Since most people agreed that FWs should be best if used mechanized, I think the calculations should consider that. Alone in the field Fire Warriors should be less efficient than Crisis suits.

Hence a suggestion might be to make the mechanised FW cost 250 points?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I think the base Fire Warrior Cadre should *start* at 6 Fire Warriors... and then allow 3 Devilfish and other upgrades if desired.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

Umm, my point was that even if we waved a magic wand and increased the stats (for shooting or assault, take your pick) you would still have to give them transport and possibly one or two other upgrades to make them viable. However even with better stats, at 300+ points I suspect that people are going to choose other formations over the FW for all the other reasons mentioned.

Turning this question on its head, at what cost do upgraded FW start to look attractive, and can we work the stats back to match that kind of cost??

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I posted an answer to this in the other thread, but 4x FW are 100 points, 2 devilfish are 50, and the 2 PF+Dfish upgrade is 100, so there's a 250-point formation.  Without a leader, that's really fragile, AND lacking in the one thing you need in an assaulting unit: numbers.  Even Marines usually assault with 8 stands (either 2x Assault or Assault and Devastator), so this 6+3 formation is a little light, especially when the Marines are throwing either 8x CC3+ or 4xCC3+ and 4xFF3+ (Marines are hitting with about 400 points, not counting the obligatory Chaplain/Librarian and the THawk that delivered them).  Currently, the Tau formation would throw 6x FF5+ and 3x FF6+.  That's just not going to cut it as an assault unit.  Let's say we bump the Fire Warrior's FF *way* up to match Devastator Marines.  That puts this mixed formation at 4xFF3+, 2xFF5+, and 3xFF6+.  Better, but still kinda weak, and with that big a jump, we'd probably have to increase points.

The full 8xFW+4xDFish w/ Pathfinders is 400 points, and currently hits at 10xFF5+, 5xFF6+.   Using the same FW stats, that goes to 8xFF3+, 2xFF5+, 5xFF6+.  That's going to leave a mark on just about anything.  FF4+ probably wouldn't need a points increase in the Tau army (it would in any other force), and would change that 400 points to 8xFF4+, 2xFF5+, and 5xFF6+, in addition to their AP attacks at range.

The problem for me is that I *want* two formations of FW, but at 400 points each, I can't afford them and the rest of the stuff.  Paring FW formations down to 6FW+3Dfish would drop the price to 225, 325 with Pathfinders.  That's a better cost-point, and it has advantages of better matching FW pack sizes (you'd have 4 FW per base if you bought one pack, and the current 8xFW bases completely use up two packs).  So, 2-3 packs of FW would get you 2-3 formations, depending on how you based them.  personally, I'd still go for 6/base for FW, 4/base for PF, so I'd need 3 packs of FW to get my two formations of FW.  Plus, that makes an immediate visual distinction, and keeps the number per base matching unit sizes from 40k (just like I'd do Marines and IG 5/base).

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

There's also the added headache of Mech FWs being a mixed unit type formation. If you lose a single transport, they become an all-15cm move formation... A "loss" of effective points essentially . Another minor reason not to take them in my mind.

It's a pity we can't make them the Masters of Mobile Battle where you can fit 3 FW team in a DF so losses can be compensated i.e you have 8FW teams and 4 DF, you lose a fish, but the other teams can mount up in the other DFs...  

Or! each team gets a fish  

If they're going to be "up-gunned" the points will have to be adjusted... 200 points for 6 "up-gunned" FWs and +75 points for 3 Devilfish seems decent...

Or even 175 for the base six, if you maintain the "2 Support per 1 Cadre" limitation.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

That's the pain of Mech Inf in all lists (well marines can tweak a bit with Razorbacks). I don't see that as problem

And IMHO this is where the co-ordinated fire fule (or commander) comes in. I envisage the Tau using more, smaller formations that combine as needed for tactical reasons to get the kind of firepower you outline.

Taking your example, rather than a single full-on formation for 400 points, consider three smaller formations each 200 points that are close together. Using the co-fire and commander rules you can always move at least a pair of the formations simultaneously thus getting the desired effect, with the third acting as a reserve. Enemy retaliation severely damages one of the leading formations, so the third steps in and you still have the ability to use a "single" 400 point formation.

This principle is not new - it was at the heart of the Napoleonic reforms of 1796, and was one of the key reasons why the French under Napoleon were so successfull for the next 15 years until the Allies started to copy his organisation and methods.

So what I am saying is that the Tau unlike any other race seems to have the capability to build a "popcorn" style army that is actually used as a combined arms force on the battlefield. . . .
But would this work in E:A? and more importantly, has anyone tried to do this?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

It's funny Ginger I had a very similar idea a while back but didn't bother to post it because I guessed no one would like it and the issue of activations, co-ord fire and cost were complicated. It was also aimed at the way the list was built which I thought for sure would be shouted down as most novel ideas here do.

Kudos for attempting to propose this idea.