Options against Heavy Infantry

Discuss tactical and strategic development for 40K/Tau.
AleksandrGRC
Shas'Saal
Posts: 113

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#37 » Jan 28 2018 01:43

The rvarna or whatever has guns good for the job. its still only going to bring down 2-3? Of these targets a turn for a lot of pts though.

User avatar
SniperTau
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 229

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#38 » Jan 28 2018 03:09

I played a game vs Custodes a couple days ago and 36 fire warriors and two fire blades and a Pulse Accel drone didn’t even dent them.

User avatar
Krospgnasker
Shas
Posts: 44

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#39 » Jan 28 2018 03:20

SniperTau wrote:I played a game vs Custodes a couple days ago and 36 fire warriors and two fire blades and a Pulse Accel drone didn’t even dent them.


With one markerlight, you'd need 66.67 pulse rifle shots to kill one Custodes boi on average.

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Vre
Shas'Vre
Posts: 3253

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#40 » Jan 28 2018 06:21

SniperTau wrote:I played a game vs Custodes a couple days ago and 36 fire warriors and two fire blades and a Pulse Accel drone didn’t even dent them.

Same experience here. 100+ Pulse Rifle shots dealt 1-2 wounds to the squad, the only effective thing was CIBs and Missile Pods.

Commander Quickdraw
Shas
Posts: 2

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#41 » Jan 29 2018 01:06

Shouldnt the R'Varna be perfectly suited to deal with custodes? 6w3 shots, s6 wounds on 3, ap-3 with ats puts them at 5+ save which they'd have anyways with their invuln, 3 dmg outright kills one custodian.

This comes at a Range of 60" and with a painful nova charge mortal wound bubble against deepstrikers.

On top of that the r'varna is a tough nut to crack for them at t8 because custodes have very few lascannons.

Sounds good to me.

User avatar
Kelandis
Shas'Saal
Posts: 61

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#42 » Jan 29 2018 02:53

Talking about Custodes and their invulnerability saves, everyone has to remember that a faction trait for the Custodes is that if you're only taking them, then all their invuln saves get increased by 1. So a Custodes only army is actually 2+/4++

User avatar
gunrock
Shas
Posts: 110

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#43 » Jan 29 2018 03:11

AleksandrGRC wrote:The rvarna or whatever has guns good for the job. its still only going to bring down 2-3? Of these targets a turn for a lot of pts though.


Is that factoring in a markerlights, the nova charge re-rolls, and possibly calling Kauyon?
All the rivers run into the sea, Yet the sea is not full; Unto the place whither the rivers go, Thither they go again.

User avatar
Draaen
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 156

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#44 » Jan 29 2018 05:33

Yeah Ion and missile pods and melta were predictably very effective against the custodes. Surprisingly my flamer suits did a good punch but I think all my drones failed to cause a single wound. My opponent was downright horrified of my crisis suits with ATS and 2 cyclic Ion Blasters.

As far as Custodes go a 2+/4++ and potential 2+/3++ T5 with 3 wounds is difficult to break through. Especially if they are within their -1 to hit banner. Their shooting was surprisingly effective due to the higher damage and armor pen and almost guaranteed chance to hit. Also if custodes get into combat with something like a Yvahara you should expect it to be dead or very close to dead. They have a ton of attacks that if supported by a captain are almost guaranteed to hit do multiple damage and can get +1 to wound. You'd need a lot of drone support to get away unscathed.

All told not too bad without their bikes when I played them but they were tougher to put down then I thought and did more damage then I thought they would. After that game though I've decided to shift around my TAC list a bit and put an ATS on my flamer suits. It would turn that unit into a real threat against hordes or elites and I think 6 flamers with AP-1 should be good enough at clearing out chaff. They felt a little useless late game when the targets were Guilliman or Custodes lol.
All empires fall you just have to know where to push

AleksandrGRC
Shas'Saal
Posts: 113

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#45 » Jan 31 2018 12:07

Oh dude, I'm like estimating 2-3 at 75% hit rate novacharged guns and i didnt consider the -1 to hit banner. Im sure someone can show you good math but mine could be way off with that banner. The above post is better i was just thinking of the gun profile itself. Use flammers and cibs.
If they wreak one riptide variation they will another.
So best not to have to many points in one unit?

Also considering making a all commers list flammers and cibs are a good choice again.

These custode bikes can kite some of our forces while clearing chaff then dive into our heart and crush it when the time is right. Diverting our movements to chase them with our 18” weapons on suits could easily create opportunities for them.

Kinda why i was thinking long range firepower like broadsides or the Rvarna burried behind ranks of cheep infantry n the like. That and i got a rvarna off kijiji recently and was trying to justify it :).
Unfortunately points price wise :/
and i like moving so its not overly appealing. But this might be a matchup where a strong meatline with 30+ missiles will work ?

Oh. And seekers.
Seekers are the ideal weapon lol.

Pirhannas and skyrays
New meta.

User avatar
Orion7
Shas'Saal
Posts: 97

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#46 » Feb 02 2018 10:55

nic wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:
nic wrote:If you do not declare Kauyon when launching your seeker missiles then you are probably doing it wrong. I agree that the Piranha have the edge over the whole game but they need the Kauyon even more than the Skyray. My point was (and is) that highly elite armies are where Seeker missiles begin to look like a good option.

Kauyon would require the Skyray to be immobile, and for a Commander to be nearby, and for that Commander not to have used Manta Strike, and for there to be enough units around to justify using Kauyon.

On the other hand, firing your Seeker Missiles at a target with 5+ Markerlights makes the Sky Ray BS2+ re-rolling ones, which is better than Kauyon, doesn't require a Commander, and is more tactically flexible.

Kauyon could be useful, but since there's a very high chance that you're firing at a Marker-lit target anyway, I don't think Kauyon is totally necessary here.


Necessary - no, there are other ways to maximise the hits. It is certainly an option but we are deep-diving into list building philosophy and the issues of fully supporting the big one-turn Seeker missile strike with a balanced number of markerlight sources. Getting 5 marker hits on multiple targets is usually beyond what my list can reliably achieve, a Kauyon by contrast is always achievable with resources I already have in every list. A discussion of counters that only lets me reliably counter one enemy unit seems rather weak, similarly a need to add lots more markerlight sources into the list complicates the discussion.

In my experience the only models that can safely hold their Seeker missiles back to wait for markerlight support on a fresh target are models which can hide off the table - so Remoras really. Your mileage may vary.


Don't forget, the sky ray carries two markerlights itself. Factoring in the stratagem you really don't need meant markerlights in your list to keep it fed


Limitations? You mean you don't want Fido the kroot hound as a character?

User avatar
CDR_Farsight
Shas'Saal
Posts: 266

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#47 » Feb 02 2018 11:20

Arka0415 wrote:
gunrock wrote:I know that you explicitly mentioned these weapons having a parallel level of efficiency on commanders, but I also think that Commander MP+ATS should be considered individually as it's a load out that translates poorly to XV-8.

Good point, I forgot to add Missile Pods. Missile Pods would just be...

+ Longer range
= Equal damage against Custodes as CIBs
- Less efficient than CIBs
- Less damage against Terminators and Paladins than CIBs

For the time being though, I don't think Missile Pods can properly be compared to the other three weapons. Missile Pods and Gun Drones don't synergize very well, and a simple points-per-wound analysis would undersell the value of the Missile Pod's superior range. What do you think?





By the way here's something fun. To chop through 5-man Custodes squad (T5/W15/Sv2+) you would need 154 Airbursting Fragmentation Projectors mounted on 52 XV8 battlesuits costing a total of 3,724 points. Fun!


Yes and no...the ability to stay out of range can mean extra turns shooting which would then increase its late game efficiency/utility. I think it is completely viable against heavy infantry meta but will lose efficiency against a mixed force od heavy infantry supported by long range firepower that also has the ability to reach out and touch him.
To secure victory, the wise must adapt ~ Puretide

User avatar
Yojimbob
Shas'Saal
Posts: 573

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#48 » Feb 02 2018 03:37

Orion7 wrote:
nic wrote:
Arka0415 wrote:Kauyon would require the Skyray to be immobile, and for a Commander to be nearby, and for that Commander not to have used Manta Strike, and for there to be enough units around to justify using Kauyon.

On the other hand, firing your Seeker Missiles at a target with 5+ Markerlights makes the Sky Ray BS2+ re-rolling ones, which is better than Kauyon, doesn't require a Commander, and is more tactically flexible.

Kauyon could be useful, but since there's a very high chance that you're firing at a Marker-lit target anyway, I don't think Kauyon is totally necessary here.


Necessary - no, there are other ways to maximise the hits. It is certainly an option but we are deep-diving into list building philosophy and the issues of fully supporting the big one-turn Seeker missile strike with a balanced number of markerlight sources. Getting 5 marker hits on multiple targets is usually beyond what my list can reliably achieve, a Kauyon by contrast is always achievable with resources I already have in every list. A discussion of counters that only lets me reliably counter one enemy unit seems rather weak, similarly a need to add lots more markerlight sources into the list complicates the discussion.

In my experience the only models that can safely hold their Seeker missiles back to wait for markerlight support on a fresh target are models which can hide off the table - so Remoras really. Your mileage may vary.


Don't forget, the sky ray carries two markerlights itself. Factoring in the stratagem you really don't need meant markerlights in your list to keep it fed


Assuming it doesn't move because markerlights are still heavy and the skyray couldn't possibly be balanced enough to keep it steady. But don't worry, marker drones are "stable platforms" or whatever the stupid special rule is. :roll:

User avatar
gunrock
Shas
Posts: 110

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#49 » Feb 02 2018 05:48

CDR_Farsight wrote:Yes and no...the ability to stay out of range can mean extra turns shooting which would then increase its late game efficiency/utility. I think it is completely viable against heavy infantry meta but will lose efficiency against a mixed force od heavy infantry supported by long range firepower that also has the ability to reach out and touch him.


In some contexts yes, the range will just become invalidated by long range units, thus negating the advantage of multiple turns of shooting, but I think this gets offset by a few factors. If your running multiple fusion commanders in parallel, you should basically be attempting to dismantle heavily armored units early on. Backing up fusion commanders is an MP commanders first job. Second, MP commanders are much easier to support then every other variety of commander, they can land at the edge of midfield and link up with ground drones almost immediately for protection while still doing their job. Empirical accounts would tend to support this, Mp commanders are just a lot less likely to die then other varieties.

I know it was mentioned that MP commanders don't really help gun drones (no commander is good at this except possibly cold star), but they don't hurt gun drones either. They still benefit from being next to a cluster of drones, being able to call mont'ka/Kauyon, and having similar move speed.

With all of the solutions proposed I think tau just lack a single comprehensive solution against heavy infantry, but the combination of any two appropriate units seems like a reasonable answer.
All the rivers run into the sea, Yet the sea is not full; Unto the place whither the rivers go, Thither they go again.

User avatar
CDR_Farsight
Shas'Saal
Posts: 266

Re: Options against Heavy Infantry

Post#50 » Feb 03 2018 07:01

gunrock wrote:
CDR_Farsight wrote:Yes and no...the ability to stay out of range can mean extra turns shooting which would then increase its late game efficiency/utility. I think it is completely viable against heavy infantry meta but will lose efficiency against a mixed force od heavy infantry supported by long range firepower that also has the ability to reach out and touch him.


In some contexts yes, the range will just become invalidated by long range units, thus negating the advantage of multiple turns of shooting, but I think this gets offset by a few factors. If your running multiple fusion commanders in parallel, you should basically be attempting to dismantle heavily armored units early on. Backing up fusion commanders is an MP commanders first job. Second, MP commanders are much easier to support then every other variety of commander, they can land at the edge of midfield and link up with ground drones almost immediately for protection while still doing their job. Empirical accounts would tend to support this, Mp commanders are just a lot less likely to die then other varieties.

I know it was mentioned that MP commanders don't really help gun drones (no commander is good at this except possibly cold star), but they don't hurt gun drones either. They still benefit from being next to a cluster of drones, being able to call mont'ka/Kauyon, and having similar move speed.

With all of the solutions proposed I think tau just lack a single comprehensive solution against heavy infantry, but the combination of any two appropriate units seems like a reasonable answer.


I whole heartedy agree that we don't have many solutions against heavy infantry. I often find TEQ or MEQ in cover to be the absolute bane of my existence. We have very little effective multi-purpose AP-2 and even less flat 2 damage weaponry. We can boost things to AP-2; however, that normally reduces the effectiveness of the unit since it takes up a weapon slot. Furthermore, ther are just so many things out there that flat out ignore AP-1 or even gain benefits against AP-1. It is very annoying.
To secure victory, the wise must adapt ~ Puretide

Return to “Tau Tactics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests