Then you've obviously not followed the development cycle very closely.  *LAUGH*  I'm often proven wrong and willing to change time and time again.

You'll notice Tyranids get Blast markers now, which I used to be strongly against, for example.



The thing is, all the complaints are that "LV warriors give them the kiss of death and force you to take tonnes of Raveners and no Gaunts to make an effective army", coupled with "And it's so obvious I won't even playtest to show that!"

Yet, I've posted games that prove the above false; that an effective "Tooth and Claw" army can be made with a single Clutch of Raveners in a swarm, the rest being infantry and a bit of support if desired.  The assertion that "it can't work any other way" is being made by people who only "Theoryhammered" things, but my actual game experience shows that not to be the case.

I guess the refutable question would be "Can an effective army be made using LV Warriors that doesn't require mass quantities of Raveners?"  And I feel I've proven that to be possible.

And there are other options than Raveners to "bodyguard" your LV Warriors: more Warriors, Carnies, Zoeys, or any other AVs.

Hey, if changing Warriors back to Infantry makes everyone happy, I'll do it next version.

And Hena, even when Warriors were Infantry, people *STILL* took War Engines, because they're cool and effective.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Whew, I did not think the topic would become so inflammatory, that was not my intention. I would ask people to be more constructive in their criticism. This is my problem, this is my suggestion as how to fix it. In that way, these kinds of threads are more of a help for the army champions and sub-champions.

If Ravener should be toned down (which it presumably is going to be in the upcoming version), I have two ideas of how to approach it.

Change Ravener FF to 6+ (in order to make termagaunts better). When I played Tyranids in 40K, I never bothered with ranged attacks on my Raveners, I wanted them in CC. Since it is an upgrade, it should not be on par with termagaunts whose purpose is to give Tyranid armies short-ranged support. This still leaves Hormagaunts in a bad position, but I find it better.

The other approach is far more radical: a three-step approach to commonality.

Step 1: Gaunts

Step 2: Gargoyles, Raveners, and possibly Biovores and Carnifexes (since these are the 40K "monsters" or fast attack choices of 40K Nids

Step 3: Assault spawns, bio-artillery, hierodules etc (the big ones)

I do not think including Raveners in uncommons and making it a 1:1 ratio between common and uncommon broods is a good thing. Then we are back to WE popping, which we now know is a bad thing. Instead of Raveners we have Hierodules.

So perhaps a 2:1 ratio for both. 2 Gaunts unlocks 1 semi-common and one un-common brood. In this way, you still have to pay 150/war engine, but also assures that there are twice as many gaunts as raveners, gargoyles etc.

Just an idea, but I would like more people contributing ideas instead of digging their heels into the ground.

/Fredmans

_________________
Follow my Epic painting projects: Tyranids vs Steel Legion and Inquisition vs Lost and the Damned @
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14636

You don't need Raveners to protect your LV Tyranid Warriors. A mixed Swarm of lots of Gaunts and a few Carnifexes will do the job too if not better.
The Gaunts are easier killed (because AP-shots have usually a low to-hot number) but you should have alot of Gaunts. And Carnifexes are tough.
Se problem is that Raveners are better because they are spawnable and mor enumerous than Carnifexes per cluster.+

Solution:
Put Raveners to Uncommon Broods.
Reduce Raveners to 3 or even 2 units per cluster.

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

What about reducing Raveners' save and CC (and/or FF) and creating a "Tyrant Guard" uncommon brood (or even Synapse) unit?  It could be a less effective carnifex-style unit specifically intended to guard synapse units.

Something like
Raveners to 6+ save, 4+ CC

Tyrant Guard: 20 cm, AV, 5+ CC, 6+ FF, 4+ save, (invulnerable too?).  Not sure on points

Tyrant Guards are only for Hive Tyrants.

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

Fair enough (although sometimes carnifexes get them too, apparently), although whether fluff should dictate that directly is not my call.  

What are the attributes for both the raveners and warriors that we want to maintain?

Clearly it needs to be determined whether we want warriors to be able to be targeted separately from gaunts.  If that's the case, then LV or AV is a necessity.  If they are able to be targeted, we need to decide whether they should have any sort of "bodyguard," whether intentional (non-fluffy tyrant guard) or not (raveners).  If the shouldn't have a bodyguard, then maybe the simplest solution is to prevent raveners from being included in brood swarms, forcing players to take AV or WE units to cover their warriors (as an added benefit to having the cool AV/WE units).  This could be offset by lowering warrior cost.  At that point, the one fear is that raveners become less "common" (comparatively) than they should be, since they'd only be found in sub swarms.  Perhaps lowering Sub swarm cost is a possibility (or changing tunneler rules to be more flexible).

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.

What do his Tyranid Warrior swarms usually consist of, alakazam?  

Does he post here at all?  Or has he read any of the debates?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Raveners are a problem in more than one way.

a) Either shift them to Uncommon
b) Have them as Sub-Swarm only with some points breaks for not being spawnable.

The best option may just be Sub-Swarm only. Then the stats don't have to change, more gaunts must be taken and there's no implausible Raveners as bodyguards problem. Force "bodyguarding" through existing LV's (Biovore, Zoanthrope, Extra Warriors) and Mixed Gaunt/AV swarms. We may like to have Raveners in core swarms but if it's causing so many problems it may be better for the list to impose limitations.

Sub swarm only for raveners is the only thing that makes sense background-wise. That's what they are, a rare subterrainian assault genus, not a core bodyguard formation.

Here's a quote from the current Nid codex:

Raveners have been specially bred to burrow under enemy positions and burst out from the ground with a horrifying screetch.

The phrase "specially bred" shows this is their specific role, not just something they do from time to time. They tunnel, it's their thing.



Yes, having more Raveners than either Gaunt type is unreasonable background-wise.

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

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 posted (an early game with Tyranids) he used this army:
6 Genestealers
(Left swarm) 3 Warriors, Zoanthrope, 2 Gargoyles, 4 Hormagaunts, 4 Termagaunts, 2 Malefactors, 1 Haruspex
6 Raveners (burrowing)
(Centre swarm) 2 Hive Tyrants, Zoanthrope, 2 Malefactor, 6 Hormagaunts, 4 Termagaunts, 2 Gargoyles
Heirophant Bio-titan
Harridan, 5 Gargoyles
Dominatrix
(Right swarm) 3 Warriors, 2 Haruspex, 2 Malefactors, 4 Termagaunts, 2 Hormagaunts

I can hear the gasps of shock and the "ZOMG!1! THAT ARMEE SUX1!1" comments. But we dont play in a uber competative atmosphere where we try to find a 'line of best fit' through the armies.
He likes the asthetics of his Warrior/Gaunt broods with slug support so that is what he runs with (with a fair degree of success at the moment).
His army has changed a little from this now, but he still uses swarms that look very similar.

I believe the "Gaunts" can be lumped together in that equation.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

The infiltrator rule represents localized "tunneling" of Raveners; that's the reason they were given the ability.

The "Tunneling" special rule represents a more strategic "deep" dig.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?