I'd always assumed that Co-fire was the replacement for a combined assault, not the defining feature of the list, but ok.
So, what would you suggest as a fair yardstick to compare against?  LRuss Company supporting a Mech Infantry Company (wait, that's 1050 points!)?  2 Mech Infantry Companies (900)?  Predators supporting Assault Marines (475 w/o characters or upgrades)?  Devastator+LRaider+Hunter (525) supporting Assault (175, so 700 total)?

I've already math-hammered that 2 AMHC+Hhead+Skyray+C&C (600 ea) formations and a Tetra formation (150) will barely break a formation of LRuss+Vanquisher+Hydra (700 ea), and do it by leaving the Tetras hanging in the breeze for the second LRuss company to destroy (assuming that LRuss#2 can get into position to fire on them).  For review:  Tetras START close enough to the two AMHCs to call co-fire, then double across the board into ML range of lots of LRuss.  AMHC#1 opens up with 8x AT3+ Railguns and 10x AT5+ Seekers (assuming having to advance/pop-up to get LOS, instead of Sustaining), hitting 5.33 times with the Rails and 3.33 times with the Seekers, 8.67 times total.  4+RA stops 75% of those shots, so 2.166 kills.  Then AMHC#2 repeats the feat, giving you a total of 3BMs+4.3ish kill BMs.  11-4=7 vehicles left, with 7.3BMs on the formation... that's one barely Broken LRuss company, for the application of almost twice it's points in 'superior' Tau firepower.  Two LRuss companies of LRuss+Vanq+Hydra will demolish an AMHC+HHead+Skyray formation.  Assuming a max-range engagement, 10xAT4+ = 5 hits on 4+ armor, =2.5 dead HHeads.  Retaining, 2.5 more dead HHeads, 9-5=4 surviving HHeads, with 7 BMs on them, they're out of the game for 2-3 turns.  That sounds like a case for Lance on the HHead Rails.  Pardon me for starting a new topic.

Since this is supposed to be an infantry discussion, let's look at the Dev+(HB)RB+Hunter (425) supporting Assault Marines (175).  For our comparison victims, I'm going to pick on an IG Infantry Company, with no attached support units, and no units within support range (everyone's favorite target).  While the Hunter doesn't have any targets, there are only 3 units in the Marine list that can take an AA upgrade, so he's there for 'realism'.  For the sake of discussion, I'll start with the most favorable comparison for the attackers, the Advance.  Devs advance to within 15cm of the enemy and hop out of the RBs, then open fire.  RBs give 4xAP4+, Devs throw 8xAP5+.  That's 2+2.67 hits, and the 5+ cover save means 3.11 dead IG.  Assault Marines Retain and Engage, with 4xCC3+; Devs give 4xFF3+ and 4xFF5+ in support.  That's 2.67CC hits, and 4FF hits.  5+ cover save means 2.66 Dead IG from the firefight, total of 5.67 dead IG.  IG counterattack, get 7 stands+command on the Marines and 2 stands FF, 1.5 CC hits, .67FF hits, Marine armor saves .75+.33, for 1 Marine dead.  Resolution is SM7:IG3, should be about 5 autohits on the IG, completely wiping them out.

Somewhere in here, I've already mathhammered the 2x FW+Dfish comparisons.  Ah, here it is, from page 11:Steel Legion Infantry Company (250 points) dug-in, Tau send 2x Firewarrior Cadres (300 each) to remove them to allow other operations.  13 IG units in woods, Tau do a basic Retain to blast them out.  Let's assume that all the Dfish get close enough to shoot.  [snip incorrect math] 32xAP6+ and 8x AP5+, for 5.33+2.67=8 hits total, 5+ cover save means 5.33 dead guard.  Not quite enough BMs to break the 7.67 survivors (you should break the IG one time in 3), and that's 600 on 250, outpointing 2.4 to 1 (which should be just enough to chase the IG out of the woods).  

Consolidating the Pulse Rifles to 1xAP4+ per stand would change the attack to 24xAP5+, for 8 hits, 5+ cover save means 5.33 dead guard.  No change.  

However, adding Pulse Carbines 15cm AP5+ Disrupt would change that attack to: 16xAP6+ and 16xAP6+Disrupt, plus 8xAP5+, changing the results of that attack to 5.33+2.67Disrupt hits, IG 5+ save for 5.33 dead.  5.33 BMs from casualties, 2 from coming under fire twice, and 2.67 Disrupt BMs WILL break a Steel Legion Infantry Company (7.67 Survivors with 10BMs), and cause them to flee, since the Tau are within 15cm of the position.  There'd better not be any other IG within 30cm of those woods, though, because 2 FW formations are within 15cm of the position!  Hello, intermingled assault on the next IG activation, but neither FW formation is broken (or has any BMs at all, for that matter).

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

Lion,

The idea of Coordinated Fire is supposed to be a defining feature. It's supposed to be used to create Crossfires. The Tau are supposed to Advance instead of Engaging and if we want to have that, the list needs to encourage not Engaging.

We don't want to add Lance on railguns. Instead, we want the Tau player to engineer a Crossfire against those 4+RA tanks.

LitS: With all due respect, and really appreciating the effort that went into mathhammering it, these situations never, ever occur in an actual battle context: There is no such thing as an un-BMed defending IG Inf Coy sitting there being engaged or fired upon by un-BMed attacking/supporting Tau.

There is always something that has gone wrong before, failed activations, artillery fire, running into overwatch, failed terrain tests, sub-optimal positioning, whatever. Thankfully E:A is that dynamic!

This very much limits the utility of mathhammer: While it provides a very rough estimation of a given formations abilities, I dare you replicate those numbers in the field: Things will go wrong in the face of the enemy, as we all know, strong positions crumbling easily, sure-thing assaults failing miserably.

What we need to concentrate on is making Tau and FWs work without relying on assaults: It can be done!

Actually, I´m confident that all that is needed is demonstrating that, with the current rules and stats, there are feasible, successful tactics and FW-heavy army builds that can achieve breakthroughs without assaults.

_________________
Visit www.epic-battles.de the ultimate german epic site&forum!

Looking forward to your proof of it, Irondeath. (not meaning to sound snippy, I'm looking forward to someone testing some changes instead of me constantly theory-hammering them because I have no opponents within 8 hours drive of me, and then getting ignored because I'm not playtesting.)

I agree that the likelihood of those assaults happening as written is slim-to-nil, but it does give a comparison point.  All it's intended to be is a simplistic comparison of optimum scenarios for the attacker, against a defined defender.  No BMs on either side is simply a dodge, because suppressions don't matter in an assault, and I'm comparing an all-shooting attack (which *must* lay enough BMs to break the target) with an assault (which *auto-breaks* both participants).  It's this thing called an 'ideal model' ('ideal' does NOT mean 'best' in this case), which is used to start a comparison, then you start adding more details to your model/example.

Obviously, Marines are better at assaults.  Perhaps I should have used a Mech Infantry company instead?

A mech infantry company is 1HQ+12IG+7Chimera (400 points), and it will be supporting a Stormtrooper Platoon in Valkyries (8+4, 350 points) in an attack on that same hapless foot IG company in the Woods (yes, it sucks to be the training dummies).  So, MechCoy drives up, jumps out of the tracks, and shoots at the foot IG.  That's 7xAP6+ from the infantry, and 2xAP6+ per Chimera, for a total of 21xAP6+=3.5 hits.  5+ cover save means that's 2.33 kills, 3.33BMs before the assault goes in.  Stormtroopers lose out on their 4BP Disrupt shot, since they're Engaging.  Instead, they deliver 8xFF4+ and 4xFF5+ personally, with 13xFF5+ and 7xFF5+ =20xFF5+ in support!  That's 4 hits from the Stormtroopers, and 8 hits from their transports and supporting company.  5+ cover save means 'only' 8 IG die.  10.67IG shoot at the Stormtroopers, and get 3.55 hits, 2.33ish kills on the Stormtroopers.  Resolution is ST10, IG3, which will kill the 2.67 remaining IG outright, even if the Stormtroopers roll double ones and the IG rolls a six.  Is it unlikely to get everyone within 15cm like that?  Not with an assault like the stormtroopers landing behind the position!

=====
Obviously, that's me throwing numbers around, but knowing what I should expect a unit to be able to do is important to me.  Can Tau effectively clear infantry?  Oh, yes.  Two 8-stand FW formations with Pathfinders and Devilfish will gun down an IG company, and adding a Stingray formation to the mix will allow them to clear a Mech Company.

There is still a challenge with the vehicles.  Crossfire requires you to be CLOSE to the enemy (45cm total between your forces), which makes it hard to pull on a LRuss company unless you can catch them in something like 'line abreast' while you hit them from a flank. 11x armored vehicles take up a bit of ground if they're in a circular formation, so much that you'd need to be within 15cm of the nearest vehicle to claim Crossfire.

=====

I'd love to see a 6FW+3DFish formation, myself, to lower the cost to 150+75=225.  The pathfinder upgrade should still be 2PF+DFish for 100.  I honestly ran a pair of what would be 4FW+2DFish groups when I played 40k, but that's not really feasible in E:A, as the basic formation I'm attacking is a minimum of twice the size (ie, instead of only attacking ONE squad of Marines in 40k, I have to attack two or three squads of Marines in E:A).

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

LiTS is of course correct.

Essentially this debate boils down to whether you get the best result from Ranged shooting, FF or CC; how many formations are involved and how many activations it takes. Interestingly, both examples given by LiTS require ~6-7 hits and ~7-10 BMs to break the enemy formation.

These numbers can be worked back, and given either the number of weapons / units, or their relevant stats we can derive the number of formations and their composition. So for example if we decided that ranged shooting was the desired approach, we could have a single unit (a titan) armed with a single 'hugegreatbiggun' that yields 10x AP3+ or on the other extreme, 19x units each armed with 2x AP6+ weapons. The main variables are the number of units / formations and the mumber of activations used, and the prefered 'best' method.  

So we are back full circle, asking which is the 'best' ot 'preferred' mode of attack? Are there any other clues that we can use here?

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Are there any other clues that we can use here?

Yep, it's called PLAYTESTING...  

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

No, nothing snippy in that. Indeed, I´m looking forward to shooting through all comers with FW!


Also sounds like you should give Vassal a try!
As I wrote above, Hena has already converted numerous Tau units from Vassal:40k to Epic scale and with a little effort one could play Tau vs IG, Orks or SM right away without needing an extensive collection of expensive minis.

_________________
Visit www.epic-battles.de the ultimate german epic site&forum!

Thread continued here:

http://www.tacticalwargames.net/forums/ ... 17;t=15049

_________________
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.