2, 3 and 4 have been tested and both of us see them as more or less balanced with some eventual changes to come assuming we reach concensus on the units themselves. To be honest I don't see the need for an overhaul of either list at present.

1. unit stats and any special rules will be the focus of what needs the most attention. As Jaldon and I start identifying where the differences lie, that is where the most support and discussion will be beneficial.

on a side note I have been out of my home area for the past week and really only able to post a little. When I get back we will begin to roll out the various units in logical groupings.

once we reach a playtest state we will ask everyone involved to start min-maxing and breaking the lists to define the shortcomings.

For now please playtest the lists as they are and give feedback on what is broken, it will help us a great deal if we base the discussions of what seems to be in need of adjustment.

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)

I said it before and I'll say it again. I like this option the best. Even if it was just for the story elements that it provides.

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Given the uncanny way my mind seems to mesh with Moscovian's, I'll also vote for plan 'A.' I also think it would be a great place to put the 'Nid list when we write the supplement. I'll even proof read and help out any other way on the writing, if y'all don't mind.

So, on with the testing!

_________________
The problem with knowing what we want is we just might get it.

Robert Fripp - DGM

Check out the blog at Chaos in Miami

Who, me?   I'm sure it's no surprise that I prefer option B, but I'd rather see option A than no Squat list at all. However, whichever option is chosen, I will playtest Thurgrimm's.

BTW, where can I find the current Thurgrimm's? I can't seem to locate it.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

As Jaldon and I start identifying where the differences lie, that is where the most support and discussion will be beneficial.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

Erik, I think you misunderstand.  ePilgrim is ASKING OPENLY for your help (and everyone else's) but is identifying one area in particular as important: the areas where the two lists tend to diverge.  These could be unit stats, formation sizes, or special rules.  

I am not sure how you could be MORE involved without actually making the changes for them.

EDIT

DS, you and I are on the same page.  You still would get your choice of lists, only now there is a good reason for the change in the lists.

I do see the special rules as something that needs to be worked out too.  I still agree that the inspiring doesn't do it for me thematically but the multiple dice throwing for rallies is too powerful IMO.  I know leader was being tossed around out there along with the ignoring the -1 penalty for being close to enemy units., but there was some hesitation to do anything because you'd have to re-evaluate point costs.  In light of this porjuect possibly taking off though, a re-evaluation of everything is in order anyway.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Erik M,

Easy, there is is a difference between starting a new project and refining an established one.

Jaldon and I spent a lot of effort in keeping the Squats playable in Epic. To that end we are managing the direction the lists may take. We need to tackle the unit differences before opening this to general discussion. That is hardly the same as excluding anyone.

For a while both lists existed apart, we want to move past that and this will require more thought than our own opinions.

As far as I know every army champ and list goes through the same growing pains and development process. I hope you can show us some patience as we get set up.

Once again my apologies if my personal style seems curt or stand-offish.

Keep with is, I'm sure your opinions and contributions will be useful.

Ep

_________________
Squat/Demiurg Army Co-Champion (in cahoots with Jaldon)

Given the way most EA lists play off each other, I would say you should aim to have the unit stats similar between the two lists as well much of the organization. The difference in the lists I think should come through what's available to one list and what isn't.

It would be nice if you could agree on one set of special rules as well.

And speaking of which, did my question get skimmed over or just plain ignored?

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/forums....y264064

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I'm guessing overlooked. I like the idea of saves vs. hackdowns also. That seems to me like a good way to portray being stubborn in CC.

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

Neither - they don't know what their going to do unless something has been resolved quite recently.  Dave, I agree with you on your comments above.  

I throw this out to Jaldon & ePilgrim just because it is a nitpick of mine.  Skimming/fying machines (ergo the Iron Eagles) would never be used on a high-gravity world.  The one exception would be Overlords which operate off of different principles (relative weight of gases).  While they may have decided to use that technology AD (after diaspora) I make the suggestion that Iron Eagles remain off the Thurgrimm's list.  My guess is this idea will be shot down but I had to get it off my chest.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Don't make broad statements like that. If you don't like what they are doing then be specific and mention that you disagree with them but there are people that do like what both authors are doing

You != this group

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

I was wondering when that was going to make it's entrance.  

What I specifically liked about LI's idea was that it's the middle ground between normal and the Fearless ability. It thereby gives us something to judge it by.

Some might not like it because it only gives you a bonus when your formation has already lost an assault. However to me that's where a stubborn (short) individual would really shine.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Why?

Seems as if they would be perfect

_________________
Guns don't break formations. Blast Markers break formations.

Fair enough epilgrim. And I might have been peckish too.

I guess what I am trying to say is that perhaps the work has to be started from scratch.
For example if small units and 5+ save equals bigger units and 6+ save (which I for one feel is more correct) and how to get the more special units incorporated etc.

Later on there's perhaps room for the discussed timeline. Pre tyranids with large formations and past tyranids with smaller and more heavy ones perhaps?

PSYou != this group

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641

Because it would cost tremendously to get them of the ground.

_________________
It would be nice to get lightspeed,
so far we can only reach slight speed.- Erik M
092b85658e746a91d343e53509d357744e56f641