Quote: (Onyx @ 29 Sep. 2008, 08:24 )
Something that is boring to play is not a good enough reason to change the rules.
If GM rules were this, it would certainly increase my interest in using the Tau more often.
Is that because it becomes easier to use them? Now you can fire off piranha and stuff without risking anything - and these chaps can garrison forward so a turn 1 sustain into the enemy deployment area.
Certain;ly using turrets would be boring, sure things (not here winning the game but rather marking the target) always are.
Its definatively a power increase - unless I am reading it wrong? Are you are saying that markerlights no longer allow someone to fire with no LoS to the target, you can only get that with sustain? Instead they give a +1 to hit only?
I think I might have read it as no change to the markerlights and the additiuon of the sustain/no LoS rule.
If so its far less of a boost, in fact if you wanted a mobile force its a hindrance (though not for pure arty units like piranha), but it still strikes me as unnessecary. Why is any compromise needed in this way? I thought the issue raised by Neal was the whole thing was needless, is there actually two discussions here and I am missing one?
_________________
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
- so you compromise. 
I'm happy to give it a go but I'm still puzzeled if anyone appart from Neal wants the GM rule changed. The impact i guess would be of benifit to gm formations like stingrays and skorps, no effect on hammerheads who pop up anyway so need to advance and probably a negative on piranha who like to move around. Otherwise I would probably stop using ml units to light stuff and stick with their secondary uses which means looking at stuffs abilities again 
