| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Jet Pack http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=15377 |
Page 1 of 4 |
| Author: | Mephiston [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
Today my thoughts turn to jump pack rule as a comparison to hit and run. The justification for Eldar hit and run is that their tactics and advance tech allow for the fluid movement etc. With the amended nature of the jet pack rule could this become a universal rule for Tau? Similar arguments (tech and fighting style) could be used to justify this change. This would allow formations to close within 30cms, use the deadly short range fire power then retreat out of (most) formations engagement range. Thoughts? |
|
| Author: | stompzilla [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
I like the jetpack rules.  The problem with hit and run is the way it lets you consolidate up to your full movement which is an ability i don't think the Tau should have, especially if seperate drone fms are to be reintroduced. |
|
| Author: | Mephiston [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
I'm not suggesting giving tau hit and run, I'm suggesting that all tau get jet pack. So on an advance or double they can move 10cm after all shooting is concluded. |
|
| Author: | stompzilla [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
Personally, i think that a better solution would be to improve FWs and crisis suits slightly in FF. 4+ for FWs and MW 5+ for crisis suits (At the expense of the MW shot) then the problem would work itself out. The FWs and crisis suits could cover and protect the tanks from engagement to some degree while at distance and close in together for a close range barrage and engagement with supporting fire from the HHs. My personal wish list for the Tau would be: Reintroduction of drone fms - priced accordingly. Drones to regain expendable, FWs and Crisis suits to be the only core cadres and support allowance upped to 3 per cadre. FF changes as above. Perhaps the introduction of a static unit of 3 or 4 towers that includes markerlights. Treated like a normal unit in every way e.g. BMs etc just simply static and bought like a normal support fm that could then be garrisoned. |
|
| Author: | Dobbsy [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:13 am ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
hmm, I don't know Meph. I'm not sure all Tau are justified in having it. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
Except that the new jet pack rule is no slower than the old version unless marching. Old: single 25cm - double 50cm New: single 30cm - double 50cm It's actually quicker for making crossfires... The only way it's slower is for when they get to fire. The old version was annoying and unfair. |
|
| Author: | Evil and Chaos [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 4:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
Yep, well they were much too good before. |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
I have no problem with the jet pack rule changing again if the current version proves rubbish, but I certainly don't want it to go back to the last version which was horrible to play against. There are plenty of other options to consider if this one doesn't work. What if the "jump away" was made 15cm? |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
Quote: (Hena @ 21 Apr. 2009, 16:22 ) and that march is just silly. 60cm vs 50cm ... Huh? Old march 3x25 = 75cm New march 3x20 + 10 = 70cm |
|
| Author: | zombocom [ Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Jet Pack |
Quote: (Hena @ 21 Apr. 2009, 18:45 ) The "jump away" doesn't scale properly with orders. Also it slows the formation down to get into crossfire position. It plain just gets in way. It's a bad rule which tries to emulate a bad game and should be ditched. I think it needs more time to be thoroughly tested, but I definately think it's an improvement on the old version, which was horribly unfair and frustrating to play against. That doesn't mean the current rule is ideal however; some varient of hit and run might be better if properly thought through. Either that or lose the rule entirely and just make them 25cm or 30cm movement. It may well be, as you say, that the rule isn't worth replicating at this scale. Still, anything is better than the old version. Good point on the march, that was a silly choice, my fault. The 10cm should definately be allowed there. |
|
| Page 1 of 4 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|