A counterpoint to that is truescale models for Tyranids don't exist, so a player is left to proxying their Lictor/Zoanthrope/Biovores models as INF and ignoring the basing restrictions, converting a bunch for their army or PMing people.

'nid plastics might not be the right size, but they do exist. Creating stats so people have to squeeze 3 on a base seems rather like a hard-line 40k interpretation when a precedent for making them LVs exists (the Attack Bike).

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I wouldn't expect that situation to last forever, whilst the 'nid plastics probably will remain OOP forever.


They're a lot easier to kill than an Attack Bike (Worse armour and Worse Toughness).

I put three Lictors on standard Epic bases when I built my army, and they fit just fine.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Heh, that's a page out of Gram Wendy's business plan.

If they're a lot easier to kill than an attack back we could just give them worse armor than an attack bike in EA.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

For comparison here the Attack Bike stats:
T4(5), W2, Save 3+

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

I resent that insinuation, especially since I've been arguing they should be infantry for about two years at this point.


Here's another thing:

Lictor : T4, W2, Sv5+
Ogryn : T5, W3, Sv5+

A Lictor is considerably easier to kill than a single Ogryn.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Also Ogryns have Feel no Pain which gives them an additional 4+ save.

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

There was nothing malicious in that comment, at least it wasn't intended on my part. I'm observing that if you make a list with units in it people are going to want those units, that's what the model is. What do you begrudge about that?

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

We have with the current models roughly speaking 3-5 Warriors to a stand and 1 Lictor, Zoanthrope or Biovore. I'd like to see all medium beasts as the same classification (having said that Tyrant Guard would be an exception and have LV in lieu of a special rule to represent shielding ability). If you had no models, just descriptions, I believe they would be Inf.

Infantry and LV both work for these three. They appear in singles, justifying LVs, but they also appear in packs and aren't that big, justifying infantry. 3 Lictors to a stand is an infantry unit, as a lascannon can't really threaten them. 1 Lictor to a stand is an LV as it can be taken out both by heavy bolters and lascannons.

It should be a pure balance concern, if we want the units to be tough, dangerous and expensive, they should be infantry. If they should be weaker and cheaper, they can be LVs.


How tough a unit is only matters when considering if it is LV or AV.

Again there is always the option to introduce Heavy Infantry as unit type.
- Can be hit by both AP and AT fire.
- Moves like Infantry (with all the cover benefits this includes).

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

(quote edited by the NO SPECIAL RULES committee)

_________________

The nid Mobility rule already makes LV do this.

It's the "can be killed by AT" and the side effects that has that we're against, not the movement effects.

And, again, I agree with Ulrik. It comes down to what you want to represent with the unit and how its capabilities work in terms of balance.

Agreed, and all the varient list developers have agreed that the tougher infantry way is the correct way to go. Obviously it's down to an AC to make a call, but it would be nice if we could work out a "definitive" set of infantry stats to suggest as the alternative, and to be used by the varient lists in the meantime.