Biggest change isn't a unit change, it's a rules change:  GMs *must* be fired at a marked target.  This forces maneuvering to mark targets, reduces gunline issues (kill the MLs, no GM-spam).  With this change, include the +1 to-hit from a marked target into the base attack line for GMs (AT5+, AP4+, or MW5+.  AA missiles unaffected).  Also, increase GM range to 90/105 cm.

Manta:
Change:  Reduce weaponload to match FW/40k (roughly Reaver-level), reduce points.
Rationale:  Manta is not supposed to be a Tau Titan.  Tau had a hard time dealing with titans until AX10, unless they brought a Manta (AX10 carries same big rails).

Moray:  
Change:  Reduce Weaponload to par with Warhound.
Rationale:  If Manta doesn't have 2x rail shots, why would a much smaller vessel?

Turrets (both ML and gun):
Change:  cut/paste into Collector's Section.
Rationale:  All these units are for defensive operations.  Tournament Scenario is supposed to be a Meeting Engagement where two maneuvering forces have come into contact.  These units are counter to the assumption and feel for the Tau in tournament play.  (Save for 'Siegemasters' list)

Crisis (and Stealth):
Change:  Add MW FF attack from Fusion Blasters.
Rationale:  Every other list with a ranged MW attack has MW FF (Fire Dragons, Landspeeder, do I need to keep going?).

Stingray/Scorpfish:
Change:  Just the GM rule-change, detailed above.
Rationale:  All of a sudden, these units are completely ineffective outside 30cm (45 for Scorpfish) if they don't have a ML unit within 30cm of the enemy.  This will require some points changes.  (Note that the scorpfish does not even have a ML, so only has 2x 45cm AP4+/AT4+ without ML support.)

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

Quote: (Honda @ 19 Oct. 2008, 23:09 )

UNIT: TAU SCORPIONFISH
My opinion: No change
Rationale: A characterful unit that is hinted at in IA3: Taros campaign. The unit itself is a natural progression for Tau warfare theory

A mobile Orca Bomber is referenced. There is no reference to a static missile barge.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Sorry, I was mistaken on the reference.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Hmm, that's certainly a reference to a missile orca, but nothing suggesting it'd be a skimmer rather than a flyer...

Anyway, that's off topic.

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

My original intention was to use this as a (friendly) discussion thread as well as a set of suggestions, so that we can evolve ideas about the units and people can post updates, etc.

If you guys would like the suggestions and discussion sides seperated out, let me know and I will throw out an additional thread for this.

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

I'd be surprised if genuinely new ideas come to light now, we're going to be discussing the same issues from minutely different angles; Let's just have the 'list structure' thread and then you can make some initial decisions?

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

I have a radical proposal that I'd like to throw out there for general comment.


WEAPON: TAU RAILGUN
My opinion: make it 60cm universally for ground forces(inc support craft)
Rationale: It's still a great ranged weapon, it forces the Tau to manoeuvre more, it gives the Tau a solid 60cm band across all unit types, it tones down the range at which Tau can shoot thus scaling back their perceived imbalance.

Then we're breaking the current alignment between 40k ranges and E:A ranges.  Ion Cannon is 60"/60cm, rail is 72"/75cm.  While this has been done on infantry weapons (plasma guns for stormtroopers are 24"/30cm, while bolters are 24"/small arms), this change would break/set precedent on vehicle weapons.

Also, the big rails one the support craft are 108" range in 40k (so are the rails on the AX10, but that's a different discussion).

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

Ok, this is pretty wild, but I'd like to propose some radical stats for the Manta.

Given that we have a concensus that the Manta should be more of a troop carrier than a gunboat, to me, the nearest equivilent in Epic is the Marine Landing Craft. They certainly carry a very similar number of vehicles and troops.

It's well known that epic aircraft have artifically reduced DC (see thunderhawk etc), which would put a Manta at about DC5 if it were a bomber. That's pretty close to the Landing Craft.

So, with that in mind, might it not be possible to at least conceive of the Manta as a bomber rather than the frankly awkward support craft concept?

A weapon downgrade is also fairly agreed upon. I've tried to reflect the 40k weapon layout more closely here, though these are pretty rough stat conversions. Note that in 40k the heavy railcannon is TK(1), whereas other similar weapons (Pylon, Volcano Cannon) are explicitly TK(d3).



Somewhere around the 600 point region?

Thoughts anyone?

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

This is an additonal idea that I think needs revisiting if we do want synergy and down powering with a new design of list V5.0?? I understand some won't like it, but I think it could be a useful amendment for the list.

Unit: BROADSIDE BATTLESUIT
My opinion: make them Infantry
Rationale: Synergy. Now, I know all the arguments over this previously, but Tau don't have a dedicated heavy AT infantry. Crisis suits are jack of all trades and their speed and stats don't mesh well with foot FW formations as you lose a bit of their true potential by adding them to FWs. It would also be nice to not have to rely on tanks to provide the AT backup FWs need if you so chose. Sure, you can do that already, but giving Broadsides Infantry could also mean you could combine arms with FWs more cleanly - not have the LV aspect (AT shooting) effecting the FWs. Combing this idea with my proposal on railgun stats would also make this option a little less on the nose as Broadsides wouldn't be shooting quite so far on garrison.

Hmmm, Broadsides are already pretty well protected by their very decent armour save, and making them infantry makes them significantly tougher again. This would probably have to be coupled with a drop in armour save.

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

Then we're breaking the current alignment between 40k ranges and E:A ranges.  Ion Cannon is 60"/60cm, rail is 72"/75cm.  While this has been done on infantry weapons (plasma guns for stormtroopers are 24"/30cm, while bolters are 24"/small arms), this change would break/set precedent on vehicle weapons.
[QUOTE]
Fair enough, but we are playing a different game and we can make our own adjustments for balance, surely? It is an abstraction I agree but I thought it might be a decent power balancing factor.


[QUOTE]This would probably have to be coupled with a drop in armour save.

There is also the cost/army alteration issue.  Most people have broadsides based one to a base already.

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