Tactical Command
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/

Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=28578		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  yme-loc [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
I have attached an updated test version of the Third Phase list.

Total changes since 6.6 (last approved version of the list).

1. Ethereal causes D3 blast markers on death
2. XV8 Crisis suits gain an AT6+ attack on their plasma rifles
3. All Twin Burst Cannons AA attack raised to AA5+
4. Custodian down to 225pts
5. Manta down to 650pts
6. AX-1-0 squadron down to 350pts

7. Broadsides down to 300pts, Railgun range reduced to 60cm
8. AX-1-0 and Manta gain extra seeker missiles
9. Bonded team upgrade change
9. XV15 Stealth suits and attached Gun Drones re-roll teleport test for blast markers
10. Shas'el loses Plasma rifle and is free
11. Shas'o upgrade down to 75pts
12. Hammerheads gain 'not lance' and formation/upgrade points changes
13. Krootox upgrade down to 50pts, FF to 5+

It is the intention that this is the final set of changes to test and that this 6.72 developmental version of the list will be tested for another 3-4 months and then submitted to the NetERC for approval. There are quite a few changes from the previous 6.6 (approved) version of the list and it is certainly possible that not all these changes make it into a final approved vs 6.8 of the list (either because testing shows problems or the NetERC requests changes).

But this is the final set of changes to test.

Attachments:
Tau Third Phase Expansion Force v 6.72.pdf [662.35 KiB]
Downloaded 804 times
Author:  GlynG [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
Looks like a solid list, hopefully I can get some testing for you.

You missed the reduction in Krootox off your list of changes by the way.
Author:  yme-loc [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 12:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
GlynG wrote:
You missed the reduction in Krootox off your list of changes by the way.


Thanks for the spot, updated.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 6:16 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
I must have missed it in the discussions, but what is the rational for the increased AA on the barracuda?

Oh, and is it now intentional I can get Manta, hero and barracuda for 1000? Was always before deliberately engineered not to be allowed...
Author:  yme-loc [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 7:12 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
The_Real_Chris wrote:
I must have missed it in the discussions, but what is the rational for the increased AA on the barracuda?

Oh, and is it now intentional I can get Manta, hero and barracuda for 1000? Was always before deliberately engineered not to be allowed...


Yes it is now deliberate to allow the Manta, Protector and Barracuda at 3000 points.

The Barracuda is just a test really, play has found the current configuration to be a fairly mediocre aircraft. Not bad just poor compared to the Thunderbolt for instance (admittedly probably one of the best aircraft for its points). With this change the Barracuda effectively has identical intercept ability to a Thunderbolt but loses out in raw ground attack while gaining a little back with the flexibility of its single (weak) longer range attack.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 7:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
Well, and fighter.
Author:  yme-loc [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 7:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
The_Real_Chris wrote:
Well, and fighter.


Indeed the Barracuda is a much more flexible ground attacker it just doesn't have anything like the raw hitting power of a Thunderbolt when it gets where it's going and they both work identically on intercept where the Thunderbolt gets to work like a fighter anyway.

AA5+ may be a little good (mostly because of the 360 fire arc if anything) but it is worth testing.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Sun Nov 23, 2014 9:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
Oh and I had assumed all this time the manta had co-ord fire due to its fluff as a c&c node? (Even has the c&c deck in it!)
Author:  Dobbsy [ Mon Nov 24, 2014 3:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
When I use barracudas the 15cm AA6+ burst cannon defensive shot is invariably ignored. I think I've been able to fire them once in probably ten games. The opponent doesn't need to get inside 15cm to shoot due to +1 for intercept so you always lose one Barracuda, often both. AA5+ 360 degrees is a nice boost on paper, but minimal in play (practically no point being there) when speaking defensively.

In attack AA5+ at 15cm is a lot better.
Author:  GlynG [ Mon Nov 24, 2014 4:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
The_Real_Chris wrote:
Oh and I had assumed all this time the manta had co-ord fire due to its fluff as a c&c node? (Even has the c&c deck in it!)

Yeah it really should have. Our local Tau player (Andrew_NZ) has grumbled a few times about it not having the command and control capabilities it's meant to.

To give a relevent quote from the Manta's entry in the Taros IA book:
"As well as it's own cockpit, each Manta also contains a sophisticated command bridge. From here a Tau commander can oversee battlefield operations. This allows a Manta to act as a forward command post, fire control and communications hub."

I'd like the Manta to have co-ordinated fire given the above (may need a points increase to cover it).

I'd also like to have the option for to upgrade a Manta with a Shas'O. Tau fight more realistically than the Imperium with their CC obsessed commanders and the background talks about Tau Commanders directing battles from the Manta's command bridge rather than on the ground. It might well need to cost more than a supreme upgrade on a Crisis formation to account for it's extra survivability, though it does mean you loose the BTS and supreme if it dies. I know you can currently buy a Crisis formation with Shas'O and have it inside the Manta, but it wouldn't be worth the cost if you were just leaving it inside.
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Mon Nov 24, 2014 12:07 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
GlynG wrote:
Yeah it really should have. Our local Tau player (Andrew_NZ) has grumbled a few times about it not having the command and control capabilities it's meant to.

To give a relevent quote from the Manta's entry in the Taros IA book:
"As well as it's own cockpit, each Manta also contains a sophisticated command bridge. From here a Tau commander can oversee battlefield operations. This allows a Manta to act as a forward command post, fire control and communications hub."


Looking at the model I assume he squeezes round the consoles or has his own terminal at the back to make sure the other guys aren't playing minesweeper.
Author:  osoi [ Tue Nov 25, 2014 1:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
I would like the option to put the ShasO in a Manta it would be something I would look at taking. It has rosk in having your SC and BTS in same formation but it is thematic and cant see any way that it would be OP. It also helps keep Crisis Suits cheaper which is a good thing.
Author:  Dobbsy [ Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
Yme, has the idea of giving Stealth Suits an "always -1 to hit" status similar to DE Shadowfields ever cropped up? I know there was some discussion about how hard they are to use etc and you gave them the re-roll on teleport, but was curious.

Cheers
Author:  Matt-Shadowlord [ Mon Feb 02, 2015 4:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
There's a change to the protector class spaceship that I have been considering incorporating into the Vior'la list, but I'd like to see if we can get the same tweak made to the primary Tau list too so that they're equivalent.

This is the protector's profile:

Protector - 200pts,
2x Pinpoint MW2+ Titan Killer (D3)

The change I would like to make is to give it an optional orbital bombardment that would fire instead of the TK weapons. This means that instead of getting to fire TK and Blast (like a number of spacecraft), the player has to pick between the two.

Protector - 200pts,
2x Pinpoint MW2+ Titan Killer (D3)
OR
Orbital Bombardment 3BP MW

Most ships with this Orbital Bombardment attack fire a TK as well, and are cheaper at 150pts, so most players would never use the bombardment. However, there is still a reason for it; I've seen a lot of games locally where there are no Titans in armies. This turns the Protector into 200pts worth of fly-on, fly-off dead points. Many areas feature so many Titans that this might never have come up, but we see plenty of speed freak or marine armies here that just don't have any titans (battle example viewtopic.php?f=84&t=28871 ) and I'd rather not offer players something that might be dead points.

How does this work for balance?
If the player chooses to do an Orbital Bombardment, they do a much weaker attack than the SM ship that costs the same (it's not just that one gets 2 templates and the other gets only 1, it's that the second template is much much more aim-able and likely to hit a decent amount of enemy units).
The Tau player has also spent 50 points more than a Guard or Chaos player for the same attack, without getting the TK that goes with it.

For comparison:

Space Marines:
[] Strike Cruiser 5BP MW 200 pts
Guard:
[] Lunar Class 3BP MW AND MW2+ TK(D3) 150pts
Chaos:
[] Devastation Class 3BP MW AND MW2+ TK(D3) 150pts

The bombardment could be a 4BP attack but I'd rather start small, and while 3BP MW may not sound good value for 200pts, having it as an option would certainly be better than nothing.

Thoughts?
Author:  Dobbsy [ Mon Feb 02, 2015 9:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Tau Army List vs 6.72 (Developmental)
Matt-Shadowlord wrote:
having it as an option would certainly be better than nothing.

Thoughts?

Put Tracer missiles on it instead. Fits better with the theme...?
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/