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.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Am I missing a horde of t7 Heavy units running around?

Wardogs & Armigers?

I mean, this is overkill and it's not like they are going to continue limiting T'au players to 1 Commander per detachment...

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I just realized the stupidity of making this thing s14. What t7 units are there in the game that are scary enough to merit this weapon? This seems like it was designed by a rules member that was still extremely salty about 8th edition IH Dreadnaught characters. S16 would make sense, but s14 just means it has +2 to wound anything t7, which are light transports and Dreadnaughts. Neither of which warrant 10+3MW and anti-invuln firepower. Am I missing a horde of t7 Heavy units running around?

Chaos Daemons? Be'lakor, 2-3 Keepers of Secrets, and a Lord of Change - all T7.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

These apples to oranges comparative vacuum analysis games are just silly - especially when you're willing to apply Montka to T'au ( plus HQ ) and nothing to Orks. Not to mention for those Strikes to be shooting a vehicle like that they'd need to be within 18" AND be the closest eligible unit of it turn 1, which is pretty much impossible if you decide it not to be a thing -- and it only gets more restricted from there.

Even 12 Shoota Boyz under Waagh pick up to 36 WS3 S4 swings where 12 Strikes would be 12 WS5 S3. In that math Shoota Boyz are an order of magnitude stronger than Strikes in melee.

Like I get that Shoota Boyz get sort of screwed by Waaagh, but this is not a good way to assess relative strength.

You missed the point of the post, it wasn't to highlight orkz vs Tau it was to show how Tau weapons are generalist in their abilities rather then against Orks specifically. Tau Firewarriors are now likely getting 3 shots at 18' range at S5 AP-1 with a fireblade nearby and every Tau player is going to choose Montka which means -2 vs their closest enemy, and thanks to their weapons profile, its actually rather effective when they do this...and that is without any other buffs they are likely to get. I've always wanted to play a Tau army but only with loads of firewarriors, maybe now is my chance to try it (Kidding, ize ony play da Orkz)

As far as shoota boys vs Firewarriors...yes if those shoota boyz ever got into CC...they won't, but if they ever did, yes they would win. But with 5' movement and no AP on their attacks...they aren't exactly scary in CC.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
And that made the design of the unit lopsided. No one wanted to move it like a transport, because moving too far lost you shots. It's a conflicted model that needs a point drop and the return of boarding planks strat that GW has no doubt decided to bury in a supplement in the future.

No, it made it useful. The problem with GW's design for orkz is that we don't have dedicated vehicles like other factions. A Killakan doesn't know if it want's to be shooting or slashing, a dread has the same problem. A morkanaut/gorkanaut just sucks, but for some reason has a transport capacity of 6....ok. Hell the Stompa is a transport as well, but nobody ever used it as such, they merely used it to pack Mekz into it back in like 7th to heal its HP from the inside.

The wagons have become the de-facto tanks for Orkz, the problem is GW doesn't want to give up that Transport capacity that NOBODY WANTS! On the bonebreaker it makes a bit of sense, but on a unit like the gunwagon it doesn't. A real ork would just cram more guns and ammo into the transport space. The Bonebreaker can leave room for a unit to jump out of, but even it needs a hefty buff in terms of dmg potential Because 6+D6 only on the charge is crap.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:

Well what's funny is that last edition it was more effective lol, it had leman russ grinding advance and da boomer as a cp thing. It was honestly kinda good in 8th.

It wasn't good, it was playable. Thats the difference. None of the wagons are good this edition, literally NONE. Some suggested this is because GW released the Primork vehicles Killrig and huntarig, but I'm not sold on that theory.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I just realized the stupidity of making this thing s14. What t7 units are there in the game that are scary enough to merit this weapon? This seems like it was designed by a rules member that was still extremely salty about 8th edition IH Dreadnaught characters. S16 would make sense, but s14 just means it has +2 to wound anything t7, which are light transports and Dreadnaughts. Neither of which warrant 10+3MW and anti-invuln firepower. Am I missing a horde of t7 Heavy units running around?

A lot of Vehicles are T6 and T7. Predators and rhino chassis are all T7, Riptides are T7, battlewagons are T7 etc. So it does make a lot of sense there. It's also a pretty hefty upgrade (+4 strength) so it changes wounding T6 and T7 to 2s instead of 3s. It just makes it as close to a guaranteed wound against those medium vehicles as possible while the heavies with T8 only get wounded on a 3

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I just realized the stupidity of making this thing s14. What t7 units are there in the game that are scary enough to merit this weapon? This seems like it was designed by a rules member that was still extremely salty about 8th edition IH Dreadnaught characters. S16 would make sense, but s14 just means it has +2 to wound anything t7, which are light transports and Dreadnaughts. Neither of which warrant 10+3MW and anti-invuln firepower. Am I missing a horde of t7 Heavy units running around?

Oooo, fun game! Might I add Leviathans, Sicarans, Hive Tyrants, and Dimachaerons to the growing list?

Tyel wrote:

ccs wrote:
Yes.
Because GW determined that they weren't selling enough Hammerhead kits.
Solution: Make the Hammerhead a desirable unit.
Result: the rail guns new stats.

Do you think it took them 10 years to notice?

No. It only took them about 4 years (2017 - now).
Why? Because in 3e-7e it's 1/turn shot was quite capable of doing it's job. That changed with 8th. You couldn't 1-shot a Rhino, let alone any tank more dangerous that'd you'd actually aim such a gun at.

Tyel wrote:
All in all I don't think this is about sales, its just trying to make a one-shot weapon work.

So it IS about sales.
Because if the thing doesn't work, then people won't buy it.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Honestly as a dark eldar player the only way i can think of fighting these things is just spamming lots of smaller vehicles. We still don't know what else tau have though.

@Tyel: I don't think you understand. I can only have 3 ravagers and a couple flyers. God only knows what else they can bring. Each shot that hits (the hardest part) and wounds (2+ to wound) will auto-kill almost any vehicles i have (each railgun shot does 7 damage+3 mortal wounds and avoids invulnerable saves and all my armor so 10 damage i can't avoid during its worst shots). If they pick out the ravagers first i'll be down a solid amount of firepower esp. if this happens turn 1. As i said before the only things i can do against this is spam vehicles or something similar.

Drukhari also have tons of units that can fire with blasters and heat lances, plus multiple sources of mortal wounds. Even the most common transports, raiders, carry a powerful anti tank weapon. Drukhari would easily have enough anti tank even if they lose some gun boat. And they have effective ways to assault enemy gunboats pretty soon.

ccs wrote:

Tyel wrote:

ccs wrote:
Yes.
Because GW determined that they weren't selling enough Hammerhead kits.
Solution: Make the Hammerhead a desirable unit.
Result: the rail guns new stats.

Do you think it took them 10 years to notice?

No. It only took them about 4 years (2017 - now).
Why? Because in 3e-7e it's 1/turn shot was quite capable of doing it's job. That changed with 8th. You couldn't 1-shot a Rhino, let alone any tank more dangerous that'd you'd actually aim such a gun at.

Tyel wrote:
All in all I don't think this is about sales, its just trying to make a one-shot weapon work.

So it IS about sales.
Because if the thing doesn't work, then people won't buy it.

So the only way to prove it isn’t about sales is if nothing worked?

ccs wrote:

Tyel wrote:

ccs wrote:
Yes.
Because GW determined that they weren't selling enough Hammerhead kits.
Solution: Make the Hammerhead a desirable unit.
Result: the rail guns new stats.

Do you think it took them 10 years to notice?

No. It only took them about 4 years (2017 - now).
Why? Because in 3e-7e it's 1/turn shot was quite capable of doing it's job. That changed with 8th. You couldn't 1-shot a Rhino, let alone any tank more dangerous that'd you'd actually aim such a gun at.

Tyel wrote:
All in all I don't think this is about sales, its just trying to make a one-shot weapon work.

So it IS about sales.
Because if the thing doesn't work, then people won't buy it.

"It's just for the sales" is kind of a dumb argument anyways. Multiple companies and studies have proven that games which are well balanced and are feelling "right" sell a lot better than those which aren't. Games have dropped in popularity (and thus sales) when balance went down or new mechanics/rules changes were frustrating people.

So of course is making one-shot hammer hands work for tau done because of sales. Because everything that makes the game better is good for sales.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
Honestly as a dark eldar player the only way i can think of fighting these things is just spamming lots of smaller vehicles. We still don't know what else tau have though.

@Tyel: I don't think you understand. I can only have 3 ravagers and a couple flyers. God only knows what else they can bring. Each shot that hits (the hardest part) and wounds (2+ to wound) will auto-kill almost any vehicles i have (each railgun shot does 7 damage+3 mortal wounds and avoids invulnerable saves and all my armor so 10 damage i can't avoid during its worst shots). If they pick out the ravagers first i'll be down a solid amount of firepower esp. if this happens turn 1. As i said before the only things i can do against this is spam vehicles or something similar.

Yes. I understand that. In the 25% scenario (exact stats depending) 3 hammerheads pop up and insta-kill your 3 ravagers. The game may be over right there. Kind of sucks, bad for game design.

But.... do you know what happens if say your 3 Ravagers and a Jetfighter pop up and shoot at 3 Hammerheads and roll in the top 25% probability bracket? I'm pretty sure you kill all 3. Which equally kind of sucks, bad for game design. But somehow the game has gone on (and ravagers have generally been one of the less complained about DE units).

I would agree if there weren't weapons already in the game that do the very same thing a lot more reliably.