Tactical Command :: View topic - What are the issues with Spirit Stones?

Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

What are the issues with Spirit Stones? http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=5693	Page 1 of 7

Author:	Chroma [ Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:41 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
Okay, people often say that Spirit Stones should be reduced or removed from the Eldar armylist. ?Why is that? ?What are the specific problems with them? ?To me they appear to be a half-powered leader ability. Biel-Tan (and all the other Eldar lists other than Saim-Hann) have no units with leader at all, and only the supreme commander of the list has it, by default. ?So, with "odd" numbers of blastmarkers (other than 1), Eldar will never be able to fully clear them in the Rally phase. Spirit Stones is a weaker ability than leader as it only applies in the Rally phase and doesn't boost Marshal actions. ?Space Marines have the option to get leader in almost all their formations, plus MW attacks, and other abilites, for 50 points. ?Imperial Guard, in a tournament setting, essentially, get free leader and MW attacks for all all their formations. ?Ork formations often have multiple leaders per formation, plus modifiers to Rally rolls. ?Black Legion and LatD have leader characters for "free" in almost every formation. ?Tau have recently been given the ability to add leader to their tanks. ?Tyranids don't need leader. ?(Sorry Necrons, just haven't played you at all yet!) Why are the Spirit Stones seen as such a problem? ?Is it just because they're "free"? ?If Eldar point values were increased (as most think they should be) would the problem go away? ?Is it because there's no specific Spirit Stone target that can be eliminated to remove it? ?Is it because they were added late in development without "adequate testing"? Really, why are they such a hot button issue? ?I can't figure it out.

Author:	Justiniel [ Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
I think that by and of itself it is not a problem, the problem arises when ALL the Eldar special abilities are included as a package.

Author:	nealhunt [ Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:22 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
Why are the Spirit Stones seen as such a problem?

Like anything with lots of special rules, it is the synergistic effect that causes problems.

Pre-spirit stone, the army was already set up to make it easy for the Eldar to "hit and run" like their rules say. They have quite a bit of ability to hide while still putting rounds on target. The army was designed to be slippery - as a "crush and melt away" army - but one that couldn't hold up to sustained combat.

There are quite a few small Eldar formations that end up benefitting greatly. Anything with 3 or fewer units/DC will always rally back to 0 BMs (and the Autarch's formation up to 5 units as well).

Spirit Stones, because it makes formations come roaring back at full strength, require Eldar opponents to pin and wipe them out or suffer, but that is exactly what the other rules were intended to prevent. The net effect is that the Spirit Stones took an army which would crumple if used too boldly and made it much more resilient. That allowed it to be used more "directly" which opened up a different sort of play style, but resulted in overpowering them when used as originally designed.

Is it just because they're "free"? If Eldar point values were increased (as most think they should be) would the problem go away?... Is it because they were added late in development without "adequate testing"?

All these are basically the same question. I don't object to the mechanics of the stones in general (though the background description/justification is rather bad, imho). The real issue is that there was not sufficient testing to adequately determine point values.

As you may have picked up on, I think the part of the problem is that there were some very vocal people involved in playtesting that either didn't "get it" with respect to the design concept or simply preferred to play differently than the intended optimal style. A lot of the development happened as the population on the boards was expanding rapidly and that kind of environment makes it much harder to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to commentary and results reporting.

Author:	semajnollissor [ Fri Feb 10, 2006 7:39 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
Well, here's what I have to say about the matter: Spirit stone bother people for these reasons: 1) When a small formation (3 of fewer units) rallies from being broken, they come back with no BMs. Anytime a formation can rally and come back with no BM's some people get irked, even with mitigating (point balanced) factors. It just seems unfair. 2) Some people believe that Spirit Stones are unnecessary. If all you ever come up against are Warhosts + WE's, then I can understand why one would feel that way. However, if such forces are typical, that tells me that the other available formations might be at some disadvantage that needs to be addressed. 3) Spirit Stones give the impression that the Eldar get to ignore some part of the core rules. This is somewhat silly, since SM's, Tyranids, Necrons, Orks, etc do the same. Personally, I think there wouldn't be any complaining about spirit stones if the eldar list were better balanced - they are just a convenient scapegoat. Would losing the spirit stone rule effect the eldar's ability to beat the crap out of SM armies? I don't think so, the eldar out class SMs in every catagory besides BM management. The formations that are the most effective under the current rules will still be the most effective if the spirit stone rules where removed, and they'll still be a problem. The Eldar list has a lot of advantages: hit-and-run makes the eldar list very forgiving, the original skimmer rules gave a decided advantage to the eldar, while the to-hit values on most of the weapon systems seem one pip higher when compared to equivalent weapons in the original lists (should a pulse laser really hit on a 4+, or a scatter laser on a AT5+?). To my mind, spirit stones are not the main problem. I do think that many of the current eldar formations need a points adjustment. However, that is true with or without the spirit stones rule. Since I think there needs to be a point reevaluation anyway, I'd prefer to keep the spirit stones rule. This is because I believe that the "normal" BM rules relagate small formations to the sidelines. Large formation typically need to be assault to be broken, while small formations can break from a few shooting attacks. That makes it extremely difficult to balance high-powered units in small formations, since they may spend the entire game broken. As for some of Neal's points, I'd like to point out that the Warhosts were already designed to be more rubust than a "typical" eldar formation would normally be. They have to be in order perform like they should in assaults. Also, they are the most able to take advantage of the wraithgate. The original concept might of intended that these Hosts run up, assault the enemy, then withdraw away from the enemy, but that never was the case in practice. The hosts set the tone for the eldar force to be a blitzkrieg style force, but the rest of the army can't handle that. Is it really unreasonable for an eldar player to want his falcon's to be able to be right there with the infantry, supporting them? I think the design concept went out the window as soon as people figured out that it was easier and more effective to rush up to the enemy and assault them, using the extended follow-up move to set up support for the assualt coming from the 2nd and 3rd retained activation.

Author:	nealhunt [ Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:12 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
The hosts set the tone for the eldar force to be a blitzkrieg style force, but the rest of the army can't handle that.

Maybe you are right in that the structure of the list might lead someone to believe it is supposed to work as a blitzkrieg force. That would certainly explain my overwhelming sense that it was a desire for the Eldar to be able to work that way that led to introuding Spirit Stones.

Too bad the army is specfically NOT supposed to be a blitzkrieg style force in the sense of rolling forward quickly over the enemy. That is way too "stand and deliver" to fit with the Eldar background.

The idea is that they are supposed to hit and run, strike and melt away, never facing a direct fight.

Author:	The_Real_Chris [ Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:43 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
The normal joke said about Eldar is that it is a 'hit and hit' force. Hit and run is a waste of a supporting formation. The eldar do have more 'leader' than anyone else. The guard has on average 7-8 formations, the orks have infantry formations with it. Marines, well, they have lots of problems Eldar have it on everyone and it is most effective on their small fomrations. On one hand it makes them far more effective as supporting formations - more than their counterparts in other lists. Was it meant to do this?

Author:	Jaldon [ Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:08 am ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
Weaknesses define an army as much as its strengths. The Eldar are supposed to be a Hit and Run force that cannot survive much abuse. Before the 'arrival' of Spirit Stones, which occurred while I was away and off line, they fit this description well. After Spirit Stones they turned into a balls out, run 'em over, support a plenty, army with few 'real' weaknesses. Add in Holofields granting protection even in assaults and you end up with something that doesn't even vaugely resemble the intended objective. Making 'points adjustments' is like putting a bandaid on a severed artery. You may 'mask' it for a while, but the wound will still be critical to the patient in the end. 1) When a small formation (3 of fewer units) rallies from being broken, they come back with no BMs. Anytime a formation can rally and come back with no BM's some people get irked, even with mitigating (point balanced) factors. It just seems unfair.

Nope, wouldn't bother one snit IF it fit the fluff and the intended goal of the army. IG smaller formations with 'free' Commisaars do it all the time and it doesn't 'bother' me.

2) Some people believe that Spirit Stones are unnecessary. If all you ever come up against are Warhosts + WE's, then I can understand why one would feel that way. However, if such forces are typical, that tells me that the other available formations might be at some disadvantage that needs to be addressed.

Before the arrival of Spirit Stones these 'other formations' were acting like a hit and run army should, now they don't. The problem at the time seemed to be that the posters that wanted 'spirit stones everywhere' wanted the HIT without having to RUN.

3) Spirit Stones give the impression that the Eldar get to ignore some part of the core rules. This is somewhat silly, since SM's, Tyranids, Necrons, Orks, etc do the same.

No argument, that is until you reach 'Special Rules Overload' then it becomes a problem.

Personally, I think there wouldn't be any complaining about spirit stones if the eldar list were better balanced - they are just a convenient scapegoat.

The complaint, for my part, is that both Spirit Stones and Holofields working in CC create an Eldar army that doesn't need to perform Hit & Run to be effective and can therefore exploit all of its other special rules to the max. So this isn't a complaint about balance it IS about fluff and background.

The hosts set the tone for the eldar force to be a blitzkrieg style force, but the rest of the army can't handle that. Is it really unreasonable for an eldar player to want his falcon's to be able to be right there with the infantry, supporting them? I think the design concept went out the window as soon as people figured out that it was easier and more effective to rush up to the enemy and assault them, using the extended follow-up move to set up support for the assualt coming from the 2nd and 3rd retained activation.

It was much harder to do this effectively turn after turn, and survive the battle, when Spirit Stones weren't around. Now it is a standard tactic in every turn without any worries about the BMs going bye bye.

To be clear it is not a balance issue, it IS a fluff/feel issue.

Jaldon

Author:	MC23 [ Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:58 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
I love Neal's revisionist history of why Spirit Stones came about. The problem was having not with Eldar playing too boldly (how the hell did that become an issue, never was IIRC) but the fact eldar wins were more based on a 3 turn win. For basic Tournament play this was considered balanced. A win is a win and it didn't matter if iit was far more often 3rd turn than 4th turn. This was later refered to as 4th turn wilt. But this meant that the Eldar epic forces were poorly designed for any other style of play that couldn't be resolved in 3 turns, such as campaign play or any other extended scenarios. This left us with a "balanced" army that was broken for any other use. We looked at several solutions that would keep Eldar viable in the 4th turn without throwing off the army design. Enough of us finally agreed that where Eldar was starting to suffer was in the Rally phase. Eldar only have the SC with Leader and in no other forces gave us no special way of dealing with Blast Markers and many formations were left relatively useless. Eldar units (troupes most importantly) were designed small with numerous and/or powerful weapon systems. Each one of these suppressed by 1 BM had a far more crippling effect than on other Forces. Eldar Hosts are by and large Engagement forces so BM only account towards combat results but don't suppress anything. This meant the usual Leader solution in the usual hosts still would do nothing for the Eldar problem. But with all this, Eldar only needed the slightest nudge, a random extra Blast marker removed from a Troupe (or Host was sometimes nice) to make these formations still playing into and past turn 3. I know I was only looking about maybe 1 Blast Marker per 1,000 points each rally phase to make a difference. Now I know my earlier solutions were far more complicated than other variations I tried to pitch (maybe back from when I played M:tG). Jervis liked a simple to implement approach. He chose the Spirit Stones all inclusive answer. With publication around the corner all we had was a few panic weeks of playtesting to see if that broke the current games. Broke? even after all this time I'm not completely sold that it passes the win / loss threshold but there was no doubt it placed us at the higher end of the win side. That being quickly agreed apon, we knew we could look at this agian with ERC when even more people have played the list. Unfortunately, I still see as the greater problem is Eldar opponents and not the Eldar themselves playing Bold enough. You can't fight Eldar as you do the core armies. Eldar still die, break, and possibly rally as easily with spirit stones as they did before, they just bounce back strongly when they do rally. And it really aggrevates Eldar opponents when they watch it happen and make me feel guilty pulling it off everyone. But that is just game play psychology far more than game balance.

Author:	Jaldon [ Sat Feb 11, 2006 6:09 pm ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
The problem was having not with Eldar playing too boldly (how the hell did that become an issue, never was IIRC) but the fact eldar wins were more based on a 3 turn win. For basic Tournament play this was considered balanced. A win is a win and it didn't matter if iit was far more often 3rd turn than 4th turn. This was later refered to as 4th turn wilt.

As I WAS away during the arrival of Spirit Stones I couldn't argue against them I had to deal with them. Having the Eldar have to RUN to stay around and work hard at a win into the 4th turn (Which before Spirit Stones I didn't have a problem doing, so I still don't get it) FITS the whole feel/fluff of HIT & RUN.

Unfortunately, I still see as the greater problem is Eldar opponents and not the Eldar themselves playing Bold enough. You can't fight Eldar as you do the core armies.

Well I see the original problem as the ELDAR players who were complaining they needed Spirit Stones should have learned how to use the Eldar Army without them before 'gluing on' a half baked solution. You know like trying Hit and Run tactics instead of the now popular hit and re-deploy tactic. Besides being BOLD isn't part of the Eldar fluff/feel, Hit and Run requires they be sneaky not bold.

That being quickly agreed apon, we knew we could look at this agian with ERC when even more people have played the list.

Yep, upon getting back on line it was real obvious that both the Holofield working in CC and Spirit Stones had been 'glued on' to silence some disssenters, it was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw them.

I have had this discussion before and get tired of being accused of being a cry baby, when my REAL complaint is that it RUINS the Hit and Run feel/fluff of the Eldar. While people on the other side of the issue say the detractors are to blame.

Unfortunately, I still see as the greater problem is Eldar opponents and not the Eldar themselves playing Bold enough.

The truth is I went back over the old threads that created this mess and found the very ones that claim they needed Spirit Stones and the Holofield working in CC were the ones doing most of the belly aching about having to RUN instead of being able to stand and deliver.

To quote from memory "My formations cannot get rid of BMs and I need something so my formations aren't continually weighed down by them" were the going things I read.

This same logic was used for the Powerfist, "Well the Phantom is armed with a Powerfist for CC so the Holofield must work in CC also."

A far less racdical, and simple solution, was offered. It was allowing the Farseers to apply their Leader bonus to a formation anywhere on the table in the Rally Phase. It was turned down as not being an effective enough solution for the ELDAR dissenters who wanted the 'all encompassing' Spirit Stones.

Look the Eldar Army was working fine BEFORE Spirit Stones I know because I love playing with my Eldar Army, and have been using them from v1.0 on, but they HAD to perform Hit and Run to fight and win.

Here is a challange, instead of all this silly playground discussion I ask players to boldy pull out their Eldar units/opponents and play a battle using the Farseer rule above instead of Spirit Stones, and don't allow Holofields to work in CC and see if the Eldar need Spirit Stones to win beyond the 3rd turn.

I am willing to bet you'll find.............

(1) They actually can win in the 4th turn and the 3rd turn WALL is like the WALL in the sound barrier, a myth.

(2) That the Eldar Army has to perform Hit and Runs and avoid toe to toe stand up fights, as befits the armys fluff.

(3) That the Eldar player must practice conservation of force by remaining mobile otherwise they will get caught and killed.

(4) That the Eldar Army becomes more of a challange to play instead of the slick ease in which one can use it presently, which in my book makes it more fun to use.

Any takers ready to bust the Spirit Stone Myth?

You know I will (And already have), any others?

Jaldon

Author:

Chroma [ Sat Feb 11, 2006 7:11 pm ]

Post subject:

What are the issues with Spirit Stones?

Quote (Jaldon @ 11 Feb. 2006 (17:09))

Any takers ready to bust the Spirit Stone Myth?

You know I will (And already have), any others?

I'll step up, once I'm done prepping to the EPIC game day next weekend.

For me, the Holofields thing has never been an issue... cuz I never take Eldar Titans... and against them, I just break 'em instead of kill 'em.

But I'll try dropping Spirit Stones for a while, but, btw, Farseers *don't* have leader at the moment.

Author:	Jaldon [ Sun Feb 12, 2006 12:14 am ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
But I'll try dropping Spirit Stones for a while, but, btw, Farseers don't have leader at the moment.

They did before the arrival of Spirit Stones which made that ability moot.

Assume they have Leader and can use it anywhere on the battlefield in the Rally Phase.

Thanks for taking up the challange Hena

Jaldon

Author:

MC23 [ Sun Feb 12, 2006 4:02 am ]

Post subject:

What are the issues with Spirit Stones?

Quote (Jaldon @ 11 Feb. 2006 (18:14))

They did before the arrival of Spirit Stones which made that ability moot.

I don't recall any version of list that had leader. Unfortunately all my copies of the versions were lost when my harddrive crashed.

Author:	semajnollissor [ Sun Feb 12, 2006 5:09 am ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
Okay, to set the record straight, Farseers had the "Leader" ability up until the .4 version of the list in November 2003 (the final version was .84 [July 2004] or .85 [Nov 2004], with the overall army structure set around v.7 in March 2004). For all intents and purposes, Farseers haven't had the leader ability since the original rulebook list were finalized. ?Exarchs never had the leader ability.The spirit stone rule was added in the final version of the list. Based on 40k, a farseer + warlocks would be the only unit that would otherwise deserve the leader ability (Ld10 + embolden). I'd like to add that, at the time of the discussion about the 3rd turn wilt, several people suggested that Farseers and Exarchs be given the leader ability to make up for it. However, several others pointed out (I believe that I was one of them) that the warhosts were the some of only formations that didn't suffer from the problem. Another suggestion that actually made it into v.84 was the "marshall instead of hold" rule. That didnt go anywhere, and wasted alot of time. From my point of view as an Eldar player, I was frustrated that every other army could put leaders in any formation but the eldar list didn't allow it. I understand why, because in 40k the Eldar don't have any 'minor' character upgrades that improve the Ld of a squad. But the thing is, if an epic-sized Eldar army had the same C&C constraints as a 40k-sized Eldar army, then the Eldar could never mount any plausibly successful campaigns. The army would just run away. There has to be a mechanism somewhere in the transition between the two scales that keeps the Eldar army on the the battlefield. I'd also like to add that none of the playtest list had a holofield that didnt work in CC. the problem was that some players from the SM/TL days just assumed that they didn't work in CC, while newer player played by the explicit rules. It did come up, occasionally, but JJ felt that Eldar titans would be too vulnerable in CC otherwise. IMO, the holofields working in CC is just another red herring. I, personally, blame the hit-and-run rules for any undue eldar strengths. Specically, the part of the rules that allow eldar formations to make a full move after winning an assault. It would have been more fair to say they could move 10cm or 15cm, istead of the potential 35cm that things like jetbikes can do. ?But, it is too late for that to change. Finally, I think any discussion of removing the spirit stone rule should wait until the SM list gets straightened out. We want a balanced list, not a nerfed one.

Author:	Jaldon [ Sun Feb 12, 2006 9:06 am ]
Post subject:	What are the issues with Spirit Stones?
From my point of view as an Eldar player, I was frustrated that every other army could put leaders in any formation but the eldar list didn't allow it.

Let's see formations without leaders.........
Stormboyz Warhorde
Kult of Speed
Blitz Brigade
Stompa Mob

An IG player that rolls low cannot put a leader in every formation

So no not every other army can put leaders in any formation

And you are saying the Eldar ability to effectively have leaders in every single formation evens this up because other Armies have the potential to have leaders in every formation?
Sorry but that doesn't seem very fair to me.

I understand why, because in 40k the Eldar don't have any 'minor' character upgrades that improve the Ld of a squad. But the thing is, if an epic-sized Eldar army had the same C&C constraints as a 40k-sized Eldar army, then the Eldar could never mount any plausibly successful campaigns. The army would just run away. There has to be a mechanism somewhere in the transition between the two scales that keeps the Eldar army on the the battlefield.

So irregular military formations in the real world that operate without a strict C&C structure are incapable of staying in the field because of it. Moseby and Forrest would be suprised to hear that.

I, personally, blame the hit-and-run rules for any undue eldar strengths. Specically, the part of the rules that allow eldar formations to make a full move after winning an assault. It would have been more fair to say they could move 10cm or 15cm, istead of the potential 35cm that things like jetbikes can do. But, it is too late for that to change.

Before Spirit Stones I felt it worked fine as the Eldar had to time their attacks to take into account their poor recyle ability with BMs. Now they don't, which is where the problem sets in, those small formations remain constantly active at full ability without constrant, making them more powerful then their size would make one think.

From my point of view as an Eldar player,

And from my point of view as an Eldar player before Spirit Stones I had to think hard about timing my actions, with them it is almost too easy, doesn't feel right, and I think real cheezy as those spirit stones cannot be made a target at all like everybody elses units that do have leader. So I do not like it at all.

Finally, I think any discussion of removing the spirit stone rule should wait until the SM list gets straightened out. We want a balanced list, not a nerfed one.

So discussion is bad?

Jaldon

Author:

semajnollissor [ Sun Feb 12, 2006 10:42 am ]

Post subject:

What are the issues with Spirit Stones?

Quote (Jaldon @ 12 Feb. 2006 (02:06))

From my point of view as an Eldar player, I was frustrated that every other army could put leaders in any formation but the eldar list didn't allow it.

well, you caught me, I was speaking in hyperbole. But, I think my point is still valid, because except for those 4 ork formations (and all the areospace formations that aren't effected by BMs in the same way), nearly every formation in the rule book lists can have leaders. Whats more, those IG players usually end up with 6+ commissars, which is plenty in a tourney sized list with a typical number of activations.

And you are saying the Eldar ability to effectively have leaders in every single formation evens this up because other Armies have the potential to have leaders in every formation?
Yes, that is exactly how i feel. Also, the spiritstones make up for the lack of ATSKNF, mob up, and generally small formation sizes, which all have just as large an effect. I think it is king of telling that none of the rulebook armies actually use the BM management rules set in section 1 of the rule book.

Sorry but that doesn't seem very fair to me.

I understand why you feel that way, I just don't agree.

I understand why, because in 40k the Eldar don't have any 'minor' character upgrades that improve the Ld of a squad. But the thing is, if an epic-sized Eldar army had the same C&C constraints as a 40k-sized Eldar army, then the Eldar could never mount any plausibly successful campaigns. The army would just run away. There has to be a mechanism somewhere in the transition between the two scales that keeps the Eldar army on the the battlefield.

So irregular military formations in the real world that operate without a strict C&C structure are incapable of staying in the field because of it. Moseby and Forrest would be suprised to hear that.
Whoa there, what does that have to do with what I said? An Eldar army in 40k is anything but irregular. Plus, the eldar are imaginary. All I was trying to say was that an eldar army in 40k has no will to fight; they break easily and often. If thats how they are supposed to play in epic, they'd be hopeless. I suggest that somewhere between the scales there has to be a mechanism that mitigates the ease with which the eldar break.

I, personally, blame the hit-and-run rules for any undue eldar strengths. Specically, the part of the rules that allow eldar formations to make a full move after winning an assault. It would have been more fair to say they could move 10cm or 15cm, istead of the potential 35cm that things like jetbikes can do. ?But, it is too late for that to change.

Before Spirit Stones I felt it worked fine as the Eldar had to time their attacks to take into account their poor recyle ability with BMs. Now they don't, which is where the problem sets in, those small formations remain constantly active at full ability without constrant, making them more powerful then their size would make one think.
I think it only worked fine for the warhosts, which are big enough to shrug off the BMs. In fact, I'd point out that for a long time, the Aspect host only had 6 units per formation, not the current 8. I believe that the formation size was increased to make it more survivable.

The problem was, if the opponent was smart, he'd just take out the small support formations with A/C, artillary, or teleporters, and play to reduce the number of eldar activations.

From my point of view as an Eldar player,

And from my point of view as an Eldar player before Spirit Stones I had to think hard about timing my actions, with them it is almost too easy, doesn't feel right, and I think real cheezy as those spirit stones cannot be made a target at all like everybody elses units that do have leader. So I do not like it at all.
But how is it any different than what the SM's get to do? Or what the orks get to do? Is it maybe because they pay for their abilities? Or is it that eldar just have a bad reputation for cheesiness. My opinion is to let the eldar pay for the cheese, and in doing so transform the cheese into "flavor."

Finally, I think any discussion of removing the spirit stone rule should wait until the SM list gets straightened out. We want a balanced list, not a nerfed one.

So discussion is bad?

Jaldon

Discussion is fine, but we might as well be debating which end of a hard boiled egg to crack first. It is clear that there are some people that want spirit stones to go. I just want to make sure that those people know that the opposing point has supporters, too. I want to keep spirit stones in the list (or something like it). If it isn't balanced, raise a few point costs (mainly the guardian warhost upgrades, and the aspect host, and the jetbike host, and most certainly the revenants). Taking away spirit stones isn't the only solution to the problem, and i hope it isn't the preferred solution.

Page 1 of 7	All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/