"A Horde of Tooth and Claw"

This has been the mantra for Tyranid design for quite some time... but it's never really been addressed, that I'm aware of, as to what it's supposed to mean and how it's supposed to guide us.

- Does it mean that Gaunts should be the primary unit used by the Bugs with only a "flavouring" of bigger stuff?

- Or that Tyranids should have to rely primarily on close-combat as their way of attacking with poor shooting?

- Or that bulky formations should be the only choice to effectively field the army?

- Or anything else people may think.

I'm quite interested in this and would like to hear feedback.

One thing to strongly keep in mind though is that the current "Phase IV" Tyranid list is also intended to be used as the "generalist" Tyranid list, introducing and allowing the bulk of Tyranid models, just like the Marine, Ork, and Imperial Guard lists in the Armageddon rulebook don't force a single style of play.

Other lists/Phases can have more of a focus.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

I think Jaldon's post from the spawning thread sums up what the Phase IV list should be representing.

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/forums....y268204

To me this is what "a horde of tooth and claw" is. Lots of littles with a few bigs thrown in there for flavor.

This description is why I'm against LV warriors so much. They make it necessary for you to take more of the bigger stuff to keep them alive.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Unfortunately it doesn't really mean anything. Any nid list is a horde of tooth and claw, whatever the composition.

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

And, from that thread:

"(1) To return the army to a seemingly endless horde of little critters backed up by a handful of bigger critters. (Most Brood Creatures)"

Again, what's a "seemingly endless horde of little critters"?  Should we change the list to "You may select 1 Uncommon per 10 Commons"?  Is that what you mean by a "few bigs"?

And this is EPIC, aren't the "bigs" the War Engines?  Or do you mean anything other than Gaunts?  This is where things seem to fall apart.  To me, a swarm of Warriors, Raveners, Gaunts, a Hive Tyrant and some Carnifex *is* "Lots of littles", since they're all Inf, LV, or AV.

And, again and again, a "Gaunt Army" is *NOT* a core reflection of Phase IV... Phase IV is where the bigger bio-beasts start to shine... to me, the core design principle of the "first" Tyranid list is to get as many of the Tyranid units and special rules nailed down as possible so that other "focused" or "specialized" lists can bloom in fertile soil.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

If, from the above thread "Little critters are defined as all the common brood creatures", what's wrong with there being more Raveners to "block" for the LV Warriors?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

I'm trying to find a copy of the line drawing from the Apocalypse book that shows a tyranid swarm attacking an Imperial position.

Basically, it shows about 150/200 infantry, and three bio titans.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And some Carnifex, Zoanthropes, and some unidentifiables!  *laugh*  Not sure that thing is online anywhere.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Phase IV *isn't* "about Titans or big things", it's when they appear in a significant number.

It's also when all the specialist "bio-tanks" make a strong appearance.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Aargh!  I'm having flashbacks to class discussions of Lacan and Sassure with the never-ending sequence of signified and signifiers.

Take 2 tablets of coherentism and call me in the morning.

_________________
Neal

I recently got back into Epic and am building and testing Tyranids out. This is my way of looking at Tyranids list development. First of all, I like the current list a lot. I also think the list makes sure that you have to field a lot of common broods, if that is its purpose. In fact, I wish I could field more uncommon broods, but I dig the Independent formations too much.

Now, I do feel that the "teeth-and-claw" design feels a bit restrictive. Epic is not 40K. In bigger battles there should be bigger bugs. If teeth-and-claw means adding more restrictions, I feel that the army list is going backwards. Can you field a Marines army with pure Terminators and Thunderhawks and Titans? Can you field a IG Tank army? Can you field an Ork army with a bare minimum of one warband? Yes, yes and yes.

I read Jaldon's post as linked by Dave, and I would have to strongly disagree on more than one point. Tyranids in no way rely upon Termagaunts and Hormagaunts to carry the victory in 40K.

Why are Tyranids still plagued with the notion that it should consist mainly of some of the worst troops in the 40K universe and still expect it to do well because of numbers alone? This I would like to hear. Are Tyranids restricted? Yes, slow movement, no flyers, effectively no AA, not much ranged fire-power.What is really the incentive for restricting them further and still make them playable?

If I have understood the army development correctly, spawning is there to represent the "horde of teeth and claws", without ruining any potential Tyranid players because of an out-of-production model's range and to be honest, quite ridiculous prices at eBay at the moment. The only solution, in my opinion, to get the smaller-bug-feeling of Tyranids would be to lower the cost of gaunts (or upping the number) and get rid of spawning. Again, this would hurt some wallets, even those of existing players. You cannot expect overpriced units with poor combat abilities to "win" battles in Epic.

/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

Not at all, the current restrictions are good. My point is that LV warriors skew the ratio more towards uncommons to the point where the AV bugs are mandatory for a competitive list. I don't think that needs to be the case.

And, again and again, a "Gaunt Army" is *NOT* a core reflection of Phase IV...

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

There's another way of understanding spawning, which is that spawns (and the synapse nodes that lie at the center of the spawns) are waves in a sea of bugs. Don't bother modeling the sea -- just the waves -- i.e. there's an order of magnitude more little toothies and ehm 'fry' than are actually represented by scale models.(and yes, neal... this should be bringing Heisenberg headaches rather than Lacan headaches :-) )

Or less metaphorically bases on the table represent only _coherent_ formations of bugs, with an ongoing chitter of activity occuring below E:A's level of simulation.

Speaking of which, one of the nice things about the spawning rules is that they also provides a degree of strategic mobility that the modeled bug swarms lack tactically -- bugs can 'die' on one portion of the board and reappear on another.

(... speaking of which... that would be a neat way of modeling tunnels and/bug-drops: the ability to 'drop'/place a synapse node during play -- then spawn around it.)

Neither is an all Predator or Whirlwind list a reflection of an Astates army, nor an all Artillery company list a reflection of an Steel Legion Mechanized Infantry company. However, they are still both legal.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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