Got back from Canberra last night after a couple of days of good gaming. There were 9-10 players (first day we only had 9 plus the bye army played by the Tourney organiser - Floppy1) and 5 games were played over the two days so it was a decent playtest under tourney conditions. Army lists were 3000 points.

Armies were:
2 Codex Marine Air lists
2 IG Steel Legion
3 Biel Tan Eldar
1 Tau
1 Ork
1 Black Templars Air list (bye army)

The list I took was:

Mech Fire Warrior Cadre + MEch Fire Warriors + Pathfinders + Ethereal BTS 575
Mech Fire Warrior Cadre + Skyray 325
Crisis Cadre + 1 Crisis + Shas'O 400
Recon 3/3 split 150
Recon 3/3 split 150
Broadside group 300
Stealth group 275
Hammerhead group + Hammerheads + Skyray 475
Hammerhead group + Skyray 350

What I found interesting when trying to construct a fairly balanced tourney list was that the Tau generally don't get beyond 9 activations very often without sacrificing what little strength they have - you have to weaken formations to add new ones or reduce activations to strengthen the formations. I tried several combinations of forces and every time I came up with only 8-9 activations that I was happy with. At 10 the formations were far too weak. Even with 9 activations the smaller formations don't last in a game. Adding 150 recon formations to pad out numbers is an option, but as I had confirmed in the tournament, the recon formations die like flies so they really aren't a solid formation in terms of fighting formations and aren't around late game to provide much punch.
I also elected to ignore aircraft as I've stopped using them due to their very weak disposition and points cost. 3 Skyrays provide better air deterrent and AA than any interceptors now if you use them correctly. Sadly, AX-1-0s are over-costed and too fragile to even warrant a slot nowadays for me at least.

The tourney itself was structured similarly to Heavy Bolter that I ran in November 09. Battlepoints (win, tie-win, tie-loss, Loss)were first, then count back was Objectives captured, followed by VPs - which were recorded at game's end regardless of whether they were required. VPS were full points for destroyed formations and half for broken at game's end.

On to the games in brief.


#1- Tau 4-0 win
My first game saw me pitted against Jayden's Red Scorpions Marine air list. Having Marines to start with didn't help him as Marines tend to fair badly against Tau in my experience - but then again Marine lists in general tend to fair badly against almost all lists. Jayden unfortunately did a couple of things that cost him the game however. On the occasions where he air assaulted he was assaulting into formations with close-supporting overwatch formations so when his troops landed they had the guts shot out of them before they got to assault, then faired badly in the actual assault. In the end with so few formations, there was little else he could do. VP's were Tau 1600+ versus Marine 173?

#2- Tau Loss 0-2
Versus Adrian's Biel Tan. There's not much I can say about the Eldar that isn't generally known. They do it all and do it well. It's not surprising the Tau faired badly. Adrian is an excellent player and I made a single mistake in turn one (moving my Fusion-heads up to fire on his Phantom and straying too close to his Stormserpent which dropped out his Shining Spears with Autarch etc for an engagement. That saw me on the back foot for the rest of the game as my largest armour support was wiped out after 2 rounds of assault - unfortunately both of us forgot that skimmers can always elect to FF even vs other skimmers so my 5+ FF rolls became 6+ CC rolls. It may have gone differently but thems the breaks when you forget rules. VPs Showed the result well. Eldar 1200+ vs Tau 250??

#3- Tau Tie breaker win 1-0
Versus Walter's Steel Legion. To be completely fair, if time had not run out, new-to-epic player Walter would have decimated my forces in turn 4. I was pretty much on the back foot after turn 1 and I had to pretty much scrape together the capture of one objective while trying to avoid Walter's forces as best I could for most of the game. Even then his 2 armoured companies were a thorn in my side most of the game as their firepower is pretty ridiculous    13 Tanks puts out roughly 33 AT shots (and about half that AP)at 30cm! Tau cannot hope to deal with that much shooty. It was a tough game versus a new player. Nice one Walter! (who came a tied 3rd BTW)

#4- Tau Tie breaker Loss 1-0
Versus Troy's Steel Legion. This was my favourite game of the tourney as both sides hammered each other the whole game. This was EPIC! Infantry fought infantry and tanks fought tanks across the width of the whole board! The Tau infantry manouvered agressively up the left flank to bring the guard HQ Mechanised and Infantry companies under heavy fire while taking quite a bit of fire themselves. Cross-firing Recon and Crisis formations eventually broke the already damaged Regimental HQ then the two Fire Warrior cadres got stuck into the Infantry company and pushed it back as well. The Guard armoured rumbled down the centre bringing the agile Tau armoured under fire and doing quite a bit of damage. Throw in deathstrikes and rough rider assault on the broadsides, and manticores on anything else and the Tau started taking too many casualties however and quickly lost the impetus to effect a win. It was a great game though and a titanic fight too, as we went right up to the end of turn 4 with both of us having to make careful decisions about how to clinch the victory. In the end Troy's numerical superiority won him the game - my crisis cadre had actually captured his blitz with several broken formations around it but his doubling Stormtrooper/valks formation managed to contest it at the end of turn 3 - and his armoured company captured the TNH objective. Sadly, while the Tau did break large companies of infantry and a lot of the smaller guard formations, they didn't actually destroy more than a single Rough Rider formation the entire game - even the 3 unit manticores and 2 unit deathstrikes didn't completely die - so comparitive VPs were overwhelmingly in Troy's favour - IG 1200+ to Tau 750?. Awesome game Troy!

#5- Tau loss 0-2
Versus Andreas' Biel Tan. As it was a Swiss seeding tourney, no one plays each other twice. So as the highest placed "loser" I, unfortunately for me, had to play Andreas' Eldar in the final round. With no losses under his belt so far, I was well aware of my chances from the start. And the hits kept on rolling! With no real answer to his firepower and ability to get out of return fire, the Tau faired very badly. His revenants are far too quick and hit too hard for the Tau to recover from the effects. I did manage to suppress one with 2-3 formations shooting at them with Seeker missiles in turn 2 but the end result was a wiped out recon formation and eventually a regrouped revenant formation. My armour groups were broken turn 2 and did little more than break one of Andreas' falcon formations the entire game. The only lights of hope in this game were in turn 3 when, with great luck on the strategy roll, the teleporting stealths' ZOC managed to force the Avatar into a more distant placement range and the Crisis and Stealths then managed to avoid the Avatar engagement with a co-ordinated fire attack on the Guardian host - doubling away out of his enagagement range. Retaining, the Broadsides immediately went onto overwatch as they were the Avatar's next closest target. When he charged they put 2 BMs on him and managed to fight the assault into the second round and finally kill the avatar off with the loss of one broadside. In the end, though it was all academic. The VPs showed exactly how well the Tau had faired.

1400+ Eldar, Tau 0. Yes that's correct. No kills not even a broken formation for half points as the only broken falcon formation rallied....

So then, a fairly average result all up for the Tau. IIRC I placed about 7th and tied for best presented army with Phil's Biel Tan.

Placings were:

1st - Biel Tan
2nd - Biel Tan
Three-way tie for 3rd - Biel Tan, Steel Legion and one other who I am unsure of. Although I'm not sure how a tie was possible

Feedback on the Tau for playtest purposes

If I learned one thing in this tournament it's that this Tau list lacks the firepower and the staying power to be what they're supposed to be - Death incarnate through shooting. Base To-hit rolls are certainly very average under this system as you generally have to double your forces to shooting range to try and effect damage on the enemy before you get caught in the open and smashed. This of course means you're shooting attacks are back to base level even with Markerlights and while pulse rifles and carbines are enough to kill unarmoured infantry the rest of your forces' shooting attacks leave a lot to be desired. Also a problem, is that to effect your full firepower at range your Markerlight formations have to get within 30cm of the enemy target. Tau armour group firepower drops off considerably in early-late game because your recon formations are usually dead after their first target has been fire at once. Players who haven't even played Tau before know to kill them off first. So after turn 1-2 you have no recon formations to speak of and are already down 2+ formations. In a 9 activation army, that is terrible. I've even struggled versus Ork forces before as well - Tau just don't have the shooting capacity to effect damage on large formations that they require and are supposed to have. With an artifical assault capability the Tau seem to have two underpowered systems.

The Tau armoured forces are too weak to be fully effective. Speed and skimmer only get you so far - usually not very far at that. Even 6 Hammerheads is not enough to hurt big IG tank formations and only just enough to hurt Eldar tank formations (due to their ability to hit and run etc.) For example, Tau cannot hope to manage IG Armoured companies with 10-13 RA tanks each. The Tau do not have the firepower to do so and the Tau armour support groups lack the armour to withstand incoming fire. Paraphrasing Admiral Ackbar - "We can't repel firepower of that magnitude!"
Versus Eldar also, they die like flies to the fast and hard hitting pulse weapons. During the tourney my tanks often killed a couple of enemy tanks to then immediately be broken by other enemy tanks because the tank formations are too small and have no command and control aspects to help them continue fighting. I'm not advocating making them bigger but perhaps a better armour save could be a more useful option? Someone at the tourney mentioned that Hammerheads actually had the same armour as a Leman Russ in 40K. Not sure if this is correct but could someone please do a check?Hammerheads really do lack in stand up ability.

Unit recommendations

Stealth Suits - are slightly overpriced now with a essentially 4+ shooter and 2+ initiative. At 3+ AP they were a bit more effective and could be relied upon to hurt enemy infantry more. They also usually come down with a BM so activate on 3s often. Other than this they work well. I'd recommend a 250 price tag.

Fusion Hammerheads
Increase the to-hit on the fusion head to 4+ as it's twin-linked. In the tourney they were of little use with a 30cm range and 5+ to-hit on the double with a skyray for ML support. They don't usually have much of an effect in a game unless the enemy is all-assault as they're often broken after their first turn of shooting. You generally have to wait for the enemy armour/WE to stray close to them to use them effectively on an advance. They can double 60cm and shoot 30cm on 5+ with a ML support right now. As RA killers they are underpowered because of they're short range which forces them to have to double to get in range.

Hammerheads in general
Look into their comparison with Leman Russ tanks. They cost the same points each but they are considerably less effective with less FF, less armour, less shooting (yes they do on average have less because half the game you have no MLs on target). They don't survive like Leman Russ tanks either so get less time to actually put their maximum firepower on targets. Skimmer is now of less value than it used to be as your target generally has the upperhand in the pop-up situation if they're smart about hugging cover now. If they're supposed to have the same armour as a LR it should perhaps be the same. The only thing they have going for them is their speed right now and I'm pretty sure I'd rather lower their speed and up-armour or up-gun them. Would Lance work for Railguns at least? When you factor-in their small formation size as well they truly are not worth the same as a LR as a LR has far superior damage soaking ability with better output of fire on average. Otherwise, drop their points to 50 a piece??

Tau Command and Control
Can something be done about their poor C&C? With such fragile and small formations (other than the Firewarriors) the support groups go to water mid-game.

Did some editing of the above post if anyone's keen to read it.

Could you (or someone else) post the army lists, and if possible could the organiser post the scoring details in full. and were there any pics to drool over?

On your comments about the TAU, I have a suspicion that they work better when you have a higher number of activations (10-12) and a decent amount of terrain for the smaller formations to hide in or behind.

Yme-loc did quite well at Bristol last weekend with the following list

Mech Fire warriors + Skyray
Mech Fire warriors + Skyray
Mech Fire warriors + Skyray
Fire warriors + Broadsides
Pathfinders
Crisis + SC
Recon
Recon
Recon
Barracudas
AX-1-0
Orca

When we played (admitedly a very strange game), he was able to use the activation advantage to make a couple of co-ordinated fire attacks each turn, in which he placed the two formations on opposite sides of the target formation for Cross-fire; which would certainly make a significant dent in those Leman Russ you met. He also used the AX-10 to great effect, admittedly against weak air power - but they would have helped significantly against the Eldar Phantom / Storm Serpents you fought:- use your big guns to silence the ground-AA and "let loose the dogs of war" (under the cover of your Skyrays of course)

On Tau 'shootyness', apparently your Recon (ML) formations died quickly, so I am not surprised on your comments as this robbed your army of ~1/3 its firepower and also dropped the activations as you say. I suspect that part of the answer may be to adopt the Edlar tactic of only committing when you know your forces have a decisive advantage. This translates to high activation numbers to stay hidden and stall the intial part of each turn, then charge in all guns blazing with the ML formations supporting long-range fire-power or close-range assaults.

On the Tau armour, I have long felt the Eldar Falcons suffered the same fault. In a straight fight, the disparity between 2.5x Falcon formations for 1x Leman Russ seems too great. The real debate seems to lie in the value of the various 'special rules' and how they are used. For example, if Tau Co-fire is used to put the Hammerheads on opposite sides of the Leman Russ, that may well be a different story . . .  But it all depends on the particular circumstances of course.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

Thanks for the write-up Dobbsy.

I've pretty much come to the same conclusion regarding Tau airpower.
I've had more success when I stick to Skyrays (I've even shot down a few Thunderhawks) and have more units on the ground. I was always worried that the Tau's main TK weapons being on planes was going to be an issue (one way or another). The number of times the AX-1-0 has failed to activate (even with no BM's) at the critical moment is very frustrating.

I've found the Manta to be overpriced but fun. I haven't used it as a dropship or transport yet. I'll have to give it another go soon.

The latest list I've used (and had some succcess with) looks like this:

-Battlesuits + 2x Crisis + Shas'O
-FireWarriors + PathFinders + Skyray + Ethereal (BTS)
-FireWarriors
-Pathfinders
-Hammerheads(Rail) + Hammerheads(Rail) + Skyray
-Hammerheads(Fusion) + Skyray
-Hammerheads(Rail or Ion) + Skyray
-Recon Skimmers (3 of each)
-Recon Skimmers (3 of each)
-Recon Skimmers (3 of each)

Unfortunately, ALL my recent playtest games (5 games in recent weeks - 2 wins & 3 losses) have been against Marines (both ground pounder and air assault lists). It's been fun but maybe not enough for a more rounded assessment.

Looking forward to seeing any photos Dobbsy.

Cheers.

_________________
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 know Floppy will do so when he gets back from Canberra. Not sure on the pics issue though.


I only wish this were true as I did try it. I found even at 5+RA armour LRs are incredibly good at soaking damage. With 10-13 tanks even the extra BM from a crossfire has little effect in terms of hurting the LR company. They just regroup or rally in the end phase for minimal loss/suppression. I always try to crossfire if I can but as I mentioned I can't see how taking extra recon formations will provide much aide when they are usually the first targets to die. Sure you can get crossfires going but enemy formations near those recon fms will respond in kind to the tetras and the next turn you have no recon forces - or very few of them at least to be able to do this mid-late game.


And this would be true if Tau could actually gain a decisive advantage early on in a game without having to commit those recon forces. The recon forces let you gain that advantage early on. When you face artillery you don't have the luxury to sit back and wait for them to come to you and the only way to gain it is to move forwards quickly. Recon forces going forward to enable this tactic die. You can't get around this problem as they stand.


Yep, I agree on the circumstances issue, however you're still only shooting AT weapons on RA targets.... and as I mentioned 5+RA is still excellent at they seem to make those rolls a lot. The problem also then becomes, can you pump out 10-13 kills/BMs on the target to at least break it? I'd like to see the stats on a couple of HH formations in crossfire doing so. I'm betting they wouldn't be able to. Not to mention if there's 2 LR companies on the table....
The HHs would probably smash Eldar falcons but try getting into position to do that versus them when you have Scorpions and Revenants running around and then try to survive.

Oops! my FWs were Mech FWs not foot.

With a Stealth formation in your army, aren't you teleporting them to eliminate the enemy artillery on turn 1 (where possible) in an Engagement?

Even if you lose the turn 1 strategy roll, their threat potential means the enemy player uses his first 1/2 activations dealing with them, leaving the rest of your army free to advance.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Yes my plan was to do so. However, I was out activated by 2 and he knew I had teleporters so he simply surrounded them with Sentinels and Roughriders and waited to activate those two formations at a later point of the turn. No point in teleporting to their deaths and wasting their activation right? I do understand how to use Tau, but for some reason my opponents seem hell-bent against letting me employ my tactics at will....  


If I'd lost the strategy roll I would simply have had no Stealths left in the above situation I'm not keen on sacrificing what few troops I do have turn 1 on the extremely thin chance they'll kill the artillery. Besides there simply was no where to teleport to to enact an engagement.

Well blowing up an IG's artillery is also being somewhat hellbent on preventing one of their tactics at will when you think about it  

I've found that Tau need an activation advantage of about 2 or 3 to be effective. The list that went to the Bristol tournament for me at least is pretty close to the optimum Tau list. I wouldn't have taken the Orca and would have tried for a broadside formation or another foot FW formation with Broadside upgrade. IMHO the Bristol tournament list focuses on the two best formations in the list FW's and Recon. I really wasn't surprised it seemed to do well. I would like to hear some more about how he played it.

I do agree with parts of what you're saying. However, in my experience Tau struggle against marines or any army with the capacity to get close fast and more often than not win 1st activation. Against Eldar, although I still normally try to play aggressively, I think a very defensive strategy is best simply putting all your formations on OW for 2 turns then worrying about objectives. Eldar units are for the most part paper tigers and the range and firepower of Tau guns can make them think twice. I realize you know what you're doing and don't mean to offend with these statements.

In the E series playtesting I did with E&C we both agreed to reduce the firepower on some formations as they became broken with +1 to hit. For example Broadsides hit on a 1+, stealth suits on overwatch had a 2+ disrupt shot. This we agreed was a bit much so we made adjustments. I support the current to hit values for most of the entries. However, Fusion heads I agree should be MW4+ and Crisis suits need a bit of a hand as they currently at least for me are simply a fairly fragile place to put your SC.

Stealth suits in general I agree are not quite right as is and a 25 point adjustment and perhaps an initiative change are in order. They are essentially a teleporting ML IMHO. Their other abilities in the current environment are a bonus. If facing guard and they surround their artillery with scouts I'd probably still risk teleporting in, try and neutralize their nearby AA and strafe the artillery with aircraft. The range of Tau guns on their aircraft normally means you can be outside the AA bubble.

Hammerheads I agree entirely. For me they are not very good, overpriced and under gunned. I can't see why 4 of them cost about the same as predators who have more firepower, the same movement rate, same armour, and ATSKNF. Is skimmer, a slightly better to hit value if MLed, and 30cm more range truly worth 250 points compared to 275? 1 45cm AT4+ and 2x 45cm AT5+ vs if MLed 1 75cm AT3+ and 1 90cm AT5+ or if not MLed 1 75cm AT4+. Taking in mind that to get the extra shooting ability costs if using the cheapest formation another 150 points. Broadsides are IMHO point for point a much better option to deal with armour.

Your points on ML formations I have had different experiences. E&C does try and target them early but due to the scout rule I can minimize the potential loss and as such I have never lost all my ML formations. Even in games where I've been utterly dominated I still on average have 2-3 formations at the beginning of the final turn.

Tau aircraft while I agree with most of what you're saying, that they are for the most part overpriced. My recent experiences with the TS variants confirmed this. The base varient needs 150 more points spent on it to be effective and the missile boat simply isn't very good. The AX-1-0 however, in my experience performs brilliantly and is entirely worth its 350 points. In all my games with E&C who was actively trying to remove them I lost I think a grand total of 2 of them. Normally I do use some, at times, underhand moves to keep them functioning, such as flying cover with Bara's or keeping them within my AA umbrella. But on average they easily get their points back and in games where things are going badly I've used them to snipe infantry stands to keep the game going. Also it probably deserves to be restated, they can drop a Warhound titan from a standing start and hit any point on the table with 2 shadow sword shots.    

My main complaint about the list which hasn't been raised yet is that crisis suits are not very good now. I take them purely because I can't get a SC otherwise. Since they lost the drone protection they have become brittle, and their firepower has taken a serious blow. Currently they are outgunned IMHO by FW's who cost less points. I seriously think their base stats need a rethink in the current climate. Comparing them to termies in 40K they normally have a better armour save 3+ and a 4+ invun compared to 2+ and a 5+ invun and better base (without weapons) CC stats 3x S5 WS2 attacks compared with 2x S4 WS4. In Epic even with stunted Tau CC ability is that not worth CC5+ and at least RA5+ perhaps RA4+ now that their drone protection has been taken away. Just throwing this out there (is this the right "there"? I always have problems with this.) for debate.

And on the other hand, I find Hammerheads to be very usable. Fast effective tanks. Of course they can't really go head to head with Leman Russ' (what MBT can?).
I've found Broadsides to be too slow and they also have a giant bullseye painted on them from the first activation of the game. The opponent is always gunning for them. Now I've used this to my advantage before but to be honest, my broadsides haven't performed as I would like.

I like my armies to be fast. I've also moved away from Garrisoning (it seems to just put my forces in the enemies gunsites, exactly where I don't want them). I like to keep my army as far away from my opponents as possible to begin with and rely on my speed to get me into a winning position.


This is my experience also.

Regarding AX-1-0's,

It also deserves to be restated, that a Shadowsword can still shoot/move/claim objectives etc if it fails it's activation. An AX-1-0 can't. Having your main TK weapons not even turn up to the fight is not helpful. Indeed, it has lost me a game recently.


I can sympathise with this. I had 6 Crisis Suits move up to within 15cm's of a lit up Tactical Detachment and miss with every single shot   . This is obviously due to bad luck more than their abilities.
I have developed the art of using Recon Formations to keep the enemy away from my Crisis Suits. It is kind of a waste of the Recon's abilities, but it has proven useful. Once the Crisis Suits are engaged, it's usually all over fore them (although I've got an amazingly lucky story about Crisis Suits fighting off Marine Bikes   ).

_________________
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.

Used to live in Canberra, never knew about cancon...

I like to use them too but they're really only good at picking off transports or light tanks like falcons, at range(if you can get the drop on the falcons at least). IMHO this is a waste of a MBT as it's primary role should be to take on all comers in the MBT ranks. If we don't up-gun them with a lance weapon or up-armour them to make them at least a little more resilient in game then make them a lot cheaper than they are. They just not solid enough as MBT.


Hehe, I on the other hand find them to be one of the lynchpins in my army. They soak fire well. I may just start using the second formation I have instead of the Hammerhead Rail guns - which is a damned shame given I own around 12 of them. They're cheaper for 6 and they last a hell of a lot longer in the game. Garrisoning them on OW off your own blitz (if possible) with nice fire lanes is a great deterrent to enemy movement - especially enemy mech infantry. But you're right Onyx, opponents like to gun for them. I just find they last a while longer than the HHs and even stand up to assaults better than anything else the Tau have, which I'm very happy with. Basically, when you double them forward to shoot, with a markerlit target, they hit just as well as an advancing HH with a markerlit target and they can use terrain and have RA to boot. If you OW both formations in support of each other, not much is going to be able to get near to assault or shoot.

I should have said I don't Garrison forward at the moment. I still Garrison off my Blitz (usually with a Recon Formation and the Pathfinders - All those Disrupt BM's can ruin any Teleport assault).

I've used Fusion heads to kill Land Raiders and one Hammerhead Support Group (4 Railheads) all but wiped out a lit-up Predator Detachment/Hunter (only one Pred remained) in my last game. I also like the Skimmer ability to reduce opponents CC special attacks (Terminators/special characters etc).

I use my Hammerheads to dance about behind cover and set up crossfires to reduce armour saves (something that's quite hard with Broadsides).

Your right Dobbsy about Broadsides and assaults. That 4+RA is a life saver when they get assaulted and it's caused my Broadsides to win assaults they never should have.

_________________
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.

For what its worth, on the Hammerheads Vs Leman Russ debate, IMHO at least part of the problem lies in the Leman Russ 4+RA armour and numbers, not the lack of Hammerhead firepower to defeat it. As several people have noted, Hammerheads work well against most other armoured formations.

The issue is the E:A game mechanics where the diference between the strength of the respective armours increases exponentially when they are Reinforced. Against normal firepower,

6+RA armour is slightly worse than 5+  (11/36 against 12/36)
5+RA is slightly better than 4+ armour  (20/36 against 18/36)
4+RA is much better than 2+ armour    (27/36 against 24/36)

This is one of the main reasons why I want to use a variable armour rule rather than the straight RA. IMHO only Land Raiders should have 4/4 armour. Leman Russ should be 4/5 and Hammerheads (and Falcons) somewhere around the 4/6 or 5/6 mark. I would also consider Predators having 4/6 though that is more debatable. Note, this is the equivalent to giving these units an Invulnerable save against all but TK weapons - the only real departure being the Leman Russ. This 'variable armour' rule could also be applied to non-Terminator formations like Broadsides, Obliterators and Defilers to make the distinction with Terminator armour (and to match comments like Onyx's).

Jstr's comments on the relative cost of ML on the Hammerheads and on the tactical use of ML formations are also salient and I wonder whether the 45cm rule for Cross-fire is sufficient, but that is another story as they say.

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt