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.

Seriously I've seen this happen time and time again.  As a Tyranid player it's one of the main reasons I continue to run a Nidzilla all genestealer army.

Reserves missions.  Think about it and you quickly realize how much of a blow this is to a standard Tyranid army.  Congratulations you start turn 1 with no Synapse on the table.  So unless your like me and only have 4-5 units of genestealers as troops or maybe all ripper swarms your dead.

Turn 1 they will fire into your gaunts, they will fail their LD check, and run 3D6" right off the table.  Even if they get some Synapse in turn 2 it's no good they've lost a full turn with an assault army, and they will more than likely lack the majority of the synapse they need.

To sum it all up Reserves missions are pure death for Synapse dependand Tyranid armies.  So I propose 1 of 2 rule changes.

1.  They give Warriors the Scouts special rule to insure they get to deploy in reserves missions.  For what they cost I don't see this having any unbalancing effect on the game.  It also means if you want to compete in large point games where Reserves missions are practically guaranteed you'll lose at leas 1 carnifex to take warriors if you have so much as a unit of gaunts.

Option 2 they change the instinctive behavior rule.  No longer will Tyranids out of Synapse simply mope around.  These are Tyranids so I propose this.  For each unit that requires Synapse that is out of synapse rolls a D6.  On a 1 it stands around staring at the scenery.  2-5 they burrow granting them a automatic cover save, and 2+ to their cover save.  So a 4+ cover save in the open, and a 2+ if they're in a building.  One a 6 they get whipped into a feeding frenzy.  The scent of food is detected in the air, and they move 3D6" towards the nearest enemy unit, and if possible must assault.
I don't see either of these as game altering all things considered. 

Warriors do get to deploy in Escalation missions (as do Zoanthropes) as both are classified as Infantry.

The *real* problem is that Warriors generally suck so nobobdy wants to take them. If Warriors were properly costed then all players could feel safe taking a few units and ensuring they will always start with plenty of Synapse on the table.


That said, the reserves rules really should have been made a bit less random exactly like they're handling the rule in Apocalypse (half your reserve units come in on turn 2, the remaining units come in on turn 3).

yakface is exactly right,

changing the dynamic of excalation (so it doesn't rip apart armies) is the top priority in discussing this dymanic

Said it many times, but Warriors just need properly costed guns. Right now they get that stupid double "taxation" for the S boost *and* the S boost to the gun. Make Warriors the shooty medium bug, and suddenly their role becomes clearer, more Warriors get fielded, and synapse doesn't seem so difficult.

Hormagaunts also need to lose the Beasts classification.

Escalation just isn't any fun.

We eventually cut it from our rules.

BYE

Zoanthropes are classified as "living artillery" and I'm speaking on reserves missions. Never see an escalation mission at a tournament to date.

I 100% agree. Even Jervis himself said he plays with a house rule that they choose half of their units to come on on turn two, the other half on turn three.

It makes the game so much better and involves more tactics and thought, not just dumb luck. I hate it when my pod army ends up with one pod coming in on turn two. So much for the centuries of training and precision strike capabilities of Space Marines. Instead, it is totaly random!

And i also agree that warriors need a boost to make them more appealing and to help out the little bug armies. Escalation is a killer for bugs.

Posted By Personification on 08/22/2007 9:08 PM
Zoanthropes are classified as "living artillery" and I'm speaking on reserves missions. Never see an escalation mission at a tournament to date.

Incorrect. Zoanthropes have a special rule called "living artillery" but do not follow any of the rules for artillery units and are not classified as such (see the unit classification list in the back of the rulebook; they're classed as "infantry" ).

Just like Dark Eldar Talos have a special rule called "Skimmer" it doesn't suddenly make them a vehicle Skimmer unit.

 

 

Posted By H.B.M.C. on 08/22/2007 5:17 PM
Escalation just isn't any fun.

We eventually cut it from our rules.

BYE

Escalation is fun if:

 

A) units are allowed to move on from the short board edges that make up your deployment zone, and:

B) You use the two turn auto-Reserves rule (where 1/2 of your Reserves come on in turn 2 and the other half come on in turn 3).

 

Playing Escalation like that really changes the game in so many cool ways. It becomes much more about flanking forces as both sides are able to use their Reserve units to come in from the flanks. Try it, I think you'll like it!

 

We always play the coming in from the short board edges way, but the two turn auto-Reserves rule is an awesome idea. I hope that becomes standard somehow. Maybe a book FAQ orsomething.

Well the reason I'm saying is it needs a rules change is while it's easy to solve with house rules at tournament it's killer for a non-nidzilla bug player.

Yakface:

Totally agree with the two turn rule being better.
But it still is a little odd (being forced to split things) but not as bad as having to roll things onto the table (I can barely get my Greater Daemon on the table as it is :-)

We (HBMC and gang) cut it because it destroyed any cohesion army lists had made.
Often times when armies got split and just lost their punch.

I'm glad that people have found it fun though,
played 2 games where it was great, but played to many that just made it silly from the start (which is why we scrapped it)
In some games and with some builds it just cuts too deep into the playability (and hence competetiveness).

:-)

I have limited and somewhat unpleasant experience with Escalation games, but some of my best games I've had fun-wise have been the old Patrol mission from the 3rd ed book. The one where you have one unit and everything comes in from reserve, or something.

Posted By yakface on 08/25/2007 12:00 AM

Escalation is fun if:

A) units are allowed to move on from the short board edges that make up your deployment zone, and:

B) You use the two turn auto-Reserves rule (where 1/2 of your Reserves come on in turn 2 and the other half come on in turn 3).

Playing Escalation like that really changes the game in so many cool ways. It becomes much more about flanking forces as both sides are able to use their Reserve units to come in from the flanks. Try it, I think you'll like it!

 

A) Definitely makes a huge difference, and allows for outflanking and tactics (especially with anything that moves faster than 6"

Haven't tried B) but it sounds like a great idea!  The very first 4th ed game I played was a 2 player vs 2 player, and my ally (Eldar) never got his Swooping Hawks in.  Kept rolling a 1 for reserves.  It seems very silly to pay points for something and *never* get to use it.

What do you find is the best way to split up the reserves into halves?  Is it based on points or simply number of reserve rolls?

Ie a guard army with 2 dropping Special Weapons teams in the HQ (63 pts / unit, 126 for the FOC), 3 separate dropping Vet squads at 75 pts each, a tricked out Hellhound at 135 and an LRBT at 163.  That's about 650 pts of reserves in 6 reserve rolls (both Special Weapons units coming in the same FOC), so do you split it up into 325 points (or as close as possible) for each 'half'? ie both tanks in one half and all drop troops in the other.  Or is it any 3 units/reserve-rolls in each 'half'?

I would think that splitting it up based on 'number of reserve rolls' would be the simplest, but it might lead to some unbalancing I suppose.  I could bring in 3 Demolishers on turn 2, then drop 3 minimum vet squads on turn 3 (getting 3/4 of my reserve points in on turn 2).  That would be the most tactical use of the units by far anyways.