Re: [NetEpic ML] Tyranids vs Squats

From: ramospeter <primarch_at_...>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:36:36 -0000

Angel wrote:

>>But wipping out two units of the same point cost from
>>different armies *should* be equally easy or difficult.
>
>
>Agreed. If one army is harder to wipe out than another of the same
>point cost, then the cost needs to be adjusted. That's the whole
>reason for having points in the first place.
>
>>Actually, it's not Squats who are the most difficult to wipe out at
>
>all.
>
>>Their units are quite few in numbers. But think about wiping out
>
>*gasp* a
>
>>complete ork clan... THAT is difficult.
>
>
>Especially if the clan has been boosted with extra Boyz or Nobz. In
>a game last week I had a Goff clan with four extra Boyz, that made 27
>stands (fits neatly into 9 battlewagons for a total of 1050 pts). I
>think the BP is 14 for that lot? Can't check, I'm at work. If the
>Goffs do break and run, how can the Nids destroy 13 fleeing stands
>before they leave the battle?
>
Hi!

Interesting topic guys!

I'll weigh in my view on this. I have played Tyranids versus Squats
quite extensively. In fact its a quite fun combination since they are
at the opposite ends of the spectrum. One is a close combat army with
little long range heavy hitting firepower and the other is the total
contrary.

I understand Alber'ts concern, I had it too, but in actual play it
doesn't pan out. For those who play and have played against squats,
the infantry companies are notoriously hard to break, much more so
than the break point entails. In 15 years of playing epic I have seen
a whole squat brotherhood complete wiped out only once. Why? when you
play against tyranids you tactics change. Usually, when up against
another non-tyranid opponent, borken units are fodder to be thrown
into battle or lost for an advantage. The opponent has the VP's for
them, so you lose nothing. Against Tyranids, its a whole new
perspective. You need to worry about those broken units because
otherwise it costs you the game. Of course its relatively easy to pull
them out and hide them behind (or in) squat super heavies and deny
those bonus VP's. The effort in denying those units is definitely
greater than the tyranid players effort in trying to eliminate them.

It is ture that once broken the effort to "wipe out" may not be
greater or even easier since squat units are smaller, but the effort
to get the "first break" is HUGE. Remember that tyranids aren't the
greatest shooters, so most casualties are close combat, but closing
that range against one of the shootiest armies in the game is real
hard against a good opponent. So I view the second bonus as fair since
the initial effort is so great.

In fact I could make several good arguments that the squat break point
and VP yield is "unfair" for the tyranids since its so difficult for
them to wipe out squat units fully.

Its one of those things that on paper seems unfair, but in practice it
works out fine. In fact my experience in win/loss ration in games
between squats and tyranids, the squats usually win.

I suggest trying out games between them and reporting the findings to
compare data to see if my experiences are just a fluke or have any
validity.

Peter
Received on Thu Nov 27 2003 - 14:36:36 UTC