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.

7-8 ppm for how they are right now(more towards 7) . 10ppm if they had bs4 and access to special weapons. But agian i'm for a 20-25% reduction in alot of things in the tau codex (mainly crisis suit weapons/stealth suits in general)

I feel that 7 is way too low for a model with 30" range. Maybe 8, but I still think 9 is the most accurate.

I would go with 9ppm as is.

agian the 30" range iis great for a standard weapon its just that other squads that it goes up agianst either bring more shots or strongerlonger ranged shots for less.

I think more is required than simply changing Firewarrior point value. Tau troops choices need to cover many bases, most importantly holding objectives, but also providing some level of anti-vehicle and anti-MC support. Troops might also be a good place to put in markerlight support. If Firewarriors were to cover all of these functions, they would essentially become Space Marines, which would ruin the armies flavor. What is needed is additional Tau troops choices so that the Troops choices can work as the armies backbone while keeping Firewarriors at least partially specialized.

As for the Firewarriors themselves, they are currently overpriced. But I think a properly thought out USR, better markerlight integration, more sensible wargear (photon grenades should actually be avoided because 40k's assault mechanics), and possibly some limited assault weapon options (Crisis Suits should not be carrying basic flamers and meltaguns) would really help round out the unit and make it work better, without requiring a price reduction. Reworking the Devilfish would also help, its quite resilient things to D-Pods, but its too expensive and has no real teeth due to limited weapons and no fire ports.

The biggest problem I see with the Firewarriors is they are placed in an uncomfortable role. They are expensive and small in quantity, heavily armed with standard weapons to make up for the lack of special weapons, higher grade armor on a T3 model, a substandard statline to balance out the equipment. They fit neither the small elite force that vets and space marines fill nor the numbers to fill the gun line horde role. They are meant to be fast moving advancing troops but are terrible at advancing forward.

The firewarriors need to reworked from the ground up. I understand how some people like the fluff aspect of it, but it fails terribly when implemented on the table top. People don't want them to be numerous, equipped with better weapons, tougher, have higher leadership, or have a more extended role.

In order for the problem to be fixed, people have to be willing to sacrifice flavor for results.

If the codex got other units that were tougher at holding objectives, then Firewarriors would have the same place as Kroot, gun drone squads, Vespid, and sniper drones.

Martel732 wrote:
I feel that 7 is way too low for a model with 30" range. Maybe 8, but I still think 9 is the most accurate.

This is pretty much what Savage has been saying. I would think 7if you keep the base buy as is. 8 if you toss in the grenades and 'Ui free. The only way to get to 9 for me would be to either seriously reduce ML costs or provide some kind of decent special weapon, a flamer would be nice since FW are so weak in CC.

GW is never going to give up on their flavor. So the special weapon thing is probably never going to happen. The best you can probably hope for is a point reduction. They are never going to work them from the ground up.

It might be the case that the Tau's #1 plan needs to be tabling.

GW gave up on the Necron flavor for the sake of improving the game. Why not Tau?

And the plan to tabling works just fine provided your opponent wants you to table him. It's when they start surviving and shooting back that your plans start heading south.

The designers replied to this once and to paraphrase: "Working as intended"

There are multiple ways that GW can improve the models by themselves, but we aren't going to see even a possible improvement until GW decides to update the codex to make the troop choices somewhat equally competetive as other armies at holding objectives. Its either shoot all contestants before they assault your FW or you're screwed. Even in the fluff they say that the fire caste are the biggest and baddest of the tau race, so why the hell are they still sad when they hide behind tech? Shooting is good and all but, in an objective game it just doesn't work, I have no experience with kroot and I don't intend to start, but seriously...final vote overcosted for what they're worth atm

I do not believe you need to sacrifice fluff in order to get Firewarriors to work. The Tau codex has some fluff about having no integrated heavy weapons in Firewarrior squads because Crisis Suits handle that job. I lot of people just view this as a sort of arbitrary piece of doctrine or dogma, but I disagree. The way I understand it is that Crisis Suits carry the heavy guns because they will not be encumbered by them and can use them with unrestricted mobility, while keeping the heavy guns away from the troopers keeps them light on their feet. This keeps the whole army fluid and mobile, as no one needs to stop moving to use their weapons to full effect (well except for pathfinders who badly need markerlights to be assault 1).

Under this paradigm, I see no reason why either Firewarriors or a new kind of Troops choice couldn't wield assault and rapid-fire class special weapons, as these weapons do not encumber the wielders. And there are certain weapons I feel really don't belong on Crisis Suits, specifically flamers and meltaguns, that Crisis Suits are forced to carry because Tau troops are so one dimensional. If Tau Troops choices removed the burden of carrying basic assault weapons from Crisis Suits, that would free Crisis Suits to carry a new range of harder hitting weapons along with weapons that do rightly belong on the Suits (such as the missile pod). I think there is a lot of room to nicely overhaul both the troops and the suits collective while sticking fairly closely to fluff. Whether GW will ever get this right, however, is another matter entirely.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Often times with superior weapons. Especially compared to pulse rifles.

STR 4 24 inch rapid fire is better than 30 inch rapid fire strength 5 how?

 Savageconvoy wrote:

1.) We showed numbers showing that the FW statline is inferior compared to other troops for it's point costs. You've not done anything to show otherwise.

Statline? Whut?

Okay I'll keep my 5 point guardsmen and give them all power armour and plasma cannons.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
GW gave up on the Necron flavor for the sake of improving the game. Why not Tau?

And the plan to tabling works just fine provided your opponent wants you to table him. It's when they start surviving and shooting back that your plans start heading south.

I've tabled people with both Tau and BA. I'm pretty sure each incident was against their will. Granted, this was in 5th, but the game's not that much different. In fact, its probably easier with Tau now than BA.

Martel732 wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
GW gave up on the Necron flavor for the sake of improving the game. Why not Tau?

And the plan to tabling works just fine provided your opponent wants you to table him. It's when they start surviving and shooting back that your plans start heading south.

I've tabled people with both Tau and BA. I'm pretty sure each incident was against their will. Granted, this was in 5th, but the game's not that much different. In fact, its probably easier with Tau now than BA.

It is, I came close to tabling a guard list with two valk, 2lrbt, amd two of those d3 missile thingies just this week. Had he not called game I would have eaten him up.

davou wrote:STR 4 24 inch rapid fire is better than 30 inch rapid fire strength 5 how?

Lack of special and heavy weapons is what I was refering to. It's been shown how important it is many times in this thread.

BryllCream wrote:Statline? Whut?

Okay I'll keep my 5 point guardsmen and give them all power armour and plasma cannons.

You're not even making a coherent claim right now. Atleast before when you had the wrong math you had something you were presenting as justification for FW. You were wrong that special and heavy weapons aren't a boost. Guard get orders, heavy weapon teams, special weapon teams, a transport with firepoints for said heavy and special weapons, and a flying transport perfect for dropping those BS4 Vets loaded with special weapons on target. But keep ignoring everything and make little pokes in every now and again. I'm sure that'll work.

Martel732 wrote:
I've tabled people with both Tau and BA. I'm pretty sure each incident was against their will. Granted, this was in 5th, but the game's not that much different. In fact, its probably easier with Tau now than BA.

Ok. SO 5/6 games are objective based, i.e. capture the most objectives, and your plan A is to kill everything on the table. Good. What about plan B? What if that's your opponents plan?

The claim of "Just table your opponent" is so asinine that it gives me a headache. It's assuming your opponent doesn't have the ability to do the same nor will he have any way to respond and defend himself. I'm glad you guys were able to table a couple guys, but you can't expect to play that every game. And again, what if the enemy just simply bunkers down and claims one objective after killing off the fragile Firewarrior objective holders? What's your plan? Just kill all enemy models? Good luck with that.

barnowl wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I feel that 7 is way too low for a model with 30" range. Maybe 8, but I still think 9 is the most accurate.

This is pretty much what Savage has been saying. I would think 7if you keep the base buy as is. 8 if you toss in the grenades and 'Ui free. The only way to get to 9 for me would be to either seriously reduce ML costs or provide some kind of decent special weapon, a flamer would be nice since FW are so weak in CC.

Wait so you want the Baseline Firewarrior, WS2 BS3 S3 T3 I2 W1 A1 LD7 Sv 4+ with a S5 AP5 gun to cost the same as an IG Veteran, WS3 BS4 S3 T3 I3 W1 A1 LD7 Sv 5+ with a S3 AP- gun and grenades?

So you're telling me that I can arm all of my Veterans with Str 5 ap 5 basic weapons and carapace armor for free, so long as I am willing to sacrifice that oh-so-amazing close combat ability? LMAO! Oh. And reduce BS by 1. Crippling. *facepalm*

EDIT: I would also lose grenades. Still ridiculous at 7 ppm.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Wait so you want the Baseline Firewarrior, WS2 BS3 S3 T3 I2 W1 A1 LD7 Sv 4+ with a S5 AP5 gun to cost the same as an IG Veteran, WS3 BS4 S3 T3 I3 W1 A1 LD7 Sv 5+ with a S3 AP- gun and grenades?

So you're telling me that I can arm all of my Veterans with Str 5 ap 5 basic weapons and carapace armor for free, so long as I am willing to sacrifice that oh-so-amazing close combat ability? LMAO! Oh. And reduce BS by 1. Crippling. *facepalm*

EDIT: I would also lose grenades. Still ridiculous at 7 ppm.

And BS4 would be dropped down to BS3 and you'd also lose access to all special weapons. Still want to do it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Why does everyone keep ignoring the special heavy weapon issue?!

I will repeat what I have said elsewhere (I think earlier in this thread as well), Fire Warriors are slightly overpriced, but not nearly as so as they were in 5th. I believe that currently, dropping them to 8 or 9 points per model (their 'true' cost is probably about 8.5 points base) would be a decent stopgap fix, I think there is a better overall fix that can be made by changing a few subtle things with both fire warriors and the rest of the Tau Army:

1. Pathfinders are now a troops choice. Additionally, Fire Warriors are unable to take Pulse Carbines except on their Shas'Ui (mostly to help differentiate between the units).
2. Devilfish are now cheaper for both Pathfinders and Fire Warriors (but slightly more expensive for Pathfinders, since they get extras)
3. Defensive Grenades and the Shas'Ui team leader upgrade are now including in their cost.
4. Markerlights (not Network Markerlights) are now assault rather than heavy. Additionally, a squad may fire both their markerlight and another weapon if they remain stationary.
5. Teams have access to 0 - 2 Special Weapons gun drones, which carry BS 3 special weapons. I'm thinking these weapons will include Burst Cannons. Flamers. Fusion Blasters, and Plasma Rifles.

I think that with these changes, it would be easier to justify fire warriors at 10 ppm. Note that this is without giving them BS4, which I personally think is unnecessary.

You better rethink the tabling thing, because I don't believe GW is ever going to you want you want in Tau troops. Again, you can also take all the objectives you want after 90% of the enemies are shot full of holes.

Storming objectives can always be plan B. I'll take my chances against meqs if I outnumber them sufficiently.

BS4 makes more sense to me than giving them heavy or special weapons. The Tau fluff specifically addresses why they don't have these options. And we know GW loves their fluff. BS 4 also makes more sense fluff-wise because these guys are supposed to be experts with these rifles. But this will almost certainly never happen either.

Sure, give them the defensive grenades for free. That's something that GW might actually do, but it doesn't address the complaints on this thread at all.

RegalPhantom wrote:
1. Pathfinders are now a troops choice. Additionally, Fire Warriors are unable to take Pulse Carbines except on their Shas'Ui (mostly to help differentiate between the units).
2. Devilfish are now cheaper for both Pathfinders and Fire Warriors (but slightly more expensive for Pathfinders, since they get extras)
3. Defensive Grenades and the Shas'Ui team leader upgrade are now including in their cost.
4. Markerlights (not Network Markerlights) are now assault rather than heavy. Additionally, a squad may fire both their markerlight and another weapon if they remain stationary.
5. Teams have access to 0 - 2 Special Weapons gun drones, which carry BS 3 special weapons. I'm thinking these weapons will include Burst Cannons. Flamers. Fusion Blasters, and Plasma Rifles.

I think that with these changes, it would be easier to justify fire warriors at 10 ppm. Note that this is without giving them BS4, which I personally think is unnecessary.

I never thought that changing the price alone would fix Firewarrors that much. I like some of your ideas, but really have to ask why you'd limit it to one pulse carbine per squad. Or why even include the carbine at all?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

barnowl wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
I feel that 7 is way too low for a model with 30" range. Maybe 8, but I still think 9 is the most accurate.

This is pretty much what Savage has been saying. I would think 7if you keep the base buy as is. 8 if you toss in the grenades and 'Ui free. The only way to get to 9 for me would be to either seriously reduce ML costs or provide some kind of decent special weapon, a flamer would be nice since FW are so weak in CC.

Wait so you want the Baseline Firewarrior, WS2 BS3 S3 T3 I2 W1 A1 LD7 Sv 4+ with a S5 AP5 gun to cost the same as an IG Veteran, WS3 BS4 S3 T3 I3 W1 A1 LD7 Sv 5+ with a S3 AP- gun and grenades?

So you're telling me that I can arm all of my Veterans with Str 5 ap 5 basic weapons and carapace armor for free, so long as I am willing to sacrifice that oh-so-amazing close combat ability? LMAO! Oh. And reduce BS by 1. Crippling. *facepalm*

EDIT: I would also lose grenades. Still ridiculous at 7 ppm.

Its' a bloody photon grenade, it does not do jack all, beyond help weather the assault weapon fire before you get smashed to pieces.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
You better rethink the tabling thing, because I don't believe GW is ever going to you want you want in Tau troops. Again, you can also take all the objectives you want after 90% of the enemies are shot full of holes.

Storming objectives can always be plan B. I'll take my chances against meqs if I outnumber them sufficiently.

BS4 makes more sense to me than giving them heavy or special weapons. The Tau fluff specifically addresses why they don't have these options. And we know GW loves their fluff. BS 4 also makes more sense fluff-wise because these guys are supposed to be experts with these rifles. But this will almost certainly never happen either.

Sure, give them the defensive grenades for free. That's something that GW might actually do, but it doesn't address the complaints on this thread at all.

It does address the complaint some, you now get what was a 1 ppm upgrade included in the base cost. Giving in the Pulse Carbine the Blind SR and keep it as a free swap for the PR, would improve things, and give them a Special weapon. Remember Special Weapons are not just heavy weapons, a flamer is not heavy and would be in fluff and very useful. They are "Fire" warriors after all.

Giving carbines the blind rule would help out more than just Firewarriors. Pathfinders, devilfish, piranha, and gun drone squads would be huge intereferance units. Just drop pod in gun drone squads and you can make an entire heavy weapon unit fire at BS1. It'd do more good than pinning.

I've never liked pinning because so many lists and units are straight up fearless.

It's kinda like the Fear USR. They throw it in a lot of places and treat it like a bonus, without it having any kind of major effect.

Blind on the other hand seems to be getting some use. CSM got it as an effect from warp talons, and I've seen it mentioned a few times in DA.

Adding to that things like the Statis bomb. It got me thinking that maybe that's where Tau options should be directed. Less damage output from troops and support units and more status effects.

What if fire warriors could have an aspect of puretide, which gives either +1 WS or BS for 1ppm or +1 S orT for +2 ppm

 Savageconvoy wrote:
It's kinda like the Fear USR. They throw it in a lot of places and treat it like a bonus, without it having any kind of major effect.

Blind on the other hand seems to be getting some use. CSM got it as an effect from warp talons, and I've seen it mentioned a few times in DA.

Adding to that things like the Statis bomb. It got me thinking that maybe that's where Tau options should be directed. Less damage output from troops and support units and more status effects.

Honestly, some DA wargear looks more Tau than imperial because of the way effect things. Take the Auspex for example, no "to hit roll" just selected target unit has it's cover save reduced by one for fire form the squad with the auspex.

quack98 wrote:What if fire warriors could have an aspect of puretide, which gives either +1 WS or BS for 1ppm or +1 S orT for +2 ppm

I personally don't mind them having low WS and their S3 which is fine for them. Increasing T is a big deal because it raises them up from being common infantry to more of an elite and heavy feel. BS could be increased, but really I think weapon options are what really needs to be changed. A lot of people have different opinions of this though.

barnowl wrote:
Honestly, some DA wargear looks more Tau than imperial because of the way effect things. Take the Auspex for example, no "to hit roll" just selected target unit has it's cover save reduced by one for fire form the squad with the auspex.

Really makes you wonder what Markerlights will do in the next codex.

Markerlights in next codex (especially if matt ward writes it) on a 2+ any unit within 72" is s10 ap1 and hits on 2+.

Being serious, It'll probably allow weapons to count as twin-linked, completely ignore cover, and will probably be allowed on xv8 (in a way similar to tetras (heavy 4))