Page 2 of 3

[ 38 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Morays
Steele	Post subject: Morays Posted: Thu Oct 20, 2005 8:39 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Hi, yes please remove that Slow-Firing issue. I would like to see it at 2x MW3+ TK(D3) or TK(1). If we could use different kind of submunitions it would also improve the role as SUPPORT Craft. ( something like Carpet Bombing in WW2). Ok, I know that Tau don?t have any Artillery, besides on a Starship. But in Lack of other Effective anti WE Weapons it would make sense, having one Weapons System that is capable to , let?s say - Slow the opponents Infantry. What you think? Cheers! Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

Tactica	Post subject: Morays Posted: Fri Oct 21, 2005 7:23 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Hi Steele, Welcome aboard the removal of slow firing badwagon. Thanks for wieghing in. _________________ Rob
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 10:27 am
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	If I remember correctly the Rail Cannon variant of the Moray was specifically designed to deal with enemy WE (from a game design perspective).  The problem with changing to 2x TK(D3) or 2x TK(1) is that you dont really greatly decrease its usefulness against WE; but, at the same time, you greatly increase its usefulness against a great many other units (especially RA units like LRu, Terminators, Wraithgaurd etc).  This (IMO) represents a fairly large increase in the power of the Moray, which was not far from being balanced. Question to those who have used the RC Moray: did you face an enemy with large WE (titans, gargants etc)?
Top

Steele	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:01 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (clausewitz @ 24 Oct. 2005 (11:27)) If I remember correctly the Rail Cannon variant of the Moray was specifically designed to deal with enemy WE (from a game design perspective). ?The problem with changing to 2x TK(D3) or 2x TK(1) is that you dont really greatly decrease its usefulness against WE; but, at the same time, you greatly increase its usefulness against a great many other units (especially RA units like LRu, Terminators, Wraithgaurd etc). ?This (IMO) represents a fairly large increase in the power of the Moray, which was not far from being balanced. Question to those who have used the RC Moray: did you face an enemy with large WE (titans, gargants etc)? Yes. Indeed I face frequently large WE or at least Scout Titans, as my main opponent loves the Inquisitorial lists. And they have their Fortresses/ Basilikas with a lot of DC?s and Shields. It?s only then that I think about fielding a Moray with Railcannons. Cheers! Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:09 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	So the RC Moray does suceed in the job it was designed for?  (i.e. taking out enemy WE)
Top

Steele	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:29 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (clausewitz @ 24 Oct. 2005 (14:09)) So the RC Moray does suceed in the job it was designed for? ?(i.e. taking out enemy WE) Yes, it delivers it?s punch. But ,again, when facing large DC WE with shields , it?s nearly worthless, because either you use it first and third turns, or just at second, by this way you almost got atleast one SC shot down and/or broken/wiped out and those "little" WE still lumber around with their RA of 4+ or so. And assaults are out of question for us. Bottom line : if your are facing enemy with lot of large WE you must be able to pour EVERY Turn fire into it that is able to effectively damage them. Cheers! Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	Quote (Steele @ 24 Oct. 2005 (13:29)) Yes, it delivers it?s punch. But ,again, when facing large DC WE with shields , it?s nearly worthless, because either you use it first and third turns, or just at second, by this way you almost got atleast one SC shot down and/or broken/wiped out and those "little" WE still lumber around with their RA of 4+ or so. I would have thought that a co-ordinated fire attack using any CF-able formation as leader, a Hammerhead contingent as basic AT provider and a Moray for the coup-de-gras would do rather heavy damage to most WE. Am I missing something?
Top

Steele	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 2:23 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (clausewitz @ 24 Oct. 2005 (14:53)) I would have thought that a co-ordinated fire attack using any CF-able formation as leader, a Hammerhead contingent as basic AT provider and a Moray for the coup-de-gras would do rather heavy damage to most WE. Am I missing something? Maybe the fact that there could be more than one WE? What you do then? How many Morays do you field? For myself no more than 2. Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 3:38 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	Is it common to have more than one large WE? (apart from OGBM/AMTL)  In 2700-3000 point games you can generally only field ONE large WE (Warlord/Reaver/Gargant/Phantom etc). Two Warhounds or Revenants are fairly common, but they are not as tough (5+RA) and can be killed/broken by regular AT fire (the amount being appropriate to the cost of the Warhounds/Revenants). Or if you were to use Tactica's Planetfalling Moray tactic you would have 2x TK(D3) pin-point attacks in addition to the Rail Cannon attack.
Top

Steele	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 5:59 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (clausewitz @ 24 Oct. 2005 (16:38)) Is it common to have more than one large WE? (apart from OGBM/AMTL) ?In 2700-3000 point games you can generally only field ONE large WE (Warlord/Reaver/Gargant/Phantom etc). Two Warhounds or Revenants are fairly common, but they are not as tough (5+RA) and can be killed/broken by regular AT fire (the amount being appropriate to the cost of the Warhounds/Revenants). Or if you were to use Tactica's Planetfalling Moray tactic you would have 2x TK(D3) pin-point attacks in addition to the Rail Cannon attack. That may be true in a Standard Tourney Armylist. But as I mentioned earlier, I often play against Inquisition Forces, and they may field one large WE per Inquisitor in play, and so I face 2 to 3 of them in 3k game. They cost about 400 to 500 Points and are not part of the 1/3 part. Have a look at the list in the SG- Forum and you will see what I mean. Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Morays Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2005 7:41 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	In order to balance the Tau list we must make comparisons with existing balanced armies.  The Inquisition Forces list is not balanced yet. (Its a really interesting list, but IMO far from balanced)
Top

Tactica	Post subject: Morays Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 8:46 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Quote (clausewitz @ 24 Oct. 2005 (15:38)) Is it common to have more than one large WE? (apart from OGBM/AMTL) ?In 2700-3000 point games you can generally only field ONE large WE (Warlord/Reaver/Gargant/Phantom etc). Two Warhounds or Revenants are fairly common, but they are not as tough (5+RA) and can be killed/broken by regular AT fire (the amount being appropriate to the cost of the Warhounds/Revenants). Or if you were to use Tactica's Planetfalling Moray tactic you would have 2x TK(D3) pin-point attacks in addition to the Rail Cannon attack. Clauswitz, I couldn't help but comment on yours and Steeles comments. Please forgive the intrusion. Keep in mind, a single moray is not a single warlord or gargant. A pair is on par with reaver titan though. 600 points comparison works out there too. When you argue that a reverant or warhound are not as tough, I would argue that you are not factoring in all the pros and cons of each. Warhounds and reverants first off cannot be see 100% of the time - morays can. Warhounds and reverants are also much faster than a moray. These titans can also claim objectives, Morays cannot. That's huge when start talking about investing 600 points into a formation! Furthermore, warhounds have void shields that point blank absord initial damage - reverents have a 3+ invulnerable save! To imply that the Moray is even close to as durable as either of these formations would require more than an armor comparison. I also think you'll find that when objectively compared, the Moray will loose in resilence hands down. When you start factoring in the 2x pin-point attacks, they are only affective against WE, they are single use from spacecraft, and they cost 75 points per shot (150 points for the vehicle!) So now you are totalling the moray's ability to 750 points - not 600. At this point, the tactic as a whole should be better than a reaver. Finally, we play lots of 3K and 3500 point games. In a 3,000 point game, you are talking about 1,000 points of fliers and titans. In a 3,500 point game, you are talking about 1166 points in titans and fliers. One can purchase quite a few planes and scout or light titans at this stage. At either points levels - you could only purchase a single formation of 2 Morays as they cost 600 for the two of them. That would leave 400 points to spare at 3K or 566 points at 3500 game. At either 3K or 3500 you could buy an ample amount of titans in any of the other lists too. However, in those other lists - the titans can control objectives and still win you the game. The morays cannot hold objectives - so no matter how much they do or don't kill, they won't win you the game. You better take other stuff in the tau list. _________________ Rob
Top

nealhunt	Post subject: Morays Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:24 pm
Purestrain Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm Posts: 9617 Location: Nashville, TN, USA	Why wouldn't Morays be able to claim objectives? The only units in the game that can't claim objectives are aircraft that exit the board.  Support craft don't exit the board.  Nothing in the Support Craft rules say they can't claim/contest. === That aside, Morays do seem expensive for their abilities.  While as tough against hits as Revenants and Warhounds, Tactica has a good point about visibility.  They pack more firepower than a Warhound, but only about the same as a Revenant and they suffer badly in assaults compared to scout titans. I think either a tweak in ability or points does not seem unreasonable to me. _________________ Neal
Top

Tactica

Post subject: Morays Posted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:38 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241

NH, Thanks for waying in. Hmm... on the support craft not claiming bit. I thought they didn't claim. Perhaps that's an old idea I'm recalling that's been tossed. Heh... Clausewitz, I went back and read through this whole thread again.. (Whew!)... on the bottom of page 1, you noted this: Perhaps make it DC4, 2x 60cm MW2+ TK(D3) and 300 points? Its now not a shadowsword at all and the 600 points for two gives DC8 and 4 TK shots (plus shields, AA etc etc) versus the shadowsword coy. DC9 3 TK shots. I think this version still may be worth considering. Though for consistency, the rail-tech weaponry at 75cm may be a better choice if the 15cm doesn't imbalance the suggestion. I would probably avoid the DC increase right now and table that as an option. I like it mind you, but I'm a fan of incrimental change vs. multiple changes all at once. This would still eliminate the 90cm suggestion and deliver the multi-gun rail-tech. So the main gun would look like: DC3, 2x 75cm MW2+ TK(D3) @ 300 points each. (NOTE: DC4 per unit tabled for post playtest of the above) Clausewitz, Honda, Dobbsy, Nerroth - others, What do you think? _________________ Rob

Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Morays Posted: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:39 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	Tactica, Resilience: Moray - Deflector Shield, Warhound - Void Shield, Revenant - Holofield.  The holofield is probably the best, and appropriately its on the most expensive of the three, but can be damaged by critical hits.  Void shields are good when they are up, and do nothing once removed.  Deflector shield is good against TK, moderate against MW and weaker against AT.  As I see it, it is hard to say that the Moray is losing out due to its defensive abilities. Support Craft Rule: You can be seen 100% of the time, but equally you can see your target 100% of the time.  For me this ability is neither inherently and advantage or disadvantage, its all down to your tactics and how its used.  (Jaldon used it to snipe a 250 point arty formation out the game before it fired, advantage.  Your opponent used the rule to place non-IDF barrages onto units he couldn't otherwise hit, disadvantage - and a sneaky move that you should expect from Orks ).  Also remember that when/if the experiemental skimmer rules are "official" then the support craft alone will have this 100% sniper ability, and this ability was considered good enough that rules changes are being considered (I know its as much to do with "realism" as well). Spacecraft:  150 points for 2x PP attacks is not bad.  But when that now gives you the ability to Planetfall your Moray(s) (or Manta/Orcas). I would agrue that the Planetfall ability is worth a few points (I think the CSMs need to pay for Dreadclaws, at work so cant check just now).  A carefully planned planet fall with a single Moray could allow the 2x PP attacks, followed by a sustained firing Moray, 2x D3 + 1x D6 TK, that represents a large threat to just about any WE, and at current prices it 400 points. The Rail Cannon is and should be significantly inferior to the Ion Cannons against non-WE.  So if you take a RC Moray and your opponent doesn't have any WE then thats just tough luck, but at least you dont have any large WE to worry about! Objectives:  I can totally understand why you thought that this disadvantage would merit making the Moray better in other ways.  But I agree with Nealhunt, I dont remember reading this. Moving on:  While I may seem to be disagreeing with you a lot, I do share your desire to tweak the Moray a little.  I think the DC3 2x 75cm MW2+ TK(D3) @300 points is worth a try (I also believe that it will make the Moray a hunted unit, as it will be very annoying to have 2 TK attacks that you cant hide from).
Top

Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 2 of 3

[ 38 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

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