Page 5 of 6

[ 86 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire
Xisor	Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 6:19 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:11 pm Posts: 515	Folks, Ahem, the other proposal, and also the *current* proposal I'm making [having left behind the major fault of the Cadre.pdf: the combined/badly mixed E:A formation] is the one that I'm pushing now: 1- Name changes to the list 2- Tweaks to align it further It may meet all those points, but they are not all exactly spot on and unimprovable. The most important facet of Tau warfare is that of Combined Arms, which I think is provisionally met well. It can be made *more* the case though, such that the pure-Tau list should be penalised in some form if it deviates too far from the core tenets. Okay, I know we're not supposed to quote Wikipedia[and I'm sure Legion 4'd know better], but for now example I have to go with is this: The mixing of arms is sometimes pushed down below the level where homogeneity ordinarily prevails, for example by temporarily attaching a tank company to an infantry battalion. Combined arms doctrine contrasts with segregated arms where each unit is composed of only one type of soldier or weapon system as to provide maximum cohesion and concentration of force in a given weapon. The 'army' itself is an example of Combined arms. My eye to the disparity is that it's not the Cadres. However, and here's the crux, by stipulating that a 'what were known as' Cadres & Contingents are 'Combined Arms Cadres'. Thematically speaking that is. It's hypothetical as yet. How to implement it is not entirely difficult. Minor tweaks to what we had as cadres and contingents would generally appease my perspective on this. Whilst the list is generally 'okay', it is the tweaks to move it away from a Steel-Legion-look-alike [in a rough sense]. Okay, it's not a big move, but some things do need to be addressed. On the note of 'compulsary commanders', I've sufficiently revised my stance, and feel fine to leave it within the current abstraction [for now]. Xisor PS Just to be insanely pernickety: "- Assimilation over decimation where adversaries have aligning battle doctrines" Assimilation over decimation where feasible. Lack of aligning battle doctrines is not going to lead the Tau to simply exterminate a race. Look at the Galg...Rather they Tau simply look to have every entity serve the Greater Good as best they can. "- Intelligence, discipline, and doctrine over brute force, emotion & ego" Although I agree in principle, it is most lamentable that we end up with Commander 'Angry' Shadowsun and Supreme Aun 'Passion and furor' Va'Denta. In honesty and contrast, Commander Farsight seems quite reasonable and disciplined! [/end diversion] EDIT: Combined arms is represented in tactical decisions of a player making formations work in concert with available Markerlights and utilizing Coordinated Fire in E:A - NOT by forcing a player to group unlike fighting elements into a single activation. As I mentioned earlier, I agree, but within my new proposed Cadre[Cadre + Contingents] there should be emphasis of combined arms within these formations.[It needn't be a strict 1+ '0-2', just emphasis] _________________ "Number 6 calls to you The Cylon Detector beckons Your girlfriend is a toaster"

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Most significant implication of Codex: Tau Empire Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 7:11 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241

Xisor, I'll leave CS to act or not act on your suggestion as it pertains to your opinion this list. I think I've said all I can here as far as my opinion goes. + + + moving on + + + However, regarding your response to the following: "- Assimilation over decimation where adversaries have aligning battle doctrines" Assimilation over decimation where feasible. Lack of aligning battle doctrines is not going to lead the Tau to simply exterminate a race. Agreed - but I don't think anyone said tau prefer to exterminate. Look at the Galg...Rather they Tau simply look to have every entity serve the Greater Good as best they can.

Not true. The codex clearly states that the Tau assess each encountered enemy to see if their battle doctrines align well with the Tau. They also prefer to make peace and establish trading routes vs. burning bridges.

In regards to assessing enemy combat prowess, their perspective is clearly stated. The Tau feel they already have the best battle plan in the galaxy. If they encounter others they can teach or which have skills that closely gel with their sense of things, so be it. The Tau will never recruit h-t-h combat specialtists within their ranks because they do not believe in that mode of warfare.

If a foe is encountered that will not negotiate for peace - Decimation.

If a foe is encountered that will negotiatiate for peace (and allow the Tau to swallow their planet up within the Tau empire) - excellent, the GG was served. The Tau will then assess and assemilate where possible / valuable.

"- Intelligence, discipline, and doctrine over brute force, emotion & ego"

Although I agree in principle, it is most lamentable that we end up with Commander 'Angry' Shadowsun and Supreme Aun 'Passion and furor' Va'Denta. In honesty and contrast, Commander Farsight seems quite reasonable and disciplined!

Well, of course, exceptions occur.

Farsight and Shadowsun and both Students of the same teacher if you recall. Both somehow managed to take the diametrically opposed 'Extremes' of their Master's teachings. I think the book clearly states that each of these are not really the norm, but the extremes.

These are also Special Characters with particularly colorful backgrounds for us all to chew on. We all know Farsight's really possessed by his Khornate Daemon Sword. We also know that Shadowsun isn't exactly following the learned or taught practices of the general Tau Commander.

I think the Dex is pretty clear on the "Intelligence, discipline, and doctrine over brute force, emotion & ego".

The book goes to great lengths to describe a Tau general's intricate plans. Complete with situational variations, times of events, contingency plans, etc... They even state that as the unknown variables stack and the battle degrades too far from the currently executed battle plan that tactical withdrawal plans will be executed to allow the entire force repreive and regroup for assessment of productivity vs. options, issue of new strategies commencement of renewed efforts.

Mindlessly fighting attrition battles to the last stand, self absorbed goals or at all cost defending situations are not options or consideratons for the Tau commander.

Cheers,