I'm not actually convinced that change is warranted at all... about all I can say is that I don't have a huge ammount of experience with Barracudas, as they don't tend to appear in lists all that often.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Could this be indicative of this issue perhaps?

Totally.

Which is why I suggest 125pts, as a measure that doesn't change and stats or formation compositions and thus doesn't change the Barracuda's AA-biased role.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

That Tau are superior pilots compared to other races (except Eldar i guess) would be easier to mimic if the Aircraft rules would adopt the Iniative rule from Epic40k. Basically it states that the aircrafts with the highest initiative shoots first in an air-to-air combat.

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

You don't think it's a problem that a 3000 point tournament army could then have 8 aircraft formations?

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

Totally.  

Which is one reason I'm not convinced it needs changing at all.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Are people serious in regards to this?  

What other option in cheap aircraft have then been taken in lists. If no aircraft, have you not found the AA to be quite sufficient?

They offer air defence, or a GA (when there are no pressing air-threats). I find it hard to believe that these aircraft are not being used as they are. I know they are being used for such against me.

In fact, the reason for this debate appears to be that they were used and found to not fulfil the role that they were used for. Thier use can be used to help break units that are already struggling against the mass firepower suffered on the ground. They can be used for CAP and Intercepts. They can also be used to snipe vehicles in a trooop unit anywhere on a table (with a 45cm range), thereby slowing them down.  

I have trouble understanding why they are not being used at 150 points with all the above in mind or why they need to be changed. For their role, they are fine. Why make them superior in the air as well as the ground?

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

So then you're happy to have unit types across the game that cost the same, have different abilities and, likewise, units with similar abilities, cost less? I'm just trying to understand how we can balance things - across the game - if abilities are not at least costed in an fair manner across the game. i.e A plane with all the same weapons should be the same as a counterpart, surely?


I think it's also a fair point that various people like to use various forces in their lists. Some might not want planes, some might not want Skyrays. Why is it that the second bunch should be forced to take Skyrays to do the same job as a BC, when a correctly costed or statted BC can do a very similar job? We have to design lists so there's a choice for people. We can't assume that every single player always takes X unit because that's what everyone here on TacComms thinks should be taken.


I agree. I use them all the time - in fact I have not been without them in my lists in recent memory. It doesn't mean I should be quiet and just put up with it if it's something that costs the same as a Thunderbolt and performs worse. Look at it from this perspective, FB - If your WoEs Terminators were worse stats and costed the same as say SM Terminators, would you ask for an adjustment?

Of course you look at the big picture across the list and make adjustments as needed, but from what I see the BC is not as well performed as a TB. The weapon stats tell the picture clearly and the issue of Fighter vs Fighter-Bomber are null when looking at interception as both desginationsuse the fighter rules for that task.


Absolutely! I would love to see them be one or the other. Like Black Legion mentions, there's the Tigershark for Ground attack. Why can't the BC be used as an interceptor? Of course that's just my view and I don't expect others to think that way too. But fair's fair. If a TB costs 150 and the BC does too then the BC should perform closer to what the TB does and as I've said, it doesn't.


Any aircraft is capable of this. It's just the cost of the BC vs performance is not up to par in comparison to the TB.


But that's just it, for the cost, they aren't superior in either of those scenarios.

Not always. Factors like Strategy Rating and the context of the army can play a role in the points costs of a unit; 275 points for marine warhounds but 250 for guard as an example.

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

Problem is we are not comparing apples with apples. It has been a good discussion however.  




If the guard had as effective AA as the Tau, I possibly could agree with this. Then again, I do not have the IG list to refer to. Same goes for Marines using TB.


yet the TB does not have a 45cm range weapon which really assist the Barra to stay out of flak.



No no. I am being misquoted. The Tau as a force are fantastic on the ground IMO. Do they really require the air superiority (regardless of costs), in order to balance, or can we settle on an air caste that is available to the force, yet does not have elements of the likes of Buck Rogers and Starbuck as flying aces (represented in the plane's stats)?

This has been fun  

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

Sorry I should have included intiative, strategy, and everything similar.
And in this case, Strategy depends on if it's a Marine list or Guard list - here is not a good example as the TB costs the same no matter what.... Initiative for TB is 2+ so the same as a BC.

So, basically, all factors being similar points should be the same correct?

.
Well the Hydra has a 45cm range so can flak the BC at it's max range and don't forget the Skyray cost 100 points a pop.... tau pay a premium for such AA.


BC's only do if there's a ML on the target. Not 100% of the time either. Which, as I've mentioned,  degrades the cost/usefulness over the course of the game.


No they don't but I'm not advocating such either, just a more fair weapon stats/cost in comparison to a TB

They do have similar abilities and similar costs.

The vast majority of intercepts are at more than 15cm (to avoid defence flak) and on that basis the barracuda is just as good as the tbolt. The barracuda only loses out on shooting at ground targets, which is not its primary role (or that of the tbolt) - Tau have plenty of other options for thatanyway , and this is more than made up for by the all-around defence flak which will protect the barracuda from being intercepted as effectively itself.

Basically the Barracuda is, at the very least, a comparable fighter choice to the tbolt. The skyray is what reduces it as a choice as it is considerably better than the hydra and so reduces the need for the barracuda as an AA choice this, in conjunction with the tau having numerous ground-attack options, makes the barracuda a less taken option. Artificially increasing the ground-attack of the barracuda or reducing its cost only produces more problems.

_________________
www.epic-uk.co.uk
NetEA NetERC Human Lists Chair
NetEA Chaos + Black Legion Champion

If this were true, I would be asking for removal of the 15cm defensive range for uselessness. Can I ask you where you get this information from? Most intercepts I see are at 15cm to make use of all the weapons. Why pay for 15cm weapons otherwise? Few planes have 360 degree defense and most intercepts come from behind. The BC's 360 degree arc is more than off-set by it's 6+ to hit.


Then make it a proper interceptor.

I agree with Steve.

I see nothing wrong with the Barracuda/Thunderbolt issue if they're used correctly.

In AA, the Barracuda lose a pip on intercepting. But gain a pip on being intercepted.

In GA, outside MarkerLights, the Cuda loses two pips of AP, and one pip of AT over the TBolt.

In GA, inside MarkerLights, the Cuda loses one pip of AP, but gains one pip of AT over the TBolt.

In both GA's, the loss of one pip of AP can be considered compensation for the extended ranges the Cuda enjoys over the TBolt, a 30cm strafing range vs 15cm.

So I consider the overall to be a wash. About as balanced as can be done given the system. As for them being obviously inferior outside of Markerlights, isn't that the entire design principle of Tau? Synergy? You gain a modest advantage when working together, and a modest penalty when not? Why should the fighters be any different?

Morgan Vening