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

All the buffs you list could apply to a HH as well - and I know speed is my best utility, but someone gets to go first and if that someone isn't me then a HH can poke holes in a keeper. Other weapons can't poke holes in a keeper - they either have to be much closer, or my saves are great against them because they are a single powerful shot.

I don't actually think the Hammerhead has a bad target. Can you elaborate what targets it would be a "waste" to shoot the hammerhead at? Especially considering its other weapons.

I will say that initially, I'm sticking to Skyrays. I deeply mistrust single shot weapons (both kinds).

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
All the buffs you list could apply to a HH as well - and I know speed is my best utility, but someone gets to go first and if that someone isn't me then a HH can poke holes in a keeper. Other weapons can't poke holes in a keeper - they either have to be much closer, or my saves are great against them because they are a single powerful shot.

I don't actually think the Hammerhead has a bad target. Can you elaborate what targets it would be a "waste" to shoot the hammerhead at? Especially considering its other weapons.

Given the Railguns stats, the optimal target for a railgun would be: sitting 71 & 7/8" away from you, be T7 W10 with a 2+/2++ save (and be markerlit) This would take advantage of the weapons range, its hefty Strength, AP and ignore invulns ability, and 10 is the minimum damage it can do. The secondary weapons would be best shooting at light infantry since their stats are more suited for that, an they will likely get to be used since battlefields rarely allow you to leverage range to the extent that perhaps you would want to

Shooting at targets with fewer wounds or worse saves wastes the Railguns damage and armour penetration characteristics (it will still kill them though), also Ghaz and C'tan are awful targets as they have a damage cap. It would also be a waste to shoot a railgun shot if something significant had a single wound remaining after a previous railgun hit as your excess 9-11 damage would be wasted. I would say the absolute worst thing to fire it at would be a single model unit with 1W like fenrisian wolves (not that that would happen much), chaos spawn would also be a contender

The solid shot could potentially kill 4 geq, 2 meq or 2teq, 8/4/2 if you use submunitions and 1CP but you are really paying for the ability to deal damage to well protected targets with the railgun, not the ability to squash infantry. Essentially you will be buying the railgun to shoot at a specific type of target (monsters, Titanic units and other vehicles) so shooting anything else will be a waste (why bring a railgun if you arent going to shoot it at tough things). Geq can be dealt with by pulse weapons, meq and teq with plasma/ion weapons. I guess its about efficiency. sure the railgun can kill pretty much anything it hits outside of Titanic units but if its shooting at guardsmen, its not shooting at their chimera, or the leman russ.

I would say the only time a hammerhead would be better than a broadside is if the target has a really strong invuln, but for almost the same points as a Hammerhead you can take 2 broadsides,heavy rail rifles are just obscene weapons if the leaks are correct, and in addition to being great against tanks they can deal with meq/teqs as well, and plasma rifles are awesome as well. for me its a choice between 8 high powered shots for similar points to 1 for the hammerhead.

You're not considering the full potential of the hammerhead, while comparing it to the full potential for other units.

Against a markerlit 30-man conscript unit within 18" of the HH, it will kill nearly 12 of them (nearly half) for zero CP. For 1CP, it kills 18.

That's 155 pts of Hammerhead into its worst target profile (conscripts) and it gets a 60 (nearly 40%) point return for no investment, or a 56% return for 1CP.

Don't forget the Hammerhead gets 16 Strength 6 AP-1 1 damage shots as well as the railgun.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Don't forget the Hammerhead gets 16 Strength 6 AP-1 1 damage shots as well as the railgun.

If you're bringing your T7 3+ tank with a 72" railgun within 18" of an enemy unit to shoot with its burst cannons, you're playing it wrong.
You take 2 SMS instead for the 30" range and most importantly the no LOS shooting. You keep it hidden as much as you can, you move it out to take a good shot and you try to do so in a way that allows the Hammerhead to be as close as possible to the board edge while being screened from deepstriking anti tank threats. Long range ones are usually less deadly and you can always have a nearby drone to sacrifice for the greater good.
And as much as a railgun Hammerhead may be good, it's not a profile you'd spam. One, maybe one + Longstrike in Tau sept lists is what is going to be played.

Let's be honest, this thing was designed to play peekaboo with Knights and other T8 Stompy boys from across the map. Telemons, Relic Contemptors, and Blood Thirsters, all crap their pants at the sight of this thing. It's not for use against Conscripts, Plague Bearers, or Blood letters.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Let's be honest, this thing was designed to play peekaboo with Knights and other T8 Stompy boys from across the map. Telemons, Relic Contemptors, and Blood Thirsters, all crap their pants at the sight of this thing. It's not for use against Conscripts, Plague Bearers, or Blood letters.

Three automatic mortal wounds means you can still shoot them in a pinch and kill 4 dudes, regardless of being the preferred target or not.

Hey, I mean, if you just want to not shoot 16 Strength 6 shots per turn because it's not "how you use this thing", be my guest.

To me that's a bit like putting a Lascannon on a Leman Russ Punisher and then saying you don't ever want to shoot the 20 Str 5 shots, but YMMV

(Seriously. Its secondaries are as good as the main weapons on other tanks. Sorry that isn't good enough to make it even worth shooting, though. What more would they need, Damage 2 on the sixteen shots? Strength 7 or 8?)

Yes if you have a HH with burst cannons its probably worth getting to shoot them but the point is that you don't have to take burst cannons and can take something else that better complements a HH's range and playstyle. (aka SMS)

And if you are desperate enough for str 5 shots that you chose to bring burstcannons your better of taking 20 gun drones then 1 Hammerhead.

The hammerhead burst cannons are Strength 6, and 8 shots each (at AP-1); called Accelerator Burst Cannons.

You gain 6" of range and ignore LoS, but lose 1 strength and half the number of shots for the same points cost with the SMS. To me the Burst Cannon is the CLEAR better choice.

It's be like replacing a Punisher Cannon with 15 Vostroyan lasguns. You lose shots and strength, but hey range amirite

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Hey, I mean, if you just want to not shoot 16 Strength 6 shots per turn because it's not "how you use this thing", be my guest.

To me that's a bit like putting a Lascannon on a Leman Russ Punisher and then saying you don't ever want to shoot the 20 Str 5 shots, but YMMV

(Seriously. Its secondaries are as good as the main weapons on other tanks. Sorry that isn't good enough to make it even worth shooting, though. What more would they need, Damage 2 on the sixteen shots? Strength 7 or 8?)

I don't think I've ever seen burst cannons on a hammerhead or skyray, it's usually the SMS for the ignore LOS shots and range. 18" for burst cannons is not exactly short ranged, but its getting awfully near to 'danger close' territory. now that the burst cannons are getting a significant boost, this 'may' change however (I strongly doubt we will see many Tau tanks with burst cannons.)

The reason you buy the Hammerhead is for the main weapons, specifically the railgun, and most people would probably like to shoot said railgun at an optimal target. Now a Hammerhead in the open is a dead Hammerhead, since its far from tough. which means if you move it out to shoot some conscripts, you have either already won the game (well done!) or you are going to, in your opponents next turn, lose the hammerhead (also, well done!). This use it and lose it is why you will see most tau vehicles with SMS instead of BC (SMS are also longer ranged than BC), even when they are hiding they can do something

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The hammerhead burst cannons are Strength 6, and 8 shots each (at AP-1); called Accelerator Burst Cannons.

You gain 6" of range and ignore LoS, but lose 1 strength and half the number of shots for the same points cost with the SMS. To me the Burst Cannon is the CLEAR better choice.

It's be like replacing a Punisher Cannon with 15 Vostroyan lasguns. You lose shots and strength, but hey range amirite

forgot about the extra point of str yeah. Still think SMS are superior. They let the HH stay out of sight more which is needed because they die quickly, non-LoS shooting is very powerful and there is a limited amount of places you can get it and Tau are in no short supply of the type of firepower of an 'Accelerator' Burst cannon.

Right, you obviously would point the gun at an optimal target. My point isn't "wow, hammerhead kills conscripts well" but rather that "hey, claiming that the HH is good for one thing and one thing only because other units are more versatile" is a bit of a lie.

Conscripts are the worst possible target for it in every way, and it still gets over 50% of it's points back laying into them if it really must.

That's a better point for point return than most "anti-tank units" in the game would get in a similar situation, while ALSO being damn good at tank hunting.

And if you are keeping the Railgun out of LoS so that you can use the SMS (a weapon that comes on a gazillion platforms in the Tau army list unlike Accelerator Burst Cannons), then lol. Sure man. There probably was a better way to get artillery in your list than buying that Railgun and before strapping the NLOS to it.

Accelerator Burst Cannons are I think also on devilfish, skyrays, piranhas, and razorsharks, Fewer platforms than SMSs, but not really that much.

Good spot Unit1126PLL, using those ABCs is probably as easy as 1-2-3. They are very well priced at 5 points (or 10 for 2) and I do think for the HH and Skyray they are well worth the cost.

There are a few match ups out there where they bring barely any anti-tank and the added value of those 16 shots would be huge. Even against a more balanced opponent, if you clear their anti tank by turn 3, just two turns with the ABCs will probably get you a massive return.

Chaos Jim wrote:
To the Knight players, the railgun is busted. You can’t hide, you lose a Knight every turn because the Tau player has 2 hammerheads, you can’t shoot back that well because they’ll either be hiding, or you’re bracketed so you can’t hit the broadside of a barn, or you’re dead.
This got me thinking about something I thought about awhile ago.
What if you just bring an all armiger/war dog army?
You still get to play knights, but armiger class knights don’t have the titanic keyword. So they can hide.
I’ve done the calculations and you could run 14 armiger class knights in a standard 2k point game, and then equip half of them with autocannons.
Of course you’d have to buy 14 armigers, but they’re faster, are still quite tanky, and more expendable. Plus they all have obsec if you’re running mono knights, and they all count as 5 models for objectives.
I want to know if this is a decent counter play to the railgun if you still want to play mono knights.

true. the Tau faction is going to be completely toxic upon arrival. especially against vehicles.

In a meta where vehicles already suck

Depends on the vehicle, Crusher Stampede Tyranids, last time I cheched, were Crushing Stampeding tournaments.

And before them, Ork buggy spam was king.

It does suck if you are talking about Space Marine tanks or 8th ed vehicles.

That's what I'm referring to. Nids being monsterous creature. But vehicles in general this edition blow, with all the AP just ripping their armor off and making it kinda poinles they just get chipped away. Even with guard recently getting 2+ save it feels bad.

And yeah space marine vehicles are criminally trash.

Nids being monstrous creatures is irrelevant, they fulfill the same role as vehicles.

Well, they have the same mechanics.

Role depends on the individual creature or tank (a toxicrene isn't doing the job of a tyrannofex, and a rhino isn't doing the job of a gladius)

 Backspacehacker wrote:
That's what I'm referring to. Nids being monsterous creature. But vehicles in general this edition blow, with all the AP just ripping their armor off and making it kinda poinles they just get chipped away. Even with guard recently getting 2+ save it feels bad.

And yeah space marine vehicles are criminally trash.

The Railgun is broken nonsense but there were plenty of editions where vehicles did not even get a armour save - it was well past time when they got it though

The counter to that is, vehicles also literally could not be wounded by a lot of weapons though.

 Backspacehacker wrote:
The counter to that is, vehicles also literally could not be wounded by a lot of weapons though.

Yes, and vehicles that used to die to a single heavy bolter/assault cannon it, also. My orky paper things are much tougher now and finally playable after a very long time; before that since 3rd we only had the 5th edition gimmick that provided 4+ to vehicles thanks to the KFF. Otherwise all our vehicles, including the most armored ones used to say goodbye turn 1 or 2 at most with little effort from the opponent.

 Blackie wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
The counter to that is, vehicles also literally could not be wounded by a lot of weapons though.

Yes, and vehicles that used to die to a single heavy bolter/assault cannon it, also. My orky paper things are much tougher now and finally playable after a very long time; before that since 3rd we only had the 5th edition gimmick that provided 4+ to vehicles thanks to the KFF. Otherwise all our vehicles, including the most armored ones used to say goodbye turn 1 or 2 at most with little effort from the opponent.

As someone playing 4th edition against an Ork player, I wish I had the luck of your opponents. 3 AV 14 battlewagons is a lot to suffer from, especially stuffed full of badness like Meganobz.

So per Goonhammer it looks like they're less than 160 points. That's a steal.

EviscerationPlague wrote:
So per Goonhammer it looks like they're less than 160 points. That's a steal.

145, 155 with the 2x Accelerator Burst Cannons

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Blackie wrote:

 Backspacehacker wrote:
The counter to that is, vehicles also literally could not be wounded by a lot of weapons though.

Yes, and vehicles that used to die to a single heavy bolter/assault cannon it, also. My orky paper things are much tougher now and finally playable after a very long time; before that since 3rd we only had the 5th edition gimmick that provided 4+ to vehicles thanks to the KFF. Otherwise all our vehicles, including the most armored ones used to say goodbye turn 1 or 2 at most with little effort from the opponent.

As someone playing 4th edition against an Ork player, I wish I had the luck of your opponents. 3 AV 14 battlewagons is a lot to suffer from, especially stuffed full of badness like Meganobz.

Well, to be honest for the vast majority of 4th edition orks played with 3rd edition codex, when battlewagons were AV13/12/10 and most importantly 0-1 per army. 4th editon codex dropped a 5-6 months before the release of 5th. But even considering that codex, is it really that difficult to bring down open topped vehicles with AV12 from the side and AV10 from the back? KFF in 4th wasn't as effective as in 5th, when it provided 4+ to all vehicles. IIRC vehicles in cover only gained -1 to the damage table in 4th, not an actual save. Or maybe that was 3rd?

In 5th I played very often with 3 BW with 4+. Still one guaranteed dead wagon per turn. A single lascannon could do it.

All in all, the "it could be balanced" looks to have been proven completely wrong.

You'll be hitting on rerollable 3s, wounding on potentially rerollable 2s, no saves, at least 10 damage. The souped up burst cannons are a ludicrous addition on such a cheap model. If the only reason you aren't maxing them out is because everything else is absurdly pushed, that says something for the Tau book.

All in all this Codex looks like Ork Buggies+1. Almost any list I can imagine has a bazillion high S, high AP shots that on decent dice (which becomes very probable with a bunch of rerolls) will just table people with no skill beyond point and click.

Awful for the game.

Tau might be bad but the biggest issue with the Ork list was that you couldn't hide. Thanks to flyers and indirect fire it would hit you anywhere on the board no matter the terrain.

Atleast against Tau you can hide (SMS aren't what is broken)