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.

Okay, so it has long been my opinion that there were only a few things that needed to be fixed with the Tau Codex and they were all so simple they could have been done in an FAQ. But no, we get a new Codex and yes, most of the problems aren't fixed. This is despite me detailing them (and offering simple and varying solutions to them) in a letter to GW. Oh well. :S

Worse yet, there are more problems in the new Codex.

 

So here's my list of what still needs to be fixed and what's new. Some of these might be known, others may not.

CONTINUING:

1. They still haven't sorted out which mission rule takes precedence, Infiltration or Escalation, so Stealth Suits mostly likely suffer in Escalation games.

2. It's still impossible to reach the 100 point limit of Wargear. The most you can get is 91. So why bother with the limit?

3. Drones still count towards Morale checks for 25% casualties, below 50% for VP purposes and half-strength purposes for holding objectives. The first one I can understand but I've never understood the second and third limitation. Why on earth would a Tau Fire Warrior care if a Drone took the hit rather than his best buddy? Better them than me mentality.

4. GW thinks they've fixed Shield Drones. Unfortunately, they haven't. Thanks to the 'No Save' rule (p24 of the rulebook) Shield Drones are still useless unless everyone else (or maybe the majority - it's a confusing issue thanks to GW's insistence on confusing Invulnerable and Armour Saves) has a Shield Generator.

5. The wording for Independent Character status still bothers me a lot. I understand the intent behind it, and behind the rules for ICs on p51 of the rulebook, but the wording in the Tau Codex (and others) continue to contradict it. They could at least have tidied the wording up.

6. Ethereals still can't take any armour (even though the damn front cover of the Codex shows an Ethereal in armour!). Not even a Shield Generator, which would make sense.

7. EMP Grenades are still totally and utterly useless.

8. There's still the line in the Devilfish entry about it not being able to carry XV suits. Why is this line even here? Editing, people!

9. I'm still unclear of whether or not the Pathfinder's Devilfish may move in the Scouting movement pre-game phase or not.

NEW:

1. Twinlinked weapons are possibly illegal. Or at least, the Codex is contradictory. In plenty of places it refers to buying the same weapon twice (thus making it twinlinked). Unfortunately in the Battlesuit Armoury intro (p25) it clearly states: "No model can pick the same item twice,".

2. It's possible to have two independently firing Plasma Rifles on a Crisis Suit. Nowhere in the new Codex does it say you have to twinlink the two weapons.

3. Lots of the new stuff isn't included in the summary (on p48), such as the AFP, the CIB,

4. The last sentence for the Cyclic Ion Blaster (p26) makes no sense whatsoever. "Any rolls to wound of a 6 count as AP1, regardless of the target's Toughness." Since when has Toughness had anything to do with Armour Saves?

5. The Ejection System (p26) fails to state the VP conditions. Does the opposing player still get them for destroying the Crisis Suit? Or does he have to kill the pilot now? Or does he get half-and-half?

6. The text for the Failsafe Detonator (p26) fails to clarify if you have to declare the item's use before rolling for Falling Back or not. This is important because if you have declare before and then roll three 1s on your Fall Back roll, your own troops are caught in the blast.

7. The Stimulant Injector (p27) suffers from the Armour/Invulnerable problem that GW refuses to acknowledge. FNP clearly states (on p74 of the rulebook) that it doesn't work against close combat weapons that allow no Armour Save. But if you combine the SI with a Shield Generator, you now have a 4+ Invulnerable Save. So does it work again?

8. The Disruption Pod (p30) has been almost entirely nerfed, unless the Tau player is intent on keeping all of his vehicles still. You can move 12" and all hits count as glancing. Or stay still, purchase the DP and have a 50/50 chance of having hits count as glancing.

9. The Devilfish (p36) no longer has the Gun Drone (p30) upgrade and so, if you wish, you can now fit another two Gun Drones on to the vehicle. An added extra punch for FoF?

10. Likewise, there's nothing to prevent the Sky Ray from taking an extra two Seeker Missiles (p31) (although these won't count as Defensive).

11. This is petty, I know but the usual GW bad editing still persists (p31): "The missiles do not need a line of sight from the vehicle they are mounted on to the vehicle."  How difficult is it to hire an editor?

12. Back to Seeker Missiles. Sigh.  It clearly states (p31) that "The missiles may always be fired, even at different targets if relevant, regardless of the distance the vehicle has moved or whether it has fired any other weapons." So why (p41) is there a reference to the missiles being Defensive Weapons?

13. Sensor Spines (p31) have been changed considerably but I'm not sure it's a problem as of yet. The ability to travel through terrain seems good at first glance but all it offers you is 'obscured', which you should be getting anyway (from moving over 12"). So it's pointless. And it's lost the ability to detect mines and traps (not that this was ever useful enough to take the upgrade - but against Mauleed's 3-Whirlwind army? Shudder.).

14. Shield Drones have lost their ability to force the opponent to target them first in close combat. It's still possible but it requires the Tau player to be clever (if he's stupid enough to assault) or the opponent to be stupid.

15. Gun Drones no longer have a jetpack if they accompany infantry. How they stay afloat I don't know.

16. Drones (p31) now have no Ld stat and so never flee. However, this doesn't apply to Gun Drone Squadrons (p38) for some unknown reason and who have Ld7. Why a unit of Gun Drones that has been programmed to fight has a Ld and yet a unit of the exact same size that has not been programmed to fight and has already been damaged has no Ld and will never flee, I don't know.

17. Commanders are now 1+, which creates a problem for all those players who like to take two Ethereals or no Commanders or a Special Character to lead the army.

18. Commanders have not been reduced in price even though all other Crisis Suits have. Why not? Have they improved in some way that I don't know about?

19. The wording on the Commander's entry about Independent Characters has a RAW flaw. (Hey, that rhymes...) If a Commander is acommpanied by a bodyguard he no longer counts as an IC and cannot therefore join other units. However, if he has a bodyguard and drones, he technically can.

20. The new Stealth Suits not only look worse but are now easier to spot at nighttime.

21. There may be a RAW problem with Fire Warriors and the Infantry Armoury. On p36 it says: "One Fire Warrior Shas'la may be upgraded to a Shas'ui team leader ... and may select items from the Infantry Wargear list." The problem is if you compare the Infantry Armoury table (p28) to the Battlesuit Armoury table (p25) then you can see each column in the latter is clearly labelled. In the former, only the middle column is labelled Infantry Wargear. I think it's pretty obvious that the label is meant to apply to all three columns but an argument can be made that it applies only to the central column (the precedence of the Battlesuit Armoury labels and the fact that other units get access to the Infantry Armoury, not just the Infantry Wargear). Thus you'd be able to take a Drone Controller but not Drones (which in itself contradicts the RAW elsewhere) for example. Again, this comes down to intent vs. RAW.

Note the same can be said about Vehicle Upgrades.

22. The Piranaha, we are told on p39, can take only certain Tau Vehicle upgrades. But this is all of them save one, which is the Multi-Tracker which is irrelevant. So, again, why is this text here? Bad editing, perhaps.

23. Plasma has become more expensive across the board... yet it's still the same cost for Broadsides. Isn't that odd?

24. The cost of the Ion Cannon has been seriously reduced. There's little point as I still doubt you'll see any save in armies with 3 Hammerheads (and rarely even then).

25. Finally, my biggest gripe. O'Shovah has been screwed over worse than ever. Before, he was a subpar choice. He cost at least 45+ points too much in comparison with a similarly equipped Commander (as opposed to all SM special characters who are cheaper and more powerful than similarly equipped SMs) and probably around 75+ points too much due to all his massive restrictions. The advantage he possessed was that he had a power weapon, a shield generator and counted as a Monsterous Creature. With a similarly equipped bodyguard with the Ork Fighter upgrade, he could tear through the average Marine squad (maybe not Assault Marines) and make them run.

But now he's been shafted. O'Shafta. He now has: a point limit on his army size (say what?); has to be taken with another HQ (as if he wasn't too expensive already); has lost his Monsterous Creature advantage (heaven forbid GW lets someone threaten their precious little coddled Space Marines...); has lost the partially useful if way too expensive Ork Fighter upgrade for Preferred Enemy (and as I have told people before, average and expensive beats crap for free); now must take 1+ Crisis Suits; and hasn't come down a bit in price despite Crisis Suits being cheaper and him still being vastly overpriced.

In exchange, he's gained a target lock and a bonding knife, Gun Drone Squadrons, the ability to finally fill out a full FOC, and he can take a larger bodyguard (which is a disadvantage more than an advantage).

Oh, and he gets Bonding for free! But, what everyone seems to be missing, is that (possibly according to RAW) everyone still has to pay for it because they don't have access to the Armoury!

Sheesh. What a deal. Thanks, GW.

 

 

 

 

Does anyone else have anything to add before I write yet another letter of complaint to GW?

Your new questions:

8. The Disruption pod is 5 pts to increase your chances of glancing instead of penetrating by 50% on turn 1.

15. It's called "every model in the unit moves at the speed of the slowest model." Game balance.

16. Game balance.

18. Game balance.

That's all I've got.

My two cents:

1) Stealths in Escalation.  Infiltrate USR (pg.75) "does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table."  As Stealth are Jump Infantry, they would start off board in Escalation regardless of their Infiltrate ability.

2) 100 pt limit on Wargear.  I figure it leaves the possibility open for Chapter Approved Tau wargear to appear later on.

3) Dead drones taking a unit below 50%.  The Tau guys start to get nervous when all their bullet-catcher units fall over.  Game-wise, it'd just be more complex having this special unit type that still moves and fights but doesn't count for morale checks.  *shrug*

4) Shield drones weirdness.  RAW-wise, ugly.  Actual play-wise, I dunno if people are really going to claim that the Crisis suit falls over before it's drones.

5)IC wording. Yup, that's off.  I'm starting to think that 'hidden' ICs are only really disallowed in the old Chapter Approved compilations (for 3rd ed!) and the Haines online FAQ, both of which are sorta iffy for a solid argument.

6)Armoured Ethereals.  That's really one of Space Pope's bodyguards, who only wear decorative armour to show off their shinyness. Really though, a targetted Ethereal is gonna die armour or not unless he has some sort of 2+/2+(I), which ain't gonna happen.

7)EMP grenades are useless.  So are Krak grenades. Big deal.

8)Devilfish not carrying XV battlesuits.  So what's so wrong w/ the line?  The current line says it carries 12 models.  As battlesuits don't ride in the 'Fish, there has to be something prohibiting them from getting on board.  You know that somebody's tried joining their commander to a Fire Warrior team and embarking for a joyride.

9) Pathfinder Devilfish Scout movement. Under the Pathfinders unit entry, it says a Team "consists of 4-8 Pathfinders and a Devilfish".  The 'Fish gets to Scout move, though it wouldn't have killed them to put a line expressly allowing it.

8. There's still the line in the Devilfish entry about it not being able to carry XV suits. Why is this line even here? Editing, people!

This one is simple, it's to prevent people from attaching Commanders to squads that have devilfish and using them to zip him around the battlefield.

1. Twinlinked weapons are possibly illegal. Or at least, the Codex is contradictory. In plenty of places it refers to buying the same weapon twice (thus making it twinlinked). Unfortunately in the Battlesuit Armoury intro (p25) it clearly states: "No model can pick the same item twice,".

2. It's possible to have two independently firing Plasma Rifles on a Crisis Suit. Nowhere in the new Codex does it say you have to twinlink the two weapons.

This appears to be the same question really, the armoury statement from question 1 means that question 2 is moot.  A better way of putting it might be that there is confusion on how crisis suits carry weapons (can they carry two of the same weapon without being twin-linked?)

7. The Stimulant Injector (p27) suffers from the Armour/Invulnerable problem that GW refuses to acknowledge. FNP clearly states (on p74 of the rulebook) that it doesn't work against close combat weapons that allow no Armour Save. But if you combine the SI with a Shield Generator, you now have a 4+ Invulnerable Save. So does it work again?

This is more a problem with the USR than with Tau, I'd suggest adding it to Yak's 4th ed FAQ questions.

8. The Disruption Pod (p30) has been almost entirely nerfed, unless the Tau player is intent on keeping all of his vehicles still. You can move 12" and all hits count as glancing. Or stay still, purchase the DP and have a 50/50 chance of having hits count as glancing.

It appears to me that the disruption pod is primarily for those situations where you can't guarentee getting first turn and the terrain isn't suitable enough to prevent your vehicles from getting shot.  It might also be important for use with Landing Gear.

9. The Devilfish (p36) no longer has the Gun Drone (p30) upgrade and so, if you wish, you can now fit another two Gun Drones on to the vehicle. An added extra punch for FoF?

Erm, are we looking at the same book?  Pg 36:

Weapons:  A Devilfish is armed with a Burst Cannon and a pair of Gun Drones.  It is also equipped with Landing Gear.

It appears that they decided to put all of the relevant built-in items in the weapons section rather than list them in "options."  This is repeated in every other vehicle in the book.

10. Likewise, there's nothing to prevent the Sky Ray from taking an extra two Seeker Missiles (p31) (although these won't count as Defensive).

Yes, there is.  Take a look at the "Options" section for the Skyray, Seeker Missiles are not listed at all.

15. Gun Drones no longer have a jetpack if they accompany infantry. How they stay afloat I don't know.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that it's to prevent the Tau player from "jumping back" the gun drones in the assault phase (though the reason he would do that escapes me).

16. Drones (p31) now have no Ld stat and so never flee. However, this doesn't apply to Gun Drone Squadrons (p38) for some unknown reason and who have Ld7. Why a unit of Gun Drones that has been programmed to fight has a Ld and yet a unit of the exact same size that has not been programmed to fight and has already been damaged has no Ld and will never flee, I don't know.

Drones taken as wargear don't have a Ld stat as they will never be called upon to make a Ld check by themselves.  If their controller dies they are destroyed.

19. The wording on the Commander's entry about Independent Characters has a RAW flaw. (Hey, that rhymes...) If a Commander is acommpanied by a bodyguard he no longer counts as an IC and cannot therefore join other units. However, if he has a bodyguard and drones, he technically can.

No, the commander entry is pretty clear on this.  If he has a bodyguard, he doesn't follow the Independent Character rules.  If he has drones, he can join other units as long as he's an independent character.

23. Plasma has become more expensive across the board... yet it's still the same cost for Broadsides. Isn't that odd?

Not really, they mentioned they were increasing the cost of plasma on battlesuits to make other weapons more appealing.  Broadsides were rarely, if ever, seen with plasma in 3rd and don't exactly have a lot of options to compete with.

But now he's been shafted. O'Shafta. He now has: a point limit on his army size (say what?); has to be taken with another HQ (as if he wasn't too expensive already); has lost his Monsterous Creature advantage (heaven forbid GW lets someone threaten their precious little coddled Space Marines...); has lost the partially useful if way too expensive Ork Fighter upgrade for Preferred Enemy (and as I have told people before, average and expensive beats crap for free); now must take 1+ Crisis Suits; and hasn't come down a bit in price despite Crisis Suits being cheaper and him still being vastly overpriced.

Re-read the section on the Dawn Blade again.  He still gets the bonuses Monstrous Creatures do in close combat, he just doesn't get the other penalties (like being picked out for shooting).

I haven't read the new codex(or really the old one...) but I think I can answer a little.

The CiB's side ability is not bad, or that hard to udnerstand. It's like Rending-lite, except that you roll to see if it bypasses armor with the wound roll, not the to-hit. See the Sister's Divine Guidance ability. :p

The way I read the stim injector is this: You do NOT get a Feel No Pain roll if you get nailed by an AP1(debatably an AP2 as well) shot, or by a power weapon.

Disruption Pod: Skimmers can stll be stunned. Or not get the first move of a game.

Failsafe Detonator and hitting your own guys. Rolling a one 3 times is a 1/216 chance. Sucks for whoever is(was) left standing. :p

Since I have nothing else to do with my time right now, I'll put in my input on your new questions.

1) Armoury woes.  The line 'no model can pick the same item twice...' is directly after the sentence 'A model in a battlesuit that has access to the Armoury may also choose up to 100 points from the Battlesuit Wargear list.'  The two items restriction is referring to the Battlesuit Wargear list, which is different from the Battlesuit Weapon Systems list.

2)Two single weapon systems.  'Where a weapon system is given two points values, the first is the price for the normal, single-mounted version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type).'  If you buy two burst cannons, you automatically pay the 2nd price (as you've picked two of them) and they're twin-linked.  There is wiggle
room here, but I don't think carrying two single plasma rifles will fly in play.

3)Some items are missing from the summary.  Yup, that's correct.

4)Fun with the Cyclic Ion Blaster.  It's Rending!  No, it's Divine
Guidance!  Wait, it's ....uhhh...something.  I know, it'll do something
later against the new Eldar Wraithwacker, which has the new rule that any non-instant death weapons automatically counts as AP-.

5)Ejection system VPs.  Well, as the 'battlesuit is replaced with a single model, representing the pilot', I'd say that there's no VPs gained for the removed battlesuit until the pilot gets killed.  The battlesuit is not dead, off-table or falling back, and has been replaced with the pilot.  The 50/50 was the Forgeworld ejection system.  This could get weird as you get half VPs for shooting up the suit, but once it loses it's last wound, it's worth no VPs.  This might take some more thinking.

6)When to use the Failsafe detonator.  So what if your team gets caught in the blast on a triple one for fallback?  It's a bad dice roll, and it's part of the game.

7)Stim Injector.  As like the Shield drones from above, I think common usage will win out over RAW.

8)Disruption pods.  Really, you think they're nerfed now?  I'm of the opinion that they're much better as Obscurement will give you some protection against Stunned results and losing first turn on terrain-sparse boards.  I always found that the 6" range reduction was only useful aginst highly static armies, and with 4th ed's emphasis on mobility, there's a lot more moving anti-Hammerhead fire out there.

9)Adding more gun drones to a Devilfish.  Unfortunately, Gun Drones are no longer a buyable Tau Vehicle Armoury option, instead existing only in each vehicle's upgrade options.  Would have been interesting though.

10)Sky Ray entertainment.  Seeker missiles are not a buyable option for the Sky Ray tank.

11) Bad Seeker editing.  Yup that sucks.

12) The defensive wording is that the Networked Markerlights are the defensive weapons, not the Seekers!  Additionally, at first glance it may appear that Seekers can't be salvoed as they have strength 8, so this might be to prevent that.

13) Sensor spines aren't too bad, much like disruption pods.  Just
insurance against that stunned/first-turn results.

14) Shield drones lost their "target me first!" rule when the 4th edition Tau FAQ came out.

15) Obviously the Fire Warriors wear the Drone on their head like a coolie hat to add additional protection.

16) Wargear purchased Drones don't need leadership as if their controller runs, they go with it, and if their controller dies, so do they.

17) Since obviously those 2 Ethereal armies were just tearing up the old codex games, they had to be nerfed.  =P

18) Commanders pay 5 points for that neat 'unicorn' head they have now.

19) You have a bodyguard.  Regardless of drones, they still can't join another unit.

20) Stealths are just as visible at night as they are during the day.  
Everybody finally noticed that a black suit doesn't get any...uhhh..darker at night.

21) You're not seriously arguing this on a Header, are you?

22) Pirahnas have excess wording on their Armoury options.  This is to prevent them from taking the Pintle Mounted Railgun coming out in next month's White Dwarf.

23) Since Plasma rifles were rarely used by Broadsides in the last codex, the Earth Caste engineers have plenty of back stock.

24) It's just to promote something other then the usual Railheads.  
Personally, I'd be happy with it if the new Markerlight rules aren't
forcing me to rethink my army.

25) Go go O'Shovah!  Well, barring the fact that he's a Special Character (and supposed to suck), let's see.  Well, he never had a power weapon to begin with and it was really weird to have him outnumbering units by his lonesome.  "Oh my Emperor, he's huge!  Run away!"  "That's funny, he doesn't look any bigger then a normal Crisis suit."  It's because of his awesome combat powers obviously, you'll say.  So how come Kharn the Betrayer, Bahharoth and Captain Shrike don't inspire the same kind of fear against their opponents?  (answer: cuz they kill everything they run into, leaving no one to run away).  And Ork Fighter isn't even an average ability...for 15 POINTS, you too can have a Fire Warrior that hits things on a 4+ and still swings slower then most.  At least now, you can hit Orks on a 3+ if you survive getting choppa'd in the face.

Okies, that's enough.  Off to rest now from answering too many questions. =D

Posted by spmusubi on 03/25/2006 3:18 PM
Armoury woes. The line 'no model can pick the same item twice...' is directly after the sentence 'A model in a battlesuit that has access to the Armoury may also choose up to 100 points from the Battlesuit Wargear list.' The two items restriction is referring to the Battlesuit Wargear list, which is different from the Battlesuit Weapon Systems list.

Sorry, but that is not the case due to the wording of the sentence:

No model can pick the same item twice, and all equipment, other than wargear (which is assumed to be integrated), must be represented on the model.

If the sentence ended at the first comma, you would have a valid argument. However the continuation of the sentence makes it clear that the whole sentence refers to the entire Armoury and not just wargear.

Man, I really need to get this codex to start sorting this stuff out.

The question about twin linked weapons is an interesting one. Does a twin linked weapon count as one weapon or two weapons? I don't mean how many hardpoints it takes up, but in a general sense..... is a twin linked weapon, be it burst cannons, railguns, heavy bolters, lascannons or whatever, is that a single weapon or two? If a twin-linked battlesuit weapon system is considered to be a single weapon, but takes up two hardpoints, then I see no issue. But i can see a couple potential issues depending on how that question is determined.

For instance. If a twinlinked weapon is two weapons, then it may be tough to take them other than the case of broadsides which specifically state them being permitted in the case of the railguns and plasma rifles.

BUT, if a twinlinked weapon is considered to be just one weapon, and takes up a SINGLE hardpoint, then we can have a big problem as well. Such as having a twin linked missle pod + twin linked plasma rifle + multi-tracker.

-Hans

Posted by Hans on 03/25/2006 5:41 PM
Does a twin linked weapon count as one weapon or two weapons?

It is clearly stated on page 25 of Codex Tau Empire that the second points value is for "... two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type)."

It also clearly states that a twinlinked weapon counts as two weapon systems... so you can't have more than one twinlinked system.

CONTINUING:

1. 40k rule book puts stealth troops as jump troops. Just troops dont' start on the table in escalation. How is that a needed fix?????

2. 100 is always the limit.

3. Drones still count towards Morale checks for 25% casualties and why wouldn't they?

4. Shield drones are more than fixed. Shield drone with a Broadside team now has a T4 Sv2+/4+ which is way awesome.

5. IC has always been worked that way.

6. Ethereals can take shield drones. Plus if you read anything about the Ethereals they are not all about fighting.

7. EMP Grenades are still totally useful vs Dreadnaughts that kill FW squads badly.

8. Because CS are the equal to the Teminator.

9. Transport vehicles are placed on the table with the unit that has scout. They get to move before the first turn because of the unit they are with. Thats simple.

NEW:

1. Twinlinked weapons are allowed.

2. Thats just silly.

3. Good place to look.

4. That is a way to say that 6's wound you no matter what your toughness is. Like rending.

5. You have to kill the pilot. Why would it be any different.

6. There is no declairing. It happens.

7. NO.

8. It's used for the turn after you get stunned. How hard is that one to figure out.

9. Isn't th at cool.

10. Isn't that cool.

11. Nothing changes.

12. Because thats how they are worded.

13. If you put 3 whirlwinds on the table you are sad. Very very sad. Going through woods is cool. Tank shock units in woods is cool.

14. Just so you know 4th Ed changed that rule. You attack what you have on your base.

15. So.

16. Drones have the leadership of the person that controls them. Thats simple. If the drones are not fearless than they need a leadership. Just be glad they don't go down to 4.

17. Deal with it.

18. because they are commanders.

19. No he can't.

20. you are correct.

21. Well you can't have everything.

22. who knows


23. No

24. I use them all the time.

25. he is fine.

Posted By CaptAnderton on 03/25/2006 5:31 PM
CONTINUING:

7. EMP Grenades are still totally useful vs Dreadnaughts that kill FW squads badly.

Mmm...I was curious as to why some people regard you as the laughing stock of dakka. How many times have your FW squads been attacked by Dreads? How many times has a dread made it across the board to contact your troops? If you, as a tau player, allowed an armour 12 vehicle that moves 6 inches a turn to make it across the board I pity the people who take your advice seriously.

 

Chuck

chuckyhol - nice personal attack there smart guy.
Maybe he's playing against a deep striking dread force and all 6 arrive on turn 2 and all his heavies are off the board?
I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in here just for S's and G's!

1. Read the rule book... its been quoted in posts before me.
2. I like the idea of more wargear later, but I'm sure if they didn't put a wargear limit you'd be asking if there was one.
3. I don't know about you but if something is shooting at me I'd be unnerved, and better yet if something EXPLODES next to me I'd be wanting to leave.
4. Its been answered above. The extra wounds are nice on broadsides.
5. All ICs act that way.
6. Wow, you can't take armor for a guy who's horrible at close combat and will always be in a squad. Lemme get right onto calling GW about that problem.
7. OH NO! That must mean that everything in every army book must be useful! Commissars, tech marines, shining spears, and dire avengers COME OUT YOUR DAY IN THE SUN IS HERE!!
8. to prevent people attaching their commander to a FW squad and trying to cram him into a devilfish.
9. IIRC the rulebook says if the unit has scout so does the tank.
NEW
1. In the armory it states you can't take something twice, but in the weapons section it says you can take weapons twice. Where's the question?
2. "Count as twinlinked" pretty clear to me.
3. Well that's GW for you... I'd hate to see how much you'd complain if you played orks at the start of 3rd edition, they didn't even have a summary page.
4. ZOMG the editorz suxorz!
5. Just play it like the FW one.
6. So don't detonate it! If your own men are stupid enough to get cought in it maybe they deserve to die for your commie government.
7. That's been GWs mistake since 3rd edition, never clarifing that.
8. See response to the other number 7.
9. Maybe the rules themselves?
10. See above.
11. See 4.
12. See 4.
13. Don't skimmers ignore mines?
14. *shrug* and marines lost their bolter-grenade launchers, guard lost combi-weapons.
15. To prevent kiddies from moving the drones in the assault phase illegially.
16. I like Big Chris' response "Game Balance"
17. Ok, big deal.
18. Have they improved? Access to the special kit without paying for some kind of upgrade, thats not an improvement is it?
19. See above post from nobody.
20. And thats a rules question how? Excuse me GW this guy is having trouble figuring out why FICTIOUS entitys can hide.
21. Doesn't it say under the drone controller that you get drones to go with it?
22. I believe you said it yourself, its irrelevant. Its put in there to stop all the kids from buying it.
23. Broadsides don't have many options to choose from, and no one takes it anyway when SMS are better.
24. You should be happy things went down in price, not complaining.
25. I'll be sure to tell Calgar that he's tons better than any other marine commander when I dust him off tomarrow.
You do realize tau are supposed to SUCK in close combat right? Having 1 monsterous creature in the list ment he didn't suck.

Wow, I got a response from Capt. Anderton. I feel so special. Like I?m the driver of the short bus. Still, this should make me laugh.

Okay, let?s reply to some of your replies, guys. Thanks so much to everyone who replied. I?ll try to be fair (as I always do, although I?m not always successful) and credit those people who have corrected me. But likewise I?ll point out where people are wrong.

bigchris1313 said:
8. The Disruption pod is 5 pts to increase your chances of glancing instead of penetrating by 50% on turn 1.

Good point. Although I still prefer the original version. And I?ll still save 25+ points and hide my vehicles behind terrain on the first turn. Of course, that isn?t always possible, so kudos bigchris for pointing out my mistake.

bigchris1313 said:
15. It's called "every model in the unit moves at the speed of the slowest model." Game balance.

No, game balance won?t wash here. There was no problem with the jump pack on drones before, so why fix it. In fact, not fixing it would have resolved one of the Shield Drone problems.

bigchris1313 said:
16. Game balance.

Again with the weak cop-out excuse of game balance. I?m disappointed. A unit of 8 Gun Drones start the game with Ld7. Another unit of 8 Gun Drones have no Ld and never flee. How can that possibly be balanced?

bigchris1313 said:
18. Game balance.

Again? Really? Your argument is that the Crisis Suits stay the same but go down in cost, while the Commander stays the same but stays the same price. That?s not game balance.

spmushi said:
1) Stealths in Escalation. Infiltrate USR (pg.75) "does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table." As Stealth are Jump Infantry, they would start off board in Escalation regardless of their Infiltrate ability.

Granted. But p75 also says: ?Some units have special rules ? that allows them to deply on-table. Such special rules apply as usual.? Infiltrate is a special rule. Therefore Infiltrate still applys. So it?s the chicken and the egg problem which I?ve yet to see resolved.

spmushi said:
2) 100 pt limit on Wargear. I figure it leaves the possibility open for Chapter Approved Tau wargear to appear later on.

Good answer. Probably not going to happen but it?s a very good answer.

spmushi said:
3) Dead drones taking a unit below 50%. The Tau guys start to get nervous when all their bullet-catcher units fall over. Game-wise, it'd just be more complex having this special unit type that still moves and fights but doesn't count for morale checks. *shrug*

Fluff-wise, bull crap. If you design something to catch bullets, you?ll expect it to catch bullets. Do Space Marines run away when their bunker starts to be pockmarked with bullets? Of course not. Game-wise, you absolutely right, from GW?s perspective at least. Another layer of complexity? How more dumbed-down can 4th edition get, I wonder?

spmushi said:
4) Shield drones weirdness. RAW-wise, ugly. Actual play-wise, I dunno if people are really going to claim that the Crisis suit falls over before it's drones.

RAW-wise it is true. Play-wise I agree with you. But do we play by the rules or do we cheat?

spmushi said:
5)IC wording. Yup, that's off. I'm starting to think that 'hidden' ICs are only really disallowed in the old Chapter Approved compilations (for 3rd ed!) and the Haines online FAQ, both of which are sorta iffy for a solid argument.

Yeah, it?s a problem. It was under 3rd edition but 4th edition seemed to have fixed it. Then they refuse to change the wording in the Tau Codex and so the problem comes back.

spmushi said:
6)Armoured Ethereals. That's really one of Space Pope's bodyguards, who only wear decorative armour to show off their shinyness. Really though, a targetted Ethereal is gonna die armour or not unless he has some sort of 2+/2+(I), which ain't gonna happen.

Oh, I agree that an Ethereal will die regardless of his armour. But that?s an Ethereal on the cover, in armour. No other Codex, IIRC, has something on it?s cover that is an illegal option in the Codex itself.

spmushi said:
7)EMP grenades are useless. So are Krak grenades. Big deal.

It is a big deal unfortunately. Krak is useless (don?t do krak, kids) but you have the better option of Melta Bombs. Tau don?t. And they are much, much less likely to deliver the grenade in the first place.

I know, I know, game balance. But the average IG Guardsman will get more success from a krak grenade than a Tau Fire Warrior will from an EMP grenade, but they cost the same.

spmushi said:
8)Devilfish not carrying XV battlesuits. So what's so wrong w/ the line? The current line says it carries 12 models. As battlesuits don't ride in the 'Fish, there has to be something prohibiting them from getting on board. You know that somebody's tried joining their commander to a Fire Warrior team and embarking for a joyride.

and

nobody said:
This one is simple, it's to prevent people from attaching Commanders to squads that have devilfish and using them to zip him around the battlefield.
Correct. I didn?t see that. I was stupid enough to think that no one would be stupid enough to join a Crisis Suited IC with a Fire Warrior unit. But yes, I can cross #8 off my list now as I was wrong on that one.

spmushi said:
9) Pathfinder Devilfish Scout movement. Under the Pathfinders unit entry, it says a Team "consists of 4-8 Pathfinders and a Devilfish". The 'Fish gets to Scout move, though it wouldn't have killed them to put a line expressly allowing it.

No, I suggest you re-read the entry. Pathfinders get the scout rule, their Devilfish does not. So the problem still exists. GW tried their best but typing that one extra sentence was obviously too expensive/hard/logical (delete whatever you think is applicable).

nobody said:
This appears to be the same question really, the armoury statement from question 1 means that question 2 is moot. A better way of putting it might be that there is confusion on how crisis suits carry weapons (can they carry two of the same weapon without being twin-linked?)

Yes, you?re correct. That is a clearer way of putting things. Thank you.

nobody said:
This is more a problem with the USR than with Tau, I'd suggest adding it to Yak's 4th ed FAQ questions.

Agreed. I believe Yakface has included it. However, it is a Tau-specific problem as not many other models have the Invulnerable Save/FNP combo. (Blood Angel Chaplains, I think? any others?)

nobody said:
Erm, are we looking at the same book? Pg 36:
Weapons: A Devilfish is armed with a Burst Cannon and a pair of Gun Drones. It is also equipped with Landing Gear.
It appears that they decided to put all of the relevant built-in items in the weapons section rather than list them in "options." This is repeated in every other vehicle in the book.

Yes, we?re reading the same book. But you?ve read it poorly, I?m afraid. I suggest you re-read it. If it?s still not clear to you, re-read the old Codex. And your opinion on pulling out all the built-in items isn?t true. Look at the Hammerhead.

nobody said:
Yes, there is. Take a look at the "Options" section for the Skyray, Seeker Missiles are not listed at all.

Yep, you?re right. My mistake and my apologies.

nobody said:
Drones taken as wargear don't have a Ld stat as they will never be called upon to make a Ld check by themselves. If their controller dies they are destroyed.

And what about Gun Drones that separate from vehicles. They still have no Ld.

nobody said:
No, the commander entry is pretty clear on this. If he has a bodyguard, he doesn't follow the Independent Character rules. If he has drones, he can join other units as long as he's an independent character.

Nope, the rules are perfectly clear but say the exact opposite to what you?ve inferred.

nobody said:
Not really, they mentioned they were increasing the cost of plasma on battlesuits to make other weapons more appealing. Broadsides were rarely, if ever, seen with plasma in 3rd and don't exactly have a lot of options to compete with.

I agree that Plasma was rarely seen before. However, if a weapon is more expensive for one unit then it should be more expensive for all other units? unless there?s a difference in the units. Which there is. But there are other differences too and they don?t seem to matter. So why do they here? There?s no logic behind the decision.

The simple reason Plasma?s gone up in price is that everyone took Plasma on their Crisis Suits and Plasma was the most effective weapon against Space Marines. And we all know how precious Space Marines are to GW. They?d fall into Mount Doom with them.

nobody said:
Re-read the section on the Dawn Blade again. He still gets the bonuses Monstrous Creatures do in close combat, he just doesn't get the other penalties (like being picked out for shooting).

Nope, you?re mistaken. Re-read the new Codex entry for O?Shovah and then compare it to the Old Codex.

DragonPup said:
The CiB's side ability is not bad, or that hard to udnerstand. It's like Rending-lite, except that you roll to see if it bypasses armor with the wound roll, not the to-hit. See the Sister's Divine Guidance ability. :p

I understand that?s the consensus on how it should be played. But that?s not what the text says. Where does the target?s Toughness come into it?

DragonPup said:
The way I read the stim injector is this: You do NOT get a Feel No Pain roll if you get nailed by an AP1(debatably an AP2 as well) shot, or by a power weapon.

Well, you?re wrong about the AP1 or AP2 (or even AP3) weapons, because they have no relevance to the argument. If you do get hit by a CC weapon that ignores saves, you don?t get a FNP roll. But Invulnerable Saves cannot be ignored. It?s the Invulnerable/Armour Save problem that GW is just ignoring.

DragonPup said:
Failsafe Detonator and hitting your own guys. Rolling a one 3 times is a 1/216 chance. Sucks for whoever is(was) left standing. :p

True but doesn?t answer the question.


spmushbi said:
1) Armoury woes. The line 'no model can pick the same item twice...' is directly after the sentence 'A model in a battlesuit that has access to the Armoury may also choose up to 100 points from the Battlesuit Wargear list.' The two items restriction is referring to the Battlesuit Wargear list, which is different from the Battlesuit Weapon Systems list.

Wrong. See Ghaz?s argument above.

spmushbi said:
2)Two single weapon systems. 'Where a weapon system is given two points values, the first is the price for the normal, single-mounted version, and the second is for two weapons (counting as a twin-linked weapon of that type).' If you buy two burst cannons, you automatically pay the 2nd price (as you've picked two of them) and they're twin-linked. There is wiggle
room here, but I don't think carrying two single plasma rifles will fly in play.

I never mentioned carrying two single Plasma Rifles. I said it was possible to carry one twin-linked weapon and one weapon. That?s three weapon systems, which I now have realized is illegal. So that?s marked off the list too.

spmushbi said:
5)Ejection system VPs. Well, as the 'battlesuit is replaced with a single model, representing the pilot', I'd say that there's no VPs gained for the removed battlesuit until the pilot gets killed. The battlesuit is not dead, off-table or falling back, and has been replaced with the pilot. The 50/50 was the Forgeworld ejection system. This could get weird as you get half VPs for shooting up the suit, but once it loses it's last wound, it's worth no VPs. This might take some more thinking.

You?d say? That?s great (seriously, I?m interested in opinions on this) but irrelevant. GW have to say. And they haven?t.

spmushbi said:
6)When to use the Failsafe detonator. So what if your team gets caught in the blast on a triple one for fallback? It's a bad dice roll, and it's part of the game.

The point is you could roll badly and then decide not to use it. Thus you?d never have a problem. Thus there is a problem with the vague rules.

spmushbi said:
7)Stim Injector. As like the Shield drones from above, I think common usage will win out over RAW.

Agreed? if you like cheating. Sorry but that?s the way it is.

spmushbi said:
9)Adding more gun drones to a Devilfish. Unfortunately, Gun Drones are no longer a buyable Tau Vehicle Armoury option, instead existing only in each vehicle's upgrade options. Would have been interesting though.

Wrong. Re-read the Codex entry on the Devilfish and the upgrades please.

spmushbi said:
10)Sky Ray entertainment. Seeker missiles are not a buyable option for the Sky Ray tank.

Yes, you?re right. I was wrong on this. Mea culpa.

spmushbi said:
12) The defensive wording is that the Networked Markerlights are the defensive weapons, not the Seekers! Additionally, at first glance it may appear that Seekers can't be salvoed as they have strength 8, so this might be to prevent that.

Again, you are correct. I misread the Codex. My apologies. But it is interesting to not that if you move more than 6? you?ll only be able to fire one Seeker (unless you take the Multi-Tracker upgrade), which makes the Sky Ray much more static and vulnerable.

EDIT: I?m wrong again! I re-read the entry for Seeker Missiles and you can fire as many as you like.

spmushbi said:
14) Shield drones lost their "target me first!" rule when the 4th edition Tau FAQ came out.

No, they lost it against ranged attacks. It?s always been unclear about close combat. But now they?ve lost it completely.

spmushbi said:
16) Wargear purchased Drones don't need leadership as if their controller runs, they go with it, and if their controller dies, so do they.

See the problem about other Drones above.

spmushbi said:
17) Since obviously those 2 Ethereal armies were just tearing up the old codex games, they had to be nerfed. =P

I saw plenty of them. And what if you want just one Ethereal and no Commander?

spmushbi said:
19) You have a bodyguard. Regardless of drones, they still can't join another unit.

Re-read the text. That?s not what it says.

spmushbi said:
21) You're not seriously arguing this on a Header, are you?

Yep. I know the intent (or at least I believe I do) but again, the RAW is different.

spmushbi said:
25) Go go O'Shovah! Well, barring the fact that he's a Special Character (and supposed to suck), let's see. Well, he never had a power weapon to begin with

Okay, technically not a power weapon. But it fulfilled exactly the same function so in all but name? rose is a rose?

spmushbi said:
and it was really weird to have him outnumbering units by his lonesome. "Oh my Emperor, he's huge! Run away!" "That's funny, he doesn't look any bigger then a normal Crisis suit." It's because of his awesome combat powers obviously, you'll say. So how come Kharn the Betrayer, Bahharoth and Captain Shrike don't inspire the same kind of fear against their opponents? (answer: cuz they kill everything they run into, leaving no one to run away).

Yep, it was stupid. But it was effective and made him worth taking. Now he just plain sucks. Which is really bad for Tau cause while they?re sucking they can?t breathe (no noses, you see).

spmushbi said:
And Ork Fighter isn't even an average ability...for 15 POINTS, you too can have a Fire Warrior that hits things on a 4+ and still swings slower then most. At least now, you can hit Orks on a 3+ if you survive getting choppa'd in the face.

But for 5 points you could have O?Shovah?s Bodyguard with a WS4 and I4, so they?d hit before Orks and kill tons of them and make them run. Not any more. Now they act after Orks and end up dead. But it?s free, so it must be great.


Capt Anderton said:
1. 40k rule book puts stealth troops as jump troops. Just troops dont' start on the table in escalation. How is that a needed fix?????

See above. Read the rules. You know the rules, don?t you?

Capt Anderton said:
2. 100 is always the limit.

Nope. It isn?t. Read the various Codex rules. You know the rules, don?t you?

Capt Anderton said:
4. Shield drones are more than fixed. Shield drone with a Broadside team now has a T4 Sv2+/4+ which is way awesome.

Except the Broadsides would be removed first according to the RAW. Read the rules. You know the rules, don?t you?

Capt Anderton said:
5. IC has always been worked that way.

No, it hasn?t. Didn?t under 3rd edition, did under 4th, now doesn?t again in the new Tau Codex. That?s the rules. You know the rules, don?t you?

Capt Anderton said:
6. Ethereals can take shield drones. Plus if you read anything about the Ethereals they are not all about fighting.

Shield Drones aren?t armour. Ethereals are about fighting, if they weren?t we wouldn?t be allowed to take them (like the other castes).

Capt Anderton said:
7. EMP Grenades are still totally useful vs Dreadnaughts that kill FW squads badly.

EMP grenades ? sorry, I forgot I was talking to a pseudo-military man, so I should say NADES ? don?t work against Dreadnoughts unless they?re immobilized. So you have to immobilized the Dread and then get your Fire Warriors into close combat (losing lots in the process) and then hit the thing (unlikely) and then only have a slight chance of hurting it. That?s not going to happen.

Capt Anderton said:
9. Transport vehicles are placed on the table with the unit that has scout. They get to move before the first turn because of the unit they are with. Thats simple.

No, it?s not simple. Pathfinders have the Scout rule, Devilfishes do not. That?s simple. But you?d know that if you knew the rules.

Capt Anderton said:
2. Thats just silly.

Newsflash! Capt Anderton thinks RAW is silly!

Capt Anderton said:
4. That is a way to say that 6's wound you no matter what your toughness is. Like rending.

No, it?s nonsense. Read the rules.

Capt Anderton said:
5. You have to kill the pilot. Why would it be any different.

Because it?s different in so many other places in the rulebook and other Codexes, perhaps?

Capt Anderton said:
6. There is no declairing. It happens.

Where did you read that? Give me a page number. Until then, sit down and shut up.

Capt Anderton said:
7. NO.

Why not? Give me a page number. You know the rules so well, it shouldn?t be hard for you to do.


Capt Anderton said:
13. If you put 3 whirlwinds on the table you are sad. Very very sad. Going through woods is cool. Tank shock units in woods is cool.

Ooh, you called Mauleed sad. I?m telling.

And tank shock is never cool.

Capt Anderton said:
14. Just so you know 4th Ed changed that rule. You attack what you have on your base.

Really? So my Fire Warriors attack painted sand? That?s good to know. I might win the assault in that case.

Capt Anderton said:
16. Drones have the leadership of the person that controls them. Thats simple. If the drones are not fearless than they need a leadership. Just be glad they don't go down to 4.

Wrong. And stupid.

Capt Anderton said:
17. Deal with it.

Hmm? I wonder if you?d (or anyone) would say the same if Land Raiders were a 1+ choice in a Space Marine army. Or Shining Spears a 1+ in any Eldar army, etc.

Capt Anderton said:
18. because they are commanders.

Oh, well that makes all the sense in the world then. Why do GW charge so much? Because they are GW. Why is Capt Anderton so obtuse? Because?

Capt Anderton said:
19. No he can't.

Yes, he can. Read the rules.

Capt Anderton said:
25. he is fine.

Oh. Everyone relax, stand down, keep cool. Capt Anderton says O?Shovah is fine, so he must be. Never mind the fact he still costs almost 33% more than he should (while Space Marine characters cost usually 50% less than they should).

Did Stu-Rat just win the award for longest post ever?

But that?s an Ethereal on the cover, in armour. No other Codex, IIRC, has something on it?s cover that is an illegal option in the Codex itself.

Well, Eye Of Terror shows Abaddon crushing a planet with a claw. Don't recal an option for that in the codex...


It's called 'Artistic Licence'

Hello! I only have time to answer a few of the easy ones, so here we go.

9. The Devilfish (p36) no longer has the Gun Drone (p30) upgrade and so, if you wish, you can now fit another two Gun Drones on to the vehicle. An added extra punch for FoF?

How many points is this Gun Drone upgrade in the Tau Vehicle Armoury? 'Cause I can't find it

Capt Anderton said:
7. EMP Grenades are still totally useful vs Dreadnaughts that kill FW squads badly.

EMP grenades ? sorry, I forgot I was talking to a pseudo-military man, so I should say NADES ? don?t work against Dreadnoughts unless they?re immobilized. So you have to immobilized the Dread and then get your Fire Warriors into close combat (losing lots in the process) and then hit the thing (unlikely) and then only have a slight chance of hurting it. That?s not going to happen.

Stu-Rat, did you know that in 4th ed. you can hit a mobile Dreadnaught in close combat with grenades on 6's? (BBB, p.72) Not great odds, but at 8-12 Fire Warriors in a squad, you should get the odd hit in.

4. GW thinks they've fixed Shield Drones. Unfortunately, they haven't. Thanks to the 'No Save' rule (p24 of the rulebook) Shield Drones are still useless unless everyone else (or maybe the majority - it's a confusing issue thanks to GW's insistence on confusing Invulnerable and Armour Saves) has a Shield Generator.

I'm confused. Shield Drones have an Armour Save, as explained in the "close protection" rule (Tau codex, pg.31) So maybe you can explain to me why they are useless? Since they have the same toughness and armour save, you can allocate hits as you please, no?

Anyway, that's all the time I have for now. Looking forward to your replies! Good gaming!

Clarence

-edit - my god, Dakka has messed up my font good - sorry 'bout that!

As I don't have the new codex yet (maybe tomorrow, if my local stores have it yet), I have to ask.

Does the new codex drone rules regarding vehicle disembarkation still say those drones form a separate "Drone Squadron" when they separate? If that is the case, then there is no problem, as you would then use the stat line for Drone Squadrons. I

-Hans

Yes, we?re reading the same book. But you?ve read it poorly, I?m afraid. I suggest you re-read it. If it?s still not clear to you, re-read the old Codex. And your opinion on pulling out all the built-in items isn?t true. Look at the Hammerhead.

How the old codex is set up doesn't matter.  All that matters is how they set up this codex.  Look at the other vehicle entries:

Pg 41:  Weapons:  A Hammerhead is armed with a turret mounted primary weapon system and a hull-mounted secondary weapon system, and is equipped with landing gear.  It is always equipped with a targeting array (already added to BS above) at no extra point cost.

But lets not stop there, how about the Sky Ray on the same page?

Weapons:  A Sky Ray is equipped with landing gear...

How about going back a page to the Piranha?

Weapons:  Each Piranha is armed with a hull-mounted burst cannon and a pair of Gun Drones.

Can you provide an example where this isn't the case in the current codex?

 

And what about Gun Drones that separate from vehicles. They still have no Ld.

An arguement can be made from the quote on page 30 (From then on, the drones function as a Drone Squadron) That you would use the entry from the Gun Drone Squadron (just with reduced numbers), but you are right, this is just sloppy.

 

Nope, the rules are perfectly clear but say the exact opposite to what you?ve inferred.

How so?  The wording on pg 32 is "Unless accompanied by a Bodyguard, the Commander is an independent character..."

The drone rules say:  "If he is an independent character then the drones and character form a unit but the character and drones may still join another unit"

Since there is a Bodyguard, he's not an independent character, so the drone rules don't allow him to join other units.

I agree that Plasma was rarely seen before. However, if a weapon is more expensive for one unit then it should be more expensive for all other units? unless there?s a difference in the units. Which there is. But there are other differences too and they don?t seem to matter. So why do they here? There?s no logic behind the decision.

The simple reason Plasma?s gone up in price is that everyone took Plasma on their Crisis Suits and Plasma was the most effective weapon against Space Marines. And we all know how precious Space Marines are to GW. They?d fall into Mount Doom with them.

Yup, you've given a perfect reason why Crisis plasma went up and not Broadsides.  Just because one kid in the class is throwing paper airplanes doesn't mean you punish the other kid who's sitting quietly in the corner. 

Nope, you?re mistaken. Re-read the new Codex entry for O?Shovah and then compare it to the Old Codex.

Old codex:  The Dawn Blade makes O'shovah count as a Monstrous Creature in hand-to-hand combat, so he ignores Armour saves and rolls 2d6+5 for Armour Penetration.

New codex:  ...No Armour Saves may be taken from hits caused by the dawn blade and O'Shovah rolls 2d6+5 when rolling to penetrate the armour of a vehicle.

These are virtually identical, just different wording in the second entry.  The only difference I can think that you are going for here is that he doesn't count as 10 models in close combat like MCs do in 4th edition.  Keep in mind that in 3rd (when the first Tau codex was written), MCs didn't have any  bonus as far as size went.  The wording in second codex is just a cleaner way of saying he gets those bonuses, but he's not a MC.

For the record, the correct wording on the bonding question is:  Every model in Farsigh's army with access to the Armoury gains a bonding knife at no additional cost

This means as long as you have a character in a unit, he automatically gains the bonding knife.

>> >>4. GW thinks they've fixed Shield Drones. Unfortunately, they haven't. Thanks to the 'No Save' rule (p24 of the rulebook) Shield Drones are still useless unless everyone else (or maybe the majority - it's a confusing issue thanks to GW's insistence on confusing Invulnerable and Armour Saves) has a Shield Generator.

>> I'm confused. Shield Drones have an Armour Save, as explained in the "close protection" rule (Tau codex, pg.31) So maybe you can explain to me why they are useless? Since they have the same toughness and armour save, you can allocate hits as you please, no?4. GW thinks they've fixed Shield Drones. Unfortunately, they haven't. Thanks to the 'No Save' rule (p24 of the rulebook) Shield Drones are still useless unless everyone else (or maybe the majority - it's a confusing issue thanks to GW's insistence on confusing Invulnerable and Armour Saves) has a Shield Generator.

>> I'm confused. Shield Drones have an Armour Save, as explained in the "close protection" rule (Tau codex, pg.31) So maybe you can explain to me why they are useless? Since they have the same toughness and armour save, you can allocate hits as you please, no?

The main rules on shooting say that models that do not have a save are removed first, before rolling saves for models that have them.

A Broadside does not have a save against a Lascannon. A shield drone does. So the Broadside would be removed by the first Lascannon wound, and its drones would automatically die. The purpose of shield drones is to take the Lascannon hits and let the suit live longer.

Oh man! I will be getting the new Codex tomorrow and now I really do feel my Farisght Enclave is going to be neutered even more. Good lord, why bother with having Shield Drones on your Broadsides, if they do not have Shield Generators? May as well save the points, get a Shield Generator and just roll for the model. If you must remove units that get no saves first, why bother having Shield Drones now?

*sigh* All the things they did to screw up O'Shovah and all my hard work into his type of army. I hope to find a resolution to these horrid changes (ESPECIALLY the friggin points limit and his useless, free Ork Fighter ability) I used to hit them first, now I cannot. Total garbage.

I don't think anyone will play the Broadside Shield drones that way. Mind you, a unit of Broadsides with Shield drones and generators would be a tough target.

I was going over the GW forums and people were mentioning a "Close Protection" special rule the drones have. Still unsure what this means, but they mentioned it allowed you to supercede the BBB rulings in hit locations/model removal rules. (ie, you can allocate any hit to the drones first, before you allocate them to other models, saving your suits.)

Can anyone clarify this new special rule?

Well, I have 3 Broadsides with 2x shield drones each and I make sure they attract heavy firepower, while O'Shovah and my many Crisis Suits move in for the kill.

As far as the commander thing goes (#18, I think), since he's an IC, he can join other units. Also, unless the battlesuits specifically say against it, he should have the Move Through Cover USR.

Posting back with more responses for Stu-Rat!

Stu-rat said
1) Stealths in Escalation. Infiltrate USR (pg.75) "does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table." As Stealth are Jump Infantry, they would start off board in Escalation regardless of their Infiltrate ability.

Granted. But p75 also says: ?Some units have special rules ? that allows them to deply on-table. Such special rules apply as usual.? Infiltrate is a special rule. Therefore Infiltrate still applys. So it?s the chicken and the egg problem which I?ve yet to see resolved.

Hmmm, I confess that I'm not seeing the problem here.  

P: In an Escalation mission, jump infantry must start in reserve.

P: Tau Stealth teams are both Jump Infantry and Infiltrators (Tau Empire, pg.35).

P: Infiltrate USR states 'The Infiltrate ability does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table." (BGB pg.75)

C: In an Escalation mission, Stealth teams must start in Reserve despite possessing the Infiltrate USR.

Stu-rat said
spmushi said:
3) Dead drones taking a unit below 50%. The Tau guys start to get nervous when all their bullet-catcher units fall over. Game-wise, it'd just be more complex having this special unit type that still moves and fights but doesn't count for morale checks. *shrug*

Fluff-wise, bull crap. If you design something to catch bullets, you?ll expect it to catch bullets. Do Space Marines run away when their bunker starts to be pockmarked with bullets? Of course not. Game-wise, you absolutely right, from GW?s perspective at least. Another layer of complexity? How more dumbed-down can 4th edition get, I wonder?

Fluff-wise, why wouldn't a Fire Warrior think about running once he notices that all their expendable Drones are dead and he's likely to eat the next incoming round?  Another (useless) fluff argument is that Tau for some reason do not see their Drones as expendable, since they don't program them to completely ignore Morale checks.  Game-wise, now we can add all sorts of units that aren't counted for 50% checks and whatnot.  Servitors, Grots, Thrall Wizards, familiars, etc.

Stu-rat said
spmushi said:
4) Shield drones weirdness. RAW-wise, ugly. Actual play-wise, I dunno if people are really going to claim that the Crisis suit falls over before it's drones.

RAW-wise it is true. Play-wise I agree with you. But do we play by the rules or do we cheat?

I prefer to see it as "Do we invalidate an entire game mechanic (defensive drones) or play by a clearly (in this case, really clearly) visible rules and intent interpretation?"  RAW is important to understand how a rule is written.  It's equally important to have a position on how it should be played.  For some cases (mystics intercepting drop pods), there are arguments on both sides.  For this case, I don't believe that anyone will argue against Drones taking the hits except as an intellectual exercise.

Stu-rat said
spmushi said:
9) Pathfinder Devilfish Scout movement. Under the Pathfinders unit entry, it says a Team "consists of 4-8 Pathfinders and a Devilfish". The 'Fish gets to Scout move, though it wouldn't have killed them to put a line expressly allowing it.

No, I suggest you re-read the entry. Pathfinders get the scout rule, their Devilfish does not. So the problem still exists. GW tried their best but typing that one extra sentence was obviously too expensive/hard/logical (delete whatever you think is applicable).

Entry reread as requested.  I stand by my assertation as the Devilfish is listed as part of the Pathfinder Team unit entry.  Of course, naming conventions are hardly a good way to determine actual units (Furiso Dreadnoughts).  There's another YMDC thread on the issue, so I figure it'll get hashed out there.

Stu-rat said
spmushbi said:
6)When to use the Failsafe detonator. So what if your team gets caught in the blast on a triple one for fallback? It's a bad dice roll, and it's part of the game.

The point is you could roll badly and then decide not to use it. Thus you?d never have a problem. Thus there is a problem with the vague rules.

Once you've taken the Fall Back roll, you've already prevented the enemy from Sweeping Advancing you, thus the Failsafe Detonator is already active.

The CC sequence goes like such.
1) Crisis team loses combat and fails their Morale test.
2) Assuming enemy in base to base contact, Initiative roll-off for sweeping advance.
3) If Crisis team breaks off, roll 3d6 for Fall Back move.

By activating the Failsafe detonator, it prevents the enemy unit from executing a Sweeping Advance (Tau Empire, pg. 26), and step 2 is replaced by Step 3 with the addendum that the character remains behind and blows up.

You can't take the 3d6 roll until you've already stopped the possible Sweeping Advance by starting the Failsafe sequence.

Stu-rat said
spmushbi said:
9)Adding more gun drones to a Devilfish. Unfortunately, Gun Drones are no longer a buyable Tau Vehicle Armoury option, instead existing only in each vehicle's upgrade options. Would have been interesting though.

Wrong. Re-read the Codex entry on the Devilfish and the upgrades please.

Okies, I've reread the Devilfish entry in Tau Emprire.  Pg36 states that under 'Weapons', a Devilfish is armed with Burst Cannon and a pair of Gun Drones.  It 'may also be equipped with any of the vehicle upgrades specified in the Tau Armoury.'

My point is that Gun Drones as a purchasable Vehicle Armoury option no longer exist in Tau Empire, only in the old Tau codex.  Pg 30 does not list Gun Drones in the Tau Vehicle Armoury box at the top of the page.

Stu-rat said
spmushbi said:
17) Since obviously those 2 Ethereal armies were just tearing up the old codex games, they had to be nerfed. =P

I saw plenty of them. And what if you want just one Ethereal and no Commander?

I highly doubt you saw any 2 Ethereal armies, as they were 0-1 (Codex: Tau, pg.23).

Stu-rat said
But for 5 points you could have O?Shovah?s Bodyguard with a WS4 and I4, so they?d hit before Orks and kill tons of them and make them run. Not any more. Now they act after Orks and end up dead. But it?s free, so it must be great.

Well, that'd be 45 points not counting weapon systems.  WS4 still means you hit an Ork on a 4, much like you would with WS3.  And if you have the charge, I3 would have made you faster then an I2 Ork anyways.  What was so great about this upgrade again?  Preferred Enemy: Ork isn't anything to write home about, but I don't think Ork Fighter was all too great either.

Whew.  This is turning out to be a lot of typing.  Hope this discussion is helping out anybody who's reading their new Codex and saying "Huh?"

Actually, the rules have to say that if two different armor saves are in the same unit, then you use whichever has the majority first - ties going to the weaker armor type.

(We locals hashed out this rule with regards to the Storm shield Black Templar Assault squad long ago.)

If you look at the last sentence, it says somethink like: "Of course, invulnerable saves may be taken as normal."  What this seems to mean, that when referring to the rule for mixed armor saves (which we seemed to have dubbed the 'No Save' rule), the only save that is considered for that purpose is the models basic (i.e. non-invulnerable) save.  During the discussion of the rule, the BBB (or BGB, whatever) refers to a models armor save.  Since the new rule automatically makes shield drones imitate the unit they are with, this should never be an issue (unless their toughness is different).

Invulnerable saves may be taken, if the models taking the wounds are in the majority armor save.

As for the rest of it, I got to see the rulebook for a total of 10 minutes tonight.

Okay, guys, I?m going to repost the problems that are still causing headaches in another post in a moment. Thanks for all your help so far everybody, I appreciate it.<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

 

Some more have been fixed since I posted last, so thanks to

 

 

I?m going to remove this problem:

 

Stu-Rat said:

3. Drones still count towards Morale checks for 25% casualties, below 50% for VP purposes and half-strength purposes for holding objectives. The first one I can understand but I've never understood the second and third limitation. Why on earth would a Tau Fire Warrior care if a Drone took the hit rather than his best buddy? Better them than me mentality.

 

I still don?t agree with it but we?re stuck with it. Can someone answer a question for me however? Do Orks take morale checks when their grot screens die? Do IG units when their Abhuman screens die? I don?t think so.

 

I know, I know, they?re different units, so the morale effect is irrelevant (oh for WFB?s complexity). And it?s three different races, with the Tau having a very different outlook.

 

Anyway, I guess it?s not really a problem, more of a gripe. For that reason, I?m also removing:

 

7. EMP Grenades are still totally and utterly useless.

 

13. Sensor Spines (p31) have been changed considerably but I'm not sure it's a problem as of yet. The ability to travel through terrain seems good at first glance but all it offers you is 'obscured', which you should be getting anyway (from moving over 12"). So it's pointless. And it's lost the ability to detect mines and traps (not that this was ever useful enough to take the upgrade - but against Mauleed's 3-Whirlwind army? Shudder.).

 

15. Gun Drones no longer have a jetpack if they accompany infantry. How they stay afloat I don't know.

 

20. The new Stealth Suits not only look worse but are now easier to spot at nighttime.

 

23. Plasma has become more expensive across the board... yet it's still the same cost for Broadsides. Isn't that odd?

 

24. The cost of the Ion Cannon has been seriously reduced. There's little point as I still doubt you'll see any save in armies with 3 Hammerheads (and rarely even then).

 

(Boy, you can tell I was mad when I wrote that first list?)

 

 

And I?m also removing these problems because I was mistaken:

 

8. There's still the line in the Devilfish entry about it not being able to carry XV suits. Why is this line even here? Editing, people!

 

9. The Devilfish (p36) no longer has the Gun Drone (p30) upgrade and so, if you wish, you can now fit another two Gun Drones on to the vehicle. An added extra punch for FoF?

 

(Thanks to clarence and nobody for pointing out to me that the Gun Drone upgrade is not an option to buy. However, the bad editing still exists and technically, Devilfishes have not take the Gun Drone upgrade like they had under the old Codex. Apologies about me getting confused about this guys.)

 

10. Likewise, there's nothing to prevent the Sky Ray from taking an extra two Seeker Missiles (p31) (although these won't count as Defensive).

 

14. Shield Drones have lost their ability to force the opponent to target them first in close combat. It's still possible but it requires the Tau player to be clever (if he's stupid enough to assault) or the opponent to be stupid.

 

 

 

Okay, so what does that leave us with??

Posted By Stu-Rat on 03/25/2006 7:50 PM

spmushi said:
1) Stealths in Escalation. Infiltrate USR (pg.75) "does not allow units that would normally be in reserve to deploy on the table." As Stealth are Jump Infantry, they would start off board in Escalation regardless of their Infiltrate ability.

Granted. But p75 also says: ?Some units have special rules ? that allows them to deply on-table. Such special rules apply as usual.? Infiltrate is a special rule. Therefore Infiltrate still applys. So it?s the chicken and the egg problem which I?ve yet to see resolved.

 

No.  The "Special Rule" they are referring to is "Scout."  Not "Infiltrate," which has nothing to do with always being on the board, but only with how you are on the board.

 

spmushi said:
3) Dead drones taking a unit below 50%. The Tau guys start to get nervous when all their bullet-catcher units fall over. Game-wise, it'd just be more complex having this special unit type that still moves and fights but doesn't count for morale checks. *shrug*

Fluff-wise, bull crap. If you design something to catch bullets, you?ll expect it to catch bullets. Do Space Marines run away when their bunker starts to be pockmarked with bullets? Of course not. Game-wise, you absolutely right, from GW?s perspective at least. Another layer of complexity? How more dumbed-down can 4th edition get, I wonder?

 

The best answer to this IMO, is that no other wargear add on, IN THE GAME causes this issue.  Not Chaos Spawn, Chaos Hounds, Familiars, none of it.  None of them add to your unit size for moral tests, they are free wounds and attacks.  Only the Tau are limited in this way, to my knowledge.

 

spmushi said:
6)Armoured Ethereals. That's really one of Space Pope's bodyguards, who only wear decorative armour to show off their shinyness. Really though, a targetted Ethereal is gonna die armour or not unless he has some sort of 2+/2+(I), which ain't gonna happen.

Oh, I agree that an Ethereal will die regardless of his armour. But that?s an Ethereal on the cover, in armour. No other Codex, IIRC, has something on it?s cover that is an illegal option in the Codex itself.

 

 

Art doth not a legal choice make.  There are paintings of Dreadnaughts with two CCW, leading people to believe the Furioso was available to everyone.  Untrue.  Misleading, yes, and annoying.  :shrug:

spmushi said:
7)EMP grenades are useless. So are Krak grenades. Big deal.

It is a big deal unfortunately. Krak is useless (don?t do krak, kids) but you have the better option of Melta Bombs. Tau don?t. And they are much, much less likely to deliver the grenade in the first place.

I know, I know, game balance. But the average IG Guardsman will get more success from a krak grenade than a Tau Fire Warrior will from an EMP grenade, but they cost the same.

 

How do you figure?  Vs Walkers, you need to get a 6 to hit with the Grenades because apparantly Dreadnaughts spin about with their arms extended to keep from getting hit.  (ridiculous excuses.  Totally ridiculous)  Vs vehicles, it depends on whether or not it Skims or moved last turn as the determining factor.  WS never comes into account for Grenades vs Vehicles.  The Krak grenade has a S value.  That means it works against a limited number of vehicles.  The EMP grenade works equally well vs all armor types, 10-14.  I call that a good deal.  However, my cheap EMP delivery system is no longer available (Human Aux) and I never put them on FW anyway.

 

spmushi said:
9) Pathfinder Devilfish Scout movement. Under the Pathfinders unit entry, it says a Team "consists of 4-8 Pathfinders and a Devilfish". The 'Fish gets to Scout move, though it wouldn't have killed them to put a line expressly allowing it.

No, I suggest you re-read the entry. Pathfinders get the scout rule, their Devilfish does not. So the problem still exists. GW tried their best but typing that one extra sentence was obviously too expensive/hard/logical (delete whatever you think is applicable).

 

Based on my reading, it seemed that this was GWs intent.  (Yay!  Intent and RAW agree!)  Under the Pathfinder DF special rule (about Deepstriking units) it says that the fish needs to be on the board at the beginning of the turn to be used.  Well, since there is never a time when the Devilfish WOULDNT be on the board at the beginning of the turn if it had Scout, this must mean that they knew it couldnt deploy.  Now, it might get destroyed, you say.  Sure, then it wouldnt be on the board.  But the wording for Teleport Homers and Demonic Icons says they must be "on the board at the beginning of the turn" in order to be used, since Deep Strike takes place at that mystical "before move phase" of the game.

 

nobody said:
This is more a problem with the USR than with Tau, I'd suggest adding it to Yak's 4th ed FAQ questions.

Agreed. I believe Yakface has included it. However, it is a Tau-specific problem as not many other models have the Invulnerable Save/FNP combo. (Blood Angel Chaplains, I think? any others?)

 

The answer to this question can be found in how Necron Wraiths work.  (Hunh?)  WBB is not allowed vs weapons (ranged and close) that allow no save.  But wraiths get an Invulnerable save!  Doesnt matter.  According to the Necron FAQ, If a weapon allows no save, it allows no save.  You still get your Invulnerable, but not FNP.  (Now, to muddy the waters and get some good anti Marine hate going, Nartheciums still work if you have an I or Cover save, because that piece of wargear states it heals a wound if you fail a save of "any kind."  I love how Marines get everything everyone else gets, but better.)

 

DragonPup said:
The CiB's side ability is not bad, or that hard to udnerstand. It's like Rending-lite, except that you roll to see if it bypasses armor with the wound roll, not the to-hit. See the Sister's Divine Guidance ability. :p

I understand that?s the consensus on how it should be played. But that?s not what the text says. Where does the target?s Toughness come into it?

This has been discussed elsewhere.  Yes, the wording is stupid and pointless.  Add it to the FAQ list.

DragonPup said:
The way I read the stim injector is this: You do NOT get a Feel No Pain roll if you get nailed by an AP1(debatably an AP2 as well) shot, or by a power weapon.

Well, you?re wrong about the AP1 or AP2 (or even AP3) weapons, because they have no relevance to the argument. If you do get hit by a CC weapon that ignores saves, you don?t get a FNP roll. But Invulnerable Saves cannot be ignored. It?s the Invulnerable/Armour Save problem that GW is just ignoring.

See above.

spmushbi said:
17) Since obviously those 2 Ethereal armies were just tearing up the old codex games, they had to be nerfed. =P

I saw plenty of them. And what if you want just one Ethereal and no Commander?

Really?  2 Etherial armies?  2 of the 0-1 HQ choices in the same army?  How interesting.  Yes, Commanders should not be 1+.  There are situations where you cant fit a commander in.  Patrol missions, I believe.  But I could be wrong.

 

And thats all I have to say about that.

I was going over the GW forums and people were mentioning a "Close Protection" special rule the drones have. Still unsure what this means, but they mentioned it allowed you to supercede the BBB rulings in hit locations/model removal rules. (ie, you can allocate any hit to the drones first, before you allocate them to other models, saving your suits.)

It doesn't allow you to bypass anything.

'Close Protection' simply grants the Shield Drones the same Toughness and Armour Save value as the individual they accompany.

So a shield drone accompanying a Broadside has the same Toughness and Armour Save as a Broadside. However, if they are wounded by an AP2 shot the Boradside would not get a save, while the Drone would get its invulnerable save... which means the Broadside, as a model that doesn't get a Save, has to be removed first, making the Close Protection rule absolutely useless against high-AP weapons.



I believe that this is not the way the rules on page 24 are intended to work... That section is talking about a unit being hit by several different weapons, rather than units with mixed types of saves. The casualty removal section gives the owning player the right to choose which models are removed as casualties... however, you would still run into the exact same problem if the Broadside/Drone combo was hit by more than one weapon. A Lascannon and a Bolter, for example: You would have to remove the Broadside as the Lascannon Casualty, as it does not get a Save, and take the Bolter shot on the Drone.

Anyone notice that O'Shovah's Ballistic Skill dropped from 5 to 4?(apparently his points still remain the same.......) Also, now the only way you can field any type of drone is with an IC/Shas'vre or Team Leader. Total garbage now. All my suits, fullly painted with twin linked weapons and drones are now illegal and my favorite model now reduced to BS4, whereas that no class Shadowsun and every other Shas'O has BS5.

*cries*