Upcoming T'au Codex

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 359

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2107 » Feb 11 2018 11:15

Torch wrote:Ultimately, the fluff doesn't really translate into rules. Aun'Shi has WS 2+ right? (double check that cause I don't use him at all) Which means that Tau could git gud with enough practice. And he doesn't even have optics and computers. Fireblades also have good BS, but they don't have battlesuit tech.
Meanwhile we have a century old Space Marine genetically engineered into a veritable goliath with power armor strong enough to stop tank shells... T4... 3+ Sv.... 1 W.... :?

So long story short, we have a wide margin to work in so long as it improves gameplay. And by we, I mean GW and not us at all.

Technically the space marines have an armor that is as good as a knight's or a baneblade's, which is as good as a crisis suit's.
GW is actually awful at setting baselines and doesn't know how to scale stats. I've been saying this for years.
Space marines should be 4+ in everything. WS, BS and Sv, but should be WAY stronger and more durable than a regular person.
S/T should be 5, and W should be 2.
Things with super-human shooting abilities (such as most vehicles, mechanicus, etc.) should be BS 3+ (there is no reason for space marines to have super-human shooting skills).
Things with super-human fighting abilities (such as space marine veterans, captains, especially equipped units, such as assault units, etc.) should be WS 3+. Space marines in general could fit into this as they have super-human reflexes.
Things with god-like abilities for shooting or fighting should be 2+ (daemon princes, primarchs, titans, etc.)
Things that are bad at shooting (orks) should be 5+.
NOTHING should be 6+ to make room for -1 to hit.
Terminators/baneblades/riptides should be 3+ Sv.
2+ should be reserved for titans and things with meter-thick armor.
Crisis suits, which have basically better-than-ceramite armor should be 4+
Heavy armored regular infantry (like fire warriors and some guardsmen) should be 5+
Light armored targets, such as flak armor and pathfinders should be 6+
Targets with no armor (like orks) should be 7+

Additionally
With the above changes, AP should be nerfed (AP -4 becomes -3, AP -3 becomes -2, AP -2 and -1 becomes -1)
Titanic targets should give +1 to hit them.
There should be some sort of evasion save stat (something like 7e cover save).
Supersonic targets should give -3 to hit (ever try to hit a supersonic jet with a rifle?) unless the firer is also supersonic. Flying targets should get -1.

User avatar
Zadocfish
Shas'Saal
Posts: 64

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2108 » Feb 12 2018 12:11

Incredible. Every single one of those changes would make the game worse and more tedious. Most of it literally just makes something or other less likely to happen at any given time... they just move the baseline one step lower for everyone, for the most part. At best, it changes nothing but the time it takes to play a game... at worst, it would eliminate what little balance there is in the game.
I am a Christian.

User avatar
PullsyJr
Shas
Posts: 21

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2109 » Feb 12 2018 12:41

Torch wrote:When I first got into Tau way back, markerlights were a side note to me, they didn't define the army.

I agree completely. I avoid the use of Markerlights; pretty much always have. They are a cool thing to have, but now they are simply a crutch to raise a poor army up to an ordinary one.

Give me a unit of Rail Rifle Pathfinders, and I'd take that over Markerlight Pathfinders any day. They are so much fun. :D

User avatar
Darthi
Shas
Posts: 46

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2110 » Feb 12 2018 02:55

PullsyJr wrote:I agree completely. I avoid the use of Markerlights; pretty much always have. They are a cool thing to have, but now they are simply a crutch to raise a poor army up to an ordinary one.

Give me a unit of Rail Rifle Pathfinders, and I'd take that over Markerlight Pathfinders any day. They are so much fun. :D

That was The only reason I bought them so that i could run 2 railrifle teams

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 359

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2111 » Feb 12 2018 02:57

Zadocfish wrote:Incredible. Every single one of those changes would make the game worse and more tedious. Most of it literally just makes something or other less likely to happen at any given time... they just move the baseline one step lower for everyone, for the most part. At best, it changes nothing but the time it takes to play a game... at worst, it would eliminate what little balance there is in the game.

There is only so much you can do on a six sided die. And when your baseline is close to the max, there is not much you can do in terms of balancing.
And your statement is just wrong.
I moved some stuff up and some stuff down.
All I did was make the progression more linear.

User avatar
Zadocfish
Shas'Saal
Posts: 64

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2112 » Feb 12 2018 03:31

Eh. The vast majority is just a shift down while the Marines and super-heavies get a shift up. All changes that would make the game less fun and less balanced, either way.

Also, Space Marines DO have a reason to be better at shooting than regular humans... they're edited from the ground up to be better than humans at virtually everything, and most have many, many years of experience. Represented on the current models as an extra point in WS, BS, S, and T; their tank-like armor is represented by having armor identical to the majority of tanks.

You seem to think that some part of this is unbalanced/non-fluffy, but goodness knows I can't seem to figure out how.
I am a Christian.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 509
Contact:

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2113 » Feb 12 2018 03:50

If you want a more balanced and fluffy game go play inquisitor where a guardsmen is toughness 40 and a space marine is 200 and use D100 to decide everything, FYI I love inquisitor but a 5 man skirmish game takes aslong as a 2000pt game of 40k I feel GW are trying to do their best to keep the game as fluffy as it can be but most importantly fluid, balanced and fun and 8th is 10 times more fluid than 7th.

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 359

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2114 » Feb 12 2018 04:34

Zadocfish wrote:Eh. The vast majority is just a shift down while the Marines and super-heavies get a shift up. All changes that would make the game less fun and less balanced, either way.

Also, Space Marines DO have a reason to be better at shooting than regular humans... they're edited from the ground up to be better than humans at virtually everything, and most have many, many years of experience. Represented on the current models as an extra point in WS, BS, S, and T; their tank-like armor is represented by having armor identical to the majority of tanks.

You seem to think that some part of this is unbalanced/non-fluffy, but goodness knows I can't seem to figure out how.

You forget that in 40k everything is as good as tank armor and better than a human. Read the wiki entry on fio'tak and the one on combat armour.
When it comes to damage deflection and mitigation, Fio'tak is comparable to the ceramite used in Space Marine Power Armour, but weighs substantially less on a per unit basis.

The distinctive domed Tau helmet of a Combat Armour set includes many systems, ranging from communication equipment, night vision sensors, targeting and ranger-finder information, visual relay systems, and access to the main command network. The helmet is configured to allow for simple upgrades to be fitted such as Blacksun Filters and Target Locks, and the vision slots are pre-configured to see Marker Light beams.

HivMnd
Shas
Posts: 6

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2115 » Feb 12 2018 06:00

PullsyJr wrote:Requiring Markerlight support is bad design. What if I want to play an all suit army? I still need to take Pathfinders? There is no other army in the game that has such an inane dependence on a single unit (yes, Marker Drones exist but the argument stays the same).

...



It may not be much, but the stealth suit team leader can take a markerlight.

User avatar
PullsyJr
Shas
Posts: 21

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2116 » Feb 12 2018 06:05

HivMnd wrote:
PullsyJr wrote:Requiring Markerlight support is bad design. What if I want to play an all suit army? I still need to take Pathfinders? There is no other army in the game that has such an inane dependence on a single unit (yes, Marker Drones exist but the argument stays the same).

...



It may not be much, but the stealth suit team leader can take a markerlight.

You are entirely correct (sensor towers, tetras, and a couple of other models have them too) but then they're incidental to the army, not something that a list is built around.

A unit of stealth with Markerlights would be interesting...

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 509
Contact:

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2117 » Feb 12 2018 06:22

PullsyJr wrote:
HivMnd wrote:
PullsyJr wrote:Requiring Markerlight support is bad design. What if I want to play an all suit army? I still need to take Pathfinders? There is no other army in the game that has such an inane dependence on a single unit (yes, Marker Drones exist but the argument stays the same).

...



It may not be much, but the stealth suit team leader can take a markerlight.

You are entirely correct (sensor towers, tetras, and a couple of other models have them too) but then they're incidental to the army, not something that a list is built around.

A unit of stealth with Markerlights would be interesting...


But most AM armies require officers to function to give orders and make the guardsmen effective.

Tyranids require synapse creatures to keep their cheap troops from being all over the place.

Contrary to every other army orks require large units for their mob rule to work.

Dark eldar basically require transports to get close to you so their units aren't shredded mid field.

Ok pathfinders might not be great but we also have fireblade, fs marksman, firewarriors Shas'ui, stealth suits Shas'vre, xv84 commanders, our stratagem, and Pathfinders are really cheap for what they do and in this edition MSU is great for filling up detachment for more CP so I don't see what the issue of relying on markerlights to make our units effective is?

User avatar
PullsyJr
Shas
Posts: 21

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2118 » Feb 12 2018 06:53

Nymphomanius wrote:Ok pathfinders might not be great but we also have fireblade, fs marksman, firewarriors Shas'ui, stealth suits Shas'vre, xv84 commanders, our stratagem, and Pathfinders are really cheap for what they do and in this edition MSU is great for filling up detachment for more CP so I don't see what the issue of relying on markerlights to make our units effective is?


Because of the quantity of Markerlight hits you need, a player is pretty much forced into taking at least one full unit of Pathfinders per enemy you want lit up. Yes it is entirely possible to scatter the laser throughout the army, but then the models using the Markerlights can't really do much more (having the things as Heavy is ludicrous, for example).

All of the examples you gave (with the exception of Dark Eldar) have multiple ways to achieve their abilities, or the enabling models are cheap enough that they're background noise in an army creation process. And the abilities are activated either passive or at no "cost" (the model doesn't need to sacrifice anything to achieve the desired effect).

Tau, however, needs to burn through two whole units of Pathfinders if more than one enemy unit is to be marked, simply because of the woeful to hit and the staggeringly bad Markerlight table. The stratagem is good, but one use only per turn.

I'd be less annoyed if Pathfinders could do more (better cover save, infiltrate instead of the stupid Scout move, change a light to being Assault 1 rather than Heavy, as examples). As it is they are non-survivable paper thin primary targets who provide only enough support to bring the army to the "mediocre" level against a single target.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 509
Contact:

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2119 » Feb 12 2018 07:00

PullsyJr wrote:
Nymphomanius wrote:Ok pathfinders might not be great but we also have fireblade, fs marksman, firewarriors Shas'ui, stealth suits Shas'vre, xv84 commanders, our stratagem, and Pathfinders are really cheap for what they do and in this edition MSU is great for filling up detachment for more CP so I don't see what the issue of relying on markerlights to make our units effective is?


Because of the quantity of Markerlight hits you need, a player is pretty much forced into taking at least one full unit of Pathfinders per enemy you want lit up. Yes it is entirely possible to scatter the laser throughout the army, but then the models using the Markerlights can't really do much more (having the things as Heavy is ludicrous, for example).

All of the examples you gave (with the exception of Dark Eldar) have multiple ways to achieve their abilities, or the enabling models are cheap enough that they're background noise in an army creation process. And the abilities are activated either passive or at no "cost" (the model doesn't need to sacrifice anything to achieve the desired effect).

Tau, however, needs to burn through two whole units of Pathfinders if more than one enemy unit is to be marked, simply because of the woeful to hit and the staggeringly bad Markerlight table. The stratagem is good, but one use only per turn.

I'd be less annoyed if Pathfinders could do more (better cover save, infiltrate instead of the stupid Scout move, change a light to being Assault 1 rather than Heavy, as examples). As it is they are non-survivable paper thin primary targets who provide only enough support to bring the army to the "mediocre" level against a single target.


But it seems to me the issue isn't markerlights it's a combination of a poor buff table and fragile delivery system. I don't think ML should be anything but heavy but I think pathfinders should be markerlight specialists and get +1 to hit with markerlight if they didn't move, and of course an improved table

armisael
Shas'Saal
Posts: 57

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2120 » Feb 12 2018 07:33

I saw one comment in BoLS said that “On the Warhammer40000 FB page, the 40k rep keeps saying "we never said Dark Eldar are next"”
(Has anyone saw it?)

Is that mean T’au codex might be next?

User avatar
Studioworks
Shas'Saal
Posts: 162

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2121 » Feb 12 2018 08:27

If we take in consideration that we and Necrons didn't get points change in Chapter Approved + T'au article in the Regimental standard, the next two Codices will be T'au and Necron and our will be the first in line. I have a good feeling that today GW will announce our codex. :biggrin:

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 331

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2122 » Feb 12 2018 08:39

PullsyJr wrote:
Nymphomanius wrote:Ok pathfinders might not be great but we also have fireblade, fs marksman, firewarriors Shas'ui, stealth suits Shas'vre, xv84 commanders, our stratagem, and Pathfinders are really cheap for what they do and in this edition MSU is great for filling up detachment for more CP so I don't see what the issue of relying on markerlights to make our units effective is?


Because of the quantity of Markerlight hits you need, a player is pretty much forced into taking at least one full unit of Pathfinders per enemy you want lit up. Yes it is entirely possible to scatter the laser throughout the army, but then the models using the Markerlights can't really do much more (having the things as Heavy is ludicrous, for example).

All of the examples you gave (with the exception of Dark Eldar) have multiple ways to achieve their abilities, or the enabling models are cheap enough that they're background noise in an army creation process. And the abilities are activated either passive or at no "cost" (the model doesn't need to sacrifice anything to achieve the desired effect).

Tau, however, needs to burn through two whole units of Pathfinders if more than one enemy unit is to be marked, simply because of the woeful to hit and the staggeringly bad Markerlight table. The stratagem is good, but one use only per turn.

I'd be less annoyed if Pathfinders could do more (better cover save, infiltrate instead of the stupid Scout move, change a light to being Assault 1 rather than Heavy, as examples). As it is they are non-survivable paper thin primary targets who provide only enough support to bring the army to the "mediocre" level against a single target.


The thing is Tau have been BS 4+ forever but it's only seemingly an issue in 8th. We've relied on Markerlights forever, but it's only seemingly an issue in 8th. Markerlights have been Heavy forever, but it's only seemingly an issue in 8th. So what has changed in 8th? How Makerlights give us our buffs, with a table rather than a point system.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the concept of Markerlights (i.e. a weapon that exists just to give buffs to other weapons), as proven by 3rd-7th edition Tau. The one thing everyone can agree on is that the implementation of Markerlights in 8th is problematic

PeeJ
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 176

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2123 » Feb 12 2018 09:22

pilky wrote:There is absolutely nothing wrong with the concept of Markerlights (i.e. a weapon that exists just to give buffs to other weapons), as proven by 3rd-7th edition Tau. The one thing everyone can agree on is that the implementation of Markerlights in 8th is problematic


And also the fact that our guns are less effective now, and in a lot of cases random, and the game in general has changed considerably to favour more hits over 'big' hits (see quad las cannon tanks and compare them to the hammerhead).

Yes, the markerlight table is an issue, but there are far more issues than just that related to how things have been re-balanced moving into 8th. We came off pretty badly in all honesty and it's a combination of things added up that did it, not just one.

User avatar
Atlas_MH
Shas
Posts: 10

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#2124 » Feb 12 2018 09:56

Has anyone looked to see if our points cost per unit/weapon/support system are justified if the BS is 3+?

What if the markerlight system was more like:
1 ML: Destroyer/Seeker
2 ML: No Cover
3 Ml: No penalty for moving/advancing
4 ML: +1 BS
5 ML: AP -1

Simple fixes imo that keep the tau focused on ML but not dependent on them to be good. Re-roll ones are too redundant in the index.

What if Commanders are limited to 2 weapons and 2 support systems?

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CMO and 11 guests