Right, it's not well thought out, it's also one I came up with at work (warhouse operative, woo...
) not long after reading the novel Star of Damocles.But what is this idea?
Seperate Tau Lists
Simply put, from seeing the issues arising from the AMHC, Fire Warriors, Vespids and sometimes other components...perhaps the original direction was too broad? It tried to incorporate too many things?
Perhaps, keep all the restrictions as 'meta-options' available to 'a Tau player', yet heavily restricting the combinations. Particularly in how many options are selectable in one list. Indeed, it'd allow for certain aspects, tactics and options to be focused upon, incorporating what we know of Tau flexibility, but without complicating the actual playing of the game.
So, more to the point, the idea!
Three Lists: Farsight, Shadowsun, Icewind
The point? Make each sufficiently tactically different to allow the player a bit of a choice, but let the lists themselves be a bit restricted. Presumably these lists would be tied to their 'names' as a school-of-thought or something, but we could also think up new names to better suit the actual game to be played.
Indeed, two lists depicting broad strategies might work too.
But, me not being a very brilliant Epic player, or indeed any sort of authority, I thought I'd run it past you lot to see if you think there's any sort of merit in such an approach? Or, indeed, if I'm making no sense! And, also, if it's simply a really, really bad idea...
