Login |  Register |  FAQ
   
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Tau Indirect Fire rule

 Post subject: Tau Indirect Fire rule
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:41 am 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481
Hena wrote:
Keeping the FF low means that you have to maneuver to get best bonus from crossfire. Also with Coordinated Fire you can cause enough firepower in one action to overwhelm targets that are needed.


This is spot on! Very well put.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tau Indirect Fire rule
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:00 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 11:01 pm
Posts: 1455
Hrmmm... Hadn't thought about it that way.  That is the feel I'm trying to push for, after all.  Units that by themselves aren't all that, but when properly supported turn into unholy beat-sticks is the feel I want for the Tau.  (Support in 40k = DFish transports and markerlights)

I'm absolutely against making FW the only unit with Markerlights.  At most, FW can have 3 markerlights (team leader + 2 marker drones) in a squad.  Pathfinders can have 10 (team of 8 + 2 Marker drones), and will always have 5-8, depending on the number of railrifles.

I really need to make some time to throw down a few games, see if how this sounds is how they work, and get back to you all.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tau Indirect Fire rule
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:05 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
It was just an idea to throw out there.

We certainly have to make markerlights rarer, to force the Tau player to bring some formations close to the enemy. Currently with the turrets and such it's too easy to light the enemy, meaning there's no point doing anything but sitting back.

Something also needs to be done to make FW worth taking, as background-wise they should make up the majority of the army, but they currently never do on the table.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tau Indirect Fire rule
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:53 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:49 am
Posts: 5569
Yes, removing the turrets would certainly make pathfinders worth taking, but wouldn't help with FW.

Maybe remove the option for a pathfinder only formation and make them just an upgrade for FW? That'd make them worthwhile.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: Tau Indirect Fire rule
PostPosted: Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:19 pm 
Brood Brother
Brood Brother
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 3:06 pm
Posts: 9684
Location: Montréal, QC, Canada
Quote: (Hena @ 10 Oct. 2008, 05:19 )

Ha! Chroma, you wanted the exact same thing for Tyranids only in larger format

I don't "want" this for Tau, I'm just playing devil's advocate here.

Other than the Sentry Turrets, I like the current Tau rules.  My main concern with the Tau army is the "everything *and* the kitchen sink" nature of the list.  If there's a "one list fits all" armylist, there's not a lot of reasons to make alternate lists, and I think that's a shame.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 67 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


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