When i used to play 40K Tau, one of the things i used to find quite characteristic was that the Tau seem to have a better quality of shot.

To expand a little:  Imperial armies would often feature many anti-tank heavy weapons with a missile launcher/plasma/melta/lascannon in almost every squad.  The Tau on the other hand would field specialists that contains all the special weapons and would have maybe 3 heavy weapons (Rail guns).  Tau strategy primarily relied upon excellent mobility to put these few but high quality shots (A railgun hit on a rhino in 40K was an automatic penetrating hit for e.g.) to good use and destroy key enemy targets from a distance before sending in the crisis and firewarriors to engage an immobile and weakened enemy and deliver the killing blow.

Is there any way this effect can be simulated?  Perhaps a boost to railgun effectiveness and a movement boost?  Skimmers to 30 cm and some way of boosting railguns for the same cost as they are now (HHs are pretty overpriced as is).  Would disrupt railguns be too much for an army that's thin on nos and relys on shooting to break enemy fms? It would certainly have the desired effect, with fms having to slow their advance to marshall prior to breaking or to re-organise after breaking.

Tau also don't have an awful lot of MW ot TK shots at the minute either and this could go somewhere to make up for that.

Of course the AMHC will have to be removed as a core fm and the support allowance upped to 3 per core cadre but there's strong arguments for this already.  Of course that leaves us with the Ion cannon as an unattractive option but for me the iconic tau weapon is the railgun.  Perhaps the Ion cannon could gain some of it's AA back to make it a competetive choice.  Say one shot at 5+.

Just brainstorming right now, haven't considered in depth the potential ramifications but it feels like a good idea right now.  

Opinions/problems/suggestions?

Quoted to help keep this thread on track.  

_________________
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.

Well given I started this thread I guess I should have posted first!    

anyhoo...

Rules:

GM/MLs - I've mentioned it a few times now but I'll repeat it here to make it obvious. MLs have too short a range as they stand. I don't mind the theory of the new GM/ML rules but they force the Tau to get too close and lack a reasonable "safety range" - that being the small chance they won't be shot to pieces/assaulted in the enemy turn. Having to throw forces too far forward in the hope of attaining ML coverage only to have them obliterated next action is suicide. I have said it before - this is ATTRITION! - and counter to all Tau strategic thinking. Either try them with a ML range of at least 45cm OR make them longer and force them to be used only on fired upon targets...??

Tau jet packs - From what I've seen so far they aren't too bad. I haven't had extensive testing in different situations so far though. My jury's out atm.

Units:

Drones - I don't mind which way we go - either make them solely an expendable upgrade with no individual formation OR do both) so long as we get expendable back for the upgrade. Making them 6 will be very annoying however given I doubt people will be able to get any more - thanks FW!   I just think they're a bit naff right now and I doubt I'd use them again if they were to stay in their current form. That would be a pity given I own a full formation.

Hammerheads - I feel the same way as Chroma and Hena, they seem to lack "shooty" and speed now. They just don't make a great main battle tank anymore for some reason - too weak in a real confrontation. Long gun range isn't that good when most MBTs can shoot the same range as them and often have RA and if someone mentions Skimmer is the answer I'll sneer with derision given the new skimmer rules. I'm not 100% sure how to go about upgunning them but the revised GM rules really did cut them badly. Maybe a downgrade in cost so you could take more?? I'm also in the "ditch the AMHC and up the number of support slots to 3" camp for these guys at this stage.

Barracuda GM weaponry - I foresee it being useless 3/4 of the game given most forward ML units will last 1 turn. I really hate paying for stuff when there's a more than good chance I won't get to use it. Either make the GMs non GM OR give the Barra it's own ML. It's not clutching at straws as modern aircraft that utilise guided bombs etc weapons have some sort of guidance laser for self guidance.

Ethereal - I just think it's very silly to give an assault weapon to, essentially, a non-combative character. This is doubly so when the whole Epic army is designed to avoid close combat! It smacks of hypocrisy. Ditch the extra attack and make him cheaper??

Firewarriors - ahh Firewarriors... While I truly think they'd work better with 4+ FF I know that won't happen. So I'm not going to even put forward the argument for it. Consider my hands thrown up in the air in frustration.

Crisis suits - Everyone here knows my ceaseless argument on MW FF - I still stand by it, so I won't repeat it.

Pathfinders/Tetras - I like the addition of the Co-ord fire to these guys. It makes sense given the new GM/ML rules and gives them a purpose. Even if that does at present mean their quick and untimely deaths 9 out of 10 times....  

more to come... I'm heading out.

I try to give some feedback based on my 5 or 6 games played til now. Therefore still alot that I might not have encountered so far...

GM/ML: Its only a 5+ AT attack but on units that have it, it looks kinda important and is for sure implemented in the cost of the unit. I have used it in some games and it helped. But most of the time this would mean to lose the unit that gave me the ability to shoot and I didn't fire my other weapons because of the range. But of course, thats the thing about GMs with their huge range. Anyhow, normally my opponent knows how to disable my ability to use them effectively and its nearly impossible to use properly... at least I am not able to. I think they need a change, cause in that way its just a "gimmick" and I'd rather take more units with punch than PF and Tetras. Stealt suits might indeed come in handy, but of course always pretty risky.


Firewarrior: I like the change toward the ability to disrupt. I think its better than those 2x 30 cm shots were. But still, most of the time they seem kinda weak. The only thing I'd like is obviously FF4+. I think its needed. Otherwise I pretty much get always eaten in assaults.

Tetras and Piranhas: Okay, relatively cheap and can help. But most of the time I count them as a waste of ressources. But its possible I didn't use them properly. I need to test them a bit more.

Hammerheads: I think they are slightly overprized. But all in all I like them. Its good they are 6 tanks strong. Therefore I prefer the AMHC, cause 3 tanks are broken so fast.

Barracuda and Tigershark (not the AX thingy, never tested):
Pretty much never helped me. The Barracudas are cheap, thats for sure, but what do I want with a cheap flyer that does pretty much nothing. Especially those GMs... The Tigershark is slightly better, but also more expensive. I think they need some finetuning. Especially the Barracuda.

Drones: I dont care for them in the current state. Just a waste of points, but I never tested them. Its just an assumption based on stats in comparison to other tau infantry.

The rest seems okay to me. At least it worked as it should have, or for what its supposed to.

I was going to wait till after my next test game against Mephiston before posting on this (as this time I will be the Tau*).  However, as I am not sure when that will be yet and since my view contrasts with some here I wanted to put forth the other side of the fence. (*Note that I have played as the Tau in offline games, but having a batrep to illustrate would have helped, hopefully this will come soon)

GM/ML
IMO this is not a "gimmick" but a core element of the Tau army and one that is very powerful.  But it is all about how you use them.  Which is both a matter of list construction and tactics.  In fact when used optimally they can seem almost broken.  (Note that my useage of ML/GMs involves next to NO attrition-like tactics, no more so than any other army that wants/needs to fling something forward to take out deathstrikes or similar)

Barracudas
Are excellent value INTERCEPTORS.  No, they don't make the best ground attack platforms, because they are not meant to be.  Used as interceptors, along with Tau AA, they make for a formidable air defence.

Fire Warriors
Much better than given credit for.  In combination with the Etheral I reckon it a near no-brainer for a Tau formation to "hold the line".  Personally, I perferred the 2x 30cm shots, as even I don't like getting into CC assault range, but the disrupt shot is useful defensively.

Recon (Tetras/Piranhas)
Both really excellent units, combining to make a really useful formation.  Tetras give you fast MLs and co-ord fire, and Piranhas can stack up AT4 shots on sustain fire cheaply.

Drones
Never used them.  With disposable/expendable or something I might consider them, but as people have noted adding units with lesser saves that still cause BM on kills isn't the best tactic. Perhaps merge regular and heavy drones into one so that they can be up-gunned (and armoured?) and given MLs?

Crisis
I am not a fan of the new Tau Jet Pack rule.  It's too Eldar-like ( ) and slows them down too much (well the associated speed decrease does).  I actually loved the old rule, but I am resigned to that not coming back.  But the concept of a rule designed to help the Tau avoid assaults is IMO far preferable to giving the Tau assault boosts (like MWFF etc).

Hammerhead/Devilfish
I have had mixed results from Hammerheads, generally when I am under-cautious they get taken out, but they can also devastate many lightly armoured formations.  The new skimmer rules require considerably more tactical thought to use them, but since the old skimmer rules were an abomination I am more than heppy to deal with that.  Note that I very much doubt I would use Hammerheads as a support formation, if I use them its an AMHC.
But I would say that devilfish are definately too SLOW.  The speed decrease was unnecessary IMO.  My second game with Mephiston resulted in the Tau LOSING the game because devilfish aren't fast enough.  Even if the more heavily armed fish-chassis vehicles need to be slightly slower the devilfish needs to get back to its old speed.

I would agree that for a shooty army the Tau have rather limited access to TK weaponry, either you go for AXs or its a Manta.  And neither of those units is going to make you popular if you need to use them all the time.  Since I assume the Moray was dropped for fluff reasons I am not sure what the solution to that problem is.

OK from my 8 or so games.

Devilfish are too slow at 25.

Hammerheads (and probably the other tanks too) are under gunned. I'm happy with the current marker light/guided missiles but the units need a bit more shooting to make them work in an army that needs to win by shooting.

Still not 100% sure that the jet pack rule works and the crisis suits are probably too slow.

Ok, first off <waves hand at Chroma> I'm here...  

Now a couple of thoughts:

1. GMs are not going to become a main weapon. They are icing on the cake. So I would not expect GMs to become an equivalent to rail technology.

2. Movements should be consistent and something I will plan on evening up in the next cut. I will say though that we did not touch the movement rates of any vehicles (not counting the crisis in this), so they've been what they are for quite awhile. I guess we all just missed the DF.

3. Barracudas are a little light, but that was intentional this round. That decision will be evaluated.

4. I like the jet pack rule. It's simple and it works. It doesn't work like the old rule, but it works and it's easy to explain to opponents.

5. I don't think we are done with FWs. The other thread on infantry is interesting and should be developed a bit more.

6. I would expect the AHMC to continue service.

Observations/Analysis so far:

i. The redefining of the list has really scrambled all the old paradigms. I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing.

ii. Unfortunately, new synergies have not surfaced universally across the community. I plan on studying the Mephiston/Clausewitz batreps more deeply. I also thought the Hena/Asaura batrep with all the light units was very interesting from a mechanics perspective. Chroma's games have struck me more as examples of lists that have no synergy in them. I don't mean that in a critical way, he's just playtesting, but that is what stood out to me.

The one game I was able to play involved units that had not changed much (except for the crisis) and they performed as expected against a fairly moderate SM build.

The keyword in my comments is that I expect the Tau list to provide synergies between its formations. We need to be able to capitalize on those synergies and it becomes a force multiplier, yielding better results than individual units by themselves. Hena has outlined a few in his comments.

More later, duty calls...

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Good to see you back!  

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

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

just thought i'd put my 2 cents in also. i've played against tau quite a bit and if i remember correctly i've won every game accept one (against an opponent i would consider an even match)
most of the problems have already been stated, drones being a big one. but the one i have the biggest problem w/ are the FWs. 2 shots at 30cm was awesome. though i admit not exactly what i envision them to be (less shots/better accuracy). why not give them better to hit rolls? i think better FWs will alleviate some of the GM haters. as it is no one fears the FWs so you have no problem getting in and taking them out before the ML units can have any effect. PLEASE LOSE THE DISRUPT! everytime someone makes a list it seems people throw disrupt in on everything (chaos variants). its the same as the 2x 30 cms, good, but not fitting w/ how they should be.
GM/MLs i wish i could comment on more but i think my opponent doesn't use them correctly. on paper they seem awesome and the main reason i would like to have a tau army some day.

They are slower to create Crossfires. Meaning 40cm instead of 50cm move to get into position. I don't like this one a bit.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Honda: I would propose one change to the jetpack rule, which I unaccountably left out when wording it: the extra 10cm move should also be allowed on march activations.

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

@ZC: Fair enough. I will take that under consideration.

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

Hena, I understand that you do not like the change. I understand that this change impacts how you field Crisis suits. However, do not expect that the jet pack mechanics are going to change