Page 2 of 2

[ 27 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2

Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept
clausewitz	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 4:46 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	Another thought... IF the Hammerhead cadre was added and IF the Dragonfish SC unit was brought back, it would seem possible to field an all AV/WE Tau army.  Is this something that would be feasible from a background perspective?  Is it desireable from a game-play perspective?
Top

Steele	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 5:16 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am Posts: 423 Location: Duisburg , Germany	Quote (clausewitz @ 28 Oct. 2005 (17:46)) Another thought... IF the Hammerhead cadre was added and IF the Dragonfish SC unit was brought back, it would seem possible to field an all AV/WE Tau army. ?Is this something that would be feasible from a background perspective? ?Is it desireable from a game-play perspective? At least it would give some new Flavour, but without any Infantry it will be difficult to win. I tried against a Blood Angel Army and barely won at the tie breaker with an 500 Point advantage. Steele _________________ Quid pro Quo
Top

Honda	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 6:22 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:44 pm Posts: 1891 Location: Katy, Republic of Texas	A couple of responses: 1. Is an armored formation "Tau-ish"? I would say yes. Primarily for this reason. There's a lot of focus on "Patient Hunter" as the Tau philosphy, but keep in mind that there is also the harder side to Tau tactics which is "Killing Blow". Now, these two types of tactics are the Yin and Yang of Tau operational theory...and there is nothing preventing a Shas'o from incorporating variations of each into a plan. Again, PH/KB are strategies for war and combat and should not dictate what forces are used. 2. Alternative lists. I think it is a little premature to start off on new lists just because we haven't nailed this one down yet. Until we have a really good idea of what the main list should look like I think we should hold off to prevent us from running down parallel paths and duplicating efforts. Now having said that, I think Nerroths Guenschi (sp) list is significantly different enough from what we are working on and it has had enough intellectual capital invested in it to continue on it's course. 3. HH size: I think if we consider an armored cadre as a main force unit, then it would be easy to limit add-ons to only HH contingents and upgrades. Based on earlier notes, this would keep the size down and prevent someone who might be inclined to game the list. So now we are talking about an approximately 11 unit tank unit. 4. All AV/WE list. As stated above, go ahead if you feel lucky. I think that kind of list might trick some, but in the long run you'll only be limiting yourself. I don't think we should legislate against stupidity (harsh term, but for a point). There are ways to pick un-competitive lists from the other races and no one prevents them from doing so. Caveat emptor. _________________ Honda "Remember Taros? We do" - 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment
Top

clausewitz	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 7:17 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm Posts: 916 Location: Glasgow, Scotland	There is some precedent for leaving out awkward units for future "possible" lists.  The Capitol Imperialis was dropped from the AMTL list for a possible Skitarri/Tech Guard list. I agree that there is no harm done is trying out a HH cadre to see how it goes.  I just wasn't sure if it was Tau-ish. RE the all AV/WE army, again my concern was more about the theme than balance.  I had assumed that there was a reason why in previous lists FW/Crisis were mandatory.
Top

Clockwerks	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:00 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:51 am Posts: 122	If I may add my 2c worth I agree that while I like the idea of an armored company of HHs I wonder if it is very Tau-ish. I always tend to think of them as medium to smaller sized formations that will stalk something (much like Eldar) with patience and then deliver a swift and decisive strike when the timing is right (When crossfire is established, for example) I -love- the idea of smaller HH cadres running around with supporting Pirannhas or Tetras and Skyrays... But they can already do this, can't they? From the Tau perspective, I think that having a large formation of HHs would be an unwise application of firepower where as a wise Shas'O would have it spread out so that they would have the minimum amount of forces to bear with the maximum firepower potential. First rule of modern warfare, after all. Adam
Top

Nerroth	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:16 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm Posts: 573 Location: Canada	I'd have no problem with a 6-strong main formation, but if the problem is with making it too big forget about Stingray upgrades - I'd rather keep the Stingrays as a separate formation altogether, you don't see Basilisks squadroned with Russes do you? OK so the difference isn't quite that major but I wouldn't put Stingrays anywhere near a forward-deploying HH formation, they are more fragile and work better hiding behind terrain - or babysitting your home objective - and taking advantage of your army's Markerlights in a way the more direct-fire HHs wouldn't. Also, glad you like the Gue'senshi, it's taking forever to paint up 3000 points' worth - but it'll be worth it eventually! Gary _________________ Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers v7.3 pdf Human armed forces for the greater good.
Top

Honda

Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 9:50 pm

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

I'd have no problem with a 6-strong main formation, but if the problem is with making it too big forget about Stingray upgrades - I'd rather keep the Stingrays as a separate formation altogether, you don't see Basilisks squadroned with Russes do you? OK so the difference isn't quite that major but I wouldn't put Stingrays anywhere near a forward-deploying HH formation, they are more fragile and work better hiding behind terrain - or babysitting your home objective - and taking advantage of your army's Markerlights in a way the more direct-fire HHs wouldn't Agree wholeheartedly. I still hadn't made up my mind on the Stingray contingent, but I think this comment verbalizes from an operational perspective why it doesn't fit. So that would mean a HH cadre would only allow adding the HH contingent, and either a swordfish or a Skyray. Nothing else. So now we are talking about a 6 (minimum) - 9 (maximum) sized unit. This seems better like a better fit. Thoughts? _________________ Honda "Remember Taros? We do" - 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

Nerroth	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:19 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm Posts: 573 Location: Canada	Much better. Fits nicely between the Eldar and IG in terms of formation options at 6-9. (Wonder if I should let the Gue'senshi Armoured Company take a few extra Russes, like the IG list? Then again, 10 is plenty...) Gary _________________ Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers v7.3 pdf Human armed forces for the greater good.
Top

Tactica	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:33 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Regarding Tau-ish concerns, to Honda - he nailed it. All mech concepts are VERY T'au'ish. Besides, I hope more than someone tries to go all vehicles and WE with the list to see if they can pull it off. I'm not offended if they can get it to work - as long as its balanced in results. Eldar is the only list I've seen make this strategy work. (well, old black legion could do a great job of this - but that's another thread on another list...) if someone was to go nuts on all Tau vehicles - unlike Eldar, I don't think it would work very well here against other lists. Our vehicles are nowhere near as tough with all the RA of IG so the holding objectives perspective is going to be difficult... and land grab will be challenging as we don't have vehicles as fast as Eldar. I suspect the FW cadre will always be a staple in the Tau list. No proposed 'stingray upgrade' for this formation will limit the size further. I'm OK with that. Looks good guys, I follow all the logic and will include the base 6 as previously discussed in the revisions document then. Cheers for all the great feedback, _________________ Rob
Top

Nerroth	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:42 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm Posts: 573 Location: Canada	Wow, first I get good feedback on the Or'es El'leath, then a thumbs-up on the Grenadiers, then agreement on this - sounds a bit too good to be true in my book! *Awaiting giant anvil...* Gary _________________ Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers v7.3 pdf Human armed forces for the greater good.
Top

Tactica	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:45 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	*Awaiting giant anvil...* _________________ Rob

Top

Nerroth	Post subject: Armored Mobile Mechanized Cadre - Concept Posted: Fri Oct 28, 2005 10:46 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm Posts: 573 Location: Canada	You did diss Battlefleet Gothic, what did you expect? Gary _________________ Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers v7.3 pdf Human armed forces for the greater good.
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 2

[ 27 posts ]

Go to page Previous  1, 2

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