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

Skyray - love it / hate it?
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5443		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  Tactica [ Sun Nov 13, 2005 7:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Skyray,

Many are using this model to proxy it for other models or not including it in their list as something they rely on or are putting it in due to old habits (hydra in every IG formation for example) so... the question beckons...

Is the skyray something you usually take and is it working for you? Why or why not?
Author:  asaura [ Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Quote (Tactica @ 13 Nov. 2005 (18:34))
Is the skyray something you usually take and is it working for you? Why or why not?

I don't use it. It's expensive and ineffective. I can get the same effect (no kills, only BMs) from IC Hammerheads.
Author:  Steele [ Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Quote (Tactica @ 13 Nov. 2005 (19:34))
Skyray,

Many are using this model to proxy it for other models or not including it in their list as something they rely on or are putting it in due to old habits (hydra in every IG formation for example) so... the question beckons...

Is the skyray something you usually take and is it working for you? Why or why not?

I ever field it along the HH Formations. Besides giving a Formation boost, it holds 2 Missiles against the AT threat and has AA capability, a decent one but still. And of course, because I have the Models.

Cheers!
Steele
Author:  clausewitz [ Sun Nov 13, 2005 10:45 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
I haven't had a lot of luck with my Skyrays as far as shooting things down goes.  Its somewhat the same as Hunters in the SM list.  They have good range and a couple can cover most of the table.  But don't often shoot many aircraft down.

As always the threat of flak is as much a factor as its actual affect.  Between Skyrays, IC Hammerheads and things like Morays, the Tau can have a fair number of AA shots, so if you choose to brave the flak you run the chance of many hits, even if on average the number of hits isn't great.

I will generally use a couple of Skyrays, as placing two BMs per turn on attacking aircraft will ensure that they don't activate every turn (i.e. one on the way in and the other on the way out).  Two Skyrays give me the coverage needed.
Author:  Honda [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 12:16 am ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
For me it's kind of like, totally late, if you rely on flak.

:(8:

This is just a personal preference (which is fully supported by the USAF :D ), but the best way is to use your aircraft is to shoot down their aircraft, then switch to ground support.

Controlling your airspace removes most needs for ground flak unless it is dual purpose like the Hydra or Flakwagon.
Author:  nealhunt [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
The only use I can see for a Skyray is in a formation of Stingrays where the GMs are synergistic.
Author:  Steele [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Quote (nealhunt @ 14 Nov. 2005 (16:06))
The only use I can see for a Skyray is in a formation of Stingrays where the GMs are synergistic.

Neal,
look at the Stats, the Stingrays have their own Markerlights.

Cheers!
Steele
Author:  Legion 4 [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
You got to have Flak/AAA/ADA ... CAP isn't always available ... And I like the model ! :;):  Plus we dropped the CAP rules !  Only CAS vs. Flak ...  :cool:
Author:  nealhunt [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 5:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Quote (Steele @ 14 Nov. 2005 (15:14))
Quote (nealhunt @ 14 Nov. 2005 (16:06))
The only use I can see for a Skyray is in a formation of Stingrays where the GMs are synergistic.

Neal,
look at the Stats, the Stingrays have their own Markerlights.

Cheers!
Steele

I don't understand why you think that would make a difference.  Why are you taking one close enough to the enemy for that to matter?
Author:  Tactica [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Steele,

I agree with NH. The ship has a design flaw. Its 75 points when we have other more valuable assets for 62.5 each that do a better job and have proved to be balanced.

The skyray has a 30cm range to make use of its Marker which means you are putting this formation dangerously close to the enemy when or h-t-h isn't the worlds greatest. We keep these formations alive by terrain and pop-up. If we are marking something within 30cm with the skyray, we are also probably in charge range. We are also probably in a desperate situation.

The added missle shot in comparison to a normal fish or HH body is the difference. Its AA is somewhat of a joke in effectiveness IMHO.

To me, this piece is either over priced, or under gunned.

These things were feared by armor in Taros per the fluff. IG even had their own names for these things as they could bust armor and AA like nothing they had seen. E:A makes a mockery of the history on this piece IMHO.

The stingrays have GM's at 5+.

At the 75 per tank points level, I think the Skyray would be a good candidate for GM 4+ shots. That would raise its GM potential and make any flier think twice about flying into a marker lit area. You never sustain fire flak, so at best it would get to 3+ and at best would be 2+ vs targets in the open on ground if it could sustain and they were marked. At worst it would be 6+ if it doubled and ground targets were in cover.

If we dropped the points to 50 per skyray, I think it would be a good candidate for GM5+ shots. That would still raise its GM potential and make any flier at least consider flying into marker lit area. 4+ flak if the flier is within 30cm as you still can't sustain on AA. Like the above, it would have a range of 3+ to 7+ for the same spectrum of ground target potential.

Either of the above would make the upgrade more appealing and useful IMHO.
Author:  HecklerMD [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
I'm wondering why we're using ML's to guide a AA missile?  AA missiles are primarily radar or infrared guided (heat seeking), laser designation is too diffacult with fast movers and relies on LOS which can be broken by crossing below the horizon or entering a cloud!

I Also wonder why the Space Marines have a better AA missile than the Tau?  And its named Hunter too!

How About: (and this is really off the top of my head)
Drop the Seeker.
2x "Better name than Hunter" Missile 60cm AP5+/AT6+/AA5+
Smart Missile System 30cm AP4+ Ignore Cover

Lighter AA fragmentation warheads also effective vs inf, not so much against armor:  No real qualms about dropping the AT6, though I know that would disagree w/ IA3.
Missiles drone guided (Suicide drones  like in BFG :p )
Author:  Steele [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Quote (Tactica @ 14 Nov. 2005 (19:06))
Steele,

I agree with NH. The ship has a design flaw. Its 75 points when we have other more valuable assets for 62.5 each that do a better job and have proved to be balanced.

The skyray has a 30cm range to make use of its Marker which means you are putting this formation dangerously close to the enemy when or h-t-h isn't the worlds greatest. We keep these formations alive by terrain and pop-up. If we are marking something within 30cm with the skyray, we are also probably in charge range. We are also probably in a desperate situation.

The added missle shot in comparison to a normal fish or HH body is the difference. Its AA is somewhat of a joke in effectiveness IMHO.

To me, this piece is either over priced, or under gunned.

These things were feared by armor in Taros per the fluff. IG even had their own names for these things as they could bust armor and AA like nothing they had seen. E:A makes a mockery of the history on this piece IMHO.

The stingrays have GM's at 5+.

At the 75 per tank points level, I think the Skyray would be a good candidate for GM 4+ shots. That would raise its GM potential and make any flier think twice about flying into a marker lit area. You never sustain fire flak, so at best it would get to 3+ and at best would be 2+ vs targets in the open on ground if it could sustain and they were marked. At worst it would be 6+ if it doubled and ground targets were in cover.

If we dropped the points to 50 per skyray, I think it would be a good candidate for GM5+ shots. That would still raise its GM potential and make any flier at least consider flying into marker lit area. 4+ flak if the flier is within 30cm as you still can't sustain on AA. Like the above, it would have a range of 3+ to 7+ for the same spectrum of ground target potential.

Either of the above would make the upgrade more appealing and useful IMHO.

Ok, Tactica I agree with you that pointwise it maybe to expensive. Keeping a Formation just out of harms is not bad either, but it suits my playing style very well, it?s kinda Jaldons Way of the Tau - be aggressive - take the battle to the enemy.Retreat when you must, but keep in strike range. I fared well so far. And even if it?s shot to pieces, there will be another unit taking over the role of Marking some shiny targets. They may be useful with the Stingrays if you can spare them to add this formation, I haven?t, so it?s used offensively. Regarding the Taros fluff, I don?t know it, but if you feel uncomfortable with the stats ( BTW - for it?s undergunned as an AA Unit too) propose knew ones and we?ll test them. As for the Basic Roll to Hit : JG posed the Values at 6+, I tried them at 5+ and they turned out to be VERY effective, so if changes are about , I would restrict them to the AA capable Missiles. That would give the AA Unit its proposed Role.

@Neal
I think I misinterpreted the definition of Synergistic. You are right about it.

Cheers!
Steele
Author:  Tactica [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 9:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?

I'm wondering why we're using ML's to guide a AA missile?  


Heckler,

Physically:
The Skyray model has 2 marker lights on it.

Taros WH40K Fluff Precident:
In WH40K, Taros - which is our most up to date reference for this E:A units capabilities - The Skyray used its guided munitions to pummel enemy tanks and aircraft - so much so that the imperium named and feared the unit.

Taros WH40K Gaming Mechanic Precident
has a networked Markerlight system that it can use to guide its missles to their Ground Targets. Therefore it does not have to rely on other units to paint a target. It still can use the markerlights of other units in the army to guide its missles to an intended target.

The networked system also allows it to fire at two targets per turn instead of only a single target. Typically only superheavies have this luxury in 40K.

A Skyray may further opt to buy an anti-aircraft mount, though this is not required. With which, it can then use its markerlights to fire its missles at aircraft targets as well as ground targets. In addition, if this option is purchased it may also use markerlights of comrades for the same purposes.

WH40K Gaming Caveat to ML and GM in general
For reference: Markerlights and Seeker missles work differently in 40K. Units with Markerlights fire their markerlights as a weapon based on the units normal 'to hit' with ballistics skill. If a hit is scored, then a seeker (guided missle) from any unit on the field or in reserve can be immediately guided to the target now needing a 2+ to hit a ground target or a 4+ to hit against an air target. So its the markerlight formation that's firing the missle not the unit carrying the missle in this regard. Furthermore, a marked target yeilds a 2+ to hit with any weapong using the mark - guided missles are not the only things that can use a mark in 40K Tau. So again, the 40K mode of operations with markerlights and their net benefit is completely different than E:A's implimentation of the markerlight.

E:A Design
Its been a design principle for some time that E:A Tau Skyrays would be able to make use of the markerlights and thus become better to hit with them. Its also been a decision for some time that unguided launch is also necessary. Since this decision, certain units may or may not be better at the unguided launch. (Stingray has a base 5+ instead of the typical 6+ for example)

Future
There is nothing to say that the base GM value could not be lowered from 6+ to something more interesting due to its networked ML on board intelligence system.

I Also wonder why the Space Marines have a better AA missile than the Tau?  And its named Hunter too!
They hit better without a markerlight assist, but don't have the same range. They cannot assist from a markerlight, but one would think that _with_ a marker, we would at least be as good, if not better. So point is an interesting one.

How About: (and this is really off the top of my head)
Drop the Seeker.
2x "Better name than Hunter" Missile 60cm AP5+/AT6+/AA5+


Ironically, the AP of this missle wouldn't go up. The AT ability would considering the historical use of the Skyray.

Lighter AA fragmentation warheads...

Fragmentaion aren't really Tau's style. They are more pin-point accuracy and high payload.

though I know that would disagree w/ IA3
Agreed, and we probably want to avoid such a divergence if not required.
Author:  Tactica [ Mon Nov 14, 2005 10:20 pm ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Quote (Steele @ 14 Nov. 2005 (20:02))




Steele, if the unit is functioning for you in an aggression role - even if only alblative - that's valuable info! :)

I don't know if that's the desired way the masses want to see that unit used. As an AA piece of its calibur, one may typically value it in other roles.

That said, I don't think you'd lose the option to continue its use in your current role even with the changes being kicked around. After all, it would still have a marker, and it will still be a skimmer, and you'll still have AA and GM capability, and it would still add to the formation size regardless of what tweaks are done.




if you feel uncomfortable with the stats ( BTW - for it?s undergunned as an AA Unit too) propose knew ones and we?ll test them.

Proposed two options already to see if anyone had interest - one keeps it at 75 points, other puts it down to 50 points. Either are worth considering IMHO. I think Heckler is kicking this one around a bit as well.


As for the Basic Roll [of Guided Missiles] to Hit : JG posed the Values at 6+, I tried them [Guided Missiles] at 5+ and they turned out to be VERY effective, so if changes are about , I would restrict them to the AA capable Missiles. That would give the AA Unit its proposed Role.

I've added in the brackets above what I think you are saying. This is a very good point and I'm glad you brought it up.

I think I recall the conversation you are referencing. At that time, we were talking about lowering GM as a whole across the entire Tau list from 6+ to 5+. That has been abandoned in general as other tweaks are being made to avoid having to take this measure across the entire list.

For the record, I do not advocate GM at 5+ 'across the board' for the Tau WIP v4.2.4 list. Other changes have worked to resolve some of the AT and quality MW problems IMHO. I think we still have a moderate amount of AT and MW in comparison to other lists out there - and we have no real close combat MW abilities in the list, but tactics, new tricks, and unit tweaks have all worked to eliminate a large portion of the problems we were encountering in comparison to other lists.

Even though the Tau WIP v4.2.4 list as a whole is working better on the AT, quality ranged MW front when compared to the old legacy v4.1, it doesn't mean we can't take a specific unit (Skyray in this case) that's not working properly and adjust one of its weapon types to GM 4+ or GM 5+ instead of typical 6+ - if that's all that's required to fix it. The stingray for example does have a 5+ GM system.

Cheers for the good comments and conversation Steele,
Author:  clausewitz [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 2:49 am ]
Post subject:  Skyray - love it / hate it?
Just for comparison its worth noting that the SM Hunter:
1. Is not a skimmer
2. Has 5+ armour, not 4+
3. Has just one AT shot, not 2
4. Has no AP shots at all
5. Has 15cm less range

In return the Skyray doesn't have TSKNF.

Both are 75 points.

Am I wrong or does the Skyray seem fine by comparison to the SM Hunter?
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/