Top

Tactica

Post subject: Tigershark Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:03 pm

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

Quote (Honda @ 09 Jan. 2006 (19:43)) The Scorpion is the only one that I'm not sure if its working correctly for the points though. For me, the scorpion rarely makes the cut, and when it does, I usually seem to regret it. More testing to be done now that 4.3.3 is out though. I use these a lot. I like two of them in a formation because of the multiple layers of fire that they provide. They have the range to take advantage of ML's that are closer up, pack their own AA and should someone break through your lines, they don't just fold on you. Mine have taken hits, but I've never lost them in a game and they've always done nasty stuff to their targets. So they provide sustainable shooting through the back half of a game, when sometimes I'm struggling to keep my HH's floating. I'm not sure they are costed correctly as they seem a little high, but it's not off by a lot. Honda, I'd like to get a game in with you sometime. I'd like to get a feel for what role the scorpion is playing for you on field in combination with your fire discipline and battlefield tactics. To date, I've not lost them, but I've not had them be considered a real threat by the opponent either. I've never felt they were worth their points in productivity. Perhaps I'm just not taking the markerlights required to see them become valuable. Hmm... I'll have to start trying them more in the first have of 2006 and get a real feel for them with the other list changes now. Historically speaking, I've been dissappointed with them. Cheers, _________________ Rob

Top

Tactica	Post subject: Tigershark Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:05 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am Posts: 2241	Quote (CyberShadow @ 10 Jan. 2006 (05:38)) Quote (RedDevil @ 10 Jan. 2006 (01:19)) Where did this come from? ?I will let this pass this time, but I am very disappointed with you Tactica. ?The next time you ridicule a legitimate question by me or anyone else, I will definitely not stay quiet. I believe that the comment was made in jest... hence the 'LOL' (laugh out loud). I also tend to think of the Tau units as more in terms of what they hunt, rather than their representative in other lists. I see the Tiger Shark as SHT striker, not necessarily with the power to go toe to toe with a Titan of any class, but enough to ruin the day of a ShadowSword. I would then class the Moray and Manta as the middle and heavy hitters, going against the average titans - although I also envision the Manta as a more support craft for the troops where required. The Scorpionfish is much more of a troop support vehicle in my mind, not necessaily designed to go hunting on its own (although it can if required). Well put CS on all accounts. I fully agree. I don't classify the Tau against other lists. What they hunt is perfectly stated. Cheers, _________________ Rob
Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Tigershark Posted: Wed Jan 11, 2006 3:08 am

Brood Brother Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm Posts: 8139 Location: London

[quote="Tactica,10 Jan. 2006 (16:00)"][/quote] TRC, I will challenge your last sentence. The TS is not heavier than the SSw. Shadowsword has a single shot that can deliver d3 TK. TS has two shots that now hit on 4+ and cannot sustain fire. The most one can do is 2 TK or 2 stands. The most the shadowsword can do is 1 stand or 3 TK. I challenge your challenge! It is. The shadowsword is a point target destroyer. Against a Non WE target it does not make its points back as well as a Tigershark. You also ignore the Tigershark carries three other weapon systems unlike the shadowsword who has 2 heavy bolter and little chance to use them. Against anything but a multiple hit target the Tigershark can deliver a better payload (just TK wise it on average gets one hit to a shadowswords 5/6s). The aircraft obviously flies so can only be hit by AA however, more than one opponent has moved their AA to threaten my aircraft after my approaoch - even if I did skirt the edges of their flak lines on my approach (which is rare and nie impossible against savvy and prepared players), the TS has 45 cm range weapons and cannot sustain fire. The SSw can also claim objectives and the TS can be ignored if one chooses too as it cannot win the game.

I am amased by your approach comment. There is no way most races can stop me on the approach - with the exception of the Eldar (if they aren't relying on WE intergral flak, like the army I just fought tonight did), the Tau (with an ion heavy force) and maybe the marines if the whole army is bunched under the cover of their two hunters. Guard, Orks, most marine forces. They haven't the range to cover themselves. The fact I have such a high number of activations also means that I am calling the shots. Have flak so you have me ranged on the approach, I can run you out of activations or simply kill it with the rest of the army. Move it up post attack and the rest of the army can respond. Again causing you bother. Intergral flak is outranged by me, and flak batteries normally come in flavours of three.
The range and activation advantage is critical here.

True it can't win games - but it can stop the opponent doing so which is almost good enough. Oh, and yes I can't sustain fire, but then again I can ignore a lot of cover, then again my ssw rarely need to sustain either hitting as they do on a 2+

It moves as a bomber. If an opponent cannot adequately defend against a bomber attempting hit and run, the opponent should consider his relative E:A aircraft counter measures in general. I would hate to see what that same opponent's response is to 9 unit ork fighter bomber squadrons, what their response is to an Eldar viper laiden with infantry, or landa assault by orks, or marine landing craft complete with predator FF and infantry are... all are very hard and effective plane based assaults... the TS is the least of many players concerns.

And you've hit a good point there - ?with range 45cm TK weapons flying around you need to up it. Because the level of flak you had before won't cut it now. People in my experience did not deal with air assaults by shooting them down, but by blastmarkering them than dealing with them on the ground. Most air assualts are one shot affairs against a properly set up opponent, or they are held back giving them time to maul the opposing ground troops a lot more.
People dealt with bombers or air prior because the main wepaons were 15-30cm in range and so all flak was in with a chance. Those 6-9 strong ork fighterbomber fomrations also cost a lot of points, delivering not much firepower at close range. 4 fighter bombers are less worry to a Leman Russ formation with a Hydra than one Tigershark.

Its been proven in recent bat reps - without a target of value, the TS and its light railcannons are relatively insignificant. All infantry and tank eldar armies, orc speed and infantry armies IG armies with no SHT, chaos armies with no SHTs... etc. There's more than one really solid army out there with no SHT in it that's highly effective in the tourny situation that would just sit back and completely ignore the TS with light railcannons.

I wouldn't hunt WE's with it, I'd hunt high value RA targets, laden transports or high value infantry targets (like say the Ork warboss). The added activations and increase to the number of blastmarkers and general kills I was getting is enough otherwise

Lets give it more playtest.

You see we aren't completely at different viewpoints I was hoping to play with the Tau again tonight but ended up using imperials as I'd lost the Tau print out.
At the latest the planes will fly again next Tuesday (vs Eldar). Its not a case of straight bindingly obvious overpoweredness (like the old cheap Helltalon).

Heres a challenge for you though - what load out would you accept on a TS with 30cm range costing 150-175. And do you think it could be one twin linked shot with D3 damage? That would then be more of a SHT/scout titan hunter.

Oh, and looking at the army list it is 200 for 1 now right? The latest list seems to say 1 for 175.

Editting in an attempt to improve my awful English.