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.

 Micky wrote:
Yeah, that's kinda what I figured too.

I have vague notions of fielding an Etherial + Honor Blade with a squad of Honor Guard, decked out with EMP Grenades and Pulse Carbines, as a sort of tank-hunting shock troop.

...its probably a stupid idea, but it would be fun. =)

I'd just ask why Pulse Carbines? A Pulse Rifle is superior in almost every situation now, except that rare time when you actually pin a unit.

If they made the Photon Grenade Launcher on the Carbine have some actual purpose (my choice would be increasing the range for Stealth granted by defensive above 8") then that might change, of course.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Micky wrote:
Yeah, that's kinda what I figured too.

I have vague notions of fielding an Etherial + Honor Blade with a squad of Honor Guard, decked out with EMP Grenades and Pulse Carbines, as a sort of tank-hunting shock troop.

...its probably a stupid idea, but it would be fun. =)

I'd just ask why Pulse Carbines? A Pulse Rifle is superior in almost every situation now, except that rare time when you actually pin a unit.

If they made the Photon Grenade Launcher on the Carbine have some actual purpose (my choice would be increasing the range for Stealth granted by defensive above 8") then that might change, of course.

Etherial with Honor Blade, squad decked out with EMP grenades and assault carbines. So they can assault. Probably pretty effective against vehicles actually.

Like i said, probably a stupid idea, but also fun. =)

I use an Honor blade Ethereal as an objective marker and just have a squad of Fire Warriors "Guard" him.

Looks cool on the battlefield and I don't have to worry about the ethereal. To make it where everyone understands he is not an actual model, He is on a 40mm base.

Actually that would be a decent unit. Ethereal w/ HB, 12 FW Honour Guard w/ PRs, EMP grenades & Markerlight, 4 Shield Drones.
Buy the transport and put something else in it

If all goes well thats BS5 FW rapid-firing w/ S5, having 16 4+ & 4 4++ saves to take the return fire

Worst thing about ethereals is other people can take them for allies :( My friends this year are taking an ethereal in apocalypse just to make sure it dies and i have big big problems D:

Best use for ethereal is to kill it when your army is in a shadowsun LD10 bubble

 Orkaswampa wrote:
Worst thing about ethereals is other people can take them for allies :( My friends this year are taking an ethereal in apocalypse just to make sure it dies and i have big big problems D:

Best use for ethereal is to kill it when your army is in a shadowsun LD10 bubble

Only Tau units get Preferred Enemy when he dies. Only units who take the Leadership test when he dies get it and only Tau models with LOS to him take the Leadership test.

So when they start trying to re-roll those ones they just rolled with their Space Marines (or whatever army they're playing) you just burst into laughter and lay the rules down on them, letting them know they just wasted 50 points (admittedly not much in an Apoc game but every little helps) for a special rule which the majority of their army can't use

The point is, it'll make everyones Tau try to run away, so for 50pts, you suicide the ethereal into something, and watch as portions of the enemy start to fall back.

Hell, take 5 of them and do it repeatedly! (man that would suck...)

 Ovion wrote:
The point is, it'll make everyones Tau try to run away, so for 50pts, you suicide the ethereal into something, and watch as portions of the enemy start to fall back.

Hell, take 5 of them and do it repeatedly! (man that would suck...)

Nope, if an Ethereal dies then only firendly (i.e on his team) Tau run.

So unless your buddy is on your team and is trying to make sure that he loses by making half of his team run away then it won't be a problem.

It says all tau under the entry, implying every tau model on the board, friend or foe - hence the point.

"If a friendly ethereal is killed then every unit of tau on the tabletop" - Quote, Tau Codex

Each ethereal is friendly to someone, so every tau will always take the test, and LoS doesnt matter in this bit, LoS is only for inspiring presence.

 Orkaswampa wrote:

"If a friendly ethereal is killed then every unit of tau on the tabletop" - Quote, Tau Codex

Each ethereal is friendly to someone,..

This qualifies for the most obtuse reading of a rule I've ever seen...

 Redbeard wrote:

 Orkaswampa wrote:

"If a friendly ethereal is killed then every unit of tau on the tabletop" - Quote, Tau Codex

Each ethereal is friendly to someone,..

This qualifies for the most obtuse reading of a rule I've ever seen...

I have to agree. if you are not defining "friendly" as the side that paid the points for the ethereal, the person using this tactic is a prick. I would shake his hand and give him the win and not even set up.

This bugs me so much, people like that are the reason i quit playing 40k in 2nd ed, and makes me question if I should get back into it.

Mecha_buddha wrote:

 Redbeard wrote:

 Orkaswampa wrote:

"If a friendly ethereal is killed then every unit of tau on the tabletop" - Quote, Tau Codex

Each ethereal is friendly to someone,..

This qualifies for the most obtuse reading of a rule I've ever seen...

I have to agree. if you are not defining "friendly" as the side that paid the points for the ethereal, the person using this tactic is a prick. I would shake his hand and give him the win and not even set up.

This bugs me so much, people like that are the reason i quit playing 40k in 2nd ed, and makes me question if I should get back into it.

Defining friendly makes no difference to the rule. If a friendly Ethereal dies all friendly and none friendly Tau take the test by RAW. It’s a stupid rule but it clearly says all Tau on the table top not just friendly ones. We ended up house ruling this as its stupid in Tau v Tau games.

I would like to know how people are taking Ethereals as allies as that seems impossible to me. You cannot take an Ethereal as an ally then get it killed as you do not have the HQ slots for an ally ethereal.

Mecha_buddha wrote:

Defining friendly makes no difference to the rule. If a friendly Ethereal dies all friendly and none friendly Tau take the test by RAW. It’s a stupid rule but it clearly says all Tau on the table top not just friendly ones. We ended up house ruling this as its stupid in Tau v Tau games.

Well, if that's how you want to read it, it's not hard to argue against.

1) defining Friendly is important, because the rule only specifies that it takes effect when Friendly ethereals die.
2) I don't have an entry in my codex for "Friendly Ethereal".

See, actually, it's a rule that, by RAW, does absolutely nothing, ever.

I would like to know how people are taking Ethereals as allies as that seems impossible to me. You cannot take an Ethereal as an ally then get it killed as you do not have the HQ slots for an ally ethereal.

He did say apocalypse, where FOCs are irrelevant.

 Redbeard wrote:

Mecha_buddha wrote:

Defining friendly makes no difference to the rule. If a friendly Ethereal dies all friendly and none friendly Tau take the test by RAW. It’s a stupid rule but it clearly says all Tau on the table top not just friendly ones. We ended up house ruling this as its stupid in Tau v Tau games.

Well, if that's how you want to read it, it's not hard to argue against.

1) defining Friendly is important, because the rule only specifies that it takes effect when Friendly ethereals die.
2) I don't have an entry in my codex for "Friendly Ethereal".

See, actually, it's a rule that, by RAW, does absolutely nothing, ever.

I would like to know how people are taking Ethereals as allies as that seems impossible to me. You cannot take an Ethereal as an ally then get it killed as you do not have the HQ slots for an ally ethereal.

He did say apocalypse, where FOCs are irrelevant.

I missed the apocalypse refrence. Wasn’t friendly defined in the area that determine which wargear affects you or everyone on your side? So Friendly Ethereal’ are in the game. To quote the 5th edition rules

"In most occasions this is clear, as the rules use the words ‘friendly’ or ‘own’ to indicate your units, and ‘enemy’ for the opponent’s." So it only triggers when your friendly’ (own) Ethereal dies but once trigged it affects all Tau not just friendly Tau. I assume 6th still has friendly to mean own.

At 2000pts with 2 Primary HQ and 4 Primary Troops, you can take an Additional Allied Detachment.

So at 2000pts you can take an ethereal! (Though you've got to take roughly 200+pts of other models for it, though you can take some Broadsides and a Hammerhead... oh and of course they all might run when the ethereal dies too!)

Don't blame guys i don't want to use the tactic or killing my own ethereal to make the opponent flee, im just warning you all. Less "this prick" please.

Clarify - 6 FW and an ethereal is enough for the ally detachment, just thought id clear some confusion.

 Orkaswampa wrote:


Clarify - 6 FW and an ethereal is enough for the ally detachment, just thought id clear some confusion.

Except it isn't - You haven't brought a crisis commander, thus not fulfilling the codex 1+ requirement for such.

I was looking at the rules for the detachments, and i have another question. It lets you take another detachment, as opposed to expanding the first. So wouldn't you be forced to take the 1+ unit in each detachment, meaning that it is impossible to take an Etherial as an ally? It makes sense fluff-wise that the Tau wouldn't send an Etherial out unless it was their forces that were the majority.
Of course this has no bearing in an Apocalypse game, but still.

 DakkaHammer wrote:
I was looking at the rules for the detachments, and i have another question. It lets you take another detachment, as opposed to expanding the first. So wouldn't you be forced to take the 1+ unit in each detachment, meaning that it is impossible to take an Etherial as an ally? It makes sense fluff-wise that the Tau wouldn't send an Etherial out unless it was their forces that were the majority.
Of course this has no bearing in an Apocalypse game, but still.

That is my understanding of the rules, as well.


Back OT - has this thread yet discussed any of the FW suits in 6th edition? Primarily the XV-9 "Hazard" suit? I just ordered 3 and while they're equipped with phased ion guns, I'm going to try counting them as having pulse submunition rifles and see how they perform. 6 s5 large blasts that ignore cover from one unit seems like overkill, but at 350 points or so for the unit i think that's understandable. However the PiG's have rending, so that would be 24 s4 rending shots instead of the blasts.

Both seem good, but which is better?

 DakkaHammer wrote:
I was looking at the rules for the detachments, and i have another question. It lets you take another detachment, as opposed to expanding the first. So wouldn't you be forced to take the 1+ unit in each detachment, meaning that it is impossible to take an Etherial as an ally? It makes sense fluff-wise that the Tau wouldn't send an Etherial out unless it was their forces that were the majority.
Of course this has no bearing in an Apocalypse game, but still.

It does not work quite like that.

Each detachment is, while separate, a part of the same army.
As such you don't have to take a crisis commander with each detachment, just as you cannot have duplicate named characters that way and no twin special-issue items.

The limits are PER ARMY, not per detachment. two totally different things.

 tetrisphreak wrote:


Back OT - has this thread yet discussed any of the FW suits in 6th edition? Primarily the XV-9 "Hazard" suit? I just ordered 3 and while they're equipped with phased ion guns, I'm going to try counting them as having pulse submunition rifles and see how they perform. 6 s5 large blasts that ignore cover from one unit seems like overkill, but at 350 points or so for the unit i think that's understandable. However the PiG's have rending, so that would be 24 s4 rending shots instead of the blasts.

Both seem good, but which is better?

24 S4 Rending shots from BS4 suits will kill ~4 MEQ or 1/2 of a TEQ a turn statistically, but YMMV

 IHateNids wrote:

 tetrisphreak wrote:


Back OT - has this thread yet discussed any of the FW suits in 6th edition? Primarily the XV-9 "Hazard" suit? I just ordered 3 and while they're equipped with phased ion guns, I'm going to try counting them as having pulse submunition rifles and see how they perform. 6 s5 large blasts that ignore cover from one unit seems like overkill, but at 350 points or so for the unit i think that's understandable. However the PiG's have rending, so that would be 24 s4 rending shots instead of the blasts.

Both seem good, but which is better?

24 S4 Rending shots from BS4 suits will kill ~4 MEQ or 1/2 of a TEQ a turn statistically, but YMMV

Sadly, Shas'Vre piloting XV-9 suits are only BS3. Which lends me further towards the blast weapon rather than the PiG. With markerlight support, either through drones or pathfinders (or God help me, a pair of tetras!) the Phased ion Gun seems to ramp up considerably in effectiveness, in my test-rolling. I was hoping to hear from some peeps who may have used the XV9 in battle and gotten their impressions of such.

NEW FAQ OUT!

I havn't gotten to read it beacuse I cannot access it from work but I am hearing Target Locks are back! Time to retool my list yet again!

New GW FAQ wrote:Page 30 – Armoury, Disruption Pod.
Change the last sentence to read “A vehicle with a disruption
pod has the Shrouded special rule against any weapons firing
from more than 12" away.”

Now that is good. 3+ cover on a moving hammerhead with MT? yes please!

Does jink stack with cover and night fighting (stealth/shrouded) rules then?


Dont have a book to hand :(

YAY! Target Locks!

And Disruption Pods give Shrouded against shooting over 12" away.

So if you move with D-pods you'll be getting a 3+ cover save against anything over 12", 2+ if you go flat out. Looks like Disruption Pods are a must have again. Our vehicles are going to be up there as some of the best with this change, especially Hammerheads with D-pods and Multi-tracker.

Drones aren't Characters any more.

Iridium Armour's movement penalty has been clarified (don't think it really needed it but oh well).

Allied detachments of Tau need to take the 1+ Commander and Fire Warrior units.

 IHateNids wrote:

New GW FAQ wrote:Page 30 – Armoury, Disruption Pod.
Change the last sentence to read “A vehicle with a disruption
pod has the Shrouded special rule against any weapons firing
from more than 12" away.”

Now that is good. 3+ cover on a moving hammerhead with MT? yes please!

I do believe I will be more open to fielding hammerheads now. This is an absolutely ridiculous buff!

I do believe that makes Mech Tau more viable than ever.

Well, the new FAQ fixed a bunch, yeah Target Lock, but left somethings out in the cold. It really needs to clarify Seeker missles and Snap Fire against fliers. If nothing else it would up the sells of Skyrays.

DID WE GET TARGET LOCK BACK?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!? (I need someone else to confirm this, i dont believe the FAQ )