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.

What would the point of pathfinders even be with a flat ability that can't stack?

Yeah, you can target separate units, but now markers aren't really needed in volume since anything more than a single token would be a waste.

Honestly I'd prefer if they changed markers to only work for the squad they are attached to unless listed elsewhere. The effect is completely different for each unit it's used for. The unit with the marker forgoes shooting and instead acts as a spotter for his unit. This would make squad leaders, even for crisis suits, have to give up something in order to buff the unit. Still based on a simple shooting mechanic.

Examples:
Firewarriors: If the Shas'ui hits the mark, the squad benefits from +1 BS.
Crisis suits would be buffed to BS4 base. If the marker shot hits the target the unit benefits from ignore cover, template weapons would be counted as twin-linked instead.
Broadsides would be buffed to BS4 base and if the marker lands the unit gets tankhunter or monster hunter for that target.
A Skyray that uses it's own marker would gain missile lock. It could avoid firing any weapons and use it's markers to allow another unit to shot at aircraft and FMC at BS2 vice BS1.
Pathfinders would be open to becoming a scout unit that utilizes special weaponry.

Drones would be difficult, but I could imagine that the price of marker drones and drone controllers increasing to allow the leader to fire while the drone targets.

This also gives the options for IC to give unique buffs to squads for shooting. It's something that would need a lot of reworking and would take up a lot of rule space, I know. It's just how I'd prefer the mechanic to be.

LockeWatts wrote:
Kanlauwen, you are just so damn toxic when it comes to discussing Tau.

I will freely admit that yes, I let my mouth get the better of me to start with. I was having a bad day and let it control my posting to Savageconvoy.

You want to nerf them to the power of the old (bad) codices, when most people are discussing how to bring them in line with the other 7th edition codices.

Skitarii, Cult Mechanicus, Space Wolves, Imperial Knights, Khorne Daemonkin, and Harlequin are all 7th edition codices. Do you really want to argue that those books are as powerful as Codex: Necrons or Eldar or Dark Angels(feels weird saying that name and "powerful" together!) or Space Marines?

And out of all the new 7th edition codices, you won't find that the armies as a whole are what is powerful but rather specific formations made up of specific units.
You don't hear people talking about how powerful the 10th Company Strike Force or 1st Company Strike Force are in Space Marines. You hear them talking about how broken it is having the Demi-Companies min-maxed as much as possible with specific Chapter Tactics to get their "free" transports.

You don't hear people talking about how powerful an Eldar Warhost consisting of a Guardian Battlehost, Aspect Shrine, and Outcasts is. You hear them talking about Windrider Hosts and Wraith Hosts.

Furthermore, you some how have this religious level bent against the Tau, where you argue for nerfs and when comparisons are made to other powerful things in the game, you either argue those should be nerfed too, or "boo hoo Tau players".

Yep. I'll say "boohoo Tau players" when they argue that "because Wraithknights are powerful, Riptides should be buffed" because that's a ridiculous argument to make. Just like I will say that Wraithknights should be nerfed if I'm asked about it.

That's not "having a religious level bent against the Tau", that's called "wanting consistent game balance".

Damn dude. We get it, you want to wield the nerfhammer. The rest of us would like something else.

And the rest of the player base would likely prefer either every book get brought up to Space Marine/Necron/Dark Angels levels, not Eldar levels, or every book gets brought down to match the non-Decurion style of books.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
What would the point of pathfinders even be with a flat ability that can't stack?

Yeah, you can target separate units, but now markers aren't really needed in volume since anything more than a single token would be a waste.

Honestly I'd prefer if they changed markers to only work for the squad they are attached to unless listed elsewhere. The effect is completely different for each unit it's used for. The unit with the marker forgoes shooting and instead acts as a spotter for his unit. This would make squad leaders, even for crisis suits, have to give up something in order to buff the unit. Still based on a simple shooting mechanic.

Examples:
Firewarriors: If the Shas'ui hits the mark, the squad benefits from +1 BS.
Crisis suits would be buffed to BS4 base. If the marker shot hits the target the unit benefits from ignore cover, template weapons would be counted as twin-linked instead.
Broadsides would be buffed to BS4 base and if the marker lands the unit gets tankhunter or monster hunter for that target.
A Skyray that uses it's own marker would gain missile lock. It could avoid firing any weapons and use it's markers to allow another unit to shot at aircraft and FMC at BS2 vice BS1.
Pathfinders would be open to becoming a scout unit that utilizes special weaponry.

Drones would be difficult, but I could imagine that the price of marker drones and drone controllers increasing to allow the leader to fire while the drone targets.

This also gives the options for IC to give unique buffs to squads for shooting. It's something that would need a lot of reworking and would take up a lot of rule space, I know. It's just how I'd prefer the mechanic to be.

I like these. Makes each one feel unique and definitely fits the Tau theme of MSU. Lotta work but i think it would ultimately be worth it.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
What would the point of pathfinders even be with a flat ability that can't stack?

Yeah, you can target separate units, but now markers aren't really needed in volume since anything more than a single token would be a waste.

Which is the point because nowhere did I say that I wanted to keep the token system around.

By making Markerlights a flat ability which does quite a bit overall(reroll failed To Hits and To Wounds, +6" range, and an additional attack with their ranged weapons seems to keep getting overlooked) and removing the token nonsense the intent is twofold:
1)Having Split Fire means that you can utilize a special weapon in a 5 man Pathfinder Team to fire at a different target.
2)You can put Markerlights on two separate targets and get the bonuses spread out more.

Although thinking a bit more, I would give them something more than "just" Split Fire, possibly a special rule called "Forward Observers" where up to half of the Pathfinder Team(rounding down if not an even number) can each choose to fire at separate targets to the main unit but only utilizing Markerlights and it not counting as separate targets for the purposes of Split Fire.

So realistically, that would mean:
A 5 man Pathfinder Team could put Markerlights on two separate targets while the remaining 3 models could fire at two separate targets while a 10 man Pathfinder Team could put Markerlights on 5 different targets while the remaining models could fire at two separate targets or 9 could fire their Pulse Carbines/Rail Rifles at one target and one could fire at a different target with whatever.

Honestly I'd prefer if they changed markers to only work for the squad they are attached to unless listed elsewhere. The effect is completely different for each unit it's used for. The unit with the marker forgoes shooting and instead acts as a spotter for his unit. This would make squad leaders, even for crisis suits, have to give up something in order to buff the unit. Still based on a simple shooting mechanic.

I disagree with this conceptually, simply because your proposals are not realistically "giving up something in order to buff the unit".

As an example?

Examples:
Firewarriors: If the Shas'ui hits the mark, the squad benefits from +1 BS.

Here, you sacrifice a single Pulse Rifle shot to fire a Markerlight shot to grant +1 BS to the remaining members of the squad.

That's not really a huge sacrifice.

Crisis suits would be buffed to BS4 base. If the marker shot hits the target the unit benefits from ignore cover, template weapons would be counted as twin-linked instead.

Again, not a huge sacrifice. One of three suits doesn't fire but the entirety of the unit gains Ignore Cover?

Broadsides would be buffed to BS4 base and if the marker lands the unit gets tankhunter or monster hunter for that target.

Honestly, this one I can almost get behind but for the fact that it leaves HYMP still in a much better place than they deserve to be.

A Skyray that uses it's own marker would gain missile lock. It could avoid firing any weapons and use it's markers to allow another unit to shot at aircraft and FMC at BS2 vice BS1.

Skyrays as a markerlight platform for others I have to disagree with. They should be a "closed network Markerlight", only allowing other Skyrays in their Squadrons to fire at the same time.

Pathfinders would be open to becoming a scout unit that utilizes special weaponry.

Then they wouldn't be the Pathfinders that have existed before and they usurp the point of Stealth Teams; which are scout units that are intended to actually wreak havoc unlike Pathfinders who are there to guide/direct the army.

Drones would be difficult, but I could imagine that the price of marker drones and drone controllers increasing to allow the leader to fire while the drone targets.

Simple solution:
Marker Drones are removed from the Drone options but instead single Marker Drones can be fielded as non-FOC consuming options. A single Marker Drone by itself should be something like 10 points and be upgraded to include Stealth.

This also gives the options for IC to give unique buffs to squads for shooting. It's something that would need a lot of reworking and would take up a lot of rule space, I know. It's just how I'd prefer the mechanic to be.

I just don't see why ICs should give some kind of "unique buffs to squads for shooting" when most of them already do?

Fireblades grant an additional Pulse Weapon shot if the unit doesn't move and Ethereals can grant an additional shot for Pulse Weapons in a bubble.

 Kanluwen wrote:

1)Having Split Fire means that you can utilize a special weapon in a 5 man Pathfinder Team to fire at a different target.

People aren't taking special weapons on pathfinders because they are incredibly expensive for a BS3 model in a small unit of T3, 5+ models with generally bad leadership. They just aren't a unit that is meant to do much in it's current state than provide support for units and not really actively engage units.

Here, you sacrifice a single Pulse Rifle shot to fire a Markerlight shot to grant +1 BS to the remaining members of the squad.

That's not really a huge sacrifice.

Wasn't meant to be. It's 10 points for a Shas'ui with an additional 15 for a marker currently. It's supposed to be a cost effective way to give a boost to the unit while making squad leader upgrades actually worth taking.

Again, not a huge sacrifice. One of three suits doesn't fire but the entirety of the unit gains Ignore Cover?

A crisis suit is a huge deal. You're cutting out 1/3 potential fire for the unit to gain a suitable advantage. That is a big sacrifice. Besides, Crisis suit weapons aren't that excessive all things considered. There are psychic powers that grant similar buffs without really making the unit lose anything in the process.

Honestly, this one I can almost get behind but for the fact that it leaves HYMP still in a much better place than they deserve to be.

Not going to lie, I can't think of a good fix for missile sides. I'd honestly prefer them to have weapons like a twin-linked Air-bursting Fragmentation Projector. Who even remembers that weapon exists?

Skyrays as a markerlight platform for others I have to disagree with. They should be a "closed network Markerlight", only allowing other Skyrays in their Squadrons to fire at the same time.

I could see this working if they allowed Tau to Squadron their vehicles aside from the Piranha. Personally I always saw the Skyray as more of a long range support and targeting vehicle, but I think there are a few options that could work.

Then they wouldn't be the Pathfinders that have existed before and they usurp the point of Stealth Teams; which are scout units that are intended to actually wreak havoc unlike Pathfinders who are there to guide/direct the army.

True. But personally I feel both units need an overhaul. Pathfinders don't feel like mobile scouts because of their heavy weapons. Stealth Suits just can't dish out enough damage alongside their invulnerability and high point cost. The nature of the game means the few turns that Pathfinders exist should be spent maximizing units marked and removed rather than trying to move or use special weapons. The entire concept of them having a transport they can't really utilize without sacrificing a lot of firepower for the whole army is just beyond me.

Simple solution:
Marker Drones are removed from the Drone options but instead single Marker Drones can be fielded as non-FOC consuming options. A single Marker Drone by itself should be something like 10 points and be upgraded to include Stealth.

This is possible. I was considering jumping the points up and letting them be purchased solely as wargear.
The only problem with that is that the drone squads would just be limited to gun and the useless shield drone.
But I've always figured those should be allowed to purchase 1 sniper drone or missile for every 4 gun drones.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

1)Having Split Fire means that you can utilize a special weapon in a 5 man Pathfinder Team to fire at a different target.

People aren't taking special weapons on pathfinders because they are incredibly expensive for a BS3 model in a small unit of T3, 5+ models with generally bad leadership. They just aren't a unit that is meant to do much in it's current state than provide support for units and not really actively engage units.

Which is why I bumped them up to have Stealth and made a point of mentioning that "I would be surprised if Pathfinders were not made to be BS4 with the next book".

And thank you for emphasizing my earlier point for me. Pathfinders literally are there to do nothing but be Markerlight platforms in the eyes of most players.

Here, you sacrifice a single Pulse Rifle shot to fire a Markerlight shot to grant +1 BS to the remaining members of the squad.

That's not really a huge sacrifice.

Wasn't meant to be. It's 10 points for a Shas'ui with an additional 15 for a marker currently. It's supposed to be a cost effective way to give a boost to the unit while making squad leader upgrades actually worth taking.

Do you really think that they will not make Squad Leaders mandatory at a slight increase to the squad?

There are far more ways to give a boost to the unit than simply making it so that the squad leader grants you a Markerlight and +1 BS for 25 points(because that wouldn't be a "must take" upgrade at all in the eyes of many Tau players!).

If anything, I think that this divide between where you stand on Markerlights and where I stand emphasizes that maybe there should be different Markerlights in the Tau Empire book.

Again, not a huge sacrifice. One of three suits doesn't fire but the entirety of the unit gains Ignore Cover?

A crisis suit is a huge deal. You're cutting out 1/3 potential fire for the unit to gain a suitable advantage. That is a big sacrifice. Besides, Crisis suit weapons aren't that excessive all things considered.