Upcoming T'au Codex

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 120

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1351 » Jan 09 2018 07:07

QimRas wrote:
Temennigru wrote:
Rayscarnage wrote:Then it is not a GW thing to fix but your meta....

They argue that PL is good for some armies and horrible for others. Specifically the ones with few upgrade options like orks.
And I don't like open play either. I like narrative play. I would still like to have an option to use illegal units in my battleforged army though, because it is fluffy.


Great! Pick a narrative mission and go to town. If your friends are arguing PL, they probably have not played it and are assuming how it is calculated. But to address their issue, play a mission where there is an assumed PL imbalance, like Planetstrike, giving them the side with the higher PL. I broke down the T'au in a lot of the Narrative missions in the above linked thread, so you may want to check it out.

Incidentally, Battleforgedness in Open and Narrative play only requires that each unit in a detachment share a keyword, and not that the entire Army has to share a Faction keyword. That's a Matched Play thing. So you can have your cake (allies) and eat it too (CP and Stratagems) as long as you form them into legal Detachments.

Oh, that's good. I'll try to convince them when I visit them in march.

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'Saal
Posts: 351

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1352 » Jan 09 2018 07:13

Temennigru wrote:Oh, that's good. I'll try to convince them when I visit them in march.


Good luck! Those missions are a lot of fun. If you have lots of building terrain or Tidewalls I would suggest one of the Stronghold Assault missions that include the Meatgrinder rule. Especially against Orks. That should be a blast.

User avatar
DominayTrix
Shas
Posts: 21

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1353 » Jan 09 2018 11:02

Temennigru wrote:
Rayscarnage wrote:Then it is not a GW thing to fix but your meta....

They argue that PL is good for some armies and horrible for others. Specifically the ones with few upgrade options like orks.
And I don't like open play either. I like narrative play. I would still like to have an option to use illegal units in my battleforged army though, because it is fluffy.


In my experience with PL your friends are right. It can easily turn into "who has the most expensive upgrades that are made cheaper" when every leman russ/predator has full lascannon sponsons, Commanders just run Missile Pods and Fusion Blasters since anything cheaper is a waste. Now an argument can be made "well then don't abuse that and it will be fine" but that is the same thing as just having your opponent run a weaker list in matched play. I do recommend Narrative if you like fluffy play, but I would still recommend points. No reason why you can't just use points in Narrative for your non-battleforged army.

User avatar
Zadocfish
Shas'Saal
Posts: 25

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1354 » Jan 10 2018 02:26

Temennigru wrote:
Rayscarnage wrote:Then it is not a GW thing to fix but your meta....

They argue that PL is good for some armies and horrible for others. Specifically the ones with few upgrade options like orks.
And I don't like open play either. I like narrative play. I would still like to have an option to use illegal units in my battleforged army though, because it is fluffy.


They are totally right; it's interesting how T'au aren't good at all in matched play, but are actually quite formidable in PL games. The difference that weapon selection makes to us is absolutely enormous; our Crisis Suits are terrible right now because of the snowballing point costs with their equipment; in PL, well, having a 3-unit Crisis team with 6 Shield Drones is a flat 14 PL, and if you deck them out with Missile Pods they end up throwing out 18 S7 AP-1 D3 shots at massive range per turn. That's roughly equivalent to what other armies can get for the same PL, while it's grossly inferior to what other armies can get for the same points in matched play.

So yeah, in PL we're on-par or above, while in points we have a total of about 5 or so unambiguously viable units in our entire index... but, I can't really blame your competitive friends for not wanting to convey a very targetted advantage on one player or the other. PL is just too advantageous for us.
I am a Christian.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 414
Contact:

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1355 » Jan 10 2018 02:56

As you said PL puts us on equal footing not gives us a massive advantage but there are some units it's better for than others.

Pathfinders being one for 3 PL we can take 5 Pathfinders with 3 rail rifles, normally almost 100 points and at 18" putting out 6 str6 Ap-4 D3 damage shots with a chance for extra MW on 6+ for same cost Am can get 10 guardsmen with 1 heavy and 1 Special weapon and whilst they do have Lascannon access it doesn't compliment their special weapons because it has to be still to fire or get -1 and plasma and melta wants to be up close and personal.

Commanders again are great for 6PL and missile Commander is now same cost as fusion Commander.

Drones do suffer a little as 1PL is meant to average about 20pts and 2 drones for 1PL isn't great when fir the cost of 12 drones you can get a whole Commander!

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2614

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1356 » Jan 10 2018 03:21

Nymphomanius wrote:Drones do suffer a little as 1PL is meant to average about 20pts and 2 drones for 1PL isn't great when fir the cost of 12 drones you can get a whole Commander!

One funny flaw with PL is that the Forgeworld XV9 pays 1 PL per drone. Awful. What would you rather have, 6 Gun Drones or a Commander? :D

User avatar
FoxZz
Shas
Posts: 11

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1357 » Jan 10 2018 11:07

I've been thinking to changes for T'aus that woud be welcome in the new codex and help both internal and external balance.

Main Tau issues currently are lack of reliable firepower beyong 36" range, lack of indirect fire capabilities, lack of sniper like units, cost-inefectiveness of most of its core units. This leads to the spam of the few good units of the deck, very predictable playstyle among other problems.

First, I think it would be nice for Kroots to come back in our lists. Currently, they are very squishy and they lost some of their special rules that render them quiet useless compared to Firewarriors. So I think the first step would be to give them a special rule, could be "Jungle Fighters" or "Forest Specialists" or something like that. It would give them an extra cover bonus when in forest, similar to Marskman Stealth Field, but only when in forests. It would also remove rolls maluses when charging in forest. Secondly, their movement could be increased from 7" to 8" to represent their light infantry status and ther superior physical abilities. It would make them better at objective grabbing. Lasty, their Stealthy hunter ability could be improved into an infiltrator ability (which they used to have). Kroot hounds could have a special rule allowing them to always strike first in the fight phase (they used to have a very high initiative) and lastly, maybe kroot gun could get Rapid Fire 2 instead of 1.

Secondly, Crisis teams need to be improved to match their point cost or their price should be decreased, as it as already been stated here several time. I'd rather keep their price as is because I thik armies have a good balance of Suits and Infantry currently. To improve them, first step could be to increase their movement to 10" to compensate the loss of the JSJ mechanic. Currently I find the Crisis gameplay too restricted to Manta Strike mechanic. Drone would need their speed to be increased too so they can keep up with the suits. This could also be aplied to Stealth teams.

Another important fact is the lack of reliability of Suits during the shooting phase, which force us to spam Commanders. A good middle ground could be to make all the big suits (Riptides, Ghostkeel, XV88 Broadsides) but also flyers (Razorback, Sunshark and I would add Piranha) at Balistic Skill S3+. Secondly, XV25s and XV8s Shas'vre should also get a BS of 3+ but not the regular Shas'ui. Shas'vre "upgrade" should remain free, as it would be a squad level buff already payed when you buy the 3 mandatory suits that make a team. It would make Fusion Blaster on Stealth teams more rewarding for example and would allow more diverse builds for Crisis teams, while not making them too powerfull.

Tau also lack reliable mortal wound platform besides the Storm Surge nor does it have a good AA platform. Upgrading Skyray's Seeker missiles into Destroyer missiles and giving it a stock Velocity Tracker would turn it from never used crap into a very decent pick, while resolving those flaws. Drone Snipers is another unit that is never taken, they used to have a rail rifle which was a lot more powerfull, but it's another debate, what they really need is the sniper rule allowing them to deal a mortal wound on a 6+.

Maybe Devilfish, Hammerhead and Skyray should have their movement speed increased to 14" ? However, they should definitely get some vehicle support systems. They used to have access to stuff like weapons stabilizers, jamming equipment, couner-measures, night vision systems, etc. Maybe this king of support systems could come back with new rules.

Lastly, many weapons stats should be updated, a standardisation is needed among the different weapons types with common special rules and coherent improvments : pulse (carabine, rifle, canon, etc), rail, ion, plasma, missile, fusion. A burst cannon for example is just a gun drone but more expansive, maybe its range should be increased ? Plasma Rifle needs to be improved, so is the Railgun, which would also requirre a Rail line redesign. Tau lack weapons doing consistently more than 1 dammage, it's always D3 or D6, which can have very unpredictable results, which is kind of a shame considering fluff says Tau have very reliable weapons ; as well as weapons in the 36" to 72" range. Some ideas :
- Pulse weapons could have -1 AP for every 6 roll to wound, similarly to Shuriken weapons
- Every wound from a pulse carabine fired by a firewarrior should inflict -1 to all the target rolls until the end of the turn to simulate the grenade launcher of the carabine
- Besides overcharged profile and area effects weapons, all Tau weapons should have fixed dammage : 1,2, 3, etc
- Strength of 12 for the rail gun ?
- ?

Also, I really like the idea of a pool of Markerlight to spend as you see fit. It avoids markerlights "waste" and addss flexibility and tactics, rather than just being based on luck. Sometimes, you don't need an ignore cover perk, but you'd like a better BS, and sometimes, you just want to fire a seeker, etc. But because you have a limited amount of Markerlight available, you cannot choose everything at the same time, while allowing you to use what you really need, so it's quite balanced.
1 Markerlight could be re-rolls one and fire a seeker missile on platform BS
2 could be ignore cover, fire a destroyer missile, no maluses when advancing/moving
3 could be +1 BS (and would be combinable), no night malus
The rest would stay as it is currently, army wide bonus lasting for the whole turn.

Here was some ideas I got or that I gathered and liked on the Internet. Tell me what you think, if there is some things that you like, others that are over the top or underdone ?

PS : Sorry for the wall of text, I tried to give arguments and avoid wish listing.
Last edited by FoxZz on Jan 11 2018 11:26, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 170

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1358 » Jan 11 2018 01:20

Just thought of something that could make Air Fragmenting Burst Cannons interesting. What if they allowed you to overwatch with the user's CT. That would actually give them an interest and a lot of synergy potential with other units and For the Greater Good.

User avatar
Shas'O Ora
Shas'Saal
Posts: 44

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1359 » Jan 11 2018 02:41

I would grant the Kroot a hard to hit bonus always.(ballistic ability of the unit shooting at them -1)
Who can sneak through forests can do the same through urban terrain, ruins, high grass....perhaps not giving them an additional bonus when they are really in cover then.
(based on the story out of one of the older codices, where the Kroot where hidden in a city during Damocless Crusade)

Same bonus for the Pathfinders, too?
It would compensate their light armour and it is their main task not to be seen.

:fear:

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 120

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1360 » Jan 11 2018 04:22

FoxZz wrote:I've been thinking to changes for T'aus that woud be welcome in the new codex and help both internal and external balance.

...

Here was some ideas I got or that I gathered and liked on the Internet. Tell me what you think, if there is some things that you like, others that are over the top or underdone ?

PS : Sorry for the wall of text, I tried to give arguments and avoid wish listing.

I agree with most of what you said.
But the problem with the railgun is not the strength. It is the damage. Models that take railguns can only take one (or 2 in the broadside's case, but with lower STR), and it deals the same damage as a lascannon, which can be spammed (you can take 4 on a land raider, which is the SM transport and has more firepower than our main battle tank) and makes their platform way more points efficient. Railguns need a serious overhaul if they are to be viable weapons. Maybe fiddle around with their mortal wounds ability a bit would fix both it and our mortal wound problem (like mortal wound on a 4+ rather than a 6+ or auto mortal wound).

As for markerlights, I would also like to see them auto-hit that you cannot fire if you moved. It makes no sense for you to have to hit a laser pointer, as it is not a projectile or an energy burst.

As for sniper drones, I don't really like the idea of sticking railguns on them. Their model is obviously equipped with a pulse weapon. I just think GW went full retard with all pulse weapon and just copy-pasted their stats everywhere. Each one should have its own special rule.

Pulse rifles are fine being vanilla, even though I would give some sort of AP to them
Pulse carbines should have some sort of pinning ability
Longshot pulse rifles should have a way to deal mortal wounds (because headshots), and their "hits characters" rule should belong to the unit. Not the weapon.
Pulse blasters should have higher damage at 5" and/or should auto-hit like a flamer and/or fire overwatch at full BS, as they are essentially shotguns.
AND FINALLY
BREACHERS SHOULD BE EQUIPPED WITH PULSE PISTOLS SO THEY CAN SHINE IN MELEE
THEY GAVE US THE SHINY PISTOL RULE BUT NO PISTOLS

Wes
Shas
Posts: 5

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1361 » Jan 11 2018 06:47

Kroot can control their evolution, so I'd allow them to choose one type of "kindred trait" at the start of battle. Maybe these Kroot are hard to hit, these have plus one toughness, these have plus one movement, these have plus two leadership, or something along those lines. Perhaps they could only choose a kindred trait if they start the battle within six inches of a Kroot Shaper.

And this might be overpowered, but maybe a "keen vision" rule where they can target enemy characters behind enemy lines if the kroot unit doesn't move (or took a half movement) that turn.

User avatar
FoxZz
Shas
Posts: 11

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1362 » Jan 11 2018 08:56

Haechi wrote:Just thought of something that could make Air Fragmenting Burst Cannons interesting. What if they allowed you to overwatch with the user's CT. That would actually give them an interest and a lot of synergy potential with other units and For the Greater Good.


I was rather thinking of giving the Airbusting Fagmentation Projector an "ignore cover" ability, because after all, that's what airbust are meant for :
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2ZpNaqAVC8#t=0m43s
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UolMYY7QaA#t=1m13s

To be honnest all the blast weapons should ignore cover : flamers, sub-munition ammo, etc

Shas'O Ora wrote:I would grant the Kroot a hard to hit bonus always.(ballistic ability of the unit shooting at them -1)
Who can sneak through forests can do the same through urban terrain, ruins, high grass....perhaps not giving them an additional bonus when they are really in cover then.
(based on the story out of one of the older codices, where the Kroot where hidden in a city during Damocless Crusade)

Same bonus for the Pathfinders, too?
It would compensate their light armour and it is their main task not to be seen.

:fear:


Pathfinders definitely need "hard to hit", about Kroots, I don't know what's best, general +1 to cover (a save bonus), or -1 to hit ? (a hit bonus) ? Would both be OP ?

Wes wrote:Kroot can control their evolution, so I'd allow them to choose one type of "kindred trait" at the start of battle. Maybe these Kroot are hard to hit, these have plus one toughness, these have plus one movement, these have plus two leadership, or something along those lines. Perhaps they could only choose a kindred trait if they start the battle within six inches of a Kroot Shaper.

And this might be overpowered, but maybe a "keen vision" rule where they can target enemy characters behind enemy lines if the kroot unit doesn't move (or took a half movement) that turn.


Yep this could be a good idea, at the begining of the game, each Kroot platoon get to choose 1 of its abilities which could be : bonus to cover, hard to hit, night vision, one more attack, etc
ABout "keen vision", Kroots used to have sniper bullets, so this could be ok.

Temennigru wrote:I agree with most of what you said.
But the problem with the railgun is not the strength. It is the damage. Models that take railguns can only take one (or 2 in the broadside's case, but with lower STR), and it deals the same damage as a lascannon, which can be spammed (you can take 4 on a land raider, which is the SM transport and has more firepower than our main battle tank) and makes their platform way more points efficient. Railguns need a serious overhaul if they are to be viable weapons. Maybe fiddle around with their mortal wounds ability a bit would fix both it and our mortal wound problem (like mortal wound on a 4+ rather than a 6+ or auto mortal wound).


Yep I agree, what about a strait 6 dammage instead of a D6 dammage ? So it's only one shot, but it's a reliable 6 dammage, it would also be kind of unique.
12 dammage would allow it to wound on 2+ T6 targets, which would make the Railgun a low firepower but high reliable dammage. You might not spam it as much as the Lascannon, but with Longstrike or its buff, you have 0,7 chance to deal 6 dammage to any monster/vehicule with less than 6 tougness and 3+ save, which is quite significant.

Temennigru wrote:As for markerlights, I would also like to see them auto-hit that you cannot fire if you moved. It makes no sense for you to have to hit a laser pointer, as it is not a projectile or an energy burst.


I agree, but this might be a OP if coupled with a pool of markerlights, and even with the current table.


Temennigru wrote:As for sniper drones, I don't really like the idea of sticking railguns on them. Their model is obviously equipped with a pulse weapon. I just think GW went full retard with all pulse weapon and just copy-pasted their stats everywhere. Each one should have its own special rule.

Longshot pulse rifle is fine for them as long as thye give it the sniper special rule that allow it to deal a mortal wound on a 6+ like other snipers.
What about giving Pathfinder with railgun the sniper rule allowing it to target characters this time ? It would compensate the very high price of the rail rifle and the low BS of Pathfinders.


Temennigru wrote:Pulse rifles are fine being vanilla, even though I would give some sort of AP to them
Pulse carbines should have some sort of pinning ability
Longshot pulse rifles should have a way to deal mortal wounds (because headshots), and their "hits characters" rule should belong to the unit. Not the weapon.
Pulse blasters should have higher damage at 5" and/or should auto-hit like a flamer and/or fire overwatch at full BS, as they are essentially shotguns.
AND FINALLY
BREACHERS SHOULD BE EQUIPPED WITH PULSE PISTOLS SO THEY CAN SHINE IN MELEE
THEY GAVE US THE SHINY PISTOL RULE BUT NO PISTOLS


I agree with that, especially the pulse pistol for breachers. As for sniper drones, it doesn't change anything if the ability is on the weapon or the unit, since this unit is always equipped with this weapon. As long as they get it.
By the way, if Pulse carabine were able to shoot Photon Grenades, the longer range would mean that the fire return from the targeted unit would also be much less accurate, which is usefull. Would be nice also if Photon grenades would reduce charge movment by 1 D3 or something.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 831

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1363 » Jan 11 2018 03:05

I have mostly been watching on in wonder at the ever growing mega-thread that this has become. This looked like a decent place to try to jump in.

FoxZz wrote:I've been thinking to changes for T'aus that woud be welcome in the new codex and help both internal and external balance.

Main Tau issues currently are lack of reliable firepower beyong 36" range, lack of indirect fire capabilities, lack of sniper like units, cost-inefectiveness of most of its core units. This leads to the spam of the few good units of the deck, very predictable playstyle among other problems.

First, I think it would be nice for Kroots to come back in our lists. Currently, they are very squishy and they lost some of their special rules that render them quiet useless compared to Firewarriors. So I think the first step would be to give them a special rule, could be "Jungle Fighters" or "Forest Specialists" or something like that. It would give them an extra cover bonus when in forest, similar to Marskman Stealth Field, but only when in forests. It would also remove rolls maluses when charging in forest. Secondly, their movement could be increased from 7" to 8" to represent their light infantry status and ther superior physical abilities. It would make them better at objective grabbing. Lasty, their Stealthy hunter ability could be improved into an infiltrator ability (which they used to have). Kroot hounds could have a special rule allowing them to always strike first in the fight phase (they used to have a very high initiative) and lastly, maybe kroot gun could get Rapid Fire 2 instead of 1.


Kroot are one of the units that could be fixed either with a rules tweak or a points change. If they get their old deployment and outflank tricks back then they would be worth the points cost. As they stand they are really only worth 5ppm and would be a viable chaff unit at that cost.

FoxZz wrote:Secondly, Crisis teams need to be improved to match their point cost or their price should be decreased, as it as already been stated here several time. I'd rather keep their price as is because I thik armies have a good balance of Suits and Infantry currently. To improve them, first step could be to increase their movement to 10" to compensate the loss of the JSJ mechanic. Currently I find the Crisis gameplay too restricted to Manta Strike mechanic. Drone would need their speed to be increased too so they can keep up with the suits. This could also be aplied to Stealth teams.


I am going to put myself in a minority here and say that what Crisis suits really need is
a. sensible weapon costs
b. A ton of stratagems to make them interesting
c. commanders who are better at buffing them than just outclassing them

FoxZz wrote:Another important fact is the lack of reliability of Suits during the shooting phase, which force us to spam Commanders. A good middle ground could be to make all the big suits (Riptides, Ghostkeel, XV88 Broadsides) but also flyers (Razorback, Sunshark and I would add Piranha) at Balistic Skill S3+. Secondly, XV25s and XV8s Shas'vre should also get a BS of 3+ but not the regular Shas'ui. Shas'vre "upgrade" should remain free, as it would be a squad level buff already payed when you buy the 3 mandatory suits that make a team. It would make Fusion Blaster on Stealth teams more rewarding for example and would allow more diverse builds for Crisis teams, while not making them too powerfull.


Some of the units in the index just need a redesign: the Riptide is near the top of that list. The total imbalance of defence to offence on the Riptide means that it is probably impossible to fix with just points changes/stratagems/whatever.

Broadsides on the other hand I actually feel have a good fit between what you would want the model to do and what it actually does on the table. The points are the issue there and the fix should be very easy.

FoxZz wrote:Tau also lack reliable mortal wound platform besides the Storm Surge nor does it have a good AA platform. Upgrading Skyray's Seeker missiles into Destroyer missiles and giving it a stock Velocity Tracker would turn it from never used crap into a very decent pick, while resolving those flaws. Drone Snipers is another unit that is never taken, they used to have a rail rifle which was a lot more powerfull, but it's another debate, what they really need is the sniper rule allowing them to deal a mortal wound on a 6+.


I feel like the Skyray needs something but I am not clear what. It is possible that just giving it access to vehicle upgrade systems and giving it back the VT would make it slightly more interesting again. I am OK with not everything being a strong pick for tournament armies but everything should be a strong or interesting pick for more general play.

FoxZz wrote:Maybe Devilfish, Hammerhead and Skyray should have their movement speed increased to 14" ? However, they should definitely get some vehicle support systems. They used to have access to stuff like weapons stabilizers, jamming equipment, couner-measures, night vision systems, etc. Maybe this king of support systems could come back with new rules.


I am 100% with you on this.

Vehicle support systems are much needed, the vehicles in the index are just rather unexciting and tend to underperform. Performance is trivially easy to fix with points changes but that does not always make units more interesting - it is essentially only a fix for tournament players.

FoxZz wrote:Lastly, many weapons stats should be updated, a standardisation is needed among the different weapons types with common special rules and coherent improvments : pulse (carabine, rifle, canon, etc), rail, ion, plasma, missile, fusion. A burst cannon for example is just a gun drone but more expansive, maybe its range should be increased ? Plasma Rifle needs to be improved, so is the Railgun, which would also requirre a Rail line redesign. Tau lack weapons doing consistently more than 1 dammage, it's always D3 or D6, which can have very unpredictable results, which is kind of a shame considering fluff says Tau have very reliable weapons ; as well as weapons in the 36" to 72" range. Some ideas :
- Pulse weapons could have -1 AP for every 6 roll to wound, similarly to Shuriken weapons
- Every wound from a pulse carabine fired by a firewarrior should inflict -1 to all the target rolls until the end of the turn to simulate the grenade launcher of the carabine
- Besides overcharged profile and area effects weapons, all Tau weapons should have fixed dammage : 1,2, 3, etc
- Strength of 12 for the rail gun ?
- ?


I am happy with most of the really basic weapons. Some of the more special and exotic weapons do need looking at - with railguns at the head of the queue.

The points values on weapons are another matter entirely. Only a few are appropriately pointed, most are really quite badly overcosted.

FoxZz wrote:Also, I really like the idea of a pool of Markerlight to spend as you see fit. It avoids markerlights "waste" and addss flexibility and tactics, rather than just being based on luck. Sometimes, you don't need an ignore cover perk, but you'd like a better BS, and sometimes, you just want to fire a seeker, etc. But because you have a limited amount of Markerlight available, you cannot choose everything at the same time, while allowing you to use what you really need, so it's quite balanced.
1 Markerlight could be re-rolls one and fire a seeker missile on platform BS
2 could be ignore cover, fire a destroyer missile, no maluses when advancing/moving
3 could be +1 BS (and would be combinable), no night malus
The rest would stay as it is currently, army wide bonus lasting for the whole turn.

Here was some ideas I got or that I gathered and liked on the Internet. Tell me what you think, if there is some things that you like, others that are over the top or underdone ?

PS : Sorry for the wall of text, I tried to give arguments and avoid wish listing.


Markerlights really need a get-out clause for the double-jeopardy of targets with negative penalties to hit. If that gets fixed then T'au armies that depend on them would be viable rather than hopelessly frustrating to play in the bad (but common) match-ups where opponents impose free army-wide penalties to hit. I largely do not care how it gets fixed so long as it gets fixed.

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 120

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1364 » Jan 11 2018 05:54

nic wrote:Markerlights really need a get-out clause for the double-jeopardy of targets with negative penalties to hit. If that gets fixed then T'au armies that depend on them would be viable rather than hopelessly frustrating to play in the bad (but common) match-ups where opponents impose free army-wide penalties to hit. I largely do not care how it gets fixed so long as it gets fixed.

The problem is markerlights themselves roll to hit. So pathfinders with -2 would hit on a 6+, so every 6 pathfinders you would get 1 markerlight.

User avatar
nic
Kroot'La
Kroot'La
Posts: 831

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1365 » Jan 11 2018 06:01

Temennigru wrote:
nic wrote:Markerlights really need a get-out clause for the double-jeopardy of targets with negative penalties to hit. If that gets fixed then T'au armies that depend on them would be viable rather than hopelessly frustrating to play in the bad (but common) match-ups where opponents impose free army-wide penalties to hit. I largely do not care how it gets fixed so long as it gets fixed.

The problem is markerlights themselves roll to hit. So pathfinders with -2 would hit on a 6+, so every 6 pathfinders you would get 1 markerlight.


I know, that is my exact point. T'au cannot mitigate their weapons trying to hit a target that has penalties to hit because the way we improve "to hit" also requires a roll to hit. Double jeopardy.

I am not that bothered how it gets fixed so long as it gets fixed. Otherwise everything with a BS4+ is basically dead weight against any of the increasingly common opposition that gets army-wide rules granting a penalty for anyone shooting them.

User avatar
CDR_Farsight
Shas'Saal
Posts: 206

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1366 » Jan 11 2018 06:18

nic wrote:
Temennigru wrote:
nic wrote:Markerlights really need a get-out clause for the double-jeopardy of targets with negative penalties to hit. If that gets fixed then T'au armies that depend on them would be viable rather than hopelessly frustrating to play in the bad (but common) match-ups where opponents impose free army-wide penalties to hit. I largely do not care how it gets fixed so long as it gets fixed.

The problem is markerlights themselves roll to hit. So pathfinders with -2 would hit on a 6+, so every 6 pathfinders you would get 1 markerlight.


I know, that is my exact point. T'au cannot mitigate their weapons trying to hit a target that has penalties to hit because the way we improve "to hit" also requires a roll to hit. Double jeopardy.

I am not that bothered how it gets fixed so long as it gets fixed. Otherwise everything with a BS4+ is basically dead weight against any of the increasingly common opposition that gets army-wide rules granting a penalty for anyone shooting them.


I mitigate it now by using a Droneport with a Cadre and Markerdrones, then I sit the marker drones within range of a Drone Controller to get a 1+ to hit. Now I can still get 2+ to hit on -1 targets for my markerlights and I can at least get the rest of my army back up to 4+ for at least the first turn pretty reliably. -2 penalties suck a bit more and should be way more limited than they currently are. All of that being said, that combo alone comes in at almost 250 points, so you can't use it in every scenario, but it helps if you know your friends are a-holes and are going to run negative modifiers on you to make up for the times you wiped them in 7th :P
To secure victory, the wise must adapt ~ Puretide

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 170

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1367 » Jan 11 2018 08:02

CDR_Farsight wrote:I mitigate it now by using a Droneport with a Cadre and Markerdrones, then I sit the marker drones within range of a Drone Controller to get a 1+ to hit. Now I can still get 2+ to hit on -1 targets for my markerlights and I can at least get the rest of my army back up to 4+ for at least the first turn pretty reliably. -2 penalties suck a bit more and should be way more limited than they currently are. All of that being said, that combo alone comes in at almost 250 points, so you can't use it in every scenario, but it helps if you know your friends are a-holes and are going to run negative modifiers on you to make up for the times you wiped them in 7th :P



Until your opponent easily shoots down the 4 drones, or even the entire port if he has the first turn =\

User avatar
CDR_Farsight
Shas'Saal
Posts: 206

Re: Upcoming T'au Codex

Post#1368 » Jan 11 2018 09:10

Haechi wrote:
CDR_Farsight wrote:I mitigate it now by using a Droneport with a Cadre and Markerdrones, then I sit the marker drones within range of a Drone Controller to get a 1+ to hit. Now I can still get 2+ to hit on -1 targets for my markerlights and I can at least get the rest of my army back up to 4+ for at least the first turn pretty reliably. -2 penalties suck a bit more and should be way more limited than they currently are. All of that being said, that combo alone comes in at almost 250 points, so you can't use it in every scenario, but it helps if you know your friends are a-holes and are going to run negative modifiers on you to make up for the times you wiped them in 7th :P



Until your opponent easily shoots down the 4 drones, or even the entire port if he has the first turn =\


It aint perfect lol...but nothing is for Tau in 8th
To secure victory, the wise must adapt ~ Puretide

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Nymphomanius and 8 guests