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.

Jefffar wrote:

Sasori wrote:

SabrX wrote:IMO, Hammerheads should be like the Necron Doom Scythe's Death Ray, but with 72" straight line from the barrel rather than nominating a point and additional 3D6" line to a second point. I don't see the point in reducing strength given the BA Blood Lance and Necron Death Ray doesn't suffer the same drawbacks.

That would be way to good. The Deathray has a lot of drawbacks, such as it's high cost, fragility, and random distance to take into account for it's weapon. The Hammerhead would have to not only take a serious price rise for what you are suggesting, but also come with some serious drawbacks.

Hammerhead is already decently overpriced as it is, wouldn't need a serious disadvantage to provide that upgrade. Maybe make it an Ordnance mode.

Yes it would. The Doomscythe costs 175 points on an AV 11 platform, and the Deathray has a random range. What he is proposing, is a 72' line, that can hit multiple units, and is Strength 10 AP1. How on earth would it not need a serious disadvantage and massive cost increase, to justify that kind of firepower?

The problem is that Cadians are supposed to be elite riflemen that spend their entire, admittedly short, lives training to use the lasgun. The fact that they are BS 3 base is unacceptable. BS 4 base is the least I expect, hell they don't even have to change anything else. Just up the BS of every IG unit in the codex by 1. Suddenly the codex is almost completely viable.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:The problem is that Cadians are supposed to be elite riflemen that spend their entire, admittedly short, lives training to use the lasgun. The fact that they are BS 3 base is unacceptable. BS 4 base is the least I expect, hell they don't even have to change anything else. Just up the BS of every IG unit in the codex by 1. Suddenly the codex is almost completely viable.

I don't know how serious or sarcastic you're trying to be but IG cadians had a rule previously where they rerolled 1's to hit when shooting and currently have access (like all IG) to veteran squads as troops. Your training for 10 years but still only 20 years old cadians have an elite option to represent the fluff.

Either way, I don't see FW at BS4 but crisis suits should be. It always astounds me that a veteran Tau soldier who has at least 8 years of combat experience and is piloting an advanced robot with hitech targeting sensors has the same chance to hit as a guardsman only a few months out of bootcamp with an iron sight on his lasgun. Crisis suits either need a downgrade on points cost or a bump on meaningful abilities (like hit and run and BS4 standard).

And this, kids, is why we leave rules writing to the pros and not to the internet community

chaos0xomega wrote:And this, kids, is why we leave rules writing to the pros and not to the internet community

Talking to me or slowpoke? Your post just appeared after I submitted so I'm not sure.

It was aimed at Sasori primarily, but also slowpoke due to the counterargument (which is valid, but also not a very productive way of making a point). Really, its just an in general statement in response to the general BS3/BS4 argument that erupts in every Tau wishlist/rumor thread ever.

Actually there is a slight increase in the chance to hit with BS2/twin-linked. Maybe they should just do that for FW.

Yeah statistically, BS2 TL is a 55% to hit.

chaos0xomega wrote:It was aimed at Sasori primarily, but also slowpoke due to the counterargument (which is valid, but also not a very productive way of making a point). Really, its just an in general statement in response to the general BS3/BS4 argument that erupts in every Tau wishlist/rumor thread ever.

Sorry if I sound a bit confused, but are you saying you Agree with me? or you Agree with the insane ideas for the Hammerhead?

While I do think it would be cool to see a deathray hammerhead, I'm agreeing with neither of you. The point of the statement is to point out that neither side really knows what they are talking about because they are gamers and not game developers, and they don't have a full view of what goes on behind the scenes in rules development (implying you dont know the algorithms or processes used to determine points cost/balance rules).

Sasori wrote:

Jefffar wrote:

Sasori wrote:

SabrX wrote:IMO, Hammerheads should be like the Necron Doom Scythe's Death Ray, but with 72" straight line from the barrel rather than nominating a point and additional 3D6" line to a second point. I don't see the point in reducing strength given the BA Blood Lance and Necron Death Ray doesn't suffer the same drawbacks.

That would be way to good. The Deathray has a lot of drawbacks, such as it's high cost, fragility, and random distance to take into account for it's weapon. The Hammerhead would have to not only take a serious price rise for what you are suggesting, but also come with some serious drawbacks.

Hammerhead is already decently overpriced as it is, wouldn't need a serious disadvantage to provide that upgrade. Maybe make it an Ordnance mode.

Yes it would. The Doomscythe costs 175 points on an AV 11 platform, and the Deathray has a random range. What he is proposing, is a 72' line, that can hit multiple units, and is Strength 10 AP1. How on earth would it not need a serious disadvantage and massive cost increase, to justify that kind of firepower?

Except the doom-scythe is super sonic. I have play tested the hammer head death-ray when these rumors were first leaked a year ago and it isn't as OP as it sounds. The hammer heads low mobility means that unless you move it for three turns or play a noob you won't ever "spear" more then two units. You also need to keep in mind that this rule acts diferently then the DS as the DS can direct where the ray moves form point A to point B. If the hammer head shoots then point A isn't 12" away from it like the DS but is it's gun itself. Currently the HH is a piece of shart. It really should be feared.

chaos0xomega wrote:While I do think it would be cool to see a deathray hammerhead, I'm agreeing with neither of you. The point of the statement is to point out that neither side really knows what they are talking about because they are gamers and not game developers...

Oh THAT'S why GW is so bad, they don't even play their own game they write. There game developers must have a lot of trouble testing rules when they can't play the game too. Makes a lot more sense now.

It's really simple statistics in the long run. What mathematically can be done to balance them out? Easy, punch in all the numbers and calculate cost to effect ratios. now take IG codex and do the same and then run a regression analysis on them and see if they come out even (Pro tip: they won't). If you are feeling brave, do this for all codices and run a multiple regressions analysis and see where Tau land on this line. My earlier statement about all Tau really needed was a 10% cost reduction came from me doing the first of these two options. Tau are ~11% more expensive in the cost/effectiveness department than IG (Using all units at null gear loadout).

Also I find it really silly to say that the "gamer" can't contribute to the development of codices. Do we really want GW to write codices with zero feedback from their consumers?

BS4 for FW is enough for me to start playing Tau.

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:BS4 for FW is enough for me to start playing Tau.

BS4 Firewarriors would make me quit Tau.

Backfire wrote:

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:BS4 for FW is enough for me to start playing Tau.

BS4 Firewarriors would make me quit Tau.

BS4 FWs for me, would make sense if they are well trained marksmen...
I mean, I don't know much fluff to be honest, just bits I hear at my club mainly, but from what I gather, and this may be totally wrong, IG rely more on mass numbers rather than brilliant training. While Tau seem more like they would train the Fire Warriors for ages before they get sent into battle, and by that time they would be pretty good shooters. Tau are a shooty army, they are really poor in assault at the moment, having shooty stuff at BS3 doesn't seem fair, they can't quite get the numbers that IG can, so they are at a disadvantage.

Backfire wrote:

Bleak_Fantasy wrote:BS4 for FW is enough for me to start playing Tau.

BS4 Firewarriors would make me quit Tau.

I agree. BS4 would be a complete cop-out in design.
The overall idea with the current stat system is that humans are baseline. With this idea, armies with base BS of 4 should be rare. But since fully 3/4 of the Codex out there are SM, the proportions are a little off.

With the current system, the Tau are overcosted, and lacking in the super-special rules. A 10-15% decrease in cost would do just about right, under the current rules. However, with 6th right around the corner I'll just wait to see how it plays out, and wait for some rumint before crying that my army isn't broken with an instant win button.

If we go against the grain for a moment, how about making Tau BS2 across the board, but 10-20% cheaper, and also give them plenty of cheap Markerlights.

I just cant wait to back up my existing Tau with some cool looking new mini's, I have been a painting madman after Kroothawk (praise his soul) compiled this list. Its been a while since i have been really excited over an army coming out.

One of the things that people need to remember is that BS 3 is the in universe norm. As a game there is so much BS 4 in use that BS 3 seems somehow defective or faulty instead of the in universal normal.

Tau are a guard variant army, not a marine variant.

Where the Guard have invested their time, energy and points into having more guns and more tanks,t he Tau have chosen to build better guns and better tanks, however, at the core of it, they are both basically a guardsman under all that equipment.

Better tanks?

Give the Hammerhead Ion Cannon sponsons and we'll call it even with the Leman Russ.

Jefffar wrote:One of the things that people need to remember is that BS 3 is the in universe norm. As a game there is so much BS 4 in use that BS 3 seems somehow defective or faulty instead of the in universal normal.

Tau are a guard variant army, not a marine variant.

Where the Guard have invested their time, energy and points into having more guns and more tanks,t he Tau have chosen to build better guns and better tanks, however, at the core of it, they are both basically a guardsman under all that equipment.

Better guns I'll give you but better tanks? Really? First, I think you meant tank, singular since there's only one choice with two variants. Tell you what, I'll take all the IG tanks and their variants and you can have the hammerhead. Deal?

As for BS4 firewarriors, we already have that option, if you take a useless HQ choice to get them (ethereal honor guard). I've play-tested BS4 firewarriors and they aren't even close to OP, they still fold in close combat and 99% of the factions have dedicated close combat units....

Kilkrazy wrote:If we go against the grain for a moment, how about making Tau BS2 across the board, but 10-20% cheaper, and also give them plenty of cheap Markerlights.

Perhaps make Pathfinder troops or Markerlights default on all vehicles? Another option is making marker drones dirt cheap. Markerlights should also be changed from heavy to assault.

As long as Crisis Suits get decent ankle hinges everything will be fine.

Kilkrazy wrote:If we go against the grain for a moment, how about making Tau BS2 across the board, but 10-20% cheaper, and also give them plenty of cheap Markerlights.

You could justify that by giving BS2 to all AI-controlled drones. Tau are supposed to have a mediocre amount of tech anyways, and they've always been the AI-loving faction in the fluff. With the Imperium's hatred of artificial intelligence (in favor of servitors), the Eldar's preference of shoving ghosts into their robots, and the Necrons being living robots themselves... the Tau's preference towards programmed AI should be furthered.
There are still people out there are have a high liking towards Tau-only Tau lists, and AI Drones fit into either player's preference.

People usually get mad when GW makes sweeping fundamental changes to a unit that fans have multitudes of. It'd be questionable to giganerf Fire Warriors like that and say their professional shooty-caste units have the aim of a Grot or an untrained human.

Dantalian wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:While I do think it would be cool to see a deathray hammerhead, I'm agreeing with neither of you. The point of the statement is to point out that neither side really knows what they are talking about because they are gamers and not game developers...

Also I find it really silly to say that the "gamer" can't contribute to the development of codices. Do we really want GW to write codices with zero feedback from their consumers?

Yes actually. Design by committee doesn't work, you cannot make something that will be all things to everyone, otherwise you end up with the wargames factory greatcoat minis but seriously, for all the hate Matt Ward gets his rules are tons more balanced than some of the crap I've seen suggested in this thread and others.

If they nerf Firewarriors in any way, I'm selling Tau and getting a new army.

Firewarriors are gak to begin with, cheap Markerlights aside. All they need is lower cost.

I remember a rumor about Ethereals unlocking BS4 Honor Guard as a Troop though, which could be cool if they make the Ethereal worth a damn. BS4 Firewarriors aren't worth it if your whole army just runs off the table.

Absolutionis wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:If we go against the grain for a moment, how about making Tau BS2 across the board, but 10-20% cheaper, and also give them plenty of cheap Markerlights.

You could justify that by giving BS2 to all AI-controlled drones. Tau are supposed to have a mediocre amount of tech anyways, and they've always been the AI-loving faction in the fluff. With the Imperium's hatred of artificial intelligence (in favor of servitors), the Eldar's preference of shoving ghosts into their robots, and the Necrons being living robots themselves... the Tau's preference towards programmed AI should be furthered.
There are still people out there are have a high liking towards Tau-only Tau lists, and AI Drones fit into either player's preference.

People usually get mad when GW makes sweeping fundamental changes to a unit that fans have multitudes of. It'd be questionable to giganerf Fire Warriors like that and say their professional shooty-caste units have the aim of a Grot or an untrained human.

Drones have BS2 now, compensated with twin-linked carbines or targetting arrays.

My thought is that Fire Warriors with BS2 would be awesome if there were enough cheap, effective Marker Lights to make them effectively BS4 most of the time. It requires the Tau player to deploy and manoeuvre well, which is the fun challenge of Tau.

And will the markerlights also be BS2? That won't be fun...

SabrX wrote:And will the markerlights also be BS2? That won't be fun...

Yes, but there will be loads of them.

Kilkrazy wrote:

SabrX wrote:And will the markerlights also be BS2? That won't be fun...

Yes, but there will be loads of them.

Ick.

A full shooty army with no CC ability should NOT shoot like Orkz.