This will be a running thread until I work through all the clean up issues in the list.

First set of questions/clarifications:

1. I (and our group) have never played the Shas'O and Shas'el this way. Why do they and the Ethereal have an Invunlerable Save? Is the justification for this shield drones?

2. Based on other comments I'm planning on dropping the Burst cannon on the Piranha and Devilfish to AP5+. Strong feelings either way? It did not appear so from the comments, nows the time to speak up.

3. Hammerheads: They are supposed to have the SMS on them, correct?

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

1 - Yes, Shield Drones.

2 - I have no strong opinion.

3 - Yes.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Thanx!

Next question: Drones are CC6+ and FF6+. In 40K, drones are actually quite useful in Hand to Hand, superior to FWs even. Is the CC6+ intentional? Would it seriously unbalance the formation if they were CC5+?

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Just for reference: Under my System a single Burst Cannon would be 30cm AP5+. Perhabs 15cm AP5+.
It's identical to a Heavy Bolter but with half the range in Wh40k and one pip worser Armourpiercing (won't negate Carapace armour).

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Are they better in hand-to-hand than a standard Imperial Guardsman?

If no, then keep them at CC6+

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Drones have +1 Initiative and +1 Armour Save but -1 Weaponskill compared to a Guardsman in Wh40k.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

So basically, they are as strong and tough as an infantry man, don't hit as much, but do strike first.

I'd say they were even, but I don't want to open a can of worms from a balance perspective, so if it appears to cause an imbalance, then I'll leave them as is. If it doesn't and players might use them more, then we might consider the change.

I'll leave this one open for more comment.

Thanx for the quick turnaround on the feedback.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Armour Save is accounted for by their armour save.

Initiative is worth noting, but with the WS2 I'd say it's a wash... so keep them at CC6+ IMHO.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I don't disagree at all and am fine with CC6+. I just want to give others a chance to weigh in.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Cleaning up is turning out to be dangerous...    

This is a thought and I just want to float it out there to see what people think. In the Tau Codex there is a new SC known as Shadowsun who is in a new version of the Stealthsuit (XV22).

So that got me to thinking...

I'd like opinions on adding SC to the Stealth suits. It would allow for a 1+ Stealth unit, which might be an interesting option (the idea is growing on me). It doesn't seem like a high risk change, but I'd like to hear others opinions.

Other News:

1. The changes are done. I will send off at the end of tomorrow, to get the PDF generated and hopefully we'll have the new version posted up by early week. I've highlighted all the changes (I think I got them all) to make them easier to see as well as identify any that I may have left out.

2. I'll be honest, the change to 1+ Initiative for crisis suits bothers me and I think I can now put my finger on why that is. My biggest concern is not with friendly games, I am really concerned that this change might severely impact the composition of tournament lists.

If the ultra-competitive build turned out to be all Crisis + Skyray, that would be a list failure from my perspective and a waste of everyone's contributions to date.

So that is my concern. I will be testing and I would greatly appreciate others helping out in that regard as well.

Cheers,

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Send it to me (you have my email address) and I will turn it into a PDF and publish it to the web in minutes, not days.



I'd note that they've been tested at 1+ initiative for the last two years, without complaint AFAIK.



Did you go for +25pts on the Skyray formation?




Sounds sub-par to me really, Stealths tend to die early in the game if the opponent is wise.

Still, my objection is definitely not a complaint that it'd make the formation too powerful!

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

This is true, but I would also note that they have not been stress tested. That is what I would like to see in a game(s) for myself and would appreciate others help in testing. I agree that probably up to three formations at 1+ are not unbalancing. That's the most I've ever fielded and that was in a pretty big game and with an older list.

What I want to make sure of is that 4, 5, 6, or more crisis spam formations do not suddenly come into some as yet realized economies of scale because it has never been tested. When TRC uncovered the AX-1-0 imbalance, it was because he took 5 in one list and legally "gamed" them. Up until then, most of us rarely took more than two-three.

Also, you guys have been screaming at me for being such a jerk about the crisis initiative and I've struggled to explain clearly what my concern is. Now I have. Don't just blow off the concern until we're sure it doesn't exist.

It is feasible that it could be a problem. The Skyray formation is relatively new and could provide enough of an air umbrella that a large number of 1+ Crisis suits could tip the balance of the list.



Yes, the Skyray formation has no upgrades and is now priced at 275.



I didn't think to bother you with this as last time we experienced a lot of server issues and people couldn't access the list. If that has been resolved, then I'll send the final copy to you for conversion.



I would chalk this up to the "Interesting twist" department vs. Super strengthener. I agree that if you just drop your Stealth in the middle of a hornets nest, they die pretty easily. In previous lists, I liked marrying up crisis and stealth, but now that option is no longer available, I look at them a little differently.

For my games, I'd take it every now and then just for the variety.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

I'll upload it to the Tactical Command Wiki server, very reliable.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Thanks Honda (and E&C).

Did you correct the Twin Missile Pods on the AX-1-0 (reference sheet)?
They should be AP5+/AT6+.

Also the Manta Burst Cannons on the reference sheet had no firepower entry.
Should be AP5+/AA6+.

I would've thought the main reason for Shas'O, Shas'El and Ethereal having Inv Saves is because they are Characters, just like all leader figures in all armies.

All the rest sounds good.

Cheers,
Steve.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

1. I agree with Onyx, they're characters.
2. at 15cm they do provide nice shooty for the Tau and we have been trying to make Tau "short range death". AP4+ is more deadly shooty IMO. That said if you have to change them, well it's not something I'll really fight you on.
3. It will certainly make HHs more shooty in the AP department that's for sure. While it's nice, I have played HHs without them so far without missing them too much. Also I'm not sure the more AP you put on all the other HHs would mean more reason to take Ion-heads IMO

Honda, I'm happy to leave the GDs at CC6+. It seems less "silly" to me as I just can't see a drone being better than a living, thinking, specifically armed(carries a knife etc) humanoid.


Personally, while I like the idea of new "characters" I'm against it for 3 reasons:

1/Stealths are already pretty nifty and don't really need a character boost - even if it is the SC
2/One character across an entire civilisation strapped into a stealth suit does not a Supreme-Commander for-any-Tau army-build make
3/I'm not keen to add new stuff in a list that is truthfully nearing completion. I would trial it in your own lists and maybe look at adding it in a future version after the lock down.


Honda, will this be open for all to see in draft form so we can all pick up errors?




TBH Honda, I think you may be worried about nothing. I have to say (and I'm not trying to harp on about the skyray) that while the crisis at 1+ may be your issue, have you considered that the 3-Skyray formation is the unbalancing factor in this "Ultra-competitive" list boogieman? If we remove that formation from the theory of that list you just get Crisis suits at 1+ and have you yet heard about an all crisis list in any tourney being uber?

I'm not saying I won't try to test it but I have serious doubts about it working well - in a friendly let alone a tourney. Here's my immediate theory-hammer view on it before I can test it in RL:

1/While air armies may hate the look of it on face value, air armies are not every army in a tourney, thus possibly half your tourney experience would see you do pretty average against other properly tuned Tourney forces.
2/This list lacks any real synergy. Sure it has MLs but the Skysweep formations need 1 kill to be broken so having to go within 30cm of the enemy would see them often broken and unable to perform that major task.
3/Crisis suits aren't fast enough to avoid being picked off as 4-unit formations.
4/Where does the army get any fast crossfire/objective capture, or multiple opportunities for co-ord fire? 1 Supreme commander for 12-14 activations...?
5/No solid long range AT shooty...?
6/Who markerlights for all the skysweeps' weaponry?

And these are just my first impressions....