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.

I was surfing the forge world site for tau and my eyes came across the remora fighter. It occured to me that the remora is cheaper, more survivable, and comes with 2 seeker missiles and a !networked! markerlight compared to the new tau bomber having only 2 seeker missiles and one non networked markerlight, in addition to having heavy burst cannons, which seem better versus the pulse bomb.

Does the sunshark really stand a chance competetively? Am I missing some horrible part of the remora? Also, buying 2 remoras is cheaper than buying a sunshark!

Aside from the fact that a lot of tournaments/players refuse to allow FW units, not really.

Remoras are IMO superior, and look stylin' too

Remoras are garbage. They're stuck with their 4th edition point cost, so if you compare them to the codex flyers or Barracuda the firepower you get for your points is a joke. The concept is good though, so maybe once they get a proper update (IA:Aeronautica updated the rules for 6th but didn't re-balance them) they'll become a viable option.

Also, the BCs are NOT heavy burst cannons, they're just regular ones with twice the range.