don't like railheads

A review of past Tactics by commanders during the First, Second, Third & Fourth Phase Expansion.
User avatar
Spooky
Shas
Posts: 395
Contact:

Post#19 » Feb 28 2006 09:13

oh yea thats a good point, the difference between thinking railheads are crap, and thinking you don't want to use them

i don't mind what you choose to use. its up to you. i probably won't get the chance to play against 99% of the people on this forum, (as its so international) so frankly, i don't care whats in your army.

but thats not too interesting to talk about on a forum i feel... "im going to use this models cos its nice " / "thats nice" .... the end

what i use forums for, is trying to kind of .. think aloud almost, and work out & discuss what are strong options, good units, and so on. to make the army stronger. this is an interesting angle for me, particularly as it has no actual single answer.



so yea, just because i rip into someone who doesn't rate railheads, doesn't mean i'm having a go at them or am telling them they must use railheads. its just, i think they're wrong, and i can't resist trying to point out why :)

User avatar
Flashman
Por'Ui
Por'Ui
Posts: 468
Contact:

Post#20 » Mar 01 2006 06:33

If I have a problem with an army that packs 3xRailheads or any kind of power gaming *cough* coz that's essentially what it is. It's just I can't justify ( and admittedly I've never and proberly will never do the tournement scene) "power gaming".

In my mind.

It makes me feel dirrrty :-?

Seriously though surely the biggest counter argument to a 3xRailhead has to be cost. With the rebirth of the Broadside as a viable Heavy weapons option, thanks of course to the fixing of drones and the addition of the ASS. You have potentially 2xTL Railguns for the same cost as a Railhead...

Hypothectically if you take two other Heavy support options you can drop the Broadsides after your opponent has put down most of their's. Meaning you should have to move very little in your opening turns to make a killing.

Just my thoughts :neutral:

Ezzeran
Shas
Posts: 41

Post#21 » Mar 01 2006 07:51

If I have a problem with an army that packs 3xRailheads or any kind of power gaming *cough* coz that's essentially what it is.


We all play for different reasons. Powergaming is certainly a valid one. If people want to win tournaments and that's what it takes, then that's what it takes. That's their brand of fun. I don't think anyone can take a "holier than thou" stance when it comes to a hobby that has as many facets (the game, the modeling, the painting, etc.) as 40k.
Ezz

User avatar
midnight
Shas
Posts: 229

Post#22 » Mar 01 2006 08:30

onlainari wrote:
Marc wrote:you think not liking the railhead is bad, i just don't like the railgun!

I could have been more specific. I played 14 games, 10 of which were at 1750pts, without railguns. While my w/l/d during this period was a respectful 10/2/2, I still believe railheads are better than ionheads after this extensive play testing.


You know, I had thought it was you making this at first, then I saw you indicating you had changed your mind.

I like running 2 rails and an Ionhead. Believe it or not, the Ionhead has died first almost every game. It seems marines have a real issue watching 3 of them evaporate with no save and then another 1 fall to burst cannons. I had one bathed in plasma last night, raptors dropped in and fired 2 plasma guns and a plasma pistol with tank hunters. It still killed 2 before they finally killed it.

I will point this out to the naysayers. Iron Warriors, 9 obliterators, instakill with only a 5+ save to survive. Melta will do it, but not at 72", and they will walk up and twin-melta or twin-plasma you.
Rail accounted for 2 oblits by itself.

User avatar
P'Shar's Rifles
Kor'O
Kor'O
Posts: 2041

"power gaming"

Post#23 » Mar 01 2006 08:51

I think you're making a lot of assumptions in saying that 3 railheads automatically makes for "power gaming". Some of us are tread-heads (what's the tau equivalent? grav-heads?), some of us really like mecha and want lots of crisis suits, some of us love out 7331 ninja stealth teams, and yes, some even love their orderly ranks of firewarriors marching forward, guns blazing. To me, power-gaming is a mind-set, not a list selection. And that's not to say it's necessarily a bad mind-set. It's ok that some folks like to squeeze maximum kill efficiency out of every last unit. It's equally ok that some of us enjoy the narrative of the game more than the outcome. There's room in the hobby for both kinds of player.

I'd caution against alienating good, friendly players by condemning them for using the units and tactics they enjoy. Most mech tau players have heard these complaints for what we would all consider perfectly reasonable, balanced lists.

Saying three railheads=power gaming on a Mech Tau forum... well, we make a lot of trade-offs by going mech, including increased vulnerability to heavy weapons fire and reduced overall firepower. Taking three railheads is one way of trying to compensate somewhat for those trade-offs.

Besides, my railheads (when I use them) can't hit the broad side of a Land Raider most games. The only way they ever seem to swing the balance is by taking a beating and surviving long enough to not lose me VPs. Three shots at BS4 ain't that scary to my opponents anymore. Now, twin-link those railguns and I'll take the complaints. ;)

User avatar
kai'lore
Aun'O (Ret.)
Posts: 3480

Post#24 » Mar 01 2006 09:43

nice one P'Shars, I fully confess to being in that category of Tread/Skid Head! Just love picking up my toy tanks and moving them around and yes, I do add sound effects ....

Just as an example of the depths of my sickness, I am putting together a BT army with 2 Crusaders and 1 LR. Half my army is Land Raiders!

vroom kai

Marc
Shas
Posts: 56

Post#25 » Mar 01 2006 11:46

Spooky wrote:"if your oppents list hadent been anti-meq aimed exaclty how successful do you think your hammerhead would have surived"
people do always build their lists with MEq mostly in mind, as they make up 60% of the average field. but people also try and leave themselves the capacity to deal with 'odd' armies like tau, eldar, nids, etc.

i agree that if an army tools specifically for tau, it makes things a lot more difficult... tau carve out an existance by being a minority army, so people don't build for us, so you can take on the average "all-comers" army and it can't deal with tau very well as its too different.


so you argee that your only winning because your not playing on a level playing feild

Spooky wrote:are you gonna try and kill siren with fusion then? lol. say hello to daemonettes!


and your going to try and kill it fusion at least my way the enmey make the mistake of coming on to the feild where the rest can then sort out the mess. you on the other hand just float around hoping that he dosnt corner you

Spooky wrote:"all you need 3 lascannons for the forunt armour and 9 for all three"
well, surprisingly, i wouldn't be planning on sticking my tanks in front of 9 lascannons all game long.
hammerheads have no place facing tactical squad's lascannons. its just not a good idea. thats what SMS is for. against a tri-las pred, i'd try and stack a lot of my rails/crisis into it at once, skimmers can shoot underneath each other (skimmers don't block LOS) so you can jump all 3 railguns out in a line and shoot all into it. you should win that firefight... then move on.
lascannons aren't really what kills my hammerheads, its more assault cannons and stuff thats mobile.


i just used lascannons because they are common anti tank wepoan i agree that there are better anti hammer wepoans out there.

Spooky wrote:yes, those things are nasty for tau. they're nasty for any kind of tau. i don't see their mention as being a specific reason to not take hammerheads, as any kind of tau army will get punished by them.


well my suits are not effected so badly because of sheild tech i arrange into them, fire warrior live in the fish and the fish isnt so badly effected by a glancing result. kroot live in cover any way



Spooky wrote:but, this is not an arguement which supports taking less hammerheads. if you took less hammerheads, this problem would happen more often. if you take more hammerheads, the problem will happen less.


this sounds like a guard tatic. so i have to pay 600 pionts to get a working rail where as i could play the same in broadsides and i would get 6 you need to rethink your tatics badly.

Spooky wrote:"- the more tanks you have, the more you overload the enemy's anti tank." ---- "true but that considers many targets"
so?


i was thinking of bait and distaraction tatics using suits. but its far off topic don't worry about it

Spooky wrote:"a good anti tau list i played against had metla bombs on the IG squad leaders to deal with [tankshock]"
you changed what we were talking about. i was talking about submunitioning hordes, its a great weapon against nids or orks. your point was correct, that they can always space out (although thats a disadvantage for them as it slows them down) and my counter point was that tank shock will bunch up the horde again, ready for submuntion love.

but now you bring in meltabomb guardsmen into the arguement? this is not relavent. i wouldn't be tank shocking guardsmen, because i'd be hiding in the backfield railgunning their tanks, and guardsmen aren't an assault threat to my infantry.

[/quote]

tatic, counter tatic, counter taitic, counter tatic. this what happens in the world of campains. there fore the piont is realvent

IG player be siting at the back you play realy mono stlye guard. what about deep striking or a mechianised forced? also you can do same thing with Orks with nod and Tank bombs and there realy good at it. nids do a simalar thing by interweaving warriors into there squads

thought overal there is nothing you have said that makes me want to have a hammer head in my army they are weak, easy to destroy and disrupt and make perfect targets for the enemy. i would rather take a broadside if i need to take Rails.

User avatar
Spooky
Shas
Posts: 395
Contact:

Post#26 » Mar 02 2006 05:00

me: "i agree that if an army tools specifically for tau, it makes things a lot more difficult... tau carve out an existance by being a minority army, so people don't build for us, so you can take on the average "all-comers" army and it can't deal with tau very well as its too different. "
Marc: "so you argee that your only winning because your not playing on a level playing feild"

no mate, i didn't say that. i play with an all-comers tournament tau list, against other all-comers tournament lists. because tau are a minority, and different to fight against than most opponents, it gives us an advantage. that advantage would be lost if people tooled up against tau.



me: "pointless siren arguement"
Marc: "and your going to try and kill it fusion at least my way the enmey make the mistake of coming on to the feild where the rest can then sort out the mess. you on the other hand just float around hoping that he dosnt corner you"

don't really follow you, but i'd much rather have skimmer tanks rather than suits against slaanesh.. against a siren anyway you use 3 hammerheads to block the prince in, it's only str6 or something, if you get *right next* to it then it can't move and can't summon daemons



me: "well, surprisingly, i wouldn't be planning on sticking my tanks in front of 9 lascannons all game long."
Marc: "i just used lascannons because they are common anti tank wepoan i agree that there are better anti hammer wepoans out there."

the point is not the weapon, its the speed. lascannons are slow. broadsides are slow. hammerheads are quick. you have the initiative, you can decide how many lascannons you expose your hammerheads to. this makes hammerheads survive, because you don't have to play foolishly with them



me: [deepstriking plasma/melta, indirect ordnance, and oblits etc are harsh for any kind of tau, not specifically hammerheads]
Marc: "well my suits are not effected so badly because of sheild tech i arrange into them, fire warrior live in the fish and the fish isnt so badly effected by a glancing result. kroot live in cover any way "

let's be fair here and compare like with like. a hammerhead army can still have devilfish for the FW, cover for the kroot, and shield gens on the suits if you want. the issue of comparison is hammerhead rails vs crisis fusion. against deepstrikers, both suffer. depending on the weapon, one suffers more than the other.

you don't need deepstrikers to kill fusion teams though, as they're so cripplingly short ranged.



me: "but, this is not an arguement which supports taking less hammerheads. if you took less hammerheads, this problem would happen more often. if you take more hammerheads, the problem will happen less."
Marc: "this sounds like a guard tatic"

does that make it invalid?
if i played guard, i'd probably have 3 pie plates.



me: [i suggest rail is useful for submunitioning horde assault armies, he suggested they spread out, i point if they spread its to my benefit and also that i can tank shock them back into bunches to be submuntioned, he mentions guard can have meltabombs, i say this isn't relavent as guard aren't assault hordes, and i wouldnt be tank shocking guardsmen with meltabombs.]
Marc: "tatic, counter tatic, counter taitic, counter tatic. this what happens in the world of campains. there fore the piont is realvent"

no, again, hammerheads have the initiative because they're quick. it's my choice to tank shock or not. i wouldnt tank shock meltabomb guard.
again, its an example of the speed of the hammerhead being useful to dictate the game.

Marc
Shas
Posts: 56

Post#27 » Mar 02 2006 06:23

If you were sorry you wouldn't have called him names

if your going to play this game i will redefine

I play campains and local games where people know who there going to face most of the time there for my intrest is with dealing with counter tatics and i finded that hammerhead is usless tank after a little pre planing

no mate, i didn't say that. i play with an all-comers tournament tau list, against other all-comers tournament lists. because tau are a minority, and different to fight against than most opponents, it gives us an advantage. that advantage would be lost if people tooled up against tau


sorry but thats not a level playing feild. the MEQ's you come up agaisnt have been designed to fight MEQs where as you have tau who are not a MEQ and therefore you have a majour advantage over them. therefore it not a level playing feild.

don't really follow you, but i'd much rather have skimmer tanks rather than suits against slaanesh.. against a siren anyway you use 3 hammerheads to block the prince in, it's only str6 or something, if you get *right next* to it then it can't move and can't summon daemons


the prince is a S6 and monsterish creature which means he rolls 2D6 and he can still summon deamons the hammerheads don't stop that. some deamons can even deal with hammerheads thinking deamonets with Rending.


the point is not the weapon, its the speed. lascannons are slow. broadsides are slow. hammerheads are quick. you have the initiative, you can decide how many lascannons you expose your hammerheads to. this makes hammerheads survive, because you don't have to play foolishly with them


so you need your enemy to be spread out and bad board which are blocky. your games must be boring simalar after a while.

let's be fair here and compare like with like. a hammerhead army can still have devilfish for the FW, cover for the kroot, and shield gens on the suits if you want. the issue of comparison is hammerhead rails vs crisis fusion. against deepstrikers, both suffer. depending on the weapon, one suffers more than the other.


you can but i just tring to give reasons why other units are better than hammerhead. i didnt say you didnt take them but i get to take 600 pionts more of them than you do.

you don't need deepstrikers to kill fusion teams though, as they're so cripplingly short ranged.


and when did i say that all my suits deepstriked? and your realy hung up on fusion, i don't allways use fusion to destory tanks i've got seekers and EMP and not every thing out there has AV14.

does that make it invalid?


you didnt read what i wrote after your paying 600 piont just to have 1 working tank.


no, again, hammerheads have the initiative because they're quick. it's my choice to tank shock or not. i wouldnt tank shock meltabomb guard.
again, its an example of the speed of the hammerhead being useful to dictate the game


its call insurance and you missed piont the guard spread out and are not affect. at 4 pionts that a pretty cheap peice of insurance compared that horiffic 400 pionts you pay for a working tank.

again, its an example of the speed of the hammerhead being useful to dictate the game.


not its not let recap in your style

You: i shot hords with Pie plates
Me: hordes spread out
You: i tank shock
Me:horeds have squad leaders with greandes or other wepaons
You: my tank donst have to tank charge then its won
Me: hordes still spread out and have payed 4 pionts to keep you away and has saved even more pionts by keeping you a way

Flaming deleted. Please read the above posts about being judgemental of 'power-gaming' O-B

User avatar
Orange-Bell
Por'O
Por'O
Posts: 931

Post#28 » Mar 02 2006 06:43

So, the point of this is that Marc will never use railheads, and Spooky always will? I think that is well established. I don't think there is a lot more either of you can add here.

Name-calling is not tolerated here, Marc. Spooky may be overly adamant about his point (just as you are), but he is always civil. Don't let it happen again.

O-B
O-B

User avatar
onlainari
Por'Ui
Por'Ui
Posts: 304

Post#29 » Mar 02 2006 06:45

Hey Marc railheads are good yeah?

No-one likes baiting, either
100/19/20 w/d/l
Tournament: 21/4/4 w/d/l

Marc
Shas
Posts: 56

Post#30 » Mar 02 2006 09:55

sorry spooks, i get worked up and take it out on people with out go reason. no hard feelings hey?

User avatar
Spooky
Shas
Posts: 395
Contact:

Post#31 » Mar 02 2006 10:12

edit- don't worry marc im not easily offended. if you're debating a point, im happy.

my point about the meltabombs was that guardsmen are radically different than assault hordes.
hormagaunts can't have meltabombs, but if they're bunched up, they get ruined by sub blasts. tank shock doesn matter cos they cant hurt me but auto pass. its just a mechanism to cluster them up to get more under the template.

gaunts are fast and want to get close. pushing them back with tank shock is good as it buys me more space and lets me protect my infantry from combat.

guardsmen are not a combat threat, they're not close to my lines, the game is totally different environment. i'd be wanting to keep my HH at the back and pick rail shots into the tanks. i don't need to have the HH at the front, like you do against assault-hordes.

again, all this shows in my eyes is that hammerhead gives you OPTIONS of what to do. you don't have to tank shock a meltabomb unit. taking meltabombs on your guardsmen is swell, but i wouldn't really need to tank shock them anyway, even if they didnt have them.




anyway, sorry if you feel i'm moving the goalposts or redefining things from under you. this wasnt my intention, i re-stated a few things to try and clarify as i thought you'd misunderstood. perhaps you had missed my point originally, and thats why you though i'd changed my story.


"sorry but thats not a level playing feild. the MEQ's you come up agaisnt have been designed to fight MEQs where as you have tau who are not a MEQ and therefore you have a majour advantage over them. therefore it not a level playing feild. "

wow we have a totally different perspective on this. if other armies tool for MEq, they have to accept the possibility of coming up against non-meqs, and then that meaning their at a disadvantage. that's their fault for a poorly designed, inflexible army. over-specialisation is a weakness, and its a weakness i make use of by playing a non-meq army.



"the prince is a S6 and monsterish creature which means he rolls 2D6 and he can still summon deamons the hammerheads don't stop that. some deamons can even deal with hammerheads thinking deamonets with Rending. "

you missed what i meant. if you get 3 skimmers and surrouned the siren, it can't place its summoning template and the daemons are destroyed. you cant hurt the siren, it can't really hurt you either though.


"so you need your enemy to be spread out and bad board which are blocky. your games must be boring simalar after a while. "

i play with tables that have approx 25% terrain on. if its distributed over the table, you should be able to use that terrain to block LOS. hammerheads make good use of this, same as JSJ suits do.
40k without terrain is almost completely pointless.


"and when did i say that all my suits deepstriked? and your realy hung up on fusion, i don't allways use fusion to destory tanks i've got seekers and EMP and not every thing out there has AV14. "

no, i didnt say you deepstruck your suits. i said fusion suits can be killed because they're too short ranged, and it doesnt require deepstriking enemy troops to kill them.
(EMP's? omfg)


"taking 3 tanks is good" / "that sounds like a guard tactic" / "does that make it invalid?"
"you didnt read what i wrote after your paying 600 piont just to have 1 working tank."

i did read that you said taking 3 tanks to ensure you had available rails, sounded like a guard tactic. you don't pay 600 pts for 1 working tank, don't be facetious.

User avatar
Flashman
Por'Ui
Por'Ui
Posts: 468
Contact:

Post#32 » Mar 02 2006 06:28

*Shakes head* Is it me or is it hot in here? *wipes brow*

For a change I just thought I'd quote.... myself! :shock:

El'Flashman wrote:If I have a problem with an army that packs 3xRailheads or any kind of power gaming *cough* coz that's essentially what it is. It's just I can't justify ( and admittedly I've never and proberly will never do the tournement scene) "power gaming".

In my mind.

It makes me feel dirrrty :-?


I sooo shouldn't have used the PG word or I could have put a well placed 'akin' in there. Ah well the road less travelled and all that. For the record I don't have a problem with anyone taking 3xRailheads. It's just if I did it...

I'd feel dirrrrrrty... :sad:

because it'd make me feel like I was PGing. It's entirely reasonable for a Mech to take 3 Tanks, Tau or not. It's almost expected. I just don't like/want to do it.

Ezzeran I know we all play for different reasons, some for fun, some for sport. This thread seems to have two different types of player at loggerheads. Tourney Guys and those who don't... do the... tourney thing. The reality is tournaments are an invitation to... er... you know what. The PG thang, but that's to be expected. I'm sure people who like that sort of thing sit around all day thinking up really evil :evil: list's to blow away their opponents. Again if that's your thing. That's cool, but holier than thou! I most certainly am not. :/

Oh and P'Shar's I make no assumptions... only Judgements! :D

Seriously though surely the biggest counter argument to a 3xRailhead has to be cost. With the rebirth of the Broadside as a viable Heavy weapons option, thanks of course to the fixing of drones and the addition of the ASS. You have potentially 2xTL Railguns for the same cost as a Railhead...

Hypothectically if you take two other Heavy support options you can drop the Broadsides after your opponent has put down most of their's. Meaning you should have to move very little in your opening turns to make a killing.

Just my thoughts :neutral:


I suppose with the whole Spooky vs. Marc thang *moves head side to side and clicks fingers* my final point got lost in the wind. Broadsides are cheaper and better at taking out tanks. Sure they do not have 12" movement, but if you deploy well then there really should be no need for it and in the example I cite; If you have 3xHeavy support there is no excuse for poor BS deployment. Not to mention... in city fight. Oh man...

Anyway. In closing I like Railheads, just not three of them. I get no joy from that. I like a varied list with lots of different goodies in it. Sure I'll never win a tournement, but if I whip my regular opponents. I'm quite happy. Oh and I can look down my nose at those Obliterator heavy Choas armies... with this holier than thou face - :eek:

We're all different. We all love Tau... why can't we just get along.

Peace out my fellow Tau brothers

User avatar
P'Shar's Rifles
Kor'O
Kor'O
Posts: 2041

oh, is that all?

Post#33 » Mar 02 2006 07:28

heh, well, I guess if they're just JUDGEMENTS, then it's fine. carry on. ;)

btw, Kai, I also make vroomy noises when I fly my skimmers around. I also make shooty noises, stompy noises, and squad chatter. depending on my opponent's response, I sometimes just make them in my head. :)

Vroom!

User avatar
Orange-Bell
Por'O
Por'O
Posts: 931

Post#34 » Mar 02 2006 07:56

Opponent: Why are your sunforge attacking the pinned space marines? There's a landraider within 6" of them!

You: Well, they really don't like space marines, and last time I didn't listen to them they deliberately tried to throw the match. I do whatever they say now.

;)

O-B

(yeah, I do it too!)
O-B

User avatar
kai'lore
Aun'O (Ret.)
Posts: 3480

Post#35 » Mar 02 2006 09:52

lol, me too. Squad chatter, ripping and tearing sounds and so on.

It's funny that you get weird looks from people isn't it?

"Dude, WE are playing a game with little plastic space guys. Sure we have rules and dice and tape measures but c'mon, let's have fun too!"

Looking forward to swoosh sounds with Piranha now! :D

kai

User avatar
Flashman
Por'Ui
Por'Ui
Posts: 468
Contact:

Re: oh, is that all?

Post#36 » Mar 03 2006 05:58

P'Shar's Rifles wrote:....sometimes (I) just make them in my head. :)

Vroom!


Lol... oh man! :D

Return to “Archival Datacore”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest