But "Learn 2 play, noobzor" still stands does it?



Just how many of the vocal majority actually play epic on a regular basis, against other people, in real life (I.e. not Vassal), play Tau or more importantly actually use the AX-1-0?

There has been a problem with a unit identified (Not a new one either, this has been identified as an issue for quite some time) by regular Tau players, the point has been put across as clearly as possible and a very reasonable and easy fix identified yet there is no actual discussion of the solution highlighted.  

All we get is "Learn 2 play!!!111oneoneone) and "well Tau need a weakness" (WTF is the artificially low FF values if not a weakness!) from the vocal majority, a lot of whome, don't play epic on a regular basis, or play Tau using AX-1-0s.  Keyboard warriors as it were.

Yes, the tone of this post is quite angry and the reason for that is that it's quite f*cking frustrating to raise an issue and be dismissed out of hand by people who have no actual experience of what they are talking about.

*Storms off to find nicotine*

Frankly, it's not that people are saying "learn to play" or "sucks to be you", we're saying we genuinely don't think it's a problem.

Jstr19 is the regular Tau player in my group, and he feels AX-1-0s are just about the best thing in the list (or they would be if he could ever hit with them ) Opinions vary.

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

Dobbsy/Stompzilla,

I have been paying attention. The point I was trying to make and didn't do a very good job of explaining, is that of the various TK weaponry the Tau have fielded in the past, the AX-1-0 was probably the weakest of the three.

Given the desire to remove the Moray and the Scorpionfish, that means that the weakest of the three is all that remains and guess what, a single squadron isn't a  blind killer. Once we got it tuned to fit in the previous lists, we shouldn't be too surprised that standing on its own, it now doesn't behave so dangerously. It would still be problematical if spammed in a list, so I don't foresee it coming down in cost. However, I am not abandoning it. That is part of what the 30-45 eval period is about.

That being said, the Tau list is not going to have an obvious solution for all problems and as I pointed out, historically (if I can use that phrase in a game of fantasy), Tau don't deal well with WEs. From a fluff consistency perspective, the solution is in the correct area of the list (Air caste). So we'll just have to work through that.

/*FLASHBACK ON
As far as the Scorpionfish goes, I loved mine. In my typical lists, I took a minimum of 2, preferred 3 in a 3000 pt army, putting the SC in one and made it the nucleus of my attack "amoeba". I will miss it greatly.

However, I am also looking forward to the new synergies.
/*FLASHBACK OFF

As far as the list goes, I got nearly a full days work on it today, which means I am ahead of schedule. In the interest of expediency, I am most likely going to publish the army list first to get people playing/thinking and follow up with the unit statistics later. In the short term, we'll just pull from whichever list is appropriate.

My goal is to get a working copy out as soon as possible and follow up with a more presentable/printer pretty version soon thereafter.

And Stompzilla, the correct phrase is, "It sucks to be me", as I have to either make all of you happy or tick off all of you equally.

Certainly not an easy thing to do.  

_________________
Honda

"Remember Taros? We do"

- 23rd Elysian Drop Regiment

You do, very much, have my sympathies Honda.  Lol, "If i knew then, what i know now..."

However (Wow, it really does suck to be you,   )

To re-iterate what Dobbsy has said and what i myself think:

No-one is calling for Tau to suddenly be awesome at killing WEs.  All we really want is to see a 350 pt unit become worth 350 pts and at present it's felt they are too fragile.

I could even live with a drop down to TK(1) as long as the survivability of the unit is given a slight boost, as they really are too easy to negate at present and not worth 350pts in my experience.

stompzilla

I don't wish to cause angst so please bear that in mind. After removing shields off a titan (which Tau can do with massed firepower combined with their special rule of coordinated fire and markerlights), and then combined with a retained initiative, that 350 point item that you are advising has a real chance of dropping that titan at 45cm. Combine that with a dedicated AA (not just 1xSkyray), and you have a more effective titan killer than alot of other forces with the added benefit of the amount of activations left over in the next round (which a single 625 or 850 point item will not give.

These "Keyboard warriors" as you put it keep giving examples of these things. Are they actually tried out or even rebuffed, or does playing Tau alone give someone the entire right to change something because it is not working in line with how they play strategically?

_________________
Frogbear is responsible for...
Previous World Eaters
Previous Emperor's Children
Previous Death Guard
Previous Imperial Fists
Previous Chaos Squats

I think the issue is, having your primary TK abilities in a plane, is an all or nothing scenario (and I have said as much before).

If the enemy AA is neutralized, the AX-1-0 reigns supreme. If the enemy still has decent AA in play, the AX-1-0 is quite severely compromised. There's not much middle ground.

It's just not the same situation as a Shadowsword (which can have a BM placed on it by an AP shot) or a Zzapp gunned Gun Wagon.

I have not had much success using the AX-1-0 until recently, as I was being way too aggressive with it. I'm learning to be more patient with it and it's having more of an impact now.

_________________
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 would. Two reasons - over teh course of the game I'm making my points back and more importantly I'm not loking for points parity. A lot of units have an enabling effect on others and are not game winner. Terminators can be game winners. Knocking off 1-2 out of the formation and reducing it to a nusiance is right up their in my book. Course I'd prefer to blow away a thawk or LC, but in their absence a terminator is more than sufficient compensation.



Big surprise, 300 points of interceptors can down a similar pointage of bombers? And if they are on CAP I have two viable choices. 1) Stand Down. If you are hung up on points that's a near equal trade off and further might encourage a ground attack with them next turn. 2) Limit my attack to an area covered by a couple of Skyrays/other flak. Sure they will dive in but I've a chance to blow one away before hand.



Again I'm not really seeing the problem. 300 points of fighters coming in, 'cept this time the poor things have a 15cm range.

And yes, if you are making air a major component you have to support it. I wouldn't get a marauder squadron and expect miricals, I would expect to have to support them damn well to get anywhere.



I would say the opposite. In a large point game there are counters galour. However in a small game there is one or two and you have the whole first turn to try and blunt them before you land (supported by a couple of TK lance shots from orbit).

350 points. Here is an odd comparison, considering if you have a-10s I have to jump through hoops to protect my high value assets, what causes more disruption. The threat of the flying tk's or teleporting terminators?


A fair few, sadly I'm stuck on vassel currently being in india, but I've won the odd tourney, done a bunch of bat reps, that sort of thing. Actually vassel actual ensures more batreps as the damn thing records where at a club night say I invariably forget to take pictures.

But otherwise you have a point, the tac com board is a strange amalgamation of players who play two of three times a week down to once a year and of course a wide range of experience and ability.

Learn to play is somewhat harsh but has a grain of truth. Air is a tough aspect of the game to use and even tougher to balance. You can see the 'historical' progression of air prevailance on the EpicUK site as steadily more and more air assets turn up as people come to see more utility from taking them. Likewise if the old design forum was alive you would see one by one players twigging how to get more out of air, swiftly followed by complaints from regular opponents.

I remember ardent debates with whole gaming groups chiming in that thunderbolts were useless and air assaults marginal.


I feel it has not yet reached the BlackLegion army of WE/MW/IC level yet. It may have reached the level of annoyance that the original A-10 stats caused (and of course back then people were saying it was awful, couldn't do anything, make it better). For reference (and a laugh) they were I believe War Engine, Save 5+, DC 2, crit destroyed, 2x Light Railcannon (45cm MW3+ Titan Killer 1), Burst Cannons (15cm AP4+/AA6+), Missiles (30cm AT5+/AA5+), Guided missiles (45cm MW6+), 175 points for 1


What would you propose remembering its the same airframe as the tiger shark?


Oh another bonus of Vassel, I might get to give Dobbsy a game one day

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

TRC - Just so you know, I'm not calling for any changes to the present stats (I'm learning to play with them).
You seem to have lumped me in with those that are.

_________________
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.

Nah, just replying to various points in one post so the thread doesn't become a million pages long

You are here now




Yes. Its one of the flaws in Epic and only a massive engine redesign i think would solve it. So its had that effect on the metagame where people take armies that can get air superiority, or simply deny air superiority or are too numerous for air to do much at the expected levels.

Its why aircraft power levels are kept artificially low so their points can match, but the higher the potential ability the more binary it becomes as you really have to be looking at it from the angle of getting air superiority on the battlefield.


Patience with any air asset normally pays dividends I have sadly learnt (I want to charge now!).

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Lack of transport capacity is utilised by adding extra armour and weapons systems?  Fluff is always easy to manipulate and use to justify game balance.

Would the slight increase in armour and decrease in offensive potential not help towards moving this unit towards the middle ground and avoid it being so much of an all or nothing unit?

Personally i think it would. In addition it may help to balance out the effect of this unit against armies who are somewhat lacking in the AA dept (Although i can only really think of ferals that fall into this category, at this point in time).

sorry to be a numb nuts, but how does MW x+ TK(n) work? Does anyone get an armour save (implied by MW) or not?

_________________
numquam culum es

No armour save. Just about all TK weapons use this convention; it means they use the MW rules for hit allocation, but deny all saves (except invulnerable).

It means you could in theory have AT TK weapons, or AP TK weapons too.

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

And Deflector.

And Holofield.

And Living Metal.

Tank Killer. It's not what it used to be, anymore.

Morgan Vening