| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
Asura,
A historically valid point and reference, but admittingly dated.
First, I appoligize. I had forgotten about the thread you mentioned on the old forum which ended in June, 05. So that was my fault.  This may be a blessing in disguise though.
Second, Tau players I've ran into still use it the v4.1 interpreted way in playtest and no complaints are being generated as written/interpreted. Its still working today. Again, I had forgotten the above and had been playing it this way all along - so - I assumed that was the way all were playing it. Therefore, why mess with something that's not broke?
Third, there's been 4 more months of development and playtest since that time. In threads lost, I know we've touched on this issue and since then - I don't recall anyone revisiting JG's old proposed elaboration. We continue to learn beyond June 2005 with the logistics of this and other rules and how they work/effect the Tau list. I dare say we've learned a bit more about the logistics of this rule's implications since June 2005 and would ask that all consider that fact.
Fourth, Frankly, it just seems to make common sense the way its written in v4.2.2 and I thought I was only elaborating to clarify how things are working today while attempting to close loop holes or unanswered issues and keeping it logical.
Fifth, The as written/interpreted way now is the same way you, baronp, and myself were guilty of back in June 05 as you pointed out in that thread on the old forum. Its the intuitive way the rule would work!
To elaborate on the Tau WIP v4.2.2 CF rule as it should be executed as written...
1) Declare CF and formations participating as a Tau action
- Roll initiative test for success/failure.
If success,
2) Declare Action with 1st formation
- Resolve 1st formation shooting action
- Check for break and withdraw target formation if necessary.
3) Declare Action with 2nd formation
- Resolve 2nd formation shooting action
- Check for break and withdraw target formation if necessary.
4) Delcare Action with 3rd formation
- Resolve 3rd formation shooting action
- Check for break and withdraw target formation if necessary.
This works well because the timeline logically flows and its not over the top pounding an enemy before he has a chance to react.
In the dated June 05 proposed change, and after rereading the thread, to me there are clearly logistical issues that I think we've since thought better of:
1) All three Tau formations on sustain fire orders - but for some reason, Formation 2& 3 aren't going to actully pull the trigger until formation 1 is done and they are further going to wait and see if the enemy formation is going to break and run, and get out of their range... heh, but if they stay in range - Formation 2 is going to have a go... but if they get beyond us... Bugger! We can't run after them a few steps and our guns are out of range - drat, there they go!!! This just seems silly _IF_ all three Tau formations have to declare their action simultaneously.
2) All three Tau formations could do a move and fire, same issue in 1) above...
3) 2 could do a move and fire with the first sustaining at the same time as the first two commence firing - same issue above...
So, *IF* one must declare the action of all three simultaneously, one would further assume all three fromations resolve simultaneously prior to the enemy reacting. However, that assumption seems to strong in game effect and is unnessisarily strong and illogical.
As proposed in v4.2.2 - which is just an elaboration of the way its typically played from my experiences - If you allow the enemy to withdraw inbetween each Tau formation's action being resolved, it tones down the power of the CF.
However, its only logical that subsequent formations taking part of the CF would not only watch formation 1 fire, and watch the enemy formation retreat, but formation 2 and 3 would then react accordingly. If the enemy formation is allowd to check for break and run - the subsequent Tau formations most certainly wouldn't watch the target formation leave and not attempt to react.
Anyway, my thought for clarifying and elaborating on CF in v4.2.2 as I did.
Feel free to in agreement or challenge as you see fit.
The more the marrier! 
_________________
Rob
|
|
