(gary_clark1946 @ Nov. 15 2006,16:46)
QUOTE
There is no reason why a formation of vehicles with transport shouldn't be able to pick up another. (but that battle is on going).
There are legion potential problems with it. It's been debated several times both on here and on the SG boards. Here's a clip from the last round about Land Raiders at SG:
I actually like the idea of WEs transporting as a formation rather than per-WE. The problem with it is that it effectively turns all WE transport formations into Commanders.
Had a couple formations beaten up? Just pile them into a WE and presto! You combined them into a single formation. On the flip side, you can start with a bunch of small formations loaded for a mega-assault, then after the assault combine them back together or split up to expand your activation count as needed. Since BMs from assaults are only placed on the formations that actually take damage, you can plan the assault so that most of the resulting "fragment" formations come out of the assault with no BMs. The obvious tactic would be to recombine the suppressed formations to resist breaking and split off unsuppressed formations for activation count.
The problem came to the forefront in the Ork list because they could take a Warband w/ extra Battleforts and freely mix and match formations, allowing an absurd amount of tactical flexibility. Hence, the fortress restriction for Orks.
One similar issue that comes to mind is CSM LRs because they can attach them to a normal formation like Orks could. You could have a retinue with LRs attached, loaded with Forlorn Hope formations that would function like Orks with Forts. Or, garrison troops on OW for area denial, then have the retinue with LRs come up behind them and pick them up. They're already half way across the board, so they should be positioned for a huge combined assault.
SMs could do something similar with an LC loaded with LRs and small formations. With LR Crusaders' 3 transport capacity the options for a BT list would expand.
WEs transporting as formations might not be a problem in general but I'm not willing to assume that it won't. I think quite a bit of playtesting is in order before anyone can confidently say that it doesn't allow abuse, not to mention ironing out issues like what to do with BMs.
