Top

HecklerMD

Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:40 am

Brood Brother Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:42 am Posts: 201

IG Tank Co:  Vanquishers are usually reserved for the company commander, if one is available.  But we all know where Tau put their local commanders, in Crisis Suits, and I think the idea of a "command tank" isint reflected in Tau doctrine Also, the change from LR to LRV is from AT4+ to AT2+ The change from HH to SF is: HH                                   SF RG:AP4+/AT3+                   TLRG:AP3+/AT2+ Smart Missile System           TL Missile Pods 30CM, AP4+                       45CM, AP4+/AT4+ Nothing                             Burst Cannon                                       15CM AP5+ Seeker Missiles                   Same As you can see the difference between a HH and SF is much greater than the difference between a LR and a LRV. And, lastly: In short - its the lead tank in the most expensive tank formation... Your HH cadre is 6 HHs plus a free upgrade, and 2 contingent choices and 1 auxiliary formation, all for 375 A HH contingent + HH Upgrade is 6 HHs for... 375, and takes away 1 contingent choice and allows no extra axuiliary choices. Extra contingent/Auxiliary choices, free upgrades, all for the same 375 points... How is this more expensive again? We should still have to pay the 25pts for the SF upgrade for this cadre, any other way seems way too unbalanced

Top

Tactica	Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:01 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	I meant more expensive compared to the HH contingent, however, your point is well made and I can't say that I disagree with it. I'd rather err to the side of caution since you are not the only one to make this claim, but your analysis seems to be the most compelling. 6 HH with no free upgrades it is. Thanks for your comments. Glad you elaborated. _________________ Rob
Top

Tactica	Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 7:54 am
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	4.2.2 available in first post now! See that post for list of revisions. Collector models and tweaks are all that's left... _________________ Rob
Top

Honda

Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 3:11 pm

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

Now in the Tau world, I can see someone wanting all Ion's and skyray for major AA coverage of something. You probably won't see all rails - accept that someone might not own a stingray and they want to run WYSIWYG. Swordfish would be the logical choice if you have the model and are going for heavy AT in the formation. Hobby Tip: I got a number of Skyray models because I like the way they look and decided that I would use them in "counts as" roles. So I painted the seeker missiles in one color to represent my Swordfish and in another color for my Stingrays. Looks pretty cool. YMMV. _________________ Honda "Remember Taros? We do" - 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

Tactica	Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:29 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	My Swordfish modelling tip (learned from JG but modified in application) is Buy 2 Railgun Hammerheads to make 1 swordfish, and then use spare HH body and spare HH turret without the gun - to make a Devilfish! No waste! _________________ Rob
Top

Tactica	Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 4:31 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Here's a picture. _________________ Rob
Top

baronpiero	Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:12 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm Posts: 186	I start to like the shape the WIP 4.2 takes. I have two small unit tweakings to submit for the WIP that I have in mind for some time now, but I'm not sure that opening yet another thread for that would be a good idea. It's about battlesuits. I know they're not the main focus, however their gameplay still seem perfectable. Here we go Stealth battlesuit team: Add -Teleport- to unit notes. Reasons for this change: >playtest reports have shown stealth battlesuits to be a popular choice as an upgrade. However, they are hardly ever taken as an independent contingent. It seems that players often prefer to them the more expendable Pathfinder contingent, which is also more worthwhile to the army as a whole because of the Coordinate Fire ability. >Concistency with existing rules: according to the rulebook, -Teleport- can be used to represent stealthyness as well as an actual teleporting ability. There is also a precident to this in other armylists with the Tyranid Lictor and Alaitoc Pathfinders. >Consistency within the Tau army list: -Teleport- as stealthiness definitely fits Tau tactics, and fits particularly well the stealth team as they look like a close match to Japanese Ninjas who are renowned for their ability to appear from nowhere and vanish. Finally it makes stealth contingent have something unique in the Tau army. Broadside Battlesuit team: tweak Broadside Battlesuit weapon set (tone down AT, up AP): 2x Twin-linked Railguns 75cm AT>3+< - >2x< Twin-Linked Plasma Rifles 30cm AP4+ - Why? In the current 4.1 list, the broadside battlesuit is currently 2 x AT2+. My problem here is the way it plays on the field: the current AT2+ makes Broadsides extremely good at shooting on the move, especially when you drop them from an Orca dropship to deliver 8 x AT2+ shots. Hitting on a 2+ basis also means that Broadside battlesuits hardly ever need to take sustain-fire orders apart from hitting a target that is in cover. This change could make sustain-firing with broadsides a logical option as it should be, still not necessarily the best. Last but not least, AT2+ means that failling an activation with broadside won?t hinder them much: most of the time they won?t need to be moved anyway, will just loose 2 shots and still deliver 6 x AT2+ shots. This also makes them too good at retaining the initiative. The suggested change, would address it aswell. As a side effect, this change alters the way a railgun is translated from Warhammer 40K. I believe the current railgun has followed the following design process: Hammerhead railgun was designed as an upgunned Leman-Russ battlecannon (AT4/AP4 -> AT3/AP4), and was then directly adapted on a Battlesuit by twin-linking and removing the AP submunition (hence AT2+). On the contrary, I wanted railguns could be seen as an upgunned imperial lascannon (AT5 -> AT4), and then twin-linked (AT4 -> AT3). Hammerhead railgun is then considered an upgunned version of a battlesuit weapon, as it is the case for all Hammerhead variants released by Forgeworld, mounting battlesuit weapons as a main gun. Therefore, this change seem to increase coherency as a side effect, meaning that all Hammerhead main weapons can be seen as an upgunned version of a battlesuit weapon. Meanwhile, the broadside team is granted an extra plasma rifle to match their actual weaponry 1:1. There's certainly room for that now. As a side note, this change could help pass the pill for those who are not big fans of Battlesuits being made infantry once again.
Top

Tactica	Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:32 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Baronp, Glad to hear you like the way the list is shaping WIP 4.2.2 is shaping up! I'm on board with your stealth suggestion and have wondered if the same shouldn't be a 'jetpack' rule, however, I'm sure that would be frowned upon. I was thinking of the Deep Strike 40K ability with all jet pack formations (battlesuits, stealth, and dronees) Stealth only for teleport was discussed previously on this board. It was something a consensus was never reached upon and the discussion just kinda died without reaching a conclusion. Then the boards failed and data was lost. This is a good topic to discuss again. Broadsides, I'm not on board with a change for this formation. They are AT specialists. They are not AP specialists but can deal some damage in mass. In 40K, they cannot currently move and fire - but neither can a lot of things in Epic. However, in the new codex, they will become slow and purposeful with Advanced Stabalisation System upgrade that they'll be allowed. Finally, the broadsides have proven themselves to work quite well through various playtest versions. Changing Railguns as a whole across the board is not appealing to me at all. Therefore, I'm not on board with this suggestion. _________________ Rob
Top

baronpiero

Post subject: TAU WIP 4.2 - Here - See Link in post Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:30 pm

Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm Posts: 186

Tactica:Broadsides, I'm not on board with a change for this formation. They are AT specialists. They are not AP specialists Don't misunderstood the purpose of my suggestion: - The extra plasma rifle is of minor importance, and I would be fine with or without it. - I really worry about their AT delivery being practically unaffected when moving /when failing initiative, and the fact you'll never sustain-fire with them. TacticaIn 40K, they cannot currently move and fire - but neither can a lot of things in Epic. However, in the new codex, they will become slow and purposeful with Advanced Stabalisation System upgrade that they'll be allowed.

And you'll agree that 40K stats are only a starting point only worth considering as a first draft, after that, only the way the unit plays in Epic actually matters.


TacticaFinally, the broadsides have proven themselves to work quite well through various playtest versions. Changing Railguns as a whole across the board is not appealing to me at all. Therefore, I'm not on board with this suggestion.
It's not changing all railguns. It's about having Battlesuit Railguns a smaller version of the Hammerhead Railgun.


Maybe you'll be interested to know what motivated this change...

Game experience (this happenned in many games against Marines):

- Tau player chooses Orca (transporting Broadside contingent)
- Marine Player has a whirlwind detatchement + hunter.
- End of turn 1: Marine player has moved on to attack, leaving the Whirlwinds alone
- Last activation of the Tau player on turn 1: Ground attack using the Orca & Broadsides. => 8xAT2+ shots = 4.44 whirlwinds Destroyed. I Mean, even crisis Battlesuits blasting at 15cm range will 'only' inflict 3.33 casualties. Not to mention that broadsides are deployed out of reach other ennemy units, possibly in cover (shouldn't be too hard with 75 cm range) controlling an objective.

This is an every game trick that my opponents just cannot do anything about That's why I often play crisis as a replacement to soften-up my lists.


More precisely, I don't think broadsides are balanced as a unit. I rather think they do well in counter-balancing other AT gaps in the Tau army like the poor bonus we receive for markerlights. And if you have plans about Markerlights I would recommend to make the room clean, by addressing broadsides first (well, unless there is a major consensus about them being okay for the future).

Private joke: the reply in the other thread will be delayed