An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
Shas'o Shortsight
Shas
Posts: 32

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#37 » Jan 14 2018 08:03

I think Fly and the higher toughness are mostly a good compensation for the loose of JSJ. At least in the Survival part of our 18" weapons. But there are two points where I feel it's a major loose.

1. JSJ wasn't just a "can't touch this" move. It allowed to redeploy for a target change, prepare synergies (f.e. for the greater good) and to capture objectives while participating in the fight. It was the fluent warfare always depicted in background stories. Now our suits are just about getting in the enemies face and keep blasting.

2. Plasma rifles. While our other weapons are able to operate at maximum range, plasma rifles need to be in 12" to be efficient. This means, after dropping they have a harder time to change targets. With JSJ you could redeploy (see 1.), now you have to advance which is slower and needs a hard point to keep shooting with -1 to hit.
Additional, getting within 12" to their target means getting much closer to pretty much anything. JSJ didn't allow to escape the target, but at least you weren't in the middle of the enemy army.
For me, being inferior an inferior version of imperial plasma didn't kill plasma rifles. Loosing JSJ did it.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3282

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#38 » Jan 14 2018 08:36

Shas'o Shortsight wrote:2. Plasma rifles. While our other weapons are able to operate at maximum range, plasma rifles need to be in 12" to be efficient. This means, after dropping they have a harder time to change targets. With JSJ you could redeploy (see 1.), now you have to advance which is slower and needs a hard point to keep shooting with -1 to hit.
Additional, getting within 12" to their target means getting much closer to pretty much anything. JSJ didn't allow to escape the target, but at least you weren't in the middle of the enemy army.
For me, being inferior an inferior version of imperial plasma didn't kill plasma rifles. Loosing JSJ did it.

With Plasma Rifles and a little luck, you could consistently end ~18" away from your shooting target, safe enough from assaults. Now that's just not possible with Plasma Rifles. Just another reason to use the 18" guns in our arsenal I guess.

User avatar
AnonAmbientLight
Shas'Saal
Posts: 894

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#39 » Jan 16 2018 12:22

To preface, we cannot have a conversation if you're not going to reply properly, or if you're going to change your mind on what was actually said.

You said, specifically, and I'm quoting here:

Arka0415 wrote:I agree. What matters is that it was nearly a faction-defining trait, and was removed without compensating our battlesuits for the loss of durability and range.


As I pointed it, this is verifiably false. Did we, or did we not see changes to these suits in 8th, yes or no? You are in another thread about stealth suits praising their usage and durability. So it seems you have conflicting views about your own opinion.

Arka0415 wrote:I was voicing points I thought were relevant, probably didn't warrant this level of response. I apologize, but if you have an issue with my discourse I welcome the discussion, but please bring it up in PM.


Go back and read what your original response was to me. You used straman arguments and dismissive hand waving and thought that would be enough, especially after your above statement. You didn't even bother to reply to the points listed.

This is what discussion topics are for. You don't get to come in and say, "This is my opinion. No one else can ever challenge it openly on a discussion forum." That's completely absurd. You also don't get to make such a sweeping generalization and expect not to have to defend it.

I would like to point out that it is disrespectful to the topic and the poster to ignore counter points made, and then expect the person you're talking with to "move it to PM". Then why the hell are we in a forum??


Arka0415 wrote:Gaining one point in toughness is doubly-positive for XV8s, not only are we harder to wound, but the wounding table itself changed, meaning that only a few weapons wound us on 2+ (Railguns, Vindicator cannons, etc.), when in previous editions many weapons (Lascannons, Lances, etc.) not only wounded our XV8s on 2+, but also caused Instant Death effects.

True, extra wounds are always welcome, but it's somewhat of a zero-sum buff. The weapons that used to delete all of our wounds via Instand Death (again, Lascannons etc.) still have a high chance of removing all of our wounds with a single chance. It's not exactly a +50% durability increase as the characteristic increase implies.


I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You said that +1T is good, and I agree. You are harder to wound. Then you turn around and say that +1W is meaningless and write it off citing multi-wound weapons. That is a strawman argument. Which is why I pointed out that in order to be consistent, you would have to agree that +1T doesn't help much either because of how the new system works...

Arka0415 wrote:True, XV8s did get a number of benefits in 8th Edition that they didn't previously have. And that's great! The 8" movement is a nice benefit. However, these benefits (at least in my opinion) don't restore the incredible durability and tactical versatility that JSJ offered.


As mentioned, you don't get to come in, say your opinion is law, and then write off everyone else's that doesn't mesh with your own train of thought. Keep in mind at this point you have gone from saying that our battlesuits have gotten no compensation, to a lack of compensation, and now you're just saying "your opinion".

Notice that you haven't yet replied to my point of what you do when JSJ fails or isn't an option based on positioning. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If T'au get back normal JSJ, then they would undoubtedly lose some of their buffs I have mentioned.


Arka0415 wrote:This was a later development though. Eldar getting JSJ was another ability that started with Tau and was slowly spread to other armies, like non-vehicles firing multiple weapons and split-firing (the benefits of the old Multi-Tracker and Target Lock, respectively). Maybe the Eldar gaining JSJ was what caused people to realize it was too powerful?


Eldar got JSJ back in 5th IIRC. Is your argument only the "true masters" of JSJ have right to claim it? You're also proving my point rather well here. If Eldar got their JSJ taking away to little to no compensation, why do you think that GW took it away from T'au? I think you've answered your own question.
Sky IS Falling, T'au WILL Suck, Sell Me Your Models

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 439

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#40 » Jan 16 2018 01:19

Shas'o Shortsight wrote:I think Fly and the higher toughness are mostly a good compensation for the loose of JSJ. At least in the Survival part of our 18" weapons. But there are two points where I feel it's a major loose.

1. JSJ wasn't just a "can't touch this" move. It allowed to redeploy for a target change, prepare synergies (f.e. for the greater good) and to capture objectives while participating in the fight. It was the fluent warfare always depicted in background stories. Now our suits are just about getting in the enemies face and keep blasting.

2. Plasma rifles. While our other weapons are able to operate at maximum range, plasma rifles need to be in 12" to be efficient. This means, after dropping they have a harder time to change targets. With JSJ you could redeploy (see 1.), now you have to advance which is slower and needs a hard point to keep shooting with -1 to hit.
Additional, getting within 12" to their target means getting much closer to pretty much anything. JSJ didn't allow to escape the target, but at least you weren't in the middle of the enemy army.
For me, being inferior an inferior version of imperial plasma didn't kill plasma rifles. Loosing JSJ did it.

1- I wouldn't call fly compensation. Now people can just spam AA guns and get +1 to hit against 99% of our army.
2- Plasma rifles are crap at maximum range. Most of our army hits on a 4+ and it only deals 1 damage, so you have a ~25% chance of killing a single tactical marine with it. Yay.
You would be better off taking a cyclic ion blaster. Especially since you are spending 40-100 points on the platform, you need to maximize its value. By taking plasma rifle, you are buying a ferrari and giving it a 20HP engine.

User avatar
Torch
Shas'Saal
Posts: 83

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#41 » Jan 16 2018 01:33

I'll just throw in my two cents:

8th edition is way different from 3rd-7th. The core mechanics are different and so are their effects on particular units. It's therefore basically impossible to reliably compare units across them.

-Retreating from close combat is a huge change that really helps Tau. Our suits are no longer required to stay in a melee and die. They can run away AND shoot on top of that.

-Another point, lascannons and meltas are less reliable at killing suits now than before. Sure they could roll 3 damage, but they might roll 1 or 2. Previously, a lascannon or melta would wound suits on 2+ and instantly kill them ignoring armor. Our suits being at T5 and 3 wounds means a lascannon wounds on 3+ and has a 1/3 chance of failing to kill it on top of that. And with the new AP system, we get 6+ saves against lascannons. Not to mention how drones can mitigate that further.

As you can see, not everything is directly translatable. Just look at stealthsuits, they're actually really good. So long as GW tweaks points and maybe certain stats (such as ballistic skill I hope), then everything will be fine. And honestly, GW has made a decision on the flow of the game and JSJ was deliberately cut out to meet that flow.

Last point: I personally didn't like JSJ back when I started playing. It wasn't tactical, it was just a free move out of sequence, it felt cheesy and it was not fun to play against. The thing is once you start ignoring core aspects of the game with zero penalty (such as turn sequence: move THEN shoot) then it's no longer tactical at all. Being forced to play by the same rules as everyone else is where tactics come into play.

Temennigru wrote:1- I wouldn't call fly compensation. Now people can just spam AA guns and get +1 to hit against 99% of our army.
2- Plasma rifles are crap at maximum range. Most of our army hits on a 4+ and it only deals 1 damage, so you have a ~25% chance of killing a single tactical marine with it. Yay.
You would be better off taking a cyclic ion blaster. Especially since you are spending 40-100 points on the platform, you need to maximize its value. By taking plasma rifle, you are buying a ferrari and giving it a 20HP engine.


Considering that AA guns are typically regarded as near useless, there won't be many players using them. Still, I would have preferred an "aircraft" keyword for flyers so that AA guns could target them specifically.

I'm just going to throw this out there: plasma rifles would be amazing with Rapid Fire 2... It would make up for the lack of strength and damage compared to imperial versions. Plus they'd be different.

Shas'o Shortsight
Shas
Posts: 32

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#42 » Jan 16 2018 01:57

Temennigru wrote:[
1- I wouldn't call fly compensation. Now people can just spam AA guns and get +1 to hit against 99% of our army.
2- Plasma rifles are crap at maximum range. Most of our army hits on a 4+ and it only deals 1 damage, so you have a ~25% chance of killing a single tactical marine with it. Yay.
You would be better off taking a cyclic ion blaster. Especially since you are spending 40-100 points on the platform, you need to maximize its value. By taking plasma rifle, you are buying a ferrari and giving it a 20HP engine.

1. Jetpacks granted the ability to move over models and to, kind of, escape melee. A working against our suits doesn't stop Fly from granting us both abilities. So, even if it isn't flawless, it is a compensation.
2. That's why I wrote that plasma rifles need to be in 12" to be worthwhile and this does not work without JSJ.

Edit: I would like them to be 18" assault2, maybe going to S7.

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 439

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#43 » Jan 16 2018 02:22

Torch wrote:
Considering that AA guns are typically regarded as near useless, there won't be many players using them. Still, I would have preferred an "aircraft" keyword for flyers so that AA guns could target them specifically.

I'm just going to throw this out there: plasma rifles would be amazing with Rapid Fire 2... It would make up for the lack of strength and damage compared to imperial versions. Plus they'd be different.

Whenever I play with my friends, they spam AA. It might be useless against everything else, but they are hard-counters to the tau.
I'd be OK with anything they give plasma rifles. They desperately need a buff.

Also, I don't know if I've said this before, but I wouldn't mind if they brought back JSJ as a support system. Vectored retrothrusters would be great for this.

User avatar
shasocastris
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 1038
Contact:

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#44 » Jan 16 2018 09:35

As a point of clarification, the Eldar jetbikes DID have the 6" assault move before the Tau did. It's been a part of them since their 3rd ed codex. No one used it because jetbikes weren't used as often until 5th/6th ed.

However, the point still stands that it was the Tau that made the mechanic their own and yes, a whole army was designed around key units being able to do this. It is an absolute loss for a variety reasons, some I'll reiterate, some I'll add.

Melee: Many people I played against in 5-7th complained about how JSJ was too powerful. Or how it made the Tau unplayable. You know what was unfun for Tau? Getting unconditionally stomped in melee. And also just having nothing to do in the assault phase. It made the Tau into a unique army that was both frustrating to play against and also difficult to play with. It was never "cheesy." It required a different sort of skill to fight against than yet another space marine army.

Shooting: One thing that is being overlooked is that JSJ was always crucial to our army surviving the enemy shooting phase. As someone whose played since we came out, we've never been able to outshoot a dedicated Guard, Space Marine, or Eldar list. Their platforms were always more efficient, and only got worse with the invention of vendettas, centurions and scatbikes. On the other hand, we were always able to get the hell out of dodge. We were able to not get shot off the board by the opposing force. I would LOVE to have this against Ad Mech.

And you're right, it was frustrating to play against. I would switch armies with my opponent's on occasion to see what the other side was like. It meant I had to use things like infiltrate, deep strike and outflank. It forced my opponent's to be tactical. One can argue that it should be removed. The counter argument is that our opponent's should expand their strategic abilities.

So, yes, we got certain bonuses in survivability beyond 7th. However, we lost our main method of staying alive, which was not getting shot/charged in the first place. It was a great deal of fun to play with and I greatly miss it.

Cheers!

User avatar
Torch
Shas'Saal
Posts: 83

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#45 » Jan 17 2018 02:59

That's fair enough. But, if we look at how GW is designing the game, JSJ is not coming back (Also, Guard lost platoons so we aren't the only ones dealing with change). Instead, though, our units will need to be tougher and shootier to make up for it. Considering that our suits got more wounds and better toughness means that GW has recognized this as well.

Though, to be clear, I have no doubt that JSJ will become a stratagem, it just won't be free. So, those tactics you liked are not entirely gone. They're just limited.

Also, we can tie up heavy weapons and tanks in CC to prevent them from shooting at all. Which has a similar effect as JSJ, except we're being very aggressive (which is exactly what GW wants). I've run Piranhas into tanks plenty of times, and they aren't even suits. Heck, you can run a devilfish or hammerhead into a tank with little consequence.

Temennigru wrote:
Torch wrote:
Considering that AA guns are typically regarded as near useless, there won't be many players using them. Still, I would have preferred an "aircraft" keyword for flyers so that AA guns could target them specifically.

I'm just going to throw this out there: plasma rifles would be amazing with Rapid Fire 2... It would make up for the lack of strength and damage compared to imperial versions. Plus they'd be different.

Whenever I play with my friends, they spam AA. It might be useless against everything else, but they are hard-counters to the tau.
I'd be OK with anything they give plasma rifles. They desperately need a buff.

Also, I don't know if I've said this before, but I wouldn't mind if they brought back JSJ as a support system. Vectored retrothrusters would be great for this.


If you're friends are bringing AA just to fight you, then I suggest going all infantry just to mess with them. Those AA guns won't hurt anything. Granted, you'll be missing anti armor, but rail rifles do okay in a pinch and you can just use kroot hounds to lock down their tanks until the end of the game. Maybe throw in some Krootoxen as well for some extra punch (pun not intended). Then kill off infantry with massed strike teams and fireblades. You could easily fit 200+ models in 2000 pts and have 4+ battalions, or a brigade if you take shapers.
That is assuming you have that many models... :P

Anyway, I completely agree that AA gun targeting is decidedly unfair against Tau and should be tweaked to target actual flyers.

User avatar
GND
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 147

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#46 » Jan 17 2018 04:19

I originally left this thread because there are obviously people that are very passionate about JSJ without any interest in changing their opinion and I didn't feel like having my knowledge of the English language insulted and my points ignored. But things seem to have calmed down, so I'll just throw out some random opinions.

shasocastris wrote:You know what was unfun for Tau? Getting unconditionally stomped in melee. And also just having nothing to do in the assault phase.


That was indeed unfun. It is also absolutely not the case in 8th edition. No sweeping advances, no locking in CC and higher durability. We can survive a charge just fine. And we have something to do in the Charge phase now - charge. Often overlooked, but useful nonetheless.

shasocastris wrote:One can argue that it should be removed. The counter argument is that our opponent's should expand their strategic abilities.


That argument makes sense from a (good) player perspective. But from GWs perspective, a company that sells a game and wants its players to have fun, it doesn't hold water.


Torch has made very good points points about edition change and non-transferability of mechanics. I personally miss JSJ despite everything it did. But I didn't complain when it got removed and I doubt we will see it again in the same form. Just another victim of edition change.

Temennigru wrote:Whenever I play with my friends, they spam AA. It might be useless against everything else, but they are hard-counters to the tau.


I have a couple of friend who were thinking the same thing and started spamming AA guns (especially since I sometimes bring lists that are 100% FLY). Turns out AA guns are rather bad. Even with the +1 to hit, their damage output is rather sub optimal. It's hardly a hard-counter to Tau. If you are having trouble against lists like that, start a thread about it Tactica so we don't derail this thread.

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 342

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#47 » Jan 17 2018 07:08

Temennigru wrote:
AnonAmbientLight wrote:To be clear, the list I made was a counter to your post that said "We got no compensation." When someone says, "I have no compensation" it means they have gotten nothing in return.

So the goalposts are presumably moved to a "lack" of compensation, but you explain it in literally the worst cherry picked way.

bla bla bla...

And last point on this, it will undoubtedly be a stratagem. So you'll still be able to do it when you need it.

You're not usually pessimistic on topics like these or maybe I have not been paying attention.


You can't really say that +1 T and +1 wound is better because the entire damage system was changed. If you got hit by a melta in 7e you got 1 wound. Now you get 4 on average. The +T and +W was supposed to compensate for the DAMAGE INCREASE IN WEAPONS (even though it effectively REDUCES our durability in relation to 7e, when we could survive multiple high powered shots, since we were not vehicles).


I think we shouldn’t talk down the +1T and +1W so much. Yes a Melta is going to hurt, but the +1T means it's a 3+ to wound (vs 2+ in 7th) so it's less likely to wound. It also has a 1/3 chance of NOT killing a suit, whereas in 7th it ALWAYS killed to suit due to instant death. And finally we can fob it off onto a drone and so usually lose no wounds. And that's against a Melta. Against most common weapons in the game we're now wounded on 5s vs 4s. Taken as a whole, we are now FAR more survivable an army than we ever were in 7th, even with JSJ

User avatar
Shas'O R'Kai
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 140

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#48 » Jan 17 2018 09:51

AnonAmbientLight wrote:To preface, we cannot have a conversation if you're not going to reply properly, or if you're going to change your mind on what was actually said.

You said, specifically, and I'm quoting here:

Arka0415 wrote:I agree. What matters is that it was nearly a faction-defining trait, and was removed without compensating our battlesuits for the loss of durability and range.


As I pointed it, this is verifiably false. Did we, or did we not see changes to these suits in 8th, yes or no? You are in another thread about stealth suits praising their usage and durability. So it seems you have conflicting views about your own opinion.


I think what Arka was getting at was that JSJ gave us durability in the form of not being shot at via positioning. Sure he was praising stealthsuits, but that's because that unit is much more durable now. The XV chassis though, not so much. We had mobility severely reduced with the removal of JSJ and T5 3W was an adjustment to the new mechanics of the game, not a direct durability increase.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:I was voicing points I thought were relevant, probably didn't warrant this level of response. I apologize, but if you have an issue with my discourse I welcome the discussion, but please bring it up in PM.


Go back and read what your original response was to me. You used straman arguments and dismissive hand waving and thought that would be enough, especially after your above statement. You didn't even bother to reply to the points listed.

This is what discussion topics are for. You don't get to come in and say, "This is my opinion. No one else can ever challenge it openly on a discussion forum." That's completely absurd. You also don't get to make such a sweeping generalization and expect not to have to defend it.

I would like to point out that it is disrespectful to the topic and the poster to ignore counter points made, and then expect the person you're talking with to "move it to PM". Then why the hell are we in a forum??


I don't think Arka ever said anything remotely resembling "This is my opinion. No one else can ever challenge it openly on a discussion forum.". Your tone and language seems to me pretty hostile, and I think Arka was right to try to move it PM's to try and settle the dispute/debate with no further hostile replies. This kind of tone is not conducive to meaningful discussion. Keep it civil and calm.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:Gaining one point in toughness is doubly-positive for XV8s, not only are we harder to wound, but the wounding table itself changed, meaning that only a few weapons wound us on 2+ (Railguns, Vindicator cannons, etc.), when in previous editions many weapons (Lascannons, Lances, etc.) not only wounded our XV8s on 2+, but also caused Instant Death effects.

True, extra wounds are always welcome, but it's somewhat of a zero-sum buff. The weapons that used to delete all of our wounds via Instand Death (again, Lascannons etc.) still have a high chance of removing all of our wounds with a single chance. It's not exactly a +50% durability increase as the characteristic increase implies.


I was pointing out your hypocrisy. You said that +1T is good, and I agree. You are harder to wound. Then you turn around and say that +1W is meaningless and write it off citing multi-wound weapons. That is a strawman argument. Which is why I pointed out that in order to be consistent, you would have to agree that +1T doesn't help much either because of how the new system works...


The extra toughness is great. It helped define the suits as more than just infantry, mostly by making S4 now 5+ to wound. The mechanics made +1T from 4 to 5 a big deal, however we've ended up paying for it in points cost. The wounds aren't nearly as big a contributor. Sure it helps vs small arms fire, but when you consider that ultimately terminators (who got a similar treatment) are no more durable than they were previously, it alludes to the +1W not being a direct increase in durability but more of a scaling to keep up with the mechanics. I also don't believe Arka ever wrote it off. His point was the same as mine, that yes its a buff, but the damage was raised to coincide with it. Lascannons etc have a harder time killing a suit, but that's more due to the +1T than the wound.


AnonAmbientLight wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:True, XV8s did get a number of benefits in 8th Edition that they didn't previously have. And that's great! The 8" movement is a nice benefit. However, these benefits (at least in my opinion) don't restore the incredible durability and tactical versatility that JSJ offered.


As mentioned, you don't get to come in, say your opinion is law, and then write off everyone else's that doesn't mesh with your own train of thought. Keep in mind at this point you have gone from saying that our battlesuits have gotten no compensation, to a lack of compensation, and now you're just saying "your opinion".

Notice that you haven't yet replied to my point of what you do when JSJ fails or isn't an option based on positioning. You can't have your cake and eat it too. If T'au get back normal JSJ, then they would undoubtedly lose some of their buffs I have mentioned.


Again, at no point was it stated that anybody's opinion was law. I think you're taking what was said far too literally. What I think Arka might have been getting at is that there's no net compensation. We got a massive cost increase, a slight relative durability buff, saviour protocols, and a huge mobility/flexibility decrease. Even if this isn't the case, picking on someone's semantics without actually considering the intention seems a bit in bad taste. Maybe saying there's NO compensation was a bit of a sweeping statement, but the intention there was that we're at a net loss overall in return for a big price hike.

If JSJ came back (it almost definitely won't so this is all probably moot), then we'd lose saviour protocols. That was the mechanic to try and give us the durability we lost with JSJ. However, what it didn't give us was the tactical flexibility we had. JSJ was arguably much better and more fun than Saviour Protocols.



AnonAmbientLight wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:This was a later development though. Eldar getting JSJ was another ability that started with Tau and was slowly spread to other armies, like non-vehicles firing multiple weapons and split-firing (the benefits of the old Multi-Tracker and Target Lock, respectively). Maybe the Eldar gaining JSJ was what caused people to realize it was too powerful?


Eldar got JSJ back in 5th IIRC. Is your argument only the "true masters" of JSJ have right to claim it? You're also proving my point rather well here. If Eldar got their JSJ taking away to little to no compensation, why do you think that GW took it away from T'au? I think you've answered your own question.


I think the comparison between Eldar and Tau JSJ is maybe a bit misleading. JSJ for the Eldar was a nice little extra bonus. For us, it was central to how we played. Of course it wasn't our "right to claim it", but it was integral to our entire playstyle and flavour. Taking it away from the Eldar doesn't really hurt them. Taking it from us, hurt a lot of what made us fun and appealing.

You're obviously passionate about this which I really admire, but keeping it civil is much more likely to result in a progressive debate.

R'Kai
Playing with a short reach since 2007 :crafty:

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3282

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#49 » Jan 17 2018 10:39

I was trying to keep my contributions short and to the point- since it seems like you really want me to reply line-by-line I will do so, however, from here on out I'm going to be brief. It's important to include all voices in the discussion, not just yours and mine.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:To preface, we cannot have a conversation if you're not going to reply properly, or if you're going to change your mind on what was actually said.

...

Did we, or did we not see changes to these suits in 8th, yes or no? You are in another thread about stealth suits praising their usage and durability. So it seems you have conflicting views about your own opinion.

If we're going to play absolutes, then yes, of course battlesuits changed in 8th Edition. They lost Jump Shoot Jump and a favorable wounding table in exchange for an improved statline and weapon damage values. By saying "without compensating" I'm referring to the fact that the ability removed and the statline improvements are not equal. Battlesuits were not compensated for the loss of JSJ. I'm not saying that literally nothing changed about battlesuits, it should be clear that wasn't what I was talking about.

Edit: About Stealthsuits, this why it's best not to be so absolute. Battlesuits are durable and effective. However, they are less durable and effective than before. Both can be true.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:Go back and read what your original response was to me. You used straman arguments and dismissive hand waving and thought that would be enough, especially after your above statement. You didn't even bother to reply to the points listed.

As I said before, I'm keeping this brief. You made some good points, and you made some points I felt should be responded to. I responded to the ones I felt were relevant, and kept things as compact as I could for other readers. Remember that there are other readers on this thread, just because I don't explicitly reply to something doesn't make it disappear.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:This is what discussion topics are for. You don't get to come in and say, "This is my opinion. No one else can ever challenge it openly on a discussion forum." That's completely absurd. You also don't get to make such a sweeping generalization and expect not to have to defend it. I would like to point out that it is disrespectful to the topic and the poster to ignore counter points made, and then expect the person you're talking with to "move it to PM". Then why the hell are we in a forum??

You're free to disagree with me- by all means, please do. However, what is disrespectful is to call me dismissive and hypocritical. If you have an issue with that please tell me in PM.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:As mentioned, you don't get to come in, say your opinion is law, and then write off everyone else's that doesn't mesh with your own train of thought. Keep in mind at this point you have gone from saying that our battlesuits have gotten no compensation, to a lack of compensation, and now you're just saying "your opinion".

Again, as before, my opinion is not law. I never said it cannot be challenged. I'm a guy on the internet who likes to talk about blue people, I don't pretend to be any cleverer or more authoritative than anyone else here. I have ideas and I like to share them.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:Notice that you haven't yet replied to my point of what you do when JSJ fails or isn't an option based on positioning. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

This was another point that I didn't think required a response, sorry about that. We're talking about JSJ as a gameplay mechanic, not every hypothetical situation. Sure it can fail, that was a nerf to JSJ that happened after it was introduced. And if you're in a situation where it cannot be used... I guess don't get in that situation? That's something that depends on player choice in earlier phases or even earlier turns.

AnonAmbientLight wrote:Eldar got JSJ back in 5th IIRC. Is your argument only the "true masters" of JSJ have right to claim it? You're also proving my point rather well here. If Eldar got their JSJ taking away to little to no compensation, why do you think that GW took it away from T'au? I think you've answered your own question.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "true masters", but I was referring to the Battle Focus ability that Eldar got in one of the old editions. Forgot what it was called. Basically a form of quasi-JSJ that many of their units could use, including infantry and non-Jet Pack units. Tau don't have the "right" to JSJ, but it had a much more sizable impact on our army I'd say, being one of the critical things that kept our battlesuits alive and shooting.

I don't think I answered my question- I just hypothesized that JSJ being used by the Eldar too (and its use in those meta-defining jetbike spam armies) may have led to its being labeled as "overpowered".

I don't know if JSJ is overpowered or not, I'll leave that judgement to the game designers. What I do know is that XV8s are easier to kill and easier to charge, in large part because we do not have JSJ. Perhaps just increasing all of our weapons' ranges by 6" would have been compensation enough, since that would have a similar impact to moving backwards 6" after shooting. Just an idea.
Last edited by Arka0415 on Jan 17 2018 10:50, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ghostly Daemon
Shas'Saal
Posts: 74
Contact:

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#50 » Jan 17 2018 10:46

Arka0415 wrote:Perhaps just increasing all of our weapons' ranges by 6" would have been compensation enough, since that would have a similar impact to moving backwards 6" after shooting. Just an idea.


I only played a little of 7th edition, so I don't have a whole lot of experience. I do miss JSJ and I think this point right here makes all the difference. We don't really need it if we're 6" further away from our target than we would be otherwise. I imagine it'll come back as a Stratagem like Fire and Fade, but regardless, I think increasing the range pretty much solves the issue at hand.
:fear: :fear: :fear: :fear: :fear: :evil:

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 439

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#51 » Jan 17 2018 06:47

Ghostly Daemon wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:Perhaps just increasing all of our weapons' ranges by 6" would have been compensation enough, since that would have a similar impact to moving backwards 6" after shooting. Just an idea.


I only played a little of 7th edition, so I don't have a whole lot of experience. I do miss JSJ and I think this point right here makes all the difference. We don't really need it if we're 6" further away from our target than we would be otherwise. I imagine it'll come back as a Stratagem like Fire and Fade, but regardless, I think increasing the range pretty much solves the issue at hand.

Having JSJ as a stratagem is useless. The whole point of JSJ was moving often with all your units to kite your enemies.
I would never pay 1 CP for moving out of turn with a single unit.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3282

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#52 » Jan 17 2018 06:56

Temennigru wrote:Having JSJ as a stratagem is useless. The whole point of JSJ was moving often with all your units to kite your enemies.
I would never pay 1 CP for moving out of turn with a single unit.

Let's assume that a 1 CP stratagem becomes the reality though. You could use a build with one mid-range XV8 unit and one short-range XV8 unit, where only the short-range unit needed the stratagem. Or you could run a 5-model or 6-model XV8 deathstar that only required the stratagem once. I agree that it's not the same as JSJ, but it seems clear that we'll get such a stratagem.

User avatar
Temennigru
Shas'Saal
Posts: 439

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#53 » Jan 17 2018 07:12

Arka0415 wrote:
Temennigru wrote:Having JSJ as a stratagem is useless. The whole point of JSJ was moving often with all your units to kite your enemies.
I would never pay 1 CP for moving out of turn with a single unit.

Let's assume that a 1 CP stratagem becomes the reality though. You could use a build with one mid-range XV8 unit and one short-range XV8 unit, where only the short-range unit needed the stratagem. Or you could run a 5-model or 6-model XV8 deathstar that only required the stratagem once. I agree that it's not the same as JSJ, but it seems clear that we'll get such a stratagem.

That is a waste of a stratagem slot. I would rather have the ad-mech "explode a vehicle" or the ork "this turn, every 6 gives you an extra shot". Those would be way better options. JSJ should be vectored retrothrusters or some other support system if we are to pay for it.

Duckumentary
Shas
Posts: 18

Re: An Appeal for Jump-Shoot-Jump

Post#54 » Jan 17 2018 08:13

I really do believe that this mechanic will return to Tau during 8th. However I doubt we will have to wait much longer to be sure. Bikes move 14", Jump packs move 12", and Jet Packs only move 8"... This indicates to me personally they left the Tau's movement as being somewhat lacking with the intention of reinstating our old rules inside our Codex after they had a chance to flesh out other armies. If you consider the fact that the Jet Pack keyword is located within all of our Suits it only makes sense that there will be some kind of rule associated with it accordingly. I wouldn't be surprised if it went back getting D6" move during assault, giving us an average of 11.5" total. The last point I will make is that the Riptide still retains a 2D6" Jump move for overcharging (Formerly 2D6 standard, charged for 4d6) which suggests that it is still something that is associated with Tau overall and hopefully doesn't remain a pony trick for the Riptide.

I do however have two concerns. First, JSJ used to seriously slow down my games from 5th onward, in a Tournament moving every unit twice slows down the game. From what I have seen, they have tried to speed up the game (Such as removing templates to avoid precise distance measuring, including advancing during your movement to avoid moving twice) The second is that the Drones don't currently have the rules. Admittedly I could see jumping BEHIND a squad of drones that are acting as a firing / defense line which had been sitting on the edge of 18" after deepstriking. But I would be concerned they cannot keep up with the unit (But may be part of speeding up the game mechanics by not having 40 drones JSJ all over the place 4 per squad. xD

I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to see if a single unit with this ability would be game breaking, and after how badly the Riptide has been flamed by the community and what I'm sure resulted in a reduced sale of the kits, I would doubt they had drawn that conclusion.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Temennigru and 3 guests

cron