Dominatrices. And the former can only create new Termagants.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

I voted for spawnig for the above reason. I chose que because I think its not exploitable.


I also agree With the above though and i think the respawnable creatures should be limited to the most common creatures.

Cheers!

There is also an alternative Spawning style not mentioned, that linked to specific units (with no other forms of spawning). Some units would be designated as being able to spawn certain units at a pre-determined or variable rate. Units that could potentially have this ability and the units that they could 'spawn' are listed below. (Note that I use spawn rather loosely as it would also take into account additional units joining from other sources such as tunnelling raveners or a flock of gargoyles)
Tervigon - Termagants (Hormagaunts also?)
Dominatrix - Termagants, Hormagaunts, Gargoyles, (Maybe other rarer units, also could grant the ability to any formation within range)
Harridan - Gargoyles
Trygon Prime - Raveners
Hive Node - Termagants, Hormagaunts, Hive Guard (again other rarer units and grant ability to any formation within range)

Well, I still think we need spawning to best represent the 'hordes' coming across the table, but am still not entirely happy with the current mechanics; so wanted "something else" though this is really a variant on the original 9.2.1 rules.

To me the best description of Tyranids has always been the idea that there are 'unknown' numbers of Tyranids around (underground, off table or just out of sight of the enemy); you know there are lots, but do not have a clear picture of what 'lots' actually is.

Obviously the Tyranids work by attrition, throwing themselves against the enemy and trying to swamp them with numbers. However if the opponents can isolate where the 'heart' of the Tyranids army is, they can cut off the reinforcements being thrown in, and thus can swing the battle their way; by defining the numbers of Tyranids in the immediate vicinity (the table top part of the whole battlefield), the opponent can defeat the Tyranids strategy.

So in summary it is a battle over Tyranid reinforcements. Reinforcements appear from 'unknown' points in the rear of the Tyranid battlefield area and are fed forward by passing them from swarm to swarm.

To present this effect,

1. Determine the number of reinforcements from the number of available spawning points as usual.
   • These can only be added to swarms outside 30 cm *** from an enemy unit during the rally phase or using a marshal.
   • Reinforcements may not be placed such that they can assault an enemy unit.
   • If a swarm 'marshals', apart from removing BMs, the appropriate number of new Tyranid units may be added to the swarm that is furthest from any enemy unit.
2. Tyranid units may be swapped from one formation to another during a turn (but doing so ends the activation of the swarm to which they are now attached), or in the Rally phase.
3. Tyranid 'brood' units that are not under the control of a swarm during the turn may do nothing and are removed after the spawning phase of rallying.
4. Reinforcement units must first be drawn from the dead units in the army list, but if none remain the player may introduce any other Tyranid units in his collection.
5. If the battle goes to a point draw, this counts as a Tyranid victory (because their opponent has failed to find and stifle the heart of the Tyranid army).

*** a stronger, but probably overpowered variant is for units to be added to those swarms which have more than half the swarm outside assault range of enemy units.

I'll pipe up briefly to say that i've voted for no spawning: for simplicity's sake more than anything else...every other spawning mechanism I've played with has had logical/practical flaws. As a nid player I REALLY benefitted from the 9.2.1 spawning rule where I could bring my dead back wherever I wanted them but wasn't keen on the fact that - all of a sudden - there's a massive slug tank over there where previously there was nothing!

Additionally whilst there are certain aspects of the EuK list that I dislike it does seem to have garnered some good rep from most people and I'm happy with it's simplicity: in the hopes that we can gain parity between several 'core' lists I'm going to stick with no spawning.

(AND...we have previously spent a LOT of time and effort discussing spawning: if we drop it then perhaps we'll be done quicker! I'm one of those lurky types who, despite enjoying my nid army, have grown tired of forever waiting for a completed list not in development that I can safely use without it being tinkered with again a few months down the line! Another reason I welcome the EuK one at this moment)

_________________
MoK's Painting Blog
Now Showing:
Mok's Modular Modern Messy Guard Army