This is my idea for a Farsight Enclaves variant list now that we have a normal list locked in. I'd like to hear what other people think and see if there are any glaring problems that I don't see.

OK I have stickied this

proffesorcurly is now Farsight Enclaves list developer.

Considering the really large boost with the FF special rule, I think I'd start by giving them only one support formation per core formation?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Are Enclave XV8s meant to have 3+ firefight (Ignore Cover) when fighting marked formations? They lose a lot of ranged firepower compared to normal XV8s, so I guess they need it (and they don't have any options for organic markerlights, unlike Fire Warrior Cadres). Just wondered as they seem to get +1 firefight twice.

Yes, the 4+ natural firefight is intentional. I felt the doctrinal difference and short range, all target firepower warranted a bump. With the new markerlight rule it goes to 3+ which is right at the level I feel it should be. If it becomes a problem we can change it though.

Evil - I'm somewhat intrigued by the 1 support per core idea... It does make me think about what I need in the army a great deal more but I worry that might be too constrictive. When I tried to make an army one-for-one it was certainly... more challenging. Do you think that would still allow enough variation to be interesting though?

if it's too much you could have 3 support per 2 core (rounding down maybe.... ) so 3 core formations would get you 4.5 (4) support formations

Well, in 40k the Farsight Enclave is *really* restricted in what support it can take IIRC. Instead of 3 tanks it can only take 1, for example.

So reducing the support formations from 3 per core to 1 per core would give it that Farsight Enclave style, mostly focusing on the (FF trained) infantry, but with one third the number of support formations/units.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

My gut instinct is that the Blood Brothers special rule is going to be considerably more useful than the Coordinated Fire rule.

Personally, if I were to try to min-max this list, I'd have lots of FW to maximize the FF benefit and, of course, lots of attached ML units and/or ML support formations necessary to use the FF bonus. I'd probably stick with Stealth formations and Skyrays on the mech FW formations, because the Pathfinders are so heavily downgraded. Then, because there would already be lots of MLs running around as a requirement for the FF boost, I'd probably take Piranhas for cheap, pseudo-arty support - 150 points, 90cm/no line of sight, lots of speed to grab objectives.

Even with the increased FF, I'm not sure I would take Crisis suits. My experience is that without blazing fast moves (like SM Land Speeders) the 15cm range/FF combo is often quite limited. I might take a few for a shoot/support role or for an air assault. They would really only fit in a very aggressive strategy, which I know is intended with Enclave, but even then, the Crisis would only be useful in limited numbers. Basically, I'm thinking that an obligatory formation for an SC would be the only Crisis on the field.

So, something like...

Crisis + SC
Mech FW + Skyray
Mech FW + Skyray
FW (garrison/blitz guard)
Stealth
Stealth
Piranha
Piranha

2025 points, 8 formations (4 core/4 support), lots of points and support slots remaining to customize as desired

I don't think that's likely to be especially abusive in terms of game balance, but I'm not sure it fits thematically with the Enclave.

Has there been anymore development on Enclaves or is this DOA?

I've resently started a Tau army and plan to test this list as I like the idea of it. Not sure what the consenus on balance is but on first read it doesn't seem as strong as the main Tau list. (which is fine by me, no one wants to see a sub-list render a main list redundant)

Guess I'll have to see how effective those Firewarriors can be in assaults I'll post the results in a couple of weeks.

I will try and contact the list developer and see if they are still interested, although they have not logged on to taccomms since July - otherwise I will take the list on and get an update done.

Probably starting with E&C's suggestion of one support per core choice to really represent the restricted resource nature of the Enclave.

In reality it's impossible to say what the balance of the list is like as there have been no battle reports using it, so I would be very happy to see your reports when you play some games with it.

I'll be playing my first test game next week but wanted to check something.

The rule says crisis and firewarrior units 'directly involved' in a firefight receive +1 to hit if the target is lit. Is this intended to mean that units using supporting fire do not recieve the bonus?

I think I already know the answer (yes) but just wanted to be clear.

P.S I would also like to say I don't like the sound of one support per core, this rule cripples the lost and the damned and I think it will lead to alot more air units being used to keep the activation count up.

Well I'm not dead, so there's that. As to the question, supporting units do not get the +1 from Blood Brothers.

I'll look through the list over Christmas and come back with thoughts. I may not be able to be the lead developer anymore though, unless Vassal games can count as me actively testing the army. And people start playing Vassal games - Epic is something I've always been interested in, but no one around me plays. Nothing for it, unfortunately.

However, I love number crunching. So let me crunch some numbers and see what I can come out with. My design process is pretty straightforward for those that are interested.

First I look at the main Tau list to see the 'baseline' for units that I want to adjust. I do some number crunching to figure out the speed, mobility, shots, toughness etc for a given unit, for a given points cost. I try and make a judgement on how much these are worth and adjust the individual units accordingly.

Second I try and build a list that exploits the changes made and see how the army operates as a whole (theoretically, of course) compared to the main Tau army.

Finally I look at other armies for comparable units/formations to see how they match up/how the armies match up.

I do this because I am probably terrible at this game. I say probably because I haven't been able to play it very often, so I stick to the numbers that I can handle.

Now, onto this list specifically. The design I was envisioning was that the core formations are going to do all the heavy lifting - that's the way the Enclaves are presented. This army does not get things done with its toys, at least compared to the typical Tau army.

1 support per core seemed too excessive to the people I was talking to when the list was first being made. I don't want this to be Suits + Airforce, with benefits. A thought I've had would be to put Air + Support into the same pool, with air having an additional limit of 1/3 of the force and keeping it 2/per core. I'll think on it a bit more.

Anyway, merry christmas and happy new years everyone.