[Lists] Call me stupid, but....... |
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but.......  Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:37 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
That's wrong. Objectives must be placed 30cm from the board edge and 30cm from each other.
6.1.4, second paragraph:The remaining two objectives must be set up in
their opponent?s half of the table, at least 30cm away from the
opponent?s table edge and 30cm away from any other
objectives that have already been placed. |
The farthest back it could be placed would be straight back towards the Nid corner, 30cm from each edge. That would put it ~55cm from the center line. The other would have to be closer, but not by much.
I think this is something I'll address in the next WIP: that Common and Uncommon broods have to be set up within Synapse range; it really makes no sense that they could start "out" of it at all, and I've just been doing it by default. |
I think this is still not very effective, only stripping 10-15cm distance. The back edge of the swarm is still 15cm from the objective. The front edge can then be 45cm from the objective (using the T-style setup you referenced earlier). That's within 10cm of midboard at best, probably less, so even with the radius cutting off some distance, it's not more than 15cm for the body of the swarm. It also won't work at all with a swarm that has multiple synapse creatures synapse because they can stretch out a lot farther.
Any Nid garrison will effectively start on the centerline, near mid-board, and a corner deployment allows them to close off the enemy to ~1/3 of the board or less on Turn 1.
_________________
Neal
| Top |
|
 |
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:45 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (nealhunt @ 22 Dec. 2005 (16:37)) | That's wrong. ?Objectives must be placed 30cm from the board edge and 30cm from each other.
6.1.4, second paragraph:The remaining two objectives must be set up in their opponent?s half of the table, at least 30cm away from the opponent?s table edge and 30cm away from any other objectives that have already been placed. |
|
The "opponent's table edge" in a corner deployment only goes half-way up each side of the table, the rest is "no-bug's-land" and is available for objective placement and objectives have to be placed "at least 30cm away"...
Whoa  ... I just re-read that... I think we've got a FAQ question!
Everywhere I've played that second "30cm" has been read with an implied "at least", not as a fixed 30cm! ?Wow, that makes a huge difference in game setup if that's the case! ?I really don't think objectives always have to be placed in a 31cm sided triangle though...
By strict reading that's the case though... You place your Blitz, then the enemy places theirs, then you must place a Take-n-Hold objective 30cm away from their Blitz, and then they place one 30cm from your Blitz or the T-n-H you just placed... essentially linking objectives in 30cm chains... I really don't think that's the case, is it?!
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
| Top |
|
|
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 6:06 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
|
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
Hmm... we've always played that it was both sides, but I think you are probably correct. In any case, I still don't think it appreciably restricts the Nids from garrisoning the majority of their force almost on the midline.
====
And it should be read as
"...at least [30cm away from the opponent?s table edge and 30cm away from any other objectives]..."
not
"...[at least 30cm away from the opponent?s table edge] and 30cm away from any other objectives..."
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 6:11 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (nealhunt @ 22 Dec. 2005 (17:06)) | And it should be read as
"...at least [30cm away from the opponent?s table edge and 30cm away from any other objectives]..." |
We've always read it as:
"...at least 30cm away from the opponent?s table edge and at least 30cm away from any other objectives..."
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 6:25 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (nealhunt @ 22 Dec. 2005 (17:06)) | | In any case, I still don't think it appreciably restricts the Nids from garrisoning the majority of their force almost on the midline. |
But a lot of armies can do that. ?Garrisoned Stormboy Mobs and Stompa Mobs are a nightmare to face, and don't even start on Siegemasters! ?They're garrisoning tanks! ?*laugh* ?(Hmmm... I'd like to see a fight of 'Nids vs Seigemasters, I wonder how the barbed wire would do...)
Sure, Tyranids are going to try and get the "jump" on the enemy by starting close up, but if they're all deployed right away, the enemy has free reign to setup in a more defensive arrangement to try and counter that. ?
With Jaldon's "Carnifex Terror" army there's few activations, and T-formation garrisons on the corner deployment are still going to be fairly bunched up for artillery strikes. ?And every action spent spawning back the broods is one less Engage taken. ?Yes, it's a very evil army, and I look forward to seeing how it performs on the table. ?Against my Tau opponent I see it getting chewed apart by massed Hammerheads though...
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
ragnarok
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:34 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:43 pm
Posts: 2084
Location: Reading, England
|
|
One point that I agree with Jaldon on is the speed of the bio tanks. Exocrines, or both flavours should be speed 15 or even 10. They are designed to nest somewhere cozy and destroy the enemy with volley fire, not outrun a carnifex assault organisum!
In my game against N0-1 H3r3 the reason I managed to win was because I doubled my artillery brood back from the center line to confront his monolith on my blitz. Breaking it then sustaining on the warrior phallanx the next turn.
A reduced speed would make them more of a "fixed" placement. Something that needs to be planned.
_________________
Tyranid air marshal
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Jaldon
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:43 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:38 am
Posts: 720
Location: Utah, pick a Pacific Island the other half of the year.
|
The objective placements in given example are incorrect, both Take & Holds are within 30cms of a table edge, and within 30cms of each other.
"The remaining two objectives must be set up in their opponents table half, at least 30cms away from the opponent's table edge and 30cms away from any other objectives that have already been placed."
In all of the battles played the opponents set their objectives as far into one flank as humanly possible, within the dictates of the rules, and it didn't change the Nid ability to cover over 3/4s of the table with bugs.
The two Bug Swarms were set up with all creatures in Synapse range, but as they are no longer required to remain within 5cms of each other, they can be spread all over the place within that same swarm. Consider a single Tyranid Warrior has an actual Synapse Range of 30cms (15cms behind him and 15cms in front of him) and you will quickly realize this really isn't that hard to do.
Heck, a single Tyranid Warrior Formation of three Tyranid Warriors can cover 102cms of frontage and/or depth and keep all of it's Bug Warriors in synapse range! (30cms per Tyranid Warrior +4cms for the stand it is sitting on times three equals 102cms)
As for Agility, this only became a needed item when the Nid army started suddenly becoming full of units that are LV, which to some extent I believe has gone just a bit too far.
As I stated at the begining, I am really not trying to slam the entire list as I do see an awful lot of real good ideas in it. But what has been done has had some effects that I believe weren't anticipated. Which is why we playtest!
Again Thanks For your time Chroma.
Jaldon 
_________________
Brave sir Robin, when danger reared its ugly head he bravely turned his tail and fled, Brave sir Robin.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:46 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (Jaldon @ 23 Dec. 2005 (02:43)) | The objective placements in given example are incorrect, both Take & Holds are within 30cms of a table edge, and within 30cms of each other.
"The remaining two objectives must be set up in their opponents table half, at least 30cms away from the opponent's table edge and 30cms away from any other objectives that have already been placed." |
In corner deployment the opponent's "table edge" only goes half-way up either side of the board so the remaining "no bug's land" should be legitimate areas for objective placement.
The objectives in the example picture should be at least 31.5cm away from each other and from the enemy deployment edge, as that's how I plotted them in Campaign Cartographer, it may have gotten futz up a bit when I converted to a .jpeg.
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:56 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (Jaldon @ 23 Dec. 2005 (02:43)) | | The objective placements in given example are incorrect, both Take & Holds are within 30cms of a table edge, and within 30cms of each other. |
Okay, there's just one thing I need to get straight here Jaldon:
Are you saying the take-n-hold objectives need to be placed exactly 30cm apart, no more, no less? (I agree on the no less part, certainly!) So that basically the placement of the first one dictates a, somewhat tuncated, 30cm arc in which the second one must be placed?
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 6:05 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (Jaldon @ 23 Dec. 2005 (02:43)) | | As for Agility, this only became a needed item when the Nid army started suddenly becoming full of units that are LV, which to some extent I believe has gone just a bit too far. |
Actually, I felt the need for something more than walker the first time one of my Hive Tyrants got killed by a tree. ?*laugh* ?And then I discovered the HT couldn't lead a swarm into the jungle either!
The conversion of more units to LV status was a manifestation of two things: 1) Making certain units more vulnerable to fire, as I felt it more likely enemy troops would be firing both their small arms *and* their heavy weapons at the floating brain bug or the stalking mantis bug, not just one or the other. ?
And 2), the modelling aspect. ?I really didn't want to have to re-base my biovores from 1 on a base to a minimum of three. ?The stats of most of the LV-ed creatures seems more likely to represent the capabilities of an individual creature or two, not 3-5 of them all together.
Agility seemed to address the needs of skittery-spidery bio-titans, walking tanks, and lithe hunters better than just walker.
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Chroma
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 6:29 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
|
| Quote (ragnarok @ 22 Dec. 2005 (19:34)) | | One point that I agree with Jaldon on is the speed of the bio tanks. ?Exocrines, or both flavours should be speed 15 or even 10. ?They are designed to nest somewhere cozy and destroy the enemy with volley fire, not outrun a carnifex assault organisum! |
This is probably a good change to look into. Can you try it and see how it works out?
_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer
Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steele
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:08 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
|
| Quote (Honda @ 22 Dec. 2005 (16:12)) |
Even if the 1-garrison-per-objective rule under discussion is adopted, that won't stop the Nids from closing off a corner deployment in the first turn.
|
Where is this being discussed? Thanx! |
Hi, it?s a semi-official Rule beeing up to be Official at the SG Forums.IIRC.
Steele
_________________
Quid pro Quo
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Jaldon
|
Post subject: [Lists] Call me stupid, but....... Posted: Sat Dec 24, 2005 2:20 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 6:38 am
Posts: 720
Location: Utah, pick a Pacific Island the other half of the year.
|
|
Are you saying the take-n-hold objectives need to be placed exactly 30cm apart, no more, no less? (I agree on the no less part, certainly!) So that basically the placement of the first one dictates a, somewhat tuncated, 30cm arc in which the second one must be placed? |
They cannot be within 30cms of another objective, but are not required to be within 30cms of any other objective. So any distance from 31cms up. So yes no less.
The objectives in the example picture should be at least 31.5cm away from each other and from the enemy deployment edge, as that's how I plotted them in Campaign Cartographer, it may have gotten futz up a bit when I converted to a .jpeg. |
Yes, the second view taken from the SG site was much clearer to me on my ancient laptop, and is correct.
However, it doesn't change anything as the Blitz is used for the opposite flank deployment in a corner set up anyways.
Players here most often choose
not to use a corner deployment as it is handing larger armies an easier way to flank and hem in smaller armies, and often those small armies are the ones with the higher strategy rating.
The conversion of more units to LV status was a manifestation of two things: 1) Making certain units more vulnerable to fire, as I felt it more likely enemy troops would be firing both their small arms *and* their heavy weapons at the floating brain bug or the stalking mantis bug, not just one or the other.
And 2), the modelling aspect. I really didn't want to have to re-base my biovores from 1 on a base to a minimum of three. The stats of most of the LV-ed creatures seems more likely to represent the capabilities of an individual creature or two, not 3-5 of them all together.
I understand your reasoning behind it, I just believe it is having a negative effect on the army list as a whole, and itself is creating many more problems rather then solving any. This is, however, just my opinion and I can easily live with disagreement on opinions.
More importantly, I do firmly believe you would find JJ giving the axe to most of the things, pointed out as such, in my original post. That isn't furthering the list, rather it is a step backwards as then things would have to be re-done and playtested all over again.
Again this is just my opinion based upon my experiences working with JJ from the start on the entire Epic-A project and the Nid army specifically.
Thanks for your time Chroma, and Merry Christmas.
Jaldon
