Tanks - what a disappointment

Discuss tactical and strategic development for 40K/Tau.
1ofmany
Shas'Saal
Posts: 22

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#37 » Aug 23 2017 02:18

On a regular gaming table 48" x 72" minus 2x12" deployment then the range difference is not that hot.

And the marine players I play never go out with out 2 predators. One with cronus and one regular and they will set up as last.

Thanks.

zawyvern
Shas'Saal
Posts: 32

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#38 » Sep 22 2017 12:13

I'm getting back into Tau after a couple of editions. I have a bunch of hammerhead hulls from back in the day of fish of fury. so this post caught my eye. I don't know the forgeworld stuff so well so I'll keep it to the index.
I definitely see how the firepower can be an issue going toe to toe with a las predator.
But the problem is there isn't much of an alternative for the Tau to take anti-tank. Broadsides are less tough with BS4+, and taxed with mixed weapon types if you go anti-tank (mandatory SMS or plasma rifles). That and one suit is only like 10 points cheaper than one railgun tank.

Suits in general are too expensive and slow now.
The fusion commander is good but everyone knows about it now and deploy against alpha strike.
The tidewall gunrig is cool but hitting on 5s and needs a rider to target something else besides the closest unit. (I suggest the firesight marksmen btw) And the gunrig is not as sturdy as the hammerhead.

The only thing I can think of is to take them in decent numbers 4-6 railgun hammerheads, including longstrike. if you take broadsides with that maybe you're opponent won't know what to target.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2183

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#39 » Sep 22 2017 12:40

zawyvern wrote:I definitely see how the firepower can be an issue going toe to toe with a las predator.

It's absolutely tough. You either need to use Commanders w/ 4x Fusion Blasters to take care of the Predators, or XV8s/Commanders w/ Cyclic Ion Blasters in larger numbers.

zawyvern wrote:But the problem is there isn't much of an alternative for the Tau to take anti-tank. Broadsides are less tough with BS4+, and taxed with mixed weapon types if you go anti-tank (mandatory SMS or plasma rifles). That and one suit is only like 10 points cheaper than one railgun tank.

Suits in general are too expensive and slow now.

Yeah, that's exactly the issue. I guess Broadsides get a little niche as they can take Velocity Trackers, or HYMP w/ ATS, but yeah they're shockingly expensive. Unless the points come down a lot in the new Codex no one will use them.

zawyvern wrote:The only thing I can think of is to take them in decent numbers 4-6 railgun hammerheads, including longstrike. if you take broadsides with that maybe you're opponent won't know what to target.

I mean, with this loadout you're talking about 1000+ points worth of dedicated anti-tank, worse yet 1500+ points if you add XV8s. We need to use cost-effective solutions like Fusion Commanders and battlesuits with Cyclic on Blasters. I bring one Hammerhead at 1500-2000 points and two at 2000+ points; in my opinion they're not a spammable unit but rather they provide a versatile, long-range gun that's good at finishing off targets your XV8s and Commanders didn't quite kill.

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 266

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#40 » Sep 22 2017 08:33

Keyword: BATTLESUIT is a very points premium keyword to have. They probably thought that 'Saviour Protocols' was going to be a big thing to watch out for when they "Balanced" T'au, but it just pushed out suits from being effective

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#41 » Sep 22 2017 09:03

Glarblar wrote:Keyword: BATTLESUIT is a very points premium keyword to have. They probably thought that 'Saviour Protocols' was going to be a big thing to watch out for when they "Balanced" T'au, but it just pushed out suits from being effective

Except that Stealth Suits aren't that expensive and that Saviour Protocol works on Infantry as well who as well aren't exactly expensive. ;)

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 266

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#42 » Sep 22 2017 09:11

Panzer wrote:
Glarblar wrote:Keyword: BATTLESUIT is a very points premium keyword to have. They probably thought that 'Saviour Protocols' was going to be a big thing to watch out for when they "Balanced" T'au, but it just pushed out suits from being effective

Except that Stealth Suits aren't that expensive and that Saviour Protocol works on Infantry as well who as well aren't exactly expensive. ;)


I imagine that's b/c the drones have a similar stat line to infantry, remember how it originally worked was the drone would take the wound and not a mortal wound, the MW was just a stopgap for an overpowered ability with no points adjustment:

Drone: T4, Sv 4+
FW: T3, Sv 4/5+ (less valuable)
Stealth: T4, Sv 3+ (slightly more valuable)
XV8: T5, Sv 3+
XV88: T5, Sv 2+
Ghost: T6, Sv 3+
Riptide: T7, Sv 2+

Now, as value of a 'wound' goes up we see points skyrocket. Ghost and Tide are less expensive than they could be, compared to the XV88, simply b/c they have a damage table to compensate

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#43 » Sep 22 2017 09:20

I still think it's stupid that the cost for Saviour Protocol is included in the Battlesuits. It's not their ability. It's the Drones ability. The Drones should be more expensive so the Suits can be properly priced even if you don't take any Drones with them.

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 266

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#44 » Sep 22 2017 09:22

Panzer wrote:I still think it's stupid that the cost for Saviour Protocol is included in the Battlesuits. It's not their ability. It's the Drones ability. The Drones should be more expensive so the Suits can be properly priced even if you don't take any Drones with them.


That may fix the drones spam / Fireblade combo

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#45 » Sep 22 2017 09:37

It would fix a lot of things. The fact that Crisis Suits and bigger Suits are too expensive as well as the Gun Drone spam. Then we just need something to fix HQ spam for every army and we're a big step closer to where we want to be.

Anyway, that's not exactly this threads topic here. Nothing of that would affect our tanks which would need a big point drop as well. ^^

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 367
Contact:

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#46 » Sep 25 2017 10:59

It's not just the tanks that expensive it's our weapons look at the rail gun on hammerhead vs a Lascannon on a predator yes it's +1 Str and causes D3 mortal wounds on a 6+ and has submunition but is almost the same cost as the double Lascannon that has 2 shots a Turn.

Compare that same double Lascannon to the railgun on a Broadside that's more than 50% more for 1 less Str, less range but 1 mortal wound on a 6 on a model with lower BS less wounds and toughness and is only 10 points cheaper and HAS to take additional non anti tank weapons and those are overpriced also.

For the same cost as a double SMS you can get 4 heavy bolters and I know which I would prefer.

That's one of our biggest problems not even the cost of our units is high but our weapons are arbitrarily more expensive than other races also.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#47 » Sep 25 2017 11:06

Nymphomanius wrote:on a model with lower BS less wounds and toughness and is only 10 points cheaper and HAS to take additional non anti tank weapons and those are overpriced also

That's doesn't count towards how weapons are priced though. That's something for how the chassis should be priced.

But I agree that a lot of our weapons are too expensive as well on top of the chassis often being too expensive. I'm expecting a price drop on a good amount of our weapons and chassis once our Codex comes around.

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'Saal
Posts: 310

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#48 » Sep 25 2017 11:45

Panzer wrote:
Nymphomanius wrote:on a model with lower BS less wounds and toughness and is only 10 points cheaper and HAS to take additional non anti tank weapons and those are overpriced also

That's doesn't count towards how weapons are priced though. That's something for how the chassis should be priced.

But I agree that a lot of our weapons are too expensive as well on top of the chassis often being too expensive. I'm expecting a price drop on a good amount of our weapons and chassis once our Codex comes around.


Didn't the design docs specifically say they are planning to adjust prices of even the same weapon between different codexies due to the weapon being on different platforms? Have they just not done that much?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#49 » Sep 25 2017 12:13

QimRas wrote:
Panzer wrote:
Nymphomanius wrote:on a model with lower BS less wounds and toughness and is only 10 points cheaper and HAS to take additional non anti tank weapons and those are overpriced also

That's doesn't count towards how weapons are priced though. That's something for how the chassis should be priced.

But I agree that a lot of our weapons are too expensive as well on top of the chassis often being too expensive. I'm expecting a price drop on a good amount of our weapons and chassis once our Codex comes around.


Didn't the design docs specifically say they are planning to adjust prices of even the same weapon between different codexies due to the weapon being on different platforms? Have they just not done that much?

First time I hear about that and so far Lascannons or Plasma or whatever are priced the same everywhere.
It honestly would be a terrible idea to price a weapon differently on a unit per unit base instead of factoring in how well a unit generally works in it's base cost.

User avatar
QimRas
Shas'Saal
Posts: 310

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#50 » Sep 25 2017 12:15

Panzer wrote:
QimRas wrote:
Panzer wrote:That's doesn't count towards how weapons are priced though. That's something for how the chassis should be priced.

But I agree that a lot of our weapons are too expensive as well on top of the chassis often being too expensive. I'm expecting a price drop on a good amount of our weapons and chassis once our Codex comes around.


Didn't the design docs specifically say they are planning to adjust prices of even the same weapon between different codexies due to the weapon being on different platforms? Have they just not done that much?

First time I hear about that and so far Lascannons or Plasma or whatever are priced the same everywhere.
It honestly would be a terrible idea to price a weapon differently on a unit per unit base instead of factoring in how well a unit generally works in it's base cost.


Well, regardless what they said if they are the same price across all of them, I guess they are not doing it that way.

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 367
Contact:

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#51 » Sep 25 2017 01:47

Panzer wrote:
QimRas wrote:
Panzer wrote:That's doesn't count towards how weapons are priced though. That's something for how the chassis should be priced.

But I agree that a lot of our weapons are too expensive as well on top of the chassis often being too expensive. I'm expecting a price drop on a good amount of our weapons and chassis once our Codex comes around.


Didn't the design docs specifically say they are planning to adjust prices of even the same weapon between different codexies due to the weapon being on different platforms? Have they just not done that much?

First time I hear about that and so far Lascannons or Plasma or whatever are priced the same everywhere.
It honestly would be a terrible idea to price a weapon differently on a unit per unit base instead of factoring in how well a unit generally works in it's base cost.


Umm in each codex they are but otherwise no not even close SM plasma gun 13 pts Flamer 9pts
Tau plasma 11 Flamer 11
AM plasma 7 Flamer 7
Heavy bolter costs AM 8 SM 10 Admech 12

It's all over the shop tbh that's just a small example

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#52 » Sep 25 2017 01:58

Nymphomanius wrote:
Panzer wrote:
QimRas wrote:
Didn't the design docs specifically say they are planning to adjust prices of even the same weapon between different codexies due to the weapon being on different platforms? Have they just not done that much?

First time I hear about that and so far Lascannons or Plasma or whatever are priced the same everywhere.
It honestly would be a terrible idea to price a weapon differently on a unit per unit base instead of factoring in how well a unit generally works in it's base cost.


Umm in each codex they are but otherwise no not even close SM plasma gun 13 pts Flamer 9pts
Tau plasma 11 Flamer 11
AM plasma 7 Flamer 7
Heavy bolter costs AM 8 SM 10 Admech 12

It's all over the shop tbh that's just a small example

Okay I just re-checked.
You are right about AM, however Index Space Marines had the same cost for their Flamer as we have and you can't compare their Plasma with others like that. Ours can't be overcharged and only has S6 after all.

Well I guess they are doing it differently for each Codex then. Which is pretty dumb imo. Same weapons should cost the same for everyone. If a unit can shoot better or is more durable it should be included in the units cost, not in the weapons cost...

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 367
Contact:

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#53 » Sep 25 2017 05:11

Panzer wrote:
Nymphomanius wrote:
Panzer wrote:First time I hear about that and so far Lascannons or Plasma or whatever are priced the same everywhere.
It honestly would be a terrible idea to price a weapon differently on a unit per unit base instead of factoring in how well a unit generally works in it's base cost.


Umm in each codex they are but otherwise no not even close SM plasma gun 13 pts Flamer 9pts
Tau plasma 11 Flamer 11
AM plasma 7 Flamer 7
Heavy bolter costs AM 8 SM 10 Admech 12

It's all over the shop tbh that's just a small example

Okay I just re-checked.
You are right about AM, however Index Space Marines had the same cost for their Flamer as we have and you can't compare their Plasma with others like that. Ours can't be overcharged and only has S6 after all.

Well I guess they are doing it differently for each Codex then. Which is pretty dumb imo. Same weapons should cost the same for everyone. If a unit can shoot better or is more durable it should be included in the units cost, not in the weapons cost...


I completely agree, i added the SM codex prices as i think its even stranger when you consider our plasma and flamer are same price, AM plasma and flamer are same price, yet SM plasma costs more than flamer.

its also massive BS when you look at AM auto cannon vs our missile pod 60% more expensive for 12" less range, D3 damage instead of a fixed 2 makes no real difference, yes its assault not heavy but i would take AM auto cannons all day on my suits and stick them at the back if i had the option.

and you can't even tell me its because we can spam them because a heavy weapons team can take 3 and costs 30% of what a crisis suit costs (much lower T + Sv, more wounds same BS)

infant for the same cost as 3 XV8 with 3 MP each you can have 6 heavy weapon teams with 3 auto cannon each! twice as much firepower for exactly the same cost and we are meant to be a gun line army? (ok does take up more slots but with detachments that really isn't and issue neither is being heavy support vs elite)

User avatar
KuroRyu
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 284
Contact:

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#54 » Sep 25 2017 08:37

If you like our vehicles has anyone considered going smaller rather than bigger?

Piranhas with fusion are fast and cheap. sure they're still point for point not as efficient as commanders but you can't have 5 commanders in one FOC slot.

To compare them to a hammerhead you get 2 fusion Piranhas for slightly less than one stock railhead
Piranhas have 1 less wound between them but don't deteriorate as they take damage. T5 vs T7
2 BS4+ fusion shots vs 1 BS3+ railgun shot that gets worse as it takes damage

Seems like a winner if you really want armour

Return to “Tau Tactics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest