Jhi'Myr wrote:I like the gumption you've got. I have been putting thought to an overhaul like this, myself. But three word names Just don't run off the tongue like the dualies.
Draco023 wrote:Does anyone bring 3 different weapons?
Draco023 wrote:For an xv8 we could simplify it to the weapon name that's taken twice is listed first with a new name for the most common support systems ( ATS is piercer, shield is guard and drone controller is guide maybe ) so you'd get a soul forge piercer as example has fusion, flamer ATS while a forge soul would have 2 fusion and one flamer.
Commanders would be the same, if only two weapon names are listed then there is two of each. Two weapon names and a support name then it's two of the first, one of the second and the support. The same soul forge piercer is two flamers, a fusion and an ATS.
Nitrogue wrote:Alternative for the multiple of the same weapons could just be a new "upgraded" name.
I.E. 1 burst cannon is storm, 2 burst cannons is tornado. 1 misslepod is fire, 2 is inferno. (i think flamers might work better with that last one).
Not sure how you would do 3 or 4 weapons (looking at you quad fusion blaster commander)
Kael'yn wrote:I would go this way:
Nymphomanius wrote:What about as been suggested a name for one or 2 of each weapon and if using 3 of a weapon put San infront of its first name, to me T'au have always seemed quite Japanese mech themed and San is 3 in Japanese so I trip missile pod suit would be Sanfire suit and Yon for 4 so QFC would be a Yonsun Commander?
Kakapo42 wrote:Thus, instead of trying to create a comprehensive lexicon for every possible weapon and wargear option, it may perhaps be more elegant to approach it from the other end and instead think about what kind of job you want the Crisis Team (or commander) to perform on the tabletop, then consider what equipment it has, and give a descriptor to the sum of those two factors.
Arka0415 wrote:I agree here. There's also the issue of using terminology that "sticks" though- "Fireknife" caught on in the past because everyone used that configuration. It might be best to figure out the popular and viable configurations first, and then apply new terms to them?
The Fusion Commander is a good example of the issue with naming. People say Fusion Commander or QFC because those terms are short and memorable. We could go back to saying something like "Sunforge Commander" but any more complex than that and people might not actually use the new term.
Harlequin2 wrote:Kael'yn wrote:I would go this way:
Damn, that's a lot of effort. I like it, but I'm struggling to see why you would need the second word for weapons. It seems redundant and, again, adding more for people to remember. Apart from that, my chief worry is that it's too complex. I'd prefer something accessible so more players would use it. Perhaps a forum-wide vote would be best so everyone can decide which system they prefer?
Kael'yn wrote:On a side note:
Using names for our suits also has the property to establish a community language that exclude people outside of Tau (or new to them) to understand our words. It is a good thing or not, depending of each one view, but in my experience, it can be frustrating at first to read Tau batrep and tactics and taking time to understand what was a "Burning Eye Team", but when mastered, you have the feeling to be part of the community.
Harlequin2 wrote:So, if I've got this right, you guys would prefer a simple, but more canon-orientated naming system? Basically a parallel to the Living Tau Xenolexicon but with a list of all the canon XV8 names of the past with their loadouts? Then maybe tips on how you could make your own customised name based on canon trends? That could be an incredibly valuable resource for the website and Tau players as a whole, especially since a lot of that information is hard to find. I don't think Lexicanum even has most of it and I myself don't have the 3rd Edition Codex, the Forgeworld books or the Warzone books, so getting help from members that do might be necessary.
If this is the line of thinking then I'm definitely game.
Kakapo42 wrote:Thus, you can find the article in question here in the Library subforum.
TauMan wrote:You guys don't make this easy do you?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests