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.

Are heavy rail rifles broadsides okay as anti-air units if your running tau decurion? Since fitting in a skyray is hard as hell, it seems like they'd perhaps be an acceptable form of anti-air if not purely because you can fit them in without a huge tax. What do you guys think?

Missilesides are still a better choice. HRR have no place in a competitive, non-comp environment unless you play nothing but Hammer and anvil or really big boards. Even then, you can get a CAD with a skyray for around the same points as a full unit of broadsides with VT's. If the broadsides are your mandatory heavy choice, then just go with the traditional missiles with EWO. Twin-linked hymp should have a reasonable chance to drop a non-av12 flyer even without skyfire. If nothing else, it'll probably make them jink.

HRR are the worst weapon in our codex for their price.

In the current state of 40k, our once iconic Rail Technology just doesn't put out enough shots to be competitive sadly. I keep hoping they will do something to make the many different rail guns good again. I love pathfinder models with rail rifles, but they took the target lock off of them in sixth edition meaning they have to fire at the same thing as their unit's marker lights. Broadsides with HRRs look amazing, but at S8 one shot just don't compete with HYMPs, and I love my HHs, but they get targeted so quick because vehicles die easy, and even adding in Longstrike to make it BS 5, my luck always ends up making either the roll to hit or pen a 1.

Ion and missiles have sadly replaced Rail in our lists and I would love to see something make Rail special again. I think one thing that could help would be to possibly reduce the HYMP to S6. It would still make it just as annoying as Scat Bikes, and still effective as an anti-horde weapon (which I really think it was designed to be) and make the HRR be a viable anti-armour weapon again.

The problem really isn't with rail it is with AV and MC. AV13 and 14 is not really a defense and is in most cases easily by passed. The issue is low AV jinking units that require a lot of shots to get past saves. It is the same vs MC; a single shot will not kill and can usually be absorbed by an invul or a my toe is in this forest cover save. There is really no advantage to having a single high Strength in the game any more unless its a blast weapon that can maybe instant death multiwound models. In nearly every instance where you need a weapon of this type is is almost always better to go with a melta type weapon. Until this changes you will never really see weapons like rail guns making appearances.

nedTCM wrote:The problem really isn't with rail it is with AV and MC. AV13 and 14 is not really a defense and is in most cases easily by passed. The issue is low AV jinking units that require a lot of shots to get past saves. It is the same vs MC; a single shot will not kill and can usually be absorbed by an invul or a my toe is in this forest cover save. There is really no advantage to having a single high Strength in the game any more unless its a blast weapon that can maybe instant death multiwound models. In nearly every instance where you need a weapon of this type is is almost always better to go with a melta type weapon. Until this changes you will never really see weapons like rail guns making appearances.

We need some kind of over-penetrate mechanism so that very powerful shots that roll well do extra wounds/hull points.

Or something.

The traditional anti-tank weapons are just inferior to mid-strength multi-shot weapons at killing vehicles and MCs. Those multi-shot weapons are also better at killing everything else...

Gamgee wrote:HRR are the worst weapon in our codex for their price.

Such a shame that one of the most bad-ass looking weapons is so useless.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

We need some kind of over-penetrate mechanism so that very powerful shots that roll well do extra wounds/hull points.

I like this idea (as in I think it is cool), but honestly I don't think we Tau need more ways to break vehicles at this point lol

Also it is sad that rail guns suck now for cost as they do look so cool

Think what kind of hate Tau would have if their Heavy Rail weapons were Str8 D weapons, like the Eldar Wraith Str4 D flamers. That would crank the hate to 11.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:
Think what kind of hate Tau would have if their Heavy Rail weapons were Str8 D weapons, like the Eldar Wraith Str4 D flamers. That would crank the hate to 11.

SJ

Or even str6 D with flat D on the tanks

 Zeuriel wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

We need some kind of over-penetrate mechanism so that very powerful shots that roll well do extra wounds/hull points.

I like this idea (as in I think it is cool), but honestly I don't think we Tau need more ways to break vehicles at this point lol

Also it is sad that rail guns suck now for cost as they do look so cool

I don't mean "we" as in "tau" - I meant that the game needs it to make lascannons, bright lances, etc. worth taking.

Vehicles also need a durability boost against mid-strength multi-shot guns.

If you can make the threat range count for something, sure.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Zeuriel wrote:

 Scott-S6 wrote:

We need some kind of over-penetrate mechanism so that very powerful shots that roll well do extra wounds/hull points.

I like this idea (as in I think it is cool), but honestly I don't think we Tau need more ways to break vehicles at this point lol

Also it is sad that rail guns suck now for cost as they do look so cool

I don't mean "we" as in "tau" - I meant that the game needs it to make lascannons, bright lances, etc. worth taking.

Vehicles also need a durability boost against mid-strength multi-shot guns.

I would not be objected to giving vehicles a 3+ armor save. essentially makes them less susceptible to RoF; As most AT weapons are ap1-2. The only issue would then be balancing how many HPs they have so that if you 'dont' roll an explode result they can still be taken down. Flipside.. simply increasing the number of HPs could help as you would need to dedicate more shots still.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That all said... in the ranged support cadre.. they are not so bad because you get dbl the markerlights. Get BS5 and ignore cover..

But yeah even still that only makes missle sides all the better still.

- HYMP need to be +10 points maybe.. maybe +15
- HYMP drop to s6 as mentioned above
- HRR drop twin linked.. gain heavy 2 OR get salvo.. 2/3 or something..

HRR are good anti nurgle bikers units.. but not necessarily better than a HYMP. I would love to see them get Salvo 2/3 with like 80" range, or leave as TL or Heavy 2 with relentless with the 60" range. That way the HYMP snap shoots if they move, but the HRR can still fire if they move, giving the inferior option an appealing feature.
I don't really think they need a +15 points adjustment, they are lower leadership, lower WS and BS terminators with 2 wounds. Maybe some poitns, but not 15

They could also improve single shot anti tank weapons across the board by instituting a new special rule.

<cool fancy name> : A weapon with this special rule that rolls a penetrating hit against vehicles deals d3 hull points instead. If the str is greater then or equal to the toughness of the target unit, an unsaved wound deals d3 wounds instead of 1.

Seems fairly balanced.. maybe too good?

 Grizzyzz wrote:
They could also improve single shot anti tank weapons across the board by instituting a new special rule.

<cool fancy name>: A weapon with this special rule that rolls a penetrating hit against vehicles deals d3 hull points instead. If the str is greater then or equal to the toughness of the target unit, an unsaved wound deals d3 wounds instead of 1.

Seems fairly balanced.. maybe too good?

That has the problem of then making literally everything we try to improve into a miniature D-Weapon, which we already have way too much of.

The problem lies with the spam cannons being too good, not with the big guns being bad at their job. I've never had problems killing tanks with Lascannons, and very rarely loose vehicles to autocannon/scatterlaser fire.

edit - revised version:

{a different fancy new name}: When a vehicle looses it's last hull point to a glancing hit, place a marker on the wreckage. At the start of your turn, roll a D6 for each of your markers on the board. On the roll of a 4+, the vehicle returns to play with 1 HP.

But why? That rule wouldn't even make sense.

makes more sense than making everybodies heavy weapons capable of tearing all vehicles in two (fire dragons beome even more broken)

Just to come to the idea that glancing hits are unlikely to do lasting damage. Obviously, penetrating hits that take the last HP would still kill it (should probably clarify that tbh).

Baasically so that a glanced-off last HP doesnt necessarily mean a dead tank, just a one that shorted out or whatever that the crew might be able to bring back. Probably a general thing that, a main rule

 IHateNids wrote:
makes more sense than making everybodies heavy weapons capable of tearing all vehicles in two (fire dragons beome even more broken)

Just to come to the idea that glancing hits are unlikely to do lasting damage. Obviously, penetrating hits that take the last HP would still kill it (should probably clarify that tbh).

Baasically so that a glanced-off last HP doesnt necessarily mean a dead tank, just a one that shorted out or whatever that the crew might be able to bring back. Probably a general thing that, a main rule

I should also clarify I don't think every single heavy weapon should have that rule i made... maybe lascannons... rail rifles.. maybe bright lances.. etc. I definitely don't intend to give everything that rule would be crazy.

As much as I think it necessary, I dont think a rule like that has a place.

You'd be better off turning them into modified D-Weapons like the Eldar Scytheguard, but thats just adding to the problem at the other end of the scale.

I know there is hate for the tau codex, but I did not understand why they dropped heavy rail rifles down to str 8 ap1. I understand that they re not going to be as powerful as the hammerhead rail gun. I could see if it was Heavy 2 and not twin linked, but even then more people would prefer the 4 shots at str 7 ap4. I might also have agreed with str 9 ap1 on them keeping tl heavy 1 as that makes it more of a threat to av 13/14. As it stands though the only reason to take heavy rail rifles is if you are purposefully handicapping yourself.

another thought on modifying would be to make the rail rifle str/ap stay the same, but make it an assault weapon making the unit more mobile as part of the bargin

 Grizzyzz wrote:
They could also improve single shot anti tank weapons across the board by instituting a new special rule.

<cool fancy name> : A weapon with this special rule that rolls a penetrating hit against vehicles deals d3 hull points instead. If the str is greater then or equal to the toughness of the target unit, an unsaved wound deals d3 wounds instead of 1.

Seems fairly balanced.. maybe too good?

That makes vehicles (which are already too weak) even weaker.

It also hits Monstrous Creatures, which is perfectly fine by me.

AP1 should have a bonus against Monstrous Creatures in the first place, and I'm pretty sure it isn't just me that feels that way.

 Scott-S6 wrote:

 Grizzyzz wrote:
They could also improve single shot anti tank weapons across the board by instituting a new special rule.

<cool fancy name> : A weapon with this special rule that rolls a penetrating hit against vehicles deals d3 hull points instead. If the str is greater then or equal to the toughness of the target unit, an unsaved wound deals d3 wounds instead of 1.

Seems fairly balanced.. maybe too good?

That makes vehicles (which are already too weak) even weaker.

Yeah I think their needs to be some kind of over all balance rework.. give vehicles an armor save.. plus allow anti tank weapons that dont explode an easier chance to RoF something down... but if given both.. you now don't have scat bikes mowing down vehicles.. and you don't suddenly make vehicles too good that they can't be taken down except by ap1 weapons and lucky 5+ rolls.

Not quite on topic, but what do you guys think of rail rifles getting a special effect to reflect their more high penetration effect to the effect of:
"On an explodes result, the (non-SH) vehicle counts as destroyed, and any units embarked on the vehicle take explodes result tests, but the vehicle stays on the field as if it were wrecked, and no explosion results are tested beyond the embarked passengers."
With the effect you could up the strength a touch, without as much collateral damage. (i've lost multiple piranhas to explodes results getting a pen and rolling a 6 on the damage chart, curse you open topped!)