Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
User avatar
namegiver
Shas
Posts: 61

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#109 » Dec 14 2017 01:46

CDR_Farsight wrote:Also, for those of you thinking the markerlight stratagem is a step in the right direction, please repeat after me:

A primary Tau mechanic should not need a stratagem to be viable


Both things can be true, and are imo. Until we get a codex, the CA17 updates are a step in the right direction and we'll be getting a codex real-soon-now. Patience, grasshopper -- you don't want to get me started telling tales of YEARS before codex releases like we had back in the day :biggrin:

This Fibonacci joke is as bad as the last two you heard combined.
namegiver's Shi'ar Sept Project Log

User avatar
CDR_Farsight
Shas'Saal
Posts: 266

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#110 » Dec 14 2017 02:04

namegiver wrote:
CDR_Farsight wrote:Also, for those of you thinking the markerlight stratagem is a step in the right direction, please repeat after me:

A primary Tau mechanic should not need a stratagem to be viable


Both things can be true, and are imo. Until we get a codex, the CA17 updates are a step in the right direction and we'll be getting a codex real-soon-now. Patience, grasshopper -- you don't want to get me started telling tales of YEARS before codex releases like we had back in the day :biggrin:


"Grasshopper?"..."Back in the day?"...please, I've been playing since 1992 and bought my first models in the rogue trader era. :P

Now back to Tau....Tau point values are now and have always been based on their ability to get better via markerlights. It is a PRIMARY MECHANIC of the tau army. CPs are designed to do quirky fun things. The two are mutually exclusive. We have already paid the price for markerlights in our base points costs for all of our models, but what markerlights provide are nowhere near the points we have paid for them, and expending precious CP for a random enhancement does not fix that.
To secure victory, the wise must adapt ~ Puretide

User avatar
namegiver
Shas
Posts: 61

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#111 » Dec 14 2017 02:35

CDR_Farsight wrote:"Grasshopper?"..."Back in the day?"...please, I've been playing since 1992 and bought my first models in the rogue trader era. :P


LOL, ok fellow longbeard... no disrespect intended. Just trying to keep things in perspective ;-)

This Fibonacci joke is as bad as the last two you heard combined.
namegiver's Shi'ar Sept Project Log

User avatar
Torch
Shas'Saal
Posts: 83

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#112 » Dec 14 2017 03:38

Now that I think of it, is there any reason that markelights should be a primary mechanic for the army? Why can't it be a secondary boost?

Hear me out guys.
Right now, markerlights somehow make infantry aim better, which doesn't seem right to me. From what I remember of the fluff, seeker missiles are designed to be heavy weapons support for the troops at all times. Basically, you aim the merkerlight at a tank and then blow it up with seekers which means you don't need fusion crisis to move over to kill it.

So here's an idea:

1 markerlight hit: allows models to fire equipped seeker missiles at their ballistic skill at this unit
2 markerlight hits: Smart missile systems gain +1 to hit rolls at this unit
3 markerlight hits: Seeker missiles automatically hit this unit

Now, the only issue is that seeker missiles only do mortal wounds, I would change them to the following:
Seeker missile: heavy 1; S9; AP -4; 2D6 damage but pick the highest; one time use
(I would also say that all seeker missiles on a skyray may be fired in one turn because they're all different weapons right?)

So with that in mind a seeker missile with 3 markerlight hits has a 2/3 chance of doing on average 4 damage against tanks. A skyray could therefore do 16 damage (on average) in one turn if firing all its missiles, but would be mostly useless for the rest of the game.

This now leaves room to buff crisis suits and broadsides to BS 3+, AND 3 markerlight hits are not difficult to achieve. This also means that we are no longer completely reliant on suits to kill tanks.

I realize this may never happen now, but what are your thoughts?

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 390

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#113 » Dec 14 2017 03:53

I may be the voice of dissent here, but I have no issues with markerlights or the current markerlights table.

In the games I have played, I have pretty easily been able to tag priority targets with 3-5 hits, while still tagging secondary targets with 1 hit each. This is usually enough coverage for me to surgically remove targets from the board and win games. And this was all before the stratagem came out.

User avatar
namegiver
Shas
Posts: 61

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#114 » Dec 14 2017 05:24

QimRas wrote:I may be the voice of dissent here, but I have no issues with markerlights or the current markerlights table.

In the games I have played, I have pretty easily been able to tag priority targets with 3-5 hits, while still tagging secondary targets with 1 hit each. This is usually enough coverage for me to surgically remove targets from the board and win games. And this was all before the stratagem came out.


I agree completely. My current list now feels markerlight heavy, so I'm experimenting with removing some marker drones and adding in a couple of Firesight Marksmen in their place. Combined with a Fireblade, a unit of markerlight Pathfinders, some scattered in Firewarior squads and Uplinked Markerlights I don't think I'll miss 'em.

This Fibonacci joke is as bad as the last two you heard combined.
namegiver's Shi'ar Sept Project Log

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 390

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#115 » Dec 14 2017 05:59

namegiver wrote:
I agree completely. My current list now feels markerlight heavy, so I'm experimenting with removing some marker drones and adding in a couple of Firesight Marksmen in their place. Combined with a Fireblade, a unit of markerlight Pathfinders, some scattered in Firewarior squads and Uplinked Markerlights I don't think I'll miss 'em.


Pathfinders have become special weapons support in most of my lists, with Fireblades and Firesight Marksman being my primary marker sources. I don't think I have ever used a marker drone.

User avatar
namegiver
Shas
Posts: 61

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#116 » Dec 14 2017 09:16

QimRas wrote:Pathfinders have become special weapons support in most of my lists, with Fireblades and Firesight Marksman being my primary marker sources. I don't think I have ever used a marker drone.


I have a couple with my Stealth Suit unit and I tuck two in with my Crisis Suit unit just in case they have to drop in somewhere other than by the Stealth's Homing Beacon. I'm also running an independent unit of Marker Drones more as a fire magnet than anything... opponents really like killing Marker Drones ;-)

I see you wrote Fire Blades, plural. How many do you run at 2k?

This Fibonacci joke is as bad as the last two you heard combined.
namegiver's Shi'ar Sept Project Log

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 390

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#117 » Dec 14 2017 11:52

namegiver wrote:
QimRas wrote:Pathfinders have become special weapons support in most of my lists, with Fireblades and Firesight Marksman being my primary marker sources. I don't think I have ever used a marker drone.


I have a couple with my Stealth Suit unit and I tuck two in with my Crisis Suit unit just in case they have to drop in somewhere other than by the Stealth's Homing Beacon. I'm also running an independent unit of Marker Drones more as a fire magnet than anything... opponents really like killing Marker Drones ;-)

I see you wrote Fire Blades, plural. How many do you run at 2k?


I only play Narrative and Open Play games, not Matched Play, so no points. But I will usually have 1-2 Fireblades in each detachment, and I will usually run two Vanguard Marker detachments, at least one Pathfinder Outrider detachment, and one or two Fire Warrior Battalion detachments at 100 PL, which is roughly equivalent to 2k points. So maybe... 4-7ish? I am likely going to scale it back now, though.

User avatar
namegiver
Shas
Posts: 61

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#118 » Dec 15 2017 12:21

QimRas wrote:I only play Narrative and Open Play games, not Matched Play, so no points. But I will usually have 1-2 Fireblades in each detachment, and I will usually run two Vanguard Marker detachments, at least one Pathfinder Outrider detachment, and one or two Fire Warrior Battalion detachments at 100 PL, which is roughly equivalent to 2k points. So maybe... 4-7ish? I am likely going to scale it back now, though.


Interesting. I've just been running one (mostly because I currently have only one modeled, I guess), who usually hangs out with a couple of Firewarrior squads and gun drones. You've given me something to think on.

This Fibonacci joke is as bad as the last two you heard combined.
namegiver's Shi'ar Sept Project Log

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 390

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#119 » Dec 15 2017 12:24

namegiver wrote:
QimRas wrote:I only play Narrative and Open Play games, not Matched Play, so no points. But I will usually have 1-2 Fireblades in each detachment, and I will usually run two Vanguard Marker detachments, at least one Pathfinder Outrider detachment, and one or two Fire Warrior Battalion detachments at 100 PL, which is roughly equivalent to 2k points. So maybe... 4-7ish? I am likely going to scale it back now, though.


Interesting. I've just been running one (mostly because I currently have only one modeled, I guess), who usually hangs out with a couple of Firewarrior squads and gun drones. You've given me something to think on.


Ill PM you with a barebones list I use. We are probably derailing this thread.

User avatar
Beerson
Shas'Saal
Posts: 225

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#120 » Dec 15 2017 05:02

Crisis suits and broadsides with BS3+ is something that I thing should really be in codex as they are elites/"snipers" and from fluff view they are piloted by elite warriors and have lots of electronics to help the pilot shoot, especially the static, stable broadsides with their precise railguns (if IRL railgun physics apply)
Also marker drones with BS4+ (their only use is hitting markers and with 5+ they are far from viable) and don't tell me they shouldn't because pathfinders hit on 4+, pathfinders have other options/ uses and are cheaper

And yeah I agree that requiring heavy points investment without returns or a constant use of stratagem for our primary mechanic is just bad job on GW's part.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3251

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#121 » Dec 15 2017 05:12

Beerson wrote:Crisis suits and broadsides with BS3+ is something that I thing should really be in codex as they are elites/"snipers" and from fluff view they are piloted by elite warriors and have lots of electronics to help the pilot shoot, especially the static, stable broadsides with their precise railguns (if IRL railgun physics apply)

I'd love that change but I just can't see it happening. Every Tau update, and every time people say "It'd be nice to have BS3+ battlesuits this time!" (back then it was BS4, but anyway) and it never happens. I think BS4+ is just one of the design features we need to live with, like our lack of close-combat options.

User avatar
Jhul'vol
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 56

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#122 » Dec 15 2017 05:15

I would love to have our suits hit on BS3+, not sure what it would do with the point cost though.
I'm pretty sure we will get taxed by the opportunity to get a 2+.

For the marker drones I feel the 5+ is fine. With a drone controller you're back to 4+ and you're free to move and shoot.
Considering you also have +1" movement, +1T and a better save, combined with ignoring heavy I think their points are pretty fair.

User avatar
Bloodknife92
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 647

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#123 » Dec 15 2017 05:17

I too kinda feel like our Markerlights are a huge tax we have to pay just to be able to shoot at one single unit, maybe two unit as good as every other army can without a tax. I take 10 Pathfinders and a Fireblade in every ay I write, and the Pathfinders do feel like a bit of a tax. If Makrerlights always hit on 3+ and were immune to negatives, then I feel it may be worth taking a full unit of Pathfinders. The Pathfinders aren't even the main problem. The main problem I have is paying crazy high points costs for units that can't hit stuff.... I pay just under 100 points per model for Fusion/Shield Crisis that hit on 4+, and yet Space Marines get a Redemptor Dread, which has 4 ranged weapons AND is good in melee combat, for just over 200 points? The Skitarii get a crawling tank that ignores the penalty for moving and shooting heavy weapons, AND gets a small army worth of weapons that hit all our Fly units on 2+ for close to 150 points? I carry a salt shaker around with me all the time now, so when people give me flakk about the T'au, I just pour some salt on them to help them understand how I feel :D

User avatar
Orion7
Shas'Saal
Posts: 97

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#124 » Dec 15 2017 05:29

I'd like to see something like the old electro warfare suite as something that we can do in the psychic phase. Essentially using technology to hack enemy units and cause shenanigans rather than magical warp powers.

Or I mean, they could always just give us the fluff friendly psychic-bear-in-a-bubble alien that sometimes appears in stories


Limitations? You mean you don't want Fido the kroot hound as a character?

User avatar
Bloodknife92
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 647

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#125 » Dec 15 2017 07:14

Orion7 wrote:I'd like to see something like the old electro warfare suite as something that we can do in the psychic phase. Essentially using technology to hack enemy units and cause shenanigans rather than magical warp powers.

Or I mean, they could always just give us the fluff friendly psychic-bear-in-a-bubble alien that sometimes appears in stories

Funny you say that. In 7th, Ghostkeels had pretty much that! They could, once per game, force an enemy unit that was shooting at them, to suffer the Gets Hot! Special Rule.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 524
Contact:

Re: Let's Contact GW! (Round 3)

Post#126 » Dec 15 2017 07:40

Bloodknife92 wrote:
Orion7 wrote:I'd like to see something like the old electro warfare suite as something that we can do in the psychic phase. Essentially using technology to hack enemy units and cause shenanigans rather than magical warp powers.

Or I mean, they could always just give us the fluff friendly psychic-bear-in-a-bubble alien that sometimes appears in stories

Funny you say that. In 7th, Ghostkeels had pretty much that! They could, once per game, force an enemy unit that was shooting at them, to suffer the Gets Hot! Special Rule.


I think you're confusing that with a relic that caused an enemy unit to have get hot guns EVERY turn within 12" the keels 1use only ability made whatever shot at him need 6's for that turn

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nix0n, Osocruel and 6 guests