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.

Aeri wrote:

What do you guys think about the barracuda now? I think it's going to be a very strong unit

Eh, maybe? Its basically two hammerheads smooshed together at a points premium. Move and fire helps it significantly, but its just too fragile for its cost and doesnt put out enough firepower.

Which is a shame as I love the entire FW Air Caste line.

Don't forget it can leave airspace to reposition and focus on critical targets!

Aeri wrote:
Don't forget it can leave airspace to reposition and focus on critical targets!

True, but with changes to the length of the game, only getting one or two shooting rounds with it isnt a point in its favor from my perspective.

Again, I want to like it, but the confluence of factors just doesnt sell it for me.

I think I'm going to dust my devilfish off for the start of 9th to gain more board control earlier in the game.They don't seem to have been hit too hard with the pts increase compared with some of our other stuff.

Devilfish might be critical in my opinion, as well as kroot.
I think about fielding 2 with darkstrider and either an ethereal or a fireblade.

Also Stealth Suits might be the big winners for our midfield dominance.

Regarding the cuda: you are right, sending it off the board too often might not be the best move. I will have to play with the load out of the main gun a little to see what is best for my force Ion canon might not be the safe pick it was in 7th edition.

On another note: my gaming group is extending our 2000 points limit to 2500 as we do not want to play smaller games.
We appreciate the point increase across the board as it became a major fine-tuning across the board. Will see how armies work with the adjusted points in 2500p games.

The notion of fish of fury returning is appealing, but 9th is really shaping up to be an addition where you have to be able to kill vehicles. In that context, a T7 with no invuln and no drone support is just going to melt.

If they were priced like Rhinos or Chimeras, itd possibly be a different story, but at 100+ points a pop its just too costly for my taste.

Stealth Teams for infiltration coverage I do agree on. With Ghostkeels being prohibitively priced the capacity to foil forward deployment or deep strikes even for a single scoring turn is going to pay major dividends. While they took a cost hit, two barebones teams are collectively only a smidge more than a Ghostkeel and can screen out a good chunk of the table.

Sterling191 wrote:
The notion of fish of fury returning is appealing, but 9th is really shaping up to be an addition where you have to be able to kill vehicles. In that context, a T7 with no invuln and no drone support is just going to melt.

If they were priced like Rhinos or Chimeras, itd possibly be a different story, but at 100+ points a pop its just too costly for my taste.

Vehicle saturation is an option. What are Piranha's looking like in cost? Spamming the hell out of them to move block and provide close fusion threats that need to be dealt with could work as a solid first wave to keep opponent pinned in while you move out and grab objectives (though fly changes hurt this tactic a lot)

IanVanCheese wrote:


Vehicle saturation is an option. What are Piranha's looking like in cost? Spamming the hell out of them to move block and provide close fusion threats that need to be dealt with could work as a solid first wave to keep opponent pinned in while you move out and grab objectives (though fly changes hurt this tactic a lot)

The Piranha chassis went up by 11, and Fusions went up by 1. So total cost for a fusion bike is 70 points once the drones get factored in.

Sterling191 wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:


Vehicle saturation is an option. What are Piranha's looking like in cost? Spamming the hell out of them to move block and provide close fusion threats that need to be dealt with could work as a solid first wave to keep opponent pinned in while you move out and grab objectives (though fly changes hurt this tactic a lot)

The Piranha chassis went up by 11, and Fusions went up by 1. So total cost for a fusion bike is 70 points once the drones get factored in.

Hmm, I mean it's not terrible. The real issue is them getting tagged so easily now. But even tagged, they'd still screen out the enemy from moving around quite easily due to their size. But them maybe just spamming even more Devilfish would do that better?

I guess Piranhas might be able to clog up the board and try and contest objectives that are weakly held. They can probably survive getting tagged by the more basic troops out there and 12 S5 shots is a decent counterpunch they can still deliver in that case (FSE may be the choice for vehicle bullies like this)
I don't think they'r really going to pull off "vehicle saturation" since they're going to absolutely melt in ways that make a Devilfish look like a brick house. Plus a popped fish may have protected a tasty obsec center for a bit.

But they do win for being cheap? Most other competing stuff is "more-for-more". Stealth Suits clock in at 78 for a basic unit and are better at early-game objective grabs and screening via infiltrate (but highly vulnerable to being tagged), but you're probably putting more points into them than the minimum too.

rbstr wrote:

But they do win for being cheap? Most other competing stuff is "more-for-more". Stealth Suits clock in at 78 for a basic unit and are better at early-game objective grabs and screening via infiltrate (but highly vulnerable to being tagged), but you're probably putting more points into them than the minimum too.

Honestly I think XV25s are going to be the winner here. Infiltrating during deployment is significantly more impactful than zooming up turn one, and if somebody tags a 3x burst cannon team its not for a moment a loss. Also, with the Infantry keyword XV25s are the only battlesuit that can fully benefit from cover.

They're just the right combo of price and ability for an expendable forward recon force, which amusingly enough is precisely their narrative role. Might even be worth giving a pair of Drones (that can separate and act independantly, plus protect zoomers like Coldstars as they sprint upfield).

Not to mention being infantry suits xv25's can actually undertake actions for scoring purposes.

So, can we now include a Dal'yth Stormsurge for mobile, placeable cover?
Counts as being in cover if it doesn't move.
5+" tall

 carldooley wrote:
So, can we now include a Dal'yth Stormsurge for mobile, placeable cover?
Counts as being in cover if it doesn't move.
5+" tall

He counts as being in cover, not being one.
Also, no sept trait unless you bring a whole trio.

Pretty sure at least one of the Tidewalls is over 5" tall.

 BoomWolf wrote:
no sept trait unless you bring a whole trio.

where does it say that?

There is a box in the 9th rulebook that says:

"Auxillary Support, Super-heavy Auxiliary and Fortification Detachments never gain Detachment abilities."

Basically tidying it up so that every army has the same rules as some codexes were worded differently.

With shield drones going up to 15pts compared to gun/marker drones at 10pts how are people looking to mix their drones?

I've done a bit of calculating and if you kept the drones out of LOS and only use them for saviour protocols then gun drones are more efficient per point.
If they are being targeted by 0AP (single wound) shots the gun drones are still more efficient per point.
If they are being targeted by 1AP (single wound) shots the shield drones are now more efficient per point.
If they are being targeted by 2/3AP (single wound) shots the shield drones are a lot more efficient per point.

I'm thinking of running squads of mainly gun/marker drones with a couple of shield drones to be used against higher AP single wound shots.

 ke3f wrote:
With shield drones going up to 15pts compared to gun/marker drones at 10pts how are people looking to mix their drones?

I've done a bit of calculating and if you kept the drones out of LOS and only use them for saviour protocols then gun drones are more efficient per point.
If they are being targeted by 0AP (single wound) shots the gun drones are still more efficient per point.
If they are being targeted by 1AP (single wound) shots the shield drones are now more efficient per point.
If they are being targeted by 2/3AP (single wound) shots the shield drones are a lot more efficient per point.

I'm thinking of running squads of mainly gun/marker drones with a couple of shield drones to be used against higher AP single wound shots.

Marker Drones with a Drone Controller on my Riptide?

The math you're using is not immediately apparent there and I'm not convinced it's going the right direction. You're basing that on the drones themselves being shot at, or on the likelihood of a shot getting past the save of the battlesuit/infantry being protected? (I figure you'll let the AP0 D1 shot past Savior Protocols pretty often unless you're getting close to a bracket. It's facing a 2+ save on tides and sides and iridium crisis, after all.)

Lets go with something more simple - Your Commander got wounded 3 times and you SP 3 times. So on average:
You lose 3 gun drones or
You lose 2 shield drones, one makes its 5+++.

Conveniently that's 30points of drones either way (which is surely why they made shield drones 15 points).
Marker/gun drones basically just offer more points efficiency from their markers/guns!

Anyway, I'm probably going to take some marker/gun drones now.
I won't, however, be mixing shields into units with other drones. I want to get that marker/gun value out of those drones and so they're going to be exposed more often to fire. If your gundrone pokes out the whole squad can get lit up and that'd be a very inefficient loss of a shield drone.

Sounds like tactical descisions have to be made (both while building the lost and playing it). Bad times for us Tau players

rbstr wrote:
TLets go with something more simple - Your Commander got wounded 3 times and you SP 3 times. So on average:
You lose 3 gun drones or
You lose 2 shield drones, one makes its 5+++.

Yeah I messed the maths up on the SP. However as soon as you are dealing with multi wound dealing weapons the shield drones lose their efficiency where as the gun drones would be exactly the same. I still think that running a couple of shield drones per squad will be useful as Tau won't be able to be aggressive taking board control and objectives without exposing models.

 ke3f wrote:

rbstr wrote:
TLets go with something more simple - Your Commander got wounded 3 times and you SP 3 times. So on average:
You lose 3 gun drones or
You lose 2 shield drones, one makes its 5+++.

Yeah I messed the maths up on the SP. However as soon as you are dealing with multi wound dealing weapons the shield drones lose their efficiency where as the gun drones would be exactly the same. I still think that running a couple of shield drones per squad will be useful as Tau won't be able to be aggressive taking board control and objectives without exposing models.

What do you mean shield drones loose their efficiency I thibk your using the wrong rules for shield drones.
They take the wound before save and on a 2+ move that to the drone as 1MW so it's still tanking a flat 1/3 of the hits it takes. Not sure its quite 15 points worth as you can often straight up fail that 5++.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What's peoples thoughts on XV9 hazards suits, I keep looking at them as while they aren't as tanky as crisis suits the -2 to charges appeals as I suspect a lot of charging onto objectives to be a thing and taking -2 from a charge feels like it could be the thing helping you hold an objective for a turn.

Ice_can wrote:

What's peoples thoughts on XV9 hazards suits, I keep looking at them as while they aren't as tanky as crisis suits the -2 to charges appeals as I suspect a lot of charging onto objectives to be a thing and taking -2 from a charge feels like it could be the thing helping you hold an objective for a turn.

They're...weird. But in a good way. My brain *really* likes the Pulse Submunition build (which with small blast and points shifts is only about 6 points more than it was in 8th), and the inbuilt support system rule is still gold. I'd want to get some playtime with them before making any decisions.

Ice_can wrote:
I think your using the wrong rules for shield drones.

Yeah you're right my brain has gone to mush.. I'm looking forward to picking up some 9th edition games and getting back up to speed with things.

Have you guys considered taking gun drones over shield drones after the point increase. 10 to 15 points is pretty hard to swallow for me, so I wanted to consider other options. After my calculations 100 BS3, S4, -1AP Shots kills 11 shield drones, the same amount killS 22 gun drones. 160pts dead vs 220pts. You are losing a 4+ invuln and a 5+ FNP, but there are benefits, Gun drones has quite a lot of firepower. With drone controller 4 shots, BS4, S5, AP-, isn’t bad if you have 30 of them. 120 S5 shots is going to hurt MEQ’s. Shorter games is also something we need to consider. We can’t afford to play the long game anymore to the same degree. Smaller map is good for gun drones at range 18”. Our overwatch is also free, so we might as well make use of it. Drone controllers are also more available since we done need target lock anymore. Any factors I’ve missed? What are you going to play in the new edition?

I'm planning a slightly odd list not going to lie

Sticking with my shield drones, bit also trying to stick with a very big suit heavy list, I'm not 100% convinced it's the right execution, but the idea is go agressive with mobile heavy hitters Riptides backed up with commanders, Stealth teams Crisis Bodyguards and you'll likely call me a non beliverin the greater good but Kroot.

You know... if you are playing a triptide list, if you go first, you are pretty much assured of getting whatever objectives you want. Its very difficult for another army to march into your lines. I was playing a mech tau list, went 2nd... I never got a chance to move forward. except with my sunshark bombers, but they couldn't hold anything.

 Sazzlefrats wrote:
You know... if you are playing a triptide list, if you go first, you are pretty much assured of getting whatever objectives you want. Its very difficult for another army to march into your lines. I was playing a mech tau list, went 2nd... I never got a chance to move forward. except with my sunshark bombers, but they couldn't hold anything.

Yeah that's the issue having, makijg an army that wins if it goes first and looses if it goes second.

The more I think about it, the more I'm liking Sunsharks for 9th. 175 is not cheap, but its comparable to the Ghostkeels that I think most folks will be dropping from their lists, benefits massively from the changes to Heavy weapons, and also can do serious work with Blast (the overcharged profile of each of its 4 Ion Rifles is a d3 shot profile, so against 6+ model targets they wont even need to roll).

Oh and the always, always clutch bombing run for Mortals.

They're also going to synergize damn well with Farsight lists.