scream wrote:
I know that I arrive a bit after the battle but I was not really involved Tau until few months ago when I started collecting them
I have few questions to clarify some things in codex that are not really clear:
So many typos, it hurts. Sorry, but I had to fix them. I'm fairly certain that "Tau" is it's own plural, among other things. Oh, and welcome to the discussion.
Are you saying that you collect Tau in 40K? If so, then the input is helpful. If not, then less so.
scream wrote:
- Shas'vre:
They come in a unit with a Shas'el or Shas'o (1 Shas'o & 3 Shas'vre or 1 Shas'el & X Shas'vre). Shas'o & Shas'el are Command units but not Shas'vre so it means that for this unit, you have to place orders for Shas'vre but not for the Shas'o/Shas'el. I think that Shas'vre should gain the Command ability too as they form a single unit but only Shas'o and Shas'el would be HQ (as they currently are).
While the situation with Shas'vre is a bit odd, it is not unique. Squats have a lot of Formations that have a Command model in the same detachment as non-Command models. They also have to place an Order counter for the normal models while the Command model can do as it wants, so long as it stays within 6cm. Necrons (in the Slann/Necron pdf) also have this issue with their "Supreme Commander" Special Formation which includes a Platinum Lord (Command) and two stands of Immortals (not Command). Sisters of Battle have their "Sister Repentia" Special Formation with the same situation. PDF have two such Special Formations: the "Battalion Command" and "Regimental Command". I think that's all of the formations with this situation. Thus unless we are going to give Command to all of the related models in the various factions (which for Squats would mean giving Command to just about all of their Infantry and Cavalry models), I think it would be a bad idea to do so for the Tau's Shas'vre.
In other words, yes you have to place an Order counter for the Shas'vre. That is working as intended, it is not an error.
scream wrote:
- Markerlight:
Has this "weapon" a 360° arc of fire ability ? I suppose yes for infantry/cavalry but the Skyray also has Markerlight ability. On this unit, Markerlight is placed on the turret (at extremity of each weapon rack) so I suppose it's a 360° but if not, this means that Skyray are not able to mark at flyers (only turreted/360° aof/AA vehicle weapons can target at flyers).
It is my understanding that Markerlight is not a weapon. It is a Special Ability. As a Special Ability, it should be usable in a 360° arc for all models, unless stated otherwise for specific models. Perhaps the description of Markerlight should be adjusted to say this specifically.
None of the Skyray's weapons have the Turret ability. However, the Skyray does have the AA ability, so it doesn't need Turret. Admittedly, the AA ability is just for the AA Seeker Missiles, so they are able to target Flyers. Perhaps another addition to the description of Markerlight would handle this, saying: "If any weapon on a model with Markerlight can target Flyers, then the Markerlight on that model can also target Flyers."
scream wrote:
- AA Seeker Missiles:
AA Seeker Missiles on flyers should only be able to target at flyers but they are not AA as per standard "AA rule". They do not gain a 360° arc of fire, can not snap fire at flyers without penalty and can not fire during first fire segment. AA seekers missiles are bound to the 180° flyer front fire arc but can shoot at flyers during advance fire segment.
If I'm reading this correctly, you seem to be saying that NONE of the AA Seeker Missile entries on any flyer should have the AA ability. Is that correct? If that is what you are saying, then you seem to be directly contradicting your next paragraph.
I'd actually tend to agree that weapons on Flyers should not gain the AA ability. Frankly, this could easily be fixed by changing the wording (on pages 24 and 26 of the NEG core rules) slightly to make Flyers able to target other Flyers without penalty or restriction. Seriously, any weapon system on a Flyer (except Bombs and related) should be able to target other Flyers. This change would probably make the Flyer rules a bit more balanced, as Flyers would be able to engage each other without relying on their CAF.
scream wrote:
Why it is important to keep AA seekers missiles on Barracudas & Tiger Sharks: If you remove those missiles from Tiger Sharks, Tau have a very poor AA cover ... Skyray detachments have 2*4+/-1 AA shots for 150 points. That's 1 hit per squadron. Very low on result if you compare to the best AA units in the game : Hydra = 4 hits for 300 points/2 hits for 150 points; Firestorm = 1.5 hit for 150 points (but TSM -2).
So getting the possibility to use seekers missiles on Barracudas AND Tiger Sharks open a possibility to have a correct AA cover for the Tau.
First of all, nobody suggested removing the weapon entry for "AA Seeker Missiles" from any model. The discussion is because some weapons with that name have the AA ability while others do not. The discussion is about which ones should have the AA ability. You seemed to be saying, two paragraphs above, that none of them should - yet in the above paragraph you seem to be saying that they all should. Er, can you make up your mind?
Second, as they currently are in the rules for NetEpic Gold, neither the Barracuda nor either version of the Tiger Shark actually have the AA ability on any of their weapons. My suggestion was actually adding to the Tau's AA ability by giving the AA ability to the "AA Seeker Missiles" on the Barracuda. Thus nothing is being removed from the Tiger Sharks.
Third, comparing just the weapon systems on various models (and ignoring all of their other stats) by the full point value of the model is at best disingenuous and at worst intentionally misleading. [This is also something that the Points Formula will be good for - ensuring that every model pays for exactly the abilities that it gets.] Also, anything is going to seem low when compared to "the best in the game". That's why it's bad to do that.