Ok, let's see here... Special Rules roundup time:

Co-fire:  Add the Tau Supreme Commander to it, otherwise no changes.

Markerlights:  Remove all reference to firing unguided, add +1 to-hit to all GM-equipped units (AP4+/AT5+MW5+).  Are we increasing GM range to 90cm (or greater)?

Tau Supreme Commander:  Separate entry struck from the list, folded into Co-fire rule.  Note that this doesn't decrease the actual word count for special rules.

Technology:  
Jet Packs:  Per zombocom, language to be added as developed.

Drones:  Get the grot Expendable rule.  Copied VERBATIM from page 109, Formations that include at least one Ork non-Drone unit don’t receive Blast markers for Grot Drone units that are killed, and don’t count Grot Drone units that are lost in an assault when working out who has won the combat.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

Hope the headache is getting better mate.

Unfortunately, the obvious way to solve the Sentry Turret/Tower issue is to follow shmitty's plan. Anything else will result in these units being dropped now and then there will be those few but loud voices that will make it very hard to reintroduce them at a later stage.

I believe we either fix it now or never.

I have 12 Sentry Turrets and if these things get canned now, I can see myself using shmitty's ideas as a home rule around here. It's too good a solution not to be used.
As has been stated, they are already in the list (all be it in section 6).
Doing this will reduce confusion and special rules.
It follows the Tau fluff (FAR more than dropping them).

To ignore this solution because it doesn't fit the guidlines feels like kicking an own goal.

With regard to the Save on Sentry Turrets/Towers, I see where the 40K stats lead us to a 5+ save. Unfortunately, in Epic things play out differently and I still think that a 6+ save is more playable and fair to both players.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

shmittys approach to mix Remote Sensor Tower (RST) with Drone Sentry Turrets (DST) looks good.
Either that or the RST Formation needs special rules wich should be avoided.

RST should be Light Vehilcle with Armour 6+.
DST should be Armoured Vehicle with Armour 6+ (same Armour as a Chimera-Chassis but open topped, look at the Chimera[enclosed, 5+ save] and the Griffon[open-topped, 6+ save] for comprison).

And i prefere the 10cm move after shooting for Tau Jet Pack units.

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

On the RST; apart from the issue over deployment (which I think we all agree should only be in the Tau table-half), the other issue is whether or not the formation can activate like a 'normal' formation.

I believe there are two parts to this problem that are interrelated. Firstly, 'non-activation' etc adds a Special rule that some are anxious to avoid. Secondly, 'activation' implies having some meaningfull activity - shooting or assault as it has no movement. (I ignore rallying as I think we all agree that the RST ML will still operate even if the formation is broken).  

I am actually more concerned from a game-play perspective over the impact this has on activations than the capabilities of the formation per se. The presence of the formation forces the opponent to choose whether to use an activation attacking the RSTs or not. However, if the formation can also activate, this can be used to out-activate the opponent, and it is this aspect that I feel is wrong, and thus why I feel the Special rule should remain.  

As far as the wording goes, I would prefer a more generic term 'Passive', or 'Static' etc to describe the unit which could then be used elsewhere if necessary. Something along the lines of:-Passive / Static
These units do not activate, so may not be mixed in a formation with 'normal' units. 'Passive / Static' units cannot contest objectives, have no movement and unless they have FF and CC values they have no Zone of Control. In all other respects they operate like 'normal' units, so 'Passive / Static' formations can be shot at or assaulted, they accumulate BMs and eventually break. If they lie in enemy ZoC when Broken, they are automatically destroyed unless they are Fearless.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Just make the formation's capability commensurate with a value of 100 points and it's fine for it to be a "stalling" formation... say, 2-3 "Markerlight Towers" and a couple of "Weapon Towers".

Most armies have low cost, spoiler formations like this whether it be IG Sentinels, Ork Gunmobz or Eldar Rangers, so it's not really an issue.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Exactly. And Sentinels, etc are be more useful because they can move and shoot. RST/DST Formations can only shoot.

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

. . . . . which is why Shmitty and Onyx were adding guns etc and making it a 'normal' formation, complete with an activation. At 100 points, each unit is then worth 33 points, and you start to make comparisons with units in other races etc - "and that way lies madness" as they say.

Very quickly you get to ask why you cannot use a mobile 4x Drone formation for 75 points instead of this immobile 3x unit formation for 100 points . . .

Hence my preference for the really cheap 'non-activating' formation that is not even a speed bump, which IMHO better represents what the thing is supposed to do. Its main/only battlefield function is to enable the Tau GM to work.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Some thoughts on the list by LiTS

Markerlight and Guided Missiles: Guided Missiles may only hit targets that are markerlit. If this rule is adopted, then GM ranges could be extremely long, but would then require the presence of nearby ML formations (like Drones dropped from Tigersharks; a concept I really like as it is very Tauish)

Jet-packs: While I quite like Zombo's proposal, I think the full Hit-&-Run rule should also be tested. While I understand the concerns expressed, shooting and then bugging out seems very appropriate to Tau tactics (at least IMHO)

Drones: I very much like the idea of using 'Expendable' as outlined by LiTS

Deflector shields: KISS is good

Support Craft: Still needs discussion and testing IMHO. Given that people are insistent on keeping weapon ranges long, APU is probably the way to go, but in this case I would suggest considering dropping it altogether in favour of plain 'Skimmer'.

Apart from RTS (above) I have no real preference on the other points

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

On Drones and "expendable", the 'Nids thread is considering a slight revision of counting 1/2 casulaties in assault. Is there any merit in using the same idea here for consistency??

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

*********************************************
SPECIAL RULES ROUND UP
*********************************************
@LitS: Did you know that it's Rodeo time in Houston?


Co-fire:  Add the Tau Supreme Commander to it

H: AGREED

Markerlights:  Remove all reference to firing unguided, add +1 to-hit
to all GM-equipped units (AP4+/AT5+MW5+), range 90 cms

H: AGREED

Tau Supreme Commander:  Separate entry struck from the list, folded
into Co-fire rule.  Note that this doesn't decrease the actual word
count for special rules.

H: AGREED

Technology:  
Jet Packs:  Per zombocom, language to be added as developed.

H: AGREED. NOTE: THIS WILL CONTINUE TO BE DISCUSSED WITH CS OFFLINE. I THINK
ELDAR "HIT AND RUN" ALTHOUGH CLOSE, IS STRONGER AND I DON'T THINK IT IS
AS CLOSE AS AN EMULATION AS THE Z APPROACH. WE NEED FINAL VERBIAGE ON THIS.

Drones:  Use Tyranid "EXPENDABLE" rule

H: AGREED. ALTHOUGH WE ARE DISCUSSING THE DEMISE OF MACHINES, THE TAU ARE NOT
WASTEFUL OF ANY OF THEIR RESOURCES AND THEREFORE WOULD NOT NEEDLESSLY TRASH
DRONES.

Deflector Shields:  Dropped to a flat 5+ invulnerable save

H: AGREED. KISS

Support Craft:  Are we going to a unit note that says "Always counts as
a skimmer that is Popped Up," or are we staying with the current rule?

H: DROP SUPPORT CRAFT, USE APU IN VEHICLE NOTES. KISS

H: RSTs...I agree fully with Ginger's points. It should be a passive (i.e. no
activation unit, probably 6+ armor, that only markerlights. Agree that it can
only be deployed on Tau half of the board as in further reading of IA3, it is
clear that they were pre-deployed in potential areas of enemy advancement. They
do not keep the enemy from doing anything other than having to stop to take them
out to remove the ML in their midst.

This may take a special rule to frame up properly, but given that we are dropping
so many others, I don't see that as significant issue. Yes, we should minimize the
SRs as much as we can, but let's not go running off like Chicken Little because we
found one under a rock.

So, given the above, let's work out the stats and costs. From a cost perspective, it
would be better to go a tad high, then introduce an obvious gimme. Also, given that the
occurence of the units was somewhere around "occasional", but below "frequent", lets
think hard about how to slot them. There was specific mention about the interaction with
Pathfinder forces, so perhaps set them up as a one per Pathfinder or Piranha formation.

Comments on the whole lot? I think we are really close on these.

Cheers to everyone for the effort on this, I know the energy level was pretty high on this group. However, I think we need to keep in mind that these rules are defining the character of the Tau list. To me, these rules animate a bunch of numbers and give the list its personality, so I consider them very important. To me this goes beyond playability, it makes the attractive enough that people want to play it again and again and makes others curious about it.

Regarding a Mixed Sentry Turret/Tower formation...


It must be remembered that these formations would come out of the Tau's Support Groups/Aux Formations (2 Support per Cadre). Whilst a Sentry Turret/Tower formation is cheap, it cannot be spammed numerous times or there won't be enough actual combat units to fire the GM's. There is the trade-off.

IMHO they should be reasonably fragile, so yes it will be likely that they will be quickly destroyed, but that is actually part of the point of the formation. With 'scout' they will be spread across the table adding to their overall resilience by limiting the number that can be shot or engaged, which is also enhanced by terrain. Sure they can be shot ot assaulted, but with 5+ armour they will have some chance of survival and though less likely, assault resolution dice may go in their favour. When Broken, being dispersed may mean that one or two units lie outside enemy ZoC, so are not automatically destroyed.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.