One of those is a unit special rule, and can only spawn Gaunts. The other is the rule I was referring to in Apocalypse, and represents units coming in from off board, not being grabbed from randomly passing creatures. In Epic it would be similar to another formation coming into an engagement. When it comes down to it, the idea that three stands of infantry (15 creatures) could be randomly wandering around under the enemies guns and not be attacking them instinctively, but instead milling about until a passing synapse reminds them they're hungry for some biomass, doesn't sit well. The idea that there are 80 or so creatures a turn (average of 8 spawning swarms at 1d3) is downright unbelievable.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

I disagree, as do most others. Most people see the board as covered in nids, but only some of them being actively synapse controlled. Many of them will be underground, or dropping from spores in the sky too. Remember that the old rules had entire formations being removed from the board because they didn't have synapse...

Calling on 40k for evidence doesn't work at all here, it's much too detailed a scale for the type of thing that spawning represents to show up in the same way, though all of the constituent parts that spawning represents are there: Tunneling units arriving (ravenor, trygon, mawloc etc), mycetic spore drops, tervigon birth, without number, lurking units being grabbed by synapse, etc. They're all represented seperately in 40k, but here they're mostly abstracted into one mechanism.

It's not hard for me, at least, to imagine that a gaunt pack can huddle under some bushes until a hive tyrant passes by and gets them back into the fight. Remember that the Epic board is big - they aren't going to go running around wildly to look for prey they can't see.

Heh, that could be a cool idea for a scenario...the Nid player places several objectives that contain feral nids that will attack when the enemy approaches, but otherwise they stay in place, maybe until a synapse picks them up.

Like I said, I'm not under the illusion I am part of the majority here. But I do wonder whether the rule/concept is so ingrained at this point we can't see the forest for the trees.

I should add that a physical spawning pool, like an objective replacement a la Eldar Portals, or a specific unit, like Tervigon or Dominatrix, that allowed spawning, would be fine with me. It's "the board is covered in invisible Tyranids" that bothers me.

I know that's not really the case, but the fact is they can't be shot until they reach spawning range and are under control of the hive mind. Some spawn within engage range of the enemy, when their instinctive behavior to attack should have already kicked in. It feels as if the Hive Mind Umbrella(tm) has less basis in the fluff than in keeping spawning going as a rule. And the rule is proving to be very difficult, if not impossible, to balance.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

I used to be of the same opinion but came around.



I have such Brood Nests in the Leviathan list that add to spawning nearby.



Which is why Jaldon is proposing not to allow spawned units to be placed within 15cm of the enemy.



There's lots of basis in the fluff, see all the "spawning mechanisms" in 40k I mentioned above, which are all merged into a single mechanism here.

Half of those spawning mechanisms are represented seperately in Epic as well. Tunneling, Mycetic drops, Tervigon spawning (albiet as part of the larger spawning framework), without number (Combined assault), all are represented on top of spawning. That leaves us with lurkers, and as you mentioned, merging and dissolution of uncontrolled swarms no longer happens in Epic.

But I've said my part, and will merge into the background, like a Lictor. At least for now...

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Just checked the 2008 handbook:
2.1.3 Disposable
Some units are seen by their allies as expendable. This may be because the units are specifically created to sacrifice themselves, because the units are simply not valued, or for a number of other reasons. Disposable units do not generate Blast Markers when they are removed as casualties. This includes special effects which create Blast Markers when the Disposable unit is targeted, i.e. when hits
are allocated to the unit. Unless otherwise noted, Disposable units DO count as casualties for the purposes of assault resolution (1.12.7).

Whereas your Expendable reads:
Expendable
Expendable units do generate a blast marker when they are removed as casulties. This includes special effect weapons that generate blast markers when an expendable unit is targeted. Expendable units do count as causlties for the purpose of assault resolution.

So what's the point of saying something is expendable if it doesn't do anything that a normal unit does anyway? Generate blast markers, count as assault resolution... everything like normal. So what am I missing?

_________________

Probably the "not" which is missing after the first "expendable units do..."

At least I'm pretty sure that it should be there, but not after the second one.

Yep, Expendable creatures do NOT generate blast markers but DO count for combat res ... it's just a typo

The spawning rules are worded in a slightly confusing way with extensions that have been discussed in this thread not incorporated in a clear manner. I'm using the following wording which should match the functionality in a clearer manner.

Spawning: After a formation with at least one synapse unit regroups or attempts to rally it may spawn. Roll a number of dice based on the following modifiers:
Formation is not broken 1D3
There are no enemy units within 30cm 2D3
Broken formations may not spawn. The total rolled is the number of spawn points available to the formation. Destroyed brood units may be returned to play using the following costs:
Infantry Unit 1 Spawn Point
Light Vehicle Unit 2 Spawn Points
Armoured Vehicle Units 3 Spawn Points
A Spawning formation must return units from its own formation first. If at full strength the formation may Spawn dead units from other formations. The spawned units are placed in coherency with the rest of the formation, and are then treated as part of the formation for the rest of the game.
In the end phase, after rallying takes place, all understrength formations with Synapse units must Spawn back as many units as they can. Full strength formations may spawn if the player wishes. Understrength formations must all spawn before full strength formations.
For the purposes of the Grand Tournament Scenario, Tie Breaker calculations should be based on the starting size of each Tyranid formation, and the Break Their Spirit goal should be based on the starting cost of each formation.

arkturas's wording works for me.

_________________

Sorry folks been out of town working, and no I didn't have internet connection. I will get caught real quick here and get the latest updates up ASAP.

Looks good Arkturus

Sorry for the delay

Jaldon

_________________
I know a dead parrot when I see one and I'm looking at one right now.
Tyranid AC

I still really think a spawning queue is worth trying. It solves ALL the problems.

I finally had a crack at the new Nids rules this week. Now when summer is over, I will try to squeeze in monthly Nid games, trying other lists as well (this time I played 9.2.1 with a few minor modifications).



Overall, I support this change. Being so dependant on movement, the 2+ initiative left various swarms unable to move during the first two turns (which could leave them out of the game unless it went to turn 4). Nids also now have to put more consideration into engagements (which is a good thing).



It feels very Tyranid, although the lack of blast markers on swarms is a rightful concern for the opposing player. On the other hand, it enforces the "kill synapse" mentality upon the same opponent, so it works.



The formation pools combined with the new synapseless formations led to some changes. First of all, when formations without losses spawned, they spawned from other formations' casualties. When units switched pools, we decided to play it as if casualties always returned to its last unit's spawning pool, rather than the original. This was in order to make it playable, but it should be noted somewhere, I guess.

The other thing that happened was that my opponent (very wisely) let synapse-less formations be, in order to prevent me from spawning those units back. Since they cannot control or contest objectives, and are highly immobile, they become easy to avoid. I am not for or against this, it is just what effectively happened. More comments to follow on synapse-less formations later on.

A related issue (that is related to 9.2.1) is the rarity of uncommon broods. For this list, it is easier to field titans than AV:s. Since you can spawn them, it is not so much of an issue, but I would rather adopt a 1:1 ratio as in the Leviathan list and ditch the AV spawning. If more could be fielded, it would end up the same, and I think opponents would also rejoice. Even if we contemplate the "hoarde" of gaunts between synapse swarms as the "swarming" aspect of spawning, I think the hive mind would try to use its better tools and perhaps not give the gaunts too much attention.

I will try the Leviathan spawning queue and list next time.



If this is to be adopted, the free allocation of purchased units in 9.2.1 has to be abandoned (for simplicity's sake).

I still think this is a mistake, and found the latest iteration of the synapse rule (to have appeared in 9.2.X) much preferable. It further enforces the tactic the other rules suggest anyway. The ONE problem I found with it was when WE:s counted as their DC x synapse units. This meant that if you fielded a Dominatrix and stayed below 16 synapse units your opponent had to take it out. When it counts as 1, it suddenly comes with a much needed drawback. With the new initiative, I think Dominatrix is much more of a given than it was before.



Without the instinctive rule, swarming/spawning made a lot of sense as the units that went "poof" could find their way to a synapse. With the Instinctive rule, these swarms become part of a spawning-denial game. I think they should be able to at least contest an objective, so they pose some sort of tactical threat and has to be dealt with. Not decidedly for or against, but observing a new kind of game within the game, and not entirely sure whether I like it or not.

/Fredmans