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.

 Kingsley wrote:

LValx wrote:
Kingsley's idea is interesting. I could see that working, but I also find it to be a bit too pricey for what it would do and how often it would actually be successful (I dont see too much mech anymore, so I'm not sure Str.6 side AV shots would be that useful around here).

6 Strength 6 AP1 shots (plus Carbines) is pretty scary for most infantry units as well!

Assuming 6 Pathfinders with the weapons that is over 100 Points for it, I'd rather outflank some Kroot who can bring far more firepower thus threatening a larger variety of infantry.

So working units with pathfinders are:

outflank: 10x pathfinders, 3x rail-rifles, 2x gun-drones

normal: 10x pathfinders, 2x marker-drones

Am I right?

Personally I take a 9 man plain unit and for just a hair under 100 i've been very happy with it. In a pinch they can shoot some Str5, but I generally don't ever feel the need to, I want to shoot the markers at all times.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
I dont see the drones as necessary. Majority T is still 3 and they have low BS

I'm also considering leaving them bare boned, however I'd probably add Shas Vre with blacksun filter, 10 pts invest for that leadership doesn't look that bad for ignores night fighting gadget...
Guns (imo) are a waist on them, since you can pimp out other units quite a lot and Pathfinders have a clear role and thats market lights.

LValx wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

LValx wrote:
Kingsley's idea is interesting. I could see that working, but I also find it to be a bit too pricey for what it would do and how often it would actually be successful (I dont see too much mech anymore, so I'm not sure Str.6 side AV shots would be that useful around here).

6 Strength 6 AP1 shots (plus Carbines) is pretty scary for most infantry units as well!

Assuming 6 Pathfinders with the weapons that is over 100 Points for it, I'd rather outflank some Kroot who can bring far more firepower thus threatening a larger variety of infantry.

Kroot will be expected to outflank, while Pathfinders won't. I think Pathfinders are the best "threaten the back area" unit in Codex: Tau, despite the theoretical superiority of Kroot and Stealth Suits-- simply because people will not register them as an outflanking threat but rather as a backfield support element.

I will equip my Pathfinders with special guns and drones and all that crazy stuff. Why? Because it will be more fun that way. They have these cool new options, and I want to use them. Drone squads can handle marking, they're boring anyway.

Whats wrong with having 3x 4man pathfinder squads. Work from there.

Spending 9-10 shots (thus 0-10 hits, avg of 5 or so) on a single unit seems wasteful. I reckon often you will find you would want to be able to split your ML firepower up more.

Also, whilst it is a huge glass cannon, 4man team with 3 Ion Rifles just feels like a good idea. Still cheap @ 74pts, Will likely die/retreat just as badly as a squad twice its size (due to assumed minimum threshold of enemy firepower). Can chuck out str7 shots or throw out triple str8 blasts, useful in a number of situations.

In addition it gives you access to a type of firepower (str8 blast, I.E. multiple hits) that is lacking elsewhere in the codex.

Thougths?

Razerous wrote:
Whats wrong with having 3x 4man pathfinder squads.

Mainly eating up all your FA slots.

 Kingsley wrote:

LValx wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

LValx wrote:
Kingsley's idea is interesting. I could see that working, but I also find it to be a bit too pricey for what it would do and how often it would actually be successful (I dont see too much mech anymore, so I'm not sure Str.6 side AV shots would be that useful around here).

6 Strength 6 AP1 shots (plus Carbines) is pretty scary for most infantry units as well!

Assuming 6 Pathfinders with the weapons that is over 100 Points for it, I'd rather outflank some Kroot who can bring far more firepower thus threatening a larger variety of infantry.

Kroot will be expected to outflank, while Pathfinders won't. I think Pathfinders are the best "threaten the back area" unit in Codex: Tau, despite the theoretical superiority of Kroot and Stealth Suits-- simply because people will not register them as an outflanking threat but rather as a backfield support element.

We agree to disagree!

 Kingsley wrote:
Kroot will be expected to outflank, while Pathfinders won't.

Err, how does this work? You have to declare that a unit is outflanking at the start of the game, so I don't really see how it's going to be a surprise that your Pathfinders outflank when you tell your opponent "my Pathfinders will outflank" before the game even begins.

simply because people will not register them as an outflanking threat but rather as a backfield support element.

So you're depending on your opponent not reading the codex and realizing that rail/ion rifles are a threat, or are you just not going to tell them that your Pathfinders have been upgraded and have guns instead of markerlights?

 Crimson wrote:

Razerous wrote:
Whats wrong with having 3x 4man pathfinder squads.

Mainly eating up all your FA slots.

And being easy FB.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:
Kroot will be expected to outflank, while Pathfinders won't.

Err, how does this work? You have to declare that a unit is outflanking at the start of the game, so I don't really see how it's going to be a surprise that your Pathfinders outflank when you tell your opponent "my Pathfinders will outflank" before the game even begins.

I go second. My opponent deploys thinking my Pathfinders will be on the field. I then declare that they will be outflanking. My opponent's deployment is not adapted for this and is hence vulnerable.

 Peregrine wrote:
So you're depending on your opponent not reading the codex and realizing that rail/ion rifles are a threat, or are you just not going to tell them that your Pathfinders have been upgraded and have guns instead of markerlights?

I'm depending on my opponent interpreting Pathfinders as a support unit instead of an aggressive one. My prediction is that most players will be tricked by this. And it's not like the Pathfinders are suddenly bad if the opponent knows they might outflank. You can just deploy them normally and suffer the small amount of list inefficiency that the rail rifles bring. Overall the psychological effects and potential big win of the outflank threat IMO more than justifies spending 45 points on three rail rifles.

 Kingsley wrote:
I go second. My opponent deploys thinking my Pathfinders will be on the field. I then declare that they will be outflanking. My opponent's deployment is not adapted for this and is hence vulnerable.

Ok, so in theory you give up your turn-1 alpha strike in exchange for a chance that your opponent makes a deployment mistake. But since Pathfinders still don't have all that much firepower (especially compared to things like a Farsight squad, or Shadowsun outflanking something nasty) it's probably not going to be a fatal mistake. I don't really see how giving up a priceless shooting opportunity is a fair price to pay for so little gain.

I'm depending on my opponent interpreting Pathfinders as a support unit instead of an aggressive one.

What is there to interpret? If your army list says that your 4-man Pathfinder squad is carrying three rail rifles how are they going to interpret it as anything but a pure shooting unit? Your only hope is that they don't realize that the unit no longer has markerlights, but I don't really see how deceptive army lists are a legitimate tactic.

 Peregrine wrote:
Ok, so in theory you give up your turn-1 alpha strike in exchange for a chance that your opponent makes a deployment mistake. But since Pathfinders still don't have all that much firepower (especially compared to things like a Farsight squad, or Shadowsun outflanking something nasty) it's probably not going to be a fatal mistake. I don't really see how giving up a priceless shooting opportunity is a fair price to pay for so little gain.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean. I've found that going second is preferable in most cases anyway. Luckily, most people don't seem to realize this.

 Peregrine wrote:

I'm depending on my opponent interpreting Pathfinders as a support unit instead of an aggressive one.

What is there to interpret? If your army list says that your 4-man Pathfinder squad is carrying three rail rifles how are they going to interpret it as anything but a pure shooting unit? Your only hope is that they don't realize that the unit no longer has markerlights, but I don't really see how deceptive army lists are a legitimate tactic.

Ten-man squad, for maximum flexibility and ambiguity. This also plays into your earlier point-- I expect them to easily clear nearly any backfield objective.

 Kingsley wrote:
I'm not entirely sure what you mean.

What I mean is that for this to work two things have to happen:

1) Your opponent has to make a significant mistake in deployment because of the unexpected outflanking unit. If your opponent wouldn't have made any meaningful changes if they'd known you were going to outflank then you haven't accomplished anything.

and

2) Your outflanking unit has to be a big enough threat to exploit the mistake. If you don't have enough firepower to exploit it then the mistake doesn't matter.

So my point is that outflanking Pathfinders have limited firepower compared to other outflanking or deep striking units the Tau can bring, and if you're going to give up having the first turn to use a surprise outflanking unit you're much better off using Shadowsun to outflank something much nastier.

I've found that going second is preferable in most cases anyway. Luckily, most people don't seem to realize this.

You're playing Tau. Why would you want to go second and let your opponent get close any faster than necessary when you can get the first shot and start killing them in their own deployment zone?

Ten-man squad, for maximum flexibility and ambiguity.

I don't see how this is a good idea. Against targets you want to markerlight you're probably wasting the rail rifles, and against targets you want to shoot with the rail rifles you're probably wasting the markerlights. It would have been a viable plan in the old codex when rail rifles came with target locks, but now it just creates an inefficient unit.

This also plays into your earlier point-- I expect them to easily clear nearly any backfield objective.

That's pretty optimistic. Even assuming you're in rapid fire range for the rail rifles you have (at BS 3) 6x rail shots and 14x pulse shots. Assuming the objective holders are in 5+ cover you kill 3.2 MEQs, which is far from easily clearing an objective.

I think that it can very well depend on how many markerlights are in your army.

2 groups of pathfinders already? Not taking anything else out of the FA slot?

Add in darkstrider with some rail/ion weapons and have fun with a hard to assault semi sniper kinda of group.

but otherwise.. don't bother with upgrades.

If you're taking Darkstrider then you should be taking Rail Rifles. The ability to drop a creatures toughness and then to instakill it is too good to pass on.

I face Draigowing quite a bit and the combo of Darkstrider and Rail Rifles helps a lot.

 Crimson wrote:

 p_gray99 wrote:
I wouldn't bother with drones. They've got lower BS markerlights for higher points cost, their toughness won't make a difference (you use the majority) and your pathfinders should have 4+ cover anyway, so the armour won't make much difference. Plus, it's protecting 11 point models with 12 point models... it's just a little ridiculous. Spend the points elsewhere.

It is one point more; do two points per whole squad really matter?

No, but the -1 BS will matter. 12 points for a BS2 marker or 11 points for a BS3 marker...

I gotta agree with Peregrine.. I think Kingsley's idea is not good. It may work for you, but I don't see at all how it is supposed to take people by surprise. I think you'd be better off using other platforms to clear backfield. It is simply too pricey and the bodies are too fragile.

On the flipside, I completely agree with Kingsley that going second is preferable. In almost every mission going 2nd is better and if you don't realize that, you really must not be playing the same game as I.

LValx wrote:

On the flipside, I completely agree with Kingsley that going second is preferable. In almost every mission going 2nd is better and if you don't realize that, you really must not be playing the same game as I.

I usually prefer to go second because I feel I can do much better being reactionary to my opponent's army and his opening movements, focusing my troops and fire where it can do the most damage early on. Not to mention I like being able to start my army with as much cover as possible and basically stealing a turn from my opponent where on the most part all he can do is maneuver.

 p_gray99 wrote:
No, but the -1 BS will matter. 12 points for a BS2 marker or 11 points for a BS3 marker...

Gun drones, they're twin-linked.

hokieseas wrote:

LValx wrote:

On the flipside, I completely agree with Kingsley that going second is preferable. In almost every mission going 2nd is better and if you don't realize that, you really must not be playing the same game as I.

I usually prefer to go second because I feel I can do much better being reactionary to my opponent's army and his opening movements, focusing my troops and fire where it can do the most damage early on. Not to mention I like being able to start my army with as much cover as possible and basically stealing a turn from my opponent where on the most part all he can do is maneuver.

Not to mention on objective missions, it gives you the opportunity to deny the opponent scoring opportunities on the last turn and they are unable to counter.

Yeah, since 5/6 missions and almost all tournie missions are objective based, going second is far more important than going first. I'm always hoping to go second haha. Very situational to when i'd like to go first, but my default is second.

I have noticed in this thread that folks are forgetting that you can run BS through the roof now as there is no longer a boost cap on MLs. Why not jack that 20 kroot squad to BS9 or 10 when in rapid fire range? It is much harder to over light stuff in this edition, especially when you want it dead.

barnowl wrote:
I have noticed in this thread that folks are forgetting that you can run BS through the roof now as there is no longer a boost cap on MLs. Why not jack that 20 kroot squad to BS9 or 10 when in rapid fire range? It is much harder to over light stuff in this edition, especially when you want it dead.

You wouldn't want to do that because there are huge diminishing returns on all BS above 5.

Really the only time you want to overlight is for Hammerhead templates and maybe the Riptide for anti gets hot.

Light em up boys.

Oh damn! I kinda thought upon the point about over-lighting a squad, to increase the accuracy of blast weapons.

But I didn't realise you could get a 100% hit with 9 ML hits (so roughly 18 shots, depending on how you cascade your shots). Whether you want to nuke a squad of heavy infantry with a ripe tide, or use a squad of Ion Rifles/Riptide to precision strike a bunch of tanks ('place the template anywhere on the hull' + 'the whole blast marker counts as full strength'.).

Awesome.