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

Hammerhead Fluff
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:37 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
The fluff text in the Tau army list for the Hammerhead varient models like the plasma gun & fusion cannon states that these are early or 'alpha' models of the tank, and have subsequently been superseded by newer Hammerhead varients.

This is incorrect, as these varients are in fact the very latest models of Hammerhead, seen for the first time on Taros.



I also thought it might be a cool idea to have a suggested points cost for the 'collectors' drone sentry turret, even if it's not to be tournament-official.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Dobbsy
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 12:45 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Personally, I don't have a problem with using any of the turrets in the offfical list. Not sure why we can't use them. It's not as if they aren't available models making it hard for newer players to get them.... CS?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 6:28 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Well, some of the problem is that the 'newer' turrets SUCK.  Shorter Range, lower Strength, etc.  Why would I want a 30cm AP3+/AT4+ Missile Pod turret when I can have an Ion Cannon with twice the range (and an AA attack)?  

I really regret buying the variant turrets (40k scale) at the same time I bought IA3 (before I'd seen the rules for them).  If I had known the rules, I might have bought the missile pod version, and used another turret to make a Swordfish.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:00 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Why would I want a 30cm AP3+/AT4+ Missile Pod turret when I can have an Ion Cannon with twice the range (and an AA attack)?


Perhaps because it could be a cheaper formation?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:36 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

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

Perhaps because it could be a cheaper formation?


The challenge in taking these other turrets is that they aren't that much cheaper that the loss in capability is recoverable in other units.

I know we do this a lot, but in 40K, the Ion cannon only represents about 25% (roughly) of the cost of a Hammerhead. Reducing the weapon cost by a few percentage points doesn't allow you to buy another vehicle, so in essence, you end up with slightly less capabilities and then you try to make use of the few extra points somewhere else.

Same in Epic. What it boils down to for the Tau is getting the most capability that you can out of your platforms because the Tau list (and rightfully so) is not one of those that can switch back and forth between a high effectiveness/few numbers and low effectiveness/high numbers. The Tau list operates around "capabilities" and what a Tau player should be doing is looking for the right blend of capabilities for the tactical problem they are faced with.

If you are familiar with modern day analogies, Tau are the equivalent of an American Armored Cavalry formation, whose effectiveness is derived from high mobility and local domination of opponents.

If you give the AAC formation weaker vehicles, they stop being able to do the things they need to do. In war, "better is the enemy of good enough" (cookie to the first person who knows where the quote comes from).




_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
tneva82
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:46 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:17 pm
Posts: 606

(Honda @ Sep. 01 2006,13:36)
QUOTE
I know we do this a lot, but in 40K, the Ion cannon only represents about 25% (roughly) of the cost of a Hammerhead. Reducing the weapon cost by a few percentage points doesn't allow you to buy another vehicle, so in essence, you end up with slightly less capabilities and then you try to make use of the few extra points somewhere else.).

This is only true if you go simplistic(and wrong) system of basecost+weapon costs.

If you rather derive cost on how usefull model is in REALITY you can have cheap enough price for hammerhead with the weaker guns it's tactically viable choise.

_________________
www.tneva.net
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
T0nkaTruckDriver
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:04 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 6:30 pm
Posts: 22
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

(Evil and Chaos @ Aug. 31 2006,18:37)
QUOTE
these varients are in fact the very latest models of Hammerhead, seen for the first time on Taros.

The Taros campaign is a "historical campaign". The story is essentially a history book, detailing a campaign that happened in the past.

By my understanding, the current E:A fluff is correct. The Fusion/Plasma/Burst/Missile turret variants are older technologies.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 2:24 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Incorrect.

The Taros campaign takes place around the same time as the 13th black crusade, ie; very recently in the contemporary storyline (Which basically stops at the end of the 13th crusade, and will probably never move on from there).

The Railgun, ion cannon, burst cannon varients are described as the older ones, the Plasma and fusion cannons are described as being seen for the first time on Taros, having only just been developed.


"It has been speculated that these weapons are being field-tested on Taros." - Page 158.


Similar language is also used to describe the Piranha and Tetra vehicles.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 6:08 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

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

Honda @ Sep. 01 2006,13:36)

I know we do this a lot, but in 40K, the Ion cannon only represents about 25% (roughly) of the cost of a Hammerhead. Reducing the weapon cost by a few percentage points doesn't allow you to buy another vehicle, so in essence, you end up with slightly less capabilities and then you try to make use of the few extra points somewhere else.).


This is only true if you go simplistic(and wrong) system of basecost+weapon costs.

If you rather derive cost on how usefull model is in REALITY you can have cheap enough price for hammerhead with the weaker guns it's tactically viable choise.



@tneva82

Perhaps you'd like to explain yourself a little more. What I stated was a fact, or near fact as I didn't include the cost of the other upgrades that are fairly common.

So if you'd like to quantify the cost associated with "how usefull model is in REALITY", I'd be very interested in that number and how you derived it.

I still stand by my point.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 6:28 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Synergistically, a reduced cost formation with a worse weapon doesn't always result in a worse army, as those saved points can be spent on another complimentary formation or upgrade.

That's how all army lists everywhere operate, at a micro or macro scale, after all.


It's possible that the stats listed for the 'collectors' Hammerhead varients don't accurately reflect the vehicles utiltiy too (Ie; they may have worse stats than they should). I wouldn't be surprised, considering the fluff innacuracy of this section of the list.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Honda
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 9:32 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

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

Synergistically, a reduced cost formation with a worse weapon doesn't always result in a worse army, as those saved points can be spent on another complimentary formation or upgrade.

That's how all army lists everywhere operate, at a micro or macro scale, after all.


@E&C

I'm not disagreeing with your statement on how lists "ought" to work, only trying to get the point across that the point savings gained from taking the less effective turrets is not enough to compensate for the loss of capabilities.

Keep in mind, in 40K, you can only take three hammerheads. The AMHC does not exist in 40K (though Tactica and I have given it a shot) so taking out your 9 x Ion cannon shots and taking the savings elsewhere doesn't produce the equivalent effect as having those 9 IC shots.

If you've only taken one or two hammerheads in your list, then the points saved from taking less effective turrets only allows you enough points to get extra batteries for your markerlights (a joke).

The only reason I can see for getting the other turrets is that some of them look very cool and could be used as "counts as".

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:01 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
the point savings gained from taking the less effective turrets is not enough to compensate for the loss of capabilities.


Then you drop the points further until the formation becomes cost-effective.

If an effective Tau army cannot be made without an Ion Cannon Hammerhead formation in it then there is something wrong with the list in the first place.




Also, some of the weapons there have stats that seem a bit off.

For example, the Ion Cannon (S7 AP3) is AP3+/AT4+, while the Plasma Cannon (S7 AP2) is AP4+/AT4+. Even accounting for a single less shot, the Plasma Cannon is a superlative Terminator killer in 40k, yet has worse anti-personnel abilities than the inferior AP Ion Cannon... while its range, which should be 80% of the Ion Cannon's, has only 50% of the range.

I think with a little thought it shouldn't be too hard to balance one or two of the 'collectors' models.




_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:47 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
OK, looking at page 162 in IA3 (the 40k Hammerhead statline), and converting those numbers into Epic terms

twin-linked, Long-barreled burst cannons:
40k: ?36" range, S6AP4 Assault 3
Epic: 30cm range, AP4+ (maybe AP3+, but it doesn't feel right, might have enough shots to include Disrupt)

Ion Cannon:
40k: ?60" range, S7AP3 Heavy 3
Epic: 60cm range, AP3+/AT4+/AA6+ (copied from v4.4)

Missile Pods:
40k: ?36" range, S7AP4 Assault 4
Epic: ?30cm range, AP3+/AT3+ or 2x AP5+/AT5+

Twinlinked Fusion Cannon:
40k: ?24" range, S8AP1 Heavy 1 Blast
Epic: ?30cm range, MW4+ (maybe adds an extra MW FF attack?)

Twin-linked Plasma Cannon
40k: ?48" range, S7AP2 Heavy 2
Epic: ?45cm range, AP4+/AT4+ (has the same S and # of shots as a Missile pod. ?AP2 just means it kills Marines and Termies better. ?Ion Cannon has 50% more shots, and kills everything less than a Termie dead)

Railgun:
40k: ?72" range, S10AP1 Heavy 1 (solid shot)
AND ?72" range, S6AP4 Heavy 1 Large blast (submunition shot)
Epic: ?75cm range, AP4+/AT3+ (copied from v4.4)

*****************
In 40k, the only turret variant I like is the Missile pod one, and it's still 3x the cost of an Ion cannon (Ion Cannons got very cheap in Codex: Tau Empire). ?The plasma cannons are vastly more expensive than the Ion Cannon (3.5x more expensive!), and only kill terminators better. ?The Ion cannon kills everything else just as well (better, actually, because of the extra shot). ?Range on the Fusion Cannon is too short for me to want to use it (too may monstrous creatures for me to want to get that close to the enemy), and a small blast template might get a couple partial hits if my opponent doesn't spread out much. ?Blast template weapons are highly over-rated in 40k right now. ?2" coherency vs a 2.5" diameter blast? ?that's one guy, partials if I'm lucky. ?With a Large blast (5" diameter), I will get some partials, maybe some full hits if I'm lucky, but that's it.

Why would I want a weapon that costs me at least 25% of my range in Epic? ?If we follow the 40k design for the weapons, they're horribly underpowered and shortranged. ?They offer no real advantage to me that an Ion Cannon does not. ?I can see a possible use for the Burst Cannon turrets, as very short-ranged AA, but that's only if the Ion Cannon loses it's AA attack. ?Even then, I'd still rather spend the 75 points on a Skyray and bulk up the formation.

I might consider using the variant turrets if they were 50 points each. ?[edit:  That's 12.5 points cheaper than the Hammerhead right now, and  I still don't think that's cheap enough for the loss of capability compared to an Ion Cannon.]

The problem I see with these weapons is that they have Eldar ranges without the Eldar Hit&Run and/or CC capabilities to survive getting that close.




_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Evil and Chaos
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 10:59 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 20887
Location: Harrogate, Yorkshire
Shrug, I would have thought a MW turret on the Hammerheads would have been of interest to you floaty-heads no matter the range... oh well. :)

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter
Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Lion in the Stars
 Post subject: Hammerhead Fluff
PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 11:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Not when I can just FF something with a mess of Crisis suits instead.

Unless I took an entire AHMC of Fusion Cannons, the odds are too low, and leave my tanks too vulnerable to a counterattack.  (Why, yes, I am a cold calculating person.  I am not a Cad, however, I know who my parents are, and my mother is a sweet old lady.  So don't call me a Cad or an SOB, alright?)

Like I said, my biggest complaint is that the range is so short.  If we kick the range up to 45cm, it might be better, but it's still Eldar range without the Hit&Run or CC capabilities to survive the counterattack.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"
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
  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 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