10279
Post by: focusedfire
After several requests and after hitting 30 pages it is now time to reboot as it were.
This discussion and the Fan-fiction codices(Fandices?) that are being discussed started Here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/220425.page
The discussion started off with a lot of wish-listing but eventually gravitated to a more serious analysis because of problematic rules that were being discussed in threads
like this one: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/235909.page
There was sort of a core group of us regularly posting that were longtime Tau players(Relative considering how young the army is game-wise). We had started playing Tau in their first codex and had followed to the very quickly released(US) second codex. The group was familiar with the unique design of the Tau and Their approach to warfare. From the first thread we ended up with a bit of a consensus on some areas that are in need of attention. This happened when everyone stopped wish-listing and some what agreed on a couple of basic Tau design philosophies. This gave us a group of do's and don'ts to work from concerning the Tau.
First the Don'ts:(Things not to do)
Assault oriented power weaponed HtH
High Model Count armies.
Power Fists
Uberpowerful Special Characters-this refers to in and of themselves. Focus should be on the army.
Over Powered units
Drop in tech level or remain stagnant in tech level
Leave the Tau with only 2 troop or elite choices
Nerf units
Cut and paste any battlesuit or markerlight rules
Most importantly Keep the Tau, TAU. Don't tresspass on other Armies by making them too similar.
Second the Do's:(Things to do)
Give Tau more mobility- return relative infantry mobility to 4th ed levels
Rework Firepower/Weapon ranges for 5th ed
Tau joins rest of 40K armies with coherent army-wide defining Special Rules
Write the wargear rules to where they are not a nightmare. Fix wargear and vehicle upgrades
Fix, rework or drop units that don't fit or work in the current codex
Rework Special Characters and Return Aun 'Shi- They affect army design
Aun 'Va Time to ****or get off the toilet, either army wide leadership effect, call in fire support at realist pricing.
And Most Importantly- Keep the Feel and Spirit of the Tau Army-Keep Tau reliance upon inter-unit cooperation and keep their unique weaponry.
Once there started to be a consensus that the rules them selves were really poorly writtien a couple of us decided to start writing our own fan-dex versions of the Codex. I was one of these people and started off just wanting to fix the things that were problematic in their wording and to use this as an exercise to find common ground of which units need work.
It was funny because, Nova and I were following two different design philosophies and working seperately but withing 5 pages were in agreement on about 5 units and quite a few things.
Nova took the making everything cheaper route, while I tried to keep the points the same or go up by only 1 or 2 points while improving unit effectiveness.
We and everyone following the thread at that time started to agree which units needed work and what things should be reflected in a Tau army. Cut & paste his and My posts on this consensus and then add a few other that may not be listed.
Nova wrote:There seem to be two primary directions, but it'll be hard for anyone to see them all that well till Focused and I get a place to put them up.
Things we do all seem to have a consensus on:
1) Methods to avoid and punish, rather than win at, close combat
2) moderately expensive models: the main difference in opinion here being how much specialisation to grant them. Focused seems to be going towards the eldar route, with expensive, but less numerous, powerful units, whereas I'm going more middle of the road and focusing on point-efficiency at the expense of the higher extremes of ability (ie; more forgiving but less powerful than an aspect). But overall its generally understood we'll be bit less expensive than marines but less powerful, and more powerful than IG but less economical.
3) A need for a rework on combined arms as used by the tau: In my case the markerlight system becomes the core for this, making interlocking lines of fire far more effective than just one team of pathfinders plus a single unit using all that up.
Units as a whole need to be advantageous to those around them... not as pure dependance; tau should be more self-sufficient than that eldar-like fashion of doing things; but rather as the 'trick' to winning more often: some armies need to know how to maneuver, some need to know just what to pick, some don't really need much thought at all they're so forgiving... with tau, it should be on a shootier dark-eldar level: slightly more forgiving (better survivability), but a little less total-annihilation gamebreaking offensive if used masterfully.
focusedfire wrote:Nova- Before I get into the vehicle secondaries I just wanted to point out a couple of things that seem to be of a concensus.
1)We both have written the XV-8's getting integral targeting arrays for BS4
2)We both have Shas'ui and up integral drone controllers
3)We both have the Fire Warriors themselves almost identicle. The only difference will be in available drone options.
4)Drones will have a greater position of importance by being scoring units.
There are still others but add this to what you posted earlier and the basic format for a new codex is beginning to shape up.
The only point missing is that though we had slightly differing markerlight systems we were in agreement that they needed a complete reworking.
I'm going to stop here for now but will start cutting the pertinent points out of the other thread to give some idea of where my fan-dex is going and so that everyone will be able to comment without neccessarily rehashing things already covered.
Will get back to this in a bit
,Later
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Ok, I will post first, I guess.
Battlesuits I belive they are a wee bit expensive maybe drop 3 points?. For what they do T4 is annoyingly week however IMO T5 is too strong so I propose a compramise, T4 but a rule that allows them to ignore Instant Death from S8 hits so they only wound as normal (S9 and S10 still instant kill).
Stealthsuits, 5-10 pts expensive for what they do, but I still use them well in my games for 250pts I get 18 S5 AP5 shots at BS2 (if marker drones hit) usually wounding on 2s or 3s. I have seen a squad of 10 marines die to that firepower with overkill of 1 or 2 wounds which is nothing to sniff out (I outflank so my opponent can't place counter units he will have to use)
I hate the idea of suit powerfists I think leave them S5 and this can be explained easily, being powered armour Tau strength raised to 3, then the fact that the suit is using advanced alien hyrdaulics to haul 8 tonnes of suit at you in normal 1G environments (as indicated by the name XV8 and XV88 the first indicating weight class) so yeah, it's gonna hurt.
That's all for now.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
I can see what your getting at Krellnus. Eternal warrior would be nice but I personally feel that it doesn't fit with the direction of this fan-dex. This is a personal bias on my part. I see GW handing eternal warrior out like its candy to some other armies(Bet Necrons will get it like crazy) and have made a decision not to do the same. That in order to help keep the Tau distinctive that they shouldn't get have general access to this rule. I could see giving Eternal warrior to Farsight, but only him because of the sword.
Now, I could tweek the Stim injector rules to give the suits Eternal warrior but, I personally feel that it would throw of the balance in this fandex. Also, the Stim inj. rules are fine and I don't try to fix things that aren't broke.
I agree with you about the powerfists to a point. I toyed with the Tau getting a power weapon ability in HtH. That any turn where the Crisis suit didn't fire or jetpack that the extra energy could be directed to the suits arms. This could have gone the power weapon route or just double the suits strength in HtH. After playing around with the idea I abandoned it for being an overly akward/cumbersome rule and just not Tau. Would you agree?
On this fan-dex I knew while there were some things that "HAD" to change I, also, knew that every change has an army wide effect. This is why I have backed off of a few of my earlier ideas. Some of the ideas are so elegant and far reaching that they are too good to not use and therefore eliminate the need for some of the others.
One such idea that has really affected the army are drones now being troops and counting as squad members that assume the squad type they join. The shield drones now give the squad an inv save from ranged attacks(Not HtH). This increases the squads ability to survive S8 and up ranged attacks.
In this fandex you will get charged for the wargear rather than the ability to take wargear. Having said that, my crisis are still going up in price. The prices can't really be dropped due to all of the special abilities they already have. Add to this that I am improving their profile with included/standardized wargear that will no longer occupy one of the suits weapon/wargear hard points and you will see why they are going up to 30-35pt each.
The stealth suits will be more for the same reasons and for that their weapon is being improved. I have them hovering in the 40 pt range but the Burst cannons are now 24" range and may get an extra shot.
To reply to your last bit. This is why the first Tau codex is so important. GW explained the profile increases in the unit descriptions so that people would understand everything that the suit did. When you take away the description and leave just the abstaction that these are better because of unit type, the players will start taking the improved abilities for granted and start asking for more.
Note-I may write up list of the ideas that I've had and have discarded while writing this and the reasons for why they were discarded. If I do such, it will be a bit before it gets posted.
1795
Post by: keezus
Can you adjust the first post and/or create a new thread - such that it only contains the relavent fan-dex information: Item such as:
General Army Rules
Armory
All proposed units - if they have no rules yet - list it as such. If they are conceptual - list it as such. If they have no points values - indicate as such.
This will alow other posters to address parts of your fan-dex which need tweaking without digging through a million posts. Extrapolation of unit usage can only be achieved when looking at the complete dex as math-hammer can only go so far.
Any explanations for why units are the way they are do not need to be in this initial post, and should not be, as they will be debated further down in the thread. Any changes that result from debates further down in the thread should be edited into the first post, such that people entering this discussion have a place to review the ENTIRE ruleset without any extraneous information.
Right now you are posting all sorts of "explanations" as to why certain stuff is the way it is. Considering that none of the other posters can see the entire picture, such explanations are premature. Any rationales would be good - collected in the second post of the thread (if desired) - which readers can skip over if they do not care about reading it.
4337
Post by: Pipboy101
What I would fix is making all Tau BS 5. That is it.
7430
Post by: keemperor
I have made a small fandex in hopes of using it to test out possibilities for the Tau. My approach was a mixture of cost reduction and generalizing some pieces of wargear and or options.
The Tau are horrible at HtH, so I am not making them even remotelly good at it. However I also took into account that the Tau would at least make sure that their troops are as survivable as possible, so I equipped them standard w/ photon grenades (marines have both frag and krak standard, so I don't see a problem with this for Tau)
I also made some changes, to make the Ethereal wort it. The Ethereal as he is right now is just plain horrible and simply not worth it. However I also read the fluff clearly and something that was not capitalized is that they have access to the Tau fleet and anything they would need. So to make them very survivable (or at least not die as easily) I gave them a shield generator, I also created two types of drones specifically for them, a drone that allows them to launch a power similar in practice to the orbital bombardment, but different in execution.
Please read and give me some feedback
1
| Filename |
Tau Weapons Tentative.doc |
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif)
Download
|
| Description |
Tentative Tau Codex |
| File size |
226 Kbytes
|
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Broadsides are frequently referred to "carrying the heaviest weapons in the Tau Empire".
Why not have them carrying a smaller version of the Ion Cannon as opposed to a Railgun.
Rng: 48, STR: 6 AP: 4, Type: Heavy 4 Twin Linked.
7430
Post by: keemperor
radiohazard wrote:Broadsides are frequently referred to "carrying the heaviest weapons in the Tau Empire".
Why not have them carrying a smaller version of the Ion Cannon as opposed to a Railgun.
Rng: 48, STR: 6 AP: 4, Type: Heavy 4 Twin Linked.
That may not be such a bad idea, but maybe they haven't done it so that they didn't have to make extra rules for the Broadsides, making them a straightforward unit to use (as anti-tank)
Although this was pretty much covered by the Sniper Drones, which are 36" S6 AP3 Heavy 1, Pinning, but you have three of them for 80 pts
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Pipboy101 wrote:What I would fix is making all Tau BS 5. That is it.
...no.
Making all Tau better at shooting won't fix the multiple problems facing them. Glance over the original thread to get an idea of what we are working with here.
9594
Post by: RiTides
Huzzah! For the new thread  Thank you!!!!
I am dead tired, but I will be reading (and possibly posting) more tomorrow
9230
Post by: Trasvi
In my opinion, one of the main things hampering the Tau is this idea of 'combined arms' which isn't represented. Supposedly the FW are the grunts and everything else carries the heavy weapons: but in fact, most units have the same base S5 Ap5 weapons as fire warriors!
I think increasing the availability and/or potency of markerlights could go a long way to fixing this
18312
Post by: Lacross
keemperor wrote:
well, looking at the first page....
str + 2D6 pen seeker missiles seem... overpowered. i'd expect them to be ordinance and/or barrage class at most (pick highest of 2D6; always hit side armor)(you also changed the missiles to AP2?)
EMP genades Penetration adjustment...i'd be ok with.
Photon grenades...where are the rules for not using the underslung launcher? cause i don't see how the one's equipped with just P-Grenades are supposed to function.
Automatically Appended Next Post: skimming over the rest of it, you seem to have taken the stuff from the IA:taros campaign book and stuffed it in while also changing the points around for unit costs
(50 pt unarmed hammerhead) Automatically Appended Next Post: do you also mean to imply that exchanging both burst cannons from a suit would give 2 independent weapons of the same type(i.e 2 not twin-linked plasma rifles)
or even exchanging both BC for 2 TL-P-Rifles?(4 TL Str6 AP2 shots at 12"?!) Automatically Appended Next Post: well, i'm assuming it needs more words Automatically Appended Next Post: also: the special rules for the missile racks: reloading:
if it has to do a full reload after an Alpha Strike, does that mean it can't even move? Automatically Appended Next Post: Weapon Stabilizer: (re-rolls to hit) you can use this on markerlights too?
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Making the Tau vehicle STR: 5 weapons (Burst Cannons and SMS) defensive weapons would a great add without being over-powered.
I also know for a fact that GW games development use the KISS system for their rules:
Keep
It
Simple
Stupid
Also - don't make the Tau cost less, just make them have more stuff worthy of their current points cost.
EG: Make Markerlights worth taking by changing some of their effects.
EG: Give the FW and PF Photon Grenades and EMP Grenades as standard.
EG: Give the Battlesuits Black Sun Filters, Target Locks or Multi-Trackers as standard.
EG: Let the XV-88 move and fire heavy weapons.
1795
Post by: keezus
@radiohazard: I think GW's motto is more:
Keep it Simply Stupid rather than the usual usage.
Does anyone have any comment on my idea (in the other thread) of making burst cannons pinning, with markerlights lowering leadership for pin-checks? Considering the vast numbers places where the maligned burst cannon can/is taken, this might improve firewarriors / pathfinders as pulse carbines and burst cannon from transports would have effective pinning combined with markerlight support.
I feel that pinning is an underlooked ability in Warhammer. Lowering leadership is key though, as most elite armies have Ld that is too high to reliably pin. Armies with low Ld typically have low armor and huge numbers, so being able to pin a portion of the horde has great advantages for the Tau as well.
I also feel that up to the full complement of seekers should be able to fired at a single "lit" squad. As seekers are a non-replenishable resource I don't see this as a bad thing. It would also move seeker missile firing back to the vehicle (alpha-strike replaces split fire) which removes some of the "token" wonkiness that exists now.
16988
Post by: mattv2099
I think Tau is an excellent army. They don't need much.
Most obviously:
Fix our two worthless units - Ethereals and vespids.
Devilfish should cost less points.
Give Piranha the ability to upgrade from drones to SMS.
FAQ the Flechette dischargers.
As it is there is no reason to ever take stealth suits because crisis are so much better. so maybe make stealth cheaper with a larger squad size.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
mattv2099 wrote:I think Tau is an excellent army. They don't need much.
Most obviously:
Fix our two worthless units - Ethereals and vespids.
Devilfish should cost less points.
Give Piranha the ability to upgrade from drones to SMS.
FAQ the Flechette dischargers.
As it is there is no reason to ever take stealth suits because crisis are so much better. so maybe make stealth cheaper with a larger squad size.
Clearly you haven't been playing Tau much. Granted, they are still a viable army, but at this point there are some gaping problems. Useless units and wargear, being the two most prominent.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
mattv2099 wrote:I think Tau is an excellent army. They don't need much.
Most obviously:
Fix our two worthless units - Ethereals and vespids.
Devilfish should cost less points.
Give Piranha the ability to upgrade from drones to SMS.
FAQ the Flechette dischargers.
As it is there is no reason to ever take stealth suits because crisis are so much better. so maybe make stealth cheaper with a larger squad size.
I agree - Ethereals and Vespid are useless.
Devilfish should cost less.
Piranha with SMS would be kinda kick ass, if a bit Over Powered.
Stealth Suits as a 0-2 Troops Choices would be nice. It wouldn't allow an over powered amount of them and would still mean that people would take FW and will free up Elite choices for XV8s.
9158
Post by: Hollismason
Tau are an excellent army if played correctly. Overall they really just need the following fixes.
1. Reduce the cost of Crisis suits by 20 percent. Along with a general across board 20 percent reduction for all weaponry.
2. Make it so that StimPacks are not special issue and the one that allows hit and run. This makes it so you can actually make a Close Combat Crisis team.
3. Give Master Crafted Combat Weapons not power weapons to Crisis suits.
4. Reduce the cost of Stealth suits by 20 percent. Give them the ability to take rail rifles instead of Fusion guns.
5. Reduce the overall cost of all vehicles by 20 percent.
6. Add all the Imperial Armoury stuff allowing Firewarrior teams to take a Heavy Gun Drone ( could count as two models for transport) with gun options or markerlight options.
That's it they just need the wargear rewritten somewhat and a reduction in Crisis suits and a increase in Crisis suits Squad size. I would do 3 to 5.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Tau don't need nor should they ever have anything to do with Close Combat.
Farsight is an exception to this.
16988
Post by: mattv2099
Che-Vito wrote:mattv2099 wrote:I think Tau is an excellent army. They don't need much.
Most obviously:
Fix our two worthless units - Ethereals and vespids.
Devilfish should cost less points.
Give Piranha the ability to upgrade from drones to SMS.
FAQ the Flechette dischargers.
As it is there is no reason to ever take stealth suits because crisis are so much better. so maybe make stealth cheaper with a larger squad size.
Clearly you haven't been playing Tau much. Granted, they are still a viable army, but at this point there are some gaping problems. Useless units and wargear, being the two most prominent.
I play Tau all the time. Very strong army if you use the good stuff and ignore all the crap in the codex.
11427
Post by: JourneyPsycheOut
Tau don't need massive buffs to their shooting, its very good right now as is. I read keemperor's fandex, and some things are ok, and some things are over the top. A devilfish should not cost less than a chimera. Disruption pods need a points increase. And Hammerheads are way too low in points at 50 base. For 85 points you get a hammerhead with an ion cannon, multitracker, and two vehicle burst cannons. For 85 points.... The railgun should be reduced to 25 points, but the base cost go up to 100 and have the ion cannon standard. Increase the costs of multi trackers and disruption pods. They shouldn't be no-brainer upgrades. If extra armor costs 15 points now....
16889
Post by: razorlead
I have always felt that that having a weapons that physically slows attacking infantry or disrupts their movement would "improve" the CC nature of Tau without adding CC dedicated units that would be out of line with the Tau mentality.
Ideas
Some kind of minelayer on the devilfish and hammerheads that allows them to deploy a mine belt during movement similar to the grav chute insertion.
Ability to make a piece of terrain dangerous for a turn. Some kind of slippery force field/spray foam
a kind of gravity gun "Lash" that moves units
thoughts
11194
Post by: Krellnus
focusedfire wrote:I can see what your getting at Krellnus. Eternal warrior would be nice but I personally feel that it doesn't fit with the direction of this fan-dex. This is a personal bias on my part. I see GW handing eternal warrior out like its candy to some other armies(Bet Necrons will get it like crazy) and have made a decision not to do the same. That in order to help keep the Tau distinctive that they shouldn't get have general access to this rule. I could see giving Eternal warrior to Farsight, but only him because of the sword.
Now, I could tweek the Stim injector rules to give the suits Eternal warrior but, I personally feel that it would throw of the balance in this fandex. Also, the Stim inj. rules are fine and I don't try to fix things that aren't broke.
I agree with you about the powerfists to a point. I toyed with the Tau getting a power weapon ability in HtH. That any turn where the Crisis suit didn't fire or jetpack that the extra energy could be directed to the suits arms. This could have gone the power weapon route or just double the suits strength in HtH. After playing around with the idea I abandoned it for being an overly akward/cumbersome rule and just not Tau. Would you agree?
On this fan-dex I knew while there were some things that "HAD" to change I, also, knew that every change has an army wide effect. This is why I have backed off of a few of my earlier ideas. Some of the ideas are so elegant and far reaching that they are too good to not use and therefore eliminate the need for some of the others.
One such idea that has really affected the army are drones now being troops and counting as squad members that assume the squad type they join. The shield drones now give the squad an inv save from ranged attacks(Not HtH). This increases the squads ability to survive S8 and up ranged attacks.
In this fandex you will get charged for the wargear rather than the ability to take wargear. Having said that, my crisis are still going up in price. The prices can't really be dropped due to all of the special abilities they already have. Add to this that I am improving their profile with included/standardized wargear that will no longer occupy one of the suits weapon/wargear hard points and you will see why they are going up to 30-35pt each.
The stealth suits will be more for the same reasons and for that their weapon is being improved. I have them hovering in the 40 pt range but the Burst cannons are now 24" range and may get an extra shot.
To reply to your last bit. This is why the first Tau codex is so important. GW explained the profile increases in the unit descriptions so that people would understand everything that the suit did. When you take away the description and leave just the abstaction that these are better because of unit type, the players will start taking the improved abilities for granted and start asking for more.
Note-I may write up list of the ideas that I've had and have discarded while writing this and the reasons for why they were discarded. If I do such, it will be a bit before it gets posted.
Ok I can see where you are coming from with eternal warrior and I agree (omg necrons will be evil)
Stim injectors are currently perfect they have saved my anti-tank shas'vre so many times it isn't funny
I completely agree no tau cc except what they pick up naturally from front lines combat (i.e. Shas'O WS4)
Ok, I have complete confidence in you
JourneyPsycheOut wrote:Tau don't need massive buffs to their shooting, its very good right now as is. I read keemperor's fandex, and some things are ok, and some things are over the top. A devilfish should not cost less than a chimera. Disruption pods need a points increase. And Hammerheads are way too low in points at 50 base. For 85 points you get a hammerhead with an ion cannon, multitracker, and two vehicle burst cannons. For 85 points.... The railgun should be reduced to 25 points, but the base cost go up to 100 and have the ion cannon standard. Increase the costs of multi trackers and disruption pods. They shouldn't be no-brainer upgrades. If extra armor costs 15 points now....
Yes I completely agree on the hammerhead it should be 65 base just because it can take the railgun.
razorlead wrote:I have always felt that that having a weapons that physically slows attacking infantry or disrupts their movement would "improve" the CC nature of Tau without adding CC dedicated units that would be out of line with the Tau mentality.
Ideas
Some kind of minelayer on the devilfish and hammerheads that allows them to deploy a mine belt during movement similar to the grav chute insertion.
Ability to make a piece of terrain dangerous for a turn. Some kind of slippery force field/spray foam
a kind of gravity gun "Lash" that moves units
thoughts
1. Tau don't touch CC with an indestructible 10 light year pole
2. Not very tau as minelaying requires relying on static defences isn't very tau like
3. Again, not very Tau like as they won't set up defences that could accidentally backfire unto themselves, yes they actually care about their troops that much
4. Treading too much on the toes of Slaanesh.
mattv2099 wrote:I think Tau is an excellent army. They don't need much.
Most obviously:
Fix our two worthless units - Ethereals and vespids.
Devilfish should cost less points.
Give Piranha the ability to upgrade from drones to SMS.
FAQ the Flechette dischargers.
As it is there is no reason to ever take stealth suits because crisis are so much better. so maybe make stealth cheaper with a larger squad size.
1. Vespids can still ds and kill marines as their guns are AP3 so they are not so useless
2. No that would be too uber and take away the Piranhas are designed for scouting as Missiles weigh a fair bit
3. Flechettes are perfect they are something the Tau would use
4. Oh ok, I didn't realise that crisis suits could outflank 6 guys and 2 drones, Hit on 2s and lay down some of the most powerful anti-hoard infantry based fire in the game.
Pipboy101 wrote:What I would fix is making all Tau BS 5. That is it.
That would be rubbish, it would solve nothing as to fix the commanders up properly would result in Shas'o being probably BS8 (hit on 2 with 4+ reroll) which would knock of phoenix lord's as the game's most accurate shooters ( BS 7)
9158
Post by: Hollismason
Okay Tau Crisis suits;
Change Squad size 2 - 4 ;
Decrease points by 5.
Remove the restriction on taking two of the same weapon.
Give them ability to take Stim Injectors ; Thrusters.
It's a 3 model unit with 2 wounds Feel no pain is not broken on them ; as they are tougness 4 3+ armour save.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
I assure everyone that I am still working on this. Am doing it cover to cover and am on pg8.
I have a unit and wargear idea that I want to bounce off of everyone.
The unit XV-15(No targ array! Maybe no stealthfield?)Shas'ui
BS 3 WS 3 S 4 T 3 W 2 I 3 A 2 Ld 8 Sv 3+
Squad size: 1 Shas'Ui teamlead w/bonded & 2-5 Shas'ui
Weapon: Burst cannon(Improved profile)
Wargear: Grenades of both types and HWDC(no other upgrades or options
Unit type: troops(Maybe Elites)
Cost: Thinking 85pts & 25 points each extra(may get bumped +5pts.
Story-These are used as cheap initial suit to train the Shas'ui in a real combat enviroment. All Shas'Ui spend at least one(two) Rotaa in one of these before graduating to the more advanced XV-8 XV-25 XV-88 battlesuits.
Purpose-Highly mobility Troop
Questions-
Troops or Elites?
Stealthfield or no Stealthfield?
Burstcannon - Range24" Assault 3 or 4?
Wargear Idea- My ethereal now where armour with built in sheild gen.
How do you feel about a buyable jet-pack option for the Ethereal?
Or would buyable battlesuit upgrade work better?
I'm leaning towards the
Jet-pack
let me know what you think
BTW, According to fluff Farsight has been working with Kroot and Rogue trader humans and mercs.
Gue'Vesa are in my fan-dex as Farsight only but he looses access to pirahnas and some other units.
18312
Post by: Lacross
with range 24" assault 3 seems sufficient
these guys don't have jet/jump packs?(are they jump type or jet type?)
maybe make the jump/jet pack a purchase?
and the stealth field option a purchase too?
is there a reason to give them Drones?(They can take sniper drones?)
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
focusedfire wrote:
BTW, According to fluff Farsight has been working with Kroot and Rogue trader humans and mercs.
Gue'Vesa are in my fan-dex as Farsight only but he looses access to pirahnas and some other units.
The Tau Empire has also been working with Gue'vesa, so I would think they would have access. I think Farsight's greatest strength was the bonuses he conferred to his army in the 3rd Edition Codex. I think the return of that benefit is much more befitting of an army tailored and trained by Farsight.
I believe the rule was: +2 points for +1WS and +1I, but don't quote me on that. I will look it up in the morning.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Che-Vito wrote:focusedfire wrote:
BTW, According to fluff Farsight has been working with Kroot and Rogue trader humans and mercs.
Gue'Vesa are in my fan-dex as Farsight only but he looses access to pirahnas and some other units.
The Tau Empire has also been working with Gue'vesa, so I would think they would have access. I think Farsight's greatest strength was the bonuses he conferred to his army in the 3rd Edition Codex. I think the return of that benefit is much more befitting of an army tailored and trained by Farsight.
I believe the rule was: +2 points for +1WS and +1I, but don't quote me on that. I will look it up in the morning.
I liked that rule too.
A trait system would be nice.
Like you could purchase different "tactics" like Mont'ka and Kau'yon + the others that are mentioned in the Tau fluff from the novels for your commander. Restrict the Commander to taking only one of them and give each tactic a special rule or upgrade for the entire army.
I've been tinkering with it, but I haven't come up with anyhting solid as yet.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
The XV-15 has jet-packs. Its the old stealthsuit models that I still like better than the XV-25 but understood why they were changed because they looked like FW armed with burst cannons.
As to the Farsight buy up ability. I liked the rule but it was 5 pts per model. Worked good on crisis suits and depending on how you read the rule, Farsight himself. Any other units was a bit of a waste.
The Gue 'vesa in the regular empire might be too fully integrated and vanilla. I still might allow a limited access to the Tau empire but I feel they will really shine and have a purpose in a Farsight list.
Farsight doesn't have the full support of the Tau Empire so a sperate mercenaries list make sense. Farsight, with Aun'shis help has begun to rebuild the Tau society on the frontier but, even with this, the Farsight Enclaves are short on equipment. Farsight respects any who show courage and ability, so he has allowed human and kroot mercenairies to join his army.
In order to reflect this, I have it that Farsights army has lost the ability to field or still can't field some units.
The units are:
Vespids
Pirahna light skimmers(All Anti-grav and engine parts go toward the more durable Hammerhead and devilfish)
Remora Jetbike drones
Drones of any form
Any Special issue wargear
Any other special characters than Farsight himself and Aun'shi
To make up for these shortages, especially in fast attack, Farsight can now take:
Scout sentinels(2 squadron limit)
Vendeta Gunships(1 Squadron limit)
Strom troopers(Farsights rigid training and flexible style of warfare creates a Gue 'Vesa Storm trooper style troop unit)
These humans have limited access to the Tau wargear and IG weapon loadouts.(I.E.-burst cannons in place of bolters and heavy bolters, no plasma or fusion upgrades for the storms,Devifish replaces chimera as transport option, that type of set-up)
Mandatory rule that you have to take 2 infantry squads to get the Sentinels or vendetta's
He will also get access to the kroot.
Let me know what you think.
The XV-15 idea, Any other feedback?
Troops or elites that don't use up FOC slot?
Same questions from before.
18312
Post by: Lacross
funny thing... the Vendetta transport rules don't prevent you from loading XV suits inside
10279
Post by: focusedfire
^exactly  , Keep playing with the possibilities. This may end up being OP but its a fun idea to play with. I can always put a no suit restriction if needed.
I choose the Vendetta because it had less of an IG weapons wargear dependence/conflict than the valk and that it seemed to mesh with the Tau better. Honestly, The Tau would just retro-fit the thing with railguns but that would be too, too much. Farsight would retrofit any valks into a harder hitting vehicle, so I took the vendetta path.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
I like your "training suit" idea a lot actually.
Perhaps having the Gue'vesa within the Tau Empire only able to act as Infantry Platoons with the option of Devilfish transport makes more sense. Humans trained in a generic human fashion, whilst still fitting into Tau mobile warfare.
The Tau Empire wouldn't want to use the more archaic Imperial tech such as Sentinels....but for Farsight this would make some sense.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Che-Vito wrote:I like your "training suit" idea a lot actually.
Perhaps having the Gue'vesa within the Tau Empire only able to act as Infantry Platoons with the option of Devilfish transport makes more sense. Humans trained in a generic human fashion, whilst still fitting into Tau mobile warfare.
The Tau Empire wouldn't want to use the more archaic Imperial tech such as Sentinels....but for Farsight this would make some sense.
As do I, With the XV15s have it so they are troops but you can't have more suit teams than FW squads or something to help balance it out.
Yes that would be pretty nice
10279
Post by: focusedfire
They are now in the codex as a 1 per army. Gave them the name Battlesuit Shas'Ui to denote that they are vets recieving a generic battlesuit upgrade. Story is that after spending the alloted time in these generic suits, the Shas'ui progress to become Shas,Vre that specialize a bit more.
This has me tweeking the rank track to bring the Shas'El back in by changing the definition of 'Vre from Hero to Specialist and 'El from Noble to Hero. In this dex there are no Broadside, Stealth, or Crisis Shas'ui. Those units now start with Shas'vre and can have a Shas'El team leader upgrade.
Battlesuit Shas'Ui are a troop unit that do not count towards the armies compulsory troop choices.
Unit is 4-8 Shas'Ui
Cost is 25pts per model with a bonded team leader that adds 5 pts
Unit may take drones and target locks but no other wargear excepting that which they were issued.
Including this unit has allowed for changes to the FoC and is helping to speed things up a bit.
PS, As things stand, Aun'Va is out of the Book. It seems that anything that he might do to be effective would be more appropriate for an Apoc unit. May change my mind but will be looking for opinions on his possible abilities.
Should he, Have the ability to call in an Air strike?
Maybe he allows for 1 extra unit to be taken if the Heavy support slots are full?
Would it be better where in any turn Aun'Va takes a wound, any unit with LoS to him can take 1 extra shot per model in their next round of shooting?
Aun'va opens up the question, "Should I represent the rank track within the Ethereals by having different ranks with increasing levels of ability?"
BTW, Does anyone have any feedback about the Ethereals getting a jet-pack option?
That is enough for now. Will wait for some feedback.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
focusedfire wrote:^exactly , Keep playing with the possibilities. This may end up being OP but its a fun idea to play with. I can always put a no suit restriction if needed.
I choose the Vendetta because it had less of an IG weapons wargear dependence/conflict than the valk and that it seemed to mesh with the Tau better. Honestly, The Tau would just retro-fit the thing with railguns but that would be too, too much. Farsight would retrofit any valks into a harder hitting vehicle, so I took the vendetta path.
Valks and vendets are Imperial Navy, not Guard. Tau would see them as lesser tech and not even bother using their scrap.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Sanchez01 wrote:focusedfire wrote:^exactly , Keep playing with the possibilities. This may end up being OP but its a fun idea to play with. I can always put a no suit restriction if needed.
I choose the Vendetta because it had less of an IG weapons wargear dependence/conflict than the valk and that it seemed to mesh with the Tau better. Honestly, The Tau would just retro-fit the thing with railguns but that would be too, too much. Farsight would retrofit any valks into a harder hitting vehicle, so I took the vendetta path.
Valks and vendets are Imperial Navy, not Guard. Tau would see them as lesser tech and not even bother using their scrap.
Not true. On frontier worlds, the novels specify that both Lasguns and Pulse rifles are available for the Gue'vesa. Although Farsight has access to better tech., he is in a pinch that the Tau Empire doesn't find itself in. It wouldn't be entirely surprising to me if Farsight did use lower tech equipment if he needed to arm available troops.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Well Gue'vesa are not tau, they would use rocks if it meant surviving.
But the thing is, Valkyries are under the Imperial Navy, and unless they left parts of the Navy on the crusade then the Tau would only have the burned out hulls left over from beating the Imperium's butt. Well maybe an abandoned base would hold a few, but I really don't see the Tua using them at all. After all their fighters are great performance, their Mantas are all the Drop Transports the Tau really need.
I also bet that the Tech Priest would sabotage most if not all of the "Tech" before letting it fall. And unless it was maintained by Tau mechanics, the Humans (Which were not allowed to do the upkeep) would have no idea on now to keep it running.
The Highest position a Human can hold (from what I saw) was Squad Leader... and even at that could one squad leader order a firewarrior? (I don't know)
To me it seems like a million to one that a Valkyrie would be in Tau service. Just like you really don't see a Russ fighting for them when a Hammerhead can do so much more, and do it so much better.
What do you think about a gunboat version of an Orca? Or a modified Barracuda for priority target elimination? With their arrogant attitudes they would most likely go Tau Tech... O'Shovah is the only one I have seen that uses a non-Tau weapon.
17543
Post by: acreedon
focus on the codex stuff lol. this would be cool if it influenced the next edition of the tau codex.
I think fixing etherals is pretty hard and am interested if you can make them a decent HQ choice.
Keep it coming.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
focusedfire wrote:They are now in the codex as a 1 per army. Gave them the name Battlesuit Shas'Ui to denote that they are vets recieving a generic battlesuit upgrade. Story is that after spending the alloted time in these generic suits, the Shas'ui progress to become Shas,Vre that specialize a bit more.
Like the idea, makes sense, and adds some flavour. I applaud you.
focusedfire wrote:Cost is 25pts per model with a bonded team leader that adds 5 pts
Unit may take drones and target locks but no other wargear excepting that which they were issued.
I would say just include the team leader and bonding all in the unit (in other words, don't make it an option). I imagine the unit having a team leader who helps them progress into full Shas'vre, and also the squad having to function like a unit to survive. Having them Bonded makes a lot of sense.
focusedfire wrote: As things stand, Aun'Va is out of the Book. It seems that anything that he might do to be effective would be more appropriate for an Apoc unit. May change my mind but will be looking for opinions on his possible abilities.
Possibly an Apoc unit, personally I would be okay with him being delegated to being an objective marker for the rest of time. I like Aun'Shi because he was an Ethereal that involved himself in the combat...much like special characters from other armies.
focusedfire wrote:BTW, Does anyone have any feedback about the Ethereals getting a jet-pack option?
Eh, I don't think so. Jetpack units are usually deep-striking, or at the least highly mobile. I don't see the Ethereals rolling around with the Stealthsuits or the Crisis Suits.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Correct me if I am wrong please. But ain't Ethereals kinda like the beloved Store Manager? They have great plans for the store, the employees love them, and if they get fired (Die) it ruins store moral?
So they should suck, stats wise, but offer great bonuses. Something Like all Tau may re-roll one failed moral check per turn, 6" or 12" fearless aura, and maybe a body guard or two. And keep Price of Failure
17543
Post by: acreedon
You have to keep the Price of Failure. I would suggest it giving the whole army some kind of benefit like everyone has leadership 10 or everyone is fearless or something along those lines.
I play gunline tau sometimes and use shadowsun for the leadership bonus besides that shadowsun just sits there.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Sanchez01 wrote: the Humans (Which were not allowed to do the upkeep) would have no idea on now to keep it running.
Quote this, I have read nothing either way. The question is, why WOULDN'T humans be allow to?
Sanchez01 wrote: The Highest position a Human can hold (from what I saw) was Squad Leader... and even at that could one squad leader order a firewarrior? (I don't know)
Again, all you have seen in the mini's game is evidence of Gue'vesa'la and Gue'vesa'ui, is there higher? Probably. There is no writing that I have seen that has evidenced against it. The author of the codex doesn't seem to have focused in on this yet though.
Sanchez01 wrote: To me it seems like a million to one that a Valkyrie would be in Tau service. Just like you really don't see a Russ fighting for them when a Hammerhead can do so much more, and do it so much better.
Again, why vehicles and such are far more likely with Farsight. Plain and simple, he has less to work with so I could see him using what he can.
Sanchez01 wrote:What do you think about a gunboat version of an Orca? Or a modified Barracuda for priority target elimination? With their arrogant attitudes they would most likely go Tau Tech... O'Shovah is the only one I have seen that uses a non-Tau weapon.
Well Tau tech is better...arrogant though? A discussion for another thread. The Orca and Barracuda haven't been address yet by the author, but I imagine if/when he gets around to FW vehicles and Apoc rules...there will absolutely be room for suggestion on those!
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Che-Vito wrote:
Quote this, I have read nothing either way. The question is, why WOULDN'T humans be allow to?
Because they are not Adeptus Mechanicus. One thing I really hate about the Imperium is how they let these cog-head heretics have a monopoly on human tech. All Guard and Navy Tech is protected and maintained by the Mech Priests and the such, and Space Marines are taken care of my Tech-Marines
Che-Vito wrote:
Again, all you have seen in the mini's game is evidence of Gue'vesa'la and Gue'vesa'ui, is there higher? Probably. There is no writing that I have seen that has evidenced against it. The author of the codex doesn't seem to have focused in on this yet though.
Fair enough, but do you think a Shas'la would take orders from a Gue'vesa'ui? And a quick question, would a Fire Warrior take orders from a Kroot shaper or tribe leader?
Che-Vito wrote:
Again, why vehicles and such are far more likely with Farsight. Plain and simple, he has less to work with so I could see him using what he can.
But Farsight is not the Empire, And could you provide a link (or page number) that shows he uses Human tech in battle?
Che-Vito wrote:
Well Tau tech is better...arrogant though? A discussion for another thread. The Orca and Barracuda haven't been address yet by the author, but I imagine if/when he gets around to FW vehicles and Apoc rules...there will absolutely be room for suggestion on those!
Well when it comes to talking about those, I would love to jump in  as for the arrogant, every race (maybe not orks) is arrogant, just some more then others *cough eldar *cough *cough Automatically Appended Next Post: acreedon wrote:You have to keep the Price of Failure. I would suggest it giving the whole army some kind of benefit like everyone has leadership 10 or everyone is fearless or something along those lines.
I play gunline tau sometimes and use shadowsun for the leadership bonus besides that shadowsun just sits there.
Well I was thinking something like this.
Aun is near!: While the Ethereal is alive, all Tau (not kroot, vespide, Gue'vesa) are able to re-roll one failed moral save per turn.
I See the Aun!: All Tau (not kroot, vespide, Gue'vesa) in LOS of the Ethereal do not suffer negatives to their leadership (ei being under 50% and the such)
Body Guards: 0-2 Body Guards or 0-3 Shield Drones (For a price of course)
For the Great Good!: All Tau (not kroot, vespide, Gue'vesa) within 6" or 12" (Depending on rank) become fearless.
Price of failure:
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Sanchez01 wrote:
Because they are not Adeptus Mechanicus. One thing I really hate about the Imperium is how they let these cog-head heretics have a monopoly on human tech. All Guard and Navy Tech is protected and maintained by the Mech Priests and the such, and Space Marines are taken care of my Tech-Marines
Wouldn't be that hard for the Tau to figure out, and instruct humans in. This is pure speculation, but I don't think that it is much of a stretch.
Sanchez01 wrote:
Fair enough, but do you think a Shas'la would take orders from a Gue'vesa'ui? And a quick question, would a Fire Warrior take orders from a Kroot shaper or tribe leader?
I don't have an answer there for you. Speculation could go either way.
Sanchez01 wrote:
But Farsight is not the Empire, And could you provide a link (or page number) that shows he uses Human tech in battle?
Like I said, the information on vehicles and such isn't there...that is all speculation (which the author is doing a bit of, but I think it's fair speculation.)
The information on having the ability to produce Lasguns can be found here: http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Gue%27vesa
The link actually indicates the Tau Empire, not Farsight. Since FocusedFire is writing the Codex, he can write in a bit of his own fluff on the subject.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Che-Vito wrote:
Wouldn't be that hard for the Tau to figure out, and instruct humans in. This is pure speculation, but I don't think that it is much of a stretch.
No, you are right, not much of a stretch at all, the problem is that the techs would blow it up first.. the only way the Tau would get their hands on it are these two ways, 1. they capture in an attack, but the chances of getting even 50% of the stock unharmed is low to none, as the techs would have started desroying everything in a loss .. and 2. a general defected, but they would not be able to bring much over... so a valk would be more rare then a titan
Che-Vito wrote:
I don't have an answer there for you. Speculation could go either way.
oh, i was really hoping for an answer on that one.
Che-Vito wrote:
Like I said, the information on vehicles and such isn't there...that is all speculation (which the author is doing a bit of, but I think it's fair speculation.)
The information on having the ability to produce Lasguns can be found here: http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Gue%27vesa
The link actually indicates the Tau Empire, not Farsight. Since FocusedFire is writing the Codex, he can write in a bit of his own fluff on the subject.
hmm. i just don't see it happening. and parts would be a nightmare lol
10279
Post by: focusedfire
ARRGGGHHH, Post eaten by display driver crash.
I'm going to go back and redo now
@Sanchez- The reasons that I'm goint this route are many. I will try to address your concerns point by point. Then I'll give some pages from both Tau codices with quick points explaining were it says what I'm quoting.
1)Yes, the Valks are Imperial navy but some do get permantly assigned to the IG.
2)Next, this is the frontier and is home to free mercenary companies, rogue traders, and 20 imperial worlds that declared their independence in favor of dealing with the Tau empire. Any of these would more than likely have their own Valkeries, Sentinels and support personnel.
3) If their are no support personnel it would be a fair point of trade for the Tau to help these worlds to be independent by teaching them how to maintain their own equipment. It would also be logistically easier to work within existing frameworks rather than building completely new ones immediately.
4)These are viable points of why there would be access to the Imperial equipment that I'm proposing to be used.
I am writing this with a mind to tricks GW would use to sell more models. From that view point it isn't that hard to beleive, Is it?
5)Angkor Prok established that aliens can lead fire warriors and fire caste in the Tau Empire. I know he was a white dwarf Chapter approved but for a while, he was recognized and he is still a part of the Tau back history. He was the Kroot leader that made the pact for the nkroot becoming a part of the Tau Empire.
6)Don't care for the Orca and will resist it becoming a part of the army. Last thing the Tau need is another unit that doesn't kill anything in and of itself. Now I have designed a Tau superheavy tank called the Great White that uses a Sky Ray wing on top of an Orca and has a Hammerhead Turret and gun system on the belly. It would be mounted on a Valk Flight stand. I might run just two Hammerhead turrets. I'll get around to the project some day.......also, don't know if the Tau are really all that arrogant. They are at least willing to work with other races.
7)Was thinking that the Ethereal gives +1 leadership to any unit with LoS to him and a few other things that I am saving as suprises. Why the ultimate price needs to stay is beyond me. No other army has that level of a negative for losing a single model. I'm keeping the name but reworking to better fit the fluff. Tau 1st codex has fluff about the Tau steadily moving forward pumping round after round into the enemy in anger over the enemies actions of having killed the Ethereal.
8)Again, this is the frontier so isolated worlds, rogue traders, and free companies have their own scavenged/looted equipment that they already know how to care for. Some of this comes from glimpses of Rogue Trader books but most comes from the 1st and 2nd Tau codices. The Tau got a few worlds virtually untouched with their industry still intact so replacement parts are not that hard to imagine.
Now for points from the codices.
First codex pages numbered:
50) The first codices entry for Farsight, under break-away faction, gives a better explanation for why Farsight has army limitations than the second codex does.
51) Entire page is an inquistion report that deals with the break-away Tau mercenary faction that is commanded by a Commander Farsight.Whole page is a good read and leaves a lot of room for concept exploration. This is why I am taking Farsight as more of a Mercenary army now.
54)Shows the Imperium itself negotiating with the Xenos known as Tau. The Adept and the Imperial Fist Captain are greeted by a Human and they negotiate with an Ethereal.
63)Last column, middle pargraph mentions human nobles making use of Tau Battlesuits.
Second Codex
8) Under Imperial Contact, Second column, last sentence Speaks of Farsight moving in after the crusade ships leave to fight against the Tyranids. Says he assimilates groups of human deserters(Yeah it is their fault the fleet left them behind )and renegades.
11)Tau and humanity explains how the Human worlds are what is now called the Farsight enclave
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Very insightful thank you.
1 and 2) It is rare for the Guard to have them permanently assigned. And for it to be rare in an empire of over a million worlds what are the chances for one to me among the 20-ish worlds dealing with the Tau Empire.
7) That +1 works for me, but as for the death of the Ethereal, its based on fluff right? I would vote to keep it the way it is or even to make it more of a loss for the tau...
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Sanchez01 wrote:Very insightful thank you.
1 and 2) It is rare for the Guard to have them permanently assigned. And for it to be rare in an empire of over a million worlds what are the chances for one to me among the 20-ish worlds dealing with the Tau Empire.
7) That +1 works for me, but as for the death of the Ethereal, its based on fluff right? I would vote to keep it the way it is or even to make it more of a loss for the tau...
In response to the Guard having a unit assigned...again, quote where this is rare. I know nothing either way. It isn't that much of a stretch in my imagination.
As for the death of an Ethereal, what about this possibility:
Death of an Ethereal: When the Tau lose an Ethereal, they may temporarily lose sight of their pre-planned battle plans and strategies. Every Tau (not Kroot, Vespid, etc.) must take a leadership check. If the test is failed, the squad must immediately advance 6" towards and fire at the nearest enemy during the next shooting phase.
These checks will continue until the leadership check is passed, or the unit is engaged in assault. Checks will continue to be made at the beginning of the Tau players turn.
This represents the fluff (continued advance combined with rapid fire), is not broken, and also can be quite detrimental to a Tau player if it happens.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Quote from the Guard Codex:
"With a few notable exceptions, Valkyries are under the control of the Imperial Navy and are attached to Imperial Guard regiments on an as need basis."
As for the Ethereal, That doesn't sound right. It should be more along the lines as All Tau (not alien allies) must take a leadership test, If failed they fallback.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Sanchez01 wrote:Quote from the Guard Codex:
"With a few notable exceptions, Valkyries are under the control of the Imperial Navy and are attached to Imperial Guard regiments on an as need basis."
As for the Ethereal, That doesn't sound right. It should be more along the lines as All Tau (not alien allies) must take a leadership test, If failed they fallback.
Read the fluff in the Codex. When an Ethereal dies...the Tau go into their own version of battle rage. It consists of then pouring fire into the enemy, and slowly advancing. Having them fall back if they fail a test is completely contrary to the fluff. (note, what you suggested is more or less the rule, as it is) I would give you a page number in the 4th Edition Codex, but I am not exactly sure where mine is at the moment.
As for the Valkyries...meh...FocusedFire can take some flufftistic freedom.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
What do you mean by flufftistic freedom?
that was my point, keep the rule the same, but make his alive buffs better... I will look for what you are talking about when i find mine too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
One thing I would like to see in the 5th ed. Tau codex would be Gue'vesa units.
Something along these lines:
Stats = Guardsmen but with a 4+ save
Point Cost = Just a little more then a Fire Warrior (Like 2 points more each.)
Weapon and gear = Same as Fire Warriors, but no drones option.
Now before you yell at me for making them cost more then Fire Warriors, look at the stats... Humans are better then Tau stat wise. Right? And with the same equipment (Firepower) as a Fire Warrior, they should not cost less. (Then people would take more of them then Fire Warriors)
18312
Post by: Lacross
hey, even Tau have some self respect to not have humies fighting all their wars for them
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
What is that suppose to mean?
It is mainly in there to stop players from crying over the lack of options...
18312
Post by: Lacross
it means...what did it mean? what? huh? what was i saying?
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Idk, that's why I asked.
18312
Post by: Lacross
well, according to the fluff from the codex the Tau are really big on Pride in their Empire(see Shadowsun entry)
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Yeah, and that is one of the reasons they would not use Human Tech. But they would still use Human Cannonfodder
18312
Post by: Lacross
ok,ok, but at least limit the amount of non Tau present at any Battle Field so that if there is a Tau Victory the Photo op won't show all those humans/non-Tau posing on Tau territory
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Last i read, the Tau life cycle was 40 human years so each "generation" I'm assuming is going to come every 10-15 years.
Which is almost twice the growth rate of human spawn.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
well there would be a 0-2 limit to them each choice being 10 models
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@Sanchez- Some of this comes from that I really like the overall idea of a Mercenary codex. But, GW will never do an independent one. The best that can be hoped for is a mercenary sub-list in each of the Races codices. This is what I am going for with Farsight. I think his army will be compelling and characterful by working with the current limited equipment handicap.
This gets to my point about the Valks. The real emphasis is that this area of space is kind of like the Barbary Coast or the Carribean Islands during their piracy periods. Lawless areas that have pirates, black marketeers, and mercenaries(Privateers, Rogue traders, and Free Companies). A place where you can get anything you want as long as you have the money or goods to trade for such.
As for the ethereal rule, Che-vito did a great job of explaining how the rule for the ethereals just doesn't fit.
Now about your Gue'Vesa idea. You are pretty much dead on with your thoughts of stats and number of units. Did you read in the other thread where the Storms were 0-2 in this codex?
I'll explain the back story of how Storm Troopers are fighting with Farsight.
Farsights Enclave worlds still represent the strongest military force in the area. Still, even with his strength, survival of all of these worlds depends upon cooperation.
Farsight has a string of worlds(some human) under his direct rule and there are other independent worlds that have a form of loose trade alliance with him. These worlds not directly under Farsights control, garrison themselves by raising up their own militaries or by hiring the Mercenaries, pirates or rogue traders.
Farsight trades tech and military training to these independent worlds for necessary raw resources or extra manpower. He, also, calls upon the enclave worlds for limited reinforcements and equipement when needed.
Farsight negotiates vigorously to get the few Imperial Items that can be of use and then copies them. He only uses the equipment and personnel that can actually work within Farsight's doctrines of war.
Upon one of his enclave worlds Farsight has established, with the help of some surviving storm troopers, a military training facility that trains the Gue'vesa to a level equal to that of the Schola Progenim.
Now, I picked the Storms because
1)Their armor and equippment looks about right. Human versions of the sleeker Tau equip.
2)They had less wargear conflicts(No power fists, Fewer special weapon options and no heavy weapon options.)
3)Less basic rules conflicts(No Orders system means not having to take an IG HQ and all of its extra wargear options.
4)Easy to explain the hot-shots improved weapon profile.
5)Less griping from guard players because they don't think they are worth anything.
6)Their special mission rules fits nicely with the Merc. mentality .
The other two units are because the Farsight takes a hard hit in the Fast attack in this codex and because of how the models fit thematically. The list looks like this:
2 Storm Trooper Squads(Non-scoring) Take the Vespids slot in the FoC
1 Scout Sentinel Squadron-Replaces Remora Jetbikes
1 Vendetta Squadron-Replaces Pirahnas
May decide to include 2 penal squads as troops option but buying the storm squads will be mandatory to get access to the other equipement. Think the penal legion squads would fit nice game and theme wise but just can't justify doing so fluff wise.
Tell me what you think. I'll post some of Farsights restricted troops in a day or three.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
I think adding Gue'vesa and auxiliaries is good and all, don't over do this is the Tau Empire after all.
Yes, the Tau are arrogant to a degree
codex: Tau Empire 4th edition page 10 wrote:
As the Tau harbour an unquenchable confidence in their own manifest destiny, they are utterly determined that their own methods are the correct methods.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Don't worry Krellnus, The options I just listed are Farsight only. If the Tau Empire gets any Gue'vesa it will be the storms and them only as elites. As things stand though they are farsight only.
Also, read the sentences preceding and following your quote and it is a statement that would be taken as an argument for supporting the three units that I've proposed. The following sentence,"They seek out qualities that best compliment their own.", works with the idea of the Tau incorporating useful bits from other Empires. Deep striking units and scout units are almost a hallmark with the Tau.
Again, as things stand, The Gue'vesa are Farsight only and the way things are being set up is that the Tau player will have to "buy" certain HQs, or Units, to unlock the ability to purchase expanded varieties of the Auxilla(I.E.-Must buy master shaper to be get unrestricted access to all of the types of kindreds mentioned in the Codex).
Gotta get back to writing,Later
18506
Post by: A Lictor... BLOR!!!
As I generally nly get to read this forum at work, on my cell, would you do me a favor and post the markerlight rules from your fandex? Thanks.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Well making them strorm troopers does have some problems...
Look at cadia, born to fight. They are raised to be in the Guard, yet they come in as whiteshields, and their stats suck. Then guardsmen, or their shock troopers, have the ws3 and bs3 stats we are familliar with, and these are hardcore troops, served for years, trained by the best. Then the Elite of the Elite are karskins, with storm trooper traits.
so, I strongly protest giving them storm trooper stats. At the best they should be guardsmen stats, and at the begining level they should have whiteshield stats.
oh and please dont call them storm troopers. These guys would fight the xenos to the last man, they are loyal withont question.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Storm troopers have the same leadership as the rest of the guard. I don't see them being any more loyal due to this.
I ask you to remember that these are the people that the Imperium left behind. No effert to pick them up. They are in the middle of a war and then suddenly a truce is called and the crusade fleet just ups and leaves you behind.
Doesn't matter that they were going off to fight a hive fleet, as a soldier you'd feel betrayed. If a regular soldier feels such then how does a soldier that was raised under the teachings to never treat with the alien feel about such abandonment. IMO, They would start to question everything they have been told.
Well enough of that. Got some questions for you guys. I have run into a bit of a snag on weapon roles/conflicts. The main problem is the Ion family. By all descriptions they should be rending, but this would put 2 rending weapons in the army that is in a gaming system where only 2-3 other armies have them and then it is only one per army. I really want to make them right but don't want to go OP with them
Now, I have some nifty EMP rules that in effect would make the weapons a Tau version of rending but then there is the second issue with the Ion weapon family.
This second issue is that by making the cyclic a blaster they made the weapon type short ranged by nature and the Cannon is long ranged. The Tau weapon progession is from blaster to cannon and it is quite a jump from 18" to 60". Compound this with if I make the Cyclic range 24" it competes against the Plasma rifle and if I shorten the range on the cannon down to the 36" that is required people will howl.
The Ion family really needs a rework and I'm commited to such because of the Demi-Urg. I don't want them in the Codex as units but, they are the ones who give the Tau Ion weaponry according from what I've heard fluff-wise. I'd like for them to get a casual mention. So as such, I am trying to make the Ions a bit more distinctive and have a few of my 15-20-ish variations that I'd like your opinions on.
Currently I'm looking at these profiles for the Ion cannon
Range 36" s 7 ap 3 Heavy 4, Rending or Emp
Range 48" s 8 ap 3 Heavy 3, Rending or Emp
Range 48" s 7 ap 3 Heavy 2, Rending or Emp, Blast
and these for the Cyclic Ion Blaster
Range 18" s 4 ap 4 Assault 4, Rending or EMP(If I do this the the Cannon should only be 36")
Range 24" s 4 ap 4 assault 4, Rending or Emp(This allows cannon to be 48")
Range 24" s 4 ap 4 assault 3, Rending or Emp
I've also toyed with an intermediate version for the broadsides that the player could swap with the Rail guns. I started on the idea from what other people have asked for and because I think the next edition of broadsides will be revamped to be larger.
Now the Ion weapons family is stuck in a tough spot in the Tau army. They are good weapons sitting next to great ones with out enough distinction to make them desirable. I think that they can be revamped into something distinctive enough. I'm thinking a The 36" cannon with my new sms system would be a nice mid-ranged objective clearing Tank that can still handle other vehicles.
What do you guys think? Do you mind the Ion cannon getting shortened to that range if it becomes distinctive enough to have its own seperate viable role?
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
focusedfire wrote:
What do you guys think? Do you mind the Ion cannon getting shortened to that range if it becomes distinctive enough to have its own seperate viable role?
As for your fluff, I applaud you.
The Ion weapons have always been an interesting issue. The option presented that is 36" ST7 AP3 Heavy 4 seems the most viable to me. It is, like you said, an "objective clearer" for MEQs, but also can be effective against light/medium vehicles. Rending...eh...I think the 4 shots make up for that.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
focusedfire:
I am currently leaning towards looking at a mid-range weapon that could be added as an alternate weapon for the broadside as you have suggested.
The following are some musings that I have had on this specific train of thought:
When we look at the Tau Empire, we see that they use a variety of weapon types, namely projectile, thermal, and focused electrical burst (ion). I actually catogorize the fusion blaster, flamer, and plasma rifle as a thermal based weaponry for what its worth. Each of the types of weapons has a progression that they follow, from small caliber/focused application to some of the most powerful weapons in 40k. However, there are a couple of notable holes in the progression: Fusion blaster (short range targeted thermal) -> Plasma rifle (mid-range targeted thermal) then nothing. Also, CIB (short-ranged Ion, very high RoF, low general AP) -> "nothing" -> Ion Cannon (Long ranged, good RoF, good AP)
Now, the Tau are an interesting bunch, and it seems that they favor highly directed fire, which is why they do not use many blast templates (2 plus the flamer iirc). This focus on carefully directed fire can seem to be a hinderance - we do not get the fun that could be have with plasma cannon, however, I actually believe that this is a good thing. I believe that this reliance on carefully targeted fire meshes well with the background of the Tau.
These observations can give us some direction for our consideration of the Ion weapon family.
Here is the progression of the Ion weapon family as I see it.
CIB -> Heavy Ion Rifle -> Ion Cannon
I would keep the CIB and Ion Cannon as written. In addition we would add the following weapon to the Tau arsenal. I believe that it would fit nicely in between the light CIB and the heavy cannon. However, designing this weapon is going to be an interesting process. What follows is my attempt at creating a (hopefully) balanced weapon that would be a weapon option for the Broadside battlesuit.
These are the specifications for the Heavy Ion Rifle:
1. Mid ranged (36"-48"
2A. Stationary, Good-High RoF (3-4) OR
2B. Mobile, Medium-Good RoF (2-3)
3. Decent Strength (6-7)
4. Average AP (3-4)
5. Heavy Infantry suit platform
Now, let us look at the weapon profile that I believe would be pretty balanced. (Feedback requested)
Heavy Ion Rifle (Broadside suit main gun option)
Range: 36", Assault 2, Strength 6, AP 4. However, when stationary, the rifle can be fired in a higher power mode:
Range: 36", Heavy 2, Strength 6, AP 3.
I believe that this would fill the void that the Tau have in their arsenal for either a mobile, medium strength weapon, or a medium strength good AP weapon. As normal, the Broadside would be able to use these twin-linked.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Quote for Codex: "These privileged young orphans are raised by the Schola Progenium. Here they are schooled to love the Emperor and are shown the many ways in which they can warn his gratitude."
So, I am going to stand by my previous statement of Storm Troopers would rather die fighting to the last man then join a Xenos Empire. Not to mention how little in numbers they are, they would not have been left behind.
Currently I'm looking at these profiles for the Ion cannon
Range 48" s 7 ap 3 Heavy 2, Rending or Emp, Blast
If that is the small blast marker then this sounds about right.
and these for the Cyclic Ion Blaster
Keep them the same as they are in the Codex. With assault 5 and any roll to wound of 6 equals ap1... you don't just take one, you are meant to take a few and play the numbers game on the high armor target.
Heavy Ion Rifle (Broadside suit main gun option)
Range: 36", Assault 2, Strength 6, AP 4. However, when stationary, the rifle can be fired in a higher power mode:
Range: 36", Heavy 2, Strength 6, AP 3.
I believe there should only be one mode... and more of a mix of what you have here.
Range 48" Str6 AP4 Heavy2, Twinlink
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Thank you for the compliment, Che. Dwerth, Thank you for the input. It helped me to sort out what I am doing through critiquing your idea in contrast. Let me explain: IMO, The way Tau name their weapons, the term rifle doesn't follow the progression. Might I suggest giving the weapon the Cannon name also. You could go heavy and light but the term, heavy, hasn't been used by the Tau except for the Heavy railguns and gundrones in the IA books. I am struggling with my heavy burst cannons name for this reason. It seems, rather, that the Tau go by a generic weapon description and then append that description to the unit they are used with. This is like the Broadside Railgun and the Hammerhead Railgun. Now as to the weapon profiles. IMO, there isn't enough distinction to make it a favourable choice over the Railgun. With broadsides able to get Slow and Purposeful currently (maybe relentless in my dex) the weapon just wouldn't be worth the sacrifice in anti-armor punch. The profile you posted is very similar to what I had toyed with for the Broadside Ion Cannon( BIC, need a light ). I kept having a problem with the str 6 and number of shots. It just carried the Ion Cannon problem from the Hammerhead over to the Broadsides. It wasn't until looking at your post that I figured out the solution for the Ion family. The Blaster is now: Range 18" S4 Ap4 Assault4,Emp(Is the ap1 rule from cyclic blaster on a roll of a 6. Maybe 5&6 depending upon playtesting) This is what I now have for the broadsides: Range 36" S 7 AP3 Heavy 3, Emp This will let me up the Hammerhead Ion Cannon to: Range 48" S8 AP3 Heavy 3, Emp Tell me what you think. Pls, keep in mind that I am going to tread upon sacred ground and by adjusting the rail guns. The Hammerheads are getting a range boost and one or both the broadside & Hammermead may be receiving a new Peircing rule. If the Broadsides get this rule they will drop by a point in strength. What do you think of this and will there be never ending howls of nerd rage if done?
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Why not just leave the current GW Codex stuff alone, and just add your new toys to it...
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Power balance. Honestly can't make the great stuff any better without going OP. The rail guns are great. It's just the availability of S 10 multi wound shots has gone through the roof since the last tau codex. I think my peircing rule would be a nice Tau-like counter to this.
Piercing-On a roll of 5-6, the railgun automatically causes an additional penetrating hit against anything with an AV and will ignore any invulnerable saves.
I am looking at this for the Hammerhead only but it may make sense for the broadsides, too. Or I might do away with the twin-linking on the broadsides and at that point S9 AP1 would still be pretty Dantastic.
As for the Ion cannon, it needs the range drop to also help better define its role and distinguish it from the Railgun. Also, The Ion family is being defined as having about half the range of a railgun by the smaller weapons in the family.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Well if you ask me.. the Tau are fine the way they are now... Players tent to make cheese lists and the such...but the Codex is still fine.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
I do like the idea of the Ion Cannon rules changes you are implying, however I'd be inclined to do it like this:
Ion Cannon Stream Shot.
Rng:48" Str:6 AP:3 Type: Heavy 4.
Ion Cannon Blast Shot.
Rng:48" Str:8 AP:2 Type Heavy 1 Blast.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
FocusedFire:
As to the name of the Heavy Ion Rifle, I was actually having a very hard time coming up with another name. I think I spent something like ten minutes looking up synonyms and synonyms of synonyms...and that was the best I could get.
I like the change to the CIB. The balance between RoF, strength of shot, and AP with the EMP rule fits well. Just doing some thinking on the EMP rule for Ion weaponry, it should probably be limited to a roll of a 6. Or...random idea alert, it just drops the AP value by 1. IE: a roll of a 6 with an Ion Blaster would change the shot from AP 4 to AP 3. Yes it is a weaker form of rending, however, having rending available to large numbers of Tau forces seems to me that it might be a bit unbalanced. This would cement the role of Ion weaponry as the Tau's premier heavy infantry killer, without making it a better choice against armor.
Random thoughts
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Sanchez-I, politely will disagree on this point. The current codex is not fine, never was. You can build decent and viable armies from it but the actual written rules are atrocious. The codex was hurried and it shows.
Now, combine this with time. Time meaning, 5th ed, newer codices written to be optimized for 5th Ed, newer weapons that have encroached upon the Tau's flavor/strong points, and wargear that was a strength of the army that has been made obsolete. You combine these things and the Tau are approaching a time where a rewrite is needed if not already there.
It is not a matter of winning. I still win with the Tau. This doesn't mean much because I was able to win against Tau with my friends IG before the new codex was released. I don't think there is a person who would argue the IG getting a new codex just because you could still win with them. They were an army that was hobbled by 5th ed rules and time. I feel the Tau are starting to be hobbled by these same factors.
I think this may be a matter of perspective also. The Tau have always been competitive against IG or IG based armies. If you are an IG Player(Which your sig suggests) you will feel they are fine.
As a Tau player you watch your armies abilities dwindle and you adjust. Because of the adjustment you still win but larger portions of your army are being made less effective and your wins aren't as decisive. If you are a Tau player will feel that it is time for an update.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Yeah, I am an Imperial Guard player, I am also an Eldar, Dark Eldar, Ork, Space Marine, Space Wolf, and Blood Angel player.
But that has nothing to do with it... The Tau are still a viable army and are not in the priority nor needing the priority to be amped up right now... Please state what new 5th ed. rules hurt the Tau.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Dwerth:
Am going to stick to dropping AP down to 1. This helps in the Anti-light vehicle roll as well. I'm probalbly going to leave the rule at a roll of a 6. Also doing this because of the Piercing rule I'm playing around with.
Radiohazard:
The Tau don't run a lot of Blast weaponry and I don't wan't to violate that. If any of them were to get a blast it would be the CIB.
It is funny that the Tau have Blasters that don't Blast. I noticed this and had toyed with the idea of making them all blast weapons but it just didn't fit in any way shape or form. I may even back off of the Vespid Blaster having the Blast template like I originally designed. Will let you know soon.
7430
Post by: keemperor
Sanchez01 wrote:Yeah, I am an Imperial Guard player, I am also an Eldar, Dark Eldar, Ork, Space Marine, Space Wolf, and Blood Angel player.
But that has nothing to do with it... The Tau are still a viable army and are not in the priority nor needing the priority to be amped up right now... Please state what new 5th ed. rules hurt the Tau.
Run and fleet:
Tau's greatest weakness is CC, something they must avoid at all costs. The run rule allows all armies (especially CC oriented ones) to move and close in faster, the changes to fleet that allow some units to run then assault only makes this worse.
Outflank:
Allows CC oriented armies to close in faster (Korsharo Khans all outflanking army is nasty) and it becomes extremelly hard for tau to maneuver when all units are on your doorstep without some weakening.
The much more brutal assault phase, that simply means that Tau die that much faster.
Remember the Tau's strength lies in their firepower and their ability to keep the enemy at bay, in 5th edition this became extremelly hard to not say impossible and the fact that once Tau (even kroot) get into close combat they are pretty much done for.
The Tau need an unpgrade, because they are a high mobility army, and their codex does not take advantage of the changes in 5th edition that would allow players to take advantage of these changes in the way the Tau can.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Off-Topic:
Sanchez- This has been covered in several other threads and I don't want to derail this one. So I will try to keep it short.
The same things that hurt the IG but in different ways. Here is the list:
KPs making drones on devilfish a liability
Run rule removing a turn of Tau shooting that doesn't get returned by if the Tau use the same rule.
Prevalent 4+ Cover has reduced Tau high strength/ranged punch without any rule to help compensate for this loss.(We already had markers and the Tau standard bs 3 was based off of the thought that they would be used to up BS but now you spend all the marker hits dropping cover saves for your ap 3 and down weapons.)
No more negative morale modifiers from shooting hurt Tau more than it helped.
Ther are a few more but these were the quick ones.
So are you saying that the IG did not need this last codex?
Tau and IG codices were about the same age and suffered from the same rules changes. Tau and IG were performing at about the same level tourney wise before the new IG codex came out.
So why the double standard?
On-topic:
Your statement is probably a good reflection of GWs attitude right now. So I am writing a Fan-dex to test out ideas until they do. If any of the ideas become a prevalent enough thought that it becomes a given that it should be included in the next codex I will be happy. If not, I will still be happy. Doing this while trying to take in all of the factors has been fun and challenging. It helps me keep perspective on what actually goes into the creation of one of these.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Run and fleet:
Tau's greatest weakness is CC, something they must avoid at all costs. The run rule allows all armies (especially CC oriented ones) to move and close in faster, the changes to fleet that allow some units to run then assault only makes this worse.
Then get kroot in your army to slow them down. Or use that firepower you all have... My dark Eldar are every black and white, no grey... meaning they either slaughter the Tau in CC or get slaughted on their way... It all depends on how you set up and who goes first... so use tactics and this problem is solved.
Problem Unrecognized.
Outflank:
Allows CC oriented armies to close in faster (Korsharo Khans all outflanking army is nasty) and it becomes extremelly hard for tau to maneuver when all units are on your doorstep without some weakening.
This affects all armies, not just Tau... You, the player, must counter this with your tactics and how you play your army.
Problem Unrecognized
KPs making drones on devilfish a liability
Run rule removing a turn of Tau shooting that doesn't get returned by if the Tau use the same rule.
Prevalent 4+ Cover has reduced Tau high strength/ranged punch without any rule to help compensate for this loss.(We already had markers and the Tau standard bs 3 was based off of the thought that they would be used to up BS but now you spend all the marker hits dropping cover saves for your ap 3 and down weapons.)
No more negative morale modifiers from shooting hurt Tau more than it helped.
Ther are a few more but these were the quick ones.
You think Tau are the only one having problems with Kill Points? And to be frank, I don't see a problem with them.
Problem Unrecognized
Run? Tau can make use of this just as effectively as any other race, use tactics and there is no problem.
Problem Unrecognized
4+ Cover save? well you can do the same thing, so be a pot that call the kettle black.
Problem Unrecognized
Shooting modifiers go both ways, and it helps you just the same as it help your opponent.
Problem Unrecognized
So are you saying that the IG did not need this last codex?
Tau and IG codices were about the same age and suffered from the same rules changes. Tau and IG were performing at about the same level tourney wise before the new IG codex came out.
So why the double standard?
I was happy with the old codex, this new one just gives us new toys, but the big change is now how do you play your guard army. The new codex was not "Needed" but it is a welcome change as it offers more, but it did not really change the old... If the Tau were to get a new codex, they would get new toys, but keep the old rules, much like the IG did. So when the Tau get their new Codex it should be much the same as the old one but with more options, not changes like you are proposing.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
Sanchez:
The defining charactaristic of the Tau army is that they are horribad in CC. We have 1 speed bump unit for CC, and that is all. The items that you seem to cavalierly dismiss are actually enormously difficult for a Tau player in the current metagame to combat. We are very good shooters...but when the game rules have changed the balance of the game very heavily towards CC, then this change significantly, and adversely, affects the Tau army at a disproportionate rate compared to other armies.
In addition, the change to true LoS also adversely affects the Tau more than other armies due to our prior reliance on the JsJ tactic for suits.
FocusedFire:
The reason I specifically went away from the AP 1 rule was to make sure to ensure that there is an actual choice to be made when constructing army lists. I was trying to enforce (via the weapon design) the fact that Tau commanders must properly design a force that can take all comers, without having a single weapon that can do everything: light vehicle elimination and heavy infantry destruction for example.
Edit: for comment to FF.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
So you are mad that the JSJ tactic isn't as cheesy as it used to be? You can cry me a river over that, because that one works both ways, you can now shoot an entire squad up if only 1 member is showing.
That 4+ armor save in CC is not as bad as you think, they may suck in CC but they last a whole lot longer then some other infantry in the game. And now that I cannot jump from squad to squad you can shoot the hell out of who ever just wiped one squad, putting a major damper on the CC army lists.
Everything you guys are complaining about are due to your lack of adjusting tactics... I have even lost my Archon to a Shas'O with body guards... in CC, I fell for one of his tricks and lost most of my retinue and I was unable to kill him, he then killed my HQ... Smart move on his part... so don't say you are helpless in combat, you have tricks and units w/ tactics that can ruin anyone's day.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
I am not complaining that the JsJ tactic was nerfed. You merely wanted examples, and I gave you one.
Sanchez, I feel that your comments towards Tau players are franky insulting. I have adjusted my tactics, several times since the release of 5th edition. I have adapted to being more cautious with deployment, thinking more and more carefully about movement, fire priority, and any number of other items. I am not saying we are completely helpless in CC, merely that every other army has dedicated CC units that can easily dismember our forces. And their normal forces can also easily destroy our troops!
Now, we do have counters (expensive, and only defensive) ie the shield drone/generator, but those only affect our troops. We are slower, badly skilled guardsmen in CC. And we cost more! The only benefit we have is our slightly above average armor saves.
CC army lists have been greatly improved in the current ruleset via the changes to deployment and movement options. They have been hurt slightly due to the not being able to constantly charge into fresh combat thereby avoiding all possible fire. However, on balance, the changes to the ruleset in 5th edition are significantly in other armies favor.
In addition, you simply dismiss the KP issue off-hand. No other army has the problem with the KP rule that we do. Period. This issue cannot be dismissed so lightly. When anyone else takes a transport, they are putting out 1 KP on the board. We put 2. THAT is not equitable.
19225
Post by: Taumisho
Since this is how to fix tau, Only thing I want from GW is to let me put my Kroot in a devil fish please!
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Since this is how to fix tau, Only thing I want from GW is to let me put my Kroot in a devil fish please!
The Codex says " Transport: The Devilfish can carry up to 12 models. It may not carry any troops in VX Battlesuits." Now in 5th ed. Transports can carry any of your troops, staying within their rules, after deployment to their attacked squad. So you should be able to take the kroot in them, Unless I am missing something inside the Codex saying otherwise. Now... @ Dwerth. I have a 50/50 chance of getting my but wooped by my friend with his Tau... Even after my new Codex. It all matters on who takes advantage first and is lucky enough for it to work. Your dedicated CC Units will get eaten up in shooting, so you have to get them in... Sacrificing 1 Fire Warrior squad tends to be the trap I fall for the most, He gets them into cc with my guys, their armor has always ensured to last a few rounds, and bam! his kroot arrive and wreak havoc on my troops. So saying the Tau need more CC units is like Crying because you got Chocolate Ice Cream when you wanted Vanilla or Neapolitan ice cream... Tau are shooty, and very good at it... and to be honest, they are better at shooting then my NEW guardsmen. You guys have the most powerful shooting weapons in the game, Focus on that and not CC... shoot them up and then finish them off with kroot. Works every time, and I have to play dirty to beat my buddy. In addition, you simply dismiss the KP issue off-hand. No other army has the problem with the KP rule that we do. Period. This issue cannot be dismissed so lightly. When anyone else takes a transport, they are putting out 1 KP on the board. We put 2. THAT is not equitable.
Well can any of my transports do what yours can? No. Can I get landing gear for my eldar/dark eldar skimmers? No Can my transport shoot at one target and have my drones... oh wait I dont have drones on any of my armies... Your transports can do stuff ours cant, are we complaing no... it is a small price to pay for a transport. EDIT: And where does it say they are worth 2 points? Codex says the Drones are apart of the Vehicle and do not count separate unless you detach them.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
So saying the Tau need more CC units is like Crying because you got Chocolate Ice Cream when you wanted Vanilla or Neapolitan ice cream... Tau are shooty, and very good at it... and to be honest, they are better at shooting then my NEW guardsmen.
I do not believe any serious Tau player is asking for more CC, I know I am not. I am just trying to make a point that because we are a very shooty army, we are disproportionally negatively impacted by the changes in 5th edition.
Well can any of my transports do what yours can? No.
Can I get landing gear for my eldar/dark eldar skimmers? No
Can my transport shoot at one target and have my drones... oh wait I dont have drones on any of my armies...
Your transports can do stuff ours cant, are we complaing no... it is a small price to pay for a transport.
EDIT: And where does it say they are worth 2 points? Codex says the Drones are apart of the Vehicle and do not count separate unless you detach them.
As to when the fish is destroyed, there is not only 1 KP on the table, there is the second, very soft KP in the drones. Two kills for an easy KP? If I were facing Tau, thats just like candy. I will not deny that killing a 'fish at range is a slightly more difficult proposition, with the 4+ cover save over 12", a slight increase in survivability due to the slightly increased armor (1 pt. over a rhino, or 2 pts. over a chimera), and the value that mobility brings. However, the Tau pay for this with a very expensive transport. A standard, basic 'fish with only the requisite protection upgrades runs 85-95 points. It does have the option to become slightly beefier in combat, but this is beside the point.
Currently, the IG is the best opponent for the Tau to face, even with their new codex. Killing tanks is just what we do.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Why not pay the 20 points and get the SMS then "detach" them at the begining... Them SMS are very powerful if you ask me and can be cheesy at time, but it is fair.
+if the transport dies, with drones attached don't the drones die? and being apart of the transport they are not a separate unit thus counting as 1 kp overall.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
OK, Time to feed the troll. I really want to continue with the fan-dex but then there come some statements that have to be addressed. @Sanchez- First, I'd like to point out that you by your own admission don't play Tau. As such it makes me question your presence and attitude on this thread. I have played both sides of each of the armies you've mentioned except DE. As such I can see both sides of this issue where you apparently refuse to. Now to your posts: Sanchez01 wrote:Then get kroot in your army to slow them down. Or use that firepower you all have... My dark Eldar are every black and white, no grey... meaning they either slaughter the Tau in CC or get slaughted on their way... It all depends on how you set up and who goes first... so use tactics and this problem is solved
Problem Unrecognized.
We were using kroot before as speed bumps, Run allows other armies to run around the kroot. Tau never get to stand in one place and fire at their opponent unless your opponent is mentally challenged or SMs. Run took away the time it took for the Tau to create windows to run through when the enemy got close. If your are getting beat so badly, even with a new codex, by the Tau that it makes you unable to see the shared attribute and problems of the IG and Tau then maybe "you" should learn to use tactics. (Hint*)Problem recogintion is a vital part of tactics. Sanchez01 wrote: This affects all armies, not just Tau... You, the player, must counter this with your tactics and how you play your army.
Problem Unrecognized
*Failure to recognize problem. Problem is that only a few armies in are really scared of outflankers in the backfield due to superior HtH ability. For the Tau and Gaurd theis is a bigger problem than for most other armies and failure to recognize such would make me question any tactics you might offer as a solution. Sanchez01 wrote:You think Tau are the only one having problems with Kill Points? And to be frank, I don't see a problem with them.
Problem Unrecognized
Might I suggest that you reread my post at this point. I said the problems listed were the ones that the Tau shared with the IG. Not that the IG has drones but that the KP issue comes into play where they are concerned. Sanchez01 wrote:Run? Tau can make use of this just as effectively as any other race, use tactics and there is no problem.
Problem Unrecognized
No, the Tau don't make use of such just as effectively. Assault units generally either don,t have ranged weaons or they are limited to 12". When the assault units run they lose none of their effectiveness, where as shooty armies lose their only ability to kill. Failure to recognize such discredits your analysis Sanchez01 wrote:4+ Cover save? well you can do the same thing, so be a pot that call the kettle black.
Problem Unrecognized
No pot here. Tau have a bunch of AP5 infantry rifles and just a few higher powered units. Orks in general, IG in general , Tyranids in general, Eldar guardians, DE warriors were armies or units that feared the Tau infantry gun. The Tau infantries base sv of 4+ set them above the base units of these armies. 4+ cover changed that. These guns aren't 12" range or AP- strength 3. They are s5 ap 5 range 30" that no longer gets to use its range or strength to any real advantage. The Tau were designed some what Fire Warior-centric with fire warrios as the backbone of the army and 5th ed broke the Tau's back. Sanchez01 wrote:Shooting modifiers go both ways, and it helps you just the same as it help your opponent.
Problem Unrecognized
Yeah that would be good if the Tau didn't rely so much upon shooting. This hurt the Tau more than any other army, to say other wise would be to discredit yourself. The Tau don't have the ability to slow the assault units due to limited pinning weapons and those weapons would have to wound first. So you as a Tau player burn through your marker hits to get the wounds by uping bs and dropping cover. Then the LD 10 unit takes its morale chk unmodified. You don't use the marker hits so you can drop the leadership and you don't get enough wounds to make them take a test. But you can't recognize this because to do so, you would first have to open you eyes. Sanchez01 wrote:I was happy with the old codex, this new one just gives us new toys, but the big change is now how do you play your guard army. The new codex was not "Needed" but it is a welcome change as it offers more, but it did not really change the old... If the Tau were to get a new codex, they would get new toys, but keep the old rules, much like the IG did. So when the Tau get their new Codex it should be much the same as the old one but with more options, not changes like you are proposing.
Not like changes the IG got? There seems to be a double standard that approaches the edge of hippocracy hidden in this statement. As to the New IG codex not being needed, GW differed with you on this as well as the majority of IG players. Your statement about the new IG not really changing the old forces me to ask you this question. Have you read the new codex? The changes I'm making aren't any where near the level of what the IG got. I can say this because I'm writing this fan-dex. Any statement you make has no basis because you haven't read it as of yet. Sanchez01 wrote:So you are mad that the JSJ tactic isn't as cheesy as it used to be? You can cry me a river over that, because that one works both ways, you can now shoot an entire squad up if only 1 member is showing.
That 4+ armor save in CC is not as bad as you think, they may suck in CC but they last a whole lot longer then some other infantry in the game. And now that I cannot jump from squad to squad you can shoot the hell out of who ever just wiped one squad, putting a major damper on the CC army lists.
Everything you guys are complaining about are due to your lack of adjusting tactics... I have even lost my Archon to a Shas'O with body guards... in CC, I fell for one of his tricks and lost most of my retinue and I was unable to kill him, he then killed my HQ... Smart move on his part... so don't say you are helpless in combat, you have tricks and units w/ tactics that can ruin anyone's day.
Easy to say until you get your own Tau army. Get yourself one and then back up your words. You might gain some respect for the players that play and win with the Tau. But then again, maybe it is all about you. Sanchez01 wrote:Now... @ Dwerth. I have a 50/50 chance of getting my but wooped by my friend with his Tau... Even after my new Codex. It all matters on who takes advantage first and is lucky enough for it to work. Your dedicated CC Units will get eaten up in shooting, so you have to get them in... Sacrificing 1 Fire Warrior squad tends to be the trap I fall for the most, He gets them into cc with my guys, their armor has always ensured to last a few rounds, and bam! his kroot arrive and wreak havoc on my troops.
So it is all luck? You do a disservice to yourself and anyone who plays you and wins. The tactic that your friend employs and you fall for tend to support my opinion of your play level. The Tau don't engage in attrition warfare if the can help it. Doing such reduces available fire power. Using them as bait is one thing, using them as a sacrificial unit is something else. Sanchez01 wrote:So saying the Tau need more CC units is like Crying because you got Chocolate Ice Cream when you wanted Vanilla or Neapolitan ice cream... Tau are shooty, and very good at it... and to be honest, they are better at shooting then my NEW guardsmen.
Never once asked for more or better CC, as a matter of fact I've been on record as to saying that the Tau in this fan-dex will be weaker in cc. Sanchez01 wrote:You guys have the most powerful shooting weapons in the game, Focus on that and not CC... shoot them up and then finish them off with kroot. Works every time, and I have to play dirty to beat my buddy.
Again, bold talk but seeing as you don't play Tau that is all it is...Isn't it? Sanchez01 wrote:Well can any of my transports do what yours can? No.
Can I get landing gear for my eldar/dark eldar skimmers? No
Can my transport shoot at one target and have my drones... oh wait I dont have drones on any of my armies...
Your transports can do stuff ours cant, are we complaing no... it is a small price to pay for a transport.
EDIT: And where does it say they are worth 2 points? Codex says the Drones are apart of the Vehicle and do not count separate unless you detach them.
1)Chimeras are 55 points and come with a range 36" multi las. I'd say a S6 Ap6 Heay 3 is something that the Tau transports cannot do. 2)The Eldar get vectored engines and are fast. Things the Tau transports cannot do. 3)Passengers from inside the chimera can shoot at differing targets with their mealtas, Something Tau transports don't allow. 4)Sounds like you complaing about having a cheaper better armed transport, yes it sounds just like that. And to answer your question. The drones are treated as passsengers, so when the vehicle goes up they disembark. If they die in the process then they count as a KP. If they die after such They count as a KP. The only way for the drones to not count as a seperate KP is for the Vehicle to never get destroyed.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
you by your own admission don't play Tau
I have a Tau fleet, but not a 40k army.
If your are getting beat so badly, even with a new codex, by the Tau that it makes you unable to see the shared attribute and problems of the IG and Tau then maybe "you" should learn to use tactics.
It depends on the match, and I believe we are more evenly matched and no side has the greater upper hand. The player makes the army great, not the codex. Remember that.
Problem is that only a few armies in are really scared of outflankers in the backfield due to superior HtH ability. For the Tau and Gaurd theis is a bigger problem than for most other armies and failure to recognize such would make me question any tactics you might offer as a solution.
Then adjust your playstyle if you think your opponent might do this. Blaming any loss because of this rule is just wrong, you should have prepared for it.
No, the Tau don't make use of such just as effectively. Assault units generally either don,t have ranged weaons or they are limited to 12". When the assault units run they lose none of their effectiveness, where as shooty armies lose their only ability to kill.
You don't hear me complaining and Guardsmen are easier to kill then your fire warrioirs, learn to deal with it, and keep playing.
These guns aren't 12" range or AP- strength 3. They are s5 ap 5 range 30" that no longer gets to use its range or strength to any real advantage. The Tau were designed some what Fire Warior-centric with fire warrios as the backbone of the army and 5th ed broke the Tau's back.
Then quite playing in city scape... play or maneuver your troops so they can use their weapons effectivly... and this cover save. you can get it too... Your army is so much better then you are giving it credit for.
Yeah that would be good if the Tau didn't rely so much upon shooting.
That is what tau is about, and in 4th ed they were a bit OP, now they are equaled out and doing quite well.
Not like changes the IG got? There seems to be a double standard that approaches the edge of hippocracy hidden in this statement.
As to the New IG codex not being needed, GW differed with you on this as well as the majority of IG players.
Your statement about the new IG not really changing the old forces me to ask you this question. Have you read the new codex? ?
Yeah I have it, I got it the day it came out... I love the toys, but does that mean I am going to play with a deathstrike? all three types of hellhounds, or 7 russ tanks? No, I use Infantry... heavy weapons changes made me happy, but I am still fielding the same amount... the only thing that changed for me is that I field on averaged 2 basilisks and 2 russ tanks now... the old list was 2-1 or 1-2... So there are some good to it... but I would say my Wolves need one more, My Dark Eldar need one more... But I am grateful for the Guard Codex, it has, in truth, made games a bit more fun. But the Tau... well they could use one, but not a priority like poeple seem to make it out to be. Automatically Appended Next Post: And to answer your question. The drones are treated as passsengers, so when the vehicle goes up they disembark. If they die in the process then they count as a KP. If they die after such They count as a KP. The only way for the drones to not count as a seperate KP is for the Vehicle to never get destroyed.
I fail to see how this is such a downfall... it sounds fair... take better care of your transports in game
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Sanchez01 wrote: I have a Tau fleet, but not a 40k army.
This explains much.
Sanchez01 wrote:It depends on the match, and I believe we are more evenly matched and no side has the greater upper hand. The player makes the army great, not the codex. Remember that. .
Not what you said before. You said it was up to luck. Again it is easy to say things. Doing is much more difficult. This is because the Tau are running out of Tactics to"adjust" with.
Sanchez dude, your coming off as failrly arrogant with the, well if they can beat me then they must be ok statements. You sound like this to those of us that have been playing tau ever since they came out: Behold, the Mighty Sanchez, if an army wins against him it must be fine....Priceless.
Sanchez01 wrote:Then adjust your playstyle if you think your opponent might do this. Blaming any loss because of this rule is just wrong, you should have prepared for it..
You realise that your talking to the guy that before the old tactics stop working that he starts working on the next set of tactics as apposed to just shifting to another army. The number of armies that you claim would tend to support that you are the latter. I only have Tau and Eldar. I've borrowed other peoples armies and when I do I usually win. When I stick to my Tau, I usually win.
BTW, Never blamed a loss on the rule. That is something that you have tried to assert, incorrectly, into a conversation where I never mentioned winning or losing due to a rule. All I have said is that the list of available builds and tactics that are effective fot the Tau have been steadily shrinking. As an experieneced Tau player talking to someone who apperently knows nothing about them, Maybe you would have a better track record against the Tau if you took the time to learn what you are trying to talk about.
Oh yeah, calling something cheesy tends to lead us to believe that you "are" the Type to blame the rules. That is because if the"MIGHTY SANCHEZ" loses it must be cheese. Your way of blaming a rule. Seriously dude, to me, you are coming off as that arrogant.
Sanchez01 wrote:You don't hear me complaining and Guardsmen are easier to kill then your fire warrioirs, learn to deal with it, and keep playing.
Funny, sure sounded that way when your stating how your friend can beat your IG.
Sanchez01 wrote:Then quite playing in city scape... play or maneuver your troops so they can use their weapons effectivly... and this cover save. you can get it too... Your army is so much better then you are giving it credit for.
Swing and a miss, Not playing in city scape. You don't even realise thet there are five armies that statistically outshoot the Tau out in the open.
We already had the 4+ save unlike the IG and others I mentioned. Their was no real benefit to the 4+ cover other that when facing ordinance. Your inability to understand the concept shows a certain lack of experience.
Sanchez01 wrote:That is what tau is about, and in 4th ed they were a bit OP, now they are equaled out and doing quite well.
The Tau had one year where they were competitive, so they must have been OP.
Sanchez01 wrote:Yeah I have it, I got it the day it came out... I love the toys, but does that mean I am going to play with a deathstrike? all three types of hellhounds, or 7 russ tanks? No, I use Infantry... heavy weapons changes made me happy, but I am still fielding the same amount... the only thing that changed for me is that I field on averaged 2 basilisks and 2 russ tanks now... the old list was 2-1 or 1-2... So there are some good to it... but I would say my Wolves need one more, My Dark Eldar need one more... But I am grateful for the Guard Codex, it has, in truth, made games a bit more fun. But the Tau... well they could use one, but not a priority like poeple seem to make it out to be.
Nice way to try and doge the point. The point was that the IG underwent a major overhaul from the command structure dowm and you can't even admit such. This is where I know that you are no longer worth the effort.
You have by now appended your last with another in the long list od learn to play better with the comment about taking care of you transports.
You keep throwing line about tactics that have never been discussed here. Do you know why that is?
It is because this is the proposed rules forum. If you want to talk tactics I have a Tau tactica thread over in the tactics forum. Read and learn who you are talking too before you say use tactics. I have tolerated this derailment because it has been amusing but I grow bored with you, so please take it elswhere.
Feeding time is now done.
On Topic: Have finished the Summay and am working back through the Army list. Another couple of days and I should be approaching the beginning of points tweeking and which weapon options will or will not make the cut.
So far it looks to be shaping up well.
I have helped to clarify some units that had muddled purposes.
Corrected horrible flaws in the drone and battlesuit wargear rules.
Removed useless wargear or repurposed such to be viable again.
Fixed unusual pricing in vehicle secondary weapons.
Stream-lined cumbersome rules
Gotten rid of uselees special character
Addressed certain 5th ed rules issues.
And a bunch of other stuff. It is now a matter of transferring from scribbled notes to word pad.
Keep the input coming.
BTW, Piercing rule is now. Railgun Sabot ignores Inv saves and when rolling for armour pen if a4 or 4+ is rolled then 2 dice are rolled on the vehicle damage table.
How does that sound? Remember my pricing is not going down on the weapons and vehicles. They are staying in the same area or going up a little.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Not what you said before. You said it was up to luck. Again it is easy to say things. Doing is much more difficult. This is because the Tau are running out of Tactics to"adjust" with.
Sanchez dude, your coming off as failrly arrogant with the, well if they can beat me then they must be ok statements. You sound like this to those of us that have been playing tau ever since they came out: Behold, the Mighty Sanchez, if an army wins against him it must be fine....Priceless.
Provoking me does nothing but change my tone to one more hostile.
I have been Playing vs. Tau for many years, 3rd ed. 4th ed. and now 5th ed. Only a few things change, the games become interesting and fun when playing buddies. And your right about my negative attitude... Apart from my friends, I have had a bad exsperience with Tau players... Living in WA they were all crybabies and blaimed their codex for their loss... In TX they were smug and sore winners/losers, in MD they were just annoying as can be... So from one end of the US to the Other, they were all the worst people to play... (Ork players always had the best attitudes imo) But this is not the point here... The point is Tau are a good army, Yes 5th ed. changed some things. but so what, learn to deal with them... You say it helps CC armies alot... really? Can they jump from squad to squad now? No. So my guys are stuck there, and chances are they get shot up...
You realise that your talking to the guy that before the old tactics stop working that he starts working on the next set of tactics as apposed to just shifting to another army. The number of armies that you claim would tend to support that you are the latter. I only have Tau and Eldar. I've borrowed other peoples armies and when I do I usually win. When I stick to my Tau, I usually win.
So because I have many armies I am a shifter? Well if you must know, each army has a story to it. My eldar was just too good a deal to pass up, 1k point army for 50 bucks... then about 25 buck to get it up and running sounds like a good deal. But when it comes to terni games, local games, I play my IG or DE, my other armies are there to give a variety to my games... or if the buddies get bored.
Maybe you would have a better track record against the Tau if you took the time to learn what you are trying to talk about.
My track record with Tau? Apart from my one friend, I have a great win record vs tau with my Guard and DE. But playing the local kid, the serious gamer, or the good friends... its about having fun... and playing people who complain about their army just pushes the buttons.
We already had the 4+ save unlike the IG and others I mentioned. Their was no real benefit to the 4+ cover other that when facing ordinance. Your inability to understand the concept shows a certain lack of experience.
really? you really find it necessary to continue to make this personal... I have ordinence and yes that 4+ is annoying when trying to kill them, but so what, It is what the game has become... crying over this is pointless as it effects others too.
Oh yeah, calling something cheesy tends to lead us to believe that you "are" the Type to blame the rules. That is because if the"MIGHTY SANCHEZ" loses it must be cheese. Your way of blaming a rule
Calling something cheesy has nothing to do if 'I' win vs. it or not... Not once have I blamed a game on a Cheesy unit... I either blame the loss on my mistake, my gamble, or he was just that much better, and on a rare occasion, he got lucky.
Funny, sure sounded that way when your stating how your friend can beat your IG.
Yeah he has beat me many times, and so have ork, eldar, chaos, other guard, nids, and so on... I mey not have a perfect record, but I am very happy with my results... and my results have nothing to do with this at all. This is about how you are complaining about your lack of options or tactics now because of how 5th ed limit you with the boost to cc... that is blaming the rules.
The Tau had one year where they were competitive, so they must have been OP
They are still competitive. and the OP remark... yeah they were a bit powerful in some parts... don't think I ment totaly OP as we both know that is not true
It is because this is the proposed rules forum.
You are proposing rules for something that is not broken
The point was that the IG underwent a major overhaul from the command structure dowm and you can't even admit such
your point is? I already said I was happy... and what does the New IG have to do with the Tau? Noting, The fact that the new Oders system aids them has noting to do the "broken" ness of what you claim the Tau have recieved in 5th ed. They way now that my cammond squad and do far more then before... so what, I was winning with my old codex, and I am winning with my new one too. Attacking me about my army has no point, and has no reason to be used. You bash my tactics and say I am unable to play my army... yet I am not the one complaining about the new rules... Just Deal With Them.
18312
Post by: Lacross
putting Sanchez on ignore
11935
Post by: Ian1138
Lacross wrote:putting Sanchez on ignore
Agreed.
Back to the topic:
I personally think that shortening any Tau weapon range is a bad idea. The Ion Cannon has a comfortable range; no need to risk going into multi-melta range. A possibility is making solid shot railguns ordinance to reassert them as the long range anti-tank gun.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
focusedfire wrote:
The Tau don't run a lot of Blast weaponry and I don't wan't to violate that. If any of them were to get a blast it would be the CIB.
It is funny that the Tau have Blasters that don't Blast. I noticed this and had toyed with the idea of making them all blast weapons but it just didn't fit in any way shape or form. I may even back off of the Vespid Blaster having the Blast template like I originally designed. Will let you know soon.
That's the whole point mate. Tau don't have that many Blast weapons.
Why shouldn't the second biggest Tau weapon have a blast option?
It's perfectly valid ingame and fluff wise it's a perfect addition as the Tau could have improved their Ion Technology and come up with a variable focus cannon that can either fire a stream of shots, or a blast.
Also, just because a Blaster says Blast in it's name, it shouldn't always have blast in it's type. Look at Star Wars - none of what they call Blasters have what 40K calls Blast. It represents a large powerful shot or stream of shots, which is usually close range.
Damn - I think my Scriptwriting and Film Knowledge actually transcended from work to my hobby 
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Sanchez, Sanchez, Sanchez  for someone who has been playing form 3rd ed you still have a lot to learn, lesson 1 lets start with manners, if you talk civilly with someone and don't insult them that is how they will speak to you.
Tau are still a viable army just like Necrons and DE what focused is trying to point out it that they just have a lot of wrinkles to be ironed out although you are right about the devilfish 2 KP and 80pts is worth the above average transport armour and the ability to have the ONLY scoring vehicle in the game (it is a troops choice not a dedicated transport).
18312
Post by: Lacross
5th edition rules state that only non-vehicles are scoring units
Automatically Appended Next Post:
although they do sit in the troops section
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Sanchez, Sanchez, Sanchez for someone who has been playing form 3rd ed you still have a lot to learn, lesson 1 lets start with manners, if you talk civilly with someone and don't insult them that is how they will speak to you.
In forums it is very hard to understand the poster's true attitude when typing. I did start off calm, Inquisitive at some points, but mostly neutral until they started to insult me. If you read what I post, well it is up to you, if you read it thinking I meant negative, then yeah, it is going to sound very negative, but if you read it with more of a loose tone, my questions were questions, and my statements were statements.
Now, I am here saying the Tau are fine as they are now. Could they use a new codex? Yes, all armies not with a 5th ed. codex should get a new one. But until then why complain about a still very powerful army. Trying to Fix the Tau is just a waste imo, why fix something that is not broken. Complaining about CC armies vs Tau... Do you really think GW would make it easy for a Shooty Army to destroy the CC army before it even had a chance? I sure hope not, That would get alot of CC players unhappy. In a new Tau Codex there should be lots of new toys, but the rules... well there is no real need to change them.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
radiohazard:
The reason that the Tau do not use many blast weapons seems (to me anyway) to be a focus on the careful application of directed firepower, a scalpel if you will, rather than an instrument of blunt force trauma (big, but scatterable pie plates of AP doom). It is more of a philosophical difference than anything.
Edit:
Sanchez:
We are just going to have to disagree then on whether or not the Tau are "fine." This will just have to be a difference of opinion that will not get solved with either side yelling at anyone (no blame to anyone in this thread BTW.) Many Tau players have reason to believe, and statistics back this up, that the Tau get out-shot in 40k. Our niche in the game, outshooting the opponent, is not ours anymore. We are not asking for it to be "easy" to destroy a CC force, nor do I think we are asking for rules changes for the base parts of the game. However, we do need to have new options available to us to help level the playing field when it comes to Tourney level play, or competitive friendly play for that matter.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Dwerth:
You hit the nail on the head with that last statement.
RadioHazard:
I picture this from a fluff perspective as the Tau are intent upon colonization of the worlds they conquer and want the colonies up and productive without a mass clean up effort. If they use a blast weapon it does very little collateral damage. The Tau would use the Neutron bomb rather than thermonuclear warheads.
It is this thought why I was thinking of giving the Neutron blaster a blast template but may back off of this. Every Tau blaster does have a special rule so Blast may stay as the special rule for the much smaller Vespid Squads. It will be either that or Assault 2 and the strain matron getting a blast/large blast template. I'm doing this as a way of tying in the fluff about their wings setting up the resonance and harmonics that allow the weapon to fire.
The only other blast weapon I'm looking at adding is a new missile for the Sky Ray. It does no damage but follows the idea of shock and awe and has some cool effects. It is a multi-warhead cruise missle where each warhead does photonic concussion air-bursts.
Currently, the Tau have 2 other blast template weapons and both are discribed as sophisticated or intelligent. This also seems to fall into the keeping collateral damage to a minimum thought process.
IMO, It seems the Tau may have this philosophy because their empire is small and they don't have worlds to waste. This plays into the Tau not recognizing attrition warfare as a valid or desirable style of war for such a small empire in a very large galaxy.
18312
Post by: Lacross
all that seems nice, but i'd like to see your WIP codex so that I, at least, can be on the same page as to how this fandex is put together. I'd be grateful for that.
18522
Post by: Dwerth
FocusedFire wrote:
It is this thought why I was thinking of giving the Neutron blaster a blast template but may back off of this. Every Tau blaster does have a special rule so Blast may stay as the special rule for the much smaller Vespid Squads. It will be either that or Assault 2 and the strain matron getting a blast/large blast template. I'm doing this as a way of tying in the fluff about their wings setting up the resonance and harmonics that allow the weapon to fire.
What type of weapon profile are you considering for the Vespid?
R=12", Assault 2, AP 3 would seem to me to be the way to go, especially if you have a smaller squad size (3-5). This change from the current codex would make me seriously consider taking them as a FA choice in a take all comers list. If pathfinders, revamped Vespid, and piranhas are all good choices for FA, this would make deciding what to use a wonderfully difficult choice. Currently, for me, its a no brainer deciding what to use.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Ian1138- 48" range isn't shabby and you can't put something that powerful out there without playing down another aspect. Shortening the Ion cannons range while boosting its effectiveness is a nice balance and helps the players to define its uses. Too many people make the Railgun vs Ion cannon argument when they shouldn't. One is anti-heavy tank and the other is light vehicle squadron killer.
Lacross:
Will be working on typing up the wargear today&tomorrow, Then the Army list after that. It is all down in handwritten notes and now just need to be transcribed. I'm a little hesitant releasing it peicemeal because somethings won't make sense until the army is viewed as a whole with some of the fluf their to back up the changes.
Dwerth: Again you are dead on. That is exactly what I am looking at with the Vespids. They are written up on the old thread along with the kroot. Both are in the last 2-3 pages.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Dwerth wrote:radiohazard:
Sanchez:
We are just going to have to disagree then on whether or not the Tau are "fine." This will just have to be a difference of opinion that will not get solved with either side yelling at anyone (no blame to anyone in this thread BTW.) Many Tau players have reason to believe, and statistics back this up, that the Tau get out-shot in 40k. Our niche in the game, outshooting the opponent, is not ours anymore. We are not asking for it to be "easy" to destroy a CC force, nor do I think we are asking for rules changes for the base parts of the game. However, we do need to have new options available to us to help level the playing field when it comes to Tourney level play, or competitive friendly play for that matter.
Putting it that way, I agree. I guess being on the receiving end of Tau fire with both a CC army and a shooty army I have learned to respect Tau firepower... More options in a future codex should be something to ask for, but I do believe that current rules for current choices have strong points and weak points but they balance out.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
I didn't know about you adding blast to vepid blasters.
I think it's a bad idea myself - but hey ho.
A small powerful blast like an Ion Cannon with a small blast template is quite focussed compared to the sub-shot of the Rail Cannon.
BTW, pls change the name of the Hammerhead rail gun to the Rail Cannon. It sounds better.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@Radio- Rail Cannon would work nicely, I'll have to kick it around.
You see, I'm trying to work within the existing framework as much as possible. GW has it own nomenclature for weapon families and I'm not going to buck that system. It would just confuse people.
Current progression seems to follow 2 tracks:
1)Pistol, Carbine, Rifle, and Gun
2)Blaster, Cannon
Sometimes there will be a cannon built from the Rifle or Gun but there seems to be limitations.
With GW, Cannons built from rifles are usually multi-barreled gatlings.
Cannons built from guns is more common but only when the gun was a small infantry weapon. For some reason GW doesn't often do more than 3 of any weapon type in an army.
As far as the Blast weapons for the vespids. I liked the idea of 12" blast weapons on a small 3-5 creature unit. GW's fluff behind the Neutron blaster is that the weapon uses a crystal from the Vespids home world that only they can use. Something about the vibratory frequency off of their wings modulates the energy that is channeled through the crystal into cohesive energy bursts.
From this point I started playing with the concept of why the weapon was short ranged and came up with the cohesive resonance deteriorates quickly. When energy is suddenly or quickly losses containment it usually does so in an explosive manner....hence the the idea of blasts.
Game balance may force me back down to an assault 2 with only the Strain Matron getting the ability for a blast. I want to play test it both ways before I completely decide.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
try the vespid with flamer based weapons - I think it would be better TBH.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
It is OP. Even with only 5 templates it is still a S5 AP3 weapon. I don't want to back off of the weapons strength and ap profile because it helps to set them apart while stayin Tau with the S 5.
I'll keep working on it.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
@Radio: No, it is called a railgun because of its caliber compared to weapon size (which is pretty small)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
9230
Post by: Trasvi
I know you said on the first page "No Powerfists" but I am quite partial to the idea of them.
I'll just list my reasons, starting with:
* The latest GW releases seem to be promoting the ability to create an army based on particular aspects of the background that you like, without resorting to appendix armies. Allowing powerfists (or some other type of CC weapon), in perhaps limited quantities, would allow players to build a Farsight-esque army.
* Your army could tote a maximum of 15 power fists, if you took 15 crisis suits and give up their ranged weapons. This would be crippling to the Tau army, as Crisis suits are the primary source of low AP firepower, and as such you would see perhaps 3 PF's in a 'farsight' army.
Overall I think allowing a powerfist /powersword / CC weapon of some kind would not in any realistic way enhance the CC ability of the army as a whole, but would go a long way to the goal of creating themed armies for players.
I would also like to see some major overhaul of a leadership system. Tau seem to have the least leadership modifying rules out of any army which I think is a major setback for an army with low model count.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Toying with the idea of Ethereal giving +1 leadership to all units with LOS to him along with a few other things.
About power fists, If the weapon won't help the army then why include it?
I'm approaching farsight with the thought of him, just not getting several of the high tech units. But, he will get unrestricted access to units that fit with his army. He will also have access to kroot and human allies but not both at the same time.
What do you guys think about the pulse carbine being changed from pinning to causing difficult terrain tests in yout opponents next movement phase?
Just something I'm playing around with
9230
Post by: Trasvi
What counts as Hi-Tech? Hammerheads and Broadsides are too integral (imo) to be restricted.
Are you thinking that carbines could somehow lay down grenades around the enemy and slow them down? I think that the basic premise is ok, but I think carbines are too prevalent in the army for them to have additional special rules.
Perhaps a different gun could use that rule: it would greatly help out Tau on the CC front without actually making them any better at it, per se.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
By high-tech I'm refering to miniturazation and A.I.
Farsight's army has no access to the following units or wargear:
Independent drone squadrons
Piranhas
Vespids(Limited number and loyal to the Tau)
Special issue wargear(Farsight should not get the latest Earth caste experimental gear)
Rail Rifle Drones
Remora Drone Jetbikes
His army has limited access to these units:
Only one model per squad may take drones.
Can only take Aun'shi for an etheral choice.(This was covered in the old thread and everyone approved of the fluff)
Can take only one Pathfinder/Sky Ray squads
Can take only one Stealsuit squad
Farsights army is allowed the following additional squads:
May take buy one squad of crisis suits as a Fast attack
May buy one additional squad of Shas'Ui "Skirmish" suits in the troops section.
This is still loose and will be tweeked but you should get the idea
About the carbines. Don't think it would be OP. The FW unit has to be within the threat range of of many assault units in order to use the weapon. It would only affect their next movement phase and only if it causes an unsaved wound upon the targeted unit.
Could make it a buyable upgrade. I could see GW doing something like this to drive sales by forcing Tau players to re-"arm" their troops.(Sorry for the pun, Just ..coluldn't....help...myself)
18427
Post by: radiohazard
If Big Red (Farsight) can take a lot of XV8s why not have a heavy support choice of XV8s that can have 4 weapons, drop the Jet Packs and be able to fire all 4 if they don't move and up to two if they did move.
Would make a good alternative to XV88s for Big Red.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Big red now gets XV-88s without restriction in this fan-dex
He will be looking for alternative to the sniper drones though.
BTW, The sniper drones are being a pain. Have been looking at a battlesuit as the controller with 2 drones per controller and 3 suits a squad. The suit would be equipped with a marker light and one other weapon.
Problem is I want them able to shoot and move but not able to Deepstrike or JSJ.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
focusedfire wrote:Big red now gets XV-88s without restriction in this fan-dex
He will be looking for alternative to the sniper drones though.
BTW, The sniper drones are being a pain. Have been looking at a battlesuit as the controller with 2 drones per controller and 3 suits a squad. The suit would be equipped with a marker light and one other weapon.
Problem is I want them able to shoot and move but not able to Deepstrike or JSJ.
Put a XV15/25 in the squad with Sniper Drones instead of the regular spotter and have 2 Sniper Drones with him.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
That is how they are currently written in my fan-dex but I have concerns about this being OP.
11771
Post by: gameandwatch
First thing I would change is give the firewarriors, pathfinders, suits, and all other vehicles BS4. THey are a race that has entirely forgone H2H for shooting, I would think they would be just as efficient as a SM who focuses on both. Next thing I would change would be to give pathfinders some sort of stealth or camouflage rule, as they are PATHFINDERS aka forward scouts and would employ by sensibility some sort of stealth technology. It doesnt make sense to me that they dont. Stealth suits could use a very slight price drop, I would give all crisis something like FnP: I would think with all that battlesuit around them, they would have a life support system in there that would be able to heal them to some point, I mean they are the elite of the elite.
I also think either seeker missles should gain a price drop, or a seeker missle battery could be a weapon option on a any tau vehicle, like 4 missles for 20 points, yes they have unlimited rang at BS5, but they are only S8 AP3, one shot for 10 pts... there is a reason why almost no one uses hunter-killer missles...
Broadsides should be able to DT move and fire regardless. Ion cannon should be S8, carbines should be assault 2, rapid firing pulse rifles should have 15" range. Almost all vehicles should get a price drop. Kroot need some sort of upgrade, whether its access to scavanged weapons for shapers like eviscerators in the merc codex, or a meltagun or something... More kroot units could be cool, like hunters, or knarlacs or something.
Stealthsuits should be troops: I know Im going to recieve flak for this one, but I think it is neccessary...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh yes, sniper drones as another upgrade drone type, there is a great weapon to put in a firewarrior squad...
3872
Post by: paidinfull
A bit about my Tau experience, I've played Tau since 3rd edition, won a few tournies with them and "mod" on another Tau site.
I'm pretty well versed in playing between the 2 codex and while I agree that 5th universally made some of the Tau lists more of a hindrance it certainly didn't cripple them as a race in 5th. At a big tournament here in DC a tau player came in 9th out of 32 players with a 3-1 record... his one loss being due to overuse of the Positional Relay. So a Tau player having a chance to win the whole thing definitely speaks to the codex still being a very competitive one.
That being said, I find some of the suggestions a little outlandish as they definitely way out of line with where they(GW) are currently going with their codex(codices) in general.
I think one of the issues when comparing most Codex(codices) in 5th is that we have 3 that are built for 5th edition with some pretty significant points drops. That, in my eyes, is where a lot of the discord stems from. You see a 6pt Ork with Furious Charge and a good statline, a 5pt guardsmen w/ frag&krak grenades and a 15pt marine and you start to scratch your head when you look at units in the Tau codex AS WELL AS codex like the Chaos Marines, Daemon Hunters, Witch Hunters and the seriously, seriously neglected Dark Eldar, who in my humble opinion, are easily one of if not THE weakest codex, especially when you consider their fluff to rules execution.
5th edition has revised a good chunk of our choices in competitive play but you still rarely see players run some of the traditionally "weaker" units in the Tau codex.
For example:
Krootox - The removal of "Relentless", and the restrictions on Infiltrate make this awesome concept pretty null and void, combine that with a slightly over priced cost and unless you are a die hard model and fluff fan they NEVER make it into a competitive list.
Vespids - The first addition to the Tau auxiliary, and the cost to ability ratio and this unit just gathers dust
Sky Rays - One of the more under used vehicles that pales when compared to the Broadside or Railhead
Fire warriors - the supposed staple of the codex that have taken a back seat to Kroot due to cost
Ethereals - With 1 slot mandatory it's hard to justify these beautiful models.
Now, the only issue with a list like mine above is that you can literally do the same for almost any codex. Not every unit in a codex is going to be phenomenal or "cost effective" or even competitive. That being said, I still take issue with the fluff to execution in Codex: Tau Empire.
If I were to be allowed to edit Codex:Tau Empire #2 this is what you would see:
<snip>
Replaced with PDF per request.
1
| Filename |
Tau_Empire_Revised.pdf |
Download
|
| Description |
Theoretical Tau Changes |
| File size |
199 Kbytes
|
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
paidinfull wrote:
That being said, I find some of the suggestions a little outlandish as they definitely way out of line with where they(GW) are currently going with their codex(codices) in general.
I think one of the issues when comparing most Codex(codices) in 5th is that we have 3 that are built for 5th edition with some pretty significant points drops.
I agree with FocusedFire in keeping the Tau as a higher-priced, low model count army. Dropping the points will just further Tau as that "Xenos Guard" army, and quite frankly a lower model count is more in line with the Tau fluff. Small, mission specific, elite units.
What GW is doing with their codices in general, is trying to sell more models. They are succeeding, but gladly enough, FocusedFire is free from that economic constraint.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
I agree with FocusedFire in keeping the Tau as a higher-priced, low model count army. Dropping the points will just further Tau as that "Xenos Guard" army, and quite frankly a lower model count is more in line with the Tau fluff. Small, mission specific, elite units.
Well if you make them too elite and small then would then not come off as a Xenos Smurf army? And yeah, a Xenos guard army would not be so fun, we do have orks and nids already. Now would you agree with me that the Tau are now in a good zone? Just under guard and still above Marines?
11081
Post by: Mr.R4nd0m
@Paidinfull:FocusedFire is currently not wanting to read any ones Codex at the moment as to not influence his vision, this is not to say your Codex is bad or wrong just that he wants to finish his before he does. (This statement brought to you by me being the one with internet between us right now he will be on later I'm sure.)
Also I invite you to go back(earlier this thread and the other thread) read some of his posts as allot of the problems you mention he is covering(Krootox and the such) and I invite you to just hold off and wait till he finishes the codex to judge(not that you where maybe) we are spending allot of our time writing this and as mentioned before we have it down and are just typing it up we actually have day jobs sorta and can't just sit and type all day if we could it would be done.
I also have a question for you cause you seem to know (in no demeaning or sarcastic way) but where is the tau codex going in 5th ed cause you seem to know.
(again no offense but 9th/32 is not even in the top 25%)
11771
Post by: gameandwatch
paidinfull wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I agreee with everything you have
3872
Post by: paidinfull
Che-Vito wrote:What GW is doing with their codices in general, is trying to sell more models. They are succeeding, but gladly enough, FocusedFire is free from that economic constraint.
Perhaps I misunderstood the point of the OP "How would you 'fix' 5th Ed. Tau?" That's a pretty straight forward question to me... especially in the context that we are referring to a codex that will be played in the current, 5th Edition. I find it odd that you are referring to "free from economic constraint[s]" as that, at least to me, implies that the exercise is all philosophical and not intended to actually come to fruition. Was the intent to create a 5th ed Tau? Also, as I'm sure you are well aware, GW makes models/codex/systems in order to make money. The current trend is pretty obvious, and I highly doubt you will see them NOT lower the cost of units in order to bring in new business. It doesn't make strong business sense to allow current hobbyists to do MORE with less. They want us to continue to buy more, which is why you will see: Upgrade Special Characters At least one, maybe, two new units An old unit that didn't sell well become even better Cheaper vehicles to sell more kits Cheaper Basic troops and kits that don't make entire choices I am not complaining, it's just how the trend is, and frankly I love the hobby so I continue to support GW, as they have beautiful models and a system I enjoy playing with my friends. Also of note... just because the core units are cheaper, that does NOT necessarily mean that the army size will increase. The Tau, much like IG, are a weapons army. The focus by lowering the cost of units was to permit MORE wargear and powerful units. Tau won't become a horde army, anymore than they are now(i currently have a list with 112 models in it), and will be able to put out more concentrated fire at a count between 50-70 depending on the build. @Mr.R4nd0m Hmmm, I didn't take much of that out of context, and I'm certainly not offended, but I will say that I feel you really didn't read through what I had posted. Right off the bat I stated that this wasn't my codex, but rather following GWs changes for Marines, IG and Orks, three codex I have owned, played and very familiar with their changes from 3rd-5th edition, and if "I were to be allowed to edit Codex:Tau Empire #2 this is what you would see" When I compare my post to the OP, I feel that I've addressed almost everything they were working towards. 1) Methods to avoid and punish, rather than win at, close combat (HIT&RUN, Preferred Enemy at a low Initiative)
2) moderately expensive models: the main difference in opinion here being how much specialisation to grant them. Focused seems to be going towards the eldar route, with expensive, but less numerous, powerful units, whereas I'm going more middle of the road and focusing on point-efficiency at the expense of the higher extremes of ability (ie; more forgiving but less powerful than an aspect). But overall its generally understood we'll be bit less expensive than marines but less powerful, and more powerful than IG but less economical. (Ability to add more Gear)
3) A need for a rework on combined arms as used by the tau: In my case the markerlight system becomes the core for this, making interlocking lines of fire far more effective than just one team of pathfinders plus a single unit using all that up. (Cheaper markerlights across multiple units via drones a whole unit of marker drones, lower markerlight cost)
Units as a whole need to be advantageous to those around them... not as pure dependance; tau should be more self-sufficient than that eldar-like fashion of doing things; but rather as the 'trick' to winning more often: some armies need to know how to maneuver, some need to know just what to pick, some don't really need much thought at all they're so forgiving... with tau, it should be on a shootier dark-eldar level: slightly more forgiving (better survivability), but a little less total-annihilation gamebreaking offensive if used masterfully.
focusedfire wrote:Nova- Before I get into the vehicle secondaries I just wanted to point out a couple of things that seem to be of a concensus.
1)We both have written the XV-8's getting integral targeting arrays for BS4 (i disagree with this but changing the cost appropriately also works)
2)We both have Shas'ui and up integral drone controllers (Free basic drone controller)
3)We both have the Fire Warriors themselves almost identicle. The only difference will be in available drone options.
4)Drones will have a greater position of importance by being scoring units.
There are still others but add this to what you posted earlier and the basic format for a new codex is beginning to shape up.
When I read through the rest of the OP's post I don't see anything in there regarding whether the OP didn't want to read other peoples suggestions... which is essentially what this whole post is about no? Suggestions for how we feel Tau could be tweaked to play in 5th? If the intent wasn't to gleen ideas or opinions... why start a topic about it? I'm more than a little confused as it has come across you know the OP. About the Tau player in the tournament, I failed to point out that if he had NOT been silly and kept his entire army in reserve for the entire game using Positional Relay, something he did habitually, he would have won the tournament or at least come in second. His minor loss caused him to fall to 9th, incidently. You are correct that top 33% is not competitive, but at the tourney Orks won, DAEMONHUNTERS came in 2nd, the player who the Tau lost to. The codex definitely still has it's punch. The main uniqueness that the Tau army has is it's Markerlight system. Sure you could say the battle suits, but ultimately the weapons function similarly to Imperial armies. Markerlights, IMO, define the Tau race in 40k. The OP and his confidents recognize that. My post, where you see all the points being cut, is intended to allow you to add MORE markerlights into it by having LESS cost prohibitive units. The Tau NEED more markerlights and as the OP has pointed out, a new and BETTER system. If the OP requests I'll happily remove my previous post.
16123
Post by: JCunkle
@focusedfire
Have you considered allowing pulse carbine FW the ability to "run" in the assault phase?
Move-shoot-run(d6)
It mirrors the ability of crisis suits JSJ, but doesn't steal its place due to being lower powered. It gives the carbine an advantage over the rifle (mobility), allows the rifle to carry its own advantage (firepower), and it furthers the Tau ethos of simultaneous mobility+firepower.
just a thought.
EDIT: it also can blunt the edge of a running assaulty opponent. Yay!
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
SkyRay
Cost remains the same
Remove 6 shot limit. Think about being able to launch 5/6 Missiles a turn, brings back Alpha Strike from 3rd... definitely much more appealing.
Weapon destroyed result takes out the entire rack
May I ask why to get rid of the 6 shot limit? The model does have only 6, and the Manacore can only shoot 4, though they do seem to be a bit stronger. Can I get your take on this?
Also you Gue'vesa entry. What do you think about lowering the squad points to 55, and give them Lasguns. But give them the option to buy Pulse Rifles. Like the "Off Worlder" you have there. And what do you think about making the Gue'vesa a 0-2 unit?
I liked what I saw in your list.
11081
Post by: Mr.R4nd0m
@Paidinfull: Yah I was sitting in the room with him and asked him if he wanted to read your proposed codex changes and he just asked me to say something, no one says you need to remove your post.
18312
Post by: Lacross
paidinfull wrote:
The main uniqueness that the Tau army has is it's Markerlight system. Sure you could say the battle suits, but ultimately the weapons function similarly to Imperial armies. Markerlights, IMO, define the Tau race in 40k. The OP and his confidents recognize that. My post, where you see all the points being cut, is intended to allow you to add MORE markerlights into it by having LESS cost prohibitive units. The Tau NEED more markerlights and as the OP has pointed out, a new and BETTER system.
If the OP requests I'll happily remove my previous post.
lowering the overall cost does not necessarily encourage a player to take more markerlights(unless the markerlights are significantly cheaper).
it would also encourage players to take more of the cheaper units instead.
I think a better suggestion would be to increase the power and utility of the markerlights.
I recall that markerlights used to affect single models in some old codex and now in this 4th edition codex they now affect units.
I propose that the new markerlights affect the entire army.
17072
Post by: crazypsyko666
I say make the kroot jump infantry and let the tau fire into close combat (without killing their own troops)
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@Paidinfull- Sorry, there may have been a bit of mis-communication. Offering suggestions is absolutely welcome. As is the discussion of such.
I am trying to avoid reading other Fan-dices for the reason that I want to write my version as opposed to rewriting someone elses. Since I started this I have had about a half dozen people suggest other fan-dices for me to read.
The point I'm getting at in my primitive way is that, "Discussion Good, Plagerizing Bad".
Now, as to your competitiveness statement.
First, I'm not approaching this with the main thought of tourney application due to that this will be a Fan-dex and therefore not legal. My issues for starting this were with fluff problems and how horrible the wording for the marker, drone, and battlesuit rules were.
Second, I am trying to take all factors into consideration of making the Tau follow their original design concept as a "middle" army. This fan-dex is taking a while because I'm trying to preserve that unique flavor while making the army 5th ed current and still balanced.
Third, I'd like to take this time to state that I have never said that the Tau can't win. Only that they are becoming more limited over time and with the steady releases of updated codices.
Now,personally, I still win more than I loose with my Tau but that doesn't mean that they are "competitive" If the Tau were really competitive they would be showing up in the top three at a few of the larger events on an equal basis with other armies. I also think it is hard to say that he would have won if he hadn't used the Posi-relay. We don't and can't know this. What we do know is Tau performance at the larger Tournies has not been stellar since the release of 5th.
To reply about the approaches to updating the Tau. They are not as simple as everyone wants to make it sound. I never once tried to fool myself that this would be simple, only that I would find it enjoyable(which I have).
Lets take a look at the "simple" approaches.
You simply drop the prices and you get an unbalanced xenos guard.(Note, not a shot anyone reading)
You raise the prices and improve the abilities too much and they are xenos SMs(Also not a shot at anyone reading)
I see the Tau being in the same boat as the SoB in that they are in the middle. There are several army mixes that can represent this.
Lets say that the SoB are in between the SMs(Armour and weapons) and IG(T and I 3).
The Tau are in between IG(Ranged warfare) and Eldar(Mobility).
There are other armies that could be used to describe but instead I'd like to point out that the acts of faith system serves a very similar purpose as that of the markerlights. There seems to be a theme in the "middle" armies of needing force multiplier systems.
Now, your idea of lowering unit costs to allow for more weapons sounds good but there is the limitation that most people equip their suits with as many weapons as they can, so the extra points will go to increasing model count. My quick conservative estimate is that your changes will result in an increased model count of about 20-25%. This, and that several of them would unbalance the army(Removing the SkyRay limit on shots), is why every aspect has to be examined from the point of how it affects the entire army
I would also put a few qualifiers in about your Analysis of the recent codex releases.
1)Improved/updated SC's (This I agree with but would note that some of these have hefty prices and not sure if uberSC's are Tau-like)
2)New units(I agree with this)
3)One Old unit improved(Debatable as to the number of improved old units)
4)Cheaper vehicles(Disagree because this has not been across the board but rather transport oriented and skimmers have stayed pricey)
5)Cheaper troops(The drops have included grenades but become marginalized by army restructuring and some increased equipment costs.)
I will also say now that I have taken into account the business model and you are wrong in thinking that GW can't sell more models by keepng the model count about the same.
1)Introduce cool new unit(I like the Remora as a Jet-bike)
2)Just change the weapons to where unused ones such as the Pulse Carbine and Ion Cannon become the new rage.
3)Change the army structure to allow for Sky Rays as transports and Squadrons of Hammerheads.
Make it desirable to redo all of your infantry and up the availability of Tanks in a list. That is how GW is making money with the IG.
....And no. You do not need to erase your previous post. I support the expression and exchange of ideas as long as everyone attempts to be polite. Again, I think there was a miscommunication.
@Jcunkle-fun idea but I have an army wide system in place that I prefer.
I may instead drop the pinning and have it make the unit take difficult terrain test. I'm thinking of leaving pinning to the IG for the most part. This is not set in stone. Just want to play test it before I move to sopmething else.
3872
Post by: paidinfull
@Sanchez01
To be honest, the intent for making the Sky Ray shoot unlimited SM would be OTT, especially if there are any changes to the SM as I've suggested. Though it really would be contingent on how many markerlights you could fit in your list... that coupled with the lower cost of ML across the board, 5pts basic, 10pts pathfinder, 20pts marker drone and you could easily pump out lists with 20+ marker lights in it. Being able to fire 10x S8 AP3 each turn would be incredibly ridiculous... however that is the build that made it that way. On it's own, being able to move 12" & fire up to 2x S8 shots a turn isn't that OTT... is it?
That being said, let's look at some other interactions in other codex...
Part of my logic for building it that way was looking at what GW did with:
The Valkyrie - permitting 18x BS4 meltaguns + 12x S4 LBT in your opponents face turn 1, combo that with a 97% chance to get a +1 to go first...
Did I mention that the unit Scouts or Outflanks... or that it's Scoring? Cost = 1380
20x Assault Terminators w/ TT + SS @ 800pts - So a 2+ armor with a 3+ invulnerable... essentially confirming that volumes of fire, or LOTS of bullets, is still the best way to kill ANY terminator.
10x Nob Bikers w/ Pain boy & Warboss @ 825pts - Sure, being able to abuse wound allocation can be done much much cheaper by throwing them in a BW, but this is still one of the hardest and nastiest units in the game. Most armies know how to deal with this unit, but it still can win entire games by itself... or lose them...
There are more "uber" units but you guys know em, so I'm sure you get my point.
Even so, after all that... it makes much more sense to have the Sky Ray either be Heavy 6 or function similar to the Exorcist with Heavy D6. I do agree with yourself and FocusedFire that being able to shoot 10+ SM a turn would be pretty broken and there would not be any incentive to take multiple. Its hard to compare the price tags on the Ray vs Manticore as the Ray is 22% cheaper than the Manticore. D3 S10 Ordnance Blast, Barrage is much beefer given the slight cost difference. Another thought would be to create a rule like after the 6 are fired on a 3+ the rack is reloaded, on a 1/2 you have run out of ammo... Though I admit I prefer the simplicity of it just being Heavy 6.
On the subject of the Gue'vesa... 0-2 sounds perfect. There really shouldn't be too many in a standard list, and right fully so, excellent suggestion. I did consciously not give them lasguns as I personally feel that technology is Imperial and as these are meant to represent multiple worlds. I only threw together what I thought would allow a variety of conversions and a new model line. I think that it could make sense as las technology is pretty popular, perhaps instead of Stealth and MTC, they get +1BS and S4 AP- weapons on the roll of a 5/6? I don't want to hijack FocusedFire's thread however.
@Focusedfire
I misunderstood that you were making a Fandex and that this was more of a personal endeavor, rather than speculation on what very well could happen. I was under the impression that you were looking to create a discussion regarding the transition from the current Codex to the one which will be out in what... 2011?
I think you and I have a difference of opinion regarding what it means to be "updating" a codex, and there is certainly nothing wrong with that. What I perceive your concept of "update" to mean, is keeping some of the basic names and types but actually creating entire new rule sets, so that what you get is something that is the same in name but in execution very different.
When I look at Codex:Tau Empire I really don't see a lot of system changes that need to be, for example Orks Double Initiative to Furious Charge, Marines Traits to Combat Tactics, or IG Doctrines to Orders. I feel the core, like Eldar, Tyranids, Daemons and Chaos, is firmly established, appealing and creative with a more High Tech focus. In my opinion the basics of the Markerlight system are sound. Improve shooting, Reduce Cover, Pin easier, launch missile strikes are all great concepts. The biggest drawback is that, unlike Orders, there isn't enough Markerlight application in current lists to be able to really benefit from the flexibility. By reducing the costs of current Markerlights, I mean seriously I think everyone can agree they are not equal in ability to the same cost as a meltagun, a lascannon, an autocannon, or a heavy bolter, you gain more focus on what the Tau currently are designed to do. Combine that by adding in more useful pinning weapons, like making SMS barrage, and allowing rail rifles in squads, (I think suits need something to pin as well), and you actually are able to make use of a very cool game mechanic. An army about shooting, that HAS rules to benefit from an under used BASIC rule set involving shooting, but can't actually make it work because it's too cost prohibitive. At least to me it makes a lot of sense that as a shooting army they would excel at suppressive fire.
It is possible to make a huge Tau army even now. As I pointed out I have a list that has 112 models in it. If your goal is to provide the ability to have a 40-50 count army, a 70-80 count, and a 90-100 count then I think you are heading in the right direction.
A quick response to your list
3) IG Veterans, Marine Veterans(Stern * Van), Nobs & Lootas... you are welcome to disagree that the trend is to improve an Older unit. If you would like I could list changes from 3rd to 4th as well.
4) Rhino(15pts), Predator(20pts), Vindicator(20pts), Trukk(15pts), Battlewagon(30pts), Looted Wagon(30pts), Valkyrie(went from 170 to 100), Chimera (30pts) that's a considerable number of vehicles across the 3 codex.
5) Across the 3 codex Orks, Marines, IG all have seen both a decrease in model cost, and either the weapons have stayed the same cost or gone down.
Basic ork dropped (2pts) weapons stayed the same cost, lost burna choice.
Basic Marine same cost but gained Combat Tactics, Grenades, 3 Free Weapon upgrades, and Weapon Upgrade Costs decreased
Basic IG trooper dropped (1pt) gained SGT upgrade, Grenades, Orders, while Autocannon, Lascannon, Sniper Weapon Upgrade Costs decreased
I haven't talked about the Daemon codex as there really isn't a counter point to compare to it, however, out of the 4, Orks/Daemons/Marines/IG, that have been released with 5th in mind, I don't think seeing a 100% point break for the basic troops indicates that if Tau Empire #2 was released tomorrow, that we would NOT see a Fire Warrior unit as I've detailed. It's the same thing with Eldar... I would bet money that the basic guardian drops at least 2pts. It seems pretty obvious, but its definitely not in stone.
GW as you know is in business to sell models. My guard army went from being worth 10k points down to 7k points when the new codex was released, and even having a force that size I still went out and bought the new kits and units. From a business perspective it is much easier to increase the demand for your product by requiring more to be purchased.
I completely agree with your ideas:
1) New unit a la Remora
2) Change weapon stats
However I completely disagree with
3) Sky Ray as a transport
In 3rd edition devilfish could have 4 SM... In counter argument, why not just give Devilfish the ability to have 4 SM again and do away with the Ray all together? I strongly disagree with this line of thinking. Keep Devilfish @ 2SM, adjust the rule set on the Sky Ray to make them more appealing, Heavy 6 or Heavy D6 perhaps or S8 AP3 Small blast... there are quite a few options that will make this vehicle much more appealing.
Either way... I've looked over the other fandex and am interested to see what you come up with.
18981
Post by: Sanchez01
Compared to what the other races get, no, does not look very OTT. Now playing versus Tau for a long, long time, Marker Lights are still nasty as they are now, but keeping the 2 SM limit would, combined with your intent of increasing the marker lights used, would give the Tau a major advantage over Mech armies and other Tank heavy lists. Makes me glad I chose Infantry Guard.
Giving it a 1-2 chance to run out seems to give it a gamble that some would not take... Why not keep this but change it slightly. Something like on a 1-2, play must roll a d6 to check for ammo, on a 4+ the Sky Ray may not fire next turn, but will fire as normal the turn after. On a 1, 2, or 3, the Sky ray is out of ammo. (Reminds me of the ammo check for Necromunda)
Now for the heavy 6 or D6 question, I would leave it as it is, Its own 2 Marker lights give it a 0-4 missile attack and with the suggested ammo change that should be enough.
As an added bonus to the Pathfinders, why not give them a rule that gives them, if a marker Light hits, a twin link rule for rail rifles in that squad. This should give them a side role of heavy infantry suppression.
Now about the Gue'vesa. Well Lasguns are easy to mass produce, every planet past gunpowder has them, and in vast stock too. Plus Autoguns do have the same profile. So giving them a 24" str 3 AP- Rapidfire weapon IMO should be stock. But giving them an option to buy Pulse rifles would be nice.
18009
Post by: rogueeyes
I see no problem with giving the Gue'vesa team leader a pulse rifle. This goes along with a Kroot shaper being about to upgrade to a pulse rifle for a certain amount of points in the current codex.
The Sky Ray would be good with a Heavy D6 main weapon seeker missile. It would kind of be like a heavy version of the SMS that can be taken throughout the army. To hit with a marker light then to fire D6 missiles a turn is not that hard especially when you have to think that you have a chance to miss with each missile fired as well.
3872
Post by: paidinfull
I imagine a few typical builds of the Fire Warriors to be:
6x man Marker Light Support squad @ 105pts. Ui with Marker Light and 2x Marker Drones (3x Marker Lights) (this is 35pts cheaper)
12x man Max Squad @ 133pts. Ui w/ BK, 2x Rail Rifle (S6 AP3 @ 36" pinning)
8x man FoF squad @ 81pts. Ui w/ BK
I also imagine pathfinders and marker drones to be in the majority of lists:
Max Squad 8x Path @ 135pts - Ui w/ BK and 2x Marker Drones (10x Marker Lights) (56pts cheaper)
Min Squad 4x Path @ 50pts (4x Marker Lights)
Min Squad 4x Marker Drones @ 80pts (4x Marker Lights)
Here is a list that I put together based on the changes I've suggested
3x S10 AP1
12x S8 AP3 Pinning
5x S8 melta
8x S7
7xS6 AP2
3x S5 AP3 pinning @18"
20x S5 @18" pinning (16 of which will rarely fire)
30x S5 @30" Rapid Fire
18x S5 @18"
6xS4 @ 24" Small Blast Templates, Pinning
5xS4 AP4 @18" (Rending)
25xML (20 of which are in 2x squads and are Heavy 1 so DoW, not going first, etc. are most likely going to require set up)
In one round of shooting on Turn 1, you should see about 13x Marker Light hits, 10x of which will be spread across 2x squads and the other 3x across 2x other, so 4x total potential targets
You have 8x Units that can benefit from the Marker Lights.
1x unit of Fire warriors using 5x Marker lights (2x hit + 3x negative to pin) firing @ a squad in cover have a 40% chance to pin the unit @ LD 9 and did not "go to ground", inflict 2.54 casualties, maybe forcing a Morale Check as well.
1x unit of Crisis Suits w/ Plasma using 5x Marker lights (2x hit + 3x negative to cover) firing @ a squad in cover inflict 2.78 casualties, maybe forcing a Morale Check
3x SM are fired @ 2x AV 12 Vehicles w/ a 28% chance to destroy 1x
No More Marker Lights
4x Crisis Suits w/ MP shoot @ AV 12 w/ 44% Chance to destroy no cover
1x Unit of Broadsides split fire, 2x @ AV13, 1x @ AV12. 41% chance to destroy vs AV13 w/ no cover & 28% chance to destroy vehicle #2 AV12 w/ no cover
2x Unit of Fire warriors fire @ 1x unit of MEQ in cover, inflict 3 casualties, cause a pin & morale check @ LD9
HQ
Shas'el 1x - 90
Cyclonic Ion Blaster, Gatling Rifle, On-board Marker Light, MT
So 5x S4 AP4 shots at @ 18" + 3x S5 AP3 pinning(change), all @ BS4 + 1 Marker Light Shot @ BS3
TROOPS
Fire Warriors 12x - 133
2x Rail Rifle, BK, Defensive Grenades
LD 8, 4+ SV, can regroup below 50%, 2x S6 AP3 pinning weapons
Fire Warriors 12x - 133
2x Rail Rifle, BK, Defensive Grenades
Rinse
Fire Warriors 12x - 133
2x Rail Rifle, BK, Defensive Grenades
Repeat
ELITES
Crisis 4x - 233
BK, Plasma, Fusion Blaster, MT
Anti-Heavy Infantry.
4x S6 AP2 shots @ 24" or 8x S6 AP2 shots + 4x S8 AP1 shots @ 12"
Crisis 4x - 185
BK, Burst Cannon, Missile Pod, MT
Anti-Infantry or Anti-Medium Tank.
12x S5 AP5 shots @ 18" + 8x S7 AP4 shots @ 36"
Monat 1x - 48
TL Fusion Blaster TA
Suicide AT. 1x BS4 TL Fusion Gun
FAST
Pathfinders 8x - 135
BK, 2x MD
Devilfish 1x- 75
DP
10x Marker Lights w/ Stealth.
Transport with 4+ Cover Save
Pathfinders 8x - 135
BK, 2x MD
Devilfish 1x- 75
DP
10x Marker Lights.
Transport with 4+ Cover Save
HEAVY
Sky Ray 1x - 180
Targeting Array, Disruption Pod, Multi-Tracker, ASMS, Target lock
6x S8 AP3 shots, 3x S4 AP5 SMBT, 2x Marker Lights, Fire like a Fast Vehicle, 4+ Cover, BS4, Engage Multiple Units
Sky Ray 1x - 180
Targeting Array, Disruption Pod, Multi-Tracker, ASMS, Target lock
Same
Broadside 3x - 265
TLDR w/ HWTL TL Plas, MT
3x TL S10 AP1 @ 72" + 3x TL S6 AP2 @ 24"
69 Models
2000 Total Points
3x Scoring Units
16x KP
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rogueeyes wrote:I see no problem with giving the Gue'vesa team leader a pulse rifle.
The SGT would come standard with a Pulse Rifle/Pulse Carbine
Automatically Appended Next Post:
I realize this is all "What if's" and "Pretty ladies"... but for S&G's I did a direct comparison of the list with "my edits" and the current:
3x S10 AP1 VS 3x S10 AP1 - so no difference
12x S8 AP3 Pinning VS 12x S8 AP3 Pinning - difference is current is limited to only 12x shots total not each turn
5x S8 melta VS 4x S8 melta - 1x less melta
8x S7 VS 6x S7 - 1x less Missile Pod
7xS6 AP2 VS 4x S6 AP2 - so 3x less Plasma rounds a turn
6x S6 AP3 Pinning @36" VS (none) - not available, 60pts to get at cost of 6x Marker Lights
3x S5 AP3 Pinning @18" VS (none) - not available, replaced with 1x S6 AP2 @ 24" - 2x Less shots for further range higher strength, no pinning
20x S5 @18" Pinning (16x of which will rarely fire) VS 20x S5 @18" Pinning (16x of which will rarely fire) - Identical
30x S5 @30" Rapid Fire VS 36x S5 @ 30" - 6x more
18x S5 @18" VS 15x S5 @ 18" - 1x less Burst Cannon
6xS4 @ 24" Small Blast Templates, Pinning VS 16x S5 @ 24" (8x will probably never fire) - 2x more shots @ +1S, no Pinning or Small Blast Template
5xS4 AP4 (Rending) VS 5x S3 AP4 (roll of 6's are AP1) - Less +1S, no Rending vs MC or D3 vs Vehicles
25xML VS 24x ML - 1x less Marker Light or 7x Less Marker Lights if you took the Rail Rifles
2000 points VS 2062 points - 62 points more or 112 if you took the Rail Rifles
69 Models VS 67 Models
18427
Post by: radiohazard
In 3rd Ed, Tau were the most dangerous army at shooting. In 4th, they were still dangerous. In 5th they are no where near as deadly and need fixing.
I've been running some tests with various things in the Tau army and this is what i've found:
BS4
BS 4 Tau units are not that OTT. Does it help?: yes, but this is balanced out with how bad Tau are at CC. If Tau units were BS4 as Standard (with the Shas'o and Shas'el being BS5 and Kroot being BS3) it does balance everything out nicely. OFC the codex would need to drop the targeting array for vehicles (BS5 Vehicles are waaaaay OTT).
Markerlights
A standard 4+ to hit on all rolls for Markerlights is very fair. And in response to this, I made Markerlights do the following:
+1 BS, -1 Cover Save, Target unit must take a pinning check at -1 Ld if they take any casualties this turn, fire a Seeker Missile at BS5.
Other Markerlights do not gain the +1 BS from another ML.
Nice and simple and again balanced.
Close Combat
Tau are bad at CC, get over it. I made a ruling where all Tau units (Not Kroot) ALWAYS strike last.
Tau Weapons:
Plasma Rifle - Unchanged.
Fusion Blaster - Unchanged.
Flamer - Upgraded to Heavy Flamer.
Burst Cannon - Assault 4.
Kroot Rifle - 18" Str 4, AP 6, Assault 2.
Kroot Gun - 36" Str 7, AP 4, Assault 2.
Missile Pod - Unchanged.
Pulse Rifle - Unchanged.
Pulse Carbine - can also fire a grenade that doesn't allow target unit to charge in their next assault phase. Grenade does no dmg. They no longer cause pinning.
Railgun - Unchanged.
Hammerhead Railgun - Unchanged.
Ion Cannon - Two types of shot:
Focussed Beam: 48" str 6, Ap 3, Heavy 4, Rending.
Blast Shot: 48" str 7, Ap 2, Heavy 1 Blast.
SMS - Twin-Linked.
Vespid Blaster - Unchanged.
AFP - Unchanged.
CIB - 18" Str 4, Ap 4, Assault 4, Rending.
Rail Rifle - No change.
All of these have been tested and I think they are balanced.
Points changes:
HQ
1+ Commander
Shas'o - 65pts, Shas'el - 50 pts. Option to have any of the XV suits (22, 8, 81, 84, 88, 89)
Aun - 50 pts. All Tau units gain +1 Ld, Fearless, 4+ save.
Honour Guard - as FW but 15 pts per model and fearless.
XV8 Bodyguard - 30 pts.
Elites
XV8 - 20 pts.
XV25/15 - 25 pts.
Troops
1+ FW - 12 pts, come with Photon and EMP 'nades. Loses option for Pulse Carbines.
All Kroot - +1 pt, 6+ armour save, can infiltrate and gain stealth.
New Unit - FW supression team.
Stats as FW. Armed with Pulse Carbine. 12 pts.
0-2 Pathfinders - 14 pts. Lose Devilfish as compulsory (but they do have the option) and gain infiltrate and stealth.
0-2 Gun Drones - No change.
Devilfish - 70 pts.
Fast Attack
Tetras - See IA Volume 3.
Piranha - can take SMS or Twin Linked Rail Rifles instead of Drones.
Vespid - No change.
Heavy Support
Broadsides - 75 pts, relentless.
Sniper Drones - No change.
Hammerhead - 100 pts. No Ion Cannon Option. Other options as normal.
New unit - Mako.
Stats as Hammerhead. 85 pts.
Is armed with Ion Cannon and Burst Cannon (chin mounted). Has same options as Hammerhead.
Skyray - 100 pts.
Heavy Gun Drones - see IA Volume 3.
Special Characters
O'shovah - 150 pts.
Tau units gain +1ws, but have -1bs.
No Kroot, No Vespid, No Aun, No other restrictions.
All units lose always strike last.
All other rules unchanged.
Shadowsun - 150.
Aun'va - Dropped.
Aun'shi - 75 Pts.
Doesn't strike last. All Tau are stubborn and gain +1 Ld.
WS5, Rending.
Cannot have honour guard.
Tell me what you think.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
@ RadioHazard and Paidinfull, please just post a PDF version of your listing...it clutters up the threat terribly, and makes it as unreadable as the last one.
@radiohazard: A rule that Tau always strike last in CC? Even if the enemy is assaulting the Tau through cover? Even if the army is a Farsight army? I think it would be quite broken to have a IG trooper squad be able to assault through cover, and still strike first (mind you, the frag grenades would allow them to anyways, but the point here is clear)
18312
Post by: Lacross
radiohazard wrote:
New unit - Mako.
Stats as Hammerhead. 85 pts.
Is armed with Ion Cannon and Burst Cannon (chin mounted). Has same options as Hammerhead.
so, this thing could have 3 burst cannons AND an Ion Cannon?
10223
Post by: Tyron
I think for O'Shova his retinue should be close combat orientated. I don't like that he is good at close combat while the rest aren't.
They should each have a sword of some fashion and a ballistic weapon of their choice.
To me this represents suits who he has taught himself to be able to help him when he gets into combat having a reliable bodyguard and not just armatures who can only shoot.
Give them WS 4 and I 4 to represent this, make their swords power weapons and possibly fearless (to represent they will die before leaving his side).
I think Tau should have some sort of bomb drone (like the squid) which move into base contact with an enemy and explodes using the small blast template or S8 against vehicles.
An attack drone would be good also, this would be used to help the Tau out in combat seeing as they don't like it they make drones/robots that can fight very well in close combat.
Drones should be fearless as they're robots and don't have feelings.
Through in a few forgeworld tanks.
I can go on and on with loads of ideas but this will suffice for now.
19307
Post by: Liquidice281
I'd like to see the progression of the "experimental" units. Make Shadowsun's suit available for elites with the option of deepstrike w/ twin linked plasma or fusion. Make all the experimental wargear/ suit systems available
for the army. Iridium armor for all! Also include some new "expeiremental items", maybe a few kinky weapons and wargear. One thing i also want to change back is Farsight's bonus. If i remember correctly, in the 1st codex
he raised everyones WS +1, which makes the army a little survivable, for such a restriction he puts on the army, he has to at least give us back the +1 Ws to all. Keep all the stats for the firewarriors the same and maybe
add another race or boost the kroot.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@Paidinfull- No problem. I do want to continue the dialogue but also want to focus on the Fan-dex.
What I am trying to do with this fan-dex.
First, I am attempting a cover to cover rewrite. Not to change all of the units but to correct the problematic wording and rules issues in the codex. I am also attempting to update to the new codex format.
Second, Some of the key systems to the Tau theme have lost some of their effectiveness so I am attempting to return the balance to the army. The big one here is the markerlight system and I have run into no argument about stream-lining the system.
Third, Some of the systems/units as introduced did not make sense in that there were more logical pairings for the equipment. This is about some units needing to make more sense from a tactical standpoint and to actually fit with the Tau style of war(SniperDrones and Rail Rifle Pathfinders).
Fourth, The Tau are still relatively new and some of the current units were stretched into filling FOC slots just to make the army seem like it had more to it than it did. I'm reworking these units to have more distinction and purpose along with a FOC shake-up that leaves room for new units.
Fifth, I'm attempting to guess at what GW may give us in new units and options based off of recent codex releases.
So far the changes that I have set for this fan-dex do not exceed the changes for the guard.
Now about your post(Please remember that all of these are only, IMO):
1)As things stand what I've come up with so far do not exceed the changes made to any armies released for 5th ed.
2)Sytems that need to be reworked are markerlights, drones, and there needs to be an army wide rule just to fit into 5th ed(Not saying I agree with this philosophy just noting and including the trend). Units that needed rework/repurposing were vespids, stealths, drones, and the sky ray. Parts that need some expansion are alien allies.
In response to your responses
3)About the older units. I was disagreeing about it being only one unit. Not that it happened but that there were more than just one improved older unit.
4)Vendettas/Valks went from fliers to skimmers and the vendetta is still 130 pts and though it may out shoot it is not as tough as a wave serp. LRBT went up in price. LR stayed about the same. The units you mentioned did all go down in price but their options went up to where moderately kitted versions ended up being the same price as before.
5)Some basic units did go down in price but other units went up. I'm following the SM model for not really dropping the price but including grenades and bonding knife. FW may go up to 12pt ea but you will see it in their abilities.
Now to your comments about the Sky Ray as a Transport.
First, I thought about the old 4 seekers per vehicle rule and two things stopped me. The piranhas would be over burdened weight wise and it would remove the reason for the SkyRay.
Second,I will admit to having never liked the Sky Ray model(Think the wing is too much and would have perfered smaller/lower profile launching hard point) but I know GW will not abandon it after having just released it.
Third, It just doens't work in the Tau list as a Heavy Support. There are other units that are more effective and it was dependent upon marker hits to fire from any area but didn't get any real tactical bonus for doing such.
These were the reasons why I kept it around and repurposed it to a transport for the pathfinders. It will be dropped in price and to devilfish armour values. Trasports will not be able to take the sms system because of wieght concerns. They now take drones only in the recesses. I think a transport equipped with 2 marker lights, 6 seekers, and able to carry 2 marker drones in the recesses actually fits nicely as the pathfinder dedicated transport. It functions to support the unit in its role especially with the pathfinders still having scout.
I would also take this moment to address why I am not moving to BS4 across the board and why I am not in favour of a huge price break for fire warriors.
Raising everything to BS4 removes the need for markerlights thus also removing a major theme of the Tau. I am not inclined to remove the combined arms mentality of the Tau. I actually want to push the concept of Tau are stronger through team work.
I feel that a price break will in some ways do the same thing. That doing so will push the Tau towards overwhelming their opponents through numbers as opposed to team work.
I also want to return to Fire Caste doctrine of most units being all equipped with the same weapon. This is because, giving a few other squad members better weapons is elevating the individual in a way that is Un-Tau. The exception to this rule is of course the Crisis Suits. This is one of the reasons they stand out in the current codex.
Taking the pathfinders back to being homogenous allows for the creation of an elite rail rifle squad. Returning this theme will also help to define the various units.
I gotta get back to writing. Keep up the conversation.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Lacross wrote:radiohazard wrote:
New unit - Mako.
Stats as Hammerhead. 85 pts.
Is armed with Ion Cannon and Burst Cannon (chin mounted). Has same options as Hammerhead.
so, this thing could have 3 burst cannons AND an Ion Cannon?
Yup. It isn't as broken as you might think. Automatically Appended Next Post: Che-Vito wrote:@ RadioHazard and Paidinfull, please just post a PDF version of your listing...it clutters up the threat terribly, and makes it as unreadable as the last one.
@radiohazard: A rule that Tau always strike last in CC? Even if the enemy is assaulting the Tau through cover? Even if the army is a Farsight army? I think it would be quite broken to have a IG trooper squad be able to assault through cover, and still strike first (mind you, the frag grenades would allow them to anyways, but the point here is clear)
Basically, if Tau are in the open, they will ALWAYS strike last. If in cover and the charging unit doesn't have frag 'nades the Tau strike first. Automatically Appended Next Post: sorry - i'm not all that gr8 with PDF's.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
I know this is off topic - but I have to know, WHAT IS OP? It is the only term ever which meaning I can't figure out through context.
11081
Post by: Mr.R4nd0m
Over Powered or Original Poster.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
OK, got a question for you guys.
I would like for your to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
And then tell me if the sub-munition on the HH Railgun still makes sense or would it make more sense for the railgun to fire a stack of shorter/lighter sections and to make the profile like Range 72" Str 6 AP 3-4ish? Heavy 6.
I like the blast template but the thing just doesn't make sense coming out of a railgun. GW gave the HH the blast to make it a viable choice when compared to the broadsides. I was wondering if substituing a lower powered multi-shot would disturb too many players or not.
So question is, "Would you guys have a problem with changing the large blast on the HH railgun?".
If not, "What would you substitute in its place?"
Please keep in mind that I have already improved the HH Railgun with the piercing rule from a sabot shot that lets you roll two dice on on the vehicle damage table on any penning roll of a 4+. Note, if the penetration roll of a 4 is still a glance then both damage dice are considered as glancing. Both damage dice will apply towards damage recieved by the vehicle.
Also, if I remove the blast template then I have better reasons for giving blast temps to the Ion cannon which fits the fluff better.
Input will be appreciated, Thanks
1795
Post by: keezus
Keep the old profile. GW's writers don't have any sort of idea how real weapons function, hence the nonsense descriptions of wargear. Don't try to rationalize it, you'll go crazy.
Examples:
Bolters having shell ejection ports when Bolts are supposedly caseless.
Railguns firing "submunitions"
Gauss Flayers "molecular flaying"
None of this makes sense.
18009
Post by: rogueeyes
Actually you can make sense of it. If there is an explosive shell then you can fire and hit a target. When the target is hit the shell explodes and detonates. Just because it is fired at high speed by magnets does not make it an invalid option to use a "submunition" that explodes on impact. The lower AP account for this since the explosive loses a lot of the speed from the high speed shot out of the gun.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Rogue eyes-Please reread the article. Railguns are being developed primarily to get away from carrying munitions. This helps unit survivability by not have explosives within the vehicle which might be set off by an enemy hit.
Also, a submunition using the railgun as a launcher would be moving so fast that it would use more of an apoc sized flame template rather than a Large Blast.
Keezus-Thanks for your input and you are right, it does drive me crazy.
I still want to discuss this because, IMO, the multi-segmented shot would fit the Tau more appropriately.
19307
Post by: Liquidice281
I believe that the current railgun rules are perfect. I think the Hammerhead and the broadside are the two units that don't need changing. And with the whole railgun 40k concept, its 40k....half the gak doesnt make sense. 40k is full of crap like that, and you'll also have to recognize is that we are trying to rationalize alien technology.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
rogueeyes wrote:Actually you can make sense of it. If there is an explosive shell then you can fire and hit a target. When the target is hit the shell explodes and detonates. Just because it is fired at high speed by magnets does not make it an invalid option to use a "submunition" that explodes on impact. The lower AP account for this since the explosive loses a lot of the speed from the high speed shot out of the gun.
Totally correct.
1795
Post by: keezus
radiohazard wrote:rogueeyes wrote:Actually you can make sense of it. If there is an explosive shell then you can fire and hit a target. When the target is hit the shell explodes and detonates. Just because it is fired at high speed by magnets does not make it an invalid option to use a "submunition" that explodes on impact. The lower AP account for this since the explosive loses a lot of the speed from the high speed shot out of the gun.
Totally correct.
"You can drive a car with your feet if you wanted to, but that don't make it a good idea." - Chris Rock 
Having a submunition option for a railgun is a poor idea as Railguns are in the business of long range precision strikes via delivering massive KE to the target. Submunitions by definition are smaller ordinance contained within a larger transporting munition and NOT a high explosive shell. As such, they are at odds with both of the railgun's primary roles, as submunitions are by their nature, designed to saturate the target (i.e. NOT precise) and the smaller submunitions offer less kinetic penetration.
While it is possible to fire this sort of shell from a railgun, there seems to be little point. Even if it were employed against soft targets, the dispersion pattern due to the core-munition's high speed is wholly dependent on how (and more importantly) when the submunitions are released during flight. Unreliable at best, and ill concieved at worst.
Tau Railguns work great as a game mechanic, but trying to rationalize GW's nonsensical nomenclature is a fool's errand. In real life, any role an explosive type railgun munition has is better filled by missiles loaded with high explosive.
11081
Post by: Mr.R4nd0m
Focusedfire says that's dead on, thanks Keezus.
Focus has rationalized it by using flechette's and a reversible polarity core. Its now using a template at range that is in a strait line with the barrel thus it cannot scatter, which at mach 7 you don't scatter. The flechette's lose momentum due to their smaller size and thus spread in the flame template manner. We are debating if you still have to roll to hit but this lets us get closer to original non-drifting shot.
11771
Post by: gameandwatch
Tiz true in theidea, but in game terms how would you decide where the flame template starts? Thats a hard thing to come up with.
I feel as well that if they were to have any submunition, that would be the case. In my opinion, the only weapon in my eyes that makes sense have a blast characteristic is the ion canon. In a true sense, an ion cannon causes a sudden and violent destabilization of the particles within the ion stream, which in turn react in the form of a microsized fission reaction. In true terms, it would be like a .01 megaton nuke going off. But in game terms, I would settle for a H3 Blast weapon. Makes the ionhead far more appealing in my eyes...
6931
Post by: frgsinwntr
the way i see the tau... these are only my opinions
1) the tau are against close quarters fighting as a principle.
2) the tau are made to destroy things at range
the way 5th edition is played in competitive environements, they tau unfortunatly do not have the following:
a) a way to kill a very fast unit (bikers boosting, tough assault squads, tough units like blood crushers that are too close)
b) a way to get out of charge range (can't hide in fish all game and win...)
c) an effective counter assault unit to tie things up
the reasons for this are simple... they are over costed and as a result, undergunned.
tau can be fixed if they: (these are just somethings on a wishlist that could work...)
1) make firewarriors 7pts each and small targets(+1 cover save)
2) pulse carbines should be 2 shots each
3) make missile pods and bust cannons free for crisis suits, with reduced cost upgrades to their other weapons
4) make stealth teams a fast attack choice and 15pts per model
5) drop vespids to 10pts a model and 18 inch ranged guns.
6) give kroot assault 1 weapons instead of rapid fire
7) Broad sides always slow and purposeful
8) cheaper transports
9) drones not KPs
10) +1 weapon strength to fusion blasters (make the str 9 meltaguns)
11) ioncannons at str 7 AP3 blasts for free with the hammer head, upgrade for 20pts to the rail gun
12) IA options for the Hammer head
13) sniper drones in units of 3-12 with one spotter for each drone. 15pts per drone 10pts per spotter.
14) make plasma riffles assault 2
15) missile pods assault 3
16) built in multitrackers for suits (seriously... why don't they have this as standard! )
17) cheaper marker lights that are assault!
10279
Post by: focusedfire
Gamesandwatch-The template can be placed any where along the improved HH range as long as the large end doesn't exceed the max range.
I updated the HH Railgun to help distinguish it from the much smaller Broadside version and to leave the Tank more apoc capable(Something I noticed GW doing in the last few dex's).
Already on the Ion Weapons. Was a rough decision between Blast, EMP, or rending. I came up with a compromise.
The CIB is Range 18" Str4 AP4 Assault 4,EMP
(EMP-any armour penatration or to wound roll of a 6 counts as AP1.)
Broadside Ion Cannon:Range 36 Str6 AP4 Heavy2,Blast,Twin-linked,EMP
(Ion Cannon is so energy intensive that it can only be fired with the second weapons system if the Broadside did not move in that turn.)
HH Ion Cannon: Range 48" Str8 AP3 Heavy3, Blast, EMP
This may seem a little off untill viewed with the rest of the dex but I ask that you take a look and tell me what you think.
@frgsinwntr- In reply to your post, Pls keep in mind that this is only, IMO.
1&2 are no brainers and When Nova and I started our projects we both agreed that we should give the Tau extra means to avoid HtH but punishing them if they get caught.
I don't want to try to make this for tournies.
First, because this will be an unofficial fan-dex
Second, because trying to redo a 'dex in response to tourney needs will unbalance the army and leave it unable to respond to later releases.
1)Fire warriors are about the same size as humans, they are just modeled crouching. 7pts would make them into xenos guard. I want the Tau to remain distinctive and when I say distinctive I mean in an Eldar vs Tyranids way as opposed to a SM vs DA's.
2)Pulse carbine at 2 shots ea and the grenade laucher is too powerful. Even without the photon laucher it is still pushing it.
3)This is way OP. This is from the thought of overwhelming through model count as opposed to combined arms teamwork.
4) OP. 54 Str 5 ap5 shots with effective range 24" for 270 points. I would say that this defines broken but your next one gets that
5)Way OP. 30 str5 ap3 with effective range of 30" for 10pts ea = 300pts. This is the definition of broken.
6)Makes kroot too good without a trade off to balance.
7)Agreed and already done in the fan-dex with the bonus of buying A.S.S. gives them relentless
8)Don't think GW will ever do a Skimmer transport for under 75-80 pts. I'm going for improved transports in the same price range.
9)Agreed and already done in this Fan-dex. Was one of the first things covered in the other thread.
10) OP, also decided that range 18" fusions were OP.
11)Ion Cannon needs improving instead of being made cheaper. Was dropped 15 pts from 1st codex and now you want for free. You ask for too much. My version is going up to 35-ish points with the improved profile. Playtesting will set final cost.
12)Thought about them, None have a distinct enough purpose to replace the railgun. Think railguns and Ion cannons will keep Tau distinctive.
13)12 Sniper drones is to much for one controller. I've come up with a sick idea for them(Think predator long range drones . )
14)Plasma is fine as is
15)Missile pods do need a rework. I have gotten rid of them by combining with the sms into a new SMS weapon with select fire profile.
16) Gotta leave something for people to purchase and to have to make desicions about.
Think of this as a logistics issue. Some suits will be armed with only one weapon system. Not all suits need the multitracker
17)Markerlights at rapidfire and price should be same or higher if the system is improved to have an army wide effect.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
@frgsinwntr: Making Tau small targets just does not make sense as the average Tau is 6' (so they are midgets to marines only)
EMP for Ion weapons also just does not make sense as Ions react explosivley if forced on a target as they are more likley to knock of an entire electron shell, it should for each hit roll; 1,2,3 that hit becomes a blast (don't roll again) 4,5,6 rending
Actually Rending would fit railgun fluff even if a little OP as the worst pen roll is 12.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Please make Tau Str 5 Vehicle Weapons count as Defensive Weapons.
We need this to make our vehicles function like they are supposed too.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is sombody suggesting that Markerlights should be Rapid Fire or Assault?
That is just plain stupid!!!
I know a little about targeting lasers and they need to be very still for a fair amount of time. As long as the Markerlight is within a 6ft-7ft area of the target, the weapon will hit. To be that accurate the markerlight firer needs to be perfectly still.
Don't change it from Heavy, just improve what options the Markerlight gives you.
And rail gun ammo should be able to punch through all targets (except those with an armour value) within a straight line up to it's maximum range (or until it hits a target with an armour value). It's very fluffy and not at all broken. If it hits a Marine army - at most it'll skewer 3 Marines a Turn and the vehicle. Hordes it will skewer a lot more, but that is par to the course as you have more guys blocking the LOS to the target. A bolt moving at Mach 7+ won't be stopped by a Marine or even 3 Marines or several squishier bods. A Tank or Dread might stop it, but even then thats conjecture.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@Radiohazard-In the Fan-dex I reworked the SMS to where it has a lower powered soft launch for the "No-LOS" shot giving it a counts as defensive weapon rule. It also now has a higher powered shot that does not count as defensive.
Now to your appended message:
First, Chill dude. Please to be careful with the use of the word stupid ofr a variety of reasons.
Second, I was probably working with the M.I.L.E.S. system while you were in grades school.
Third, The Beam riding and SAHL systems are the closest things we have to what a much more advanced "fictional"alien race would use.
Fourth, The latest version of the Beam Riders and SAHLs are being worked on to achieve shorter "marking" times through faster(almost Instant) hand off to the missiles (and sometimes predators).
They are working on an internal multi-guidance system to facillitate where the FAC's only have to briefly paint the object before the second more intelligent and now faster guidance system locks on.
Think of it like this. A more advanced race has come up with a telemetry marking systems that "instantly" records the targets location, speed, direction, and energy signatures.
This information is simultaneously uploaded to a computerized battlefield awareness system that allows units to immediately access and make use of the telemetry.
The units are able to make use of this by being able to note the Tau specific energy signatures that were "painted" on the target.
Think of these energy signatures as thermal, energy, or radiation dots from a specific energy spectrum that are able to be spotted on the targets surface for a short period after having been painted.
As for the Railgun having the vibrocannon effect.
First, it intrudes upon eldar tech too much.
Second, Physics works against your thought process here. I agree it would blow through infantry but the problems that a Railshots are straight line, so to go through the infantry the shot would go into the dirt. Better to make it where any unit along the railshot trajectory has to take a pinning test.
Third, Physics again when dealing with vehicles.Angled surfaces on vehicles would still deflect the shot minutely but enough to where you can't say for sure that the shot would be in a perfectly straight line after ward.
@Krellnus-
About the EMP-Ion weapons are a fancy sci-fi way of saying electron particle gun. Ion weapons by nature would short out electrical systems due to that they are electromagnetic pulse weapons. Think of them as canned lightening if that helps. The EMP pulses usually contain hyper-accelerated particles. To get an idea of what this might mean, see if you can find footage of an electron gun being fired. It is amazing what a hyper accelerated electron can do.
I went the way that I did with the Ion Cannon due to that even by our current technology we know how to physically shield against EMP pulses but the shielding has to be intact. This is why I kept it limited down to the AP1. This represents the the Hyper accelerated electron particles extra punch and the possibility that they might damage the EMP shielding enough to cause extra damage to vehicles.
BTW,The problem with electron weapons is that they are short ranged, even when contained within a carrier beam. This is due to the negatively charged particles will try to attach to positively charged atoms. This make the Ions veer off course quickly. The only hope of actually making them work over longer distances would be to somehow strip the electrons off of the target before firing the Ion beam. This is why I reduced the range but upped the damage.
Now Rending on the Railgun does fit the fluff but is not necessary. Also, It would actually hurt the guns performance by dropping its AP down to 2.
8896
Post by: Timmah
Take away the need to take 1 fire warrior squad.
Make pathfinders troop choices.
And Tau are fixed.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
@focusedfire
I didn't mean stupid to sound harsh dude.
I'm also a lot older than most people think lol. OMG the big 30 looms over me soon LOL.
In regards to the Railgun effect I mentioned, I didn't actually think about elevation WOOPS.
I think that FWs should still be 1+, but Pathfinders should definately be a troops choice.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Timmah wrote:Take away the need to take 1 fire warrior squad.
Make pathfinders troop choices.
And Tau are fixed.
Ah, yet another spam post in this thread. And people wonder why it is the 2nd thread on the same topic...
(that in mind, if you have any thoughts for me regarding this Timmah, PM me please, let's keep the clutter down)
@FocusedFire, what are your thoughts on defensive weapons in this army? What weapons, and the better question: Will the current weapons for vehicles, aka, the Burst Cannon, remain the same Strength and gain a special rule, or be dropped in Strength to be in-line with defensive weapons from other armies?
The concept that I have always found very intriguing is this:
- A Devilfish with a front mounted Burst Cannon, and two Burst Cannons mounted in the drone slots. Fluff-wise, it would provide shorter-range firepower (24") comparable to a full Fire Warrior squad (9 shots are opposed to 12), that would cover the squad as it disembarked and took up positions.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@Che-Vito I'm adapting the vehicles to work better with the Tau philosophy.I'm going for better separation of transport and tanks through specific weapon availability.The changes so far are: 1)Transports will only be able to mount drones in their recesses. No more SMS for them. 2)Drones carried in recesses always count as defensive weapons. Even if bought with the vehicle the drones are always counted as part of the unit that purchased the vehicle and will embark and disembark with the purchasing unit. 3)Sky Ray and Devilfish may mount the following: Gun drones (including special weapon drones ),Marker Drones, or Sheild drones(Special ability to be announced). 4)The Devilfish burst cannon is being upgraded to a Heavy burst cannon Range 30" Str 6 AP 4 Heavy 3 (4?) 5)Hammerhead burst cannons are also being bumped up to the heavy version. 6) SMS-is now a combined version of the current SMS and Miss Pod with a select-fire option. The lower powered "Soft lanched" missile counts as defensive. To much to explain it all here but you should get the gist. I went this way with the transports because I want Fire Warriors to still be a fighting part of the Tau rather than just passengers. The design also stresses the interconnectivity of the Tau while maintaining that certain units have distinct purposes. On another note, I was reading through the BRB and got the distinct impression that the Dis Pod may be getting nerfed in the next codex. I was reading the Smoke grenade launcher rules and they gave me the sinking feeling that rather than getting more expensive that they may instead just stay the same price and become electronic versions of the Smoke launchers. Not saying that it will happen, just got the feeling that it might. Because of this I'm going to examine the ways that the DP could be nerfed and see if I can adapt the Tau to the possible loss. Tell me what you think and ask away if you have any more questions about the Fan-dex.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Actually I disagree in that S5 weapons should be defensive for Tau, I mean think about it even in current ed, for 5 or 10 points (can't remember) we can have our vehicle shooting like a fast vehicle so what is the point?
18312
Post by: Lacross
the point is to have FOF(fish of fury) move 12" and unload both SMS(Smart Missile Sys.) and BC(burst cannon)
18427
Post by: radiohazard
Hey focused fire, have you thought about changing the BS of the Fire Caste depending on their rank???
Shas'la BS 3
Shas'ui BS 3
XV8 Shas'ui BS 4
Shas'vre BS 4
Shas'el BS 5
Shas'o BS 6
Also I thought of something a little mad...
Firewarriors
Special Rule - Firing Line.
If a unit of Firewarriors that was stationary in their last turn is charged by an enemy unit, the Firewarriors may each fire as normal instead of attacking in close combat or using defensive grenades. These shots are taken after the attacking models have charged, but before close combat attacks are made. All casualties count towards combat resolution. If a unit that always strikes first charges the firewarrior unit using firing line, the firewarriors get to shoot after close combat attacks have been resolved.
11771
Post by: gameandwatch
Interesting idea radiohazard, although this kinda conflicts with the tau Ideal of always flight to serve the greater good. Plus, how would that count initiatively? kinda confuses things. Oh, and just to clarify FF, even a railgun shot passing by a person, within 4-6 feet would kill them, as the sudden pressure change and sonic boom created by the shell would cause the skull to rupture. Hense why you see in test firings of today's railguns, the round passes through the target, shortly followed by a compression wave that smashes the target.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
gameandwatch wrote:Interesting idea radiohazard, although this kinda conflicts with the tau Ideal of always flight to serve the greater good. Plus, how would that count initiatively? kinda confuses things. Oh, and just to clarify FF, even a railgun shot passing by a person, within 4-6 feet would kill them, as the sudden pressure change and sonic boom created by the shell would cause the skull to rupture. Hense why you see in test firings of today's railguns, the round passes through the target, shortly followed by a compression wave that smashes the target.
It's all there dude...
The Firewarriors fire before combat attacks are made, unless a unit that always strikes first is attacking.
Initiative doesn't really come into it.
3872
Post by: paidinfull
@Radio
Your "firing line" suggestion is essentially giving Tau FW I10 S5 A2 attacks that always hit on 4+.
Fluff wise I understand where you are going, but in application I completely disagree with this idea. This is also counter to the OP and the majority of the consensus on this thread that Tau should NOT be good at HTH.
I'm sure your logic will include, well it's a "shooting attack", but it's most certainly is not. It's a concept identical to 2nd & 3rd edition Scorpions who's mandiblaster fired a single S4 AP5 shot @+2I.
The biggest issue with mixing shooting & close combat is it adds unnecessary complexity. For example Yriel's blast is a shooting attack that occurs in HTH. I can't tell you the number of arguments that have surfaced from this. What if my save in HTH is better than my normal, a la Wyches or older Storm Shields? How does that work? It's best to keep it simple and not mix the two. Sorry for the kibosh but... no.
10279
Post by: focusedfire
@gamesandwatch- Your statement about the pressure wave follows a common misperception or exaggeration as to how destructive the pressure wave would be. I know it isn't very cinematic, but a railgun shot would typically produce no more of a pressure wave than a lightening strike. It has to do with frontal cross sections versus length and the basic nature of pressure waves. Here are a couple of sites that have the basic theory:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/FactSheets/FS-016-DFRC.html
http://www.answers.com/topic/sonic-boom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonic_boom
This is why I feel that any units allong the line of the shot would, at most, need to take pinning tests if I were going to do a Vibro Cannon type rule. I think that the railguns, as I have them, are fine and I really don't want to add complexity of additional vibro cannon type effects. One of the reasons I started this was an attempt to clarify and streamline certain rules.
@radio- I am advancing the BS every other rank because to advance every rank reduces the need for inter unit cooperation and removes the need for markerlights. Your list is close but there are differences due to a more realistic rank advancement. It now goes like this:
Shas'la-BS3
Shas'Ui-BS3
XV15 Shas'Ui-BS3(Because they are the same rank as regular Shas'Ui and are getting used to battlesuit weapos systems)
Shas'Vre-BS4(Crisis teams are now Shas'vre only with the option of a Shas' el team lead)
Shas' el-BS4 (Now bodyguards and crisis/broadside/stealth team leaders)
Shas'O-BS5
Shadow sun is now BS6.
Markers will be able to boost BS by +1 but is now able to boost above BS5
Now, your firing line idea is good but I had already decided against something very much like it for a couple of very good reasons.
1) GW has some basic rule tenets that even they will not break on a large scale. Your rule is something that they might give a special character but never to a whole army.
2)Anytime shooting in cc has ever come up it has met with an overwhelming amount of resisntance and hatred. There are already enough whom blindly hate the Tau army because it is to different from the other grimdark armies.
3)Paidinfull said it, already. To paraphrase, in my own wrods, it adds a level of complexity that I am not going to attempt to take on when GW is backing away from the concept.
4)I have a rule in place that follows GW precedent. My Fire Caste Doctrines(formerly know as guerilla tactics) rule is a weaker but more flexible version of the SM chapter tactics rule.
Reason for number 3) IMO, GW usually gives Xenos armies different(weaker but more numerous or stronger but more limited) versions of "certain" weapons or abilities that the SM or Imperium may have. This is done in an attempt to give the xenos armies personality while maintaining the thought that those weapons or abilities are universal and only vary according to differing technologies.
I also feel that this goes against the Tau philosophy of not holding any point in particular. That when the enemy gets that close they bug out.
Sorry, not trying to dump on the idea. Just trying to show that it was considerd very early on and the philosophy of why I decided against this type of rule in the Fan-dex that I'm writing.
@Krellnus-I don't feel that returning some short ranged secondary Str 5 weapons to their intended purpose is a huge problem. Especially in that they are being balanced by availability and cost.
My doing this also has more to do with a rule that GW has that makes no sense. It is the rule where a transport moves 12" and passengers can't fire but when that same transport and unit move 12" and unload the unit can suddenly fire.
IMO,Drones should be able to fire from their recesses if the vehicle moved up to 12" and they are using their own BS. Please remember that the burst cannons on the HH are not going to be defensive and the SMS is getting revamped with a select fire whith good reasons why one shot is not defensive and the other is.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
I mentioned Doctrines before in the previous thread - will they be taking the form of ways of battle - Kauyon and Mont'ka + the other ways that are flying about???
10279
Post by: focusedfire
^Fire Caste Doctrine will be an army wide special rule. It will incorporate several army wide policies that will will in some ways enhance and in other ways limit the Tau. To some extent this is done for balance but the primary reason is to help define the Tau Armies playstyle.
Kauyon and Mont'ka will be according to your build type. I'm trying for generic commanders that will lean a little towards each style without excluding the other philosophy. There will also be a commander choice that is equally good for both styles.
18427
Post by: radiohazard
focusedfire wrote:^Fire Caste Doctrine will be an army wide special rule. It will incorporate several army wide policies that will will in some ways enhance and in other ways limit the Tau. To some extent this is done for balance but the primary reason is to help define the Tau Armies playstyle.
Kauyon and Mont'ka will be according to your build type. I'm trying for generic commanders that will lean a little towards each style without excluding the other philosophy. There will also be a commander choice that is equally good for both styles.
Kool, I'm really looking fwd to the fandex. If you want, I'd like to offer my services as a proof reader. I'm not saying that your writing sucks, but two sets of eyes are better than one and I am a writer myself.
Just throwing the idea in there.
3250
Post by: Prodigalson
Just found the thread, sorry I've missed it until now. Long time Tau player. Take a look at my army profile in my sig if you like.
Anyway, I love the concepts at the beginning... the statement of intent if you will. Gave a read through the profile and while I do not intend to address a line by line situation, I wanted to just mention some thoughts I've had. I'll try to join in more as the thread progresses.
Ethereals - They are presently garbage. I ran one with no other commander in 3.0 but come the 4.0 codex, I dropped him. His rule needs to NOT be LOS based any more as it is now, and Price of Failure shouldn't be so damageing, if it's in at all. With all of the plethera of ways to get to HTH quickly (Heroic Intervention, the Orc character, Space Wolf Scouts, Sly Marbo etc...) It's almost impossible to prevent him from dying. Until his upside is lower then his downside, he's garbage.
Crisis Suits - They were point costs at 25 pts in the old LOS rules. I understand the theory of not lowering their costs, but they have been lowered in ability. The JSJ is almost not as good in some situation as a basic jump pack (we do get the relentless rule) but in general I thought this needed a points decrease on that level alone.
Morale - This is a problem in general, for the entire list. Every other army out there has some way to control or modify leadership. Box Casters, ATSKF, Mark of Chaos, Mob Rule etc... but Tau. We have ld7 or 8 wth an upgrade. I think we need some type of rule that may spring from an ethereal that allows us a bit more control over our LD.
Troops - The bread and butter these days. Tau fire warriors are only safe in transports, and that isn't going to change as I see it at the moment, unless we get cheaper. Low toughness middle of the road armor and our point cost is not good enough to be our standard unit. Devilfish also need a significant lowering in points, possible around 50 pts or lower. It's better then a Rhino, but not as good as a chimera (better side armor, but not as good weapon, no fire points). in the alternative I love that you changed the stats on the burst cannon on the fish. It's SO much bigger, it should be better.
Kroot - Like kroot, but they need a way to actually stick around in HTH. I think they are a good unit for 7 pts, but when anyone hits them and kills a few, they break, and are run down. Useless as a speed bump till they can actually TAKE a charge.
Pathfinders - I like that you seperated the vehicle from the unit. Unless they are going to ingerate the two better, they should be seperate.
Gun Drones - Loved what you did to them, the integrated squad was great.
Vespid - I see you made an elite unit. I honestly think that is unrealistic. I understand that it's a fan-codex but I think we should try and stick with models that exist or are likely to exist. Vespid are ok rules wise, but should be a lot cheaper. 16 pts is to high. I do like the rending rule that I saw floating around, but I think it won't work with tau, too good for hth. I'd like to see vespid with enoug OOMPh to shoot a 10 man marine squad, then assault them, and kill them. Right now they hit 5, wound 3, then assault and eventually die. Also stubborn isn't a bad rule for them.
Hammerhead - I saw that you had the base tank at 50pts, that's way to low IMHO. It's better then the predator as a base tank (pred is armor 11 on the sides, we are a 12) and a skimmer. I hope it's 50pts, that amazing. Someone said earlier that str 5 shouldn't be defensive for tau. I think that should just be a rule. We should be able to move 6 (12 with markerlight) and fire everything. It gives us back our mobility, and ups the mobile firepower. Makes the warfish good again, and the hammerhead great. No more lumbering around at six inches to fire your weapons, we can zoom around finally at 12 and do it.
Broadsides - I really really believe that the Tau Codex will see a new crisis suit sprue, and an all plastic broadside. If that happens, I bet they get an alternate gun to the railgun, and the crisis suit gets a new weapon. I like the idea of the Heavy Ion Rifle, but honestly, let's just make it an Ion Cannon. If the broadside can mount a twin linked railgun, let it mount a twin linked ion cannon. The crisis suits would do well with a 36 inch range, Str 5, ap3 heavy 2 ion rifle, or something like that. I saw that the rail rifle was added as a suit design, I like that.
Also I see that you put in the Remora Drone fighter. I agree that a forgeworld model needs to be in the lineup, but I don't think it will be the remora. I don't think we need more gun drones. I think we need a plastic barricua. Good size and a flyer (like the valk) with a fast attack ion cannon for maybe... less then 100 pts? The valk is better and is around that amount. Make it fast skimmer, with gun drones, ion cannon etc... now that would be a fast attack choice that got people excited.
Just my two cents. Love the thread, and keep up the good work.
13678
Post by: EasyE
Any army could manage something as exceedingly simple as a "firing line" why would Tau get it and not any other army? Let alone on one of the more basic troops in the game. There is also the matter that it would make CC units pretty pointless balance wise.
Fire Warriors are one of the best troop choices available for their cost, it just comes down to the matter of application and some not-too-difficult tactics when it comes to keeping them around. Their base gun is amazing with a high strength and range. Yea, their toughness is 'average' but they have a decent save I don't see much to complain about here.
A Bonding Knife is a cheap way to get a small edge when it comes to keeping a squad together, available to almost every squad so I don't understand the leadership argument.
Something I would like to see is removing the 1+ Commander Suit, if an Etheral was around there isn't much reason a guy in a suit would have to be. I do think the Fire Warriors needs to stay 1+ because it keeps people from making all kroot armies, which is important fluff wise.
I like the idea of separating pathfinders from their devilfish requirement. Though pathfinders as troops would be fairly unbalancing.
3250
Post by: Prodigalson
Ever tried holding an objective with a squad of fire warriors?
It's not that normally they are a bad unit, they were fine in 4.0.
The problem is that they start on the board with giant kill markings on them. The opponent knows that if you kill them (and charge anything into the kroot) then the game is over, Tau can't hold the objectives.
I just don't want to see our future as simply 6 man fire warrior squads hiding in fish. I'd like them either to be able to stand and hold an objective (more survivable) or cheaper so I don't care as much.
9158
Post by: Hollismason
Focusedfire ansa your PMs.
I am milling about a Fandex right now for tau. No vast changes just point reductions and the inclusion of Kroot Mercenary army as well as most of the stuff from Imperial Armoury but updated.
Right now I am at a Empasse.
I want to include Human troops as well but with some differing rules to make them useful.
Basically it works
1 HQ command Squad ;
I cant decide either
1 Human Commander + 4 veterans w/ Options
or
Human Commander
4 Tau Shas O or something.
Anyway this is what i have worked out fluff wise and rule wise.
The only weapons accessible are melta, flamer, Laser.
Melta - if you read the meltagun description from the old rules etc it actually never runs out of ammo it has a fusion reactor basically.
Flamer = Promethium is easy to come by and mine somewhat in the Tau area
Laser = rechargeable no need to manufacture shells.
So basically by taking the Humans it gives Tau Access to Flamers, Lasers , and meltaguns.
So in order to take a Human Auxillary you would have to take :
HQ - Command Squad ; option of Chimera not Devilfish. a Mixture of Tau Weaponry to a degree ( no gun drones or anything ) Chimera only has access to Multilaser or hull lascannon or flamer.
ELites
0-1
Veteran Squad :
This is the one I liked that was nifty I wanted to represent that the Veterans have to a degree have access to Tau weaponry but still maintain imperial weapons as well.
SGT. but have access to purchase a Fire Warrior Caste Shaso to lead.
Give them the option of 3 skills
Infiltrate and Stealth
Tank Hunter
Armoured Strike Force ( deep strike and something similar to Stormtroopers)
Access to Flamers , two can form weapons team with Lascannon , Multilaser or Flamer .
Purchase Pulse Carbines replacing lasguns.
Then
Platoon 1
1 - 2 Infantry
0 - 2 H. Weapons
Elite :
Sentinels
h. flamer , multilaser, lascannon
H. Support
none
Basically the buy in you have to structure it like the old 2nd edition rules where a Command HQ gave you X then X gave you Y.
So there is a step buy in to what you can have.
9230
Post by: Trasvi
I'm not sure that you are still thinking about the idea, but Railguns should definitely retain some form of submunition shot. I'm not sure if you have seen the US military propaganda show "Future weapons" but they had a cool section about railguns. Basically they are considering the ability for the round to be able to 'fracture' into little flechettes, "in order to take out light targets such as infantry, light vehicles or planes". Whether that is done with an explosive, or some other very cool devices they have (electrical devices that use the spin of the bullet relative to the earth's magnetic field to determine the distance they have travelled from the barrel of the gun until they need to explode) it would still be viable to have submunitions.
But also - don't get too hung up on physics. A railgun would never be mounted on a hover tank (or man-mounted) due to recoil. If a railgun DID hit something, it would suffer Instant Death. Technically, the terms 'rail rifle', 'plasma rifle' and 'pulse rifle' make zero sense. 'Plasma' would be as effective as firing steam at someone.... so yeah, physics shouldn't get in the way of fun.
Have you considered adding a Battlesuit Transport? something Valkyrie sized that could pick up 3 battlesuits and race them 24" across the field could be deadly, enhance the mobility playstyle and add some very interesting tactics when moving broadsides to the flanks of the enemy.
Or perhaps a supression gunship? Stealing from a helicopter style, something that could deliver painful amounts of burst cannon/missile pod/CiB death into the enemy.
What about a medic-type drone or transport? Shas'O in Stealth/Broadside suits (or on foot with the troops)?
Or, in reference to the 'Stand and Shoot' style option listed above - say the Tau had to pass an initiative test, and only got one shot each (so your squad of 12 would only shoot 4 times and get roughly one casualty)? Or leave that option for Ethereal bodyguards?
Just throwing ideas out there.
16988
Post by: mattv2099
frgsinwntr wrote:
the way 5th edition is played in competitive environements, they tau unfortunatly do not have the following:
a) a way to kill a very fast unit (bikers boosting, tough assault squads, tough units like blood crushers that are too close)
b) a way to get out of charge range (can't hide in fish all game and win...)
c) an effective counter assault unit to tie things up
!
a) Mark the fast unit with pathfinders. Then have your 10 XV8 crisis shoot their plasma and missile pods at them. Then have your HH and XV88's shoot at them. Most likely they'll be dead or close to it.
b) Surround your units with Kroot.
c) Do the math. Kroot are amazing.
18009
Post by: rogueeyes
Kroot are amazing like a horde is amazing. Kroot individually suck. They are a counter attack unit that has no staying power unless it is in a forest. Rolling tons of dice is great. Losing 8 guys because you have no armor save (or it sucks) and running off the board because of a low leadership sucks.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Trasvi wrote:'Plasma' would be as effective as firing steam at someone....
If that stream is 15million degrees Celsius then yes, that is exactly what it is like.
19251
Post by: Gold tooth Jerry
i do disagree with OP. I do feel we need a Upgrade to certain units. I mean some of these other ideas are huge and some more important than what I have to say, however I feel we need upgrade to vespid, they need more armor and jet pack equivalent for there wings, or something for the high point cost and terrible survivability. Second, I feel that Kroot need some more upgrades. Say more of a merge between the Tau technology and kroot primal. This is forgeworld, but get frustrated with the armor save of great knarloc, anyway I would like to see a power claw type crisis suit. While I am on suits, I would like to see the hq merely be in the crisis suit, and his suit decide his roll. I dont know ethereal in a crysis suit or at least in some kind of force bubble. Why isnt the XV22 a working suit yet in the codex. Seem very popular in the lore, but all we have is 1 tau in a xv22 that not all of use use and still not able to use it as elite or put it on other hqs. Ethereals need a big upgrade for there huge probable penalty of your army running off the table in the middle of fight. On this point i agree with OP, because why cant they or a shaso call in a drop or orbital bombarbment or something utilizing the air or earth cast which most fluff lore goes with. It just doesnt make sense. All my shaso are good for is walking out and shooting stuff. I mean if anything acts like a leader its the ethereal but for the point cost +bodyguard and huge probable penalty. This is a side not but seekers missles need an upgrade or at least freaking automatic hits and wounds. I mean you have to have it marklighted and then it has to roll to wound and with possible saves for a cost of say 2.4 firewarriors and its 1 shot. Why games work shop why. I mean it could have atleast been twinlinked for wounds or be able to do a pie template or something besides what we have. I like many of my fellow tau players is upset with the almost copy and past with more questions, so called 5th edition codex we got. I mean some of our wargear is useless and others the wording is terrible. Seems like all that games workshop can pump out is more UN NEEDED SPACE MARINE CHAPTER CODEX............   Finally, Dont give us a codex just to keep us happy. Put some love and sweat in it, and everyone will praise games workshop for it. Give a codex to those that need a codex if your not going to do it right. I.e. necrons or even better dark eldar
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Gold tooth Jerry wrote:i do disagree with OP. I do feel we need a Upgrade to certain units. I mean some of these other ideas are huge and some more important than what I have to say, however I feel we need upgrade to vespid, they need more armor and jet pack equivalent for there wings, or something for the high point cost and terrible survivability. Second, I feel that Kroot need some more upgrades. Say more of a merge between the Tau technology and kroot primal. This is forgeworld, but get frustrated with the armor save of great knarloc, anyway I would like to see a power claw type crisis suit. While I am on suits, I would like to see the hq merely be in the crisis suit, and his suit decide his roll. I dont know ethereal in a crysis suit or at least in some kind of force bubble. Why isnt the XV22 a working suit yet in the codex. Seem very popular in the lore, but all we have is 1 tau in a xv22 that not all of use use and still not able to use it as elite or put it on other hqs. Ethereals need a big upgrade for there huge probable penalty of your army running off the table in the middle of fight. On this point i agree with OP, because why cant they or a shaso call in a drop or orbital bombarbment or something utilizing the air or earth cast which most fluff lore goes with. It just doesnt make sense. All my shaso are good for is walking out and shooting stuff. I mean if anything acts like a leader its the ethereal but for the point cost +bodyguard and huge probable penalty. This is a side not but seekers missles need an upgrade or at least freaking automatic hits and wounds. I mean you have to have it marklighted and then it has to roll to wound and with possible saves for a cost of say 2.4 firewarriors and its 1 shot. Why games work shop why. I mean it could have atleast been twinlinked for wounds or be able to do a pie template or something besides what we have. I like many of my fellow tau players is upset with the almost copy and past with more questions, so called 5th edition codex we got. I mean some of our wargear is useless and others the wording is terrible. Seems like all that games workshop can pump out is more UN NEEDED SPACE MARINE CHAPTER CODEX............ Finally, Dont give us a codex just to keep us happy. Put some love and sweat in it, and everyone will praise games workshop for it. Give a codex to those that need a codex if your not going to do it right. I.e. necrons or even better dark eldar
In the name of all that is good...punctuation!!!
19251
Post by: Gold tooth Jerry
Dont quote me just to tell me to put in punctuation. Its not an english paper its a forum post, and a post i happen to feel passionate about so.....
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Gold tooth Jerry wrote:Dont quote me just to tell me to put in punctuation. Its not an english paper its a forum post, and a post i happen to feel passionate about so.....
Alright, I will break your post down. Part of the problem, is that when you write so "passionately", as you put it, it makes it hard to read as well as making others unwilling to read it in the first place.
Gold tooth Jerry wrote:i do disagree with OP. I do feel we need a Upgrade to certain units. I mean some of these other ideas are huge and some more important than what I have to say, however I feel we need upgrade to vespid, they need more armor and jet pack equivalent for there wings, or something for the high point cost and terrible survivability. Second, I feel that Kroot need some more upgrades. Say more of a merge between the Tau technology and kroot primal. This is forgeworld, but get frustrated with the armor save of great knarloc, anyway
State clearly why you disagree with the Original Poster, it was lost in the clutter of what you wrote.
Gold tooth Jerry wrote:I would like to see a power claw type crisis suit. While I am on suits, I would like to see the hq merely be in the crisis suit, and his suit decide his roll. I dont know ethereal in a crysis suit or at least in some kind of force bubble. Why isnt the XV22 a working suit yet in the codex. Seem very popular in the lore, but all we have is 1 tau in a xv22 that not all of use use and still not able to use it as elite or put it on other hqs.
Power claw, and the Tau, just doesn't meld well or make sense. You quote "the lore" several times in your posting, and having Close Combat oriented Crisis-suits is entirely contrary to the fluff that you and I both like.
Gold tooth Jerry wrote:Ethereals need a big upgrade for there huge probable penalty of your army running off the table in the middle of fight. On this point i agree with OP, because why cant they or a shaso call in a drop or orbital bombarbment or something utilizing the air or earth cast which most fluff lore goes with.
Agreed. Ethereals needs a reworking, Orbital Bombardment would be nice, but there are other options.
Gold tooth Jerry wrote:This is a side not but seekers missles need an upgrade or at least freaking automatic hits and wounds. I mean you have to have it marklighted and then it has to roll to wound and with possible saves for a cost of say 2.4 firewarriors and its 1 shot.
Agreed. I have a feeling seeker missiles won't be touched much in the next Tau Codex though, making them about as useful as Imperial Hunter-Killer missiles...
18213
Post by: starbomber109
Tactics wise you know what tau need? An open topped transport!
But I can't figure out why the tau would build an open topped transport...it doesn't suit them at all. My brain can't even envision what a Tau open topped transport would look like...
Maybe the kroot will get one. [of course, then it'd be made 'kroot only' :( ]
18662
Post by: atropos907
Changes I would propose.
Keep the cost of most things the same with the exceptions as noted below.
BS of 3 is fine for most warriors because marines have been around for flipping forever whereas tau are short lived.
Seekers should be a small blast with the same damage stats or should be allowed to fire multiple seekers at a target for a single ML hit.
Target arrays should be included as wargear for suits because the device would likely not occupy a weapons slot but be integrated into the suit.
Suits can be upgraded with emergency photon flash packs as wargear for 3pts per suit(all or none). acts as a photon grenade when assaulted. Because seriously, the lowly troop can protect himself but the elite suits cannot.
====SPecial issue: time has passed and some equipment has been cleared for "general" use while new systems have entered the special issue roster.
==General listed:
Irridium armor and stim injectors should not be special issue but should be only issuable to vre's and higher. as they have earned the right through their proven commitment.
vectored thrusters should be issuable to all in a squad of jump capable suits(all or none) This is in keeping with the tau's desire to get the heck out of CC. Vectored retros may not be combined with stims or iridium armor since the armor weighs too much for the vectored mobility and we shouldn't stim and fly. This prevents overpowered stacking.
Vectored thrusters also convey skilled flyer.
Ejection systems in suits is silly, its a suit and the tau barely fit in it already. delisted.
==Special issue
A suit Ion discharger for 15pts. Is a support system (special issue). Acts similar to flechet but its use denies the user the ability make attacks in the assault phase as it consumes a large ammount of energy from the suits power supply. Can be fired once per assault turn and hits all models assaulting that unit or its team. All enemy models suffer a 4+ wound. on a wound roll of 6 the wound counts as AP1.
A redeployment booster pack for 20pts. Is a support system(special issue). The equipped suit( and any drones) who has no team members and is not joined with another unit may fire the booster redeploying in that movement phase by the deep strike rules for position scatter. Counts as deep striking and thus may shoot but not move or assault and gains the benefits of any deep strike special equipment.
==General upgrades
General upgrades may not be combined. An etheral or Shas'O is required in the list as their charisma and experience help in the specialized traning of the troops.
Greater good Iconic training. If an etheral or Shas'O is in the army, for 1pt per (troop, drone, Pathfinder, sniper) and 3pts per suit(non vehical) all tau(non ally) become fearless.
Kauyon Traning. If an etheral or Shas'O is in the army for 1pt per (troop, drone, Pathfinder, sniper) or 2pts per suit all tau(non ally) all tau troops gain the stealth special rule allowing +1 to their cover saves and infiltration. All suits gain +1 to their cover saves. all vehicals at 5pts per vehical also gain +1 to their cover saves.
Mont'ka Traninig. If an etheral or Shas'O is in the army for 2pts per (troop, drone, Pathfinder, sniper) and 8pts per suit or vehicle(XV, BS, HH, Pirahna etc) all tau(non ally or drone) gain a +1 to their BS(limit BS5)
====Markerlight
It is absurd that you need multiple ML's to give multiple squads or seekers the ability to improve their aim on a single target. The laser is still on target, it didnt get used in the shooting since all shooting is simultaneous. To help balance a ML hit means anyone who can may shoot with a BS improvement of +1 only(up to 5). Just because twice the laser intensity is on target does not mean your better at shooting at it. However ML's no longer stack for BS purposes. ML it 5 times and its still +1BS. However they do stack for moral purposes(I have multiple dots on me... crap) and automatically apply to moral checks even if used for weapon improvement ( again how did the laser get consumed on firing).
A ML hit may be used for improving the aim of the entire army at the single target or instead may be used to call seeker missles (any number of missles may use a single ML designator but the number must be declared before any seeker hits are resolved) This is because different pulse modulations are used to coordinate targeting vs calling in a seeker strike.
edit: Lets make it clear that a ML that hits may not be armor or invuln saved against. However cover saves do apply as the target may be partially concealed by a tree and the designator designates the tree instead.
====drones
MLDrones should be allowed to fire ML's (relentless enabled)if moved as they are so bloody expensive anyway and its a drone, its always hovering even if it belongs to troops. Right now the US military has target tracking abilities that exceed the tau in a servo'ed gimble mounted designator. Thats silly that the tau don't have this same ability. sure a troop jars the designator but a drone glides smoothly.
A heavy drone can be taken instead of two normal drones (meaning a drone controller may only control one heavy drone) for 25 pts
A heavy drone option may replace its weaponry with an area effect shield that will protect the entire squad to which it belongs from weapons fire for a cost of 35 pts for the drone. again thats a 4+ inv save.
====Stealth suits
should be able to carry additional small weaponry.
option to carry grenade launcher fittable with EMP or photon grenade, 12 inche range, in addition to normal weapon for a cost of 3pts photon and 5pts emp. This fits the role of the stealth suit as it helps them not get attacked if spotted and allows their elite status to attack tanks. Can fire in parallel with other weapon at the same target.
Can replace BC with flamer(all) fusion(leader) or rail rifle(leader)
edit: The stealth field generator should convey the stealth special rule to suits and drones, meaning they get a +1 to their cover etc etc.
====FW and pathfinders
Pulse carbines allow the option of firing photon or EMP grenades 12 inches.
This means a carbine carrier gets photon grenades for free. I think this balances the lack of RF.
EMP grenade firing must be at the same target as the pulse shot, just as the photon grenade supposedly already works giving troops something that can hurt a tank close up for +3 pts. All carbine carriers in a group must upgrade if one does.
Pathfinders are well trained at target designation and so automatically have a target lock to make up for the no stacking of ML's for targeting purposes.
Drop the cost of the pathfinder dedicated transport by 10 pts or perhaps allow it a stealth field generator for 110 pts base cost. This option only extends to a pathfinder dedicated transport.
====Hammerhead
Ok, so a BS can fire not one but two railguns S10 AP1 from what a suit can carry...
A hammer head can fire just one such RG... you can fit 12 combat ready troops in that tubs belly but an ammo changer and power supply for a single RG takes the space of 12 troops! or is the extra armor all in the troop bay?
I would propose an upgradable RG that costs 60pts but its S10AP1 version fires two rounds. Not twinlinnked but two actual shots per turn. All that extra equipment is for a faster loader on the primary round and double the energy capacity of a BS to fire two consecutive rounds. But in such a turn the tank may not move due to the energy being diverted.
All that extra power storage in a hammer head should be deliverable to the engines. In such a turn the HH can count as fast if it chooses to fire no weapon systems.
18213
Post by: starbomber109
Ok, I think I've got it.
Sailfin Light Transport
Open Topped, Fast, AV10, skimmer
Transport capacity 8 (so, enough for a minimal squad of fire warriors+drones, but not enough for a huge mob rapid firing something to death)
Special Rules: Turbo Boosters, Drone Ports
Drone Ports: Any drones that a squad carries, may be treated as vehcile weapons.
(The vehicle only comes with a single S5 gun itself though. If you want a comparison of the type of vehicle, think of a Huey hellicopter, the transports that the us Army used back in the 60s.)
6993
Post by: Wraithlordmechanic
starbomber109 wrote:Ok, I think I've got it.
Sailfin Light Transport
Open Topped, Fast, AV10, skimmer
Transport capacity 8 (so, enough for a minimal squad of fire warriors+drones, but not enough for a huge mob rapid firing something to death)
Special Rules: Turbo Boosters, Drone Ports
Drone Ports: Any drones that a squad carries, may be treated as vehcile weapons.
(The vehicle only comes with a single S5 gun itself though. If you want a comparison of the type of vehicle, think of a Huey hellicopter, the transports that the us Army used back in the 60s.)
I think this is kinda cool but is it 8+ drones or 6+ drones? because with the former you'll be putting DE to shame. Come to think of it the latter probably would too.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Ok here is something I just thought up;
Rapid Insertion Guidance Thrusters
When any Crisis or Stealth suit deploys with deepstrike special rule they do so with the following:
They may re-roll any dangerous terrain tests in the same way as skilled fliers and may always force their opponent to re-roll the deepstrike mishap table result however the second result stands even if it is worse.
18506
Post by: A Lictor... BLOR!!!
I want to see markerlights do just 3 things: -
1 to cover saves, TL any shots at targetted unit, seeker missles autohit from direction of markerlight. None of this unnecessary counters and crap.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
I concur.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Hi all, I'm a new Tau player and just thought I would post some of my impressions after getting stomped, repeatedly, by nurgle marines....
For a shooty army, Tau do not seem to do it very well. I get marker drones but making an entire army dependant upon something that must be purchased seems a bit wrong. Possibly include a marker drone with each full squade of FW or just up their BS to 4. One possible addendum would be to allow pulse rifles to rapid fire at half-range instead of the rule-based 12" since the rule seems to be based on the average 24" range.
The leadership of the army is not really in keeping with the fluff. Why is their LD so low when they all follow "the greater good", the concept of group over individual. I would recommend a new rule called "stand and fight" (if one doesn't already exist). If tau are charged in hth, they get a bonus to leadership or ignore penalties from losses as their diehard spirit won't allow them to run off and leave their brethren to fight alone.
There are not enough low AP weapons for an army that is entirely focused on shooting the enemy. You would think that if all they do is shoot, they would have some advanced infantry weapons to show for it. Maybe allowing squad leaders to have rail rifles or something like mobile heavy weapons platforms like eldar or IG. If IG can have platform las cannons, why can't the tau have platform railguns?
Troop choices are severely limited. FWs are just too vanilla and need some options instead of just with grenade or without grenade.
I really like the idea of purchasing tactics, as someone mentioned in an earlier post. The tau have different doctrine governing the flavor of their fights, why not formalize this by creating purchasable tactics that confer relevant bonuses?
Why is a vehicle, devilfish; shooting the same weapon as a foot slogger? S5 AP5? Really? For being so big on the model, it sure doesn't pack much of a punch.
I love the versatility of crisis suits and don't feel they're too expensive but they need better gear as mentioned above (too high AP on most ranged weapons).
The army really needs some tweaking and I hate how GW just throws out a set of new rules without first making sure the army books are ready to go.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Well, you seem to have added a perspective that no-one has seemed to consider, what NEW players think needs to be changed with the Tau.
Btw, the Devilfish Burst Cannon is no bigger than the Crisis Suit one.
21196
Post by: agnosto
Krellnus wrote:Well, you seem to have added a perspective that no-one has seemed to consider, what NEW players think needs to be changed with the Tau.
Btw, the Devilfish Burst Cannon is no bigger than the Crisis Suit one.
Yep, you're right but it's still bigger (and looks meaner) than the FW weapon and for the same damage. Why would crisis suits have to purchase a BC when FWs get an equivalent for free? Yes, I know the heavy version gets extra attacks but still it's not worth the pts cost for an extra shot per turn (assuming rapid fire for FW weapon).
Just saying. 
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Yes I can see what people mean, maybe because of that they should make pinning at an auto -1 ld because its like rawr scary machine gun rawr!
19445
Post by: Warboss Gutrip
I think that FW should be 8pts. For some reason, ages ago when I first heard of Tau, I was told that FW were 8pts. I did not find this broken, and they are overpriced as is, so should prove good.
Markerlights should stay the same, but I would consider an increase in range, as they are less useful that they should be in large-scale games such as apocalypse.
Finally, Tau need a 'named' Kroot character as well AS un-named and customisable master shapers/grand ethereals. Also, a buff for the Space Pope, please!
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Warboss Gutrip wrote:I think that FW should be 8pts. For some reason, ages ago when I first heard of Tau, I was told that FW were 8pts. I did not find this broken, and they are overpriced as is, so should prove good.
Markerlights should stay the same, but I would consider an increase in range, as they are less useful that they should be in large-scale games such as apocalypse.
Finally, Tau need a 'named' Kroot character as well AS un-named and customisable master shapers/grand ethereals. Also, a buff for the Space Pope, please!
I tend to agree with the Original Poster's thought of keeping the Fire Warriors the same point cost, but making them worth it! (mostly, to keep it competitive, I think that would just entail including grenades at no additional point cost).
Space Pope - ugly model, crap rules. blegh.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Completley agree about the space pope, Farsight on the other hand...
19251
Post by: Gold tooth Jerry
Hollismason wrote:Okay Tau Crisis suits;
Change Squad size 2 - 4 ;
Decrease points by 5.
Remove the restriction on taking two of the same weapon.
Give them ability to take Stim Injectors ; Thrusters.
It's a 3 model unit with 2 wounds Feel no pain is not broken on them ; as they are tougness 4 3+ armour save.
I like this idea as i dont understand why you cant have a full squad with thrusters or stim injectors, I can see why everyone shouldn't have AFP, although letting just bodyguards use them would be nice, and would make oshovah bombs deadly, still I dont think it will change. I think the forge world commander suits variants should be in codex. one gives you SMS +2 other systems, another is marklight with a target lock, last is just iridium armor, now I think all of them should be in codex or at the simplest be put in as wargear. I also like the hammerhead variants, but doubt they would throw all that in too. I think Seeker need a full revamp. I think they need to have high str and decent ap maybe ap2 a shot or a fragmentation mode with less str and ap ofcourse. Like the railgun works. I can even see the ap not changing its really the marking up a target and still rolliing to hit a guilded missle that is a single shot. I kinda feel like the sky ray should be the only one that can shoot them. Even make them bigger and more sexy looking. I feel like they should be way more than 6 on there though say 12. So you can fire 2 each round in a normal game. Guarenteed to hit/ roll to wound and take saves. Sounds good to me. A personal touch I would like to see is the sky ray launching all of its missle rather indescriminately at a marked point. maybe like a d6 guarenteed hit shot but the skyray can either no longer fire seekers or cant for a turn and is immobilized. While it is reloading. Hell even make the whole process 1 turn set up. This is just another little idea with the seeker missles but what about a combined strike. Say for each successive hit that is successfull hit get to increase the chance to wound. This really could go for any tau. Say you have some high toughness target you want to kill let some lesser guns soften the armor. I am thinking, first unit has to be markerlight, second unit has to be marker light and use additional counter to increase wound chance. You could even do this with ap at a cost of 2 markerlights for successful wounds. Fluffwise, This is right up the tau's ally, Using technology and team work to take down a larger force. Sure you could kill something really powerful with firewarriors and A LOT of markerlights, but isnt that what tau do now. While I am on the subject of markerlights i think they should be able to effect moral. Just like in movies if a bad guy has a red laser pointer on his forhead from the big gun he gets scared and runs or does somehting irrational. I realize this is represented in pinning test but what about moral test or falling back test or maybe taking thier bonus attack for charger for the cost of 2 as they are getting laser pointer in the eye. Moral, What is up with the 8 moral almost across the board. need some 9s Just a personal thought. Another beef i have is with vespid give them a 4+ save and 2 attacks problems solved. Maybe toughness 4. I would kinda like a flat out type cover save so if they move 12 and fleet they get a 4+ or a +1 in cover for moving fast. OH and for the love of God extend the range of the guns I can live with 18" 24 would be nice just further than 12" I think they should be able to infiltrate just because they fly and would fit fluff. Piranhas maybe make em 55 points. i don't know they pretty good. I might like some more gun variety in my stealth suits with appropriate cost. Wish you could do failsafe detonator on command anytime. So like i get assaulted and model pops. I would like to see more devices used. Like maybe caltrops or snares. To slow your opponent from coming. Now i know how to do this using present system, but something more intended would be nice. Thats my 2 cents
17459
Post by: Vasarto
1. All Tau Fire Warriors have BS of 4.
2.Stealth Teams and Crisis Suits have BS of 5.
3.Remove the Target Array as it is no longer needed as well as other stuff in the 4.0 book.
4.Fix Marker Light rules! In my codex it still mentions priority tests. Make new implications for the Marker Light such as adding something else to its use.
5.ADD FORGE WORLD MODELS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
Such as the MANTA and the OTHER crisis Suits and Leaders as a choice. If you didn't know. Those other crisis suits etc can only be used in Apocalypse battles. The Manta etc I can see why but those other crisis suits are not that big of a deal. Who cares if I get a Broadside 2? My Imperial Guard or Chaos army wont matter because they can still beat me and I do not even stand a single chance...Ard boys this year proved that 100%.
6.FIX ETHEREALS! Or get rid of them
7.At least 2-3 new other alien species. Including Human Soldiers as a part of their army.
8.Make another cool tank like the skyray or hammerhead that does cool stuffs.
9.Increase Strength, Initiative and Toughness....OH and Weapon Skill of Kroot by 1 and give them a save of +5...MAKE KROOT GOOD!
10. Make Vespids BETTER!
5692
Post by: Fizzywig
Personally, I would rather have the current FW at 8 ppm than better FW at 10.
Give tau combat tactics or something similar. whoever said earlier that tau need something to stay in combat... UR DOIN IT RONG!
Burst Cannons should be pinning. a minor upgrade to them but one that fits with the tau weapon systems as they are currently.
Devilfish should be a tiny bit cheaper. not a lot, but maybe 10-15 pts cheaper to keep them inline with the cheaper transports everyone else is getting.
I also am a big fan of the purchasable tactics, although, given current GW codices, make this tied to a specific type of HQ unit perhaps. include the cost in the cost of the HQ.
another troop choice. maybe make steathsuits troops, but have to have a FW squad for every unit of Stealthsuits. (or even not, but up their price) OR gue'vasa,
Stealthsuits should get the option of taking flamers (at least 1 per squad giving them all flamers might be broken if they are also troops...)
Ethereals need to not suck.
an idea for leadership, make tau immune to moral checks due to 25% casualties from shooting. or up the casualty rate. leave tau with crummy LD stats but make them test less often if they are just taking shooting wounds.
and thats all ive got for now.
12620
Post by: Che-Vito
Fizzywig wrote:Personally, I would rather have the current FW at 8 ppm than better FW at 10.
Xenos Guard for the win! Not.
The interesting thing is that some of your following suggests would help Fire Warriors keep their current price, but be better.
Fizzywig wrote:Burst Cannons should be pinning. a minor upgrade to them but one that fits with the tau weapon systems as they are currently.
Defeats the whole intention of Pinning as being "unseen, unexpected" shots (paraphrasing the BGB description)
Fizzywig wrote:Devilfish should be a tiny bit cheaper. not a lot, but maybe 10-15 pts cheaper to keep them inline with the cheaper transports everyone else is getting.
Agreed.
Fizzywig wrote:I also am a big fan of the purchasable tactics, although, given current GW codices, make this tied to a specific type of HQ unit perhaps. include the cost in the cost of the HQ.
Agreed on purchasable tactics, with special characters, either way. Whatever.
Fizzywig wrote:another troop choice. maybe make steathsuits troops, but have to have a FW squad for every unit of Stealthsuits. (or even not, but up their price) OR gue'vasa,
Gue'vesa would fill a nice niche for the Tau, and I've already modeled a whole platoon of them, so this would be wonderful in my opinion.
Fizzywig wrote:Stealthsuits should get the option of taking flamers (at least 1 per squad giving them all flamers might be broken if they are also troops...)
Interesting thought, and seems more in-line for Stealthsuits than Fire Warriors or Pathfinders.
Fizzywig wrote:Ethereals need to not suck.
Agreed. Whether it's through the use of bodyguards like Aun'Va has, or something else.
Fizzywig wrote:an idea for leadership, make tau immune to moral checks due to 25% casualties from shooting. or up the casualty rate. leave tau with crummy LD stats but make them test less often if they are just taking shooting wounds.
Or just change the Ld, which makes quite a bit of sense to me.
5692
Post by: Fizzywig
Well they could just change the leadership, but i want the low leadership when i get assaulted. id just like something that makes them not run when they get shot at. i lost a game the other day because i shot a chimera trying to contest the objective, it exploded killing just enough firewarriors to make me have to take the test, and i ran off the table like a spaz. now, thats anecdotal, and sometimes this stuff happens, but it did leave a sour taste in my mouth
Maybe a re-roll when in LOS to another tau unit soley for purposes of morale checks to to 25% casualties from shooting?
Upping the leadership is nice but it has the side benefit of making you more likely to stay in assault if you aren't wiped out, something no tau commander worth his salt wants. ill take it if its all i get, but its not the ideal solution imo.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
Che-Vito wrote:
Fizzywig wrote:Burst Cannons should be pinning. a minor upgrade to them but one that fits with the tau weapon systems as they are currently.
Defeats the whole intention of Pinning as being "unseen, unexpected" shots (paraphrasing the BGB description)
Actually pinning burst cannons are very logical, after all it is basically a xenos plasma minigun.
19000
Post by: joshau-k
focusedfire wrote:OK, got a question for you guys.
I would like for your to read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railgun
And then tell me if the sub-munition on the HH Railgun still makes sense or would it make more sense for the railgun to fire a stack of shorter/lighter sections and to make the profile like Range 72" Str 6 AP 3-4ish? Heavy 6.
I like the blast template but the thing just doesn't make sense coming out of a railgun. GW gave the HH the blast to make it a viable choice when compared to the broadsides. I was wondering if substituing a lower powered multi-shot would disturb too many players or not.
So question is, "Would you guys have a problem with changing the large blast on the HH railgun?".
Yes I would, the current railgun submunition is definitely logical.
Check out this video at 2:15 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OqlTXwLG40
That is definitely a blast template right there.
radiohazard wrote:Hey focused fire, have you thought about changing the BS of the Fire Caste depending on their rank???
Shas'la BS 3
Shas'ui BS 3
XV8 Shas'ui BS 4
Shas'vre BS 4
Shas'el BS 5
Shas'o BS 6
focusedfire wrote:
@radio- I am advancing the BS every other rank because to advance every rank reduces the need for inter unit cooperation and removes the need for markerlights. Your list is close but there are differences due to a more realistic rank advancement. It now goes like this:
Shas'la-BS3
Shas'Ui-BS3
XV15 Shas'Ui-BS3(Because they are the same rank as regular Shas'Ui and are getting used to battlesuit weapos systems)
Shas'Vre-BS4(Crisis teams are now Shas'vre only with the option of a Shas'el team lead)
Shas'el-BS4 (Now bodyguards and crisis/broadside/stealth team leaders)
Shas'O-BS5
Shadow sun is now BS6.
First of all the difference between BS5 and BS6 is 2.8%, effectively worthless. I don't think anything above BS6 should be in the rulebook. Counts as twin-linked should be BS6. Anything else is just a waste of time rerolling the dice.
I prefer radiohazards BS chart, except both ' El and 'O should be BS5.
Also I really don't like the fact that the ' el becomes the crisis team leader, I don't think this would make sense at all fluffwise.
The main difference between them should be that the Shas'O has strategic bonuses they can choose which effects the way the army is played. I think this suits fluff well as it is well known the commanders all use different strategies, obviously the regular 'O wouldn't affect it as extremely as the special characters would (though I have no idea what bonuses they should add) This would limit the Shas'O to 1 per army, which makes alot of sense as they would be much rarer than the ' El.
While we are on the subject of commanders, I think a really simple way to fix shadowsun would be to open up her weapon options. Shadowsun with 2 missile pods *drools*.
17072
Post by: crazypsyko666
Alright, sorta OT but I've got kind of a crazy idea for a T'au weapon:
'Force Cannon/Grenade'
18" S3/4/5?, Heavy 1, Blast.
All units under the blast template are moved 2d6" away from the center of the small blast template.
This is just a minor defensive weapon that could be used to knock back an assault squad ready to charge in. It could also be used as a one-shot weapon or multi-use weapon. I'm still formulating it in my head.
11194
Post by: Krellnus
@joshau-k:
Your vid link doesn't work
BS6 Shas'Os make sense, its the whole, "I've been fighting since I was a young'un" think of it as like guard vets are BS4 they are used to the fighting so they naturally adapt and get better.
19000
Post by: joshau-k
Krellnus wrote:@joshau-k:
Your vid link doesn't work
BS6 Shas'Os make sense, its the whole, "I've been fighting since I was a young'un" think of it as like guard vets are BS4 they are used to the fighting so they naturally adapt and get better.
Except they can hardly hit better, it just looks good in their resume and tricks noobs.
The link works now, there was a full stop afterwards <facepalms>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OqlTXwLG40
21942
Post by: StarHunter25
I've had a few ideas on how to bring Tau's niche back. Most has to do with ways on allowing higher BS, Ld, and ways to get around cover saves.
1. Based was on the fluff behind tau vision being "better than human, but take longer to focus." If a tau infantry unit fires at the same unit as it successfully hit in the last shooting phase, it gains +1 BS. Is not cumulative (no BS 10 fire warriors shooting at plague marines) but stacks with marker lights. Marketlight effect would come first, allowing for some very high BS on certain units.
2. Give rail rifle equipped units to shoot through walls/barricades. I like the idea of a rail rifle being able to punch through a concrete block then blast a marine's head off. If a Barret rifle can, a rail rifle should. Some sort of extra BS check could be made on this, havn't put a whole lot of thought into it tbh, just sounds cool.
3. This one is bringing something from DoW *ducks for cover*.... basically I like the idea of gun drones exploding when killed. Same thing as when a vehicle explodes, but a d3 instead. Maybe even a small blast marker over the top of it. Gives another reason to use gun drones as meat...er...metalshields.
4. Give skyrays the ability to load different tau-esque munitions into the missiles. Must purchase them beforehand. Possible have the special warheads limit the range on the missile? I realize some of these could be OTT, but that's something I'm willing to risk to give skyrays a reason to be fielded.
--Normal warhead-> S8 AP3
--Emp warhead-> Only affects vehicles. Same damage table as EMP grenade.
--Fusion warhead-> S8 AP1 small blast. direct hit 2d6 on vehicle damage table.
--Fragmentation Warhead-> effectively a AFP missile, same stuff as it does.
--Seeker warhead-> S7 AP3, always hits rear armor
That's all I got for now, plus I would like some feedback to see if my mind is in the right place. *stays in cover, hopes no-one brought a flamer*
21946
Post by: ZacktheChaosChild
Here's a suggestion, some flamers....
then they won't hang like a testicle out in the back and wait for the nids to pour into their faces...
tau vs. nids = sad tau player...
21196
Post by: agnosto
ZacktheChaosChild wrote:Here's a suggestion, some flamers....
then they won't hang like a testicle out in the back and wait for the nids to pour into their faces...
tau vs. nids = sad tau player...
Crisis suits already have flamers, twin-linked possible no less.
21946
Post by: ZacktheChaosChild
Let me rephrase that,
"THEY SHOULD HAVE MOAR FLAMERS"
21947
Post by: 1337m45747r0y
Pipboy101 wrote:What I would fix is making all Tau BS 5. That is it.
I disagree, BS 5 is simply too high. BS 4 is a bit more realistic, but i do think that all mechanized units (e.g. battlesuits, drones, vehicles, etc.) should come with a free integrated targeting array, making them BS 5.
I also feel that the battlesuits should get a T5 because advanced alien armor, hydraulics, and circuitry would allow them to withstand a hit that would cripple anything else. Automatically Appended Next Post: agnosto wrote:
There are not enough low AP weapons for an army that is entirely focused on shooting the enemy. You would think that if all they do is shoot, they would have some advanced infantry weapons to show for it. Maybe allowing squad leaders to have rail rifles or something like mobile heavy weapons platforms like eldar or IG. If IG can have platform las cannons, why can't the tau have platform railguns?
I would have to disagree on this point mainly because tau doctrine states that undedicated infantry squads cannot carry heavy weaponry. Though I do think that a new, less-costly-than-a-Broadside platform railgun unit would be a good addition to the tau arsenal.
For a shooty army, Tau do not seem to do it very well. I get marker drones but making an entire army dependant upon something that must be purchased seems a bit wrong. Possibly include a marker drone with each full squade of FW or just up their BS to 4. One possible addendum would be to allow pulse rifles to rapid fire at half-range instead of the rule-based 12" since the rule seems to be based on the average 24" range.
I've thought about this many times and agree wholeheartedly. Tau suck at shooting, and they don't even get a lot of shots to make up for it like IG do, which I think is just unfair.
Also, I like the idea of pulse rifles being able to rapid fire at 1/2 range instead of the standard 12", simply for the fact that the way Tau pulse weapons work, they would not have a lot of recoil, so, it would be easier to keep a stream of rapid, accurate fire.
I am also not fond of marker drones mainly because they are expensive, and tha Tau rely too heavily on them. I think that they need to be completely overhauled.
The leadership of the army is not really in keeping with the fluff. Why is their LD so low when they all follow "the greater good", the concept of group over individual. I would recommend a new rule called "stand and fight" (if one doesn't already exist). If tau are charged in hth, they get a bonus to leadership or ignore penalties from losses as their diehard spirit won't allow them to run off and leave their brethren to fight alone.
I like that idea, Tau would not be the kind of warriors that would take a casualty and leave their comrades to face the same fate. It just doesn't coincide with the Greater Good.
Troop choices are severely limited. FWs are just too vanilla and need some options instead of just with grenade or without grenade.
Troop choices for Tau are very limited, but they also have quite a bit of flexibility within themselves. (e.g. Pulse Rifles/Pulse Carbines) But I do not like how the kroot are set up; they need smaller, cheaper squads for their efficiency and they're just a pain to field because the only thing they're good for as they are set up right now is being expensive meat shields... Kroot need a boost.
I do have more to say on your topics, agnosto, but time does not permit me to address those at the moment. Consider my opinions.
5692
Post by: Fizzywig
ZacktheChaosChild wrote:Here's a suggestion, some flamers....
then they won't hang like a testicle out in the back and wait for the nids to pour into their faces...
tau vs. nids = sad tau player...
i agree that tau need more flamers, my suggesting is allowing stealth suits to take them.
although, if you are having trouble with nids, you have more problems than flamers. markerlights and pulse rifles > nids.
1337m45747r0y wrote:Pipboy101 wrote:What I would fix is making all Tau BS 5. That is it.
I disagree, BS 5 is simply too high. BS 4 is a bit more realistic, but i do think that all mechanized units (e.g. battlesuits, drones, vehicles, etc.) should come with a free integrated targeting array, making them BS 5.
and how much of a point increase are we looking for for this? because if you want to give it to us free, well, then tau will be omgwtfbbq overpowered. bs4 s5 shots for 10 ppm?!
1337m45747r0y wrote:
I also feel that the battlesuits should get a T5 because advanced alien armor, hydraulics, and circuitry would allow them to withstand a hit that would cripple anything else.
this i think a more reasonable idea would be making battlesuits T 5(4) they should still get instadeath to s8 rather than being a straight T5. maybe let broadsides be a straight t5 because they are designed to be more sturdy but that may be a little broken.
1337m45747r0y wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
agnosto wrote:
There are not enough low AP weapons for an army that is entirely focused on shooting the enemy. You would think that if all they do is shoot, they would have some advanced infantry weapons to show for it. Maybe allowing squad leaders to have rail rifles or something like mobile heavy weapons platforms like eldar or IG. If IG can have platform las cannons, why can't the tau have platform railguns?
I would have to disagree on this point mainly because tau doctrine states that undedicated infantry squads cannot carry heavy weaponry. Though I do think that a new, less-costly-than-a-Broadside platform railgun unit would be a good addition to the tau arsenal.
I think the idea of making broadsides cheaper is a bad way to fix the real problems tau have with their codex. 200pts for 2 broadsides and 2 shield drones, that is a fully complex unit with each broadside able to fire at different targets is eminently reasonable.
1337m45747r0y wrote:
For a shooty army, Tau do not seem to do it very well. I get marker drones but making an entire army dependant upon something that must be purchased seems a bit wrong. Possibly include a marker drone with each full squade of FW or just up their BS to 4. One possible addendum would be to allow pulse rifles to rapid fire at half-range instead of the rule-based 12" since the rule seems to be based on the average 24" range.
I've thought about this many times and agree wholeheartedly. Tau suck at shooting, and they don't even get a lot of shots to make up for it like IG do, which I think is just unfair.
if you think tau suck at shooting your doing it wrong. they may not hit particularly well but s5 gun on the basic trooper is amazing. and then you add marker-lights, and well, you have a formidable shooting force. this is not to say they are perfect, or that they don't need serious changes, but when talking about these changes we need to be honest in the true strenghts and weaknesses of current tau.
1337m45747r0y wrote:
Also, I like the idea of pulse rifles being able to rapid fire at 1/2 range instead of the standard 12", simply for the fact that the way Tau pulse weapons work, they would not have a lot of recoil, so, it would be easier to keep a stream of rapid, accurate fire.
I agree, here I would also like to add the idea of defensive weapons on vehicles being s5 for tau. and let you destroy gun-drones when a vehicle is destroyed instead of having to take them off to form their own unit for kill point missions.
1337m45747r0y wrote:
I am also not fond of marker drones mainly because they are expensive, and tha Tau rely too heavily on them. I think that they need to be completely overhauled.
try taking pathfinders instead.
1337m45747r0y wrote:
The leadership of the army is not really in keeping with the fluff. Why is their LD so low when they all follow "the greater good", the concept of group over individual. I would recommend a new rule called "stand and fight" (if one doesn't already exist). If tau are charged in hth, they get a bonus to leadership or ignore penalties from losses as their diehard spirit won't allow them to run off and leave their brethren to fight alone.
I like that idea, Tau would not be the kind of warriors that would take a casualty and leave their comrades to face the same fate. It just doesn't coincide with the Greater Good.
oh god oh god please no. please think about the implications of a rule change before you suggest it. when a tau unit is assaulted and you lose the close combat (as you will) you WANT that unit to break, even if they are slaughtered in the initiative roll off. why? because then, in your next turn, you can shoot the gak out of the unit that assaulted you with the rest of your army!!!
now yes, tau have leadership problems, but those are most evident in the SHOOTING phase. make it so drones dont count towards unit size for ld checks again, make tau get to re-roll the ld checks due to casualties by shooting, or something.
1337m45747r0y wrote:
Troop choices are severely limited. FWs are just too vanilla and need some options instead of just with grenade or without grenade.
Troop choices for Tau are very limited, but they also have quite a bit of flexibility within themselves. (e.g. Pulse Rifles/Pulse Carbines) But I do not like how the kroot are set up; they need smaller, cheaper squads for their efficiency and they're just a pain to field because the only thing they're good for as they are set up right now is being expensive meat shields... Kroot need a boost.
I do have more to say on your topics, agnosto, but time does not permit me to address those at the moment. Consider my opinions.
kroot are pretty good. 11 kroot and 10 kroot hounds is a pretty decent unit in H2H,and kroot are CHEAP. not to say they are perfect, but again, know what the current codex is and the strengths of it before you just make up ideas and plans for the next one.
21942
Post by: StarHunter25
Ok, more ideas, most of which have a certain degree of bias on my part. I'm still avoiding doing point costs because I'm terrible at it.
1. Add in other suit variants for the commander, and his bodyguard gains bonuses based on which it is. Balance/proper point adjustments still needed.
XV-81 commander > retinue can upgrade to TL-missile pod at no extra cost, and may still take 2 additional upgrades.
XV-84 commander > retinue gains target lock at full cost, but can still take all other upgrades.
XV-89 commander > retinue gains iridium armor at full cost, still can take all other upgrades.
2. Give Farsight armies the ability to field 0-2 watered-down crisis suit teams, as long as the compulsory troop number has been met . These would have the same stat line as normal suits, except they would have limited options as far as weaponry goes. 2 weapons/support systems, team leader only has a few options available to him. Now I do realize this would allow a Farsight army to theoretically field 26 crisis suits in a normal game... its just my little dream of mega Farsight bomb.
3. Repair drones!!! Basically have a weaponless tau "tech priest" drone. These would do the same repair stuff on vehicles, but also maybe be able to repair "damaged" battlesuits and other drones. Real squishy, same stat line as gun drone, minus the whole... gun part.
4. Playing off others' idea to make tau combat doctrines, I've thought about how the two methods of hunter cadres operate. All bonuses assumed to only affect tau units, not auxiliaries or drones.
---Mont'Ka (XX points) > allows an upgrade for crisis suit weapons to be "twin" rather than "twin-linked." Fire warrior teams who have a shas'ui can get an upgrade which allows them to move then shoot full 30". Allows some weapons (not sure which, don't want to make too broken) to re-roll failed wounds in shooting. Some hindrances to this to make it not all "I have this therefore I win."
--Kayun (XX points) > when a squad takes a transport, they can get a scout move. All tau units can outflank. Stealthsuits are 0-2 troop choices as long as compulsory has been met already. Stealthsuits have upgrade available to make stealth field 2d6x2 (or something similar, make them stealthier) and can make opponent re-roll check in night-fighting conditions. Devilfish attached to pathfinders have stealth fields.
Hmm... that's it again. I'll probably post some more things that I feel could return Tau's niche to the game.
15111
Post by: MrDrumMachine
I'm not sure if this has been suggested yet but I was thinking that maybe making certain kinds of drones really cheap and non-scoring troops choices. I know most tau players have buckets of drones that they don't use and I think this would be a good way to get them fielded more. The idea somewhat stems from the concept of scarab swarms except it would be a large group of drones. Cheap and an effective speed-bump for Tau in their quest to avoid CC.
I don't know how it fits into the fluff or anything like that but it might be another way to get a few of the coveted marker lights for upgrades. Maybe some kind of rule like AI Hive mind for them would let them have something like stubborn, the idea being that through collective computation they can decide the best course of action based on changing battle field conditions.
I don't have a tau codex but I think it would be pretty cool to have a bunch of drones actually be semi-useful and effective as throw away units and speed-bumps. Maybe something like 6-8 pts apiece and they are able to maintain the hive mine when 5 models and above.
13106
Post by: EzeKK
I think fixing Tau just comes down to making their units cheaper and more effective. Giving Fire Warriors heavy weapons (maybe in the form of heavy drones) and suits more weapon option etc... Then making Ion Cannons etc. more effective and BAM! Competitive.
Such upgrades could be a Hit and Run where the squad sacrifices drones to help them get away or shoot "difficult terrain bombs" onto things to make them slower.
11301
Post by: patrickparker1224
Well whenever GW does redo thier codex, I would love to see a Farsight Enclave Army list.
Now that would be cool, make it so they cant take any Zeno's (spelling) and maybe an elite FW unit with an increased BS or something like that. There's a lot you can do with them but the biggest problem is they stick to their market and whats big, which is fine and that's how they are going to make money quicker, but still I would like some news or something to let me know that GW is working on tweaking the Codex somehow.
|
|
