BlackLegion doesn't like it as it's not 40k

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

Just because 40k has screwed up big time doesn't mean we need to screw it up in Epic. Do we really need crappy rules in Epic?

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

Ok, if we go with 'leaderless swarms' being restricted to Hold or engage orders (while waiting for some nearby swarm to collect them), this should take some of the sting out of the larger WE critters, because they won't necessarily be available (dead) to be respawnable.

However as Hena says, this still leaves Gargoyles (and Raveners?) that have 'dual status' depending upon which formation that they are associated with. One way around the problem is to define Gargoyles (and Raveners?) as *Independant* (so getting BM etc), but allow swarms to include these independant critters. The effect of this is to allow the composition of the formation to determine what it can do:-

• With a Synapse in charge the swarm can respawn;
• With only independant creatures, the formation can act but with reduced initiative;
• With a mixture of creatures the swarm has internal conflicts so can only "engage" or "Marshall".

This approach would mean that the Gargoyles and Raveners are not re-spawnable, which may not necessarily be a bad thing. However if it is required that they also respawn, then we would have to add the following :-

• Declare Gargoyles and Raveners both "Independant" and "Brood".
  
• Brood critters automatically get acquired by a swarm that passes in range. When this happens The swarm may not activate later in the turn (so acquisition works like WE transports embarking troops)

The point with these suggestions is that in both, the units behave the same way irrespective of whether they are part of a swarm or an independant formation

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

AGAIN, there is no such thing as an "independent creature" in the list; "Independent" is a type of *formation*, it is not a creature modifier/note.

Would this "independent creature" special rule have to be extended to all creatures in Independent Swarms?  I don't think people would want Genestealers and Lictors that can only "Hold" or had reduced initiative.

Would a line of "Brood creatures in an Independent Swarm ignore the Brood ability" solve this "problem"?  They have been "mentally reinforced" to operate without direct Synapse control or some such.  "Independent Swarms" are those that, tend to be, sent out ahead of the main body of swarms, they're built to "work alone".

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Would a line of "Brood creatures in an Independent Swarm ignore the Brood ability" solve this "problem"?  They have been "mentally reinforced" to operate without direct Synapse control or some such.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

There are no rules being "added", it's already explained in the rules, so how is it Byzantine?

It's *binary*... there are *two* options, dictated by the actual army list, it baffles me that this can be so tough for people to understand.  It's exactly like my earlier Falcon example, the same *unit*, but with different abilities based on the formation it's in.  I've never heard of any confusion with regard to that, so why is this so confusing?

I gave the little "flow chart" the Gargoyle needs to go through, how was that confusing; it will *rarely* come up at all?  The "Brood" special rule only matters if you're part of Synapse Swarm or dead, that's it.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Here's the relevant portion of the rule:

In the End Phase, after rallying and spawning (see below), Synapse Swarms are reorganized. Unless part of an Independent Swarm, Brood creatures out of control range are removed and any that are within control range of one Synapse Group become part of its Synapse Swarm.

What is confusing about that?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

I think you may be misunderstanding the concept, so I will try to put it in "game" terms:- Take *Brood* off the Gargoyles and Raveners, but allow them to be added to synapse led swarms at the start of the game. Is that clearer!!

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I'm just saying, that with a rule that is clearly already causing consternation (if not confusion) I don't think making the whole thing more complicated with the addition of extra details is the right way to go about things... Epic is supposed to be simple and elegant, with complex interactions arising from the interaction between those simple rules...

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I'm trying to understand how the above rule I quoted is confusing, it's very specific and very simple.

The only thing that *might* be confusing, and T_R_C is correct about this, is that the "swarm composition" rules should be in the "How to use this army" portion of the book, not the racial rules, and this will be reflected in the next version.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

I didn't say *I* was confused.  


But would I be confused if I were being introduced to the army list for the first time?
I reckon I'd be confused as to the design rationale at the least, if not the function of the rule. Indeed I'm still not a fan of treating the same unit in two completely different ways, seemingly against the flow of the background.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And I am only trying to find a way of using this unit in a single, consistent way - taking "Brood" off Gargoyles allows them to work as intended in Independant formations, while it is a small matter to allow them to be added to Synapse Swarms as part of creating the army.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

The main difference between the Gargoyle in the Independent Swarm and the Synapse Swarm is that it doesn't "go to ground" in the End Phase.  How shockingly "completely different".    

You seem to be a fan of hyperbole, E&C: "so byzantine", "completely different", etc, but it doesn't actually get your point across, it, again, makes you seem more argumentative than constructive.  You're not confused by the wording of the rule (and, hyperbole again, you seem to tend to couch your comments dismissively of the all-emcompassing "rules" when, instead, we're discussing a specific rule or sub-set of rules; that doesn't help either.)

The "design rationale" of "On the EPIC scale, Tyranids use the same creatures in different ways" is indecipherably obscure for you?  Because I've expressed that rationale before and it seems to be what the Tyranids do from my readings... and, honestly, there's actually not a lot to go on out there.

As to "seemingly against the flow of the background", care to back that up with some relevant quotes from the books, as Zombo would counsel?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

But it's simply the opposite side of the same "coin" here, Ginger: "How come I can add non-Brood units to a Synapse Swarm?" is, essentially, the same question as "How come I can add Brood units to a non-Synapse Swarm?"

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

Chroma: The rules aren't confusing, they're clear, but that doesn't make them good rules.

It makes no sense that gargs/ravs who start with synapse vanish when their synapse dies, yet gargs/ravs who start without synapse don't vanish.

We understand perfectly how the rules currently work, we'd just like them to work in a different way so there is consistency in unit behaviour.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread