|
OK, I have gone through this entire thread again (oh boy!) and thought about this some more. It seems that there is a lack of consensus for the resolution for these things.
As far as I can see, there are a few issues here?
Formations ? I do take your points about having these things as formations of one. The use of a formation is there to avoid stringing them out too much, any units left out of formation by one turret being destroyed automatically self destruct. In formations of three, this means that almost the entire formation can be taken out by a single combat. Therefore, formations of six mean that they are likely to be placed in areas of the battlefield, mutually supporting each other rather than strung out in lines. Having said that? six individual formations of one does have a certain appeal and keeps things simpler? It seems that formations of one has the general backing of this boards, so we will give that a try. Markerlight Sentry Turrets will be purchased as a set of three formations, each consisting of a single MLST. (This has halved the number of units on the table, but balanced it out by trebling the number of formations.)
Placement ? I like the idea of determining where these things are before the game (after objectives are declared, before force setup), but the whole ?preplotting? thing is getting complicated. Having them set up ?before? the game is a ?realistic? scenario, and avoids teleporting completely. This solution also negates them needing an activation to teleport in, which is good in my book.
Activation ? I don?t think that it is in keeping with the philosophy of the game to allow these things to actually activate. They don?t move, don?t shoot and cant assault? what would you do with the activation! It would be a simply pass, which goes against the design principles of the game in general. MLST don?t activate at all.
Points Cost ? This is a more difficult issue. I am very aware that they could become a cheap activation, and this just feels wrong. On the other hand, over costing them leads to them never being used. On top of this, I am against the idea of getting a random allocation, and feel that we should keep their use and participation in the Tau plan within the hands of the players. This means that, the simplest solution is to keep them cheap, and limit their numbers? something like two formations for each full 1000 points of the force ? meaning a maximum of six formations in standard 2700 point or 3000 point games. I would like to keep Scout out of these things, but would be happy to recost them at 50 points for a formation of three for further testing.
Blast Markers ? These things are robotic, so I don?t think that they should be affected by blast markers at all, particularly since the effect of BMs in assaults is negated for them. So, I will add a line to the ?robotic sentry? rule to clarify this. To re-iterate, robotic sentry units are not affected by blast markers and never receive them for any reason. This means that they never broken or suppressed.
Close Combat - I agree that the current situation in assaults can lead to some strange situations. My gut reaction here is to treat them as inanimate structures. In many games, this type of structure simply doesn?t fight in close combat. What about if an enemy unit does not assault a sentry turret in the normal way, and automatically hits sentry turrets in close combat. In addition, there should be no assault resolution, no way for the turrets to fight back or hit the enemy in close combat, they have no zone of control, and they are not ?locked? and so can ?fire? as normal at their opponents. This means that an enemy has nothing to fear from close combat with a turret.
So, units in base contact with a MLST automatically hit, and the turret just makes a normal save. Units in firefight must roll to hit as normal. MLST don?t make return attacks. In addition, neither unit is considered in close combat, further rounds are not fought and the enemy may more off at any time. No assault resolution is made.
I also want to comment on the use of these things that this discussion seems to have thrown up. Personally, I see these turrets as area suppression formations, placing them at parts of the battlefield that I want covered. I don?t use them as a hard hitting unit, teleporting them into range right from the first turn. Am I alone in this? I think that this makes a difference to their perceived value. As a hitting formation, they are undoubtedly going to die fast, as area denial, they may not physically make their points back, but are worth the investment.
So, changes?
Robotic Sentry rule:
Each robotic sentry unit is classified as a formation of its own, and these units are placed at the start of the game, after objectives are declared and before forces are set up (see page 124 of the main rule book, robotic sentries are deployed after section 6.1.4 and before section 6.1.5). Robotic sentry units do not get activations and they cannot be used to claim or contest objectives.
Robotic sentry units never receive blast markers for any reasons, have no zone of control and assaults are handled differently. Enemy units engage robotic sentries as normal, with units using their close combat or firefight values. However, units in base contact with a robotic sentry unit automatically hit the sentry, which makes its normal save. Units using their firefight must roll to hit as usual. Robotic sentry units don?t make return attacks, and in addition neither unit is considered in close combat, further rounds are not fought and the enemy may more off at any time. No assault resolution is made.
Force List:
Markerlight Sentry Contingent (50 points) ? consists of three individual formations of a single Markerlight Senry Turret ? no upgrades
A maximum of two Markerlight Sentry Contingents may be purchased for each 1000 points value, or part thereof, of the Tau force. Therefore, a force of between 0 and 1000 points may take two contingents, a force of between 1001 and 2000 points may take up to four contingents, a force of between 2001 and 3000 points may take a maximum of six contingents, and so on.
Stats:
Unchanged, except that the teleport rule is removed.
_________________ https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond. https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
|
