And to chip in here that was a very painful process at the time, but ultimately it was very beneficial.  I don't know anything about the Tau so I cant say any more, other than the fact that sometimes the painful thing that no-one really wants to do given all the time already invested turns out best.  Just a thought  

_________________
"Do not offend the Chair Leg of Truth; it is wise and terrible."
-Spider Jerusalem

Which solution are you referring to?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I like the idea that has been bounced around of having styles of tau list.

A sept defence list would have access to more types of turrets

A frontier world would have more mercenary/subugated races.

An air caste defence Cadre will have access to more types of aircraft and a greater percentage to spend on air craft

and so on.

_________________
Tyranid air marshal

Except that the drone turrets were from the Taros campaign, which was the defense of a recently acquired, formerly Imperial, world.

This (admittedly small sample) shows that the Tau rely on drones when on the operational/strategic defensive, and save manned (fished) units for offensive operations.

I can make arguments both ways for whether to even include the drone sentries in a tournament list at all, compared to a specific campaign list.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

Would all those that want everything really be upset if they were included with costs in an annex? Is the burning desire to use them in tournies so great? Incidentally I think having morays in squadrons of three would be neat.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

It´s the same argument why specific Imperial Guard regiments lack static artillery and AA platforms while some lists include them.

_________________
Attrition is the proof of absence of Strategy

Yes.

It's not that I want to use them in a tournament but that a tournament list is obviously the fairest/best list to use for a fair/fun game. I have no interest, at the moment, in using non tournamnet legal units.

We are planning on running some campaigns down the track and that would be the only use for non Tournament list units I would consider.

_________________
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.

I honestly think that two lists would be best:

List 1 - A 'standard' Tau list that would look more like the FW list.

List 2 - A tankers/WE 'armoured' list that would look more like the SG list, but probably would have no access to alien Aux, along with a few other restrictions.


That gives you two archetypical forces, the infantry-heavy standard list (Which matches the armies depicted in the background) and the tanker list for the guys who like using their skimmer tanks as Core companies (Which doesn't match the background for a *standard* Tau army).

I truly believe that both lists could then be balanced quickly.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Just a note that I will be changing the Tau development board read only later today, in preparation for putting together the next version of the list.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

Oh no, I wanted to post a suggested version with rational for comments, but doubt I will get it done by wednesday afternoon

Oh well, and CS, still waiting for that game, the wife is off again on Wednesday!

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

It seems that there are a couple of suggestions from people on the way. I will hold off on starting the new version until after these two lists are posted and have had about 24 hours for feedback.

But, please get them posted here asap.

Thanks.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

Surely this could lead to people with a similar opinion to yourself calling all users of the second list powergamers or cheats or people who don't know what Warhammer 40000 is all about or worse...etc etc.

Would both (eventually) be tournament legal?
Would both be respected by all players (not shunned by 40K purists)?

If the answer to these questions is yes (and it should be) then make one (balanced/fair) list and let the Tau players pick what they want to play with.
If the answer is no then this is not even worth talking about.

Or should a player to be able to say to a Tau player "I'll play you but only if you use the proper (read 1st) list"? I hope not!

KISS.

_________________
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.

Indeed.

The 75cm ranges on many weapons are spot-on IMO, with Skimmer this necessitates some tactical movement while allowing for long range sniping.

In games, 75cm effectively means that you can strike between 1/3 to 1/2 of the battlefield from your current position. That´s as it is supposed to be in my book, and reasonably effective.

Now, Support Craft: I´m frankly surprised that the rule is so doggedly defended!

Obviously, anything that totally negates the opponent´s defensive positioning is rather powerful, and problematic. It detracts from the tactical aspect of the game and reinforces the random elements, activation rolls, to-hits and saves. Plus, as I have mentioned before, some armies, by design&default, lack any efficient counter to Support Craft and are supposed to just suck it up? Great.

The old skimmer rules suffered from exactly the same problem, and I´m sure nobody shed a tear seeing them go. The new rules have a much better feel to them, and I haven´t read any complaints.

So an APU-type (always popped up) mechanic seems the way to go. When CS publishes his new suggestions I´ll run a few tests using APU, pending any changes CS makes of course.

_________________
Visit www.epic-battles.de the ultimate german epic site&forum!

The reason the support craft rule is being defended is because there are folks (like me) who have actually played with the rules and experienced the downside of them as well.

All of the most recent arguments are about the overpowered nature of the units but the flip side (the support craft being able to be targeted with no LOS and no cover) is glossed over.

When you go to playtest this, try doing BOTH rules.  Take each activation with the support craft and against the support craft and say, "Okay, we tried it with the support craft rule, now how would the APU rule affect the situation?", record the results going both ways (TAKE PICTURES) and then we'll have some good ideas as to how the rules compare.

I am conversely shocked that all these problems have only recently come up with the support craft rule.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.