Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Possible AA Suggestion
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=17125		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Wed Nov 11, 2009 8:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
OK, I had some thoughts while I was at work last night (I have a lot of free time at work. Hell, most of my time is free time).

There's the current discussion on Barracudas. There's an issue (from some) with Skyrays. And finally, there's the issue (from others) with Tigersharks/AX10's.

So, here's my suggestion, based on a theory initially posited by E&C in his foray. Simply put, remove the following line from the MarkerLight Rule. "The +1 to-hit bonus for shooting at a marked enemy may not be used when making Anti-Aircraft attacks. "

Cut back the Hunter Missiles on the Skyray to 6+, and leave the rest unchanged. Gives a bit of a nerf to Skyrays (hopefully enough to drop them to 75pts for Upgrades, my one grief), boosts slightly the Barracuda and TigerSharks defensive options, increases the concept of synergy within the army, and makes a rule a little easier (not having an exception).

Skyray then stops being this huge umbrella, unless you have outlier Markerlights. Becoming instead a 2x6+ to 60cm, and a 2x5+ to 30cm. Tau Aircraft then gain a bonus for keeping close air cover.

I dunno. Is probably a stupid idea. I don't know anything about the fluff on MarkerLights, exactly how they work, etc. Just from a rules mechanics perspective, I think it might work.

Morgan Vening
Author:  Honda [ Wed Nov 11, 2009 9:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
Quote: 

So, here's my suggestion, based on a theory initially posited by E&C in his foray. Simply put, remove the following line from the MarkerLight Rule. "The +1 to-hit bonus for shooting at a marked enemy may not be used when making Anti-Aircraft attacks. "


To be frank, this is how I've been playing them. I didn't realize that the ML applied to Skyray seeker attacks. I remember a discussion in the past about them as to whether or not they should and I thought we came down on the side of, they do not.

Are you sure about this (looks around for his copy of the army list).
Author:  Honda [ Wed Nov 11, 2009 9:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
Ok, I am not going crazy, MLs do not affect AA attacks. Here is the text from the army list.

The +1 to-hit bonus for shooting at a marked enemy may not be used when making Anti-Aircraft attacks.

Again, Skyrays are definitely very strong, but not unbalancing. I am not inclined to change their stats.
Author:  Evil and Chaos [ Wed Nov 11, 2009 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
Indeed, we hashed this one out and settled on making an exception for AA attacks.
Author:  Dobbsy [ Wed Nov 11, 2009 11:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
If anything were to change, I'd remove the Skyray formation.
Author:  Honda [ Wed Nov 11, 2009 11:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
The Skyray formation is not going to change.
Author:  Onyx [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 12:57 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
I really don't want to see the AA attack need a ML to be effective, as we discussed in a previous thread.
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 2:57 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
Quote: (Onyx @ Nov. 11 2009, 23:57 )

I really don't want to see the AA attack need a ML to be effective, as we discussed in a previous thread.

I wasn't advocating for Guided. So out to 60cm would still be possible. 2x6+ is still effective in my books. And much better if used synergistically.

Morgan Vening
Author:  Dobbsy [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 3:40 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
Morgan, if there's a drop to 6+ AA the Barras will need to be improved substantially, as even 2x 6+ shots (on the Skyray) will rarely hit. In the 3 tank formation alone, you'd only hit 1 time in all 6 shots.
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 4:10 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
OK, I wasn't clear on this in my initial post.

Cut back the Hunter Missiles on the Skyray to 6+, and leave the rest *of the army* unchanged.

So the Barracuda's stay exactly as they are, meaning that if an opponent is engaging with the Cuda's over "hostile" turf (either intercepting or being intercepted), the Cuda's effectiveness increases.

As I said in the Cuda thread, I feel there should be some more synergy, and this might have be the small kick the Cuda needed.

It was also an attempt to bring the SkyRay down a bit, in hopes of a points cut. I don't like the idea taking a SkyRay formation (personal preference wise), and upgrades at 100pts is just a little on the pricey side.

Morgan Vening
Author:  Morgan Vening [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 4:13 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
Hmm... It seems from intent you meant to say SkyRay instead of Barra.

My point still stands there. It'd make them cheaper, and less "I have a huge honkin' umbrella and there's not a lot you can do". If you didn't support them with synergy, they'd be worse, and if you did, they wouldn't significantly change.

Morgan Vening
Author:  Dobbsy [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 4:52 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
OK, gotcha. I think I'm still in the camp of keeping the Skyray as is. 100 points is a fairly expensive umbrella. I think cost balances out the Skyray IMO. I usually can't fit more than 2 in my lists plus a squadron of BCs - I use BCs because you can't always rely on the Skyrays to be able to give support AA fire (due to broken, marched etc) in the enemy half if your troops are over that side of the table.  

As I said, I'm not that keen on the 3 tank formation which could be seen as the unbalancing factor in terms of that umbrella. I don't take it either to be honest. Can't fit it in for the points, and I don't like the eggs in one fragile basket approach.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 6:37 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
I actually think its a neat idea if it resulted in a price drop for skyrays (guess who is keen on adding them everywhere!).
Author:  Onyx [ Thu Nov 12, 2009 7:02 am ]
Post subject:  Possible AA Suggestion
I still don't favour this approach.
It will slow the game down (as opponent tries to minimise ML attacks to their aircraft) and just isn't neccessary.

I don't believe that any perceived shortcoming with the Barracuda should be fixed by kneecapping the Skyray.

The Barracuda can be fixed (if, indeed it needs any changes at all) by swapping the Seeker Missile for a Twin Missile Pod (guaranteed GA with or without ML coverage - this will also help with costing the plane) and then we can all move on and stop changing parts of the list to make other parts look more attractive.

For the record I have never (and can't see myself ever) used the 3 Skyray formation either. Very powerful but to easy to neutralise.

I don't mean to be dismissive Morgan but this is very similar to old discussions that we've already had. The Tau list development has been littered with repetition and I just want to see things move forward.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/