Tactical Command | View topic - V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Page 10 of 13

[ 193 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

clausewitz

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 12:01 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

I had a problem with the previous points as I could never fit them into my list. Too expensive for the yeild.

I reckon the yield is a lot more potent now. Certainly the MW missiles should be useful against your IG opponent. And with MLs should be able to engage the likes of the Shadowsword while keeping out of sight.
1 @ 225 (Contingent)
2 @ 400 (Cadre)

Hmm, I hadn't thought of making them a Cadre choice. Had that been discussed before? Certainly makes that choice a lot more flexible. But it doesn't seem to fit in with my mental concept of what the Tau consider a cadre. I will be interested to read what everyone thinks about this.

Hopefully sooner rather than later.
Patience is a virtue.

Top

Honda

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:25 am

Brood Brother

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

1 @ 225 (Contingent)
2 @ 400 (Cadre)

Then you could also limit the +100 points for SC Dragonfish mod on the Cadre version only.

I think we could start at 400 for a pair, though it may creep up to 425. Not so sure about the Cadre choice though. As much as I'd like to see that, I'd be really concerned that someone goes all WE on the list and gets 6 x pairs, then one more that they upgrade to the SC. That just doesn't "feel" right.

Also, I'd really rather not see the SC limited to the Cadre/pair. I'd rather not have to spend 500 pts just to get a SC if that is how I field my Supreme Commander. I was pretty big on using these guys and I will again, but some of the early versions were fairly painful from a C&C perspective.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:00 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Ok this is a terribly long thread (apologies if I've missed things and am repeating them) so I've got the gist and here's my thoughts...

Scorpionfish (I like Marlin personally :;):

)

Speed ? ? ? Armor ? ? CC ? ? FF
20cm ? ? ? ? ?4+ ? ? ? ?6+ ? ? 5+

2x SMS ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?75cm ? ? ? ? 2x AP5+ Guided missile Ignore Cover

2(3 maybe?)x Tracer Missile System ? ?90cm ? ? ? ? MW5+ Guided Missile

2x Twin Linked Missile Pod ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 45cm ? ? ? ? AT4+/AP4+

Damage Capacity 3. ?Critical Hit Effect: ?Munitions Store is hit, vehicle explodes. ?All Units within 5CM suffer 1 hit on a D6 roll of 6.
Notes: ?Skimmer

Ok, my reasoning is:

1/if it "anchors the base line" IMO it shouldn't be moving too much or too fast -hence the slower move in conjunction with it's up armouring from an orca

2/should be able to deliver it's "artillery" over an extended range (90cm Tracer) - I don't see the point in giving it a 75cm Tracer when these things can rain down from orbit i.e it doesn't really mean much to me in terms of "support" when you compare it to Hammerhead formations etc. Long range Support should be exactly that IMO not just the same ranged weaponry. It should stand out and have a reason for me to take it.

3/Giving it the SMS in addition to the T-L Missile pods gives it the necessary AP (and AT)values it requires to be an "all-round" type of support vehicle it's touted as being.

4/upping the FF to 5+ due to it's payload of SMS

5/giving it 3 DC 4+ armour would sound to me more like reinforcing the armour of an Orca. Just because it's "reinforced" doesn't literally mean it needs to be "RA" - it seems silly to me to have its save reduced but more resilient due to actual RA. In conjuction with a SC, it would still get its invulnerable save and without one it wouldn't be impenetrable.

6/On a modelling note... having 3 weapon systems you only need to model it with 3 launcher-type boxes - which (in my mind at least) makes it more simple to convert.

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:08 am

Brood Brother

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

I wouldn't want to see them as a Cadre choice.
I do favour seeing them as a pair with a slight (say 25 point) discount, having them around like that ensures they put out a lot of firepower and I see a supporting formation like this as all about the number of dice

I don't think they should be availible seperately in order to get a reduced cost SC.
Reason being I like the imagry of him being in a crisis suit in small battles and larger battles getting into one of these things - but due to the increased
danger of said battle having a mate around to soak bullets makes sense!
Upgrade wise Skyrays, Networked Drones or Dragonfish (a triscropitooth with a shield and a SC), drones.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Tactica

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:28 am

Brood Brother

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

yep - I agree guys - no cadre.

225 each, and then 425 for the pair (25 point discount for the bulk purchase)

Works for me.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob

Top

Tactica

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:30 am

Brood Brother

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

Quote (Dobbsy @ 20 Mar. 2006 (21:00))

Ok this is a terribly long thread (apologies if I've missed things and am repeating them) so I've got the gist and here's my thoughts...

Page 10 has the most recent version that CS liked...

Scorpionfish

A formation consists of one or two Scorpionfish, at 225 points each.

Stats
Type: War Engine
Speed: 25cm
Armour: 5+
CC: 6+
FF: 6+

Variable Munitions Launcher
Either: 4x Tracer Missiles : 75cm : MW6+ : Guided
Or: 6x Seeker Missiles : 75cm : AT6+ : Guided
Or: 6x Submunitions Missiles : 75cm : AP5+ : Guided, Ignore Cover

And: 2x Twin Linked Missile Pod : 45cm : AT4+/AT4+

Notes: Damage Capacity: 3. Critical Hit Effect: The primary munitions store is hit, igniting the payload internally and ripping the vehicle apart from the inside. All units within 5cm suffer a single AP6+/AT6+ hit.
Skimmer, Reinforced Armor.

++++++++++++++++

BTW: regards to modeling - this is why I like the crisis 40K missile pods, they have three large barrels on each one when you spin them around backwards - so one tube in each 'box' for each missle variant type.

OK, see you on page 20

_________________
Rob

Top

HecklerMD

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:36 am

Brood Brother

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

Just a few notes on how things like the VML might work and look:

Vertical Launching Systems

And...

Ohio class SSBN and SSGN Subs

Please note the SSGN: 1 Submarine, 154 Tomahawk Missiles, each capable of carrying various warheads: AP, AV, Anti-Ship, Bunker Buster, FAE (Nasty!), and, of course, Tac-Nuke.

Sorry, but that gets me hot. :devil:

Edit: Oh, and a Polar Bear trying to eat a Submarine:
Click

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:53 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

So people are happy with the 75cm tracer?

It just doesn't seem quite right to me - a bit flat and boring(no offense to whoever proposed it). I was thinking that if you pair 2 Scorp's up you get 4x MW tracers. It's not too OTT with just 2 per vehicle and the other systems fulfill their "fluff" design. I'd prefer longer range and less attacks to keep price balanced.

Having the armour go down when it's supposed to be "up-armoured" doesn't make sense to me either. Surely it should at least stay the same value and have a higher DC?? Okay I'll shut up now as I'm repeating what I stated in my post earlier :blush:

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 5:54 am

Brood Brother

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

Armour wise the triscorpitooth has far higher armour. I don't get your point. 4+ 2DC is lower than 5+ RA, 3DC.
The first requires 4 AT / 2 MW / 2 TK hits on average to kill (baring criticals).
The second 6 3/4 AT / 4 1/2 MW / 3 TK hits on average to kill (baring criticals

Even as a straight hit for hit comparison against AT fire 4+ armour saves 50% of the time and 5+RA 56% of the time

In case you are interested here is the guide on when to use the MW missiles

If you want to shoot both infantry and vehicles in a formation.
If you want to get less hits but with greater chance of killing what you hit (so say firing at a formation with Ogryn in front and guard behind, fire MW to limit hits to the Ogryn as opposed to AP to hit more people but less chance of Ogryn killing).
Shooting at 2+/3+/4+ AT, RA AT. Otherwise AT missiles all the way!
Shooting at 2+ AP, RA AP inor out of cover. Otherwise AP missiles all the way!

Top

Dobbsy

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:04 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:24 am
Posts: 4499
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Quote (HecklerMD @ 21 Mar. 2006 (04:36))

Sorry, but that gets me hot. ? :devil:

Me too. We are a sad bunch of gaming nerds aren't we? ? :laugh:

4+ 2DC is lower than 5+ RA, 3DC.

ahh but my point was 4+ 3DC.

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:31 am

Brood Brother

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

4+ 3dc is lower than 5+RA 3dc

The first requires 6 AT hits, 3 MW hits and 3 TK hits on average to kill baring criticals.
The second 6 3/4 AT, 4 1/2 MW, 3 TK hits on average to kill baring criticals.

Add in a Tau shield and it changes to
The first requires 7 1/5 AT hits, 4 1/2 MW hits and 6 TK hits on average to kill baring criticals.
The second 6 3/4 AT, 4 1/2 MW, 6 TK hits on average to kill baring criticals.

Top

Honda

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:16 pm

Brood Brother

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

I thought the above version was what we were agreeing to.

I still believe that we should not force the SC to run with a pair of these. Reasons:

1. You're assuming that everyone shares the "crisis-thing" vision

2. A commander needs to be able to move to where ever the action is and not degrade a particular fire sector to do that, like he would if he had a tag along.

3. What is the logic of costing a SC at 500 pts?

In my earlier battles, I fielded three of these things (ScF), with one of them upgraded to the Dragonfish. The pair went where ever needed, the DrF floated back and forth, lending fire support and potentially calling CF as needed with the assets at hand. Would the extra Scorpionfish give that formation extra fire power. Obviously yes, but I don't want the extra fire power shackled to the Commander. Let it be my choice to do that.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:30 pm

Brood Brother

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

Well yes, given the choice I would have all my activations cheap and tough

And 500 points for a supreme commander? Not exactly unheard of.....

Most lists have it pretty expensive, I think the cheapest is the Siegemasters at 150 points and the exception is the Orks were it can go anywhere.
Even marines have to pay a fair amount (typically 400+).

Top

clausewitz

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 3:30 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Not all armies have a flexible Supreme Commander choice.

IG has the 500 point Reg HQ.
Tyranids have the 500 point Dominatrix.
Even Eldar cant get a SC in a formation for less than 375 points.

The Tau have the choice of taking two different forms of SC. In a Crisis suit and in the Dragonfish. The crisis option starts at 350 points. IMO, there should be a downside to taking the Dragonfish SC option (to balance its greater survivability) and forcing the Dargonfish to come as a formation of Dragonfish + Scorpionfish seems appropriate.

Top

thurse

Post subject: V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Posted: Tue Mar 21, 2006 4:33 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 3:13 pm
Posts: 185
Location: Dundee, Scotland

1)As we are to playtest this unit, I think we should first let it be taken in formation of 1, 2 (or even 3 ) to widen the range of the test. If it seems too flexible, let's restrain the size of the formation.

2) I'm not against the idea of a cost reduction if they are taken in pair (as it is for IG). But remember that in the Tau list, 1 cadre = 2 contingents, and personnaly, I often have troubles to take all the contingents I would like, so taking a formation of 1 SF is not a no-brainer for me.

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 10 of 13

[ 193 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests

V4.4 - Scorpionfish and Dragonfish

Who is online