Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 249

Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#1 » Jun 28 2017 01:15

Hey folks, so I've just received a response from ForgeWorld regarding the Tigershark's inability to fire its Heavy Rail Cannon. It seems they're still working on an FAQ but they gave me a temporary fix. It seems to be basically getting a rule that turns Macro into Ordnance (i.e. you can fire either Macro weapons or non-Macro weapons). Seems like a reasonable solution that balances it out somewhat (did seem rather cheap for what it does).

I've quoted the email below:

Thanks for the email Our rules team have been very busy working on FAQ and updates for our recently released Imperial Armour index books. Whilst they are still working on a few of the data sheets we have some good news for the ones you are asking about.

The rules team have given us a temporary fix till the official FAQ is released so please feel free to use these in your games of Warhammer 40k.

For the Tiger Shark it should have the following text: Titan-killer: A model with this rule may fire a Macro type weapon whilst moving even if it is not Titanic, but on any turn in which the controlling player elects to fire a Macro weapon while moving it may not fire weapons other than those with the Macro type until the start of the controlling player's next turn.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2902

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#2 » Jun 28 2017 01:21

That's actually a rather good solution I guess. Although I doubt anybody would ever use the Missile Pods and Burst Cannons use then unless there are no multi-wound targets left anymore lol

User avatar
Overheal
Shas'Saal
Posts: 177

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#3 » Jun 28 2017 01:36

Could have also mentioned when the Tigershark will be back in production :-(

BillyBones
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 97

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#4 » Jun 28 2017 02:25

Well it would render the rest of the weapons unusable, that is like 70pts forr nothing. Better and more elegant solution would be to restrist it to the minimal move in order to shoot.

User avatar
Vector Strike
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 955

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#5 » Jun 28 2017 03:08

BillyBones wrote:Well it would render the rest of the weapons unusable, that is like 70pts forr nothing. Better and more elegant solution would be to restrist it to the minimal move in order to shoot.


I agree. Didn't like their answer that much, albeit it's better than what it was before, lol.

They could've given it Titanic

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2902

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#6 » Jun 28 2017 03:13

Vector Strike wrote:
BillyBones wrote:Well it would render the rest of the weapons unusable, that is like 70pts forr nothing. Better and more elegant solution would be to restrist it to the minimal move in order to shoot.


I agree. Didn't like their answer that much, albeit it's better than what it was before, lol.

They could've given it Titanic

Yeah and considering that Imperial Knights count as Titanic, it wouldn't even be that much of a stretch. Although it's already weird enough that something like Imperial Knights are Titanic and the Riptide isn't despite both being pretty much equivalent in size and point cost. :D

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 249

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#7 » Jun 28 2017 03:35

Vector Strike wrote:
BillyBones wrote:Well it would render the rest of the weapons unusable, that is like 70pts forr nothing. Better and more elegant solution would be to restrist it to the minimal move in order to shoot.


I agree. Didn't like their answer that much, albeit it's better than what it was before, lol.

They could've given it Titanic


Maybe, but even with the 70 "wasted" points, it's still arguably the best Titan killer in the game for its points cost

BillyBones
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 97

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#8 » Jun 28 2017 03:47

Well a bit a glass cannon with only 16 wounds. A Landrider is tougher.

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 249

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#9 » Jun 28 2017 05:06

A Land Raider has the same strength, toughness, and wounds. The difference is the Tigershark trades a 2+ save for a 3+ save and -1 to hit

User avatar
Vector Strike
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 955

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#10 » Jun 28 2017 06:17

BillyBones wrote:Well a bit a glass cannon with only 16 wounds. A Landrider is tougher.


but a tiger shark has a much cooler name and design!

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1289

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#11 » Jun 28 2017 06:37

pilky wrote:A Land Raider has the same strength, toughness, and wounds. The difference is the Tigershark trades a 2+ save for a 3+ save and -1 to hit


I think I'd take a -1 to hit over a +1 to save.

User avatar
Peregrim
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 145

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#12 » Jun 28 2017 11:39

I believe 20 is the wounds cut-off for the Titanic keyword, which is why they gave the Tigershark this rule instead. I think it's a worthwhile trade for less vulnerability to anti-titan weapons (even if it's still a glass cannon).

User avatar
Lechai Skull
Shas'Saal
Posts: 365

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#13 » Jun 28 2017 11:51

Gee, its expensive... I'll take one!

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1289

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#14 » Jun 29 2017 12:20

I like how at first we were complaining that it couldn't fire, so they fixed it, and now we're complaining again! :P

User avatar
Gragagrogog
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 356

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#15 » Jun 29 2017 12:33

Arka0415 wrote:I like how at first we were complaining that it couldn't fire, so they fixed it, and now we're complaining again! :P


Yea... Because it still can't fire. :D Be that with other weapons, but still.

I don't think this "facebook decision" will hold up to official FAQ.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1289

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#16 » Jun 29 2017 12:40

Gragagrogog wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:I like how at first we were complaining that it couldn't fire, so they fixed it, and now we're complaining again! :P


Yea... Because it still can't fire. :D Be that with other weapons, but still.

I don't think this "facebook decision" will hold up to official FAQ.


I hope you're right. A rule like in 7th, with other guns firing at -1 to hit, could be good in this case maybe.

User avatar
shasocastris
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 964
Contact:

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#17 » Jun 29 2017 12:59

I know that objectively the rule is basically making us waste points but I can't help enjoy the 'divert all power to the main weapons' motif that this rule brings. It has such a good scifi vibe to me.

Cheers!

BillyBones
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 97

Re: Tigershark AX-1-0 FW FAQ

Post#18 » Jun 29 2017 01:07

shasocastris wrote:I know that objectively the rule is basically making us waste points but I can't help enjoy the 'divert all power to the main weapons' motif that this rule brings. It has such a good scifi vibe to me.

Cheers!


Well that is exactely my pointthe other weapons are so energetically insignificant compared to the main guns, that firing them would have zero impact on the main weapons. on the other hand steady and level flight might be necessary to fire these babies, hence it would make sence to limit the movement to the minimal value in order to fire.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

cron