The Space Marines hold their own considerably well given the fact that they have very little in the way of MWs, even with Warhounds in support.*  If they can do it, so can the Tau

GM's.
There is a difference between 40K and IA3's fluff.

In IA3, GM's did seem to be used as suprise attacks to slow down the advance of the enemy.

In the Tau codex, up to 4 Seeker Missiles can be fitted to a vehicle and all be fired in one turn (although guided by a seperate ML).

I'm sorry E&C but you have to decide if you want to recreate IA3 in all Epic battles (boring) or allow Tau players to use GM's as they are available to be used in 40K and therefore you could actually have a swarm of GM's flying around the battlefield. 4 Hammerheads with 4 GM's could legally equal 16 GM's being used in 1 small 40K skirmish. In an Epic scale battle that would equal MANY dozens of GM's flying around the battlefield... LEGALLY and following all 40K Tau FLUFF.

Yes I know that a 40K game is a 15 minute assault in Epic but if the 40K battle were to be able to continue (with logistics for re-supply of units etc) then there could be many swarms of GM's flying around on a 40K battlefield.

It's not rocket science... (sorry, couldn't help myself)  

Mantas.
The Manta Missile Destroyer is the nearest Tau equivalent to Human Titans and Ork Gargants (quote from codex and IA3) and as such should have heavy firepower.
It is well armed and Armoured for use in front line combat, where it is expected to deploy and fight as an attack craft (quote from IA3)

The image of the Manta as just a heavy transport is inaccurate. If the Manta can be seen for what it actually is, then it's stats and abilities may be more easily agreed upon.

When Imperial Titan's formed a spearhead on Dal'yth Prime, Manta's were used to combat them (Tau codex).

Mantas are described as Skimmer and flyer in the codex. The current Support craft rule reflects these abilities. Aircraft rules do not reflect this description.

No banners needed to be raised about Manta's here.

All this said, I believe just about everyone agrees that the current stats are over-gunned. To continualy harp on about something most of us agree on and which hopefully is being addressed is a waste of time.

*Manta's should also have Marker Lights.

Tau Air caste.
Regarding the Tau air assets - again, hasn't it been widely recognised that the current stats are over-powered and most have called for TRC's ideas to be trialed. To use the existing stats as a basis for a debate is pointless.

*The Tau codex I'm quoting/reading is from 2001. Is there a newer version?

Damn it. I promised myself I wouldn't post anymore comments here without something new. Oh well...

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Yes there is.

4th edition Tau codex was released in 2006, I believe.

I'll see about chasing up a copy of the later Codex.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

In the current Codex vehicles ca nonly carry up to two Seeker Missiles exeption is the Sky Ray which always has 6) and you need a Markerlight to fire a Seeker Missile.
For every Seeker Missile fired you need a separate Markerlight.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Mosc, I'll have to disagree with you here as Marines have a plethora of good assault(both CC and FF) units with excellent armour, decent firepower, excellent air assault and ATSKNF. They simply aren't the same beast.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

Even at only 2 GM's/vehicle, there would still be a lot of missiles flying around a 40K battlefield at Epic scale.
I already mentioned the need for a ML per missile per turn, and at Epic scale that is not a problem at all.

My point still stands.

_________________
Just call me Steve.

NetEA Rules Chair
NetEA FAQ

Want to play Iron Warriors in Epic Armageddon? Click HERE
Some of my Armies.
My Hobby site.

Your point stands, but keep in my mind that one round of shooting in EpicA counts for 4-6 shots in 40k...ie each Seeker/GM shot should be a salvo of 4-6 missiles.  So, at 2 per vehicle (excepting the dedicated GM vehicles, Skyray/Scorp etc) they will be used up quickly.

I am not sure I can buy into the idea of reloads.  The only other example of that in the game is Slow-Firing.  And I just don't see scout units being reloaded.

Well i think i porposed Slow-Firing for the SkyRay and 6x AT5+/AA5+ (or 3x AT4+/AA4+) for its Seeker Missiles some time ago.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Sure, EpicA is an abstraction.  And you are right, that it does not exist to follow minor details while playing.  But, part of list design is finding the best way to abstract those details in to a simple system.  Because the details do exist in both other game systems and fluff.  An abstraction assuming reloads for vehicles like Piranhas doesn't hold up and I was hoping to explore alternatives.  The simplest thing I think would just be to drop GMs from the Piranhas and Devilfish.  I think that would make the GM/ML abstraction more accurate and better fit with the background info we have,

But if you say that 2 GMs isn't enough to qualify for a shot, then NO canon Tau vehicle gets a GM shot (except the Skyray, which is supposed to be a dedicated AA vehicle first and a stopgap AT vehicle second), so what's the point of having MLs and GMs in the first place?

Either there's enough GMs on a vehicle to deliver a shot (whether that's one per game or one per activation), and we have the ONE thing that makes Tau unique, or Tau are simply an army that moves a little faster but dies horribly if you can catch them, with NO artillery to prevent you from bunching up and crushing them.

I can make a "One-shot" attack on just about every Tau vehicle work, you just need something to remind yourself whether that unit's fired or not.

We seem to be losing the forest for the trees right now.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

I like the idea of One-Shot attacks, but that has been pretty heavily beat down by others.  2 GMs per vehicle could cover a One-Shot attack fine I think.

In the big picture, the Tau should have ML and Seeker Missiles.  I am not trying to eliminate that.  I think it IS a big part of what make the Tau unique.  What I don't like is that the current abstraction does not entirely fit with the 40k rules or with the background.  

The Tau battle stories that I have read place the Seekers as a big part of the opening salvo.  They hit hard and rain confusion, helping the Tau with overwhelming initial fire power, which the other units can then move in and finish the enemy off.  What I have not read is that there would be a constant succession of waves of GMs flying and beating the enemy down from a distance, which is what we have now.

One-Shot covers that pretty well.  It fits with what IA3 and 40k tell us the vehicles have for a GM payload.  It matches up with the stories where there is an initial salvo.  But, it requires bookkeeping and that can be a bad thing in an abstract game.  If the Seekers were one shot, something like Disrupt or increased range would make sense.

Of course, as I have digested the discussion more and read opinions, etc, I think that the best representation of Seeker Missiles would be to give the army a number of Salvoes that can be fired by a ML equipped formation.  A salvo could represent 12+ missies coming in at once and have stats like 3x AT 4+ Disrupt 90cm range.  I think if you gave one salvo per 500 or 750 points in the army you would go a long way towards capturing the feel of the type of damage and confusion a Seeker barrage is described as causing, while at the same time, not having the vehicles carry an unrealistic number of what is essentially a secondary weapon system.

Heck, having abstracted salvoes kinda works like Artillery in a Tau fashion.  No LOS is required from the carrying vehicle as the GM source is abstracted.  You could move up a unit of Tetras or Pathfinders and unleash it into your opponents deployment on the first turn pretty easily.  Stealths could teleport in and unleash it on hidden arty, which is something some players want a counter for.

Your comment about the forest and trees was well put.  I am a bit too concerned on the details of GMs per vehicle, so hopefully this post gives you an idea of how I would like to see GMs work.    BIG initial salvo, NOT sustained fire for the length of the game.

I would be interested in hearing how others feel GMs should work and what they should represent.  They are a great opportunity to make the Tau unique if we get it right.

A salvo could represent 12+ missies coming in at once and have stats like 3x AT 4+ Disrupt 90cm range.  I think if you gave one salvo per 500 or 750 points in the army you would go a long way towards capturing the feel of the type of damage and confusion a Seeker barrage is described as causing, while at the same time, not having the vehicles carry an unrealistic number of what is essentially a secondary weapon system.

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

Well we could debate GM-ML proposals till we're blue in the face (I think we already have and I'm surprised no one has passed out from asphyxia...). However, we currently have a proposal (Fire only with a ML present) that would seem to function well, albeit not to everyone's taste, but functions none-the-less and that quite a few people agree could work.

We seem to be micro-analysing this function and that just ties us in knots - both from the sheer amount of theory possible and the massive amount of argument generated.

Whether or not Seekers should be salvos or single attacks is just putting me to sleep! Seekers are essentially just another weapon system and we shouldn't have to write the sequel to War and Peace on the subject! Can we please just move ahead with the new proposal we have, and get on with the rest of the list?



Do you think it is possible to create a well balanced Tau list without adding more MWs?