Morays |
|
nealhunt
|
Post subject: Morays  Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:35 pm |
|
| Purestrain |
 |
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA
|
|
Resilience: I cranked some numbers on it. Basically, it comes off right between the numbers of the Warhound and Revenant as far as hits-to-kill. The numbers shake out slightly differently, but overall they are comparable.
Line of Sight: I'm putting this as a disadvantage overall, but only a slight one. Most WEs have the option of staying hidden if they deem the risk greater than the reward. The Moray does not have that option, so even if everything else were identical the lack of flexibility is a downside before we even get to considerations of who might be able to see what.
======
I'd like to see a slight boost in FF.
While I am a strong proponent of weak Tau assaults, the guiding principal for gauging Tau FF ability has been to figure out about what it would be without the Tau disadvantage and then subtract one. Based on the armament, it would seem the moray would have FF4+ in any other army, so FF5+ seems like it would be consistent with the design concept as well as the rest of the army.
_________________
Neal
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Morays Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:18 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
| Quote (clausewitz @ 27 Oct. 2005 (16:39)) | Tactica,
Moving on: ?While I may seem to be disagreeing with you a lot, I do share your desire to tweak the Moray a little. ?I think the DC3 2x 75cm MW2+ TK(D3) @300 points is worth a try (I also believe that it will make the Moray a hunted unit, as it will be very annoying to have 2 TK attacks that you cant hide from). |
CW,
The fact that we disagree doesn't bother me in the least. Its part of open public debate and generates good conversation on the topic. I applaud you for doing so.
Although I don't disagree with all of the points you made in the last post, I do think we find common ground in the "Moving On:" section. Therefore, I quoted that.
DC3 2x 75cm MW2+ TK(D3) @300 points is worth a try |
I agree.
Regarding it becoming a target, I think that's a good thing. Afterall, they are our pseudo-titans.
PS - don't know about you, but mine are always a target anyway!  For one, they are usually the "break their spirt" formation for my enemy at 600 points for the formation. Now that I have a MW/TK option as well as the mass fire option, my opponent's army will determine whether I took the correct variant for them to be a real threat or not. If I'm playing against an all ork infantry and LV + AV mob/horde army, I'll be wishing for those Ion-phalanxes. 
_________________
Rob
|
| Top |
|
|
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Morays Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:15 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
Tactica, that may be where our experiences differ. I haven't been using Morays as my BTS formation (I'm not sure they make a great choice for this due to the support craft rule). I have just used mine as a sniper, mostly to take out arty or things like scorpions.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Morays Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 2:19 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
Cw,
I see.
They typically end up as a BtS formation for me as I generally don't have Tau formations exceed the 600 pnt level today. Also, the Moray has proved too juicy of a target for my adversary to break when fielded as a stand alone unit/formation of 1 model. Therefore, when I field it, i field it in 2 models to the formation. So the expense leads to BtS.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
clausewitz
|
Post subject: Morays Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 2:33 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
|
|
Tactica, I try to avoid "all my eggs in one basket" situations. Therefore i have avoided (so far) the 600 point Moray formation. As then my opponent must choose between hitting the annoying Moray or the larger other BTS formation (usually FWs so far). Is there a reason you would never field two in separate formations?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Morays Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 2:42 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
I like to avoid losing activations. I've found that things like disrupt seem to make short work of breaking the moray. I've also found that Tau don't usually go first against many adversaries out there. As a result, my units that are visible to the entire field typically get sited in early.
Thus my move to drop from ship.
The ship adds overhead to the tactic of course.
This allows me to activate the ship - and hopfully retain to activate the morays. If I have two seperate formations, then I get to activate one - but the other gets the hammer blow before I can activate it.
Ergo, 2 moray's in one formation and drop from ship. I now have the most probability of activating my morays before my oppoent blasts them to breaking.
Again, just my play style and mode of thinking thus far.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: Morays Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 3:44 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
Cw,
LOL, thanks! 
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
(another instance of the support craft rule working against them 
.)