As TRC pointed out earlier, most people skim read rules and expect them to be consistant and logical. I see this as an important goal for an elegant game system, and this list fails this test.

Just because the rules are clear if you read them properly that doesn't mean they're good rules. 40k has largely unambiguous rules, but they're mostly terrible.

The current situation with Raveners and Gargoyles is neither consistent nor logical, and certainly not elegant.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

So how on earth they can act under orders of hive mind when they don't have connection to it? Initiave penalty doesn't cut it because they would still be following hive minds orders 66% of the time. They wouldn't be acting instinctively. They would be acting on hive minds orders except with less efficiency. But how they get those orders in a first place?

Nothing instinctive behaviour in initiave value 3+. Just less efficient following of hive mind.

_________________
www.tneva.net

Initiave penalty doesn't cut it because they would still be following hive minds orders 66% of the time. They wouldn't be acting instinctively. They would be acting on hive minds orders except with less efficiency. But how they get those orders in a first place?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Note that this is exactly what happens in Warhammer 40,000. They make a dice-based test, and a certain percentage of the time they can follow the orders of the Hive Mind.

If they fail the dice-based test, they can only do what broadly ammounts to a 'Hold' order (stay still and shoot, or make one move towards the board edge).

Maybe a -3 penalty instead of -2?

_________________
www.tneva.net

Well the ultimate representation of Intinctive Behavior is probably in BFG, where you literally follow a flow-chart for units/formations that have strayed from Synapse range.

But I quite like the 40k rules as a halfway house, with the Hive Mind being able to make a tenuous grasp on the lesser creatures' minds even when outside of the range of a Syanpse nexus like a Tyrant.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And as Hena said forced moves is bad game design.

Also BFG is more of a skirmish scale like 40k and not big scale action like epic so micromanagement rules like that work there. In epic what happens when they fall into instinctive behaviour? Answer: They cease to be efficient fighting unit. Forget about fighting together. They would all be individual. So any formation coherency and indeed coherency inside stand would go out of the window. This is abstracted in that unit dissapears. These may then be recollected by synapse creatures which is represented by spawning.

Macromanagement. Not micromanagement.

_________________
www.tneva.net

I dislike to repeat myself Hena and tneva82 but Tyranids which are not under direct control of the Hive Mind CAN and WILL act to pursue the Hive Minds goals. Yes they don't act as effective as if the where under direct control of the Hive Mind but they CAN and WILL act. The FLUFF/BACKGROUND supports this.
That the Wh40k/BFG rules support this is only a bonus (one you ignore with impunity).

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

I don't know ; Big ships like Hive Ships are broadly analogous to Hive Tyrants etc. and little drone ships are broadly analogous to little gaunts and the like...

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Actually, in the background all nids are linked to the hive mind, synapse creatures just have a much stronger link. When then synapse isn't around they use their own links, which are less clear, hence have a chance of not recieving the commands correctly and reverting to instinctive behaviour.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread