This thread made baby Jesus cry...


I am not sure that appeals to Jervis, as some looming spectre from the past, is entirely helpful anymore. He is that, simply a spectre, until Fanatic gets back on its feet (probably never) at which point he will probably, with a wave of his hand, destroy much of the hard work done so far anyway...

I dont know how the internal workings of the ERC function, but I can tell you that the sheer amount of stuff floating around is so damn confusing for anyone trying to get into Epic (as I did fairly recently) that people do not know what is what and by who and what has been playtested, being worked on, abandoned, official, unofficial, and any other appropriate adjective. To this end, would it not be an idea to have a disclaimer (on something like this Tyranid list) that it is a variant and the 'official' current playtest list is X and can be found at Y? This would really help new players to discover what is what (especially those that see E&Cs Tyranid list and cry that their old figures cannot be used, never realising that the 'official' list has them all in). If you are serious about 'new blood' (like me  ) then anything you can do to help them out is worthwhile, in my most humble opinion.

To get back on topic, personally, I am not so sure it is helpful to include only units that are in 40K in Epic - epic is an army game, not a skirmish game (40k), and so will have units not represented in 40k. Following that route, until the release of apocalypse we would not have had super-heavies in any epic army (and these things were taken from Epic in the first place) and (if I am not mistaken) there are units even now that we would not have following this philosophy (SM Landing Craft? Many many units from the LaTD list?). Conversely, I dont think Baneblades, Stompas, etc... are approriate to 40k either, unless you are playing on a football field (but appreciate that is just an opinion...).

As for your document, if you will permit me E&C: I perfer your slightly toned down Harridan (with only 1 MW attack), but at the moment it is sort of bouncing around on the floor like a downed moth, beating its wings in a futile attempt to fly as you forgot to add 'skimmer' to it.

To this end, would it not be an idea to have a disclaimer (on something like this Tyranid list) that it is a variant and the 'official' current playtest list is X and can be found at Y?

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish: http://www.box.net/shared/aii6v2xqu3

Could you elaborate on what you consider "crappy" about those rules in a new thread, lord_bruno?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Well, for me is very easy (sorry if "crappy" is too strong, my English is no native, I´m just copying Tneva82):

-Synapse Swarms: the EA engine is about formations, movement and fire. I think that non-fixed formations go against that. Tyranids are very different to other armies, but even being complete alien, why would they be able to merge or change their formations (swarms) while IG can´t merge heavily depleted platoons?? EA has a lot of abstraction and ALL armies could have the Synapse Swarms rule.

-Spawning: first time I saw this rule I thought it was about giving tyranid players a way to counter the lack of minis (since they are OOP). But, with the abstraction of Epic and the fluff of Nids, we could say that the tyranid armies use gaunts just as ammunition, there are plenty of them, so give them Spawing bringing them back to life. But, given the abstraction levels of Epic, we could do that with ALL armies in EA, just calling reinforcements from near areas, rallying scattered troops, etc. The only troops which really "resurrect" are Necrons (they are the undead of 40k, not Nids) as they self-repair on the field.

So generally, IMO, 40k rules exported to Epic are not neccesary "crappy", we can come up with "bad" ideas from inside Epic.

*And the TW being LV is another issue, but I used to play with the stats from the 9.1 list (the last one with TW being infantry, I think) just removing Spawing and Synapse  

** and I am pretty neutral here because I have never played 40k

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish: http://www.box.net/shared/aii6v2xqu3

Now to confuse people some more with variant lists. Fixed swarms and no spawning is a feature of the French Nid List so that's something for Lord Bruno to look at if not already seen.

It seems to me though that it doesn't really matter what succeeds the 9.2.1 list there will be several list fractures regardless.

You can't please two groups, one wants to keep and the other to lose spawning and fluid swarm rules.

I'd suggest a poll but list building by committee and all our plastic models will have decomposed by the time the list is finished.

Polls can help Champions gauge the opinions of the less vocal.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Just to pipe in here and ask a question, how big an influence has the spawning rule been in games?

I know from an opponents view, if they only get rid of 3 bases and they all come back it is a little demoralizing (as it would be facing a nid force in the flesh), however when the casualties build up (and they most certainly will), getting 2-6 models back (if that) across the whole army (as they are not all 1 spawning point), does not really effect the battle much at all IMO.

So just wondering whether this view is coming from actual games being played with the rules or just from reading the rules?

Playing the game without the rule really does not count as a playtest of the rule I'm afraid.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

And allow those that do not play with/against the force or the rule to have a vote to effect the greater game for those of us actually trialling the list. Not sure if a poll would be a fair thing as then it allows personal prejudice for no other reason as "because I don't like it" with no reasons as to why.  

At the end of the day, as long as I get to use my minis, then I will play whatever list eventuates I guess as I trust the AC to provide an entertaining list.

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Opponents of the Tyranid armies should have just as much of an opinion as the owners of the Tyranid armies ; as a (minor) army champion, I'm a firm believer in using polls to help inform me how best to guide the list that has been entrusted to me.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I agree, hence my post was adjusted to plays with/against.

It is those that have no intention of playing the list, or against it, that have the silent vote (which may actually form the majority in this case) to effect the direction of the list.

I would much prefer a thread where people have to state what direction they want such a list to go in, what needs to be removed, and most importantly - why. Without this, a poll, whilst useful for an AC to decide a change based on a few set criteria, is just a popularity contest.

1. Collate the information from all the discussions,
2. get people to state exactly what it is they have a problem list and why,
3. engage everyone involved in debate for a set time period
4. Collate the few points to be voted on
5. Run the poll

This is as fair as I can see it being done

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

In my recent games, spawning has proven very useful in some games and just a nice bonus in others (which makes sense due to its random nature).  

In most cases, it's led to a continual respawning of raveners so as to keep synapse protected.  That's the most important use, imo, again leading to the question of why raveners are the lynchpin of the list.

So you're using it defensively to protect Synapse instead of offensively to bulk up swarms to make attacks?  

If you're close to the enemy, that means you're getting a single Ravener, even on a max roll... sometimes three Gaunts are going to be a better choice, or a single Haruspex.  I don't find I'm "continually" respawning Raveners, I'll mix in Gaunts and Gargoyles if I need bulk or AA support or even a Carnifex or other "heavy" depending on the situation.

And, asking in a friendly way, have you posted any playtest reports, mkcontra?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

I have not, as I'm lazy :/ However, I've played standard games against Chaos and IG and couple of multiplayer games.  To be fair, I'm very new to epic, but these are just my observations over a small sample size.  I'll try to be more diligent in my next couple games to actually track results.  I think I can write up a pretty decent report of the chaos game as well; I'll try to do that this weekend.

Overall, I think the spawning rules in the 9.2.1. strike a good balance of being characterful, useful, but not overpowering.  They can be a great help in a tight spot sometimes, but spawning alone is not going to win you the game.

I think I prefer the randomness of the 9.2.1 spawning to the leviathan, as that's basically just adding hitpoints to your swarms.  The predictability  can lead to min-maxing.  

Overall, I think both lists are interesting and if we can try to incorporate some aspects of the Leviathan list into the 9.2.1 list, a much stronger list should emerge (in terms of robustness, not necessarily "more powerful").

To be fair, I'm very new to epic

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Just to pipe in here and ask a question, how big an influence has the spawning rule been in games?

I know from an opponents view, if they only get rid of 3 bases and they all come back it is a little demoralizing (as it would be facing a nid force in the flesh), however when the casualties build up (and they most certainly will), getting 2-6 models back (if that) across the whole army (as they are not all 1 spawning point), does not really effect the battle much at all IMO.

So just wondering whether this view is coming from actual games being played with the rules or just from reading the rules?

Playing the game without the rule really does not count as a playtest of the rule I'm afraid.

_________________
Epic Armageddon in Spanish: http://www.box.net/shared/aii6v2xqu3