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.

Ok. They're the same against that.... How does that change their role other than limiting them?

But they aren't an anti-infantry unit. They're anti-armor. How does being S8 change their role as Anti-armor?

Backfire wrote:
I agree to a point, and Broadside spam is definitely pretty monotonous way to play. I actually believe that Broadsides weren't originally all that popular amongst the players. IIRC 4th edition Tau armies mostly came with triple Railheads. You didn't start to see 9-Broadside armies until well into 5th edition because that was only way to keep up with new supershooty armies like SW and GK. But I digress.

What you are missing is that the "new dynamic" can only work if Tau get something to compensate from loss of HS slots. And the rumours don't really point to that direction. Supposed new suits will compete from same FOC slots which are already overcrowded by existing choices, so they're not going to help. Well, maybe the flyer is really good.

Or maybe Devilfish will get an option for roof-mounted TL Railguns. Lets call them 'Razorfishes'....

I think the over point should be that people can't freak out of rumors since they have no idea what's in the codex. both Necrons and Dark Angels had rumors, but they also had loads of stuff that wasn't remotely listed in the rumors, and those other thing changed the outlook of the "nerfs"/changes they made to other units. You don't see people overly complaining about the price increase on Deathwing models. Or the reduction in the "We'll be back" save.

Wait for the codex. I'd put my army up for bet that is we get S8 broadsides, we'll have at least two other units the hammerheads that can effectively kill landraiders.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
And I'm not as upset as you think I am. I'm just tired of people like you telling me how my judgement is wrong without contesting why or how I can't make opinions about a unit without playing it. Would you say the same to people who haven't tried Mutilators? We saw the rumors for those, knew it would blow, and guess what, it did. We have rumors telling us how a unit has changed. I'm applying those changes and figuring out how it affects the unit. I'm formulating an opinion on this and other rumors presented. Yet people still insist I can't do this for some reason, that the topic is not up for discussion.

I would like to point out that when the new CSM dex dropped everybody though that the Hellturkey was mediocre at best and should completely ignore the Baleflamer. Then people actually got a chance to play around with it and are like holy feth balls that's a Str 6 AP 3 flame template on a flyer. I'm fairly certain that the same thing happened with the new Dark Angels dex and will happen with the new Demons dex. Just...give the new broadsides a chance ok? And they could not be changed at all and instead be Str10 AP1 with the option to skyfire. And we'd all squee like children or rage like neckbeards if that happens.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Ok. They're the same against that.... How does that change their role other than limiting them?

But they aren't an anti-infantry unit. They're anti-armor. How does being S8 change their role as Anti-armor?

It makes them more equipped to deal with flyers, making Tau one of the only armies able to deal with flyers without taking more flyers. If I'm not mistaken Broadsides are BS 3 with the option to take BS 4, so assuming that the Skyfire is a Suit System option, that makes them BS 3 Twinlinked. So they're hitting on 4s an re-rolling misses. Even if you're hitting the front armor of a flyer, you're hitting, at max, Armor 12. So glancing on 4s and penning on 5s and 6s. So you have a 50-50 chance to hit with a re-roll of failures. Then you're so you have a 50-50 chance of removing a hull point with a 33.3% chance of penetrating. On that penetration you have a solid 50% chance of making it explode. And that's on the front armor. On the rear armor you're talking about a 83.3% chance of a glance or penetration and a 66.6% chance of a penetration, which again has a 50% chance of blowing it right up.

Love how many defenders of S8 railguns there are, even justifying that skyfire on them are the second coming of christ. Tau dont have S9 weapons or ways to bring down armor the same effect (lance weapons of eldar and the necron gun glancing thing). A S8 lance weapon would be better at armor busting than a S8 railgun.

Tau arent glorified AA guns for non tau armies.

So is it justifiable that Tau be good at taking out fliers in exchange for not anymore being good at taking out ground armor?

 TheMind wrote:
It makes them more equipped to deal with flyers, making Tau one of the only armies able to deal with flyers without taking more flyers.

Except that's not really true. Look at the math a few posts back: the increased BS is mostly offset by the more difficult penetration roll, so the net increase against flyers is fairly small. It's certainly not enough to justify the massive drop in effectiveness against ground targets.

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheMind wrote:
It makes them more equipped to deal with flyers, making Tau one of the only armies able to deal with flyers without taking more flyers.

Except that's not really true. Look at the math a few posts back: the increased BS is mostly offset by the more difficult penetration roll, so the net increase against flyers is fairly small. It's certainly not enough to justify the massive drop in effectiveness against ground targets.

The net increase of almost 25% is "small"?

shock_at wrote:
Love how many defenders of S8 railguns there are, even justifying that skyfire on them are the second coming of christ. Tau dont have S9 weapons or ways to bring down armor the same effect (lance weapons of eldar and the necron gun glancing thing). A S8 lance weapon would be better at armor busting than a S8 railgun.

Tau arent glorified AA guns for non tau armies.

So is it justifiable that Tau be good at taking out fliers in exchange for not anymore being good at taking out ground armor?

Strawman much? We're saying that people shouldn't overreact before the book is out. We don't know if there'll be other anti-tank options. For all we know, Fire Warriors could get Haywire Grenade Launchers as an option.

Could everyone please calm down and let rumours be rumours. No point getting on your high-horse or doing math. If they change it, they change it, no one is listening to you that will make a difference to that. I like the sound of the variety, personally, and embrace the challenge of adapting. If you don't then keep it to yourselves and don't spam four pages of a forum with your complaints. Can we please get back OT?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
The net increase of almost 25% is "small"?

Yes, a net increase of 25% is small when it comes at the expense of a massive decrease in their ability to do anything other than kill flyers. Broadsides would be much better off using the current rules than with STR 8 railguns, unless there's a missing bonus to armor penetration that brings them back up to effectively STR 10 (but not instant death against T5).

Strawman much? We're saying that people shouldn't overreact before the book is out. We don't know if there'll be other anti-tank options. For all we know, Fire Warriors could get Haywire Grenade Launchers as an option.

The point is that broadsides are ranged anti-tank, and a core part of most Tau armies (which people have spent a lot of money on). These changes seem like a deliberate nerf to make Tau players buy the new uber-suit to replace their broadsides.

 Peregrine wrote:

 TheMind wrote:
It makes them more equipped to deal with flyers, making Tau one of the only armies able to deal with flyers without taking more flyers.

Except that's not really true. Look at the math a few posts back: the increased BS is mostly offset by the more difficult penetration roll, so the net increase against flyers is fairly small. It's certainly not enough to justify the massive drop in effectiveness against ground targets.

The increase against flying Monstrous Creatures (in many respects as serious if not more serious a threat than actual flyers), however, is huge. Besides, Broadsides are still just as effective-- in fact, more effective with Slow and Purposeful base and twin-linked smart missiles-- against many ground targets.

Strength 10 is cool and all, but let's be real. Against most vehicles, strength 8 is perfectly sufficient. Against many infantry, you'll want to shoot Smart Missiles instead. This change primarily means that Broadsides will be significantly worse against T5 multi-wound models with good armor saves (read: Attack Bikes and mounted characters) and against AV 13/14. In exchange they get a big improvement versus flyers, flying Monstrous Creatures, and light units of all types. All in all, that seems easily worth it to me, since Tau have ample sources of AV 13/14 killers even without Broadsides but currently lack game against flyers and flying MCs.

And all of this assumes there aren't other systems that increase Broadsides' power against normal units. To be honest, I expected Broadsides to be hammered with the nerf bat, since they're one of the best units in the game at present, so imagine my surprise when early rumors indicate that they are at worst getting sidegraded!

An easy way to "fix" Str 8 Rail Guns:

High Velocity Rounds - When rolling to penetrate armour, on a roll of 6, any glancing hits count as penetrating hits.

Can people at least admit that honestly, broadside are so good right now, that they can't really make another anti-tank unit that would compete for the spot.

Maybe that is why the changed them. (as well as to get people to buy something else)

You can't make a balanced list when the choices that already exist are beyond comparison.

Coyote81 wrote:
Can people at least admit that honestly, broadside are so good right now, that they can't really make another anti-tank unit that would compete for the spot.

Maybe that is why the changed them. (as well as to get people to buy something else)

You can't make a balanced list when the choices that already exist are beyond comparison.

Broadsides aren't so good that competition is impossible. The problem is that they are the ONLY reliable way for Tau to pop heavy armor because the only other options are single-shot BS4 Hammerheads and single-shot BS3 Fusion Blasters (that need to commit suicide to have a 50% chance of hitting, and need to be within 6" range to do good damage). Broadsides aren't ludicrously good, the alternatives are just that underwhelming. Sure railgun Hammerheads are great for their submunition round and other weapons but the S10 shot is too unreliable and expensive so the Broadside is the only other option. Yes, Broadsides are good, but they aren't so good that GW had to tone them down like these rumors suggest. Assuming the S8 twin-linked thing is true it seems that the change is simply to get people to buy the new big suit.

Of course if the long rumored beam-like rules for the S10 Hammerhead railgun are true then the S8 Broadside makes a LOT more sense. However, we haven't had any update on that in a while so all we have to comment on is the Broadside.

 SonicPara wrote:
Broadsides aren't so good that competition is impossible. The problem is that they are the ONLY reliable way for Tau to pop heavy armor because the only other options are single-shot BS4 Hammerheads and single-shot BS3 Fusion Blasters (that need to commit suicide to have a 50% chance of hitting, and need to be within 6" range to do good damage). Broadsides aren't ludicrously good, the alternatives are just that underwhelming. Sure railgun Hammerheads are great for their submunition round and other weapons but the S10 shot is too unreliable and expensive so the Broadside is the only other option. Yes, Broadsides are good, but they aren't so good that GW had to tone them down like these rumors suggest. Assuming the S8 twin-linked thing is true it seems that the change is simply to get people to buy the new big suit.

I don't see this as a serious problem. Twin-linked BS3 (or BS4, or twin-linked BS4) fusion blasters are easy to get if it comes to that. With Pathfinder support, Hammerheads can become S10 AP1 BS5 and more or less ignore cover. All in all I think the rumored "new Broadsides" sound great and will bring more differentiation to Tau armies as a whole. Sure, their role is different, but that doesn't mean they're bad. I'll tell you right now that the rumored Broadsides would be a huge game changer for 40k. S8 AP1 Skyfire is simply the best anti-air available outside of Forge World, and when it comes on a resilient and versatile platform, it constitutes a very serious hit to Flyers.

 Kingsley wrote:

I don't see this as a serious problem. Twin-linked BS3 (or BS4, or twin-linked BS4) fusion blasters are easy to get if it comes to that.

Fusion blasters just don't cut it. Suits are too valuable to waste for unreliable suicide missions, and Piranhas aren't that great in 6e (to put it mildly). Plus, you gotta stop the transports before they get close, if you wait until enemy is next to you before blowing up their transports, you're already hosed.

Backfire wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

I don't see this as a serious problem. Twin-linked BS3 (or BS4, or twin-linked BS4) fusion blasters are easy to get if it comes to that.

Fusion blasters just don't cut it. Suits are too valuable to waste for unreliable suicide missions, and Piranhas aren't that great in 6e (to put it mildly). Plus, you gotta stop the transports before they get close, if you wait until enemy is next to you before blowing up their transports, you're already hosed.

Well, let's be real. When we're talking about "transports," what we really mean is "Land Raiders." S8 AP1 deals with normal transports fine-- just ask Sisters how their Exorcists are working out. I for one don't think Broadsides are the only answer to Land Raiders. A simple Devilfish or Piranha going Flat Out right up into a Land Raider's face is practically a counter on its own in many circumstances.

Besides, I'm sure Tau will get heavy anti-tank in other slots.

S8 is badly needed to make the Hammerhead played. (or maybe even use those railgun drones)
And let's be honest, I never understood how that little suit can carry a weapon just as strong as that bigass gun on the Hammerhead.
Also it's not THAT bad, you can still reliably pop rhinos, and that's what you need it for most of the times.

While I will miss my 3 broadsides making my enemy rage on first turn, I think that will be a good change.
(if the rumor is indeed true, which i highly doubt at the moment)

 IPS wrote:
S8 is badly needed to make the Hammerhead played. (or maybe even use those railgun drones)
And let's be honest, I never understood how that little suit can carry a weapon just as strong as that bigass gun on the Hammerhead.
Also it's not THAT bad, you can still reliably pop rhinos, and that's what you need it for most of the times.

Those are rail rifle drones. In other words S6 and useless against armor.
Second point. I never understood how infantry units can carry a small version of the laser cannon mounted on tanks and dreadnaughts and have the same Strength. Once Devestators and heavy weapon teams get S7 lascannons, then people can say that its not a nerf its a "role shift"

 Kingsley wrote:
Besides, I'm sure Tau will get heavy anti-tank in other slots.

And this is the key to the entire debate. If your assumption is wrong, what comes next? I was personally hoping to start a Tau army first as allies for my Eldar, eventually building into their own. I'd be using Broadsides to break my reliance on sacrificial Fire Dragons. Squads designed as sacrifice are great when you're facing an AV14 spammer (I have one in my local meta), but terrible when you're facing someone who only brings light armor or tons of MCs (I have them in my local meta). S10 Broadsides are a great TAC addition, but S8 Broadsides are much more specialized and until we see the codex we don't see a counter for the anti-AV14 loss.

If your assumption is right? Well, then some people overreacted, some people were rightly concerned but their concerns were based on lacking information, and some people are rightly upset because their chosen models that they spent time and money on no longer do what they wanted.

 Savageconvoy wrote:

 IPS wrote:
S8 is badly needed to make the Hammerhead played. (or maybe even use those railgun drones)
And let's be honest, I never understood how that little suit can carry a weapon just as strong as that bigass gun on the Hammerhead.
Also it's not THAT bad, you can still reliably pop rhinos, and that's what you need it for most of the times.

Those are rail rifle drones. In other words S6 and useless against armor.
Second point. I never understood how infantry units can carry a small version of the laser cannon mounted on tanks and dreadnaughts and have the same Strength. Once Devestators and heavy weapon teams get S7 lascannons, then people can say that its not a nerf its a "role shift"

It's not a smaller version; it's the same size as sponson-/hull-mounted lascannons. When lascannons are mounted as main weapons they're twin-linked; I don't see Devastators running around with twin-linked lascannons. Your argument, if anything, is actually in favour of S8 Railguns.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:

Second point. I never understood how infantry units can carry a small version of the laser cannon mounted on tanks and dreadnaughts and have the same Strength. Once Devestators and heavy weapon teams get S7 lascannons, then people can say that its not a nerf its a "role shift"

It's not a smaller version; it's the same size as sponson-/hull-mounted lascannons.

No it's not. Devastator lascannon is only half the size of sponson-mounted lascannon. There are lots of examples of infantry weapons being much smaller than vehicle mounted guns: heavy bolters, burst cannons, Krak missiles etc.

Go look at a leman Russ then look at a devistator. The weapons on the LM are smaller.

Backfire wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Savageconvoy wrote:

Second point. I never understood how infantry units can carry a small version of the laser cannon mounted on tanks and dreadnaughts and have the same Strength. Once Devestators and heavy weapon teams get S7 lascannons, then people can say that its not a nerf its a "role shift"

It's not a smaller version; it's the same size as sponson-/hull-mounted lascannons.

No it's not. Devastator lascannon is only half the size of sponson-mounted lascannon. There are lots of examples of infantry weapons being much smaller than vehicle mounted guns: heavy bolters, burst cannons, Krak missiles etc.

You really shouldn't say stuff that is blatantly untrue. I'll let the image speak for itself:



The sponson is slightly larger, which is easily explained by the fact that it's mounted to a vehicle and thus needs to have more electronics inside to allow the gunner to fire from inside the vehicle.

You are all assuming that every model is produced to fully and truly represent the real scale... Cool...

 Swissivy wrote:
You are all assuming that every model is produced to fully and truly represent the real scale... Cool...

Well, since that's the base of the Railgun-complaint, that's what we're trying to refute.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Backfire wrote:


No it's not. Devastator lascannon is only half the size of sponson-mounted lascannon. There are lots of examples of infantry weapons being much smaller than vehicle mounted guns: heavy bolters, burst cannons, Krak missiles etc.

You really shouldn't say stuff that is blatantly untrue.

You really shouldn't say stuff that is so blatantly untrue. I have a Predator lascannon sponson and a Devastator right in my hand, and whaddaya know, Devastator lascannon is half the size. In Heavy bolters there is only small difference.

Regardless, the railgun rails are irrelevant to it's actual power. The power comes from magnetic propulsion and that requires a lot of energy. The Suits have modified generators to handle the capacity for that.

Railgun "barrel" length is a pointless argument on the issue.

 Kingsley wrote:
...since Tau have ample sources of AV 13/14 killers even without Broadsides...

Eh , name three ranged weapons that can reliably take out AV13/14? And at what range brackets?

Cheers

Andrew

Its really nice that broadsides would become awesome AA platforms, but really, how many people actually use flyers? Some armies dont even have flyers (might change with our new codex I guess) outside of FW. I really dont see how a devilfish/piranha will actually stop a LR, thats like saying suits will stop a horde of orcs by throwing them at them. Sure it makes them lose a turn to shove large spiky objects up their rectal cavities, but that's not really my definition of stopping anything :(.

Its true we have to wait and see what the rest of the codex brings, but either way it means we will still have to shell out bags of money to make our armies playable, instead of just fixing stuff that is wrong with our current codex (but as said before, I guess that is not really a realistic thing to expect from GW).

@Savageconvoy
Actually more rail length would enable to you to accelerate a round for a longer period of time, either reducing the energy cost for an equal amount of speed or enabling a more powerful shot with increased energy cost, so that's not exactly true.

MoD_Legion wrote:
Its really nice that broadsides would become awesome AA platforms, but really, how many people actually use flyers? Some armies dont even have flyers (might change with our new codex I guess) outside of FW. I really dont see how a devilfish/piranha will actually stop a LR, thats like saying suits will stop a horde of orcs by throwing them at them. Sure it makes them lose a turn to shove large spiky objects up their rectal cavities, but that's not really my definition of stopping anything :(.

Actually, I'd say most people use flyers. Hell, I have flyers for 4 different armies within eyesight of this computer. Flyers are everywhere, I'd say 80% of all armies I see at the gaming shop. I'm also expecting fusion guns to get a longer range than the 12" that they are now. This will go a long way to making those platforms where they come from much more survivable. Also EMP grenades are pretty devastating to a heavy tank as well. Hitting on 3+ (at most) and at the very least removing an HP on 4+. Now what happens if they can be shot at range?

Its true we have to wait and see what the rest of the codex brings, but either way it means we will still have to shell out bags of money to make our armies playable, instead of just fixing stuff that is wrong with our current codex (but as said before, I guess that is not really a realistic thing to expect from GW).

I bolded the important part and GW's response will be "just as planned". And yeah, its this mentality that pisses veteran gamers off about GW, but they have no allegiance to your existing army, only to their stock holders and yeah, its mind blowing how long this philosophy has worked.

MoD_Legion wrote:
Actually more rail length would enable to you to accelerate a round for a longer period of time, either reducing the energy cost for an equal amount of speed or enabling a more powerful shot with increased energy cost, so that's not exactly true.

I actually had to look this up and I think that overall a longer barrel would be more detremental. Longer rail length means more energy consumption and more heat disipation required, while only the magnitude of the magnetic field seems to have an affect on the acceleration of the projectile. If anything it looks like honestly the Hammerhead Railgun should be the S8 version since it would create more heat along the rails and require much larger power consumption to maintain the magnitude of the magnetic field.