I agree and have already written that the best way probably is to allow FW's to have the networked drones upgrade. Additionally I think it would simply be "cool" to be allowed to have a skyray as a "command tank" in a FW formation.

Sigh, they all come out of the woodwork now.

I'd love to face you guys with Indirect and Aircraft.

To sum up, I think we have two basic ideas for incremental improvement.

The first option is to increase the firefight to 4+, and probably change their shooting to a single AP4+ shot. This has the advantage of giving them a clear role, though it goes against the "no assaults" list ethos.

The second option is to increase their firepower, such as Hena's suggestion of a 30cm AP4+ and a 15 cm AP5+ disrupt or simply 2x 30cm AP4+. This fits well with the ethos of the list, but doesn't neccesarily give the FW a role that can't be done by other units in the list.

I think we need to formalise these two ideas into two solid, fixed proposals (including the relevant points adjustments), then playtest each to see just for radically they alter the list balance.

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

Good summation Zombocom.  I think we would need to pick one of the choices for the second option to go with, my preference being the 2x 30cm shots.

I do also think there is merit to a better leadership option for FWs, although I don't know if there is a clear winner in that discussion yet.  At this point I would say it is between some kind of option for 'Networked Drones' on a Vehicle or a making the Shas'el a unit that can be added rather than a character upgrade.

The only trouble I see with the vehicle leader option for FWs is it doesn't help people that take their FWs on foot or in an Orca.

What about this as an option?  "You may replace 2 Firewarrior units with a Crisis Shas'el for 50 points."  It makes the upgrade a bit cheaper and you don't lose too much firepower.  The formation would also still fit in an Orca.

[Copied and pasted from Bat-reps section]

After following all the Tau discussions across the forum recently with some interest, I have taken the liberty of making a few changes to the V.5 list for use within my gaming group.  It's a basic copy and paste into word and and i am completely oblivious as to how to host documents online, otherwise i'd share.  Anyone who wants a look though can E-mail me.

The main changes are to army structure.  I've taken V.5 and done the following for the following reasons.

Removed the AMHC from core choices and transfered it directly to support choices as is.  I have also removed the HH support group and upped the support limit to 3 per cadre.

FWs and Crisis suits are the core of any Tau army and form the "killing blow" or Mont'Ka.  Tau army doctrine is one of aggressive defence.  They retreat in the face of the enemy and attack from afar, sucking the enemy in and weakening them before surging forwards to conduct the killing blow.  As such these 2 fms (Crisis and FWs)are esential to the Tau way of war.

Upped FWs to FF4+.  Upped crisis suits to FF4+, removed the fusion blaster as a ranged weapon and made it small arms MW.  Dropped crisis save to 4+

Not being involved in assaults is boring!  It's the main reason i stopped playing my epic Tau in favour of Eldar.  Crisis suits and FWs need a role and the killing blow is it.  Engagements are the best way to kill or cripple an enemy and the Tau should not have to miss out on that.  Even with the boost to their FF, FWs are still not dire avengers in effectiveness but can now hold their own.

Crisis suits are expensive and small fms but make excellent supporting fire fms - which is their role in Tau doctrine.  A well planned crisis/ FW engagement will hurt, particulary if the support fms have been used to weaken the enemy during the patient hunter part of the battle.  I see 2 distinct roles for Tau choices.  The support sections are there for the Kauyon "Patient hunter" whilst the core cadres are the Mont'Ka "Killing blow".  Points costs may need to be adjusted slightly but to make the Tau an interesting to play and characterful force befitting of their background i think these changes need to be made.  I dropped crisis saves to 4+ becuase, given their low nos and the prescence of the supreme commander it makes them less likely to be the instigators of an assault and make people want to choose FWs and use the 2 fms in conjunction.

Added the Moray back but placed in support.

This thing is a war engine and is the only reliable source of TK outside of aircraft.  It also compares favourably in both cost and effectiveness to the shadowsword IMO.  If people want to spam out on these, then fine but it now eats into their support allowance which is needed for HHs, markerlights etc.

Removed the SC option from the scorpion fish

The SC should be a crisis commander and should be in a core fm.  The scorpionfish option was a no-brainer and so had to go.  The inclusion of the SC in the crisis fm also adds to the "Not wanting to be the instigators of an assault" factor too.

There are likely to be minor tweaks to be made and found within the list but IMO these things take the list forward in a solid bound and form a good steady core to the list and give it direction and focus and seem to solve a lot of the problems being currently discussed across the forum.

Opinions?

Interesting stuff stompzilla (and unfortunately, I may end up doing something similar myself which is why I haven't had as much to say recently).

One question though - I heartily agree with you on reintroducing the Moray (no suprise there) but are you using an older version of the stats? The newest version of the Moray doesn't have TK weapons anymore and is a bit of an all rounder (and as such DOES NOT step on toes of any other units in the army) like a Warhound.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

I tried a few things out that have been discussed in a game today.  I had wanted to write a battle report, but the lack of a camera and good notes unfortunately killed that idea.

I played the FWs as FF4+ w/ 1 AP4+ shot at 30cm.
Also, I tried out the Shas'el as an individual unit for 100 points and stuck him in with some FWs.

I took 2 FW formations, 1 in Devilfish w/ and Ethereal and the other w/ a Shas'el and Broadside upgrades.  The unit on foot garrisoned an objective on overwatch and in cover and were actually able to hold onto it and the Leadership was really useful in that effort.

The other formation did not fair as well, although that was more due to my misplay than anything else.  I was able to use them to setup some supporting fire for a Crisis Cadre that was assaulted (which won the fight with that help) and then they were in place to crossfire the defeated unit and wipe it out.  Unfortunately, the unit then lost an assault itself (mostly due to BMs) and got beat up pretty badly (as I forgot the whole formation was fearless and took more casualties, oops).

I would say that the FF4+ made it feel like I had more options for being aggressive with the formations.  Also, I really preferred the AP4+ as I was often shooting into cover, and it felt easier (even if it is statistically similar odds).

I used the Moray stats from V4.3, as i didn#'t realise they'd been changed.

If FF 4+ is selected (I'm still not in favour), perhaps we should give them CC 7+ or even -.

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

I did ponder CC 7+ you know.

That's a pretty good idea Zombocom.

So, how much agreement do we have for the following profiles:

FWs:
sv:5+ CC:7+ FF:4+
Pulse rifles: 30 cm, 1x AP4+

Crisis
sv:4+ CC: 6+ FF:4+
Missile pod: 45 cm AP/AT5+
Plasma rifle: 30 cm AP 4+
Fusion Blaster: Small arms MW

?

CC:7+ just seems extreme to me... Tau Fire Warriors are worse than Grots?!  

CC:6+ is still bad enough to deter close combats, I don't think it needs to be pushed into a worse realm... and that's another special rule for them then, as "rolling 7+" only actually applies to shooting attacks.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

I'm sorry I didn't have time to read whole topic through, I'm not sure if this is mentioned. But how about when units are marked, and while sooting target, units don't suffer -1 while doubling? Or ignoring -1 from cover? That would add tau some more "in your face" kind of tactics without enchancing their assault capability.

_________________
Rats Keep Running...

Dark Eldar Dracon