Kakapo42 wrote:You could use multiple seeker missiles on a single target, but that ends up providing disproportionately low returns. In previous editions I only need one seeker missile to knock out an enemy vehicle or medium-sized T4 unit (in theory at least), which means I can potentially get one meaningful kill per seeker missile. In other words, if I bring 8 seeker missiles on my 4 Devilfish (not an insignificant investment), I can conceivably knock out 8 significant targets. In 8th edition, I need to bring over twice as many seeker missiles to conceivably knock out only two significant targets. It just isn't very economical. The Skyray in particular gets hit especially hard by this - it's supposed to be the premier Tau anti-aircraft unit, but with the current seeker missile rules it can only realistically shoot down one air unit per game, if it's lucky.
Yes, I think the reality is that we can't view seekers as tank-busting missiles any more, they're just for finishing off units or getting a few guaranteed wounds in, which reflects their low cost. But I'd definitely rather have seekers than psychic mortal wounds that have to target the nearest unit. And the Skyray has been neglected for several editions now, at least with other mobile missile platforms (manticore etc) their rockets can dish out multiple wounds.
Kakapo42 wrote: Oddly enough your sentiments here are eerily reminiscent of my own in Warhammer Fantasy when the 8th edition Wood Elf army book was released (Wood Elves being my main army in Warhammer Fantasy). Your comments about JSJ and your preferred playstyle even mirror my own feelings about the Asrai Archery Wood Elf special rule (which was a major factor in why I never adopted the 8th edition Wood Elf army book).
That's one of the reasons I'm not enjoying 8th as much as 7th, while the game undeniably needed to be stream-lined, GW has kinda swung too far the other way. My overall feeling is that the armies which relied on strong stats and one or two rules (Marines, Necrons, Orks, Tyranids) are largely the same, but factions that relied heavily on a big list of rules (Tau, Eldar) have lost a LOT of their flavour and fun. Unfortunately the former group probably makes up the core support base for GW, so this is unlikely to change.
Panzer wrote: Heh, ask me and my Tomb Kings. Sure they got some fancy new units in 8th, but it wasn't really what it used to be anymore. Well I didn't like 8th fantasy anyway, neither did my local community so most stopped playing and then they dropped AoS and stopped supporting Tomb Kings...so now I'm here.
This is a prime example of why I don't think GW cares as much about some of their customers as they pretend to. Dropping an entire faction the way they did was unacceptable and must have been gut-wrenching (to put it mildly).