Unusualsuspect wrote:Personally, I can't and won't support providing ATT's name to this document. It sacrifices everything else we need to make GW convinced we aren't just a bunch of greedy T'au looking for OPness just to be concise, and that ultimately results, IMO, in a diminution of the value of the A.T.T. brand (by associating it with something that presents things in what seems so clearly to me to be a biased, misleading way).
Thanks for the analysis. I appreciate your concern, but I think there's a lot less at stake here. Games Workshop gets dozens of rules queries and balancing questions every day- I can't imagine this letter will provoke any response greater than "huh, okay" and maybe a tally mark on a "Tau might be unbalanced" survey sheet or something like that.
I admit though, "biased and misleading" exactly what I was trying to avoid, so let me see what I can do.