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.

 Lobukia wrote:

 motyak wrote:
I have a question, is there really two different ranges for the Pulse Rifle in the rulebook? Or was that an innacurate rumour. Because if there is that error and they didn't faq it...

If course not. You're assuming this FAQ is because they caught an error in the book, which, of course, they didn't. What most likely happened is that either

A) Ward played a game against a shop Tau player and got missile reamed and due to his butthurt took the nerf bat out ASAP.
B) using the one day that GW design team is allowed to surf the interwebz, one of them saw a net list and had to preserve SM dominance over Tau.

There is no way I'll believe this was a correction instead of a post release nerf. Looking at the codex, you can see the intent for MDs being widely available all over the place.

At least they could have given kroot their attack back in the same document.

This. If the missile drone was seriously intended to be Broadsides only, it would have been in the Broadsides army entry in the same manner as the Riptide's SMDs. The fact they are on the general purpose drones list shows they were intended to be generally available.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grey Therion wrote:
This FAQ ruling, while astonishing, actually makes sense!

If you do the math, a squad of missile drones, even at BS2 greatly outperformed an equivalent Crisis Suit Missile squad while the drone squad had more than enough shots to take down flyers as well. Basically, 1-2 full missile drone squads could have easily become a staple in the army and even in my prototype lists I have been doing little but dropping units for more markerlights and missile drones.

But you couldn't take missile drone squads.

The fact that you can't take missile drones in the drone squad is proof they MEANT to specify that only broadsides could take them, but their inept codex editing team crapped the bed big time.

Well there goes the 56 str7 shot farsight bodyguard unit.

katfude wrote:
The fact that you can't take missile drones in the drone squad is proof they MEANT to specify that only broadsides could take them, but their inept codex editing team crapped the bed big time.

That is a heck of a leap. If Missile Drones were unique to Broadsides they would be contained within the Broadside entry. There is plenty of substantiating evidence in the new book that support this like the Interceptor Drones on the flyer.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
On the plus side, it does mean that Broadsides can have missiles on their missiles while they missile.

Oh man I really laughed out loud.... this MF'ers funny Guys...

My question is why does a riptide, which can fire 3 weapons only have 2?

@KRakarth : I think, in case it overcharges its secondary weapon to fire twice, this is to head off arguments that 'i you overcharge your secondary weapon you can't fire the ion cannon'


@ Missile Drones.
This is disappointing. Widely available missile pods would have alleviated a lot of the problems with the old codex: that decent weapons were concentrated on only 2 or 3 platforms. As another poster said: it looks like Fireknife is staying for another edition or two.

Its also frustating that S7 AP4 is good against a bunch of stuff, but against GEQ, MEQ and TEQ it's less effective than pulse rifles. Its not exactly overpowering - not nearly as much as giving out plasma to troops choices like other armies....

 Lobukia wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Earth Caste:"We are finally able to mass produce missile drones. Which unit is most in need for missile support? Yeah, very funny, I meant most in need, not least."

Well I'm getting strange looks for chucking at the table. +1

I wish they had done a limit per unit or the like. Surgery instead of chainsaw amputation.

Or y'know, just price them properly...

At 12 points for the entire drone they are less than purchasing a single missile pod for a crisis suit, sure they will die easier than the suit and are only BS2, but 12 points was never a sane price point for them, that's why people were likely to spam them.

The digital version of the codex has always had missile drones as broadside suit only. The FAQ was probably needed to bad editing of the printed version.

Well thats a croc, but I can see why the Broadsides are the only ones to get them.

And... the race is on, Ladies and Gentlemen!!!

Once again, Jeremy Vetock is off to an good start.

Will Vetock finally be able to de-throne Kelly's Space Wolves Codex, which is still holding the title for the sloppiest 40K Codex ever with a solid 7 pages of FAQ 4 years in a row?

With Codex Tau, Vetock is off to an excellent start.

We know Vetock is a strong contender.

His Army Book Skaven - no less than 9 pages of Errata and FAQ - is still the crappiest Games Workshop army supplement overall. He definitely should be up to the task, though his 40K work hasn't quite lived up to Kelly-levels of crap yet.

One should never underestimate Phil Kelly. He's got over a decade of writing gakky 40K Codexes under his belt. Time and again, he's proven he cannot grasp the most basic 40K mechanics if his life would depend on it.

It's a struggle for the history books!

Will Vetock beat 7 pages of FAQ/Errata or will Kelly defend his title?

Who will come out top?

Place your bets noooooooowww!

 Drunkspleen wrote:

My question is, why does a fun unit that might have seen widespread use get FAQ'd into being artificially restricted on day 1, and yet utterly broken things like the Tzeentch Chariot are still, well... broken, a month down the track.

I was wondering why there is still no updated Daemon FAQ...

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:

 Drunkspleen wrote:

My question is, why does a fun unit that might have seen widespread use get FAQ'd into being artificially restricted on day 1, and yet utterly broken things like the Tzeentch Chariot are still, well... broken, a month down the track.

I was wondering why there is still no updated Daemon FAQ...

Does it need one?

UltraPrime wrote:

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:

 Drunkspleen wrote:

My question is, why does a fun unit that might have seen widespread use get FAQ'd into being artificially restricted on day 1, and yet utterly broken things like the Tzeentch Chariot are still, well... broken, a month down the track.

I was wondering why there is still no updated Daemon FAQ...

Does it need one?

something to do with a chariot that cant shoot its weapon.... yep id say so

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
You couldn't take missile drone squads, only two missile drones per unit, which I think is fair when they also weren't affected by drone controllers.

You can't see where this would get silly?

At best, the Missile Drone Squads should be Riptides+Broadsides only.

They are. Riptide ones just come with shield generators.
As for why missile drones got nerfed, they were rather broken. They would have made gun drones obsolete, and being able to buy a pair of missile drones for practically every non-vehicle unit in the game would have seen them spammed as bad as Necron fliers. Yes, the few players who really wanted them for utility and planned to take only 3 in their entire list got hurt, but if that is the collateral damage to cut off Timmy Twenty Missile Drones at the knees, so be it.

It would have been much nicer and more elegant to do something like:
"Missile Drones are still experimental systems, so only two can be taken in a single squad (before being joined by independent characters)"
Problem solvered.

It seems that the FAQ is getting released to bring the iBook and hardback inline together like was said earlier. The Dark Angels iBook had all the correct entries from day one just like this one. FAQ is just serving to fix hardback issues. But the thing to note is that with this speedy of a release schedule, we shouldn't be surprised that the hardback has more issues. It has to get to into the distribution channels much faster than an electronic release. Heck, they can probably judge forum reaction of a leaked hardback and update the iBook in time to still tweak certain things.

But, this still points to a much quicker release schedule than I have seen since Rogue Trader days and I for one am ok with FAQ and errata updates. I just want new models and semi-consistent codex power levels. Good job (for once) GW.

stinkyjunk wrote:
It seems that the FAQ is getting released to bring the iBook and hardback inline together like was said earlier. The Dark Angels iBook had all the correct entries from day one just like this one. FAQ is just serving to fix hardback issues. But the thing to note is that with this speedy of a release schedule, we shouldn't be surprised that the hardback has more issues. It has to get to into the distribution channels much faster than an electronic release. Heck, they can probably judge forum reaction of a leaked hardback and update the iBook in time to still tweak certain things.

But, this still points to a much quicker release schedule than I have seen since Rogue Trader days and I for one am ok with FAQ and errata updates. I just want new models and semi-consistent codex power levels. Good job (for once) GW.

True. I honestly think this codex didn't have any unbearable ammount of . It looked and felt balanced, Tau being good at what they really are, shooting and giving us many options to do that. I can only guess they learnt something from CSM and Demons (Demons are so full of , it's ridiculous )

And yes, let them keep releasing codex (es? s?) like madmen. The more people re/join 40k because their army has been updated with shiny new stuff, the better! More people to crush!

 Zweischneid wrote:
And... the race is on, Ladies and Gentlemen!!!

Once again, Jeremy Vetock is off to an good start.

Will Vetock finally be able to de-throne Kelly's Space Wolves Codex, which is still holding the title for the sloppiest 40K Codex ever with a solid 7 pages of FAQ 4 years in a row?

With Codex Tau, Vetock is off to an excellent start.

We know Vetock is a strong contender.

His Army Book Skaven - no less than 9 pages of Errata and FAQ - is still the crappiest Games Workshop army supplement overall. He definitely should be up to the task, though his 40K work hasn't quite lived up to Kelly-levels of crap yet.

One should never underestimate Phil Kelly. He's got over a decade of writing gakky 40K Codexes under his belt. Time and again, he's proven he cannot grasp the most basic 40K mechanics if his life would depend on it.

It's a struggle for the history books!

Will Vetock beat 7 pages of FAQ/Errata or will Kelly defend his title?

Who will come out top?

Place your bets noooooooowww!

Actually, I think this Tau codex is one of the most cleanly written codexes ever.

While the Missile Drone omission in the print version sucks (it was in the iBook version from day one), overall 95% of the FAQ questions people seem to be asking are along the lines of: 'are you sure the rules mean what they say?' kind of questions.

So no, this isn't anywhere near the SW codex.

I think Jeremy Vetock seems like one of their best writers from what I'm seeing in this codex when it comes to clarity. The whole section on drones and how they behave when attached, etc, is very, very good compared to normal GW standards.

Just look at how non-existent the rules for Fenrisian wolves are in the SW codex to compare.

out of curiosity as iv not seen this before but why dos the velocity tacker allow you to shoot at normal BS against skimmers? i didnt think that was as snap shots?

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
out of curiosity as iv not seen this before but why dos the velocity tacker allow you to shoot at normal BS against skimmers? i didnt think that was as snap shots?

It allows you to decide if you want to activate Skyfire before you shoot your weapons. Skimmers are shot with the normal BS if you aren't using Skyfire. (And they still have their 5+ / 4+ jink save )

 TheDraconicLord wrote:

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
out of curiosity as iv not seen this before but why dos the velocity tacker allow you to shoot at normal BS against skimmers? i didnt think that was as snap shots?

It allows you to decide if you want to activate Skyfire before you shoot your weapons. Skimmers are shot with the normal BS if you aren't using Skyfire. (And they still have their 5+ / 4+ jink save )

right and im reading the "skyfire" rule attached to velocity tracker and it says "you may use your full BS when shooting at, flyers, FMC, and skimmers". when couldnt you use full BS when shooting at skimmers?

 yakface wrote:



Actually, I think this Tau codex is one of the most cleanly written codexes ever.

While the Missile Drone omission in the print version sucks (it was in the iBook version from day one), overall 95% of the FAQ questions people seem to be asking are along the lines of: 'are you sure the rules mean what they say?' kind of questions.

So no, this isn't anywhere near the SW codex.

I think Jeremy Vetock seems like one of their best writers from what I'm seeing in this codex when it comes to clarity. The whole section on drones and how they behave when attached, etc, is very, very good compared to normal GW standards.

Just look at how non-existent the rules for Fenrisian wolves are in the SW codex to compare.

Well, good to hear.

I still don't actually have the Codex yet (hurraaay independent-retailer-delay), but if Vetock's improved, I'm glad to hear it.

The Skaven book is a nightmare however, and Dark Angels is punching below its potential as a Codex, not least due its many errors, both simple spelling (e.g. rapis fire weapons) and unnecessarily ambiguous rulings (e.g. Standard of Devastation).

Admittedly, neither Skaven nor Dark Angels are as "important" to me as Tau. I hope its a good book.

I still wonder why GW dropped their A-list Codex writers for Warhammer 40K 6th Edition. None of the 6th Edition books (not having seen Tau yet) have been truly exceptional and inspiring IMO.

 ausYenLoWang wrote:

right and im reading the "skyfire" rule attached to velocity tracker and it says "you may use your full BS when shooting at, flyers, FMC, and skimmers". when couldnt you use full BS when shooting at skimmers?

Take the Hydra, for example...it has Skyfire (permanently). What the Skyfire rule means is that you only use your full BS when firing at flyers, FMC and skimmers.

So ANY OTHER type of unit (infantry, bikes, etc) you can only fire snap shots at them.

So yeah, when a model doesn't have skyfire Skimmers themselves don't have any weird BS protection, but the point is, when a model DOES have Skyfire everything except Skimmers, FMC and flyers they get penalized by having to fire snap shots only.

Make sense?

 ausYenLoWang wrote:
right and im reading the "skyfire" rule attached to velocity tracker and it says "you may use your full BS when shooting at, flyers, FMC, and skimmers". when couldnt you use full BS when shooting at skimmers?

Never. Without Skyfire, you shoot ground units and skimmers at full BS, flying stuff with snap shots. With Skyfire, you shoot flying stuff and skimmers at full BS and ground units with snap shots. Skimmers are always shot at full BS, but other targets are not, so the rule includes skimmers in the list of things which are shot at full BS with Skyfire.

So basically skimmers are such easy targets that they are hit equally well by people. Good to know.

Why do Eldar have such advanced tech again?

So I must infer from the two FAQ entries that this codex must be completely free from error and balanced exceptionally well. Good job GW!

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
So basically skimmers are such easy targets that they are hit equally well by people. Good to know.

Why do Eldar have such advanced tech again?

Exactly my thoughts. Cool advanced hover tanks get shot easily by everyone. I guess they compensate for this with Jink saves but still, it is an unnecessary exception to the Skyfire rule.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Oh... Well I should have known that firewarriors wouldn't get a nice special weapon in the squad.

And here I was hoping that we could see suit builds without missiles, just using drone back up. I was fine with them at BS2 because I was just going to take a crap load.

As long as I can still take my markerdrone cloud around my HQ, I'll be fine.

Firewarriors DID get big upgrades, they are just not IN their squads.

The tau book, while simplified in some regards from the last one, still is brimming with great synergy and tons of options.

This is a solid book, and players who are good at leveraging units strengths while avoiding weaknesses will enjoy it and do quite well.

Others may want to seek armies elsewhere....not every book is everyone's cup of tea...which is ok, then we would only have one kind of tea...