Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 2 of 6
  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:49 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
The upside of doing that would be far weaker formations, costing less points and allowing the Tau to field more troops than the steel legion.

How many troops do the Tau field relative to the Imperium?

Though it would look very strange if the Tau flexibility extended to not have armour or mechanised formations to challenge specific parts of the battlefield.

Incidentally would you say the Orks have a more Tau system of picks then than the Tau? They can add an unlimited upgrades of whatever they like to their formations (well, out of certain choices).

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Legion 4
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 5:23 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 5:13 pm
Posts: 36989
Location: Ohio - USA
TRC - KampfGruppe, BTW ! :;): ?Never liked the E:A List method ... preferred the SM1 templates ... Doug posted examples of some of mine, a few weeks back, including Tau. I do like the proposel that Clauswitz posted ... it should work. ?And after SM1 - G/W's lists lack any resemblance to real world TO&Es ... but, I agree, maybe that's what they were going for ...  ???

_________________
Legion 4 "Cry Havoc, and let slip the Dogs of War !" ... "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
asaura
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 7:07 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481
What if we assumed that an entire E:A Tau force is a single cadre? It would just be bigger than the cadres talked about in 40K. Then the whole thing boils down to just renaming the current "Epic cadres" and "Epic contingents" in a suitable way.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 1:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
That why I said some. In my mind stealths should stay separate. Since their role is completely different. But those whose role is similar (eg. PF and tetra), there is no need to allow them to be bought separately. Tau should combine only those that allow same battlefield role. Not the way of steel legion, where all is thrown into same box (ratlings and ogryns in a same infantry formation).

I am confused.. I thought the proposal was the the Tau should combine all the different troops in one formation a la Steel Legion?  Do Pathfinders and FWs perform the same battlefield role?  Hammerheads and Crisis?

Just curious but why would the Tau have the Tetras and Pathfinders grouped togetther?  In the Tetra description it says they use their speed and manueverability to reach areas that the Pathfinders cant.  Bunch them together and that becomes rather moot.

As L4 pointed out its been some time since Epic lists actually mirrored the background TO&E.  I can see that the Tau might well move their troops from battle to battle in the "combined arms cadres" Xisor describes, but when they reach the battlefield they would assume the kind of separate formations assumed in the Tau 4.4 list.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
colonel_sponsz
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 2:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 6:14 pm
Posts: 390
Amen to that CW.  I was just about to post pretty much the same thing.

Orde

_________________
"I'm smelling a whole lot of 'if' coming off this plan."

Tau Army List Archive
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 4:59 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Hena, I have to admit I don't really see the logic of the idea.  But there's no point in you and I arguing over it ad nauseum.  Perhaps, if I had IA3 and I could read the text I might be persauded.  I'll just say that what Xisor has suggested did not persaude me.

For me the Tau as a "modern, combined arms force" would use specialised formations working together, rather than jack-of-all-trades formations working alone.  And, again IMO, the current list structure represents that better than the propsal.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 6:33 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Unless our goal is to drive Tau players away from playing this list, I'm 100% opposed to the suggestion. The list is working quite well. Yeah - it doesn't mirror 40K, but its an accepted bend to work within the constraints of E:A.

To force a blend of specific unit types is to create more abstraction than we already have. Especially if its only for the quest to satisfy a single line of fluff depicting the Tau operating different than the Imperium!

Unless CS is on board with Xisor and Hena's attempt to fundamentally change the E:A Tau list from has accumulated from months/years of playtest development, has an initial demarkation of units/formations spawned directly from JJ's vision and not to mention is working quite well to reflect both fluff and effectiveness from many a Tau player - dare I say even a majority of them -  I plan to stay out of this one.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Xisor
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 6:52 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm
Posts: 515
Quote (Tactica @ 01 May 2006 (18:33))
but its an accepted bend to work within the constraints of E:A.

My suggestion here revolves alot around this suggestion. It has become abundantly clear to many BFG players that the Eldar Fleet rules simply don't work well enough, they break too much. The literally represent the hit and run 'style' on the Tabletop, but when looking at it: ?:80:

My point is that in terms of the 'theme' that a Tau army should adhere to based on the fluff put out by GW this is an unnacceptable 'bend'. It's too different. In this regard I sincerely think we should consult 'up the chain of command' about this one. If we don't, the development of the list could be carrying on in a direction fundamentally opposed to one that would be accepted by GW.

In this, I implore CS as army champion to get on the Astropath to JJ and the studio probing this problem further. I'd also push that, when dealing with this, we don't try and argue our cases *before* finding out the studio opinion on this. Particularly, I'd have Jervis ask around his other colleagues to gather a bit of opinion on this. It's not likely a particularly important point for the studio, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't take much effort on the studio's part to come to a consensus on the issue. Then folks here take it from there: Either as you are, in the same vein of the 4.4 list, or resolving to change direction and rejig the list.

It's alot of work, but it looks like it has to be resolved at one point or another.

EDIT: JJ's original vision is invalidated in part now. Why? Because the new Codex *appears* to directly contradict this.

Xisor




_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 8:02 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Coould you perhaps give an example of a 2000 point or so army (points not nessecery) in terms of formations and composition as I still don't really know what you want, unless its smaller mixed formations?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 8:14 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 01 May 2006 (20:02))
Coould you perhaps give an example of a 2000 point or so army (points not nessecery) in terms of formations and composition as I still don't really know what you want, unless its smaller mixed formations?

I *think* Xisor means having choices like this:

Contingent Formation (what we currently call a Cadre)

Pick any mix of 2 of the following Contingent Choices:
a. 4 Fire Warrior Units (+2 Devilfish optional) - x points
b. 2 Crisis Suit Units - y points
c. 3 Hammerheads - z points

Add up to one of the following upgrades
a. Shas'O
b. Ethereal
c. Shas'El
d. Networked Command Drones

Additionally, add up to three of the following Cadres
a. 2 Crisis Suit units
b. 4 Fire Warrior Units (+2 Devilfish optional)
c. 3 Pathfinder Tetras
.
.
.
y. 4 Kroot units
z. 4 Vespid units


The point being that the Core formations are more flexible, mix and match. (Point values not included above and example not meant to be complete)




_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 9:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Xisor, I appreciate that your goal is a better representation of the Tau as per IA3, and I applaud you for taking on a clearly difficult/contraversial endeavor.  So I hope you wont take it personally that I must disagree.

It has become abundantly clear to many BFG players that the Eldar Fleet rules simply don't work well enough, they break too much

This is not a good comparison.  The Eldar special rules in BFG being "broken" is not the same as the Tau in EA not appearing to match some background text.

I say appearing as I still maintain that the current list does in fact accomodate the kind of mix-and-match cadre being discussed.

Secondly, forcing formations such as that presented by Chroma would as Tactica mentions make the Tau very unattractive to play.  As the current list is (argueably) close to being balanced and has a character that seems very Tau to me it appears to me that we are trying to fix something that isn't broken.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Chroma
 Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 9:15 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
Quote (clausewitz @ 01 May 2006 (21:05))
Secondly, forcing formations such as that presented by Chroma would as Tactica mentions make the Tau very unattractive to play. ?As the current list is (argueably) close to being balanced and has a character that seems very Tau to me it appears to me that we are trying to fix something that isn't broken.

How would my "concept" make Tau unattractive to play?  All the current "Cadres" can be created using what I've put together, and then there'd be additional sub-Contingent formations that could be created for specialist formations like Pathfinders or Stealths.

I'd see there being Contingent formations and then "Up to 2 Cadre formations" per contingent, not unlike what we have now.  It would just be the Contingents (Core) formations that would have some more composition options... how is that worse than what we have now?

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 2 of 6
  [ 86 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net