Board index » NetEA Development » NetEA Tau

• Board index
• Search
• Register

Top

Ilushia	Post subject: Fire Warriors Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 2:33 pm
Brood Brother Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 10:50 am Posts: 1189	Space marines can, and usually will, have a heavy weapon for every 5 men. Tau can only do 1 marker-light per 6 people. Which is, on it's own, fine. But it also implies that 1 marker-light is enough to light everything within 30cm of the squad. Pathfinders have one on each model, so it fits for them to be able to light up lots of targets.
Top

Honda

Post subject: Fire Warriors Posted: Tue May 30, 2006 3:25 pm

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

Boy, stop to take care of a sickly household (if you wondering, it rhymes with FARF) for a weekend and look what happens. Rather than address individuals, I attempted to cut out ?sentiments/opinions? and respond to those. Strap in and off we go? The initial query from CS: OK. This is something that has been on my mind for a while now. It appears that many players are simply taking these guys to get at the upgrades and contingents that they allow access to. To me, this just doesnt seem correct. In addition, I must admit that I am not entirely convinced that the stats accurately represent the squads in the game. I would disagree with the statement that people are ?only? taking FW?s to get to the attendant upgrades and attachments. I think you should also consider the possibility that due to the fragility of the FW?s in HtH, that the only way to reduce their vulnerability is to add bulk. After all, to get the maximum value out of your FW?s, you have to close to within 15cm, which puts you precariously close to something else and a future Engage action. How do Tau Fire Warriors operate in the 40K background? What kind of role do they play in the force, what are their strengths and weaknesses, etc.

There are a couple different operation types, the three most prevalent are:

As mechanized infantry
As a firing line ala English archers in the 100 Years War
As small fire teams offered as bait to lure targets into fire traps


How do Fire Warriors work in 40K? Does 40K accurately portray these guys. Where does it get it right, where is it wrong, and what is the typical armament and operation of them in the game?


Again, this depends on the manner in which they are deployed. In the Mechanized variant, they deploy from Devilfish and pour large numbers of shots into units to either weaken them for the killing blow, or perform the killing blow. In a firing line, they use their longer range to degrade enemy effectiveness, then as they continue to close, apply the coup de grace. As small fire teams, they position themselves so that they are too painful to leave alone while you attack higher priority targets. One of the mechanisms for inducing pain is the use of markerlights, which I will comment on later.



The first is what they currently are - although I am not convinced by the Markerlights or the Rail Rifles!

The second is what I have termed the 'Dark Reaper Warriors', with 2x 30cm AP5+ - which seems to me a better fit but actually makes the stand less attractive.

So, any comments? Thanks.


Well you did ask...


First off, the new Tau codex is?new. 40K Tau players are still evaluating what is worth taking, what is effective, and how the changes impact their existing playing style. So it is extremely early in the codex lifecycle to start making definitive statements. The Tau need to be shaken out in a few months of tournament and experimental play.

It is possible to play the 40K Tau list without any of the changes and in fact keep the old codex play in existence. However, there are a couple of significant changes that are worth exploring:

1. Markerlights (Networked and on drones) ? These devices have taken a step up in their effectiveness and early assessments tend to indicate that they ?may? become a significant force multiplier. This change has a direct impact on how Pathfinders and Fire Warriors can be played.
2. SMS on the Devilfish: This adds considerable firepower to the Mechanized aspect of FW and is something that has been greatly anticipated by the Mech proponents for some time.


In any case, whereas in the earlier codex, the ML was not a cost effective mechanism for promoting certain operational styles (though many players still used them), now it is looking much more likely that Tau players will be integrating Markerlights into their forces because of the additional flexibility and effectiveness they provide.

My personal opinion is that removing or reducing ML?s from fire warriors is a big mistake.


Fire Warriors are the basic troopers. They do alot of work, but it is the Crisis Suits and battlesuits in almost all of the fluff[excluding FW itself] that do the bulk of the 'moving and shaking' in Tau Armies. By bulk I mean a *great* bulk of the work.


Although this use of FW?s and Crisis suits is true, it is also true that the Tau can be extremely effective in a Mechanized mode without the use of Crisis. Keep in mind that originally, the Crisis suits were called ?Crisis? because they went to where the problems were.


You need to follow some sort of 'core' for it to be accessible. I feel this is required as the Tau list feels a bit too 'open' IMO. But still, others *will* widely disagree. Very widely.


This is a personal opinion that doesn?t have anything to do with the list, other than that it doesn?t fit the commenter?s expectation. The opposite is also true for other players of the list.


In the 40K background Tau don't hold terrain basically at all. But Fire Warriors make up the VAST majority of their forces. Mounted almost exclusively in Devilfish they stage hit-and-run attacks. Bait and switch with Crisis suits. For instance, a Fire Warrior Cadre pulls forwards and opens fire on an enemy formation, drawing attention. Then retreats across a hill. The enemy persues only to find the hill to be covered by Crisis suits which moved in as they worked over it. Cut off from the main line and surrounded they're rapidly destroyed. The Tau then retreat and repeat the process elsewhere. They don't stand and shoot the way other armies do, they don't engage in siege or fortified warfare. It goes against their 'style' of combat. They're all about mobility and being able to work their way across the battlefield to the best positions.


This is an excellent depiction of one aspect of Tau operational style. It is also an aspect of their style that is best demonstrated in Epic.


Neat in theory, probably not all that good. While it'd be nice at long range, it'd still suffer from the biggest issue I see with fire warriors, their uselessness in Fire Fights. They don't have Tau Jump Packs so they can't run away. And even at 2x AP 5+ they lack the firepower to put out much damage in the ranges you need to be in to shoot. Since virtually any time the Tau can shoot at an enemy the enemy can assault them. And with a FF of 5+ they can get spanked by almost anyone. Even Termagants, who are significantly worse then they are in 40K, can beat them fairly easily! That doesn't sit right with me at all.


This is a point that often times gets overlooked, which is, that in order to be effective with all their shots, they must risk a potential engage action which often times is quite painful.


So what you propose is forcing people to take X to get Y? Not keen on this idea. Other armies aren't hamstrung by this theory. Do they not get to take the units they want to take at will? This also stops people taking a themed army if they so wish. You couldn't take an all-armour force if you wanted that's for sure. You'd be stuck with units you didn't need or want for that matter....


Agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. Do not force players or constrain their styles. Provide the building blocks necessary and let them decide.



Limit contingents by which cadres are taken[ie FW Cadre allows 0-2 from the list I made earlier]
- Drop the majority of Markerlights from the Fire Warrior stands.
- Drop the number of Firewarriors in the formation from 'uge to smal-but-upgradable.[FWs without a transport should be rigorously discouraged too, feel free to simply drop the devilfish, but the cost is{or rather: should be} there for them at an Epic Scale IMO]


Not in the way I propose. The way I put it, you'd have:

Cadre:
Fire Warriors
Contingents Allowed:
Pathfinder
Stealth
Broadside
Hammerhead
Tetras
Piranhas
Gun Drone Wing
Markerlight Sentries
[See, so FW Cadre lets you have interesting things, but nothing majorly interesting]

Cadre:
Crisis
Contingents allowed:
Stealth
Broadside
Hammerhead
Gun Drone

Cadre:
Armoured Mobile Hunter Cadre
Contingents allowed:
Hammerhead
Scorpionfish
Stingray
Piranhas

This also allows the army to be a bit more solidly renamed. Each '1+ 0-2' is a 'Cadre', but up to three formations.


I don?t like this one bit, nor is there any reason to place limitations on the list as this does. We had that in earlier versions and it was considered a major breakthrough by some of us when the artificial shackles were removed. I would be strongly against this type of approach.


It is only likely that one stand in two is going to have *any* markerlights. It is highly unlikely that 1/4 fire warriors is going to be accompanied by 2 marker drones and one having a shas'ui with markerlight. I think, given the abstraction of epic, it's fair enough to have only one unit with the Markerlight ability.


I strongly disagree with this statement. If anything, it appears that Tau players are going to increase the number of ML?s in their lists, not decrease them.


I would personally like to see the Markerlights removed from the FW squads for two reasons. Firstly, I am yet to be convinced that these are packed at anything like standard equipment in 40K, and secondly as it focusses the attention on the Pathfinders to get up front and light up the enemy. If the Fire Warriors cant do it, it becomes the Pathfinders main role... which is the way that it should be.


That statement was true in the old codex, however that is no longer a safe statement to make. The ML?s should not be removed.


The Pulse Carbines are a different matter. I like them in the squads, but I am not sure what they are there to actually achieve. I would like to leave them in, personally (the issue of the actual stats of the Rail Rifle is something that I would really like to leave until a different thread).


The issue of PC?s is something that will be evaluated over play. In the past, players didn?t take the carbines because the likelihood of pinning someone was slim and none. Now, with the ML?s ability to reduce leadership, it is possible to pin a unit. Whether this results in the increased usage of carbines is yet to be determined. How that should be reflected in EA (i.e. Disrupt) should be carefully considered. The current version does not appear to be out of whack except that some do not like its lack of emulation with 40K.


The issue of the firefight of the Fire Warriors is not something that I would like to change. There is a very delicate balance going on there, and I think that it works OK now. Sure, the Fire Warriors get slaughtered in a ff, but it is the job of the Tau player to keep them out of harms way, or supported. I think that this works fine right now.

I agree with this statement


I am not planning anything major in the structure of the list at this point, rather trying to get to the bottom of why people dont take Fire Warriors.

My current proposal is to drop the Markerlights from the Fire Warriors. I think that this will go a long way to defining the roles of both the FWs and the PFs. However, it doesnt answer or deal with the initial issue of why these guys are not seen as 'useful' on the Epic battlefield.


As stated above, ML?s should not be dropped and I would contest that the FW do not seem useful.


The tau list has 4 basic infantry types.
Firewarriors. All rounders, good at shooting, bit of numbers, armour etc.
Pathfinders. Excellent at shooting, armour.
Humans. Numbers.
Kroot. Assault.


All rounders always lose out to specialists. If I want markerlights I take pathfinders, and they are excellent assins, fast and powerful 9not to mention cheap).
If i want garrissons I take humans. here numbers are what you want, cover makes up for armour and the FF is the same.
If I want assault troops i play a different army.


The problem that I have with this analysis is that it doesn?t exactly reflect what is observed on the table. Both the Humans and Kroot are extremely immobile which is a serious issue in EA. Not that they are incorrectly portrayed, but just to state that, ?Oh, if I need to assault something, I?ll just use Kroot?, isn?t what happens. In fact, what is usually observed is that Kroot have difficulty getting to where they might be needed and that once they do get there, they more often than not, don?t perform. That is one of the key reasons most people don?t take Kroot.


Personally I don't think Pathfinders should get sniper AT ALL. Never mind just on the Rail Rifle. The Rail Rifles can target different units then the main body of troops in 40K scale, but they're not particularly all that accurate above and beyond normal weapons (They're not even Sniper weapons in 40K. Just Pinning) they are very nice for killing Infantry and Light Vehicles. And they can pin down squads quite nicely. So Disrupt and AP 5+ or AP 4+ fits quite nicely with them. But Sniper doesn't. Which I think would help quite a bit with making Fire Warriors at least as good a choice. Right now I'd much rather have Pathfinders. Even pathfinders with only sniper on their rail rifles. 4-6 Sniper, Disrupt shots is wicked. And 8-12 is far far better then normal Fire Warriors are.


This opinion has been debated ad infinitum already and really has nothing to do with Fire Warriors.


Space marines can, and usually will, have a heavy weapon for every 5 men. Tau can only do 1 marker-light per 6 people. Which is, on it's own, fine. But it also implies that 1 marker-light is enough to light everything within 30cm of the squad. Pathfinders have one on each model, so it fits for them to be able to light up lots of targets.


This does not correctly state what is possible. In the new codex, each FW unit can take multiple ML?s (the Shas?ui and Marker Light drones) and they can target multiple units. So it is reasonable to assume that what is being currently portrayed is also what is seen in the new codex.