|
I don't quite see the reasoning that this almighty one list is actually more...achievable than three smaller, more compacted and restricted lists?
In fact, I see a lengthy discussion that has faltered of late because no-one sees to be finding anything conclusive on matters of balance and style.
Again, with the not again: Any links to other discussions, or just simple (and unproductive!) remarks?
I mean: AMHC- Should it exist or not? Core or not? Plenty of answers, and as spanish friends have told me: "Opinions are like arses, everyone has one". A solution viable with seperate lists would be to contain a scattering of possibilities and army-formats.
That is:
- Shadowsun Format: Air 'Assault' and manouvers focused. Crisis cadre core. (Formations designed to easily fit Mantas and Orcas, prevalence of Morays over the other lists)
- Icewind Format: Highly Mechanised (AMHC Core, plenty of Piranhas etc)
- Farsight Format: Troop focused. Lots of auxiliaries. Fire Warrior core.
Between the lists the actual formation sizes would change, viable tactics would change and even then there is opportunity for varying the stat-lines of the actual units. So whilst Battlesuits could be Core, in an Icewind army they might only be TL-Missiel Pod monat suits. For Farsight they might be more akin to what we have presently. For Shadowsun...something else entirely?
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see why these ideas aren't more easily achievable, balance-wise, than an epic and all-encompassing list.
Indeed, have an 'all in one list' seems more difficult to balance, unless I'm missing something? Indeed, actually maintaining balance between options in a larger list would be very difficult.
So, if only as a thought experiment rather than an actual change of direction, what would be the major 'easily seperable' directions that the Tau list could actually be split up into?
NB- For the puposes of this discussion I'm taking 'core' to be the "one formation of core allows two of the others and perhaps one auxiliary" core from the army list, not just core from a tactical point of view.
My initial reaction is to swicth the focus of the 'core' of the army. So the three seperate lists would have three distinct 'core' formations (AMHC, Well Rounded Crisis Suits, Fire Warriors) whilst their ancilliary options (smaller hammerhead formations, weaker crisis suit formations, smaller/larger Fire Warrior units amongst the already-present non-core options [Piranhas, Stealths, Broadsides etc]).
Indeed, specifically the 'Firewarrior' problem and 'why does no-one take Fire Warriors' can be resolved by having one list that rewards Fire Warriors, and one list that is close to similarly effective which works but with Crisis Suits and whatnot.
As you see, I'm not deterred by idle hofflenosh! I seek new ideas and movement on the sides of the debate! Being entrenched in my PoV never served me well in my life, I don't imagine it really served anyone else well either...in the end.
_________________
"Number 6 calls to you
The Cylon Detector beckons
Your girlfriend is a toaster"
|
) not long after reading the novel Star of Damocles.
