ninja'd
though at least we came to the same conclusion.
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Thoughts on Nids http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=18169 |
Page 1 of 3 |
| Author: | angron [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:15 am ] |
| Post subject: | Thoughts on Nids |
I was thinking about Tyranids today and worked out (in my head) some rule changes that would make the Nids behave more like a relentless swarm. Starting with the 9.2.1 list Remove Synapse range Remove spawning Formations are set at army creation using the guidelines and points in 9.2.1. Independent formations are chosen normally. Synapse formations choose a synapse creature and add brood as per the current restrictions. Here is the change, At any point a synapse formation is without a synapse unit the formation automatically breaks and must take its full fall back move towards the nearest valid Synapse formation and join that formation ( get within coherency with another unit). If it is unable to get into coherency with another synapse formation at the end of that move and no other synapse formation is able to "pick up" the broken, synapsless formation by the end of the turn the formation is removed from play. What I am picturing with this rule change is the lesser nids are confused when the loose connection from the hive and attempt to reconnect as quick as possible. If they don't reconnect the scatter and if they manage to get reconnect they get put back to use as part of the assault. I intend to try these changes tomorrow with this list Hydraphant Genestealers with Broodlord Subterranean with 2 Trygons Assault group 4 raveners 4 Gaunts Assault group 4 raveners 4 gaunts Attack group 4 gaunts 4 raveners Dominatrix 12 gaunts 4 raveners 3 Haruspex Total 2950 P.s. I also think that raveners should be cc 4+ and spores should have scout |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
Welcome to the Swarm, angron! angron wrote: IHere is the change, At any point a synapse formation is without a synapse unit the formation automatically breaks and must take its full fall back move towards the nearest valid Synapse formation and join that formation ( get within coherency with another unit). While this seems to be an interesting concept, to me, the most obvious problem is that it allows the Tyranid player to "double dip" their Broods, e.g., a swarm with Carnifexes assaults, does some damage, loses their Hive Tyrant, and the surviviors run off to join a nearby Tyranid Warrior Group, which then assaults and the Carnifexes get another "go" in the same turn! As well, would the Synapse-less formation remove all its Blast markers when it joined up? Only half? Lots of questions to think about! I look forward to your report! As well, I'd recommend playing with Raveners at CC4+ and Mieotic Spores with scouts. |
|
| Author: | angron [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
Oops forgot that part, they get one blast marker for each unit remaining. This will not cause the unit that its joining to break but will represent some of the confusion that comes with the hive losing a synapse. That way if the now larger formation assaults it will have blast markers on it making it slightly less effective. I realize that this will allow the tyranid player to double dip but I think the loss of a synapse out weighs that. You are losing an activation and a scoring unit with the synapse loss. I think that double dip also helps illustrate the relentless nature of the Tyranids assault. |
|
| Author: | mageboltrat [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
A broken formation is counted as having blast markers equal to the number of models in the formation.. So I would say 8 Gaunts joining another formation would add 8 blast markers, as they haven't made a rally check or regrouped. It would also go some way to stopping the issue of "double dipping". |
|
| Author: | mageboltrat [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 1:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
ninja'd though at least we came to the same conclusion.
|
|
| Author: | frogbear [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
From what I remember, the base instict for broods when not in synapse range is to attack what it sees. Running back to a synapse I feel, does not capture this flavour. It gives the impression that they can think for themselves, which they do not. |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 10:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
Well some synapseless brood creatures just sit there and shoot the hell out of anything which isn't a Tyranid instead of attacking. |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
BlackLegion wrote: Well some synapseless brood creatures just sit there and shoot the hell out of anything which isn't a Tyranid instead of attacking. I would consider "shoot[ing] the hell out of anything which isn't a Tyranid" a form of attacking... *laugh* And the Broods moving towards Synapse isn't showing them as "thinking", it's showing them being led like moths to a light; it's instinct. Still want to see how this works out in play. |
|
| Author: | mageboltrat [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 12:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
that's is definitely how they worked in 40k up to the new book (which I haven't read, so no clue how it is now.).. I used to quite often come against them with my Necrons.. My tactic against Nids was to set up wide with my warriors either end of the board to get the Tyranids to set up wide. then I would tp or fast move all my troops onto one flank.. gun down the synapse on that flank and watch all the non synapse run away to the other end of the board.. used to give me an extra couple of turns shooting. |
|
| Author: | GlynG [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 2:00 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
The more I think about it this sounds like a potentially excellent idea. I don't think the double-dipping is necessarily that much of an issue - with 1BM each per joining unit there is a significant disadvantage. There may be times when you really don't want those few broken guants attaching themselves to an unblast-marker-ed and very killy unit nearby which was about to assault, but with it being instinctual the player wouldn't have any control over it. Slow broken units could occasionally attach themselves to an all-fast moving detachment. Units can support fire multiple times in a turn to good effect - think of a Warlork Titan - occasionally having tyranids regroup and re-fight with worse blast marker penalties and more risks than the Warlock doesn't seem so bad. It's also evocative of the endless horde approach of tyranids and makes things more tactically interesting both for both the tyranid player and his opponent. |
|
| Author: | arkturas [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 2:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
On current 40k codex for those who haven't seen it. Synapseless broods either 1) chase down the enemy (Through 40k rage rule) and can't shoot or 2) shoot the nearest enemy (If no enemy they dive for cover and stay there). The brood creature is noted as to which behaviour is followed (Feed or lurk) but it's not directly applicable to E:A due to mixed formations (Gaunts would Lurk, Fexes would Feed). |
|
| Author: | BlackLegion [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
Correct. Lictors would Lurk too which would make them absolute useless in Epic. But well Broods don't automatically Lurk/Feed without Synapses. If there are no Synapses in range they have to pass a Leadership test to act as the HiveMind (= the Player) wants. If they fail their Leadership test then then will fall to their Instinctive Behaviour and Lurk/Feed. Lictors have maximum Leaderhsip value (10) while Gaunts have a relatve low one (6). Carnifexes aren't much better (7, same as a Guardsman). YOu have toroll 2D6 and add them together. The result has to be the Leadership value or below in order to pass. If you score higher you fail the test. An Iniative penalty for loosing their Synapses would represent this just fine. Creatures with a high Leadership value in Wh40k which form Swarms in Epic with only this creature could have a better Initiative rating from the beginning (= Independend Swarms). So something like this: Swarms with Synapses and Genestealers Swarms*: Initiative 1+ Swarms without Synapse: Initiative 3+ Swarms without Synapse but high independence (Lictors, Bio-Titans, Bio-WarEngines): Initiative 2+ *as they don't follow the Instinctive Behaviour rules. |
|
| Author: | Chroma [ Thu Apr 15, 2010 11:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
BlackLegion wrote: Correct. Lictors would lurk too which would make them absolute useless in Epic. Well, they now have guns! Six inch range "guns"... *laugh* |
|
| Author: | angron [ Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:53 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Thoughts on Nids |
Ok played two games last night against Spectrar Ghost, and the rule never came into effect. I played the list in my first post, he played Malakai's new eldar legion of death and Steel legion. I always had my formations set as gaunts in front of raveners in front of synapse and marched with their first activations. I think that being half way across the board and throwing up a good troop screen helped in the synapses survivability. When I assaulted I kept my synapses in firefight, not intentionally, but that is where they reached with their movement. That ended up being an advantage because everything in front of them would die and they are immune to hack down being fearless. I actually , and I think SGhost will agree, think that the common broods should be cheaper. They die in droves and without spawning you get whittled down as you cross the board. I occasionally checked to see what would happen if I spawned and I would get one or two stands back which is not worth the extra rule. We didn't see a lot of problems with the list. The first game against the eldar I won 3 to 0 and the second game versus IG it went 4 turns to victory points and I lost by a lot. |
|
| Page 1 of 3 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|