Is that an opinion or the result of playtests? Would you have a problem with a Marine army that is allowed to move its Blitz? Or an Ork army that you have to outnumber on their half of the board in order to deny them TSNP?

I'm not trying to put you on the defensive but the VC are mirrored for a reason: balance. Even the EA rulebook points out that creating a scenario with mirrored VC will make it as even as it can be.

From your comments, it seems you're concerned with an army list allowing certain formations. While that's important I don't think it's a key issue here as variant lists can be made where those formations are allowed.



There is a problem if we want to use the standard BTS and Tie Break VCs.

For the former, it allows BTS (and other formations) go grow beyond their initial formation size and points. That will either make protecting your BTS easier (spawn back other formation losses into it) or be confusing as to what formation is the BTS (this formation is now worth more than the original BTS).

For the latter, it allows you spawn back cheaper units to get you above half for tie break. For example, let's say a formation of 10 AVs is worth 500 points and is reduced to 1-2 AVs at the end of the game. You could just spawn back 4-5 gaunts and be above half, thereby denying your opponent the VPs.

It's stuff like this that we need to stop from happening.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I would agree with Dave in regards to BTS and Fixed formations.

Although I am a little skeptical at the re-spawning, I can see why so I guess I am on board with that as well

As long as we get:
1. a competitive list out there
2. a list that allows me to play nids with the least amount of effort
3. a list that the opponent would be happy to play against again and again
4. a list that represents the miniatures that I have

...then I am happy

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

I think and hope that that's the goal of everyone

Unless I'm missing something obvious, most of these problems could be solved by focusing on the synapse units rather than the brood units.

BTS: Formation with the most synapse units, with AVs counting double and WEs counting their starting DC

Objective claiming/contesting: A tyranid formation can only claim/contest if it has a synapse unit within 15cm

etc.

As synapse units are much more limited, that seems an easy way to limit the possible abusability of any list whilst still keeping the unique tryanid flavor, especially the spawning.

They could. The point I'm concerned about is by adding rules like that we're undermining the balance of the tournament scenario by changing the game.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

I guess the one thing to add: it shouldn't be just space orks with talons (or different figures).

Exactly. What we're trying to do is to come up with a mechanic that allows spawning without interfering with the tournament scenario. The current system changes the scenario, and that's not what we want.

Would you consider something like "Only synapse units count for controlling/contesting objectives, and determining if your BTS formation counts as destroyed" interfering with the tournament scenario?

I would. You're changing the conditions needed to win and opening a can of worms with how the 'nid list plays against all lists written and unwritten.

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

So, after a weekend and a couple days, we seem to have a rough consensus.

1) Initiative should be a flat number, fixed bonuses and a penalty for lacking synapse. Nearly unanimous as to general concept (simple initiative + mods), opinions vary on the details.
2) Synapse range should be removed and replaced with Initiative mod. Nearly unanimous.
3) Swarms should be fixed at the beginning of the game. Nearly unanimous.
4) Mixed responses on swarms merging during the game.

=====

Initiative: I'll post a poll so we can get as many opinions as possible, but in the absence of a clear majority for change I am inclined to stick with the 9.2 version.

Synapse: The majority of posters favored some variant of -2 plus penalties over a flat -3. I'll post a poll to confirm.

Swarms: I think the "fixed to start" is pretty much settled. That only leaves the question of merging uncontrolled swarms. I'll post a poll on this as well.

====

I think Spawning and other Swarm structure/Army structure questions are probably best discussed in concert in a focused environment.

If everyone is okay with it, let's keep this thread on the command/control issues and I'll start up a new thread on structure and spawning (or possibly a thread each).

So what you're saying is you'd like the majority of us to stop agreeing and get back to arguing then?

I can get behind your proposed plan. Does that mean we're done with this thread now and will be splitting off the various discussions into the poll threads?

_________________
Dave

Blog

NetEA Tournament Pack Website

Squats 2019-10-17

Definitely.

What has happened to Chroma by the way? Is he still commanding and controlling the Nids?

Chroma is AWOL again (His baby is due about now I believe) and it's been 22 months since 9.2.1 was posted. I'm glad Neal's taking a hand in reviving the list.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter