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.

xmbk wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being twice as effective as a lasgun against T8+ is not very significant as you're twice as effective as possibly the worst choice to kill that kind of unit. And IG can field over twice as many Lasguns as our Pulse Rifles for similar cost.

Also better against T4 and T5. Plus T3, T6 and T7 when compared to S3, the original point. S5 clearly is meaningful.

I don't think anyone is claiming that S5 brings no advantage over S3/4, just that new wound tables have reduced the advantage and much of the time, there is no functional difference between S4 and S5 shooting. It is even clearer in case of Railgun, S10 is for nearly every situation no better than S9.

I noticed our crisis and stealth suits do not have the drone support special rule. What happens when you manta strike/infiltrate a unit of suits with drones?

 lambsandlions wrote:
I noticed our crisis and stealth suits do not have the drone support special rule. What happens when you manta strike/infiltrate a unit of suits with drones?

I believe this is an oversight (one of the many accross all indexes). I'd play you can manta strike/infiltrate with them as normal, or it falls on itself

Yeah, I just assumed you deploy them however you want (deep strike, infiltrate, normally, etc.) and then use them as per normal drone rules.

Also not sure if this has been discussed but riptides can take two support systems. Can they take two advanced targeting systems and get -2 to their AP? AP-2 smart missile systems just seem brutal and ap-4 heaver burst cannon will mow down MEQs.

 lambsandlions wrote:
Also not sure if this has been discussed but riptides can take two support systems. Can they take two advanced targeting systems and get -2 to their AP? AP-2 smart missile systems just seem brutal and ap-4 heaver burst cannon will mow down MEQs.

The Support System table header says that a model cannot have more than 1 copy of the same item

Backfire wrote:

xmbk wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being twice as effective as a lasgun against T8+ is not very significant as you're twice as effective as possibly the worst choice to kill that kind of unit. And IG can field over twice as many Lasguns as our Pulse Rifles for similar cost.

Also better against T4 and T5. Plus T3, T6 and T7 when compared to S3, the original point. S5 clearly is meaningful.

I don't think anyone is claiming that S5 brings no advantage over S3/4, just that new wound tables have reduced the advantage and much of the time, there is no functional difference between S4 and S5 shooting. It is even clearer in case of Railgun, S10 is for nearly every situation no better than S9.

Of course, it all revolves around the cost. I doubt railguns pay much for the S10 over S9, but they do for -4 AP. S5 is still significant army wide over S4, it's just a question of how much is being paid for it. I'd say FW and drones are solid for their price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Three games now with a 9-flamer suit team using the homing beacon. Great results against SM and IG. Can really impact your opponent's strategy.

9 Crisis Suits with Flamers?
By the way, Crisis Suits can now use and fire 3 Weapons each. Meaning 9 Suits would be 27d6.
This would also be 69 points per suit, or 621 points. (ATS would be 1 point per suit cheaper, or 612 points)

As far as TriFlamers vs TwinFlamer ATS
vs MEQ
27 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/3 = 15.75
18 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/2 = 15.75

vs GEQ
27 * 3.5 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 42
18 * 3.5 * 2/3 * 5/6 = 35

vs BEQ
27 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 5/6 = 39.37
18 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 6/6 = 31.5

vs TEQ
27 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/6 = 7.87
18 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/3 = 10.5

vs Rhino/Dread
27 * 3.5 * 1/3 * 1/3 = 10.5
18 * 3.5 * 1/3 * 1/2 = 10.5

Lol, sorry. 9 flamers on 3 suits. A 9-suit team would be crazy risky in this edition, imo. Points denial and pray for kill points?

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Can't believe this argument is still happening. I realise most people are (sensibly) ignoring it.

It isn't complicated. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only refer to one weapon. If they wanted you to be able to nova charge both they'd have said "use the nova charge profiles for its weapons", or something like that.

Backfire wrote:

xmbk wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being twice as effective as a lasgun against T8+ is not very significant as you're twice as effective as possibly the worst choice to kill that kind of unit. And IG can field over twice as many Lasguns as our Pulse Rifles for similar cost.

Also better against T4 and T5. Plus T3, T6 and T7 when compared to S3, the original point. S5 clearly is meaningful.

I don't think anyone is claiming that S5 brings no advantage over S3/4, just that new wound tables have reduced the advantage and much of the time, there is no functional difference between S4 and S5 shooting. It is even clearer in case of Railgun, S10 is for nearly every situation no better than S9.

This was exactly my point, thank you for articulating it better. Exalted.

So yeah, first 8th edition tournament coming up and I'm out of ideas. I don't really have the models for more skewy lists like commander spam or gun drone spam so I was thinking of more traditional approach, a gunline of fire warriors and long range dakka behind it. Probably surge and couple of hammerheads or something. What do you guys think I should compliment the gunline with?

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Please stop polluting the Tactics thread with this, it's not helpful/interesting/useful.

Does anyone have any ideas or would like to make a guess on Tetras?

Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

Pottsey wrote:
Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

With split fire you have the options to mark multiple targets with a small rerolls of 1 buff, or you can go ham and really mark one or two units that need killing.

its flexible but otherwise fair.

Mandragola wrote:

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Again....the written language has perception and tone. Use your own advice and understand basic language:

A Weapon can mean what you say or something else because it depends on what the writer meant. I read it that the writer is explaining in detail what "one" weapon can do, but isn't stating that another of the weapons can't. He may mean that, but it is written in the context of, "I am now talking about one weapon" Writing it better would be to explain the before and after. (example, this weapon can and this weapon can.....followed by.....this weapon can't and this weapon can't). The writer doesn't due to space on the data sheet.

Pottsey wrote:
Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

The biggest thing for me is that we cannot achieve BS2+ anymore, unless the unit has a native BS3+ AND you manage to get 5 MLs (as battle reports are coming out, it's common to notice it's not easy to get the 5th ML hit), not there are cost-effective BS2+ ML sources, like the now dead Mark'O. Also, the juicy benefits (+1 to hit and ignore cover) are too far on the scale, while stuff like seeker missiles need just 2 ML. It makes you use mostly the 1 ML hit. why have a table, then?
If the table at least gave 2 results of improving to hit, it would be way better (prolly at 2 and 4 ML hits).
But it's not dead, just feels weaker.

Mandragola wrote:
Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Using that logic it can only fire a single weapon that has a nova profile period when overcharging and are no longer allowed to shoot the others. Nobody is denying that 'a weapon' is singular, obviously one weapon cannot fire using another weapons nova profile which is what that part of the rule simply states, that weapons that have a nova profile can use it when the nova charge rule is active. However the whole rule isn't talking about single weapons, it is talking about while firing which means all weapons. The key point you are missing is that the first part of the rule that says 'When firing the y'vhara can ...',

Also, your 2nd point is also flawed. If they would have needed to write weapons to allow multiples, they should also have need to write one, or single, to restrict it. To me it reads while(shooting weapons) { if(weapon.hasnovaprofile && novacharged){ weapon.shootwithnovaprofile} else { weapon.shootnormally }}. You are free to play it your way I guess .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:
The biggest thing for me is that we cannot achieve BS2+ anymore, unless the unit has a native BS3+ AND you manage to get 5 MLs (as battle reports are coming out, it's common to notice it's not easy to get the 5th ML hit), not there are cost-effective BS2+ ML sources, like the now dead Mark'O. Also, the juicy benefits (+1 to hit and ignore cover) are too far on the scale, while stuff like seeker missiles need just 2 ML. It makes you use mostly the 1 ML hit. why have a table, then?
If the table at least gave 2 results of improving to hit, it would be way better (prolly at 2 and 4 ML hits).
But it's not dead, just feels weaker.

Also keep in mind almost nothing gets cover anymore, you have to be inside a piece of terrain to get any cover, no more hiding 50% behind buildings or intervening units, so even ignore cover from markerlights isnt a big benefit most of the time.

Mandragola wrote:

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Dude, you are a native speaker...
Grab a dictionary, look up what an indefinite article is.

"She was last seen wearing a blue jacket and a blue and white blouse."
This sentence is not about how many jackets or blouses she wears. It uses indefinite articles, which are used to refer to non specific things.

"May fire using a weapon's nova profile"
This sentence again, uses indefinite articles. It does not specifiy which weapon's nova profile. It neither says how many weapons. The sentence does not limit the amount of nova profiles you may use.

MoD_Legion wrote:

Mandragola wrote:
Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Using that logic it can only fire a single weapon that has a nova profile period when overcharging and are no longer allowed to shoot the others. Nobody is denying that 'a weapon' is singular, obviously one weapon cannot fire using another weapons nova profile which is what that part of the rule simply states, that weapons that have a nova profile can use it when the nova charge rule is active. However the whole rule isn't talking about single weapons, it is talking about while firing which means all weapons. The key point you are missing is that the first part of the rule that says 'When firing the y'vhara can ...',

Also, your 2nd point is also flawed. If they would have needed to write weapons to allow multiples, they should also have need to write one, or single, to restrict it. To me it reads while(shooting weapons) { if(weapon.hasnovaprofile && novacharged){ weapon.shootwithnovaprofile} else { weapon.shootnormally }}. You are free to play it your way I guess .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:
The biggest thing for me is that we cannot achieve BS2+ anymore, unless the unit has a native BS3+ AND you manage to get 5 MLs (as battle reports are coming out, it's common to notice it's not easy to get the 5th ML hit), not there are cost-effective BS2+ ML sources, like the now dead Mark'O. Also, the juicy benefits (+1 to hit and ignore cover) are too far on the scale, while stuff like seeker missiles need just 2 ML. It makes you use mostly the 1 ML hit. why have a table, then?
If the table at least gave 2 results of improving to hit, it would be way better (prolly at 2 and 4 ML hits).
But it's not dead, just feels weaker.

Also keep in mind almost nothing gets cover anymore, you have to be inside a piece of terrain to get any cover, no more hiding 50% behind buildings or intervening units, so even ignore cover from markerlights isnt a big benefit most of the time.

Not sure I fully agree with that as although there are less ways to get cover its still easy(assuming you are playing with the battlefield terrain full rules). You don’t just need to be within terrain to get cover. Being on a ruin still gives cover, behind barricades still give cover, same for behind hills still cover.

I would say removing cover is a bigger benefit than ever before. In last edition units with a 3+ save often didn’t care about cover as the armour save was better. Now that +3 armour save becomes 2+ behind cove and if I understand it right 2+ becomes 1+ so surly a lot more people will be trying to make use of cover now, when they didn’t use it in the past.

there is nothing like a 1+.
1 always fails.

Aeri wrote:
there is nothing like a 1+.
1 always fails.

1 always fails but a 1+ save model (say a Terminator in cover) hit by an AP4 weapon only drops to a 5+.

Is this right? A tank with 1 drone attached and the drones dies will cause the tank to take a LD test and if failed the tank is removed?

EDIT: I see that's not right. Drones embarked don't count towards models in a unit so wont trigger a LD.

Pottsey wrote:
Not sure I fully agree with that as although there are less ways to get cover its still easy(assuming you are playing with the battlefield terrain full rules). You don’t just need to be within terrain to get cover. Being on a ruin still gives cover, behind barricades still give cover, same for behind hills still cover.

I would say removing cover is a bigger benefit than ever before. In last edition units with a 3+ save often didn’t care about cover as the armour save was better. Now that +3 armour save becomes 2+ behind cove and if I understand it right 2+ becomes 1+ so surly a lot more people will be trying to make use of cover now, when they didn’t use it in the past.

From I remember reading in the leaks and what I've heard in battle reports you need to be in area terrain for cover (so yes that includes in a ruin) and for vehicles and monsters you also need to be 50% hidden. I think barricades were only mentioned for hand to hand fighting that you can fight over them but hills definitely don't give cover in 8th, no intervening anything ever does. Fair enough this does depend on your board setup how much cover you can get, my buildings are ruins and I have other area terrain, but fortifications like skyshield pad etc all dont give any cover. Your point about cover itself is still true, when something does have it it is more powerful than before, but I think less things will be benefiting from it, at least in my experience you have to leave your area terrain at some point . In either case since every unit has free split fire now its still fairly easy to not overshoot markerlights on targets, if you need cover, just dump lights on it till you have enough. You can even split shooting markerlights from 2 units 50/50 to the same two targets so the 2nd unit shooting can reroll 1's thanks to the first unit.

disclaimer: I'm getting my rule book tomorrow so I might not actually be correct

MoD_Legion wrote:

Pottsey wrote:
Not sure I fully agree with that as although there are less ways to get cover its still easy(assuming you are playing with the battlefield terrain full rules). You don’t just need to be within terrain to get cover. Being on a ruin still gives cover, behind barricades still give cover, same for behind hills still cover.


I would say removing cover is a bigger benefit than ever before. In last edition units with a 3+ save often didn’t care about cover as the armour save was better. Now that +3 armour save becomes 2+ behind cove and if I understand it right 2+ becomes 1+ so surly a lot more people will be trying to make use of cover now, when they didn’t use it in
the past.

From I remember reading in the leaks and what I've heard in battle reports you need to be in area terrain for cover (so yes that includes in a ruin) and for vehicles and monsters you also need to be 50% hidden. I think barricades were only mentioned for hand to hand fighting that you can fight over them but hills definitely don't give cover in 8th, no intervening anything ever does. Fair enough this does depend on your board setup how much cover you can get, my buildings are ruins and I have other area terrain, but fortifications like skyshield pad etc all dont give any cover. Your point about cover itself is still true, when something does have it it is more powerful than before, but I think less things will be benefiting from it, at least in my experience you have to leave your area terrain at some point . In either case since every unit has free split fire now its still fairly easy to not overshoot markerlights on targets, if you need cover, just dump lights on it till you have enough. You can even split shooting markerlights from 2 units 50/50 to the same two targets so the 2nd unit shooting can reroll 1's thanks to the first unit.

disclaimer: I'm getting my rule book tomorrow so I might not actually be correct

It looks like there are two sets of rules for cover and you can choose to play with either. Under the battlefield section there are expanded cover rules.

So got my first game of 8th in on Saturday. Tau vs Tau 2000 point mirror match. We rolled up missions scouring with 12" opposing deployments.

My opponent list: Dylan

Stormsurge w/ Pulse Driver Cannon & -1 rend & Move and Shoot w/out penalty (later he realized the redundancy as storm surges can due this naturally). He should have taken a 4++ shield.
Riptide with Ion Accelerator & Smart Missiles & -1 rend, & Move and Shoot w/out penalty + 2 marker drones
3 crisis suits w/ dual Burst Cannons & -1 rend + 2 marker drones
3 crisis suits w/ ? & Missile Launchers & -1 rend + 2 marker drones
3 crisis suits w/ melta gun and plasma & -1 rend + 2 marker drones
5 Fire Warrior Strikes + 2 marker drones
5 Fire Warrior Strikes + 2 marker drones
5 Fire Warrior Strikes + 2 marker drones
Ethereal
Fire Blade
Farsight

+4 CP

My list:

10 Fire warrior strikes
10 Fire warrior strikes
10 Fire warrior strikes
9 Breachers + Devil Fish
10 Kroot
6 Gun Drones
6 Gun Drones
2 Broadsides w/ HYMP & EWO + 4 Marker Drones
Commander w/ 4 Fusions Guns + 2 Gun Drones
Commander w/ 4 Fusions Guns + 2 Gun Drones
Commander w/ 3 Missile Pods & Drone Controller + 2 Marker Drones
3 crisis suits w/ dual Fusion Guns & 1 with Drone Controller & 2 with re-roll 1's + 2 marker drones
Ethereal w Hover Drone
5 pathfinder plus pulse acceleration drone + 6 " for pulse weaponry.

+ 6 CP

He has 3 objectives scattered across his deployment, I have two in mine. Last objective is in the center.

Deployment: We take turns deploying.

Dylan: Farsight and Crisis Suits are Manta Striking (Deep striking basically). Each of his 5 man warriors get placed on an objective. Ethereal behind the center Fire Warrior squad. Fire Blade behind the right flank Fire Warriors. Storm surge centered. Riptide on left flank. Everything but the Stormsurge is in cover providing terrain.

Mine: Commanders and Crisis Suits are Manta Striking. Kroot is on my right flank. Left Center is a unit of fire warriors, pathfinders + drone , and gun drone squad. Dead Center is my Ethereal and Gun Drones. Right Center is broadsides + Drones and 2 fire warrior squads. Right Center is the devil fish + breachers. Everything but my Ethereal is in cover providing terrain.

Dylan finishes deployment first and I fail to seize.

Turn One: Dylan moves his army forward and drops Farsight (his Warlord) on my far left flank but not into terrain. He also drops his burst cannon suits about 13+ inches from my front line in cover providing terrain. Shooting, his marker light drones fail to hit as he doesn't have a drone controller nearby and he can't roll above a 4. He then fires his small arms fire into several of my Fire Warrior Squads and the Kroot, Killing 10 or so Firewarriors from 3 different Squads and 3 Kroot. The big guns go after my Broadsides but end up killing nearby drones instead (savior protocals). He fails to assault Farsight into a nearby Fire Warrior Squad even after re rolling one of the charge dice and takes 2 wounds from overwatch. Ethereal is within 6" off most of my army and his leadership 9 helps me pass all my morale tests except for the lonely Kroot who only lose 1.

Note EWO only has a 12" range now and since you will likely be screening your broadsides, it is likely that your opponent can deploy an assault troop win the 10" range of one of your units and outside of the EWO threat range. So I don't see this being very useful now unless you are fielding an un-screened stormsurge.

My turn: Ethereal takes the re roll 1 ability for Stationary Battlesuits & Infantry and moves up. 1 squad of gun drones moves towards Farsight while my second depleted squad moves towards the crisis suits. Breachers get out of the devilfish and advance towards the crisis suits but are outside of 5" range :(. Devil fish advanced forward. Kroot advance up slightly and I forget to shoot with them. Crisis Suits + Fusion Commanders and drones deploy in a pocket right of the storm surge and into cover providing terrain; half of the marker drones however have to be placed out of cover. Note: Finding pockets in the backfield that are more than 9" away from all enemy units is going to be tricky. Missile Commander + Drones drops down by my Ethereal. I start with my marker lights, having my drone assisted 2 man marker drones (near the missile commander) fire first on the storm surge so as to get the reroll 1's for my next volley. In the end, my marker lights place 5 hits on the storm surge and 4 on the Bust cannon suits. It takes the combined fire of all three melta-squads and the missile commander to take the stormsurge out. I use a CP to reroll a melta damage roll from a 1 to a 5. Breachers, Broadsides, 1 Gun Drone Squad, and two Fire Warrior Squads fires into the Burst Cannon Crisis Squad for 1 wound. Second Gun Drone Squad and 3rd Fire Warrior Squad take 2 more wounds off of Farsight.

Note: I couldn't utilize MONTKA when I dropped so having the +1 to hit from 5 Markerlights was critical for my melta squad...otherwise I would have failed several to hit rolls and not killed the Storm Surge.

Turn 2: Dylan back peddles his entire army towards my 3 melta squads. His marker lights continue to fail and he only gets 1 hit on the marker drone squad and 1 hit on the crisis suit squad. Really wishing he had some drone controllers now. He uses his small arms fire to remove most of my marker and gun drones, however, I manage to keep 3 alive. Then his riptide fires into my Crisis Suits (Closest Unit) and I pass them off, slaying two more drones. Farsight shoots and slays two pathfinders and dies to over watch when he charges in.

My turn: Ethereal takes the re roll 1 ability for Stationary Battlesuits and Infantry and moves up while still staying within 6" of the pathfinder and broadside unit. Units in my backfield move up except the broadsides and the pathfinders. My melta suits stay still and one of the melta commanders calls Maunta (re roll shooting hits for units that don't move this turn). Marker-light shooting scores 4 hits on Dylan's Melta/Plasma Crisis Squad and 1 hit on his Missile Crisis Squad. Gun Drones shooting the nearest units is pretty fruitless as it ends up bouncing off his Burst Cannon Squad with a 2+ saves due to cover. Dylan uses a CP to re roll a 2+ save. I then proceed to fire all my small arms and wipe out half of his marker drones, particularly the ones near the melta suites and burst cannon suits. Fusion commanders and the 2 remaining fusion suits wipe his missile and melta suites. I use a CP to re roll a melta damage result. Missile Commander and Broadsides wipe his Burst Cannon Suites. We go ahead and call the game as my firepower can wipe all his fire-warriors next turn, leaving him with just two characters and a riptide.

Take away:

I don't see myself going 1st against a whole lot of armies and thanks to drones splitting, I'm going to have a lot of easy kill points for first blood...thankfully the maelstrom cards have a small number of VP for slaying units.

Pathfinders: Seam OK for a cheap source of marker-lights and can also fire over watch. Plus you can get a pulse accelerator drone for 8 points, which is small enough that you should be able to hide it first turn and then move it to support your advancing gun drones or stationary fire base with 6" of additional range.

Ethereal: Real value is in the leadership 9 6" bubble which makes it easy for me to pass or limit morale test damage on either advancing gun drones or strike teams. Hover-board allows gives him FLY and 8" Movement, allowing him to keep up with gun drones and more easily get away from combats that consolidate into him. He does gain Battle-Suite Keyword and thus can't be taken in a Devilfish. Being able to reroll 1's was an added benefit, though redundant with Markerlights. I like him. Dylan who spread his fire warriors out and was always moving had much less benefit from his.

Devil Fish: Lackluster in this game, 12 Str 5 shots at BS 4 and no rend -- that I already had plenty of from far cheaper platforms. Basically provides protection. Can't fire the breachers out of it. You can consolidate drops by combining I'll usually be going second to large number of drops so if the ethereal is not on the table, then I'll be losing morale tests to my opponents alpha strike. Seams like you would be better served with a unit that has more firepower for the points.

Breachers: Lackluster in this game...really hard trying to get in that 5" goodness range as Devilfish sadly is not open-topped and you have to disembark before the Devil Fish Moves so you only have a 14" threat range with the much desired -2 rend unless you advance and take the -1 to hit .

Firewarriors: Seam OK. Cheap, good range and synergized with my ethereal + Pulse Accelerator Drone.

Broadsides: Lackluster in this game...due to lack of rends on Smart Missiles and HYMP combined with poor rolling. Would have benefited more from Advanced Targeting System to boost my rends rather than EWO. As it stayed still, it can synergized with the Ethereal or Montka. Very, very expensive now.

Markerlights: Did well and I didn't feel like I had an excess. Drone controller was key. Was able to get cover reduction and re-roll ones constantly on units I wanted dead. Helps to support my deep-striking units. Also provides soaks wounds for battlesuits in a pinch. Having a unit of Marker drones drop with Battlesuits can keep them from being alpha struck off the table.

Gun Drones: Did well with the drone controller and soaks wounds for battle suits. Fast moving and can be deepstriked if accompanying crisis suits and commanders.

Commanders: Worked well for me. The fusion was better, but having a missile commander in the backfield with the advancing drones was also good. BS 2+ is very good. Being able to call Montka was amazing...but probably situational...how often will you be able to afford standing still with your army? Definitely jealous of armies that have characters that allows re rolls every turn.

Crisis Suits: Dual fusion worked well for me and you can have 6 drones accompany them on the drop. Burst Cannons on Crisis platforms are expensive and it didn't seam worth the investment as you can get that from gun drones.

Farsight: Lackluster. Not really great at close combat, not really great at shooting. Being able to call MONTKA twice in a game is a benifit but seams very situational as the units can't move. He made a mistake by dropping him unsupported. I'll pass.

Riptide: Lackluster this game. I just ignored during the game and passed his best firepower onto my nearby drones. Very expensive platform for little damage output but extremely resilient with a 2+/3++. He suffered 3 wounds this game due to overheating and nova charges.

Stormsurge: Lackluster this game as he died right away to my Beta Strike. Dylan missed out on the 4++ save. Always take that. Better firepower to cost ratio than the riptide and would have survived my alpha if he had had a 4++ save.

Fireblade: Lackluster this game. Dylan's firewarriors were too spread out and too MSU to benefit from this cheap HQ. Also harder to keep up with gun drones as he lacks Fly and only has a 6" move.


On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

 wyomingfox wrote:

On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

I bet they're still playing

 Vector Strike wrote:

 wyomingfox wrote:

On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

I bet they're still playing

I found their lack of devastation disturbing

 Vector Strike wrote:

 wyomingfox wrote:

On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

I bet they're still playing

I think I found some footage from their table:

I know very few people own them but has anyone tried the tidewall drone port? You can load it up with 4 marker drones and put fireblade cadre on top for a source of 2+ markerlights. Even better you can have cadre fire first so your drones are hitting on 2+ rerollable. Because The drones in the tidewall turn 1 they are much harder to alphastrike. You could also put a pathfinder team with heavy weapons and darkstrider for extra markerlights.

I want to play Tidwalls with Drones and that Character for Markerlight spam!

Im new to Tau looking to start so i dont know all the names yet.