"Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors |
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors  Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 2:35 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
Lance weapons are basically macro-weapons as far as our tau morays are concerned...
Lance + pulse is even uglier...
Should the deflector really only get a 6 save against a lance weapon?
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
asaura
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 9:32 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481
|
|
Lance+pulse doesn't exist, does it?
Changing the Deflector Shields rule to account for Lance sounds like it's not "future-proof" and also is a bit fiddly.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
baronpiero
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm
Posts: 186
|
|
In fact no lance+pulse weapon exists to my knowledge.
Well I find that this weakness is not very hindering in the end. I even tend to find it characterful as it is one more proof of Eldar Subtleness.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:03 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
Asura & Baronp,
First, the Pulse + Lance weapon reference was hypothetical.
The bigger picture question on the table is should deflector shields account for lance weapon hits(or other future powerful weapons)?
Lance is obviously more powerful than a regular AT shot as described in its own text.
Swordwind, Pg 11, Special Rule
1.1.3 Eldar Technology
Lance Weapons: A lance uses a highly concentrated beam of laser energy to destroy heavily armoured targets. A unit with reinforced armour (see Epic: Armageddon 2.1.11) that is hit by a lance weapon is not allowed to re-roll its saving throw. |
Lance Weapons that exist in Swordwind
War Walker, Scout, Sp:30, R:30cm, ?AT5+
Wraithlord, Sp: 25cm, R:30cm, AT5+
Prism Cannon, SP: 35cm, R:75cm, AP4+/AT4+/AA5+
Night Wing Interceptor, Fighter, R:30cm, AT4+/AA5+
The deflector shield as written is simply limited to the 'now' weapons but is clearly intended to get better as stronger shots are fired. As written, it will not take into account Lance or other "hypothetical stronger than AT of the future" weapons even though it clearly is designed to do so.
Tau v4.1
Special Rules, Pg 4
Tau Deflector Shields
Tau deflector shields work differently to Imperial or Ork shields in that they do not absorb the incoming energy, but are shaped and positioned in such a way as to deflect the incoming fire (hence the designation). A further noteworthy trait is that the shield's response will be proportionally more powerful with the energy of the attack.
Tau deflector shields work like an invulnerable save in all respects, with the single exception that they will not always save on a normal 6+, instead the score is dependent on the impact energy of the hit: The deflector will save on a 4+ against weapons with the Titan Killer ability (roll for variable damage first and then save against each hit seperately, as attacks might be only partially deflected), a 5+ against Macro Weapon hits, and a 6+ against AT attacks. It does not work at all in assaults, where the angle of incoming attacks does not allow for deflecting shots completely away from the craft.
|
As future developed weapons may circumvent this thing - just Lance already has, does this indicate a design flaw of the Tau deflector shield? That seems like a development problem to me.
Especially in this case - Lance and Macro are both 'upticks' from the basic AT shot.
I agree with Asura. To me, the 'fiddly' nature of the Tau Deflector is annoying in the first place and is condusive to problems with the Lance as well as other future weapons developed. Its affect should be more generic and not be specific to other rules IMHO.
_________________
Rob
| Top |
|
|
|
JimmyGrill
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:01 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
 |
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 10:05 pm
Posts: 61
|
|
The deflector rules are to be used as they stand against lance weapons.
At the end of the day, lance weapons are simply AT weapons with a special ability, but AT weapons nevertheless.
The only units with any realistic chance of getting at a Moray/Manta are Prisms anyway, and maybe fighters if AA is weak.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2005 2:12 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
JG,
TY for responding.
Like LV on crisis/broadsides - I have to say that I think this is a bad call.
However, you are the champion of this list.
I respect your decision and thank you for the consideration.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steele
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2005 8:28 am |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
|
| Quote (JimmyGrill @ 04 2005 Aug.,19:01) | | The only units with any realistic chance of getting at a Moray/Manta are Prisms anyway, and maybe fighters if AA is weak. |
Unless , you Planetfall that might be right. But if you drop early you might even be cought in a shower of tank shells and rockets , that is almost impossible to withstand with a deflector alone. @ the math guys: what is the statistical chance of a Manta saving the hits of 2 Landraider squadrons and a predator squadron, all maxed out? For me it was nearly a desaster, only saving 2 hits at all, god thank no criticals. I just managed to deploy the embarked troops, next turn the manta exploded in a large blinding fireball....
Cheers!
Steele
_________________
Quid pro Quo
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
baronpiero
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2005 10:56 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm
Posts: 186
|
|
Tactica:
Especially in this case - Lance and Macro are both 'upticks' from the basic AT shot. |
In fact, Lance weapons are somewhere between AT and MW. Therefore, 6+ inv or 5+ inv are both realistic responses as you can't cut in the middle. So personally I don't have any issue with the current 6+ against Lance weapons from a pure logic point of view, and would prefer we stick to that built-in effect unless really needed.
Tactica:I agree with Asura. To me, the 'fiddly' nature of the Tau Deflector is annoying in the first place and is condusive to problems with the Lance as well as other future weapons developed. Its affect should be more generic and not be specific to other rules IMHO. |
That's not what Asaura said. He said that handling exceptions like lance weapons would be fiddly (inelegant if I don't miss the point?).
SteeleUnless , you Planetfall that might be right. But if you drop early you might even be cought in a shower of tank shells and rockets , that is almost impossible to withstand with a deflector alone.
That would be true for any other battle Titan if they could planetfall.
|
Steele
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:01 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany
|
| Quote (Tactica @ 08 2005 Aug.,19:06) | Asura,
Sorry I misunderstood.
I thought you meant the deflector was not future proof - i.e. new rules.
BaronP, I got it - you don't have any problems with the deflectors not being affected differently by lance from AT. I don't think lance is any different to a reinforced target - and that's what I personally am talking about.
If the gun manages to eliminate my rerolled armor save from my reinforced armor - however it goes about acheiving that affect is irrelivent to me. I see your argument for saying its weaker, but in game play - neither a lance nor a macro-weapon allow my Moray a rerolled armor save. One of them gives me a 6+ backstop, the other gives me a 5+.
Both weapons have the same probability of giving me a reinforced armor save reroll - zero % chance.
Therefore, a lance is closer to a Macro-weapon hit than an AT hit vs. a Moray or any reinforced target for that matter IMHO.
If the designers don't see that as a problem - fair enough, I do see it as a problem though. I have a very common Eldar opponent that can circumvent a rule that I get against other weapons that don't allow me to reroll my Moray's armor save. |
But how often you get shot with such weapons? As each race has their special abilities, you should accept the Eldar?s. In a mixed playing group there aren?t so much eldar, I think. And getting struck by MW Weapons isn?t incommon either. So adapt to the playing style of your opponents and keep at least one thought ahead of theirs.
Cheers!
Steele
_________________
Quid pro Quo
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:48 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
Steele,
Eldar are the only players that have lance weapons today. But tomorrow there could be the "uber Zzapp gun" or the "ultra-powerful boom gun" - whatever, they may not allow superheavies and armor save as they require an at length focus on their target whereby smaller vehicles are too hard to stay focused on, they might be gun specifically designed for skimmers and fliers which only eliminate their RA abilities... etc...
The point is, the deflector is not future proof. Today - its lances... tomorrow - right now, is it a big problem - no. Its an annoyance right now. The vehicle works.
- I have a little heartburn that our vehicle can always be seen while other small to midgrade titans are amazingly agile - eldar have a jet pack - while they still deliver a healthy dose of firepower... and we are always seen and can always see, but move pretty slow and don't really pack the same amount of firepower on the MW front - slow firing blah... Anyway, I digress.
The point I'm going for is Lance gets around our shields today because our shield rule specifically sites various main rules. There's no *other* category though.
Also, we don't have ablative Void Shields that generate and we don't have a blanket 3+ holofield either. Our save seems somewhat lacking to me.
Baron P,
My resolution would be to create the *other* category but at the same time, increase the invulnerable save by one for TK and MW as those are seriously high powered beams. Lance and RA removing items that are not MW would still give us a 5+ backstop. AT would remain unaffected...
Inv Save Chart
3+ = TK
4+ = MW
5+ = Anything besides regular AT that's not a TK or MW
6+ = AT Only
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Tactica
|
Post subject: "Lance" weapons vs tau deflectors Posted: Tue Aug 09, 2005 11:12 pm |
|
| Brood Brother |
|
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
|
|
Asura,
They are only future proof *IF* your perspective is that the deflector shouldn't increase in defense against other powerful energy weapons that are NOT classified as MW or TK...
If that's your perspective, LOL - OK, but that's most definitely not the intention of the shield from my reading of the text.
Future proof is to say that it always gets a 4+ invulnerable save. Then we wouldn't have to worry about what kind of weapon shot it would we...
Lance treats the RA vehicle like the Lance was a MW but without calling it a MW.
We could say a new weapon was going to be created that was called "Vibro Cannon" in the next Xenos list of your choosing... (hypothetically speaking)... this powerful blast of focused energy causes large mechanical beasts to rumble, shake, and degrade as the vehicles own wieght works against itself. Roll a number of dice equal to the number of DC the target WE has. On a 4+ it takes a hit that cannot be saved regardless of whether it has RA or not.
Now, this hypothetical *NEW* weapon of the future, would completely get around the deflector because of the way its written. It's not AT, it's not MW, and it's not TK. However, its just as bad as a TK - yet this powerful beam of energy would not even trigger the deflector shield.
To me, that means our Deflector shield isn't 'future development' proof at all. It lacks protection from any new weapons that are going to be created that are not specifically noted as "AT" "MW" and/or "TK".
The lance is merely the first example of such 'future development' potential of which our deflector doesn't fully address as it should.
_________________
Rob
|
|
| Top |
|
|
