There is central issue here that I wanted to highlight. Honda and I both agree that playtest and battle reports are key. They are the single most important method that we have of gathering feedback and seeing how things actually work.

We have been told that people do not want a 'closed door' development, where we just present the next version of the list for people to play and they scurry off to our corners to work on the next version alone (despite how tempting that appears some times!   ). But, that means that emphasis should be placed on battle reports, far above and beyond statements such as 'I played x and it didnt work' statements.

So, we call for battle reports and play tests, and these trickle in. People say that the playtest period is too long, and yet even with the full six month period the diversity of reports is still limited. Then, people start to say that they are unhappy that the list is not progressing, and all the while discussion based on 'opinion and feeling' continues.

So, do we want a list that progresses slower based on solid play testing, or one which has no inactivity but swerves off at a strange angle as it lacks this solid underpinning.

With the current state of things, we just cant have a fast moving and rapid development system based on numerous and diverse battle reports, no matter how 'cool' that would really be.

Now we have the situation where we actually have two Tau lists. If Honda and I dont address this, we will be accused of ignoring the development, but at the same time any movement is going to upset someone who wont be happy with whatever direction is selected, as supporters of either list will feel that theirs is being 'corrupted' by the other. Its exasperating!

_________________
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.

Well personally I think the list with the least complaints and most positive feedback would be the best option.

CS, maybe you should only listen to those people who take the time to put up batreps. That way only those who take the time to post them will get a say, and you'd get the information you need (the batreps). I'm betting people will either start posting them more regularly or people will have to shut up. I see a lot of posters in these forums and 95% of them don't post batreps with the Tau ... not once....

Perhaps set a batrep quota to gauge proposals and unit changes etc.? e.g you want a total of 10 posted batreps before you even consider adjusting a unit/list version/weapon stat? maybe only those who post any will be considered a "voice". This could then set the time for review/change in the future....

Is there perhaps a specific format of information you'd like to see batreps take? i.e "I'd like to see actual dice roll results for the XXXX unit and any resulting damage done and taken" or "Please include the XXX for this formation" etc. I know Chroma's batrep form is very handy:
Linky

Revised Schedule:

1. October - First cut of the new version will be ready by week's end. That is the version that will be used for testing until the end of the month.

2. November - Any changes will be evaluated and if added will produce the list to be tested in November. No changes made, then the list will stay frozen for another month.

3. December - Any changes will be evaluated and if added will produce the list to be tested in December. The final version will be completed before Christmas.

After that, the code will be frozen for a long time, somewhere in the 9-12 months time frame. If you want to influence the list, then you will have to provide testing results indicating an imbalace issue (e.g. costs too much, dominates play, etc.). If you decide not to participate, then the direction of the list will be influenced by those that do, pure and simple.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Hmm, does this have any effect?

_________________
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

heehee    TRC  

very nice TRC, very nice

I can only offer Vassal (unless anyone wants to trek to deepest darkest Pennsylvania (to Count Duckula theme tune)) but I would be happy to help playtest Tau. I'm not exactly an experienced player, as TRC can attest   , but I can provide rail gun fodder at least! Sadly I'm limited to 8.30PM+ EST, but I'm free most nights.

_________________
numquam culum es

I might be able to play against you in vassal...I live in Detroit. It would probably be a day by day thing, and I'm only available late (think 11:00 p.m.), due to high school stuff etc. I haven't even played a game yet, so your experience matters not!

PM sent

_________________
numquam culum es

I just wanted to clarify my earlier statement as there were some offline questions on intent.

This Thursday: V6
1st November: V6.1 (if nessesary)
1st December: V6.2 (if nessesary)
Late December: V6.X series is locked down as complete, i.e. "Final"

And then:

Late 2010: Standard annual evaluation for the ERC Army Book, instituting changes if nessesary (as every list must submit to).

Let me know if there are any additional questions.

Cheers,

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Three months to finish and lock down the list, an ambitious and exciting deadline!


Regardless of my own feelings about a rules aspect here or a unit there, I for one am ready to follow Honda's drive to finish the list by 2010!!

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

And from the same site 'secret' information on the Tau!

_________________
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

Chris I always have trouble following your posts... What same site are you mentioning here?

Sure, but my own personal theory is that the Tau have been engineered by the Eldar to fight the Old Ones/Necrons. Xenology strongly hints at a significant link between the Eldar and the Tau, and Tau development has surely been given a boost by an advanced race.

They should have no warp signature, but Farsight looks to have a Chaos blade which is influencing him.

_________________
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.

TRC has found 4chan archives.

Run for cover.