Actually Meph my position is that I am in favour of making them more shooty not more FF-based.

Also, balanced it may be, but is that all an Epic army needs? That's a bit blah IMO. Doesn't using the same old tactics for every game get really old for both sides of the table. Do people always feel happy to see the exact same tactics when they play Marines? Im betting not.

BTW, since when have we been in a rush to get this list right? Just because it's "close to balanced" doesn't mean it's correct. Are we suddenly happy to just have a finished list for the sake of having a finished list? Even if it's just a flat card board cut out of the actual way the Tau are supposed to work...?

I sincerely hope not.

5+ years down the line I'll take a balanced list that may be acceptable at tournaments every time.

No, in the 5.x days you just stayed stationary and missle-struck the enemy until they were all dead. There was no sudden hammer blow when the Tau made their move, there was just a constant stream of inbound missles.

There are multiple different ways to play 6.x, Jstr has just been concentrating on the 'patient hunter' style a lot lately.


Marines always like to set up doube-tap Engagements, IG always like to fire their artillery early, Eldar want to pull you into range of one of their warpgates, Chaos Marines will use Daemons as meat-shields... and Tau will prefer to stay at range. That's not playing exactly the same way each time, it's just playing according to how the army is intended to operate.


The list's been in development for 5 years... that's at least 3 years too many, IMO. I'm glad we're reaching a place of stability.


I believe this list is now pretty close to how the Tau operate in the background. Harassment and disengagement followed by ambush, or the repeated killing-blows of the aggressive Tau... all backed with powerful aircraft.

_________________
Currently doing a plastic scenery kickstarter

Hmmm... It very much depends. In general, which is the more decisive blow Chris? If the decisive blow is the engagement, the casualties are probably expected. I'm going to weigh towards Onyx in the belief of Fire Warriors having Firefight 4+ in general though. Consulting my fluffmaster friends, and describing what each tier in Epic represents, they agree that the Firefight is where the Fire Warrior should thrive.

They don't commit to the battle lightly (cautious), but when they do they're pretty tenacious about the whole thing. That is how they operate. Setting up crossfires and such is something Fire Warriors would do on a tactical, 40k scale. Not on the strategic scale, though. I've never come across it in the fluff. Their lack of heavy weapons, or suppression weapons like machine guns make /that/ a game that they should lose.

A Heavy Bolter should be about on the level of the six man 'stand' of infantry Epic uses at that range. Bigger rounds, better rate of fire, and the rounds have their own guidance systems to help the aim of the user. Compared to the Fire Warrior, the entire squad contributes equally, which makes it easier for them to suppress the heavy bolter than it is for the heavy bolter to suppress them. Of course, two heavy bolters and suddenly standing off in the shooting slugfest isn't what you want to be doing.

As I showed earlier, it takes 'heavy casualties' for them to call an attack off. Just based on the fluff I've read, at range the Fire Warriors would be a skirmishing force. Their true firepower doesn't come into play until they get in close, where their lighter/just as effective armor and more powerful guns can operate. I would go for something like this:

Fire Warriors
Type - Speed - Armor - Close Combat - Firefight
Inf --- 15cm --- 5+ ------- 6+ ---------- 4+

Weapon ------- Range -------- Firepower - Notes
Pulse Rifle ----- 30cm----------- AP5+
Pulse Carbine - (15cm) -------- Small Arms

Of course, if I wanted to be my 'true' Fire Warrior, it would be something like this:

Fire Warriors
Type - Speed - Armor - Close Combat - Firefight
Inf --- 15cm --- 5+ ------- 6+ ---------- 4+

Weapon ------------- Range -------- Firepower ------ Notes
Pulse Weaponry ----- (15cm) ------- Small Arms ----- First Strike*

*The Fire Warrior's weaponry range advantage means that they always get the first shots off against the enemy, as the enemy is forced to either advance or retreat. However, when the enemy has the initiative this range advantage can be mitigated. Fire Warriors only have the First Strike rule when they initiate an engagement.

However, as I understand that would be very powerful.

And I don't think the Tau have problems replacing losses. It takes a long time to raise a Shas'la, but it is no different than an Imperial Guardsman. They have to grow up, after all. The Shas'la simply 'grows up' and 'trains' at the same time.

If I understand the intention correctly, the FW ougt to be vicious at 'close range' fire, but unwilling to get into an assault. The problem being people's definition of each term. Unfortunately the rules do not easily replicate this, and trying to equate a good FF value with close-range firepower seems to result in overpowering the formation.

I do find it intruiging that no-one seems to champion some form of improved short-ranged firepower, so to borrow PC's stats above, something like:-

Fire Warriors
Type - Speed - Armor - Close Combat - Firefight
Inf --- 15cm --- 5+ ------- 6+ ---------- 5+

Weapon ------- Range -------- Firepower - Notes
Pulse Rifle ----- 30cm----------- AP5+
Pulse Carbine -- 15cm ---------- AP6+ ---- disrupt, sniper

Nah - Imperial Guard are simple recruited by the Imperium from worlds with a surplus, given basic training en-route and sent in. After a while the survivors make a decent formation Each world trains in their own ways. Some would have recruits with basic training of x weeks then however many years of service, others simple recruit entire street gangs where the training has been on the job as it were! I've always thought of them as the British did of their 18th and 19th century armies - surplus men sent off overseas with little effect ont he home country. Conversely the Tau have a long term societal wide effort in producing soldiers where overall numbers can't be significantly flexed. Thats why they would be anti attrition, a big loss for them would take a decade to replace. For the Imperium its a matter of when does the next troopship arrive?

Very true Chris. Then again, those are exactly the kind of formations the Tau wipe out/capture to a man. Raw conscripts that'll probably break and run the moment they see that the 'harmless puffs of glowing dust' that the Pulse Rifle shoots is in fact, not harmless at all and Johnny's upper body is now a red mist and the Commissar's leg has been shot off. Then you finally get in range and you realize that the 'paper armor' that the Tau are supposed to wear don't really care about your Lasgun. Funnily enough, the 'Greater Good' starts to sound good about then.

If anyone has Vassal Epic, I'd love to play some games and test the list/my ideas. The Epic community where I live is non-existent, but I do have Vassal.

I'm not sure I like your stats Ginger. They're the same as the 6.3 stats, but weaker shooting, no additional firefight ability and the short range carbine has acquired sniper. Not sure what that is supposed to represent?

Anyway, Fire Warriors engage in short range firefights and win. It is what they are good at, and I think that should be portrayed in the list. Long range shooting, not so much. Hence my thought about First Strike. I can't speak from Epic balance, I simply desire the list to function as the Tau army functions in the fluff. I've pulled out my sources and consulted with the most knowledgeable guy I know about the fluff. Consider that my 'spear in the ground' on that issue. I may not be able to speak to point costs or accurate stats. But from the fluff perspective, a Fire Warrior should be just as good in a Firefight as a Storm Trooper. That also means they're just as good as Tactical Marines and Guardians.

In any case. Vassal. Eastern Standard Time.

I think the FF5+ represents the tau ok, they are not marines (FF4+) and shouldn't be as good as them. Afterall, marines live, breathe, eat and .... sleep warfare.

Ideally tau should be FF4.5+ as this would give them the edge over guard, but unless we start using D12s, this is moot. Yes, the tau can do very well at short range, but has been pointed out before they do not want to loose anybody. They pick their fights very carefully and attack where casualties will be minimal to non-existent unless absolutely necessary. If we are to change the stats, id rather see something more along the lines of

Fire Warriors
Type - Speed - Armor - Close Combat - Firefight
Inf --- 15cm --- 5+ ------- 6+ ---------- 5+

Weapon ------- Range -------- Firepower - Notes
Pulse Rifle ----- 30cm----------- AP4+ ---- disrupt x2
Pulse Carbine -- 15cm ---------- AP5+ ---- disrupt x2

Basically every weapon in the list gains disrupt compared to v6.2 This wouldn't kill more units then previously, but it would break more formations.
I'd much rather see the shooting improve at any rate

That is a fair statement.
So what about Stormtroopers, Guardians and Krootox Herds etc... are they all as good as Marines in a firefight according to the fluff?
As has been mentioned before, Stormtroopers and Fire Warriors are very similar in abilities. Why shouldn't they have the same stats? The idea that Krootox Herds should be better in a firefight than Fire Warriors or Crisis Suits is strange to say the least.

I've just bought Courage and Honour (Graham McNeil) and it is quite refreshing to see some fluff with the Tau on the offensive for a change. IA3 has shaped so much of our thinking about Tau but IA3 is not the whole story.
Courage and Honour describes Crisis Suits charging Imperial Guardsmen in defended (having already been attacked with long range missiles which killed hundreds of Guardsmen... interesting) positions and beating the stuffing out of them. I know that Crisis Suits have better abilities than Guardsmen in Epic but I think some people here don't really have a full picture of Tau warfare. Why do Crisis Suits suddenly forget the Fusion Blasters in a firefight Engagement?
The assault was to take a bridgehead on an Imperial planet and it was neccessary to get up close and dirty with the defenders. It wasn't an ideal situation for a Tau commander I'm sure but once the decision was made, they had the tools to get the job done.

As always, I prefer correct stats and activation modifiers to portray behavoural/physical preferences/restrictions (it works perfectly with Orks).

Dang it, I promised myself I wouldn't post about this again...

_________________
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.

You'll always be sucked back in



Storm troopers should be FF4.5+ as well, but in order to differentiate from a standard guardsmen (whom they are better than) they must go to FF4+, guardians - well there eldar... tricksy elves, you never know what they'll do ... and kroot don't exist


That seems a very sensible tau tactic, engage with you're heavy suits (low casualty risk) something that has been essentially broken already (again low casualty risk) by a missile bombardment (see... told you we should have long range AP missiles )

The question really needs to be, does FF4+ really improve the feel of the list, or does it just make the tau more awesome than anything else...

FF4+ if the rest of the list remains unchanged would make the Tau list nigh on unbeatable IMO. You don't need to initiate assaults to get the best effect out of FF4+ you simply need to sit on objectives on o/w and force your opponent to engage you. The Tau are already very effective at this. If you want to make FW's FF4+ or change any other FF stats you would need a complete rewrite of the list and another few years of testing.

Do people really think FW's need a change. Personally I consider them the best infantry in the game for their points. On a double shooting at infantry in the open they hit on 4's and 5's, on o/w 3's and 4 and on sustain actions 2's and 3's. Lets not forget that the devilfish and the obligatory skyray give them 5 essentially AT5+ shots. All together the formation puts out 9 shots on 4+, 6 5+ disrupt, 1 AP5+ ignore cover and 5 AT5+. Lets not forget the 90cm guided missiles stretching the range of all the AP fire. In FF they are better than most basic infantry units. All this for a mere 325 points.

@Dobbsy: I can understand some of what you are saying about wanting the Tau to be more "shooty". But when E&C and I did the playtesting for the E series list we found that for certain formations some actions became no brainers and others formations were horribly broken. For example Broadside were doubling and hitting on 2+ at 3+ the Tau player has to put more consideration into what action to take. Stealth suits were hitting on 2+ on o/w and so on. FW's have the same stats they did in 5.x.

For my part the list is about balanced (though a bit underpowered IMHO). Nothing a few point drops and unit caps wont fix. The main problems are certain units such as tiger sharks (not Ax-1-0), drones and hammerheads are not really worth considering at the moment because other formations do the same job cheaper and/or better.

That all assumes that you have a marker light on whatever unit comes into range...


[/quote] Agreed, i think the hammerheads may be ok at 200/100, they do have speed and immunity to AP over the broadsides and a little more flexibility for AP. Whilst the broadsides are a little bit more resilient.

Statswise, 300 for 6 of either, if shooting at vehicles, both get 4 hits (standard shooting, no markerlights) if against AP, Hammerheads are better.

As for the Tigershark/Drones... do we even need a drone formation? The tigershark could gain a bombing run of 4xAP5+ disrupt or some such?, Maybe ditch it in favour of the Missile strike variant?

At the moment I think the standard FW formation is Mech FW + Skyray. In my current favorite list of my 10 formations 7 have ML's. I think we may safely assume based on previous gaming experience that when the Tau shoot the target is MLed.

I agree. If your shooting at something that isn't lit then I'd liken it to engaging without preparing the target, chances are you're doing so from necessity rather than design or already have an overwhelming advantage.

I have been thinking about drones. What would people think about heavily abstracting them and treat each drone unit as a swarm of drones of various types. I've been thinking something along the lines of:

Type: Speed FF CC Save
Infantry 25 5+ 6+ 4+
Burstcannons 15cm AP4+
Notes: Tau Jet Packs

They would be able to keep up with FW's as they get 10cm extra movement after the action and could give them a better chance in a FF by allowing them to put units in front with a decent save. The save could be justified by thinking of them as between 7 to 10 drones including heavy drones and shield drones. Then allow them as an upgrade only for about 75 points for 2 and if you want to take a semi-independent formation you need to take the TS.

What do people think?