Tanks - what a disappointment

Discuss tactical and strategic development for 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Harkus959
Shas'Saal
Posts: 131

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#91 » Oct 24 2017 11:42

How much would you say the hammerhead would improve as a tank hunter if you could replace the secondary weapons with CIB, or just an Ion Rifle?

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#92 » Oct 24 2017 11:49

With CIB almost nothing. They are still only 18" after all. Ion Rifles about as little since they are too weak.
From the common weapons regular Missile Pods would be the best option i guess.

User avatar
Harkus959
Shas'Saal
Posts: 131

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#93 » Oct 24 2017 11:56

Panzer wrote:With CIB almost nothing. They are still only 18" after all. Ion Rifles about as little since they are too weak.
From the common weapons regular Missile Pods would be the best option i guess.


Well, we do have missile drones as an option for the Broadsides, so perhaps we'll see them become an option for the Railhead too, replacing the gun drones to make it a more competitive anti-tank tank.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#94 » Oct 24 2017 12:00

Unlikely without getting a new Hammerhead box with those bitz added but it would help a little I guess. It's still not ideal though. Missile Pods are more anti-infantry than anti-tank but it's the only regular weapon with the needed range for a long ranged tank.

User avatar
Yojimbob
Shas'Saal
Posts: 385

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#95 » Oct 24 2017 12:27

That is without a doubt the biggest problem we have with potentially arming our tanks with guns. All our good stuff is 18" and severely lack long range threat anymore. They'd have to create a new secondary weapon AND add it to the boxes which seems unlikely. If they do end up merging with some of the FW designs and have multiple weapons for the turret besides the ion and rail then they might redo the kit and add better secondary weapons but I find that all highly unlikely and we will be forever stuck with 5/0/1 secondary options.

User avatar
Harkus959
Shas'Saal
Posts: 131

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#96 » Oct 24 2017 12:32

Hmm, the FAQ added a <HAMMERHEAD> keyword, and its the only vehicle we have a character for. It's also been in production as the exact same kit since the original Tau range (I think) so perhaps they are paying some special attention to one of the seminal tau units.

Do you think it's just wishful thinking to imagine we might be getting an updated Hammerhead kit, or is there a slim chance?

User avatar
Czar Ziggy
Fio'Ui
Fio'Ui
Posts: 550
Contact:

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#97 » Oct 24 2017 12:51

The hammerhead key word was added to clear up longstrikes ability.

Based on the current codex release trend, I think any new kits are unlikely. GW is pushing to have all books out by this time next year. I believe we will see new models and units in supplementary campaign books which would release after the codexs and push the narrative forwards. Similar to what happened with Tyranids in 6th with the Baal series.

Czar Ziggy

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#98 » Oct 24 2017 12:56

Harkus959 wrote:Hmm, the FAQ added a <HAMMERHEAD> keyword, and its the only vehicle we have a character for. It's also been in production as the exact same kit since the original Tau range (I think) so perhaps they are paying some special attention to one of the seminal tau units.

Do you think it's just wishful thinking to imagine we might be getting an updated Hammerhead kit, or is there a slim chance?

Definitely more wishful thinking than anything else I fear.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1946

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#99 » Oct 24 2017 06:55

Harkus959 wrote:Hmm, the FAQ added a <HAMMERHEAD> keyword, and its the only vehicle we have a character for. It's also been in production as the exact same kit since the original Tau range (I think) so perhaps they are paying some special attention to one of the seminal tau units.

Do you think it's just wishful thinking to imagine we might be getting an updated Hammerhead kit, or is there a slim chance?

That'd be nice. The Hammerhead box is one of the few that didn't get an update when they changed the box art to Vior'la, it's still rocking that crazy camouflage T'au scheme. Maybe it'll get re-boxed, but I doubt it'll get any new parts. Though I'd love to see something like a coaxial Heavy Rail Rifle, or Rail Rifles instead of SMS :biggrin:

User avatar
Harkus959
Shas'Saal
Posts: 131

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#100 » Oct 24 2017 08:16

Well, if this thread has proved anything, it's that hammerhead is well deserving of an update. In fact, it probably needs one.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1946

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#101 » Oct 26 2017 07:10

Harkus959 wrote:Well, if this thread has proved anything, it's that hammerhead is well deserving of an update. In fact, it probably needs one.

Yup :?

User avatar
Plainshow
Shas
Posts: 36

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#102 » Oct 26 2017 03:35

Panzer wrote:Missile Pods are more anti-infantry than anti-tank but it's the only regular weapon with the needed range for a long ranged tank.
This would be interesting option as it wouldn’t require any repackaging, missiles are missiles.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#103 » Oct 26 2017 04:05

Plainshow wrote:
Panzer wrote:Missile Pods are more anti-infantry than anti-tank but it's the only regular weapon with the needed range for a long ranged tank.
This would be interesting option as it wouldn’t require any repackaging, missiles are missiles.

It kinda still would. It would require GW to add the options of regular Missile Pods instead of SMS in the instructions and to include the Missile Pod bit. SMS and MP are two different things.
Anyway, as I mentioned in the post you quoted, it wouldn't really be the solution anyway. MP is an anti-infantry weapon, like the SMS. Not something you'd want on an anti-tank loadout.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1946

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#104 » Oct 29 2017 10:09

Assuming the Hammerhead doesn't get a model update (which I'm assuming it won't) then we're stuck with:

1. A considerable buff to the Railgun
2. A strategem
3. A change in how Markerlights/Seeker Missiles work

Jorthax
Shas
Posts: 16

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#105 » Oct 30 2017 04:33

Arka0415 wrote:2. A strategem


My problem with strategem's fixing things is that we can be (not always) a relatively 'elite' army and therefore I've found it harder to fill out those +3CP force orgs to get as high a totals as my friends. Paying 1CP a turn to fire a hammerhead is not going to help. I have a feeling we are going to be CP starved if we get JSJ back.

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 121

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#106 » Oct 30 2017 01:02

Considering what happened to Leman Russes and Fire Prisms, we could hope for the same treatment on our HH, and have their turret fire twice if they moved at half range. That and a small price drop would make them very viable.

User avatar
Yojimbob
Shas'Saal
Posts: 385

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#107 » Oct 30 2017 02:20

Haechi wrote:Considering what happened to Leman Russes and Fire Prisms, we could hope for the same treatment on our HH, and have their turret fire twice if they moved at half range. That and a small price drop would make them very viable.


It's basically a guarantee that we will get the same treatment for the HH but I'm STILL confused as to what will happen to the skyray. I'm betting it goes the same was as other flyers getting renewable missiles every turn but I doubt it will be the full 6 like it always has been. Likely will be dropped to 4.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'Saal
Posts: 3548

Re: Tanks - what a disappointment

Post#108 » Oct 30 2017 02:55

The easiest fix for the Skyray would be to give him unlimited Seeker missiles. I'd play one even with the current Seeker rules if he had an unlimited amount of them.

Return to “Tau Tactics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests