Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

The point is basically balance, and the fact you have marker lights. Seriously, super long range, str 5, rapid fire weapons is pretty powerful. But give em BS4? holy crap! They'd mow down marines like nothin!

Hymirl wrote:Firstly BS4 isn't warrented on Fire Warriors. BS3 is the skill level for a well trained soldier. Thats what Fire Warriors are (just like guardsmen and eldar guardians). Considering all the minor bonus and disadvantages they're at the exactly right skill level for their background.

Secondly, bumping their BS to 4 wouldn't actually help that much is increasing the effectiveness of pulse rifles by 16.6% really going to save the day? No. The problem with firewarriors isn't that they're no good at shooting its that they end up in hand to hand, lose combat, get run down and all die. (AKA Necron warrior syndrome).

So what you actually want to do is stop whining about wanting to have BS4 and ask GW for something useful like the ability to sacrifice a drone in the unit to get +2 to the initaitive roll to escape combat or something.

Give them all "hit and run"?

Fits the "hunter" fluff.

Zid wrote:The point is basically balance, and the fact you have marker lights. Seriously, super long range, str 5, rapid fire weapons is pretty powerful. But give em BS4? holy crap! They'd mow down marines like nothin!

Mow down marines like nothing? Where are you getting your data from? Did you see my mathhammer a on the first page?

kuro_khan wrote:
I doubt BS 4 firewarriors would be overpowered.

A full squad of 12 FWs rapid firing some marines.

Currently at BS 3, that's 2.67 kills. At BS 4 it's 3.56 kills.

BS 4 gives the double FoF tactic a good chance at actually hurting a tac squad, rather than just making them more bald and angry.

One extra kill isn't going to tip any balance. Especially considering that FWs are widely considered underpowered.

Oh noes!! that makes it so that it only takes 1 Markerlight to boost to BS 5.

Considering the price of a markerlight and the fact that 1 more BS is only one more marine kill, all I have to say is, "big deal".

I don't complain when a 10-man squad of marines completely mow down my Dark Eldar squad.
Marines are twice as much, true, but they are three times more effective in a gun battle, 150% more efficient as well, when taking into account point costs.

Dark Eldar have the ability to omgwtfbbq MEQs with Ap 2 weaponry, so I think it's fair.

But what do Tau have vs Marines?

But what do Tau have vs Marines?

Plasma rifles which at BS4 would be pretty horrific. I've seen a squad of 2 Brightwinds (admitted at BS5 from ML hits) take out 4 Terminators that were body guarding Marneas and wound Marneas as well! Leaving Calgar at my mercy to blow him to bits the following turn.

THat one point extra BS would have 2 major effects. It would mean the Tau player could lay serious fire down on Space marines without needing Markerlights (which means he can attack more squads at a time). Or he can blow marines apart in cover as he'll need fewer marker light hits to get him up to BS5 and he can use the others to strip cover saves...

Whilst BS4 FW wouldn't be aver powered, BS4 Crisis suits would be...

OK, and you're saying the army that is supposed to be the best at ranged combat shouldn't be able to do this? It's not like Tau have anything else to fall back on, like oh.. WS 4, Str 4, hidden powerfists or ANY power weapons to speak of...

OK, and you're saying the army that is supposed to be the best at ranged combat shouldn't be able to do this?

I'm saying if you make all Tau BS4 or better they'd be massively OP and no one would stand a chance against their guns...

Tau don't need so much of a boost, as a points reduction.

fire warriors should be 9pts (or 8 if you are feeling generous, also without having to spend so many points at lead/bonding them, hopefully)

Tau vehicles are very expensive, too, for what they can do.

Special characters could use some re-working, because all of them have some huge flaw that makes them unsavoury and aren't worth replacing your Shas'O or Shas'El.

A better HQ choice alternative than Ethereals.

More new units, because there is very little diversity in the army as it stands. commander + 2fw (or 1 and a kroot squad), some crisis, hammerhead, maybe 1-2 broadside, pathfinders make up most armies

So you do what everyone else does against guns. Get cover saves and rush into close combat. This simply gives Tau the ability to whittle the enemies down enough that they stand a chance when they are, inevitably, in CC.

If you gave them BS4 youd have to increase marines and aspect warriors up to BS5 and then leaders would become BS 7 or more making shooting overpowered. Yes it does stick with the fluff, but i dont think it'll work.

i say they can have BS 4 but they lose there S5 weapons

T'au are fine except for the cost.

If they were dropped to 7 or 8 points each they would be extremely cost effective.

I say they can have BS 4 but they lose their S5 weapons

That would destroy Tau as an army and be totally anti-fluff.

I think rather than giving Firewarriors BS4 maybe giving Shas'vre a BS increase instead of their WS increase like. Whilst giving FW wargear than can increase their BS if the squad numbers a certain amount of models or more. Then make Targetting Arrays available via Hard Wired, so FW team leaders can take them with a ML. Whilst cutting points for FWs and ML Drones

Thus giving the Tau a few more options to try to help differing army builds. I'd Also like to see some more weapon choices for the Crisis Suites, i.e. something with AP3.

Fire Warriors need to be more effective at fire and movement and more able to avoid H2H by keeping out of range. This is not achieved by making them cheaper or higher BS.

It would be achieved by increasing the rapid fire range of the pulse rifle to 15 inches.

It would be achieved by increasing the rapid fire range of the pulse rifle to 15 inches.

Yeah I think this would work well too. Or increase it to 18" and have the Carbines range increase to 24"...

I still think they need a points reduction though. How about this:

Pulse Rifles have rapid fire range increased to 18", Carbines become assault 2.

Squad of firewarriors - 65 points:

1 Shas'ui and 5 Shas'la

Extra Shas'la 9 points
HW targeting array for Shas'ui 10 points
Multi-Node Targetting System 35 points for unit

Multi-Node Targetting System - If the Firewarrior squad numbers 6 or more Firewarriors each model has it's BS increased by 1. As soon as the unit strength drops below 6 models they lose this bonus.

Drones do not count towards unit strength (so your Monat can't be broken by having his 2 sacrificial drones destroyed...).

I like it, I like it.

Not OP.

Very Fluffy.

FlingitNow wrote:

It would be achieved by increasing the rapid fire range of the pulse rifle to 15 inches.

Yeah I think this would work well too. Or increase it to 18" and have the Carbines range increase to 24"...

I still think they need a points reduction though. How about this:

Pulse Rifles have rapid fire range increased to 18", Carbines become assault 2.

Squad of firewarriors - 65 points:

1 Shas'ui and 5 Shas'la

Extra Shas'la 9 points
HW targeting array for Shas'ui 10 points
Multi-Node Targetting System 35 points for unit

Multi-Node Targetting System - If the Firewarrior squad numbers 6 or more Firewarriors each model has it's BS increased by 1. As soon as the unit strength drops below 6 models they lose this bonus.

Drones do not count towards unit strength (so your Monat can't be broken by having his 2 sacrificial drones destroyed...).

Rapid fire to 18" might be a bit much but I can easily see 15" being reasonable.

I like the squad concept but 35 may be a bit high; more like 20-25 IMO considering you lose it the first time you're assaulted in close combat.

15" is good to me, instead of that stupid way Rapid Fire is handled now, I think all weapons should just be at half-range.

As for increasing BS for larger units, no, that seems too odd and not that sensical. [Some] Professional Guard, Space Marines, Scouts, Stormtroopers, and many others have similar systems to what I am gathering you're implying with "Multi-Node Targetting System," which I would guess means that there is an inter-unit linking for target acquisition. It's just one more thing to make stuff more complicated than it needs to be.

All models in a unit should always count towards unit strength. If you rely on something and suddenly it is gone (even if that was it's purpose), that puts a little scare into you.

And yes, I have returned, things seemed to have calmed down a bit and we're back on subject. I'll be trying a little harder to avoid being lured off subject, or luring others off subject. That's the beauty of voluntarily excusing yourself, you can voluntarily invite yourself back!

15" is good to me, instead of that stupid way Rapid Fire is handled now, I think all weapons should just be at half-range.

As for increasing BS for larger units, no, that seems too odd and not that sensical. [Some] Professional Guard, Space Marines, Scouts, Stormtroopers, and many others have similar systems to what I am gathering you're implying with "Multi-Node Targetting System," which I would guess means that there is an inter-unit linking for target acquisition. It's just one more thing to make stuff more complicated than it needs to be.

All models in a unit should always count towards unit strength. If you rely on something and suddenly it is gone (even if that was it's purpose), that puts a little scare into you.

And yes, I have returned, things seemed to have calmed down a bit and we're back on subject. I'll be trying a little harder to avoid being lured off subject, or luring others off subject. That's the beauty of voluntarily excusing yourself, you can voluntarily invite yourself back!

I thought 18" might be more appropriate to match dire Avengers? Also by then making Carbines assault 2 they become viable, you have the choice of trying to cause pinning or having the ability to fire at a longer range. But both give you 2 shots at 18". A 15" rapid fire would be redundant if you applied to bonus to the essentially defunct carbines at the moment as you'd get 2 shots to 18" with them...

I don't see increasing of the BS for larger units as being complicated at all. I think most people who play the game can count to 6. Oh and on this subject:

I like the squad concept but 35 may be a bit high; more like 20-25 IMO considering you lose it the first time you're assaulted in close combat.

You are probably right about the points it is something that would have to be play tested. But your whole squad is dead the minute they get assaulted so that you'd los ethe bonus in that situation I'd argue would happen even if the bonus counted for any unit size. The unit size thing adds balance to the power and encourages poeple to take full 12 man squads. Having just a 6 man team would firstly then cost 100 points and you'd lose the benefit the second you lost just one FW.

Ok I can understand why drones count towards unit strength and losing them can cause panic but the way the rule currently works is that you can't take 2 drones with a single suite as losing them could mean that he is broken and will never be allowed to rally as he'll be under half strength. So they should count for the purpose of panic tests but not for calculating if the squad is under half strength perhaps?

I do agree. Drones shouldn't count to unit strength.

They are meant to be expendable. Shield drones are programmed to sacrifice themselves to protect the T'au.

Gun Drone squads should be unbreakable because they can't feel fear. (they are machines)

Dire Avengers are Assault 2 i belive. Half range rapid fire makes alot more sense then,"my long rang shot is 30" but when i flick on full auto i can only hit things 12" away"

It's not so much that the rule is complex, but that it is another new rule specific to Tau that is not a simple "All Tau have widgets that do wingdings." How these special rules interact with other special rules can complicate things unnecessarily, and for a rule that, I at least, find presumptuous.

For instance, does it only apply to Tau models in the unit, or do Drones count, what happens when special characters join the unit, what about special characters deployed with the unit. What happens when they leave? Also, how would it effect special rules from other armies? If there is a special rule that reduces the Tau BS (for whatever reason), do the MNTS still apply, or are they ignored? Does this affect the base BS, or is it an upgrade for purposes of something that might be used against their BS?

See? There are/can be a lot of questions involved to complicate matters. I am not one for "dumbing down" 40k, but with so many rules lawyers running about and the fate of winning a Tournament possibly riding on it (and thus what prizes and honors may be had), ruling one way or another could become infuriating.

As for Drones not counting as they are "expendable," well then for those same reasons would Bodyguards count against unit strength? Their purpose is to be expendable. What about the six Guardsmen in a Guard Squad? Their purpose is to protect their leaders, special weapons, and heavy weapons. Should they count as unit Strength?

The thing it, they all do because the members of the unit become reliant upon them. They have their gaul to fight because they know they have their protectors there to take the hits. Once those protectors die or are incapacitated/destroyed (such as a drone), their confidence may waiver, and question their decision to put themselves in that particular situation.

Addressing the drone squads, they're not stupid. If suddenly their number is halved, a program can be assumed to kick in to assess their situation and decide whether or not to preserve what is left and redeploy, or stay and keep fighting. This decision might not always be fortuitous to their masters, and the program might make a mistake, hence the need for a leadership test. I would assume this was in mind of the designers, or else they may have made them fearless and Ld10. But that's my opinion.

you are blinding me with your logic

Skinnattittar is correct

Grey Templar wrote: you are blinding me with your logic

Skinnattittar is correct

You are quite gracious. My thanks to you for your candor.

I don't know. Every army list has an entire range of special rules already that adding one to Tau wouldn't be too onerous. Space Marine veterans have access to special munitions, Chao Space Marines have Marks and Icons, Imperial Guard have orders and so on.

The trick here is that the game designers, or those of us wanting to homebrew some rules, need to think of something specific to Tau that helps them without being A) overpowering or B) too much like what other armies already possess.

I don't feel that a purchased piece of wargear that boosts firing efficiency is taking things too far; if it's confusing then make a new drone that provides the benefit to the squad; it's not any better than a markerlight drone so make it cost the same amount and roll a d6 each turn, before the squad chooses a target, (no different from Imperial Guard orders) for each squad that has one, on a 4+ (or whatever number) the drone has accumulated enough battlefield data to assist the squad.

I'm still torn when it comes to drones and morale. On the one hand, not even battlefield troops in the current century care when a predator gets shot down much less 40k years in the future. That said though, a loss of a drone could represent less intel on the battlefield which could affect morale. Dunno, I'll stew on it some more.

Some good thoughts here, from everyone.

Skinnattittar wrote:Everyone always thinks their armies deserve a boost for this or a boost for that. You never really hear someone admit their army is overpowered or something is under priced and they want GW to fix it.

My point? The fluff supports BS3 Tau but not BS4 Tau. They lack depth perception, which is extremely important when trying to fire weapons at long range. No depth perception means no ability to properly judge range or orientation to non-linear paths, such as aiming a rifle or tracking a target. So a Tau without a helmet would probably be BS2 or even BS1! But they have a whole slew of advanced tech at hand so it helps them cope and gives them BS3. Those with BS4 either have even more tech and/or have experience, in the same way as Guard Vets are BS4 to the regular Guard's BS3.

I play dark eldar, my army's codex is over 10 years old and I hold that it is still WAY overpowered and cheesy... thats why I love it!

For instance, does it only apply to Tau models in the unit, or do Drones count, what happens when special characters join the unit, what about special characters deployed with the unit. What happens when they leave? Also, how would it effect special rules from other armies? If there is a special rule that reduces the Tau BS (for whatever reason), do the MNTS still apply, or are they ignored? Does this affect the base BS, or is it an upgrade for purposes of something that might be used against their BS?

Well the Scorpion Chainsaw increases a Striking Scorpions strength by 1 and that doesn;t cause huge issues like you are claiming increasing the FWs BS would... You could put in a line saying that all shooting from the unit is resolved at +1 BS which would pretty much resolve all your issues. Drones obviously wouldn't count as the rule specified Fire Warriors, therefore independant characters wouldn't count either as they're not Fire Warriors either as all Tau independant characters are either Battlesuits or Ethereals. It really wouldn't cause problems or any complications.

Yeah drone squadrons shouldn't be fearless. They are obviously going to be programmed with survival instincts or they'd do stupid and suicidal things. They are not simply machines that follow direct commands they are sentient units able to act independantly and for that to work they'd need survival instincts...

I can see why they should count towards unit number for taking panic tests. But it seems a little bizarre that through the destruction of his drones a firewarrior is as effected as he would be by the death of his friends. It also in a game sense means Monats can only take 1 drone otherwise you risk them being permanently broken from just losing some drones (I know about bonding etc). Which just doesn't make sense to me from a game play point of view or from a fluff point of view. Hence the compromise of you still having to take panic tests for losses but not counting towards your 50% for rallying.

Also, on the tau question. Unless I'm fielding an all tank imperial guard army against somebody with 9 broadsides I honestly really dislike fighting against all but the best tau players because the codex is just so frustrating and hard to use. What is the point of an army whose troop units do almost nothing? The Fire Warriors should definitely be bumped up to BS4, they should also contemplate placing fire ports in their transports.
In regards to how that would affect the crisis suits, if it wasn't such a fluff issue I'd say leave the crisis suits as they are (with BS3) and make the lame excuse that it is because of the complexity of control. However, being someone who appreciates fluff nearly as much as rules (and here's a heads up... if you play 40k you care more about fluff than rules... nuff said) I'd advocate a complete re-designing of the crisis suit. I'd make crisis suits induvidually more powerful and more expensive (since they are no longer supposed to be the backbone of the army due to the new fire warrior rules), with at least t5 and bs4 standard (and I would even probably keep the targeting array upgrade).

You say a special rule would be simple now, but wait until one is agreed upon, written, then scrutinized by the millions of players with variable interpretation of the rules, how and when they apply, etc... Who would have thought "[as long as the Astropath is alive, reserve rolls receive a +1]" could be interpreted so many ways, just to have GW simply come out and say "[we're totally gak-faced when we write rules, we're not apologizing, but it doesn't work the way we wrote it. Only +1 regardless of the number of Astropaths you have.]"

So it's not so simple.

Addressing Drones, I stand fast in my resolve that a loss of an important piece of support equipment, scouting, defense, offense, or tech-support, can have an effect on morale. I am not saying all the Fire Warriors in the squad had developed an eary sense of affection for their flying friends, but consider that they are there to help you, and then they are destroyed, one might be a little bit "oh snap! There's something trying to kill me and they seem to be pretty good at killing my drones! They might be pretty good at killing me next! Aw, gak!"

I suddenly have an image of a drone going down and a Fire Warrior rushing out from cover to cradle the dying robot, begging his beloved "Sparky" to stick with him, promising the drone that a mechanic will be there soon to help put him back together, that everything will be alright, and to think of the new weapons and armor he will be getting to replace his broken ones. And as the little lights on the drone's "face" slowly dim and blink out, the Fire Warrior sadly sheds a tear and sobs....

So you are arguing GW should get rid of all special rules and have what all the armies identical? All I'm saying is the rule could be easily worked in and it would cause no more problems than any other special rule.

I siad I agree that the loss of drones would have an impact on morale. I'm just saying seeing your drone blown up is not quit ethe same as seeing a member of your species have it's life snuffed out. It is a primal thing and the impact is greater. Hence the compromise I suggested, that you do take panic tests for seeing drones get blown up but that doesn't effect your ability to rally. It also makes sense from a game play point of view. Win win really.

Adamah wrote:Also, on the tau question. Unless I'm fielding an all tank imperial guard army against somebody with 9 broadsides I honestly really dislike fighting against all but the best tau players because the codex is just so frustrating and hard to use. What is the point of an army whose troop units do almost nothing? The Fire Warriors should definitely be bumped up to BS4, they should also contemplate placing fire ports in their transports.

So by that logic, wont they still be doing nothing, but just doing it better? A bum up for BS isn't going to fix them, it's just going to make them better shooters. So more shots will hit but they will otherwise be the same. So why not just make them cheaper so you can have more units, able to absorb more damage, and be more willing to move them about to take objectives or stand behind or in front of Crisis Suits, acting as sacrificial shields.

That won't work! Some of you might say, but I as you, look at the Imperial Guard. They suffer most of the same tactical problems, what solved their terrible infantry options? Making them cheaper and with more options. Heck, Tau even have Kroot to improve upon as expendable close combat specialists. Give them some armor modifying weapons (yes, they can have special rules. Anything to encourage armor modifying weapons is a good move in my book), say, -1 or -2 to all saves, with 6+ being the minimum from some sort of special vibro-weapon. It's simple, its alien, it's effective without being odd and broken (I think power weapons and fists are generally broken, but simple and easy to use, so forgivable). Make them cheap and expendable, put them up front instead of the Tau, or behind ready to counter-attack when the Fire Warriors absorb most of the damage (having better armor).

There are a lot of alternative options to just boosting the BS of everything in the army. Many fluffy ones too.

Crisis suits I have always sort of seen as the Tau version of Terminators on speed, hopping around like Counter-Strike players with AWPs or FN Mini. Changes to them, that I would make, is to get rid of the shoot-and-skoot ability (because it's not fun for everyone else, as cool and fun as it may be to use), and make them cheaper with a greater variety of weapons to change their roles in the army. I would suggest close combat versions, but it would have to be accidental, as the Tau are supposed to abhor hand-to-hand combat. Perhaps some sort of elctro-flux field, enemy units engaged with them in close combat would suffer D6 attacks that hit on 4+, S5, this counts as the Crisis Suit's attacks in close combat. I could see Tau using Crisis Suits to blow through enemy packed lines in a mad rush for an objective. So they would need a good combined movement and assault distance, say 12" and 6", or vice-versa?

FlingitNow wrote:

Yeah drone squadrons shouldn't be fearless. They are obviously going to be programmed with survival instincts or they'd do stupid and suicidal things. They are not simply machines that follow direct commands they are sentient units able to act independantly and for that to work they'd need survival instincts...

I dunno, I'm kind of smitten with the idea of suicidal bomb drones flying across the field and smacking into enemy formations....