Why?

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread

Why the attitude?

But if you Really want an argument, open your 40k tau codex, page 16. And 22. And 39. And 48. And probably more I've overlooked.

_________________
Let there be code.

I've clashed with SK in the past but the only attitude on this thread is coming from you Parintachin with you dismissal of any discussions.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

Really? How so?

The Vespids are in the Tau codex.

Somehow you've convinced yourselves that they don't belong in the Epic lists.
The arguments give make no sense, and you don't want them questioned or looked at.

I am asking what every single 40k player who'd Glance at that list would ask: Where's the Vespids.

I'm being constructive about it: I offered a solution that would not be against the spirit of the current Tau list, which I happen to think is quite good.

So, once more: What gives? What's the holdup?

And why is asking obvious questions met with this kind of bullshit?

_________________
Let there be code.

Also, I don't dismiss discussion: I invite it.

_________________
Let there be code.

Really

And why is asking obvious questions met with this kind of bullshit?
They could, and should, be in the next version of the tau list.
I honestly don't see how that is even an argument against it.
It's wrong because it's new??

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

I am the one instigating debate here.

If I didn't, I'd have shut up and not posted my ideas here.

People here seem very hard set against that; and anything even remotely new is met by a wall of .. well read the damn thread Steve.

_________________
Let there be code.

Posts like this:

"They used to be in the main list but were removed for several reasons; Lack of models, lack of usage and the feeling that they plugged a gap that shouldn't be plugged."

"They won't go back into the now finalised main list, but they'd be a good unit for an auxiliaries themed variant list."

That's designed to shut me up. Let's take it apart, shall we?


"They used to be in the main list but were removed for several reasons; Lack of models, lack of usage and the feeling that they plugged a gap that shouldn't be plugged."
That's some very vague arguments.

"Lack of models": Apart from a pittance on the ForgeWorld site, there are really no official Tau models out there now. There are, however, several lines of quite servicable proxies, and more coming in. There's ebay too, but that gets silly expensive. I've seen Kroot go for £15 for 4 stands ...

"Lack of usage": As they're not in the list, noone CAN use them.

"The feeling that they plugged a gap that shouldn't be plugged": That's a failure of designing rules that complement the list. And something that I'm sure that the great minds on this board can overcome, if we can somehow engage them.

"They won't go back into the now finalised main list, but they'd be a good unit for an auxiliaries themed variant list."
This is a line with the perfectly obvious intention of shutting down the discussion.
What zombocom here's really saying is: Shut up. The list is "finalized". Even though there's a 5 page discussion thread adjustments.

The list is obviously not finalized.

_________________
Let there be code.

No one's saying shut up.

The main list is "Approved", and adding a new and untested unit will certainly drop it back to Developmental. While there is sense in trying to mirror 40k to a degree, whether the benefits outweigh the drawbacks needs to be assessed. If this new unit does more or less what Tau already do, is it needed? If it is an Engage specialist in an army whose achilles heel is Engages, is it potentially unbalancing?

These are legitimate concerns, and while you may not agree with the conclusions others have reached on them, getting belligerant about it won't promote healthy discussion. Advancing arguments as to why they require inclusion, fixes to concerns, and/or playtesting your proposed stats will. I have no interest in how this plays out; don't play Tau. I do have an interest in keeping the atmosphere here as freindly as possible. Thanks.

_________________
SG

Ghost's Paint Blog, where everything goes that isn't something else.

Really? Doesn't feel that way.

I'd appreciate an open atmosphere, where ideas are not shot down without good argument.

I'm not the one being hostile here. I'm the one trying to get some progress.

The argument for their inclusion is simple; I'll state it again: They're in the codex.
The Tau list has precious few choices as is, variety would be welcome.

This blank refusal to even discuss this baffles me.


Your point on the list being approved, and it being a bit of a process to redo that is actually a pretty good one.
Yet there's a 5-page discussion on list adjustments.

So; how does one go about changing a list?

_________________
Let there be code.

I realise this does not solve your list concern above, but it gets them on the table and i doubt many would complain:

You could always proxy them, using any vespid minis you have to represent other units in the tau list (stealth suits?). Proxy them for tournament play, use your rules with opponents' consent in friendly play, same as you would with IG tank variants with no home.

_________________
AFK with real life, still checking PMs

The current Tau review is more a minor review looking at a stable list, I do not intend to add any new formations to the army as that is a major change.

With specific regards to Vespids - they are indeed in the current Tau codex, which I believe is a Tau Empire Codex which represents the Tau at a slightly more advanced time line than the third phase list which has been adopted as the core Tau list here. Or at the very least it represents the Tau empire as a whole when the Third phase list may represent a specific set of expansive engagements following the retreat of the Damocles crusade.

A direct translation of Vespid abilities into epic gives fire fight specialists which would be very difficult to balance in the Third Phase Tau list.

Now other stats could be tried, using slightly forced representations of a more close range shooting style. but what does that really add to a list that is already balanced, offers a number of playstyles and options and does not really represent a time when the Vespids were commonly available troops to a Tau Shas'o.

To me a 0-1 Vespid formation would make a very good addition to any variant list (other than Farsight), it would make a nice fast scout formation for a tank style list, an obvious choice in a more alien auxillary style list but could also be added to a later style list that focus's on more recent Tau developments such as the newer forgeworld battlesuits.

They however will not be introduced to the third phase list at this stage and I am sorry if that either does curtail discussion on them or is felt to be a lack of discussion.

Sugestion:
Wait for the news Codex Tau. Rumours say thet there will be plenty of new stuff. With this stuff you could design a "current" Tau list including Vespids.

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

Epic lists are almost closer to historical lists, representing the forces in a specific battlezone rather than those used wildly - and the 3rd Phase Expansion List is almost a Tarosian war list largely due to those being the models FW made and it being the only real detailed guide on how the Tau fight a war. And there weren't Vespid at that time.




Said it before and been echoed by a couple, best bet would be to include them in the Armoured list, where they'll actually play a more significant role and won't struggle to find a niche that isn't filled by something better. That list is also in the early stages of development (to the point where units are still be added) so is in the right stage to think about including the Vespid. On top of that, there's no Kroot in that list so adding the Vespid there would be a way of keeping the 'Empire' bit of the Tau Empire rather than just sticking with pure Tau.

Epic army lists aren't generally intended to be direct reflections of the current codices. Or, more accurately, they're not intended to remain direct reflections of the current codices. Some are when they are created.

There are a variety of reasons for this:
1) New units usually lack models.
2) Adding new units (and rebalancing them) requires testing the list further, and thus makes the already-imposing task of keeping things balanced even more difficult.
3) Epic lists often have somewhat narrower focuses than 40K codices. Epic army lists will focus on a certain chapter, army, or campaign, while a codex will embrace a larger range of possibilities.
4) A lot of units in 40K make sense in 40K but don't work as well or make much sense in Epic. Marine Thunderfires, for example, fit poorly in Epic. As do Dreadnoughts, for an example that IS included.

But the end result is that new stuff doesn't get added to lists that are fairly well balanced just because a new codex came out (there are some exceptions to this, but it's a fairly solid general rule).

Vespids seem to hit at least the first three.

_________________
The Apocrypha of Skaros 1.1
Rogue Trader Expedition 0.4
The Horus Heresy 0.5
Night Lords 0.1
My Trade Thread