|
MC23, what I hear you saying is that in development, Eldar were ending with too many blast markers on all formations.
I can appreciate that, Tau have the same problem currently. However, we are using lessons learned from Eldar Spirit Stones and avoiding a blanket solution.
Instead, we choose to pursue two different paths currently which are more focused on the formation level.
1) Determine which formations should have Init 1 and which shouldn't for appropriate in game activation probability of course but thus promoting BM shedding by higher probability of successful activation in game and higher probability of regroup in end phase to actually shed the BM's.
2) Where justified, utilize Leader appropriately - as is the case with our Network Drone upgrade for a formation. In this case, its an option - not a guaranteed ability for the formation. So first you have to have purchase it for the formation at an additional cost. Second, only certain formations are allowed the ability. Third, the purchase takes of one of three upgrade slots available to the formation in question.
Now we are still in development so who's to say if these abilities are enough, but so far test results are positive.
Now back to Eldar - although I don't think the above is the right solution for Eldar, I think we could learn from this excersize.
Eldar Biel-Tan already have great initiatives. That is undisputable. So they already are activating (avoiding BM) and regrouping in the end phase (shedding BM) better than something like IG and Orcs whom which have A) Lesser initiatives and 2) lessor BM management in the end phase by comparison to Eldar.
I think Eldar can SIGNIFICANTLY back off of the Spirit Stones rule and still be very VERY successful.
We've heard of some people removing the special rule all together from their games and the list working great.
We've also heard of people like Chroma that add 10% to every formation in the army and he's still winning >50% of the games.
The problem that I've come to understand is that neither of these solutions get to the core of the problem.
The core of the problem - as I understand it - is that Spirit Stones is available to the entire army.
Thus, I think many of us have come to the natural conclusion that the formations that need it, should get it - or have a CHANCE to get it, and the rest of the army should figure out how to manage without it. Thus the polls that you locked down.
The more I think about your proposal in this thread, the less I'm keen on it. It still affords the ability to the entire list.
I think the proposal would be better served if you limited the formations that had access to the 'free' BM removal. Example your same proposal, but the 'free' BM removal could only be applied to formations that were composed entirely of Armored Vehicles. (If there were infantry, EoV, Titans, or Aircraft of any kind in the formation, then the free BM could not be allocated to them).
This would instill a greater 'limited' effect to the formations that could use the ability and target the ones that should have it. It would also give the eldar player flexability in allocation of the free removal which appears to be what you are after, but if there are too many qualified formations, then you would not be able to have enough 'free BM' removal to help them all.
I definitely think the ability should only be usable for unbroken formations. I also think the ability should only be usable to formations that have successfully rallied of course. The ability should not be automatic (unless initiative dictatest hat result) in otherwords.
However - all of this is only relevant if you maintain the current request.
Frankly, I think the ability should be targeted to X units and the ability only works if all units in the formation have th Spirit Stones ability.
To me - this is KISS. Its very straight forward, and it means you only get it if the formation is all AV's. I would still require that the ability only take effect when a successful regroup is performed of course to keep the 'chance' ability in effect.
Anyway - just my thoughts.
Cheers,
_________________
Rob
|
?Sounds good to me:
