Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 5 of 18
  [ 268 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 18  Next

E&C's Tau proposal
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:17 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
If you have proper levels of cover option 2 is probably worth more, as it is effectively +1 to hit and ignoring the cover save.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:20 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Quote: (The_Real_Chris @ 27 Jul. 2009, 16:17 )

If you have proper levels of cover option 2 is probably worth more, as it is effectively +1 to hit and ignoring the cover save.

Quite true.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 4:21 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Option 2 is also generally a bigger AP boost than an AT boost, which is probably a good thing.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Fire Warriors can't have Pathfinders added to them in this list, giving them no cheap access to coordinated fire, which lowers their usefulness significantly. I thought the point was to make FW a more viable option?

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Mephiston
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:10 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:52 pm
Posts: 4262
Errr, while they can't start the chain they can be one of the 3 formations involved. If the first formation has a markerlite in them the FW's would be a heavy hitting hammer.
Top
 Profile  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:13 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Quote: (Mephiston @ 27 Jul. 2009, 17:10 )

Errr, while they can't start the chain they can be one of the 3 formations involved. If the first formation has a markerlite in them the FW's would be a heavy hitting hammer.

Thus rewarding synergetic cooperation between formations.

If Pathfinders (or any cheap unit with Markerlights and the ability to call a Coordinated Fire action) are available to be added to Fire Warrior formations (or any formations) then that would tend to drive the list in the direction of having self-sufficient formations, instead of rewarding formation types that rely on each others' strengths.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:34 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Is it not part of the Tau's military doctrine to have self-sufficient formations though?  I thought I read that Tau cadres tended to combine arms at tactical level, rather than the IG method of keeping them separate until regimental level.

In game the reliance on small, vulnerable ML formations has traditionally been a killer weakness in the Tau list.

When I have played Tau I have used more "self-sufficient" formations and yet, IMO, I still need and use a lot of synergy between formations.  Does this concept need to be so forced in list design?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:38 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
What we see on the tabletop may not actually represent the force organisation chart, but how they operate once battle commences, where the Pathfinders will leap-frog along with a Fire Warrior formation for example, operating in close concert with it in a mutually reinforcing manner.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 5:44 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Quote: (Evil and Chaos @ 27 Jul. 2009, 17:38 )

What we see on the tabletop may not actually represent the force organisation chart, but how they operate once battle commences, where the Pathfinders will leap-frog along with a Fire Warrior formation for example, operating in close concert with it in a mutually reinforcing manner.

One could use that same concept to argue both sides of the discussion.

One could just as easily imagine those pathfinders "attached" to the fire warriors and working "just a little more closely" in a mutually reinforcing manner.

What of the other matter, that of reliance on weak ML units?  (Since we know opponents will try and kill them first if the Tau need them to be effective)
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 6:29 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
One could just as easily imagine those pathfinders "attached" to the fire warriors and working "just a little more closely" in a mutually reinforcing manner.

True, but doing it that way round makes all the formations capable of standing alone without cooperating with other formations... not very synergetic.

What of the other matter, that of reliance on weak ML units?  (Since we know opponents will try and kill them first if the Tau need them to be effective)

Well, the Markerlight formations are generally quite cheap, and so it shouldn't be difficult to bring quite a few to the party.

If at the start of turn 2 the enemy is shooting at your markerlight formations, then he's not shooting at your combat formations, meaning you should get to do him damage regardless...





=========

I'm toying with the idea of a 'bonded team' character upgrade for a single Fire Warrior unit per formation. This Upgrade would give that unit Leader and Markerlights and would cost 50pts.

Thoughts?




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
One could just as easily imagine those pathfinders "attached" to the fire warriors and working "just a little more closely" in a mutually reinforcing manner.

True, but doing it that way round makes all the formations capable of standing alone without cooperating with other formations... not very synergetic.

I have to disagree, the upgrades are what creates synergy between units.  Just because a formation upgrades with ML doesn't make it capable of standing alone (in the current list anyway).  Take the Crisis Cadre as an example: with no upgrades all it can do is shoot stuff, add ML and it now can mark for other units too, add co-ordinated fire and it can lead other units in that way, and some GM units and it can even provide long range fire support.  And all of those other options involve interaction with other Tau formations.  That definitely seems like more synergy to me.

What of the other matter, that of reliance on weak ML units?  (Since we know opponents will try and kill them first if the Tau need them to be effective)
Well, the Markerlight formations are generally quite cheap, and so it shouldn't be difficult to bring quite a few to the party.

If at the start of turn 2 the enemy is shooting at your markerlight formations, then he's not shooting at your combat formations, meaning you should get to do him damage regardless...

It has been a common complaint that reliance on small ML formations can be a big disadvantage (to the extent that I have seen posts where people declare that they intended to ditch the use of GMs in favour of straight forward fighting formations).  

I am unconvinced that my opponents will act so nicely to my ML units as to wait till turn 2 then shoot them with units that would be better attacking Tau combat units.  Surely they will use artillery, air units, warhounds, and other such units to crush small ML units as early as possible?

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:31 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Quote: (clausewitz @ 27 Jul. 2009, 20:19 )

I have to disagree, the upgrades are what creates synergy between units.  Just because a formation upgrades with ML doesn't make it capable of standing alone (in the current list anyway).  Take the Crisis Cadre as an example: with no upgrades all it can do is shoot stuff...

Yes it can shoot stuff, but it it synergises with a Markerlight formation then it can have +1 to-hit.

Synergy means lots of parts coming together to make one better whole, not lots of self-sufficient formations that are all really good at killing stuff.

It has been a common complaint that reliance on small ML formations can be a big disadvantage (to the extent that I have seen posts where people declare that they intended to ditch the use of GMs in favour of straight forward fighting formations).  

Perhaps with Markerlights as less one-dimentional, the complaint that investing in Markerlights is useless will not occur.

I am unconvinced that my opponents will act so nicely to my ML units as to wait till turn 2 then shoot them with units that would be better attacking Tau combat units.  Surely they will use artillery, air units, warhounds, and other such units to crush small ML units as early as possible?
Certainly, but Markerlight formations can be small and plentiful.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:45 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
E&C you seem to have quoted only the first part of what I said, and only responded to that half.

I'll grant that ML being less one dimensional may make then more attractive, but that has little bearing on the point in question, which is that reliance on small, vulnerable ML formations was/is considered a bad idea.  Repeating that they will be cheap so its doesn't matter if they die is still unconvincing.  Loosing formations is never good, and sacrificial ML formations has always been considered un-Tauish.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
zombocom
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:50 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
The Tau DO rely on small, fragile ML formations putting themselves into dangerous positions to improve the shooting of the rest of the army. That's precicely how the Tau wage war.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: E&C's Tau proposal
PostPosted: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:54 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
Also just to point out there is no point having easily available ML's in formations - you may as well just re stat the units.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  Page 5 of 18
  [ 268 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 18  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net