[chaintinker]

As I see it the Tau would not have a problem firing into close combat when other Tau are "delaying" the opponant. It would be "for the greater good" that those Tau died to friendly fire.

I wouldn't see Tau firing into close combat if it were their allies like the Gue'vesa or the Kroot in there though. Bad way to keep allies.

The way I would rule it is that for every 1 rolled when firing into close combat with Tau gunners and where Tau are the only friendly involved a hit is given to a Tau. Armor saves and cover saves are then applied as normal.

I am new to this board so if this had been discussed already then I appologise and ask for the relevant links to the inital discussion.

[Grim Reaper]

That is like this scenario:

You and your mom, sister, younger bro, and dad are at the subway when suddenly two knife equipped men jump out at your family. Oddly enough you have a pistol. As your family is grappled and held by the men you aim your gun into the mass of bodies. Would you shoot?

Tau believe in the Greater Godd, but that also means having as many live as possible.

[Farseer_Del]

The greater good is not about callous disregard of life, it is about unity and harmony. For example, whislt the tau in CC may be happy to sacrfice themselves for the greater good, the ones shooting won't be very happy about killing comrades!

[chaintinker]

But if the Tau are smart, and I believe they are, then they realise that is those opponants get into CC with them then the tau will die. So while one group sacrafices themselves to stall the enemy the rest shoot to kill them and ultimately save more tau overall. That is acting for the greater good. (AKA acting selflessly)

[Wargamer]

Then why doesn't anyone else shoot into combat?

Because killing your own troops isn't smart. You'd actually help the enemy overrun your positions more quickly, and decimate your own troop morale.

It's common sense, apply it.

[chaintinker]

I was thinking about the anology about a family and a mugger mentioned earlier and i don't think that the paralells are correct. I think that it would be more appropriate if you say that five stereotypical computer techs (yes I mean the skinny weak ones). these guys get attacked by Bruce Lee or somone who just wants to Kill them. now if they were believers in the Tau'va then I believe that yes one of them would voulenteer to keep Bruce busy so he can't kill them all while the rest pull out guns and try to shoot Bruce. Yes they might shoot their friend, but the odds are that they will kill Bruce also. Now if they were all in it for themselves then they would all stand there and try to punch Bruce, and then how many will die over all? Prolly all of the techs.

Now as for Why wouldn't every race want to do this? As a player I would love to do this with every race, but none of the others have the Tau'va.

[Wargamer]

Okay, analogy time:

Tau come under attack.

One unit gets assaulted.

Three scenarios occur:

1) The rest of the army join the fight to rescue their comrades.
This has great benefits for morale, but is not tactically sound.

2) The rest of the army redeploy to give cover-fire for the unit. If/when the unit retreats, or is wiped out, their comrades will be in a position to counter-attack and defeat the opposition.
This is the most tactically sound strategy, with minimum casualties, and least Morale damage.

3) The Tau open fire into the melee.
This is the worst decision, as you cannot be sure of which side you are killing. Each ally you kill decreases the time you have to redeploy and prepare to face the next assault. Also, due to massive morale damage caused, the odds of units fleeing the battle, refusing orders, and deserting increase. Tau are a compassionate race, and whilst all Fire Warriors know casualties are unavoidable, the concept of inflicting casualties on their own is totally abhorrant.

To a greater or lesser extent, this applies to all armies. It is never tactically sound to deplete your own fighting strength!

[chaintinker]

The whole point of this rule is to give you the option to fire in if you wish, and if this rule were to go into effect I wouldn't allow it to affect morale. The fighters doing the stalling would understand their role.

The odds of hitting your friend would also only be one in six, and even then they might get their armor save.

The most important thing to realise also is that they are Tau and not human so as with all fantasy, other races decisions need not make sense to all humans.*

Next you are going to tel me that you are not human. ;D This is a game and I am trying to give myself more options. and Kick more Space Marine but.

[SugarBlair]

I think that Games Workshop explained it best 'Next close Combat could be you? Do you want your own troops shooting you in the back.' And if any Race was to do this I beleive it would be Imperial Gaurd.... as there lives are for 'The Emporer' religous fanatics tend to be more sacrificail. But I don't want them to change the rules at all! Just stating the IG would do this before Tau.

[chaintinker]

OK, if the Imerial Guard were to shhot into Close combat then I would see Wargamers thoughts going into effect with reguards to morale. IG are just troops. Not nessisarily the religious fanatics, but I could see them being ordered to do so.

This section is for house rules anyways and I am not asking GW to actually change the rules unless these work to better balance the game (which I am also not complaining about...here ;D)