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.

They can run and shoot if within 12" of the Hunter Cadre commander or fireblade - the moment the enemy kills either, such benefit will be lost.

 Jancoran wrote:

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Breachers require a devilfish in order to do anything. On foot, they wont ever get more than a couple of guys in that 5" range without getting charged first.

I like the idea of the gun, i think its too short though. Either a better range or give them at least competent melee skills (WS3, 2 attacks, still S3 AP-) so they can at least attempt to fend off the inevitable charge.

Breachers are good line defense units from reserve or deployed in the case of enemies who can get there fast. I'd use them to defend the Storm Surge from Wraith Guard in Serpents and things like that.

I think in the contingent they are much more effective with the ability to move, run, then shoot.

Two neat things I've figured out with the new book, getting back to Tau tactics:

First, a 5 man Strike unit with a turret is a great way to set up resistant offensive output. Deploy all of the Firewarriors in cover out of line of sight, and deploy the SMS beside them. It can shoot out at your opponent, and your opponent cannot respond without some form of barrage weaponry. That 55 points is a good use of those mandatory troop slots.

Second, if you're like me and you want room for all the new toys and/or like suits, you don't want to be bothered with mandatory tax on junk like fast attack or heavy slots. So kill two birds with one stone and take a small unit of marker drones and a sniper drone unit. Use CF to fire the two units together, allowing the sniper marksmen's drone controller to affect the marker drones, increasing them to BS5 without having to waste a commander to babysit them. Instant reliable markerlights for cheap.

The more I think about it, the less I actually like the Hunter Cadre, not because it isn't awesome, but rather because I like the Retaliation Cadre. Sure, I can play one in the Hunter Cadre, but then I can't access the sweet Skyray, which I really like, and I divert a ton of points from the Hunter Cadre as a whole.

I'm still probably going to run a Hunter Cadre with a Retaliation Cadre as the auxiliary choice, but at least there's some consideration to not just default to the Hunter Cadre, which is nice.

So, took the stealth formation with:

ghostkeel - counterfire/stimulant

x2 x4stealth with shasvre,fusion markerlight targetlock

in 1850 pts.

I lost, but not because these guys didnt do fething awesome. These guys melted so many skitarii. At he end of turn 7 all i had left was 1 squad of 2 stealth suits my ghostkeel and my mark'o squad.

Due to many tactical errors in play and deployment (riptide ended up fighting 3 dragoons for 5 turns instead of dropping pie plates of doom) I got my ass whipped over all, but ive always loved stealths and would always take a squad or 2 back in the first codex. The keel is cool but im just really happy the suits are actually pretty sweet now with the formation.

 McNinja wrote:

 Johnnytorrance wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Except thats not how they fight.

This entire codex screams turtle.

It encourages you to fight from a distance and shoot your opponent. even if they assault you, now you have a 12" supporting fire. why even bother putting terrain on the table? to benefit Tau? might as well just play on a flat board. It doesn't matter if they have B3 base because for very little you'll be getting units that hit on 3s and 2s.

Space marines got squadroned dreadnoughts? of course the best solution is to give riptides that as well.

40k is going to a bad place in 7th edition. sucks.

don't get me started on STR D missiles and a super heavy that will beat anythings face at only 600 points.

Turtle? A friend of mine plays a strike team-heavy mobile force that is based ENTIRELY around getting upfield and into rapid fire range as fast as possible.

He rarely uses markerlights, and doesn't even own a riptide. I don't think he's lost a game yet, and he's had the same army list since 6th dropped. If you think that a static gunline is the only way to play Tau, you're wrong and have no idea how to play Tau.

Don't tell this guy he "doesn't know how to play Tau" and then jock ride a list that involves "getting upfield into rapid fire range". That means the entire basis of the list were units that should only be bought when absolutely necessary to make a battle forged army list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I would think that Ravenwing would be a scary opponent for Tau. Granted, Tau have markerlights which can take away their rerollable jink saves, but they are damn fast and fairly tough, especially those command squads with their FnP. Plus, if they charge from within 6" of a Darkshroud, they are immune to overwatch. Ouch.

Ravenwing are incredibly strong right now. Tau have the least trouble with them though probably of all the armies. The DA players really like to play bad lists for the most part but eventually the RW players will be crushing I think. They even have a gladius of their own

jakejackjake wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

 Johnnytorrance wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Except thats not how they fight.

This entire codex screams turtle.

It encourages you to fight from a distance and shoot your opponent. even if they assault you, now you have a 12" supporting fire. why even bother putting terrain on the table? to benefit Tau? might as well just play on a flat board. It doesn't matter if they have B3 base because for very little you'll be getting units that hit on 3s and 2s.

Space marines got squadroned dreadnoughts? of course the best solution is to give riptides that as well.

40k is going to a bad place in 7th edition. sucks.

don't get me started on STR D missiles and a super heavy that will beat anythings face at only 600 points.

Turtle? A friend of mine plays a strike team-heavy mobile force that is based ENTIRELY around getting upfield and into rapid fire range as fast as possible.

He rarely uses markerlights, and doesn't even own a riptide. I don't think he's lost a game yet, and he's had the same army list since 6th dropped. If you think that a static gunline is the only way to play Tau, you're wrong and have no idea how to play Tau.

Don't tell this guy he "doesn't know how to play Tau" and then jock ride a list that involves "getting upfield into rapid fire range". That means the entire basis of the list were units that should only be bought when absolutely necessary to make a battle forged army list.

Yes, and? The point I was making is that there's more than one way to play Tau. You can do a solid gunline, but that isn't even close to the only way they work. But you would know this, since you're Tau jesus.

culsandar wrote:Two neat things I've figured out with the new book, getting back to Tau tactics:

First, a 5 man Strike unit with a turret is a great way to set up resistant offensive output. Deploy all of the Firewarriors in cover out of line of sight, and deploy the SMS beside them. It can shoot out at your opponent, and your opponent cannot respond without some form of barrage weaponry. That 55 points is a good use of those mandatory troop slots.

Second, if you're like me and you want room for all the new toys and/or like suits, you don't want to be bothered with mandatory tax on junk like fast attack or heavy slots. So kill two birds with one stone and take a small unit of marker drones and a sniper drone unit. Use CF to fire the two units together, allowing the sniper marksmen's drone controller to affect the marker drones, increasing them to BS5 without having to waste a commander to babysit them. Instant reliable markerlights for cheap.

Nice ideas. Specially the second one - that alleviates the need for Mark'O!
As I'll use a CAD anyway, I'm thinking about getting just a Piranha for the HCadre 'Fast Attack' Slot and a Droneport in the Fortification slot. Put the Sniper team there and activate the 4 marker droners you can opt for the Droneport to come with. BAM! 4 marker drones at BS5 with combined fire and the stelath team will have 3+ cover!

 McNinja wrote:

jakejackjake wrote:

 McNinja wrote:

 Johnnytorrance wrote:

 Jancoran wrote:
Except thats not how they fight.

This entire codex screams turtle.

It encourages you to fight from a distance and shoot your opponent. even if they assault you, now you have a 12" supporting fire. why even bother putting terrain on the table? to benefit Tau? might as well just play on a flat board. It doesn't matter if they have B3 base because for very little you'll be getting units that hit on 3s and 2s.

Space marines got squadroned dreadnoughts? of course the best solution is to give riptides that as well.

40k is going to a bad place in 7th edition. sucks.

don't get me started on STR D missiles and a super heavy that will beat anythings face at only 600 points.

Turtle? A friend of mine plays a strike team-heavy mobile force that is based ENTIRELY around getting upfield and into rapid fire range as fast as possible.

He rarely uses markerlights, and doesn't even own a riptide. I don't think he's lost a game yet, and he's had the same army list since 6th dropped. If you think that a static gunline is the only way to play Tau, you're wrong and have no idea how to play Tau.

Don't tell this guy he "doesn't know how to play Tau" and then jock ride a list that involves "getting upfield into rapid fire range". That means the entire basis of the list were units that should only be bought when absolutely necessary to make a battle forged army list.

Yes, and? The point I was making is that there's more than one way to play Tau. You can do a solid gunline, but that isn't even close to the only way they work. But you would know this, since you're Tau jesus.

Since the drones are not part of the Hunter Contingent, I don't think they'll benefit from Coordinated Firepower.

Yes they are.

Drones purchased by any unit are a part of that unit for all rules and purposes.

One of the Auxiliaries you can take if you look to the right of the Core requirements says 1 unit of drones. Its nothing special, but it counts as an Aux formation.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Yes they are.

Drones purchased by any unit are a part of that unit for all rules and purposes.

One of the Auxiliaries you can take if you look to the right of the Core requirements says 1 unit of drones. Its nothing special, but it counts as an Aux formation.

I actually quoted the wrong post, Vector Strike mentioned using the Drones from a Drone Port to benefit from Coordinated Firepower.

Gotcha, yea thats a nogo since theyre not in the formation. One could argue it if the formation included the option for a wall.

Realized my mistake, thanks for the correction

How are you playing the new combined fire rule? All shooting units as one unit, sharing most abilities. I really want to play it like that, but it sounds very powerful. But using just markerlights for the combined fire rule, would be not that great, compared to other contingent rules.

Grundwels wrote:
How are you playing the new combined fire rule? All shooting units as one unit, sharing most abilities. I really want to play it like that, but it sounds very powerful. But using just markerlights for the combined fire rule, would be not that great, compared to other contingent rules.

Sharing rules. I'm at a loss what to do regarding target locks, though. Gonna test both ways

Grundwels wrote:
How are you playing the new combined fire rule? All shooting units as one unit, sharing most abilities. I really want to play it like that, but it sounds very powerful. But using just markerlights for the combined fire rule, would be not that great, compared to other contingent rules.

I'm going to pick three or more units, select one target, and shoot with all of the models in those three units as if they were a single unit including all rules. As far as I'm concerned, once you declare those units as combining their fire, those units are treated as a single unit during that shooting. I'm still not fully convenced that Target Lock would allow splitting of fire, due to the wording of combined fire require all models to shoot at one target appears to be more specific.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Grundwels wrote:
How are you playing the new combined fire rule? All shooting units as one unit, sharing most abilities. I really want to play it like that, but it sounds very powerful. But using just markerlights for the combined fire rule, would be not that great, compared to other contingent rules.

I'm going to pick three or more units, select one target, and shoot with all of the models in those three units as if they were a single unit including all rules. As far as I'm concerned, once you declare those units as combining their fire, those units are treated as a single unit during that shooting. I'm still not fully convenced that Target Lock would allow splitting of fire, due to the wording of combined fire require all models to shoot at one target appears to be more specific.

SJ

No where in the rule does it use the word "model". It only ever says "unit". The UNITS must shoot at the same target, which they are. One model in that unit is shooting another target thanks to target lock, but that doesn't change the fact that the unit is still shooting at the first target.

notredameguy10 wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Grundwels wrote:
How are you playing the new combined fire rule? All shooting units as one unit, sharing most abilities. I really want to play it like that, but it sounds very powerful. But using just markerlights for the combined fire rule, would be not that great, compared to other contingent rules.

I'm going to pick three or more units, select one target, and shoot with all of the models in those three units as if they were a single unit including all rules. As far as I'm concerned, once you declare those units as combining their fire, those units are treated as a single unit during that shooting. I'm still not fully convenced that Target Lock would allow splitting of fire, due to the wording of combined fire require all models to shoot at one target appears to be more specific.

SJ

No where in the rule does it use the word "model". It only ever says "unit". The UNITS must shoot at the same target, which they are. One model in that unit is shooting another target thanks to target lock, but that doesn't change the fact that the unit is still shooting at the first target.

Still not a convincing argument. If one model is not shooting at the same target as the rest, you can't say the unit is shooting at the same target.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

notredameguy10 wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

Grundwels wrote:
How are you playing the new combined fire rule? All shooting units as one unit, sharing most abilities. I really want to play it like that, but it sounds very powerful. But using just markerlights for the combined fire rule, would be not that great, compared to other contingent rules.

I'm going to pick three or more units, select one target, and shoot with all of the models in those three units as if they were a single unit including all rules. As far as I'm concerned, once you declare those units as combining their fire, those units are treated as a single unit during that shooting. I'm still not fully convenced that Target Lock would allow splitting of fire, due to the wording of combined fire require all models to shoot at one target appears to be more specific.

SJ

No where in the rule does it use the word "model". It only ever says "unit". The UNITS must shoot at the same target, which they are. One model in that unit is shooting another target thanks to target lock, but that doesn't change the fact that the unit is still shooting at the first target.

Still not a convincing argument. If one model is not shooting at the same target as the rest, you can't say the unit is shooting at the same target.

SJ

What in the world are you talking about? Even in the last codex target locks were available. I pick unit A to Fire at unit B. One model from unit A fires at unit C using a target lock. Unit A is still firing at unit B even though one model is firing at unit C

I think you may need to reread the rules for shooting and target locks

I'm with notredame. Target lock clearly says a model with it can fire at a different target than his UNIT, not a different target than the models. The main unit will get the benefits of Combined Fire.

If the model firing at a different target gets the benefit as well, I'm on the fence about that.

The way Coordinated Firepower reads to me, I wouldn't let the buffmander's abilities transfer to other squads. Nor would i let DC work across multiple squads. The way it reads to me doesnt give permission to do so. Unless we get a FAQ or ITC ruling that allows it I wont do it.

That being said, i see nothing that states that you wouldnt be able to use target locks. So I will use my TL if I have em the way they've always been.

I would say the models that use their target locks to engage a different target from the rest of the unit do not get the benefits of combined fire. Including any markerlights, special rules, etc. They are not, after all, combining fire with everyone else; they are shooting at a separate target.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I would say the models that use their target locks to engage a different target from the rest of the unit do not get the benefits of combined fire. Including any markerlights, special rules, etc. They are not, after all, combining fire with everyone else; they are shooting at a separate target.

Thats how i intend to rule it.
People usually overlook this because it rarely means anything but you still have to declare a primary target for the unit for charging purposes, where nonTL models fire, and where shadowsun has to fire one of her shots. To me, the Coordinated Fire only works on the primary target of the unit, and Target Locking models cannot benefit from it (even with other units). Unit-wide rules do spread, but units that are TL'ing to a different unit only benefit from the original unit rules (i.e. buffmander shares between both units Primary Target and his own unit's TargetLocking models, but not the other units' TargetLocking models).
Models using TargetLocks cannot benefit from Coord Fire at all, either with their own unit or another unit because they are not firing at a "their units primary target"

it just makes so much more sense and less of a headache to rule it that way to me. not to mention being able to spread buffmander to 2-6 different targets via targetlocks is kinda bs and i'd laugh my ass off it someone seriously thought it was fair to do that and not an oversight.

 ZergSmasher wrote:
I would say the models that use their target locks to engage a different target from the rest of the unit do not get the benefits of combined fire. Including any markerlights, special rules, etc. They are not, after all, combining fire with everyone else; they are shooting at a separate target.

I honestly not sure why, the only requirement is that the unit must shoot at the target, not all the the models in the unit.

I can understand that for a friendly game against a non-decurion army, because it is decurion powerful. However, for a tournament setting I don't see why you would nerf just because it sounds strong without proper play testing.

So in the new codex, what is the role of crisis suits? with deep striking, relentless broadsides missile pod crisis suits seems a little sub par. Similarly, ghostkneels also give that s7 shots with better BS and hitting rare armor makes them the go too against light vehicles. Between ion riptides and stormsurges we don't need more ap2. So what is the best way to play crisis suits?

I am thinking either fusion blasters to help deal with high armor vehicles or airbursting frag projectos for clearing out light infantry.

I also feel that monats are the way to go to cheaply fulfill our formation requirements and leave room for our bigger suits. The only problem is that buffmanders are so powerful and crisis suits are the best place to put them so making a team of 9 crisis suits sounds very powerful.

 lambsandlions wrote:
So in the new codex, what is the role of crisis suits? with deep striking, relentless broadsides missile pod crisis suits seems a little sub par. Similarly, ghostkneels also give that s7 shots with better BS and hitting rare armor makes them the go too against light vehicles. Between ion riptides and stormsurges we don't need more ap2. So what is the best way to play crisis suits?

I am thinking either fusion blasters to help deal with high armor vehicles or airbursting frag projectos for clearing out light infantry.

I also feel that monats are the way to go to cheaply fulfill our formation requirements and leave room for our bigger suits. The only problem is that buffmanders are so powerful and crisis suits are the best place to put them so making a team of 9 crisis suits sounds very powerful.

My personal favorite is two 2x Plasma and one 2x Fusion with target lock. We don't have much low AP weapons and I've found that Crisis Suits work best as heavy infantry/vehicle hunters.

Being a Farsight Enclaves Player I really think thanks to the increased squad size that mixed weapons is now the way to go. I plan to run my teams as the following:

-x5 "Fireknife" Crisis Suits
*w/ x1 Missile Pod & x1 Plasma Gun each

-x3 "SoulforgeD8" Crisis Suits
*w/ x1 Flamer, x2 Fusion Blasters Each

Both are kitted out to fill specific roles and at the same time both have a level of flexibility. The Fireknife Crisis Suits will be responsible for dealing with infantry, MC's & Light to Medium Armour. The Missile Pods give them range and strength while a Plasma Guns give them the low AP for dealing with heavy infantry. Also they have a solid rate of fire at 2 shots at 30 inches, 3 shots at 24 inches and 4 shots up to 12 inches.

The SoulforgeD8 Crisis Suits will most likely be Deep Striking (hence the smaller squad size) and will have the primary mission of dealing with Heavy Armour or clearing infantry off of objectives.

Has anyone played the Hunter Contingent according to strict RAW (can share USRs and can splitfire) against a competitive list (and ideally a list from the newer codexes, e.g. Necron Decurion, SM Gladius, Eldar)?

If so, what has been your experience?

Played marine gladius with it WITH sharing buffs. Want to know the results? 8 destroyed rhinos/razorbacks, one assault unit and half a five man squad died then I was tabled. He got the outflank warlord trait, and wit two lascannon devastator squads wayyy in the back firing with impunity doubling out my suits and broadsides after 2 rounding my ridtide I barely managed to remove 700 points of his 2500ish points. (2k game, he got 500 points in free vehicles).

Really its not over the top. I know unkillable necrons with 12 wraiths or bike heavy eldar the results would be the same. About the only thing it has significantly increased our odds against are things like wolf stars. Screamerstars still murder us.

 Orock wrote:
Played marine gladius with it WITH sharing buffs. Want to know the results? 8 destroyed rhinos/razorbacks, one assault unit and half a five man squad died then I was tabled. He got the outflank warlord trait, and wit two lascannon devastator squads wayyy in the back firing with impunity doubling out my suits and broadsides after 2 rounding my ridtide I barely managed to remove 700 points of his 2500ish points. (2k game, he got 500 points in free vehicles).

Really its not over the top. I know unkillable necrons with 12 wraiths or bike heavy eldar the results would be the same. About the only thing it has significantly increased our odds against are things like wolf stars. Screamerstars still murder us.

Good to know. The more people test it as it looks like to be (the way you did), the more we'll see results like that.
Hunter Contingent is very powerful against pre-Decurion codexes - just like post-Decurion are. Wanting to nerf Combined Firepower without nerfing Tactical Flexibility, for example, is a pretty harsh move.