Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

tneva82 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
All I am saying is that Nids were Fearless in 7E and they were hardly top tier. Being "Fearless" in 8E doesn't really change anything.*
But now the opponent is far more rewarded getting units out of Synapse range.

Umm there is big difference here. In 7th ed being fearless meant simply you didn't suffer issues when you lost combat. In 8th ed however there is no winner or loser in combat. There are simply casualties.

In 7th ed tyranids suffered 7 casualties and enemy lost 4. Tyranids lost and only they had something to worry about LD. With fearless that wasn't worry. Neither was situation bad for enemy either. They didn't take any test either.

8th ed tyranids still don't take test but enemy will be losing d6+4-LD models.

so KILL THE SYNAPSE CRITTER.

yet again the rule makes perfect sense, in synapse tyranids aren't iondividual orginisms. the fluff describes gaunts literally rushing in to kll themselves etc. for all we know there are other ruyles such as if a synapse critter dies, every unit in it's synapse makes a battleshot test then and there. (which would be perhaps unduely harsh but I could see it making sense)

tneva82 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
All I am saying is that Nids were Fearless in 7E and they were hardly top tier. Being "Fearless" in 8E doesn't really change anything.*
But now the opponent is far more rewarded getting units out of Synapse range.

Umm there is big difference here. In 7th ed being fearless meant simply you didn't suffer issues when you lost combat. In 8th ed however there is no winner or loser in combat. There are simply casualties.

In 7th ed tyranids suffered 7 casualties and enemy lost 4. Tyranids lost and only they had something to worry about LD. With fearless that wasn't worry. Neither was situation bad for enemy either. They didn't take any test either.

8th ed tyranids still don't take test but enemy will be losing d6+4-LD models.

So kill their synapse units.

Rumors are that IB is gone and instead synapse-reliant units will have extremely low leadership (around 4). If that's the case then being immune to battleshock while in synapse is balanced out by being especially susceptible when out of it.

If a ld4 unit loses 6 models (very easy to do with t3 6+sv models), they'll lose 9 more models from battleshock with average rolls. That's 15 dead models in a single phase.

In 7th being out of synapse made it so you lost whole units to IB. That was way to harsh. You want to know why no one took hormagaunts? They would eat half thier own unit, fail morale and run off the closest table edge.

 BlaxicanX wrote:

If a ld4 unit loses 6 models (very easy to do with t3 6+sv models), they'll lose 11 more models from battleshock with average rolls. That's 17 dead models in a single phase.

D6+6-4 = D6+2, 3 to 8 casualties, where are you getting 11 from?

BrianDavion wrote:
so KILL THE SYNAPSE CRITTER.

yet again the rule makes perfect sense, in synapse tyranids aren't iondividual orginisms. the fluff describes gaunts literally rushing in to kll themselves etc. for all we know there are other ruyles such as if a synapse critter dies, every unit in it's synapse makes a battleshot test then and there. (which would be perhaps unduely harsh but I could see it making sense)

Did I say do the rules make sense or not? All I said is that fearless in 7th ed and fearless in 8th ed aren't same at all(generally the squishier you are the more fearless helps you).

Sure wish people would read what I say before answering.

So you were being a pedant and making a statement that doesn't actually relate to the topic of discussion in any way?

 BlaxicanX wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
All I am saying is that Nids were Fearless in 7E and they were hardly top tier. Being "Fearless" in 8E doesn't really change anything.*
But now the opponent is far more rewarded getting units out of Synapse range.

Umm there is big difference here. In 7th ed being fearless meant simply you didn't suffer issues when you lost combat. In 8th ed however there is no winner or loser in combat. There are simply casualties.

In 7th ed tyranids suffered 7 casualties and enemy lost 4. Tyranids lost and only they had something to worry about LD. With fearless that wasn't worry. Neither was situation bad for enemy either. They didn't take any test either.

8th ed tyranids still don't take test but enemy will be losing d6+4-LD models.

So kill their synapse units.

Rumors are that IB is gone and instead synapse-reliant units will have extremely low leadership (around 4). If that's the case then being immune to battleshock while in synapse is balanced out by being especially susceptible when out of it.

If a ld4 unit loses 6 models (very easy to do with t3 6+sv models), they'll lose 11 more models from battleshock with average rolls. That's 17 dead models in a single phase.

and remember only warrior primes are gonna be able to be bubble wrap protected, 'nids could be in for a rough time vs the right armies. your average squad of warriors is gonna be 3 warriors with 3 wounds, as they are not characters, (but simply Tyranid Infantry) a Lemen russ battletank configured for infantry hunting, is gonna make quick work of that unit. and proably have eneugh heavy bolter fire left over to force Battleshock on the group of gaunts that where being escorted in.

yes IF the tyranids get into your lines with synapse it's gonna be a mess with high casualites, thats how it should work.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
So you were being a pedant and making a statement that doesn't actually relate to the topic of discussion in any way?

Well whatever allows you to feel better.

BrianDavion wrote:
and remember only warrior primes are gonna be able to be bubble wrap protected, 'nids could be in for a rough time vs the right armies. your average squad of warriors is gonna be 3 warriors with 3 wounds, as they are not characters, (but simply Tyranid Infantry) a Lemen russ battletank configured for infantry hunting, is gonna make quick work of that unit. and proably have eneugh heavy bolter fire left over to force Battleshock on the group of gaunts that where being escorted in.

yes IF the tyranids get into your lines with synapse it's gonna be a mess with high casualites, thats how it should work.

It's going to be an interesting game of cat and mouse. The tyranid player will want to keep his synapse units close enough to the action for their buffs to work, but they're also going to have to be careful not to lose them.

tneva82 wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:
So you were being a pedant and making a statement that doesn't actually relate to the topic of discussion in any way?

Well whatever allows you to feel better.

I mean, it's a yes or no question. lol

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
That being said, nids being immune to moral is bad for the game, as is anything but a very small hand full of units VERY rarely.

Explain how and why synapse negating battleshock is detrimental to the game.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game. 7th ed was plagued by a bunch of rules that were supposed to play on moral and leadership. Shadow in the Warp, fear, moral tests. Armies paid to have those rules to no effect because so many factions had damn near if not flat out immunity to it.

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit. It will be a core part of their toolbox to make them effective. When Nightlords fight Tyranids you can take their unique benefits and throw them away. They don't exist. Nids are immune.

With my suggested idea that -1 penalty still applies. Nids in synapse will be leadership 9 with only 1/2 losses counting towards battleshock. The nightlords tools still take effect while the nids are still buffed against it. Their willingness to introduce this once means more of it will come later. You need a hard line in the sand that says immunity is not allowed or you can look forward to another edition of having entire groups special rules just being negated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stop using fluff to justify game mechanics.

The fluff doesn't matter. A balanced fun game matters. Acording to the fluff the entire game board should be coveredin shadow in the warp and any psyker who fights tyranids should be bleeding out his eyes and ears and going mad.

The fluff does not need to be represented on the table top as literal extremes. Functional, intuitive, fun gameplay takes precedence.

 Traditio wrote:
"Nobody is immune to morale," they said!

you, GW!

8th edition will not differ from 7th, there will be tons of "exceptions" you will see the day warscroll will be released and in battletomes/general handbook and the rule about tyr is at least logical, gw is always gw , there is nothing to do... that's why i dont play seriously since long time, any gw games.

 Lance845 wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
That being said, nids being immune to moral is bad for the game, as is anything but a very small hand full of units VERY rarely.

Explain how and why synapse negating battleshock is detrimental to the game.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game. 7th ed was plagued by a bunch of rules that were supposed to play on moral and leadership. Shadow in the Warp, fear, moral tests. Armies paid to have those rules to no effect because so many factions had damn near if not flat out immunity to it.

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit. It will be a core part of their toolbox to make them effective. When Nightlords fight Tyranids you can take their unique benefits and throw them away. They don't exist. Nids are immune.

With my suggested idea that -1 penalty still applies. Nids in synapse will be leadership 9 with only 1/2 losses counting towards battleshock. The nightlords tools still take effect while the nids are still buffed against it. Their willingness to introduce this once means more of it will come later. You need a hard line in the sand that says immunity is not allowed or you can look forward to another edition of having entire groups special rules just being negated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stop using fluff to justify game mechanics.

The fluff doesn't matter. A balanced fun game matters. Acording to the fluff the entire game board should be coveredin shadow in the warp and any psyker who fights tyranids should be bleeding out his eyes and ears and going mad.

The fluff does not need to be represented on the table top as literal extremes. Functional, intuitive, fun gameplay takes precedence.

Fluff takes precedence. The game will be fun recreating historic and cinematic battles from the 40k universe, and if its a bit unbalanced that's okay because its not a competitive game, its just some blokes drinking beer over toy soldiers.

I care more about fluff than the game, as long as something is fluffy its fine provided its not gamebreaking. Synapse is not game-breaking. Did you have any issue blowing away T3 6+ save before? Then you wont now. If you come equipped with the right tools, ie, Heavy Bolters, you'll be fine.

In the "shooting is dead" thread I posted about how this isn't going to be a "I shoot you all or you chop all my stuff" game. CC armies are going to hit combat, and rip apart units, and shooting will blow whole units away, but at the end of T4 each side is going to have a handful of models left. You aren't just going to blow whole armies away before they reach you anymore.

There will be no interesting game of cat and mouse. If synapse is 100% needed to maintain control (like it is now in 7th) then either units that we would loose control over will be rare (as they are now in competitive lists (because they are non existent)) or synapse units will be brought in such numbers that focusing on them will be a waste of your time (like I build my lists now).

Roughly 1/3rd of my units are synapse. I overlap synapse bubbles so nothing is ever really at risk of dropping out. I bring 1 unit of 1 zoanthrope and 1 unit of 2 zoanthrops, some warriors up the middle, a second set of warriors in a living artillery node in the back and a hive tyrant popping around picking off targets and dropping in some supporting synapse if need be (it never was).

So you can try to kill multiple units of warriors and zoanthropes and hope my HT is off on it's own and let everything else in the list run wild over you or you can deal with the problems that are in your face which allows the synapse to go unmolested.

Nids function through target saturation. Distractions and redundancies. I never have 1 thing providing a key role. I have 3 or 4. I don't bring 30 hormagaunts in 1 unit. I bring 2 units of 15 and I put them in your face. You cut down one I still have the other. Meanwhile biovores bombard you from the back, an exocrine lays high AP dakka. Warriors firing off a single cannon but otherwise being unassuming. Go ahead. Shoot the warriors. 15 hormagaunts on the charge have never failed to chew through the units I wanted them to eat through.

Assuming it will be as simple for everyone as "Just kill the synapse guys" is short sighted. Anyone with any list building skills will never make it that easy. You will have too much to deal with or too many synapse units to make it efficient.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Deadshot wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
That being said, nids being immune to moral is bad for the game, as is anything but a very small hand full of units VERY rarely.

Explain how and why synapse negating battleshock is detrimental to the game.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game. 7th ed was plagued by a bunch of rules that were supposed to play on moral and leadership. Shadow in the Warp, fear, moral tests. Armies paid to have those rules to no effect because so many factions had damn near if not flat out immunity to it.

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit. It will be a core part of their toolbox to make them effective. When Nightlords fight Tyranids you can take their unique benefits and throw them away. They don't exist. Nids are immune.

With my suggested idea that -1 penalty still applies. Nids in synapse will be leadership 9 with only 1/2 losses counting towards battleshock. The nightlords tools still take effect while the nids are still buffed against it. Their willingness to introduce this once means more of it will come later. You need a hard line in the sand that says immunity is not allowed or you can look forward to another edition of having entire groups special rules just being negated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stop using fluff to justify game mechanics.

The fluff doesn't matter. A balanced fun game matters. Acording to the fluff the entire game board should be coveredin shadow in the warp and any psyker who fights tyranids should be bleeding out his eyes and ears and going mad.

The fluff does not need to be represented on the table top as literal extremes. Functional, intuitive, fun gameplay takes precedence.

Fluff takes precedence. The game will be fun recreating historic and cinematic battles from the 40k universe, and if its a bit unbalanced that's okay because its not a competitive game, its just some blokes drinking beer over toy soldiers.

I care more about fluff than the game, as long as something is fluffy its fine provided its not gamebreaking. Synapse is not game-breaking. Did you have any issue blowing away T3 6+ save before? Then you wont now. If you come equipped with the right tools, ie, Heavy Bolters, you'll be fine.

In the "shooting is dead" thread I posted about how this isn't going to be a "I shoot you all or you chop all my stuff" game. CC armies are going to hit combat, and rip apart units, and shooting will blow whole units away, but at the end of T4 each side is going to have a handful of models left. You aren't just going to blow whole armies away before they reach you anymore.

1) I don't have bolters. My armies are Nids (first and foremost), Necrons, and recently I started building Tau.

2) you didn't address the massive fluff discrepancy of SitW.

3) If you really think fluff should take precedence you shouldn't be talking about the mechanics at all. I don't think synapse is "game breaking" alone. I think immunity to the core mechanics of the game is bad for the game as a whole.

 Deadshot wrote:
Fluff takes precedence.

Then you play Narrative, and he plays Matched.
Problem solved. Thank you GW for this awesome solution to the "WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE PRIORITISE LIKE ME"-problem.

I wouldn't be so sure that night lords would loose all their special stuff vs nids.
Right now they're all about jump units and messing with morale.

So NL could deepstrike assault with talons or whatever and toast those synapse creatures.
Once they have removed synapse, the (presumably) low leadership will be further debuffed causing any casualties to pretty much wipe the rest of the unit.
If they can reduce leadership by two, then even a single casualty will cause them to loose models on a 2+ and you're not likely to kill a single gaunt. Assuming they have only 4 leadership.

All I'm saying is that I'm totally fine with nids being fearless in the way they are.
It's fluffy and you can shut it down, so they aren't completely immune, and when they do loose it? Hoo-boy.
Army wide fearless is huge in 8th, but the bigger they are...

 Roknar wrote:
I wouldn't be so sure that night lords would loose all their special stuff vs nids.
Right now they're all about jump units and messing with morale.

So NL could deepstrike assault with talons or whatever and toast those synapse creatures.
Once they have removed synapse, the (presumably) low leadership will be further debuffed causing any casualties to pretty much wipe the rest of the unit.
If they can reduce leadership by two, then even a single casualty will cause them to loose models on a 2+ and you're not likely to kill a single gaunt. Assuming they have only 4 leadership.

All I'm saying is that I'm totally fine with nids being fearless in the way they are.
It's fluffy and you can shut it down, so they aren't completely immune, and when they do loose it? Hoo-boy.
Army wide fearless is huge in 8th, but the bigger they are...

Again, this idea that you will take out a single synapse unit and the synapse web will crumple is based on a fallacy.

If that is a very real possibility (and I believe it is) nids won't build their lists that way. It's going to be piles of synapse. Your night lords gunning for a single synapse unit are going to get hit by everything else still supported by all the other synapse units. Or worse, it will be like the flyrant/lictor/mawloc lists now. There won't be anything that really needs synapse for you to try and cripple.

People will build their lists by the most efficient and effective means possible. The idea that you will be able to effectively target the synapse creatures and everything will fall apart is based on the idea that the player who built his list is an idiot.

@Lance845



If you play Nids you shouldn't complain. You got a big boost, and any Nid vs Nid battles will be bloody good games. Tau have more than enough firepower to handle Nids. Necrons haven't been shown, wait a few days and see if Gauss is now D3 wounds or something rediculous. Either way, every army is more than capable of dealing with multiple soft and hard targets, and if you build a decent list, you can deal with Nids.

2) All the psykers on the battlefield are powerful enough to resist enough to fight. SitW doesn't kill instantly. See Tiguirius and Iyanden (all Eldar are psykers). Those who are weak enough to die in such a manner are already dead before battle begins.

3) I was making a point of you asking for a perfectly balanced and even game, which is impossible to create in the first place, and harder still when adhering to fluff. I'd rather the game be imperfect and fluffy than perfect but ignore the fluff entirely. Its just a matter of who wants what and I can just as easily ask for full fluffy rules at the total expense of balance, just as you say that fluff should completely go out the window for balance sake. Its a two-layer system and neither the fluff crowd or competitive crowd can win while the other doesn't feel rubbed wrong. In the case of synapse, I think it got the perfect version because its both fluffy and not broken. You say its bad but the truth is all special rules break the core rules. Genestealers running and charging breaks the core rule of "Can't run and charge" and Tau Fly breaks "If you fall back you can't do anything." The thing you're worried about is a slippery slope that leads to Deathstars and ATSKNF. I'm perfectly fine with one army in the game ignoring this element of the game as it suits the army style and fluff both, and makes interesting and fun gameplay.

Would it be more fun for anyone if you could simply shoot a few gaunts and have them be decimated by morale? It certainly wouldn't be for the Nid player, it'd be business as usual (ie, not playing) and it wouldn't be fluffy either.




Re; Narrative gameplay

A useless element of the game that anyone can do anyway. You make a custom mission or campaign and play. It doesn't change the core rules. Power Levels are also poor for this. Either make 2 roughly equal points armies or just take whatever or specific units, power levels are no use for anything.

That is is a (real) possibility, not a guarantee. We're going to have to see the dex to know for sure.
Much of that will depend on what the new detachments look like and the missions.

Ideally, a nid player would have a few synapse creature spread out to over the army and a bunch of non synapse. Balanced armies is what they are gunning for after all and I mean that in the sense of not spamming a few elite (as in good) units.
So between deepstriking and firing big guns at the synapse creature since they can't hide, you should be able to, ideally, gradually make nids crumble. Probably focusing on one area at time.
Nids should be able to take a a few hits without loosing synapse right away as well though.

There's nothing wrong with the mechanic, but it's not an easy one to get right. If people start using only synapse units then the army isn't well balanced.
Such an elite army should be optional but not required to stand a chance. Non synapse could be super cheap too so even if you loose a few units it won't matter too much.
They could turn nids into THE horde army for all we know.

We don't know how scoring/objectives will affect gameplay so there might be incentive to take a fair few non synapse units
You're not wrong, they could easily mess it up, but the mechanic could work just fine and I hope it does.
Nids could also simply be fast enough to be in your face so soon that you will be too busy fighting chaff to efficiently fight the synapse units. the best defense is offense right?

Oh and nids will be right up there with the rest of the factions in terms of inflitration/deepstrike/tunneling on turn 1, that should provide enough of a distraction to keep the synapse units safeish for a while.

 Lance845 wrote:

 BlaxicanX wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:
That being said, nids being immune to moral is bad for the game, as is anything but a very small hand full of units VERY rarely.

Explain how and why synapse negating battleshock is detrimental to the game.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game. 7th ed was plagued by a bunch of rules that were supposed to play on moral and leadership. Shadow in the Warp, fear, moral tests. Armies paid to have those rules to no effect because so many factions had damn near if not flat out immunity to it.

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit. It will be a core part of their toolbox to make them effective. When Nightlords fight Tyranids you can take their unique benefits and throw them away. They don't exist. Nids are immune.

With my suggested idea that -1 penalty still applies. Nids in synapse will be leadership 9 with only 1/2 losses counting towards battleshock. The nightlords tools still take effect while the nids are still buffed against it. Their willingness to introduce this once means more of it will come later. You need a hard line in the sand that says immunity is not allowed or you can look forward to another edition of having entire groups special rules just being negated.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stop using fluff to justify game mechanics.

The fluff doesn't matter. A balanced fun game matters. Acording to the fluff the entire game board should be coveredin shadow in the warp and any psyker who fights tyranids should be bleeding out his eyes and ears and going mad.

The fluff does not need to be represented on the table top as literal extremes. Functional, intuitive, fun gameplay takes precedence.

Almost every game has a way to "break" core mechanics. Fireteam Zero, Pandemic, Mansion, and even classic board games had ways to do this (Sorry! has the title card, which basically breaks the game itself especially if you do the mature version).

It is such a bad complaint. It's almost a non-complaint. It's almost complaining to complain.

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit.

Given that Space Marines never had to pay for Chapter Tactics, this argument holds about as much water as a holey cup.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game

Only if there's no way of mitigating it. ATSKNF was terrible for this reason, the ability to strike down Synapse creatures grant's a benefit and cost measure.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit.

Given that Space Marines never had to pay for Chapter Tactics, this argument holds about as much water as a holey cup.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game

Only if there's no way of mitigating it. ATSKNF was terrible for this reason, the ability to strike down Synapse creatures grant's a benefit and cost measure.

ATSKNF really wasn't a bad rule. The main hate it does deserve, though, is it ignoring Fear outright instead of providing a bonus.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit.

Given that Space Marines never had to pay for Chapter Tactics, this argument holds about as much water as a holey cup.

Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game

Only if there's no way of mitigating it. ATSKNF was terrible for this reason, the ability to strike down Synapse creatures grant's a benefit and cost measure.

ATSKNF really wasn't a bad rule. The main hate it does deserve, though, is it ignoring Fear outright instead of providing a bonus.

edit: right, passes automatically. My bad.

 Shadow Walker wrote:

 Traditio wrote:
"Nobody is immune to morale," they said!

you, GW!

You just need to shoot the big ones and the rest of nids will be confused, run etc. It is fluffy.

It is fluffy and as a Nid player I am all for it. Nid players now have to protect their synapse bugs but keep them close enough to the charging hoards to keep them in line. Opponents have to decide whether to prioritize synapse bugs --to break the army early--or the fast hoard about to hit your line and shred a few units (first turn charge looks to be a thing), or the big bugs that are slower but when they hit, they'll obliterate. My Trygon and Carnifexes might actually get in some charges in 8th.

 Lance845 wrote:
Anything that ignores core mechanics of the game is bad for the game. 7th ed was plagued by a bunch of rules that were supposed to play on moral and leadership. Shadow in the Warp, fear, moral tests. Armies paid to have those rules to no effect because so many factions had damn near if not flat out immunity to it.

Lets pretend that nightlords will have some bonus to battleshock. That when enemies suffer battleshock their leadership will be -1 or some such.

They will pay for that benefit. It will be a core part of their toolbox to make them effective. When Nightlords fight Tyranids you can take their unique benefits and throw them away. They don't exist. Nids are immune.

With my suggested idea that -1 penalty still applies. Nids in synapse will be leadership 9 with only 1/2 losses counting towards battleshock. The nightlords tools still take effect while the nids are still buffed against it. Their willingness to introduce this once means more of it will come later. You need a hard line in the sand that says immunity is not allowed or you can look forward to another edition of having entire groups special rules just being negated.

Tyranids don't have immunity to battleshock though, tyranid units under synapse do. Using your analogy, all the CSM player would have to do is kill the synapse creatures and the rest of the army will be ripe for battleshock diddling.

Your response might be that the CSM player shouldn't have to target specific units in order for their core rules to work, and my response would be that it's bad game design for an army to be so binary that they're screwed if a single core rule is negated anyway. It's just as bad for an army to entirely rely on one scenario as it is for an army to be immune to one scenario.

 Lance845 wrote:
If that is a very real possibility (and I believe it is) nids won't build their lists that way. It's going to be piles of synapse.

It isn't like tyranids don't pay for their synapse. The cheapest synapse unit in the codex is 30ppm, and you have to take three minimum in a squad. That's 90 points for a 6'' bubble.

I'd prefer of the games simulate the background story. SitW should mess with psykers, nid armies should play out the way they are described and people are led to believe, as should eldar and SM. Eldar should be exotic and use mobility to win a fight, not spam troops and gun 'em down like cattle. Marines should act as a scalpel in games, making precision strikes. Orks could have had the BC formation instead, as it would have befitted them more.

well assuming the bubble radius is the same. but yeah there may be some times in which it's more efficant not to bother with synapse. (such as sending a gaunt squad to hunt down a 10 man guard squad or something) but obviously that runs a risk. if synapse critters tend to be slower then non syapse ones that could also force some decisions.

I think rhe toughness of Warriors is going to hang on how many multiple-wound causing weapons we see the enemy use.

If, for example, Krak Missiles, Autocannons and the like are rolling D3s or D4s for damage they may be only marginally harder to kill off than now.

Although if high Strength blast and ordnance markers aren't splatting entire broods that would be a blessing.

I also have a crazy hope that Lictors may return to being the killing machines they were back in second edition. Being able to disrupt - and by that I mean kill to death - enemy support units will help our key broods to get across the table.

I mean really crazy wishlist would be for a Carnifex that is good in CC and incredibly hard to kill. Rather than the gun platform they have been for ages. :-(

 Lance845 wrote:

If that is a very real possibility (and I believe it is) nids won't build their lists that way. It's going to be piles of synapse. Your night lords gunning for a single synapse unit are going to get hit by everything else still supported by all the other synapse units. Or worse, it will be like the flyrant/lictor/mawloc lists now. There won't be anything that really needs synapse for you to try and cripple.

People will build their lists by the most efficient and effective means possible. The idea that you will be able to effectively target the synapse creatures and everything will fall apart is based on the idea that the player who built his list is an idiot.

Then he pays more for synapse and less on the killy stuff. Which isn't that bad result either.

There seems to be a little bit of confusion about my position and arguments.

I am not interested in being uber powerful. I am not happy if Nids become the top tier army. I want INTERESTING games. I want there to be a ton of back and forth. I want the risk of loosing and winning anyway, or loosing by the skin of my teeth for a really great game.

We don't have enough information to say one way or another exactly how nids will be. We have little snippets about a few units and a confirmation of how one of our 3 traditional army wide rules will function (by saying synapse makes us immune to moral). Not the actual rule mind you. We don't know if it's the traditional 12" bubble or if the range will be variable for different units. We also don't know how shadow in the warp will work... or if it even exists. We don't know Instinctive behavior.

My stance on the immunity boils down to this.

If it was simply really powerful bonus against moral then it's still a risk and other variables could make it better or worse. It becomes an element that our enemy can use, even if it's unlikely to work (and it should be. Synapse should make us NIGH immune to moral).

But the moment you say it makes us immune it's done. The loop is closed. There are no variables and the risk is exactly 0. Nothing interesting can come from that. There is no tactic for us outside of the strategy of bringing enough synapse redundancies.

It's a totally binary situation. Have it and forget about it. Don't have it and be able to do nothing to stop hordes from falling all over themselves every time they get shot at.

It's not interesting now in 7th to loose all your synapse by turn 3 or 4 and then sit through another 2-3 rounds of game play while you loose active control of your units. It's not interesting or fun for most people to win that way and it's not fun to loose that way.

The moment you make synapse into that binary system you have nudged the whole system back into that same direction. Have it and don't worry. Loose it and... well.. we don't really know yet? But since synapse has gone so far in the one direction I am pretty worried about the other.

Points cost doesn't matter. Paying more for immunity doesn't make it ok because it's still not interesting. I want to participate in the game. Moral is finally becoming a major part of the game. It sucks that nids, by their basic rules and intelligent list building, by building fluffy, are going to just ignore that major part of the game as though it doesn't exist. For them, it literally doesn't.