I think I have to side with Soren on this. I think the issue should either be to WE or not to WE.

Also, it seems like we've fielded the AX at 225 before...though in this list we've probably done just about everything at least once before.  

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

I think they can work either way, but there is no need to bend the rules or come up with anything new, either WE or not.

I don't think I have ever used a Tigershark to deploy drones.  Does anyone else do this?  If it is an important ability it should be kept, but if it is really only there because it can do it, I would drop it as it would make the Tigersharks more consistent with other Epic armies.

For what its worth a couple of constraints that IMHO should be applied here to avoid Tau (or other races) A/c being overpowered :-

• AX-1-0 (or whatever TK a/c) must be priced to be 4 maximum (and preferably '3') per 3000 point game to avoid the "5 Aces" style abusive army. This is because ground AA can be shot up with impunity, and CAP (though improved) is no guaranteed defense - especially against DC2 a/c. Basically too many air formations each with powerfull weapons is abusive.
• If a DC2 WE, then only allow 1 per formation, because a pair can be swapped / positioned to reduce CAP damage as well. Basically it is just too powerfull to destroy or deter as a pair.
• Weapon ranges really ought to be a maximum of 45cm, and ideally 30cm or less to prevent 'sniping' at ground formations outside ground AA ranges.

For what it is worth, I believe a straight points comparison with Eldar A/c is worth considering, so we are talking formations in the 275 - 400 point range.

However, it may just be worth considering the use of different numbers of A/c per formation to reflect the 'fluff' and desired effects etc. So for example, the Tigershark could be 2-3 normal A/c per formation, while the much rarer AX-1-0 TK variant could be a DC2 singleton 'because of the extra armour carried to ensure battlefield survivability' or whatever reason  . . .

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Good ideas all the way across Ginger.  One constraint on formation size with Tau aircraft will be how they are packaged by FW.  Formation sizes of 3 are tough on new players as FW packages all aircraft at 2 per pack (although it could be an option for barracudas as that is how they used to come).


Also, for those following the thread I have added my thoughts on the Manta to the first post in the thread.

The Moray is tough for me as I am not sure what role it is supposed to play in the Tau army.  Is it a Warhound analog?  How many of you use the Ion version?  My gut tells me that it is primarily used by players as a TK platform.  Does it need to have both weapon system choices or could we just go with one of them?

You are on "thin ice" here Smitty    your questions are at the heart of the 'Moray debate'. Check out the discussions here and  here for starters (though there are other threads too).

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

A few notes about Manta's from reading IA3.

"The Manta is the Tau's closest equivalent to the Imperium's Titans or Ork Gargants, and carries comparable firepower."

_________________
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.

I knew I was forgetting something...

Hmm...The current Crit is way too soft.  Off the top of my head loss of the Deflector with additional hits doing a point of damage, but I would be open to other suggestions.  I will playtest it that way for now.

Thanks for posting over that info.  Do you think my stats fit within those descriptions?

@Ginger,

I was right there with you up until this:

Weapon ranges really ought to be a maximum of 45cm, and ideally 30cm or less to prevent 'sniping' at ground formations outside ground AA ranges.

IA3 pg146.

As to why Mantas weren't used to kill the Warhounds, they were probably  being used to ferry troops/equipment around. The AX-1-0 were fine for killing Warhounds but if there had been Battle Titans present, I believe the Mantas would've been there too. IA3 clearly states that Mantas are front line fighting machines.
"It is well armed and armoured for use in frontline combat, where it is expected to deploy as an attack craft."

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

Guys, my points are purely about game balance

Honda, I still have nightmares    about the "5 aces" use of AX-0-1 for 175 each against my Eldar and Marines. As Hena says, with 45cm weapons all round they easily suppressed or destroyed all ground AA, and were tough enough to ignore most CAP (except nightwings as I recall) - and the results were brutal to say the least.

Hena, regarding paired WE there are two related issues relating to the survivability of the formation.
1) You need to kill 4 points of aircraft, where most AA usually only gets 1-2 hits. As these are spread out over the formation, this is not enough to stop both a/c from completing their mission and indeed may not be sufficient to stop them returning next turn.

2) DC2 aircraft can fly 10 cms apart which potentially allows the rearmost A/c to shoot any enemy attacking the front A/c. This in turn forces enemy CAP to be positioned such that any hits are allocated to the rearmost A/c first. Assuming only one hit was scored in a previous turn, by putting the damaged a/c in front, it makes the formation that little bit more survivable. Not game breaking in itself, but it does mean that a pair is more durable than two singletons

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Hena and Ginger, interesting discussion.  I think if the Tigersharks (both models) are WEs then they should fly solo only.  For the reasons that you both mention and that there are no other examples of WEs that fly in formation that I can recall of in other armies.

Of course after some thought I think they should not be WEs and fly in formations of 2.  Right now, the only official WEs that fly are heavy transports like the T-Hawk, Landa, and Vampire.  It makes more sense for both models of Tigershark to be just Bombers and come in formations of 2 I think.

Hena earlier you said that 350 for a pair of non WE AX-1-0 was too expensive.  Could you elaborate a little please?

Zombocom - I am not sure what you were trying to highlight out of Onyx's post, could you ellaborate?

but what it really comes down to is this......it is what it is.