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.

Okay, so after paring down some of my stupid errors and the problems that were nothing more than gripes, I?ve still found the list of problems with the new Tau Empire Codex to be quite long. Here?s the list of problems:<?

 

 

Problems Continuing on from the old Codex:

 

1. They still haven't sorted out which mission rule takes precedence, Infiltration or Escalation, so Stealth Suits mostly likely suffer in Escalation games.

 

2. There?s still an unnecessary 100 point limit on Battlesuit Wargear.

 

3. There?s still an unnecessary 100 point limit on Infantry Wargear.

 

4. Shield Drones are still nerfed, at least when being shot at. In close combat all Drones are still nerfed.

 

5. The wording for Independent Character status was confusing under 3rd edition, resolved under 4th edition, but is now confused again thanks to the new Tau Empire Codex. GW (in all their all-knowing wisdom) just copied-and-pasted the IC wording from the 3rd edition Codex, so it?s probably a mistake.

 

6. The Pathfinder/Devilfish pre-game Scout move (and potentially the Escalation problem) still exists. It would have been so easy to fix (one sentence, GW, that?s all).

 

 

New Problems with the New Codex:

 

7. Twinlinked weapons are illegal according to the RAW, at least in two pieces of text. Elsewhere the Codex is contradictory.

 

8. It's is technically possible to have two independently firing Plasma Rifles on a Crisis Suit (if only because nowhere in the new Codex does it say you have to twinlink the two weapons). This is provided, of course, you argue that Problem #7 is non-existent or not applicable.

 

9. The poor editing on the last sentence for the Cyclic Ion Blaster (p26) makes no sense whatsoever. "Any rolls to wound of a 6 count as AP1, regardless of the target's Toughness." Since when has Toughness had anything to do with Armour Saves?

 

10. The Ejection System (p26) fails to state the VP conditions.

 

11. The text for the Failsafe Detonator (p26) fails to clarify if you have to declare the item's use before rolling for Falling Back or not.

 

12. The Stimulant Injector (p27) suffers from the Armour/Invulnerable problem that GW refuses to acknowledge.

 

13. Poor editing across the board (one example being on p31: "The missiles do not need a line of sight from the vehicle they are mounted on to the vehicle.").

 

14. Drones (p31) now have no Ld stat and so never flee. However, this doesn't apply to Gun Drone Squadrons (p38) for some unknown reason and who have Ld7.

 

15. The wording on the Commander's entry about Independent Characters has a RAW flaw. If a Commander is accompanied by a Bodyguard he no longer counts as an IC and cannot therefore join other units. However, if he has a bodyguard and drones, he technically can.

 

16. There?s no indication that O?Shovah replaces the compulsory 1+ Commander. Maybe he doesn?t (he is supposed to lead a Crisis-heavy army, after all?) but it clearly states in Shadowsun?s text that she does (even though she is not a Crisis-suit). This seems clearly marked but odd and so could do with some clarification.

 

17. Despite losing a point of BS, his Monsterous Creature status, and his beneficial Ork Fighter rule, O?Shovah still costs the same as he did in the old Codex. The reasoning behind this is that a free but useless new Ork Fighter upgrade, a larger but useless Bodyguard upgrade, and the free but inapplicable Bonding makes up for the loss. That?s debatable but seeing as how O?Shovah was vastly overpriced to begin with I have my doubts and would like to see some reasoning from the GW design team.

 

18. O?Shovah gives every model in his army who has access to the Armoury a free Bonding knife. Sounds great, doesn?t it? Unfortunately the only models that have access to (any) Armoury are Ethereals (who O?Shovah can?t include in his army) and some vehicles.

 

19. Shadowsun?s Command Link Drone rule states that (to be vague so as not to break copyright infringement) that some units may use her Ld within a certain distance. There is no ruling on the importance of the Drone itself. So even though the fluff clearly states it is the CLD that provides this bonus, the actual RAW says nothing of the kind. So you can lose the Drone and still benefit from the rule.

 

20. Note that Shadowsun is not an IC and (thanks to problem #5 above) may always be targeted.

 

 

 

 

Okay, so these (with the exception of the Shadowsun problems) have all been discussed to death in the previous similarly-titled topic, so please let?s not get into arguing about them here. They?re all correct as far as we can all tell, so let?s not waste time.

 

Instead, I?d like to hear any other problems people have discovered in the new Tau Empire Codex. Thank you, everyone.

Continuing Problems:

2 & 3(The 100 point Wargear limit): Everyone has this limit. They are just stating it now to be consistant and in case more wargear is added.

New Problems:

9(The CiB): Yea, editting was poor, the part about reguardless of toughness should be removed, imo. I read this as working the same way Sister's of Battle Divine Guidance works.

Weren't a stack of these corrected in the other thread?

1. They still haven't sorted out which mission rule takes precedence, Infiltration or Escalation, so Stealth Suits mostly likely suffer in Escalation games.

I'm not seeing a conflict here. They're only allowed to infiltrate in those missions that allow it. For any mission that uses Escalation, they're Jump Infantry, so don't set up on the board... which is probably why they can Deep Strike.

4. Shield Drones are still nerfed, at least when being shot at. In close combat all Drones are still nerfed.

Not sure why you would expect drones to NOT be nerfed in close combat...

7. Twinlinked weapons are illegal according to the RAW, at least in two pieces of text. Elsewhere the Codex is contradictory.

No idea what that is based on, since the armoury clearly allows twinlinking.

8. It's is technically possible to have two independently firing Plasma Rifles on a Crisis Suit

Covered in the other thread. You can't select any item from the armoury twice.

14. Drones (p31) now have no Ld stat and so never flee. However, this doesn't apply to Gun Drone Squadrons (p38) for some unknown reason and who have Ld7.

Drones would normally be accompanying another model... who DOES have a Ld stat. Squadrons work independantly. Not seeing a problem here.

18. O?Shovah gives every model in his army who has access to the Armoury a free Bonding knife. Sounds great, doesn?t it? Unfortunately the only models that have access to (any) Armoury are Ethereals (who O?Shovah can?t include in his army) and some vehicles.

Any model with access to any of the systems lists is accessing the Armoury...

Gotta refute some because the input was given and these made it to the final list anyways?

1. Is pg. 75 under infiltrate "The infiltrate ability does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table." Sufficient?

7. You cannot take the same weapon twice, however the codex also allows you to take a twin-linked weapon for 2 hardpoints. Twin linked is not the same as 'the same weapon twice'.

8. If you wanted to argue you could take a Twin linked missile pod, and then another single missile-pod, maybe?

14. Drones die if the controller dies, the controller will always have a LD stat. Gundrone squadrons are the exception, and voila they have a LD stat.



I'd like to add:
Poor editing under vespid stingwings. Vespid Stingwings are fleet! (Have fleet of wing? I suppose?)

Poor editing under vespid stingwings. Vespid Stingwings are fleet! (Have fleet of wing? I suppose?)

'Fleet' is the correct name if the USR.

Wow, after asking politely in both this and the other thread for only other problems and not arguments, within an hour I get three posts all about arguments. Sigh.

Okay, I'll do this once and once only.

Dragonpup said:
2 & 3(The 100 point Wargear limit): Everyone has this limit. They are just stating it now to be consistant and in case more wargear is added.

No, they don't. Not everyone has a 100 point limit and lots of other armies can reach 100 points. I said this in the other thread.

Insaniak said:
I'm not seeing a conflict here. They're only allowed to infiltrate in those missions that allow it. For any mission that uses Escalation, they're Jump Infantry, so don't set up on the board... which is probably why they can Deep Strike.

Okay, I get that you don't see the problem. But it exists. To be as brief as possible: Escalation disbars jump infantry from starting on the table unless they have a special rule that allows deployment. Infiltration is a special rule and allows deployment. Hence the circular logic problem.

Insaniak said:
Not sure why you would expect drones to NOT be nerfed in close combat...

Because they weren't nerfed under the old Codex and GW said they were fixing the Drone problem. Hence the problem.

Insaniak said:
No idea what that is based on, since the armoury clearly allows twinlinking.

To twinlink you have to take the same weapon system twice. The rules on the Armoury clearly state you cannot take the same weapon system twice.

Insaniak said:
Covered in the other thread. You can't select any item from the armoury twice.

Hmm... not covered in the other thread. Argued about, sure. But never settled and it's a problem that won't be resolved until GW put out a FAQ. And you've just argued the complete opposite. You're correct though. But if you ignore the first rule to get twinlinked weapons, you have to ignore it to take un-twinlinked weapons. You can't have it both ways.

b]Insaniak said:
Drones would normally be accompanying another model... who DOES have a Ld stat. Squadrons work independantly. Not seeing a problem here.

No, please re-read the drone rules. It's possible to have an 8-man Drone unit with no Ld. This is a problem.

Insaniak said:
Any model with access to any of the systems lists is accessing the Armoury...

No, they're accessing Wargear. That's completely different. If it wasn't why the two terms (i.e. the Ethereal's text). If what you say is true, then it brings up another problem that I dropped before (namely that the first column and possibly third column of the Infantry Armoury are not Wargear).

Moz said:
1. Is pg. 75 under infiltrate "The infiltrate ability does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table." Sufficient?

No. See above.

Moz said:
7. You cannot take the same weapon twice, however the codex also allows you to take a twin-linked weapon for 2 hardpoints. Twin linked is not the same as 'the same weapon twice'.

Yes it is. The Codex clearly states that twinlinked counts as two weapon systems. Two of a weapon, in other words. Therefore two items. Therefore it is illegal.

Moz said:
14. Drones die if the controller dies, the controller will always have a LD stat. Gundrone squadrons are the exception, and voila they have a LD stat.

Yes, but that's not what we're talking about. I suggest you re-read the Drones rules.




Okay, that's all taken care of. Now can we get back to listing problems we've all found, please?

Wow, after asking politely in both this and the other thread for only other problems and not arguments, within an hour I get three posts all about arguments. Sigh.

What did you expect? If it's not really a problem, it doesnt belong in a list of problems, now does it?

To be as brief as possible: Escalation disbars jump infantry from starting on the table unless they have a special rule that allows deployment. Infiltration is a special rule and allows deployment.

Infiltration does not allow units that would normally be held in reserve to deploy. There is no conflict here. Escalation forces Jump Infantry to be held in Reserve. Infiltration specically states that it does not over-ride this.

Because they weren't nerfed under the old Codex and GW said they were fixing the Drone problem. Hence the problem.

The 'Drone problem' was that they were useless against shooting attacks. Tau aren't SUPPOSED to be any good at close combat.

To twinlink you have to take the same weapon system twice.

Nope. You just pay the 'twinlinked' cost from the Armoury, and the model gains a twin-linked weapon system.

And you've just argued the complete opposite. You're correct though. But if you ignore the first rule to get twinlinked weapons, you have to ignore it to take un-twinlinked weapons. You can't have it both ways.

I did nothing of the sort. A Twinlinked weapon is a single option from the armoury. A single weapon is a single option from the armoury.

No, please re-read the drone rules. It's possible to have an 8-man Drone unit with no Ld. This is a problem.

How?

Either the Drones are linked to another model, in which case they are removed if the model dies, or they are a Squadron, in which case they have a Ld.

No, they're accessing Wargear.

And the Wargear comes from...?

Take a look at the 'Infantry Wargear' list. Look at the top of the box. See the title?

If it wasn't why the two terms (i.e. the Ethereal's text).

I don't see what the Ethereal's text has o do with it. He has access to the Infantry Armoury. So what?

If what you say is true, then it brings up another problem that I dropped before (namely that the first column and possibly third column of the Infantry Armoury are not Wargear).

Nonsense. The Infantry Armoury has a single secion entitled 'Infantry Wargear'

The 'Armoury' title shows that these items are being selected from the Armoury, and the 'Wargear' title shows that these items are Wargear.

It's that simple.

14. Drones die if the controller dies, the controller will always have a LD stat. Gundrone squadrons are the exception, and voila they have a LD stat.

Yes, but that's not what we're talking about. I suggest you re-read the Drones rules.

If you are referring to Drones that have dismounted from a vehicle, once they are dismounted they count as a Drone Squadron, and would use the appropriate statline. If that's not what you meant, I have no idea what you are talking about.

One case when the drones might need a leadership-Neural shredder.

90% of your problems seem to stem from your inability to accept rules you don't like. the only valid complaint you have is the poor wording of the Cyclic Ion Blaster.

the only valid complaint you have is the poor wording of the Cyclic Ion Blaster.

Which, for the record, although bizarre, is 100% playable.

here is one....


Independent Character:Unless accompanied by a bodyguard, the ________ is an independent character and follows the Independent Character special rules in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook... (PG 32,33, & 45)

This by itself says that if the IC has drones he is still an IC.

PG 31 under Drones

... If he is an Independent Character then the drones and character form a unit but the character and drones may still join another unit...

Is an 'Independent Character Unit' the same as an Independent Character?
Does it still mean that an IC can be targeted if behind the front line - if he has drones?

PG 47 Shadowsun Entry

Indepentent Character: Except when accompanied by her drones, Commander Shadowsun is an Independent Character ....

Why would having drones make her lose her IC status, when under all other IC references they keep their IC status?

Is an 'Independent Character Unit' the same as an Independent Character?

With the drones, the Crisis suit maintains its IC status. So he is treated like a seperate unit for purposes of hits/wounds/etc in CC. With the bodyguard, the Crisis suit is no longer an IC, so you can pull other models in the kill zone instead of him. They're guarding his body.

Does it still mean that an IC can be targeted if behind the front line - if he has drones?

He's just another unit. He's an IC in a unit, not an IC alone, so yes, the unit can be targeted behind the front lines.

Why would having drones make her lose her IC status, when under all other IC references they keep their IC status?

Because the devs wanted it that way. And that's a good thing for her too, because the drones can take the hits for her. Good deal.

I'll add my concern. It's based off the premise that you can take twin-linked weapons on crisis suits (which seems pretty clear to me, as the "two identical weapons" are treated as a singular twin-linked weapon). The twin-linked weapon, while only counting as a single weapon, counts as two battlesuit weapon systems. This, in turn, means you must have a multi-tracker on a model with twin-linked weapons. Otherwise, you can only fire one weapon system. I guess that means you can't fire at all, because you don't have two seperate weapons, just one twin-linked one.

On a related note, that means all the old commander suits with a twin-linked weapon and a regular one won't be able to fire all their weapons together, as that would be 3 crisis suit weapon systems, and only two can ever fire at a time.

Posted By bigchris1313 on 03/27/2006 11:17 PM

With the drones, the Crisis suit maintains its IC status. So he is treated like a seperate unit for purposes of hits/wounds/etc in CC. With the bodyguard, the Crisis suit is no longer an IC, so you can pull other models in the kill zone instead of him. They're guarding his body.

No; using this logic, numerous ICs would cease to be ICs, such as DE Archons, if they have a retinue.  I tried to argue the same as you once, and numerous posters argued that the BBB knocks that theory flat.  An IC is an IC, in CC.  Even with a retinue rule that says exactly the opposite.

 

I love this quote too:  4. Shield Drones are still nerfed, at least when being shot at. In close combat all Drones are still nerfed.

 

Insaniak and Stu-rat: invul saves are not taken into account when determining majority armor.  So that shield drone with the broadside gets a 2+ save, or its 4+ invul, and yes, the low AP hits can be assigned to it and not the broadside.  There is one poorly-worded sentence in the BBB which almost suggests that invul and armor saves are the same, but for majority purposes, a model's invul save is a choice, not mandatory.

Ooops, double-post.

No; using this logic, numerous ICs would cease to be ICs, such as DE Archons, if they have a retinue. I tried to argue the same as you once, and numerous posters argued that the BBB knocks that theory flat. An IC is an IC, in CC. Even with a retinue rule that says exactly the opposite.

I don't have the new Tau Dex, but if it specifically says that ICs aren't ICs if accompanied by X, then I'd assume they aren't ICs. Hmm, now let me check my Rulebook...

Well, I recant my previous statement. The BGB is clear. Damn. Thanks, Antonin.

"Okay, I get that you don't see the problem. But it exists. To be as brief as possible: Escalation disbars jump infantry from starting on the table unless they have a special rule that allows deployment. Infiltration is a special rule and allows deployment. Hence the circular logic problem."

Escalation determines deployment based upon the type of model.
Scouts determines deployment regardless of the type of model.

These are opposite rules. All Infiltration determines is a certain type of deployment, not who can and who cannot deploy.

Infiltration and Escalation do not conflict. If Stealth Suits had 'scout', then maybe you'd have an argument, but you don't here. Infiltration and Escalation are not mutually exclusive.

BYE

Posted By Grimaldi on 03/27/2006 11:30 PM
I'll add my concern. It's based off the premise that you can take twin-linked weapons on crisis suits (which seems pretty clear to me, as the "two identical weapons" are treated as a singular twin-linked weapon). The twin-linked weapon, while only counting as a single weapon, counts as two battlesuit weapon systems. This, in turn, means you must have a multi-tracker on a model with twin-linked weapons. Otherwise, you can only fire one weapon system. I guess that means you can't fire at all, because you don't have two seperate weapons, just one twin-linked one.

On a related note, that means all the old commander suits with a twin-linked weapon and a regular one won't be able to fire all their weapons together, as that would be 3 crisis suit weapon systems, and only two can ever fire at a time.

A twin-linked weapon only counts as a single weapon being fired, they just take two hardpoints on a crisis suit.

1. Not a problem, not an issue, been discussed and discounted in reply after reply. Stealth suits start off board in escalation, therefore they can't infiltrate.

2, 3. As mentioned, this may have to do with planned or possible future additions to the Tau. It doesn't DO anything right now, but it potentially can come into play in a future White Dwarf, possibly Cities of Death, or some other thing that hasn't come along yet.

4. Shield drones may not be as good as they can be, but they have improved from the 4th edition FAQ debacle. Either way, this isn't a PROBLEM, it's just a matter of usefulness.

5. Uhhhh, the Crisis Commander, Ethereal, Farsight and Shadowsun, which are the specifically noted Independant Characters, all say to follow the independant character rules in the warhammer 40,000 rulebook. How does this mean that it functions differently than in the rulebook?

6. Agreed, that is a goofed up rule that needs to be corrected, hopefully to be resolved in a FAQ.

7. The rules do conflict with themselves, but as it specifically lists twin linked weapons with price and how they are to be ruled, then most people will allow it. The only ones that wont, also don't give terminator armor to terminators.

8. P25. "the second is for two weapons (Counting as a twin linked weapon of that type). So, if you buy two weapons, you need to use the 2nd price, and they count as twin linked.

9. There are rumors floating around that the odd wording on the CIB is in relation to planned elements in the upcoming Eldar codex that is supposedly coming out in November.

10. True, does not state victory conditions. However, it can be extrapolated fairly easily. ALL the units that can take it are multi-wound units. An ejected pilot only has one wound, so you would most likely count it as a wounded unit. Therefore it doesn't count as scoring and gives half points while the ejected pilot is alive.

11. Well, if the rest of the unit falls back other than the character using the detonator, then you have to break cohesion to do so. So, the fallback move you make is dictated by your using the detonator or not. Pretty inflexible sequence of events.

12. This isn't an issue with the Tau codex, it's a greater rules issue. Nothing in the codex specifically is an issue.

13. yep, poor editing. We all know this, no need to bring it up again as we all agree and acknowledge it.

14. This has been clearly solved already. Drones that fall under a drone controller follow the rest of the unit. Drones that come off of vehicles function as a drone squadron.... which has a leadership rating of 7

15. No, he cant. Drones do not take away the IC designation, but bodyguards do. You're combining things in a manner than doesn't add up in the wording.

17. You're not making much sense there. In one sentance you say he looses the ork fighter rule, and another you say that he has it but it's useless. But he basically functions the same as he did in 3rd edition before the Monsterous Creature rule changed.

18. OK. #1, since when did access to the armory have anything to do with an item given to a character in an entry? If the entry says they have it, they have it, regardless if they can buy other stuff from the armory or not.
Also, you're totally wrong on this. ALL battlesuit units, Fire Warriors, Pathfinders, and ethereals can have at least one model access the appropriate parts of the armories. It just specifies which part of the armory instead of saying "the armory".

20.. Shadowsun IS an independant character when she isn't accompanied by drones.

-Hans

Posted By Phausi on 03/28/2006 1:32 AM

Posted By Grimaldi on 03/27/2006 11:30 PM
I'll add my concern. It's based off the premise that you can take twin-linked weapons on crisis suits (which seems pretty clear to me, as the "two identical weapons" are treated as a singular twin-linked weapon). The twin-linked weapon, while only counting as a single weapon, counts as two battlesuit weapon systems. This, in turn, means you must have a multi-tracker on a model with twin-linked weapons. Otherwise, you can only fire one weapon system. I guess that means you can't fire at all, because you don't have two seperate weapons, just one twin-linked one.

On a related note, that means all the old commander suits with a twin-linked weapon and a regular one won't be able to fire all their weapons together, as that would be 3 crisis suit weapon systems, and only two can ever fire at a time.

A twin-linked weapon only counts as a single weapon being fired, they just take two hardpoints on a crisis suit.

I don't think that fully addresses the issue.  Again, while two identical weapons are magically transformed into a single, twin-linked weapon to avoid the issue of having identical items on the same suit, it clearly states that a twin-linked weapon counts as two weapon systems.  It doesn't say it occupies two hardpoints...two crisis suit weapon systems.  The multi-tracker allows the firing of two crisis suit weapon systems in the same phase.  Let's break it down as follows:

1 plasma gun = 1 weapon = 1 crisis suit weapon system  can fire normally

2 plasma guns = 1 twin-linked weapon = 2 crisis suit weapon systems

1 plasma gun + 1 burst cannon = 2 weapons = 2 crisis suit weapon systems

* The multitracker allows the firing of two crisis suit weapon systems in the same turn

 

If you can fire the single twin-linked weapon without a multi-tracker (because it's a single weapon), you can apparently fire two crisis suit weapon systems a turn without a multitracker.  If that's the case, you can fire the plasma gun and burst cannon together without a multitracker, because they too count as 2 crisis suit weapons.

The only argument against this would be to say that any model may fire a single weapon like the twin-linked plasma gun, so the need for a multi-tracker is ignored.  If that is the case, I would say the plasma gun and burst cannon can't fire together even with a multitracker, because they count as two seperate weapons in addition to being two crisis suit weapon systems, and the multitracker only addresses the crisis suit weapon systems portion of the requirement.

Most of which could have easily been avoided without the needless discussion of converting weapons into crisis suit weapon systems.

I think people are really pulling at straws here.

You can fire 1 TL system and 1 other weapon with a multi-tracker. TL is 2 Slots but 1 weapon. Plan and simple.

Read Infiltration again in UNIVERSAL RULES. It says "You must be able to start on the table." No Jump Troops can be on the table in Escalation missions. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

Posted By CaptAnderton on 03/28/2006 6:40 AM
I think people are really pulling at straws here.

You can fire 1 TL system and 1 other weapon with a multi-tracker. TL is 2 Slots but 1 weapon. Plan and simple.

Plain and simple?  So when the codex says the twin-linked system counts as two crisis suit weapon systems, and a single mounted weapon system counts as 1 crisis suit weapon system, and a multitracker allow the suit to fire 2 crisis suit weapon systems in the same turn, it really means three?  The twin-linked weapon counts as a single weapon sometimes, but two crisis suit weapon systems at others?  The multitracker entry really meant to say two weapons, and not two weapon systems?

Maybe the codex designers don't want a twin-linked system and a regular system to fire at the same time.  That's what the rules seem to suggest to me.  Who knows what they really intended?

Tell me where in BLACK AND WHITE it says that Multri-trackers are needed to fire TL weapons? It doesn't. Show me where it says that if you buy TL weapons you have to have a multi-tracker. It doesn't.

Player 1 - Ok my CS has a TL Missile Pod/Target Lock/Drone Controller.

Player 2 - I'm sorry but you can't fire any missiles because you dont' have a Multi-tracker.

Player 1 looks at Player 2 and says - Are you stupid?

Player 2 - Dakka says....

Player 1 - There is your proplem.

Grimaldi, is this nonsense about "counting as two weapon systems" exclusive to the new Tau Empire codex?

My old Tau codex has no such quote and everything regarding twin-linked weapons and multi-trackers is very clear and, in my opinion, could not lead to your conclusions...

Ok, so by your logic I can take a commander suit with twin-linked plasma guns, twin linked missile pods and a multitracker The only requirement on the suit is that I must take three systems. Fine, I've got 5. Show me in black and white where it says I must take three systems and no more.

Of course, I can fire both twin linked weapons simultaneously, too. Your single twin-linked weapon can fire without a multitracker, despite the fact that it counts as "two crisis suit weapon systems". Therefore, my two twin-linked systems can surely fire if they have a multitracker? Heck, maybe I don't need the multitracker at all.

It's easy for us to say what it's supposed to mean, because we've seen the previous codex and have some perspective. If I were a new player, and this were my first codex, I'd be very confused on these questions.

Posted By dreddnott on 03/28/2006 10:29 AM
Grimaldi, is this nonsense about "counting as two weapon systems" exclusive to the new Tau Empire codex?

My old Tau codex has no such quote and everything regarding twin-linked weapons and multi-trackers is very clear and, in my opinion, could not lead to your conclusions...

That's a good point.  The previous 'dex is much more clear, I feel.  They talk about putting weapons and support systems on hardpoints, which easily establishes limits and such on what you can take.  With taking the same weapon, it doesn't have the new 'dex's confusing additon of a twin-linked weapon counting as two weapon systems.  It just says mounting the same weapon on two hardpoints means it fires as a single, twin-linked weapon.  It additonally adds that without a multitracker, a suit can only fire a single weapon type each turn.

 

Again, I'm not trying to be stupid here, but I think the new codex adds a line or two that makes things less clear-cut than it was last version.  Is there a reason?  I don't recall anyone having issues with the last version (except the general lack of wargear for suits), so why change it?

@ bigchris

EDIT: Pulled Hijack to make new thread. Topic Discussion continued in the 'Independent Character Status' thread

Why change it? Unless the new weapons really change things, they're morons. If it's ambiguous in the new codex, the old codex sets a logical precedent that I'm sure they didn't intend to undermine.

Who worked on the new codex anyways?

I figured I'd test my theory by having a complete 40k novice look the rules over. After my wife gave me the evil eye, I managed to convince her it would be a fun logic game where she might get to make me look like a fool.

Best quote: "How can they say taking two weapon systems counts as a single, twin-linked weapon system, and then say a twin-linked weapon counts as two weapon systems in the very next sentence?"

After reading the 'dex (new only) and this thread, she said the rules could be much clearer, but overall disagreed with my take. Disagreed to the point of saying she was shocked at how dumb I looked, and she was tempted to register just to apologize for me being so stupid.

Ah, women.

I still think there's something wrong with the way twin-linked weapons and multi-trackers are worded, but if everyone else thinks they work exactly the same as last version, that's good enough for me.  I'm sure that's the intent, but the actual wording seems.....off.

I agree with you, Grimaldi, that the wording indicates you cannot take a twin-linked weapon and make it work without a multi-tracker. It's the result of GW changing from the badly explained "hardpoint" system in the last codex, to the worse explained "systems" system in the new one.

I can't believe it was GW's intention not to let TL weapons work, or to allow double wielding of single weapons, so I shall be playing it the same way as the first codex.