Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 3
  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Pathfinder proposition
Tactica
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:11 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
User BlackLegion brought this up:

Multilaser S6 in 40K ?= ?AP5/AT6 in E:A
Assault Cannon S6 in 40K ?= ?AP5/AT5 in E:A
Tau Rail rifle S6 in 40K ?= ?AP5, Disrupt.

Question: Shouldn't the Tau Rail rifle be AP5/AT6 (no disrupt) in E:A?

This would take one of the Disrupt shots away from the Pathfinders and would give them an AT6 shot.

1. Would any be opposed?

2. Do we really *need* 2 disrupt shots on the Pathfinders?

3. What is our justification for the rail rifle having disrupt anyway?

This seems very doable, if not logical to me. Unless there is serious opposition, I think this is a no brainer for v4.4

Cheers,




_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:28 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
They certainly don't need sniper (I never new they had it, now no commander is safe from me!).
Having all that disrupt and intergral transport means I would rarely consider firewarriors.

Saying that if they got AT shots as well I'd use scissors to remove said firewarriors from printouts!

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:49 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
[quote="The_Real_Chris,10 Mar. 2006 (10:28)"][/quote]
They certainly don't need sniper (I never new they had it, now no commander is safe from me!).

That's off topic!

They do deserve sniper IMHO - and have proven to work with it for a LONG time. BTW: Historically speaking (I don't have the new codex) that's EXACTLY what they are for. Tau Pathfinders are the Tau snipers. They mark targets and pick off enemy with S6 AP3 weapons in 40K providing no save for marines and hitting on a 2+ on a D6 dice... but again - start another thread TRC, sniper is most definitely warranted on this unit! :p

Having all that disrupt and intergral transport means I would rarely consider firewarriors.

Saying that if they got AT shots as well I'd use scissors to remove said firewarriors from printouts!

You speak in riddles man... so does this mean you favor the suggestion or not - stay on topic! :alien:




_________________
Rob


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (Hena @ 10 Mar. 2006 (10:42))
Does anyone have the new codex? I would like to know if the rail rifle is standard equipment for the pathfinders?

Steele has the new codex.

Rail rifles were a GW add on to the old codex.

4 models in the smallest unit, 1 sergent and 3 others could all have rail rifles and target LOCK (Tau gear allowing each one to pick seperate target enemy units) along with their marker lights.

Don't know what the new codex will say.

However, from what we know now Hena - what say you on the proposed?

NOTE: Keep in mind, v4.4 will not necessary take all of the new codex into account. Based upon CS's timeline, he plans on getting v4.4 out and into the vault ASAP. The next revision will start to work in the new 40K codex stuff where applicable/necessary.




_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:55 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Quote (Hena @ 10 Mar. 2006 (10:51))
Quote (Tactica @ 10 Mar. 2006 (18:49))
Quote (The_Real_Chris @ 10 Mar. 2006 (10:28))

They certainly don't need sniper (I never new they had it, now no commander is safe from me!).

That's off topic and wrong. They do deserve sniper - that's EXACTLY what they are for. Tau Pathfinders are the Tau snipers. They mark targets and pick off enemy with S6 AP3 weapons in 40K providing no save for marines and hitting on a 2+ on a D6 dice... but again - start another thread TRC, sniper is most definitely warranted on this unit! :

I would disagree with that. My comparison to marine scouts still stands. Hard Wired Target Lock should not avard them sniper (especially as it was in website that only half gets the rifle in the first place).

Nope - min squad size is 4 models if I recall. Well more than half of the unit Hena.

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Tactica
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241
Hena,

Thank you for your reply. We'll agree to disagree on the marine comparison and leave the sniper thing for another discussion some day after we both review the new codex.

For v4.4 - it sounds like you agree on the logic and the removal of disrupt in exchange for the AT6+

Cheers for the answer, :)

_________________
Rob
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
The_Real_Chris
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:09 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London
I would be for it (thats the answer to the riddle) but it would be at the expense of further downgrading the firewarrior in my eyes.
But since currently I only want firewarriors for suicide fearless troops I'm fine with them becoming a tad more unfavourable :)

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
clausewitz
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:42 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Sorry Tactica, I'm going to have to disagree.  I don't think that giving Pathfinders an AT shot is a good idea.

Firstly, as TRC pointed out it would increase the advantages over Fire Warriors too much.

Secondly, it breaks the separation of AT shot from Tau infantry (non-suits).  One of the characteristics of the Tau infantry that made it different from other races was them not having an AT shot, but having markerlights instead.  This encouraged the cooperation between Guided Missile armed units and the infantry.

This was discussed at length with regards to the seeker missiles.

For me it is one of the design concepts of the list, which I think is good, characterful and should be maintained.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
CyberShadow
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:44 pm 
Swarm Tyrant
Swarm Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9349
Location: Singapore
I am certainly in favour of dropping the 'disrupt' ability from the Rail Rifle.

I think that the Sniper ability is in character for the Pathfinders, and I would like to keep it.

However, I am hesitant to allow the Rail Rifle to get AT6+ as this seems something that the unit is not designed for. (Besides, that is why they carry Markerlights).

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: Pathfinder proposition
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:50 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm
Posts: 1891
Location: Katy, Republic of Texas

Question: Shouldn't the Tau Rail rifle be AP5/AT6 (no disrupt) in E:A?

This would take one of the Disrupt shots away from the Pathfinders and would give them an AT6 shot.

1. Would any be opposed?

2. Do we really *need* 2 disrupt shots on the Pathfinders?

3. What is our justification for the rail rifle having disrupt anyway?


1. Strongly oppose any change
2. Yes
3. The Rail Rifle causes pinning tests and in the new Codex this will have even more value because the markerlight hits can be used to drop leadership roles.

I don't know how this got on this path, but the Pathfinders have been working for a long time now and I don't see any reason to change them.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Print view Previous topic | Next topic 
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 1 of 3
  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


Powered by phpBB ® Forum Software © phpBB Group
CoDFaction Style by Daniel St. Jules of Gamexe.net