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.

D6Damager wrote:


I'll be using the Bomber as it works with Mech Tau and staying mobile.

And most people will dismiss this as anecdotal but whatev...

How can they say its anecdotal? Most people haven't even SEEN a bomber NOR a fighter in action, nor used one. They have no true basis for that opinion and won't for a couple months. its AL theory hammer for the next couple months on the new units.

Anyone who tries to stand on a soap box with finger in the air and say imperiously that one WILL in fact be "competitive" is talking out their rear end. I bought the Bomber, it's put together and I can't wait to wrap my mind around ways to make it work. Lets face it, they are DEFINITELY the race that should have such things. Just so damn cool.

According to good ole math-hammer 40k (assuming the entire time that the target is another flyer and it is taking a 5+ cover/invuln save): Summary in orange if you don't want to read the break down...

Against AV12 target, with snap firing drones that do not get rapid fire, the Sun Shark will do .439 hull points a turn... if you get the markerlight hit in (50% chance) that's .643 hull points a turn. If you are in rapid fire range thats .605 without the marker light and .889 with... if the drones DO get their BS that's 1.063 hits with a markerlight and if they get the Bomber's its 1.185.

Against the same AV 12 target, the fighter does .667 if you add the missile pod.

I'd say its more or less a tie there. Then lets look at the classic flying over an enemy flyer and shooting it in the RA 10 as you're tail to tail:

Bomber gets to fire MP, Ion rifles, and markerlight as its all turreted. If the Drones have to snapfire and the markerlight misses, that's 1.21 hull points... with markerlights its 1.778, and if the Drones get their own BS, its 2.123.

Fighter gets everything to the rear also, doing 1.333 hull points a turn.

So, assuming rapid fire range, BS 1 (worst case) for the Drones, and averaging markerlight hits (since they're 50/50)...

Bomber against AV 12 scores .747 hull points a turn
Fighter against AV 12 scores .667

Bomber against AV 10 scores 1.494 hull points a turn
Fighter against AV 10 scores 1.333

If you're curious, Seeker Missiles add .333 hull points a turn against AV 12 and .555 against AV 10 (kept it BS 3 since I'm giving the Bomber a 50% markerlight credit).

Plus the Bomber can drop a bomb while still firing all the other weapons, has interceptor/Supporting Fire with the Drones, and can split into 3 models. I really think the math points to the Bomber... and if the Drones get to keep their BS or take the Bomber's, its a blow out.

Sorry guys, unless you're needing to save 15 points, the fighter loses this one

 Lobukia wrote:
Bomber gets to fire MP, Ion rifles, and markerlight as its all turreted.

This is a bad assumption. They're turreted, but the bomber's own hull blocks their shots from certain angles. The fighter has the same problem obviously, but at least all four of its ion cannon shots are in the same place.

Now, I agree that the bomber is probably the less-terrible overall, but it's important to consider the accurate numbers when realizing how much they suck.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
Bomber gets to fire MP, Ion rifles, and markerlight as its all turreted.

This is a bad assumption. They're turreted, but the bomber's own hull blocks their shots from certain angles. The fighter has the same problem obviously, but at least all four of its ion cannon shots are in the same place.

Now, I agree that the bomber is probably the less-terrible overall, but it's important to consider the accurate numbers when realizing how much they suck.

True, but in the part you're quoting, I was discussing tail to tail shots against another flier... and in that example the TL MP has pretty clear LOS.

 Lobukia wrote:
True, but in the part you're quoting, I was discussing tail to tail shots against another flier... and in that example the TL MP has pretty clear LOS.

Sure, if you're directly tail-to-tail with the enemy flyer, but that only happens if they flew on at a 90* angle to the table edge. More likely you'll end up in the enemy flyer's rear arc but with the target off to your side, in which case the limited arc of the drones suddenly becomes very relevant.

The more I think about the bomber, the more I think it needs an FAQ in a bad way. Here are the questions I would like to have GW officially answer regarding the Sunshark:

1.) Can the interceptor drones fire at full BS while attached if the bomber is flying at cruising speed (RAW says not but I am interesting in RAI)?
1a.) If no, is it legal to fly the bomber at exactly 18" so the drones can fire at full BS?
1b.) If yet to either, if the drones fail there gets hot roll, does it wound the drones or harm the aircraft?

2.) Can the drones use interceptor while attached to the Sun Shark?

3.) Does the bomber start with a pulse bomb or does it need to roll to generate one when it comes on the board (probably the former but it is still a bit ambiguous)?

I have already sent an inquiry to GW, but I haven't heard back from them

A lot of interesting rules with this unit. What I would like to see is an FAQ enabling the drones to fire at full BS while moving at cruising speed. This would make the bomber worthwhile to take.

 Lobukia wrote:
According to good ole math-hammer 40k (assuming the entire time that the target is another flyer and it is taking a 5+ cover/invuln save): Summary in orange if you don't want to read the break down...

Against AV12 target, with snap firing drones that do not get rapid fire, the Sun Shark will do .439 hull points a turn... if you get the markerlight hit in (50% chance) that's .643 hull points a turn. If you are in rapid fire range thats .605 without the marker light and .889 with... if the drones DO get their BS that's 1.063 hits with a markerlight and if they get the Bomber's its 1.185.

Against the same AV 12 target, the fighter does .667 if you add the missile pod.

I'd say its more or less a tie there. Then lets look at the classic flying over an enemy flyer and shooting it in the RA 10 as you're tail to tail:

Bomber gets to fire MP, Ion rifles, and markerlight as its all turreted. If the Drones have to snapfire and the markerlight misses, that's 1.21 hull points... with markerlights its 1.778, and if the Drones get their own BS, its 2.123.

Fighter gets everything to the rear also, doing 1.333 hull points a turn.

So, assuming rapid fire range, BS 1 (worst case) for the Drones, and averaging markerlight hits (since they're 50/50)...

Bomber against AV 12 scores .747 hull points a turn
Fighter against AV 12 scores .667

Bomber against AV 10 scores 1.494 hull points a turn
Fighter against AV 10 scores 1.333

If you're curious, Seeker Missiles add .333 hull points a turn against AV 12 and .555 against AV 10 (kept it BS 3 since I'm giving the Bomber a 50% markerlight credit).

Plus the Bomber can drop a bomb while still firing all the other weapons, has interceptor/Supporting Fire with the Drones, and can split into 3 models. I really think the math points to the Bomber... and if the Drones get to keep their BS or take the Bomber's, its a blow out.

Sorry guys, unless you're needing to save 15 points, the fighter loses this one

The fighter has 4 twinlinked shots and 2 regular shots, 1.33 hull points against av10 only accounts for the 4 twinlinked shots. the 2 extra shots give another 0.333. So its 1.777 for the fighter compared to the 50% chance of the bomber to do 1.777 vs 1.21.

The bigger benefit of the fighter is that it can fight at full capacity at longer ranges than the bomber.

 shock_at wrote:


The fighter has 4 twinlinked shots and 2 regular shots, 1.33 hull points against av10 only accounts for the 4 twinlinked shots. the 2 extra shots give another 0.333. So its 1.777 for the fighter compared to the 50% chance of the bomber to do 1.777 vs 1.21.

The bigger benefit of the fighter is that it can fight at full capacity at longer ranges than the bomber.

If my codex has twinlinked shots for the Razorshark, I'm not seeing it. Where are you getting this from?!

Fighter @Range 30" has, at best, 6 shots... 3 of which will hit

Bomber @Range 30" has, at best, 4 shots... 2.6 of which will hit 50% of the time, 3.28 will hit the other 50% (average of 2.94)

...I'm not seeing a big benefit there, especially when you factor in everything else.

I'm just curious, given the numbers... does anyone have a compelling reason to take the Razorshark other than 15pts?

Please don't give reasons I've already disproved above using that mystic tradition called math.

I'm not being snarky, I'm seriously trying to see if there's any reason I should hesitate in building two SunSharks instead of two Razorsharks?

The advantage for the fighter is S8 LBT vs. 2x S8 SBT. Against multiwound T4, the Razorshark will probably be the better bet. Against anything else, inside of 15", the Sun Shark is probably better. Sun Shark can also engage up to 3 targets, potentially, assuming the drones disembark during the move - though that leaves them vulnerable to return fire of course.

 Lobukia wrote:

 shock_at wrote:


The fighter has 4 twinlinked shots and 2 regular shots, 1.33 hull points against av10 only accounts for the 4 twinlinked shots. the 2 extra shots give another 0.333. So its 1.777 for the fighter compared to the 50% chance of the bomber to do 1.777 vs 1.21.

The bigger benefit of the fighter is that it can fight at full capacity at longer ranges than the bomber.

If my codex has twinlinked shots for the Razorshark, I'm not seeing it. Where are you getting this from?!

Fighter @Range 30" has, at best, 6 shots... 3 of which will hit

Bomber @Range 30" has, at best, 4 shots... 2.6 of which will hit 50% of the time, 3.28 will hit the other 50% (average of 2.94)

...I'm not seeing a big benefit there, especially when you factor in everything else.

Forgetting Seeker Missiles? Obviously you can fire these yourself - so you can fire your MP / Interceptor Drones / Seekers and it's still only "3" weapons as the Drones are passengers. Long shot but hey ho.

Fighter would be able to fire Quad-Ion / Burst Cannon or MP / 2 Seekers.

 Lobukia wrote:
I'm just curious, given the numbers... does anyone have a compelling reason to take the Razorshark other than 15pts?

As I said, weapon arcs and range. The bomber only has the advantage at fairly close range and within a narrow arc directly ahead or behind the model. Too far and you're out of rapid fire range, leave the arc and you only get one drone to shoot. The fighter, on the other hand, can shoot all of its weapons at long range and over a much wider arc.

Also, the fighter can move more than 18" without limiting half its guns to BS 1 and removing the blast option.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
I'm just curious, given the numbers... does anyone have a compelling reason to take the Razorshark other than 15pts?

As I said, weapon arcs and range. The bomber only has the advantage at fairly close range and within a narrow arc directly ahead or behind the model. Too far and you're out of rapid fire range, leave the arc and you only get one drone to shoot. The fighter, on the other hand, can shoot all of its weapons at long range and over a much wider arc.

Also, the fighter can move more than 18" without limiting half its guns to BS 1 and removing the blast option.

I can live with those. Arcs are a good point, but I can manage those fine. The range advantage is slim however the blasts is definitely a point to consider. We always play on a 4x6 board, so with 36" movement, I'll be fine and I certainly can plan ahead enough to only occasionally be bit by the arc bug. Bombs aren't quite better than a S8 blast, but bomb AND S7 shooting gets it close enough, IMO.

I think I feel good enough about the bomber to got ahead and build both as bombers. If, somehow, drones get to keep their BS or share the bomber's, then its cake. I'd only use either of the Tau flyers in casual play anyway, so which mediocre unit to pick isn't that trying.

Imo, if you're wasting your fliers on anti-air, when you have access to much deadlier ground based AA units, then the concept behind the Tau fliers was largely lost on you.
Both fliers are clearly deadliest when attacking ground units, only the Razor Shark is better at it, and doesn't run out of large blasts.
Taking pot shots at other fliers is fun but not to be relied upon.

Annoyingly, the Codex mentions the Razor Shark being more agile and maneuverable with its extra wing engines... So where's the Vector Dancer??

 Archonate wrote:
Imo, if you're wasting your fliers on anti-air, when you have access to much deadlier ground based AA units, then the concept behind the Tau fliers was largely lost on you.
Both fliers are clearly deadliest when attacking ground units, only the Razor Shark is better at it, and doesn't run out of large blasts.
Taking pot shots at other fliers is fun but not to be relied upon.

Annoyingly, the Codex mentions the Razor Shark being more agile and maneuverable with its extra wing engines... So where's the Vector Dancer??

With Broadsides, my fliers, ADL, and suits, I want to spend two turns clearing the skies. Then my bombers and such have uncontested AA superiority. The point being thrown around is that Sun Sharks are better at the Razorsharks' jobs and better at their own... not that bombers should shoot down enemy fliers.

 Archonate wrote:
Annoyingly, the Codex mentions the Razor Shark being more agile and maneuverable with its extra wing engines... So where's the Vector Dancer??

I agree. When i read the description on the website i was all excited about getting a flier with vector dancer. And then what... we replace our drones with extra engines so we can... not do anything different

I'm just curious, given the numbers... does anyone have a compelling reason to take the Razorshark other than 15pts?

Please don't give reasons I've already disproved above using that mystic tradition called math.

I'm not being snarky, I'm seriously trying to see if there's any reason I should hesitate in building two SunSharks instead of two Razorsharks?

I would be all over the bomber if I knew how the bloody thing worked. The biggest thing I need to know is if it is even possible to drop the ion rifle small blast templates from the air. Until then I am leaving my flyer in a reconfigurable state.

I haven't bothered putting mine together yet because I don't see the point in either. The Fighter has a better large blast and the bomber is better at taking down flyers. Top it off with the lazy rule errors such as no clear rules on how the interceptor drones work, the obvious error with the bomb generator not starting with a bomb, and both options offering nothing new or unique to the army and put into a slot that's arguably more vital and cramped than before.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Lobukia wrote:
I'm just curious, given the numbers... does anyone have a compelling reason to take the Razorshark other than 15pts?

As I said, weapon arcs and range. The bomber only has the advantage at fairly close range and within a narrow arc directly ahead or behind the model. Too far and you're out of rapid fire range, leave the arc and you only get one drone to shoot. The fighter, on the other hand, can shoot all of its weapons at long range and over a much wider arc.

Also, the fighter can move more than 18" without limiting half its guns to BS 1 and removing the blast option.

I always figured since its a "fire point" by the rules for the drones and that they have their guns mounted on little turrets so that the ion guns have a basically 360 degree angle of fire.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
The Fighter has a better large blast and the bomber is better at taking down flyers

Which in itself is bloody stupid and counter intuitive.

 Crimson wrote:
Which in itself is bloody stupid and counter intuitive.

Kind of like the DA fighter that loses a dogfight with a transport helicopter with bolted-on guns? The rest of those two codices might be alright, but the flyers were pretty clearly thrown together in 5 minutes at the last second with no playtesting at all.

 Peregrine wrote:


Kind of like the DA fighter that loses a dogfight with a transport helicopter with bolted-on guns? The rest of those two codices might be alright, but the flyers were pretty clearly thrown together in 5 minutes at the last second with no playtesting at all.

Indeed it it strange. Why does Vetock suck at writing flyers? Rest of the options at both codices are pretty solid.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Which in itself is bloody stupid and counter intuitive.

Kind of like the DA fighter that loses a dogfight with a transport helicopter with bolted-on guns? The rest of those two codices might be alright, but the flyers were pretty clearly thrown together in 5 minutes at the last second with no playtesting at all.

The real problem is how underpriced the Vendetta is. I fully expect it to be 170-200 if it maintains its current capabilities in the next Codex.

 Kingsley wrote:

The real problem is how underpriced the Vendetta is. I fully expect it to be 170-200 if it maintains its current capabilities in the next Codex.

This is of course true. Still, DA and Tau flyers are weak even when compared to vanilla marine or Necron flyers. (I have no idea how good Ork flyers are. I haven't heard much complaints, so probably decent.)

 Crimson wrote:

 Kingsley wrote:

The real problem is how underpriced the Vendetta is. I fully expect it to be 170-200 if it maintains its current capabilities in the next Codex.

This is of course true. Still, DA and Tau flyers are weak even when compared to vanilla marine or Necron flyers. (I have no idea how good Ork flyers are. I haven't heard much complaints, so probably decent.)

With 2 hull points stormtalons can be a real pushover, even if they do bring a decent amount of firepower. Id hate to say that even necron flyers suffer from a bit o' the cheese, not vendetta bad, but for what they do and how they can move troops, its unfair to fully compare the new stuff to it. Even helldrakes, which are pretty OP, are ,limited by the range of their weapons compared to some of the other new flyers.

I agree they all could use some work. But if you look at them only with 6th edition codexs they arent all bad.

Even if you're looking at only the Tau codex, they aren't that great. They take up a slot that could better be filled with large unit of pathfinders or drones. They don't really offer anything the rest of the codex doesn't offer better. It's anti-air abilities are sad, especially when you could give 5 other models skyfire with no drawbacks and still save on points. Against ground targets they are still terrible and offers blast templates that other Riptides and Hammerheads get better versions of and pathfinders, cyclic ion blaster, and airbursting fragmentation projectors are better deals if you want some extra.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
Even if you're looking at only the Tau codex, they aren't that great. They take up a slot that could better be filled with large unit of pathfinders or drones. They don't really offer anything the rest of the codex doesn't offer better. It's anti-air abilities are sad, especially when you could give 5 other models skyfire with no drawbacks and still save on points. Against ground targets they are still terrible and offers blast templates that other Riptides and Hammerheads get better versions of and pathfinders, cyclic ion blaster, and airbursting fragmentation projectors are better deals if you want some extra.

I agree, i may get a sun shark one of these days for fun, but it will be for limited engagement only. Ive got a mountain of pathfinders, marker drones, and piranhas that can fill that void for me now.