| Author |
Message |
Forum: NetEA Tyranids Topic: Tyranids and the Hive Mind |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 4:50 pm
|
|
Replies: 27
Views: 6995
|
As the Tyranids themselves exist only in OUR collective minds, there is a sort-of irony here  
|
|
 |
Forum: NetEA Tyranids Topic: Raveners |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:25 pm
|
|
Replies: 123
Views: 20162
|
| Tyranid Warriors as Inf. No option for Raveners in the broods. Special Rule: "Shoot the big ones!" Armies used to fighting Tyranids know to target the larger creatures in a brood where possible. To represent this, when assigning hits to the formation, every 3rd AP hit must be assigned to a non-gaunt... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Tyranids Topic: Raveners |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:47 pm
|
|
Replies: 123
Views: 20162
|
| I have pointed out before what his broods consist of and was told he was 'wrong' to set his broods like this (he likes Malefactors and Haruspex) *shrug* His broods usually have something like: 3 Tyranid Warriors Hive Tyrant Haruspex 2 Malefactor 4 termaguants 4 hormaguants In the battle report I pos... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Tyranids Topic: Raveners |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:35 pm
|
|
Replies: 123
Views: 20162
|
If my opinion counts for anything, we have not had a problem with Tyranids being LV and our Tyranid player only ever takes Raveners with Trygons on tunnel broods.
Try a different approach and see what happens.
|
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Death Guard discussion |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 1:17 pm
|
|
Replies: 159
Views: 26061
|
6 in a formation makes Father Nurgle cry...
"The flies, the flies,
in the burgomeisters eyes!"
Will obviously see how it plays before moaning too much, though, and I understand why you have tried it out.  
|
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: God specific lists and Fearless |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:09 pm
|
|
Replies: 90
Views: 8999
|
| I have experienced playing with and playing against a mostly fearless army (I tried to do a theamed Chaos list before switching to LordI's (then Hena's) Death Guard. Neal's comments echo this experience. I cannot comment on their 'balance' or not (not that I care too much about that, I only care abo... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Wed Aug 26, 2009 11:12 am
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
| There is a difficulty involved if the WE list allows for units with/without BRoK in them. However, I think that taking the Fearless rule as inspiration might help to solve this eventuality units not suffering BRoK could be 'carried along' but not actually fight again?). See how it works out. EDIT: A... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 9:58 am
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
| If they wipe them out in the second round, you mean? Well, there are already rules to cover the evetuality of breaking after defeating the enemy in an assault - use those. The wording I presented would obviously have to be tweaked (it was not mean to be comprehensive), so add something like 'if the ... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 1:28 am
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
| Well, I think the 'draw assaults' variation (I forget who first mentioned it) has some merit to it; it appears to fit the fluff and makes the WE that more interesting. Something like (off the top of my head)... 'After making an engage move the WE enter Blood Rage. If a formation under Blood Rage los... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 12:34 am
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
Well, I am speaking of Blood Rage, which is the topic of this thread.
For one such proposed variation of this rule, see the original post. There are of course others, such as the 'draw assaults on loss' that have been mentioned.
|
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:41 pm
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
| Quote: For the amount of effort placed on a rule that I think has shown it's face twice in the 5 playtests of the joint list I am working on, and only 3-4 times total in 11 games I have played with World Eaters overall, I feel that too much emphasis is being placed on a rule that has little t... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Death Guard discussion |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 3:35 pm
|
|
Replies: 159
Views: 26061
|
| I would personally prefer: Normals, Havoks and Terminators (max 2?) in Retinues, one support per retinue, armoured co in support. |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 5:23 pm
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
| Quote: Could I ask what playtests and games you have performed or reported on to make such a statement? For those of us that have put in the work, this is a slap in the face. So if I for one am going to be told that I need to start again, I would like to see proof of games where it does not w... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Another Blood Rage proposal |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Fri Aug 21, 2009 6:08 pm
|
|
Replies: 46
Views: 6802
|
| It appears to me that what (some?) people want the World Eaters to be is either a) too complicated to implement elegantly or b) breaks the game. Part of this problem might be that different people have different ideas on what the World Eaters actually ARE and their perceived capabilities in combat. ... |
|
|
Forum: NetEA Chaos Topic: Death Guard discussion |
| alakazam |
|
Posted: Sat Aug 15, 2009 10:21 pm
|
|
Replies: 159
Views: 26061
|
| Not wanting to flog the dead donkey on this, but would you not roll CC attacks for Tanks because they 'have too little effect'?And you know that the Nurgle's Rot can be either CC or FF, right? Usually equates to more attacks than any accompanying Rhinos (and the Rot ignores cover to boot!)... *shrug... |
|
|
| Sort by: |