Adopting game mechanisms isn't a good thing. It should be point a) what is intended/wanted to be the effect and b) how does it work in the epic scale sensibly. Just reading on how the rule is in some other list and mechanically copying it is not a good thing. So jumping in and out of cover in closer range combat doesn't mean that it should work like that in this scale.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

The current rule is in no way a direct copy of the 40k rule - hit and run is much closer to the 40k version.

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

Fair enough, if the 'Word of God' says Tau shouldn't have Engagements, Tyranids shouldn't have transports, etc, then we really have an impasse.

Jervis has wrote an amazing ruleset of a wargame...but 'what has he done for me lately'.

Your god has deserted you, join the dark side and use your own initiative   .


Tau without Fire Warriors dominating firefights, just ain't Tau to me. Getting an extra blast marker for Crossfire just isn't as useful as Engagements. Dancing around the opposing army without ever initiating Engagements (and lacking the Guards sheer firepower) means Tau are pretty weak, they can never achieve a 'killing blow' to a formation.

Can we have a thread with Jervis' Commandments, so we know what page we're all on? So if we submit an idea to TacComms we know it isn't dead in the water before it's suggested?

Question: How do you break a target formation when not assaulting?
Answer: By blast markers.

Question: Are there ways of giving those markers more effectively?
Answer: By crossfiring

Whatis wrong with Tau to play like a mix of Imperial Gard and Eldar? It would still be a unique playing experience beacause Tau still wouldn't be Imperial Guard nor Eldar.

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

That's my point exactly... because the Tau *are* a combination of Imperial Guard and Eldar: Lotsa guns and high tech.  *laugh*

But, for some reason, people have mentioned it'll "just" make the Tau "Eldar Mk2"... despite there still being vast differences... Tau don't ride around in eggshells, for one thing.  

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

There are definitely similarities between Tau and Eldar. Most of my games were against Eldar 'til now and I don't know Imps yet. But I will add this experience as well soon, since we have an imp player in our club.

But even with giving FW 4+ FF and some overall boost in FF I still would not say they are the same as Eldar. One blatant similarity is obviously the antigrav technology, but this is unchangeable, of course. From my point of view it wouldn't change too much and give the Tau a bit more survivability. Therefore those directives seem a bit constricting.

I also think and hope that it might be possible to tweak the list towards the intended goals based on the directives and towards beeing balanced. At least I like the play style for the most part right now. But I havent experienced many different armies yet.

Tyranids yesterday seemed very nice because of their vastly different play style. It seems the Tau lack something thats really special and striking. ML/GM is just some additional AT shots if lighted... coordinated fire is very situational and often not worth the effort (seems to me) and can be interpreted nearly the same as the ability to retain twice by eldar (which is superior I think, because if I take three units to shoot one formation and this one dies after my first formation is done shooting (which would be extremely lucky), the other formations do nothing). Therefore only the units by themselves try to feel tauish.

Ya know, I disappear for a couple of months because school was too hectic and pretty much come back to the same conversations.    


Anyway, I like the new rule, it makes sense and is easy to implement.