Fire Warriors are good again!

Discuss tactical and strategic development for 40K/Tau.
User avatar
Draaen
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 105

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#37 » Nov 29 2017 09:47

So my method for calculating re-rolling 1's is pretty easy.

Effective Hit Chance = Base hit chance +1/6* Base hit chance

Commander example for proof
Hit Chance = 5/6+1/6*5/6
Hit Chance = 30/36+5/36
Hit Chance = 35/36 which we know is right

Because 1/6 the time you get to re-roll and hit on your BS. Throwing that into my calculator for fire warriors I got.

Fire Warrior -2 Shots re-roll 1s
Vs GEQ 1.93 needed per kill (15.4pts/wound)
Vs MEQ 3.86 needed per kill (30.9pts/wound)
Vs DEQ 7.71 needed per wound (61pts/wound)

Fire Warrior -3 Shots re-roll 1s
Vs GEQ 1.29 needed per kill (10.3pts/wound)
Vs MEQ 2.57 needed per kill (20.6pts/wound)
Vs DEQ 5.14 needed per wound (41.1pts/wound)

Fire Warrior -2 Shots re-roll 1s +1 BS
Vs GEQ 1.45 needed per kill (11.6pts/wound)
Vs MEQ 2.89 needed per kill (23.1pts/wound)
Vs DEQ 5.79 needed per wound (46.3pts/wound)

Fire Warrior -3 Shots re-roll 1s +1 BS
Vs GEQ 0.96 needed per kill (7.7pts/wound)
Vs MEQ 1.93 needed per kill (15.4pts/wound)
Vs DEQ 3.86 needed per wound (30.9pts/wound)

Guardsman - FRFSRF
Vs GEQ 1.50 needed per kill (6.0pts/wound)
Vs MEQ 4.50 needed per kill (18.0pts/wound)
Vs DEQ 9.00 needed per wound (36.0pts/wound)
All empires fall you just have to know where to push

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2147

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#38 » Nov 29 2017 09:52

leo1925 wrote:No it wouldn't make fire warriors blisteringly powerful, with rapid fire 2, assualt 3 and pistol 2, it would bring the cadre fireblade on par with a commander using FRFSRF. And while we are at that bring up his cost to 50-55 points (so that AM players don't complain), make him affect only infantry (so that we start solving our gun drones vs fire warriors problem)

Don't get me wrong- I would love to see Fireblades granting Rapid Fire 2 buffs. Also, it wouldn't be too strong either, there's precedent for it with FRFSRF. I do stand by my wording with "blistering" though- getting double the firepower at 30" would be a massive and significant upgrade to Fire Warriors and would really change how Tau play. I'm really hoping that Fire Warriors find their niche in the Codex- they're such an iconic unit, and the new synergy-based mechanics of 8th Edition make gunlines seem quite appealing!

leo1925 wrote:In my calculations fire warriors get a bit better against DEQ and TEQ (72pts/wound vs 76pts/wound).

I don't want to sound patronizing, but that just can't be the case. Here's the math.

Fire Warrior vs. TEQ:
Cost: 8 points
Hit: 4+
Wound: 3+
Save: 2+

Guardsman vs. TEQ:
Cost: 4 points
Hit: 4+
Wound: 5+
Save: 2+

In all cases, when a Fire Warrior and Guardsman shoot at a T4 target, the statistical average damage (per point) will be exactly the same. Here are the two equations for you, where variable s is the armor save of the target:

8*(1/2)*(2/3)*s

4*(1/2)*(1/3)*s*2

For any value of s these equations will give equal results.

leo1925 wrote:In my opinion strike teams lose even in a white room comparison like this one but not by as much a i thought before entering this thread. Of course when you leave the white room and enter the real battlefield the guardsmen become even better (just like JancoBCN said) with orders+psychic powers+astropath+holy searchlight vs our fireblade+ethereal+markerlights, when you count in their various transports vs our devilfish things start looking a bit depressing.

Once you add synergy into the mix Guardsmen are far and away superior to Fire Warriors- definitely. But then again, no faction (except maybe Tyranids or Death Guard) can take on the Imperial Guard in an infantry attrition match anyway. We need to use tech they don't get access to- durable, fast-moving Drones, XV8s armed with Flamers, and other unique Tau units! :biggrin:

User avatar
Yojimbob
Shas'Saal
Posts: 421

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#39 » Nov 29 2017 10:10

Yes, AM troops are dumb and have been. But I think you'll see that us being second in the troops department is still pretty good and when we get a codex I'm sure we'll get a few added tricks as well to add some versatility, not to mention a probable points drop to our weapon platform. We have a significantly more reliable way to get +1BS with the new stratagem and hidden lights I think will be more important than ever. Hence, our troops are in a VERY good spot once the true dex drops.

User avatar
leo1925
Shas
Posts: 82

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#40 » Nov 29 2017 05:45

Arka0415 wrote:
leo1925 wrote:In my calculations fire warriors get a bit better against DEQ and TEQ (72pts/wound vs 76pts/wound).

I don't want to sound patronizing, but that just can't be the case. Here's the math.

Fire Warrior vs. TEQ:
Cost: 8 points
Hit: 4+
Wound: 3+
Save: 2+

Guardsman vs. TEQ:
Cost: 4 points
Hit: 4+
Wound: 5+
Save: 2+

In all cases, when a Fire Warrior and Guardsman shoot at a T4 target, the statistical average damage (per point) will be exactly the same. Here are the two equations for you, where variable s is the armor save of the target:

8*(1/2)*(2/3)*s

4*(1/2)*(1/3)*s*2

For any value of s these equations will give equal results.


I am not sure i get your formula, can you walk me through?
The formulas i use are:
Guardsmen vs TEQ x*(1/2)*(1/3)*(1/6) and then i solve for x, where x is the number of shots needed for unsaved wound on a TEQ, then x/2*4 (x/2 gives me the number of guardsmen needed and *4 for the points cost).
Fire Warriors vs TEQ x*(1/2)*(2/3)*(1/6) and then i solve for x, where x is the number of shots needed for unsaved wound on a TEQ, then x/2*8 (x/2 gives me the number of fire warriors needed and *8 for the points cost).

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2147

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#41 » Nov 29 2017 07:26

leo1925 wrote:I am not sure i get your formula, can you walk me through?
The formulas i use are:
Guardsmen vs TEQ x*(1/2)*(1/3)*(1/6) and then i solve for x, where x is the number of shots needed for unsaved wound on a TEQ, then x/2*4 (x/2 gives me the number of guardsmen needed and *4 for the points cost).
Fire Warriors vs TEQ x*(1/2)*(2/3)*(1/6) and then i solve for x, where x is the number of shots needed for unsaved wound on a TEQ, then x/2*8 (x/2 gives me the number of fire warriors needed and *8 for the points cost).

Our formulas are the same- I think you're just making a rounding error somewhere.

Let's do it without algebra, just to make it really straightforward.

To get one unsaved wound on a Terminator, we need 6 wounds.

For Guardsmen to get 6 wounds, they need 18 hits. For Guardsmen to get 18 hits, they need 36 shots. For Guardsmen to get 36 shots, they need 18 firing models. 18 models * 4 points is 72.

For Fire Warriors to get 6 wounds, they need 9 hits. For Fire Warriors to get 9 hits, they need 18 shots. For Fire Warriors to get 18 shots, they need 9 firing models. 9 models * 8 points is 72.





The core of the issue is, the only thing different about Guardsmen and Fire Warriors, when shooting at T4 targets, is that Fire Warriors have 2x the chance to wound and are 2x the cost.

How could they be anything but statistically equal against T4 targets?

User avatar
jens
Shas'Saal
Posts: 30

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#42 » Nov 30 2017 03:22

1. I see the point of more CP === use strategem more.
2. I don't see the point of debating Tau FW vs other army infantry here, isnt this about the strategem > drones ? :-?
3. I'm not used to that many FireWarrior squads, and missing the ( minimum ) 120 points really hurts when I'm trying to build an army.

So .. trying to understand, what are your tactics?
My initial thought is to use FWs in one of these ways:
1. stick them in cover, shoot from afar :fear:
2. footslogging - 3 squads, with a FireBlade - to unload hurt / hold an objective ( if lucky :dead: )
3. unload breachers from fish :dead:

.. what are you planning that will upweigh the missing drones. I mean, the aim is still 1 or 5 markerlights right ? ..

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 361
Contact:

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#43 » Nov 30 2017 03:53

jens wrote:1. I see the point of more CP === use strategem more.
2. I don't see the point of debating Tau FW vs other army infantry here, isnt this about the strategem > drones ? :-?
3. I'm not used to that many FireWarrior squads, and missing the ( minimum ) 120 points really hurts when I'm trying to build an army.

So .. trying to understand, what are your tactics?
My initial thought is to use FWs in one of these ways:
1. stick them in cover, shoot from afar :fear:
2. footslogging - 3 squads, with a FireBlade - to unload hurt / hold an objective ( if lucky :dead: )
3. unload breachers from fish :dead:

.. what are you planning that will upweigh the missing drones. I mean, the aim is still 1 or 5 markerlights right ? ..


The whole thread is discussing the usefulness of FW, we compared stats vs other troops because someone said that they just aren't cost effective vs other troops where it's clear that they actually aren't that bad just overshadowed by drones.

And no this isn't about stratagem > drones it's that the new stratagem is awesome and is it worth paying the "tax" of 120pts to bring 15 FW and therefore get 3CP extra.

I don't understand your third point at all because your reference to the minimum number of FW is the whole point of this thread not taking more or less...

User avatar
jens
Shas'Saal
Posts: 30

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#44 » Nov 30 2017 04:14

Nymphomanius wrote:
jens wrote:1. I see the point of more CP === use strategem more.
2. I don't see the point of debating Tau FW vs other army infantry here, isnt this about the strategem > drones ? :-?
3. I'm not used to that many FireWarrior squads, and missing the ( minimum ) 120 points really hurts when I'm trying to build an army.

So .. trying to understand, what are your tactics?
My initial thought is to use FWs in one of these ways:
1. stick them in cover, shoot from afar :fear:
2. footslogging - 3 squads, with a FireBlade - to unload hurt / hold an objective ( if lucky :dead: )
3. unload breachers from fish :dead:

.. what are you planning that will upweigh the missing drones. I mean, the aim is still 1 or 5 markerlights right ? ..


The whole thread is discussing the usefulness of FW, we compared stats vs other troops because someone said that they just aren't cost effective vs other troops where it's clear that they actually aren't that bad just overshadowed by drones.

And no this isn't about stratagem > drones it's that the new stratagem is awesome and is it worth paying the "tax" of 120pts to bring 15 FW and therefore get 3CP extra.

I don't understand your third point at all because your reference to the minimum number of FW is the whole point of this thread not taking more or less...


Well, how am I not suppose to take more firewarriors, if the idea is to add a battalion extra for the CP's ?
I'm trying to understand how to use +30 FWs AS efficient as the drones squads, commander, etc. I then need to leave out in order to get the 3 extra CP's .. Most in the tread seems to think it is a good idea, and I'm simply asking for the "gold".

User avatar
jens
Shas'Saal
Posts: 30

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#45 » Nov 30 2017 05:32

jens wrote:
Nymphomanius wrote:
jens wrote:1. I see the point of more CP === use strategem more.
2. I don't see the point of debating Tau FW vs other army infantry here, isnt this about the strategem > drones ? :-?
3. I'm not used to that many FireWarrior squads, and missing the ( minimum ) 120 points really hurts when I'm trying to build an army.

So .. trying to understand, what are your tactics?
My initial thought is to use FWs in one of these ways:
1. stick them in cover, shoot from afar :fear:
2. footslogging - 3 squads, with a FireBlade - to unload hurt / hold an objective ( if lucky :dead: )
3. unload breachers from fish :dead:

.. what are you planning that will upweigh the missing drones. I mean, the aim is still 1 or 5 markerlights right ? ..


The whole thread is discussing the usefulness of FW, we compared stats vs other troops because someone said that they just aren't cost effective vs other troops where it's clear that they actually aren't that bad just overshadowed by drones.

And no this isn't about stratagem > drones it's that the new stratagem is awesome and is it worth paying the "tax" of 120pts to bring 15 FW and therefore get 3CP extra.

I don't understand your third point at all because your reference to the minimum number of FW is the whole point of this thread not taking more or less...


Well, how am I not suppose to take more firewarriors, if the idea is to add a battalion extra for the CP's ?
I'm trying to understand how to use +30 FWs AS efficient as the drones squads, commander, etc. I then need to leave out in order to get the 3 extra CP's .. Most in the tread seems to think it is a good idea, and I'm simply asking for the "gold".


Maybe I aught to mention, the army i'm buildning, is made up of 4x commanders (+2), longstrike (+2), Fire Crisis team (auto hit), 2x DroneFishes ( FB + 11 GDs +4 ), 2x stealth teams to provide HB ( +4 ), 3 strike teams ( +4 ), and a pathfinder team ( +4, but shoots markerlights for the re-roll.).

So the teams that will benefit are the Dronefishes and the Stealth and Strike teams ..
I don't see what I can cut back on that will justify trying to get the 3 extra CPs.
If I do, the list becomes less versatile and less mobile.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2147

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#46 » Nov 30 2017 05:43

jens wrote:Maybe I aught to mention, the army i'm buildning, is made up of 4x commanders (+2), longstrike (+2), Fire Crisis team (auto hit), 2x DroneFishes ( FB + 11 GDs +4 ), 2x stealth teams to provide HB ( +4 ), 3 strike teams ( +4 ), and a pathfinder team ( +4, but shoots markerlights for the re-roll.).

So the teams that will benefit are the Dronefishes and the Stealth and Strike teams ..
I don't see what I can cut back on that will justify trying to get the 3 extra CPs.
If I do, the list becomes less versatile and less mobile.

If the majority of your firepower is Commanders, Longstrike, and Flamer XV8s, don't bother adding tons of Fire Warriors just to get that stratagem. Re-rolling ones will probably be enough for you.

Make a new thread over in Cadre Building with the list you're working on and I'd be very interested to take a look!

Nymphomanius
Shas'Saal
Posts: 361
Contact:

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#47 » Nov 30 2017 05:56

Arka0415 wrote:
Battalions.

Remember that Gun Drones can't make Battalions. That means Strike Teams and Breacher Teams are much more necessary; in other words, Fire Warriors. Mechanized or not, from here on out Tau armies should definitely include at least one Battalion Detachment.


What do you think?


jens wrote:So the teams that will benefit are the Dronefishes and the Stealth and Strike teams ..
I don't see what I can cut back on that will justify trying to get the 3 extra CPs.
If I do, the list becomes less versatile and less mobile.


You already have 3 strike teams in your list and therefore the 1 Battalion mentioned in the OP who was referring to lists now that are say 2 outrider and 1 vanguard detachment, is it worth those types of lists making space for a Battalion.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2147

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#48 » Nov 30 2017 05:59

jens wrote:Maybe I aught to mention, the army i'm buildning, is made up of 4x commanders (+2), longstrike (+2), Fire Crisis team (auto hit), 2x DroneFishes ( FB + 11 GDs +4 ), 2x stealth teams to provide HB ( +4 ), 3 strike teams ( +4 ), and a pathfinder team ( +4, but shoots markerlights for the re-roll.).

So the teams that will benefit are the Dronefishes and the Stealth and Strike teams ..
I don't see what I can cut back on that will justify trying to get the 3 extra CPs.
If I do, the list becomes less versatile and less mobile.


Thanks for pointing that out Nymphomanius- yeah, Jens, you already have 3 Strike Teams and thus a Battalion. There's no need to drop anything because... you already have it in your list.

User avatar
jens
Shas'Saal
Posts: 30

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#49 » Nov 30 2017 06:38

Arka0415 wrote:
Gragagrogog wrote:
Emberkahn wrote:also what is your point regarding battalions? Sorry I must have missed the change.


It's transitive change, command points are worth more -> therefore having detachment with more command points is more advantageous.


Exactly. Drones don't make Battalions. Taking small groups of Pathfinders and Drones makes Outrider detachments, but... there's a good chance that Battalion + Battalion + Ourider (10 CP) or Battalion + Outrider + Supreme Command (8 CP) will be our best shots at getting lots of Command Points.

:)
It was this I'm referring to, the extra Battalion ;)

User avatar
leo1925
Shas
Posts: 82

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#50 » Nov 30 2017 06:55

Nymphomanius wrote:The whole thread is discussing the usefulness of FW, we compared stats vs other troops because someone said that they just aren't cost effective vs other troops where it's clear that they actually aren't that bad just overshadowed by drones.


And then I took it back, I was wrong, fire warriors aren't as bad as I thought. It's the other mechanics of our army that need work (and of course something to be done about gun drones).

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 2147

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#51 » Nov 30 2017 06:56

jens wrote:It was this I'm referring to, the extra Battalion ;)

In your current list you have 8 CP, right? That's plenty for the time being. No need to add the second battalion when your army is relying on primarily BS2+ sources! You can use plenty of Command Re-Rolls and Uplinked Markerlights, especially now that you're getting CP back on 6+ too :)

User avatar
jens
Shas'Saal
Posts: 30

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#52 » Nov 30 2017 07:18

Arka0415 wrote:
jens wrote:Maybe I aught to mention, the army i'm buildning, is made up of 4x commanders (+2), longstrike (+2), Fire Crisis team (auto hit), 2x DroneFishes ( FB + 11 GDs +4 ), 2x stealth teams to provide HB ( +4 ), 3 strike teams ( +4 ), and a pathfinder team ( +4, but shoots markerlights for the re-roll.).

So the teams that will benefit are the Dronefishes and the Stealth and Strike teams ..
I don't see what I can cut back on that will justify trying to get the 3 extra CPs.
If I do, the list becomes less versatile and less mobile.

If the majority of your firepower is Commanders, Longstrike, and Flamer XV8s, don't bother adding tons of Fire Warriors just to get that stratagem. Re-rolling ones will probably be enough for you.

Make a new thread over in Cadre Building with the list you're working on and I'd be very interested to take a look!


The list, building in progress : viewtopic.php?f=48&t=26895

User avatar
Haechi
Shas'Saal
Posts: 147

Re: Fire Warriors are good again!

Post#53 » Dec 04 2017 06:31

AnonAmbientLight wrote:Firewarrior (Strike) - 8pts - Pulse Rifle - Rapid Fire 1 S5 30'' Rng. They also get defensive grenades which are not that bad honestly. They stack with each other and you can pile them on to charging units making them completely ineffective if you are lucky.


I'm gonna jump on this ship a bit late. It's a very interesting topic and I don't know how I missed it. Anyway, I don't think our Photon Grenades stack unfortunately. "any" hits means it doesn't matter if it's 1 or 200.

Return to “Tau Tactics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests