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.

I'm taking part in a 2v1 siege map (1k of SM + 1k of SW vs 2k of nids).
The nids are the attacking side on a map that will have a layout similar to helms deep - round citadel on one side with a long wall extending down the board, behind the wall is a smaller gate into the citadel. The nid deployment zone is going to be crater heavy and have a few small ruins to give them some measure of cover.

The only thing is, this map is very advantageous for the defenders, so we were thinking of giving the nids extra points to compensate. What would an approximately fair value be?
Also, what would be a good amount of hull points/av for the main gate?

I heard somewhere that historically, it's required to outnumber the defenders by at least 3:1 to successfully storm a heavily fortified position.

I'm not sure how that translates into game terms though.

I think 3000 vs. 2000 would be a fair fight, assuming the Nidz player is smart and brings 2 or 3 Venomthropes for lots of cover shenanigans. If he's bringing a casual list, then I think 3500 would be better, assuming it's as defensive as you say.

What's the set up, short vs. short side on a 6x4?

GW actually has a whole rule book for these games, its called planet strike, even outlines what defenders take, and what attackers can take, might need some tweaking with current formation, and fortifications that you can field. But as some one said, generally its a 3:1, especially if defenders are utilizing a wall of myrter trench system

You can also have an "endless swarm" rule: each time a tyranid unit is completely destroys, it goes into ongoing reserve and come back from its table edge on the next turn.
This way, you don't have to try to find the correct balance in points (there will always be a decent number of tyranids on the map), and it feels more fluffy (you have to beat wave after wave of tyranids).

fresus wrote:
You can also have an "endless swarm" rule: each time a tyranid unit is completely destroys, it goes into ongoing reserve and come back from its table edge on the next turn.
This way, you don't have to try to find the correct balance in points (there will always be a decent number of tyranids on the map), and it feels more fluffy (you have to beat wave after wave of tyranids).

This might be the better way to go.

Upon reading this, my first thought was "do a nid swarm with repeating waves...".

I don't play 7th so I can't help with the rules but we used to play this constantly in 2nd in high school. My buddy's father had a huge well painted Tyranid force and we'd all throw out stuff on the board and just play wave after wave.

Great fun...set a pre-determined turn limit or time limit and allow Tyranid forces to regenerate (maybe only horde creatures and not Tyrants etc.).

We used to allow genestealers, hormagaunts, termagants, and gargoyles to respawn. I don't think we allowed anything else.

I've tried setting up a number of these styles of games. I've only really feel like it worked once. Here's what we did:

#1 - Huge points difference:
We had 2000 points of Eldar having to defend against 4000 points of Imperial Guard.

#2 - Have a huge defending bonus for the defenders:
The Eldar were protected by an AV14 shield with a massive 30 hull points. Results of vehicle destroyed would deal an additional 1d3 hull points of damage to the shield.

#3 - Have a small deployment zone for the defenders, and a large one for the attacks, but with no ways into the shielded area:
The defenders only had a 12" radius half-bubble for their deployment zone, and the attackers couldn't move through the shield (the edge of the 12" bubble) until it was down. The attackers were able to deploy anywhere outside of 24" of the bubble, which mean they could come from all sides.


These three things created the dynamic of a last-ditch defence. The Imperials had to penetrate the shield before they lost too much in order to overwhelm the defenders. The Eldar had to try and kill as many attackers as they could before the shield went down in order to create a fair fight once it did. Now, we had side-tables going on that could strengthen or weaken the shield, but they were incidental. This table was the main attraction.

How did it go? The Eldar won, but only barely. The shield went down on the 4th turn, but the Eldar hadn't killed enough Imperials yet either. That table was a draw, but the secondary tables turned the tide and resulted in a victory for the Xenos team.



For your game, I would suggest switching things up a bit more. Make it a wall of impassable terrain instead of a shield, but each section of the wall should be AV14 with 10 hull points. Tyranids should be able to bring a few, though not too many, Mawlocs and/or Flyrants. Space Marines that go to ground while on the Walls get a 2+ cover save. Make it 2000pts vs 4000pts. Give the Imperials a Space Cannon that's firing on the Hive Ship. The Space Cannon has AV15 with 10 hull points as well, and can fire every turn at the Hive Ship. Each time it fires, it deals 2d6 damage to the Hive Ship, which can take 40 damage (and nothing else can hit the Hive Ship, it's in low orbit!).

The mission for the Tyranids is to destroy the gun. The mission for the Imperials is to destroy the Hive Ship. If neither happen, the game's a draw.

Bugger... may need more planning than I thought

Consider the (old?) Apocalypse stratagem which causes 5 ones to hit to void a units shooting entirely. Bodies over Bullets I think it was called.

1k extra should do and I'd say 5HP for the gate.

I think giving the nids additional waves of troops is the best way to create the right atmosphere for a siege assault style game, then making each side have different ways of measuring victory due to them both having very different goals in the battle. Perhaps the nids have to take areas of the fortress of kill particular units in the opposition army whilst the defenders may just want to survive long enough for civilians to escape of re-enforcement's to arrive.

I played a Tyranid VS Imperial siege game a few years ago and made a youtube battle report about it, if you don't have time to watch the whole thing then the rules we used are explained at the beginning of the video and I've copied a brief rundown of them below.




This is a special narrative mission in which the tyranids attempt to break the last bastion of defence on an Imperial planet.
This mission has a lot of special rules but I've listed the main ones below:
The Imperials get a lot of fortifications for free.
All tyranid units that are killed get to go back into reserve, the bugs just keep coming!
Victory is determined by gathering victory points, each side different ways to get to these points and a different ammount they need to get.
Tyranid Victory Conditions:
The Tyranids win the game as soon as they have accumulated 5 Invasion points (IP's) meaning the defenders have failed to stop the Tyranids breaking through and consuming the evacuees.
The Tyranids gain IP's in the following circumstances:
+1 IP for each Defender Warlord Killed.
+1 IP if the Imperial Bunker is destroyed.
+1 IP for if both Bastions are destroyed.
+1 IP if the Tyranids ever control the Imperial Statue at the start of one of their turns (as with objectives).
+1 IP for each Scoring Unit that leaves the table via the Defenders table edge using the Brake Through rule.

Defender Victory Conditions:
The defenders win the game if at the end of a game turn they have accumulated 25 Evacuation points (EP's) meaning they have held the Tyranids off for long enough for the evacuation to be completed.
At the start of each of the Defenders player turns EP's are gained for the following:
+1 EP if none of the Fortress sections have been destroyed.
+1 EP for each Defender Warlord on the table (including inside a transport).
+1 EP for each Comms Relay controlled by the defender (as with objectives).
+1 EP if the Imperial Bunker is occupied by the Defenders.
The defenders also gain +1 EP each time a Tyranid Warlord is killed.

It's designed so the Imperial gain lots at the start of the game but will struggle as the game goes on, whereas the Tyranids can generally aim to get one a turn if they do well.

Hope that makes some kind of sense, enjoy and let us know what you think ;-)