Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
Updated force list, phase one http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5469 |
Page 1 of 7 |
Author: | CyberShadow [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 12:48 am ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
Well, it has been a real learning curve for me over the last week. The first thing that I have learned is that some of you guys have a lot more spare time than I would have thought possible! ? ![]() I have completed the first phase of the update of the force list, which I have (almost randomly) decided to number as 4.3.1. This may not cover all changes discussed, and if there is anything that I have missed, please do let me know. I have also gone through this board and unpinned a number of threads, to keep things pinned as tidy as I possibly can. So, now a few notes about the new version. I have gone through the version 4.2.4, compiled by Tactica, and signed off many of the changes there (in red). EA Tau V4.3.1 Explanation of changes accepted for discussion Some changes implemented are simple judgements or self-explanatory Page 01 ? Acknowledgements: I have tried to include everyone, but please let me know if I have left you off this list Page 03 ? Coordinated Fire: Broken units cannot be called on for coordinated fire Page 03 ? Coordinated Fire: Only a single ?1 modifier is suffered, even if both formations have blast markers Page 11 ? Dragonfish: I have moved the stats for this out of the collectors section (which I am really pleased about as I really like this concept). I do think that we need to discuss the Battle matrix rule, as two rerolls seems clunky. Reasoning behind proposed changes not added If there are any rules amendments not implemented, please feel free to open discussion on them Page 08 ? Crisis and Broadside Battlesuits: I have not changed this unit from light vehicle to infantry, although I have been following the various discussions regarding this (although I have added the walker ability to the Crisis suits ? I don?t understand why this was not done) Page 13 ? Knarloc: I have not changed this from light vehicle to infantry or taken away the walker ability Page 13 ? Human Auxiliaries: I have not changed the weapon name to inferior pulse rifles, perhaps we can come up with a similar but different weapon, I just don?t like the term ?inferior? Thanks for bearing with me as I get climatised into this, and I hope that the pace will pick up here. |
Author: | clausewitz [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:02 am ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
RE Dragonfish. There has been fairly extensive discussion of this. The pretty much universal agreement was to drop the Battle Matrix (with the 2x SC Rerolls) and replace with the normal (Tau) Supreme Commander ability. |
Author: | Chroma [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 3:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
A question: why the limited upgrades for the Armoured Cadre? What's wrong with being allowed to add a little Mech Inf or such to the Cadre? Other than that, it looks really good! |
Author: | Nerroth [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 8:43 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
I should point out that I am Gary Carney, so I'm already credited in the list... And I pointed this out to Tactica, but Or'es El'leath is not the configuration of the Custodian, but its ship class. Also, the Hero fluff should be changed, as it is not quite accurate now the resin fleet is out. The starships' titles should be: TAU LAR'SHI (HERO) CLASS CRUISER (VASH?YA CONFIGURATION) TAU OR?ES EL?LEATH (CUSTODIAN) CLASS BATTLESHIP And the Hero's fluff should be: In the Kor'vattra Ileath'fannor - Commerce and Exploration Fleet, the fleet of starships which has served the Empire since its first expansion into space - the Lar'shi(Hero) is the pinnacle of modular Tau stellar technology. Designed as a match for Imperial ships of the line, it is a powerfully gunned cruiser capable of facing most cruiser-sized opposition in space, being the first large starship the Tau built for the sole purpose of combat. In addition to its numerous weapon systems, it has troop transport capabilities and can deploy several Moray assault ships, Orca dropships or even the huge Manta Missile Destroyers by planetfall. In keeping with the Shas'ar'tol's and Kor'vattra's shared concept of surgical warfare, Tau starships eschew the massed orbital bombardment strikes used by other spaceborne races during ongoing ground battles, to avoid friendly fire accidents and collateral damage - as they normally don?t wish to destroy what they are fighting for. Instead, they employ highly accurate pin-point attacks and ship-launched Tracer Missles to take out enemy formations and war engines with high precision. And the Orbital Bombardment article should be changed to the one in Tactica's 4.2.4 pdf (the Merchant - and the associated Merchant note - is not in the list, but the Custodian is): Weapon Range Firepower Notes Custodian n/a 3BP Macro-weapon Explorer (Vash?ya or Bork?an) n/a 3BP Macro-weapon Hero (Vash?ya) n/a 2BP Macro-weapon Hero (T?olku) n/a 6BP Macro-weapon Notes: The Bor'kan variant Explorer may only carry 4 Mantas but possesses 8 Tracer Missiles. The T'olku variant Hero has no Pin-point Attacks. And the Explorer should count as a Custodian, not a Hero. And the Hero is not Slow and Steady! Gary |
Author: | Steele [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 9:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
RE Crisis & Broadsides : Can you explain why you didn?t adopt them to Infantry Status? I thought that it was something like Chapter Approved for them. So far they work much better as Infantry. RE Dragonfish : I also thought that the second Reroll was banned? RE Hero : As I?m not the Starship specialist, but having 2 Ships Slow and Steady in the Main List? Is that for sure? |
Author: | Nerroth [ Tue Nov 15, 2005 10:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
It is not! (Good to see I'm not the only one to notice the S&S part...) Gary |
Author: | Tactica [ Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:03 am ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
CS, Glad to see you got us a list up so quick. Well done on the update time Sir. I'm glad to see you didn't drift too much from WIP v4.2.4 but I have some questions of why you did make some changes - most of which I'm hoping was accidents! ![]() Side note before I get into what I see: Jervis may wish the list be more than just 'inspired' by him - FYI, regardless of how much we all changed it - he was the original author from what I remember. ![]() Ok, jumping into the nitty gritty of what I can see. BTW: just comparing this to what we came up with in the v4.2.4 WIP list. 1) The Coordinated Fire (CF) ambiguity is back now. It doesn't say whether a player should declare each of the subordinate shooting actions before rolling to activate CF, or declare after rolling for CF but declare all subordinate actions before any formations are moved, or declare each subordinate action after each previous sub-activation has been successfully resolved. Some direction needs to be clarified. Thus the proposed in the WIP. See CF Discussion for more details. 2) GM & ML Glad to see that Nerroth's Tracer notation was included, but you may want to further note that Tracers fired from outerspace that are guided work and may target as normal. Just a suggestion for clarification since it may generate questions. 3) Tau Jet Pack Technology You've removed the air assault clause. Its part of the original defense of the jump away - even if you can't escape the aircrafts assault, which you can't, you may be able to escape nearby support formations. Why would you take this out? 4) Tau Deflector shield now lists weapon types again, and now lists lance... a rule of 'like lance' leaves room for interpretation. The last sentece has a typo, "They do not work at all in attacks from..." Overall, this section was rewritten as it was too wordy before and now takes up 9 lines again instead of 7. Your call, but seems unnecessarily wordy again. 5) You may want to check margins in general, Amoured Mobile Hunter Cadre, Broadside, Hammerhead contingent - etc in the armylit are now taking up two lines instead of 1 for some reason. 6) Stealth Suit - Drones to Gun Drones in upgrades columns - good catch! 7) Changed Gun Drone Squadron in the army list back to Gun Drone "Swarm" for some reason. Don't know why as the Datasheet actually says Gun Drone Squadron... and doesn't sound so Tyranid either!!! Eeek! 8) Added 0-1 Shas'el restriction - why? 9) Tau Ethereal's listed twice now ![]() 10) You kept the Tetra formation increase in price from 150 to 175 but you didn't keep the Tetra upgrade at +100 and put it back to +75, intentional? 11) I like your rewording of the swordfish upgrade description, good job... but there's that margin issue again! ![]() 12) You buried the upgrade points in the description of the Kroot and Gue'vesa alien auxilia. We seperated it out in v4.2.4 to have consistency with the other upgrades and to clearly list the points - like the Tracer salvo upgrade - its listed like the rest of the 'Tau Upgrades' with points to the far right column. Just a preferences thing I suppose, but seems like the Tracer upgrade on the Hero would follow suit with the Alien Auxilia for consitency one way or the other in the army list. 13) Tigershark Strke Craft is used as the unit name, but Forgeworld calls this a Tiger Shark Bomber in Taros. So they seperate out the Tiger from the Shark and they reference it as a bomber instead of a Strike craft. Doesn't mean we have to follow their lead, but your call. 14) There are all kinds of little breaking tick marks in the horizontal lines of the datasheets - just a nit picky thing. 15 & 16) The majority of the Tau community like infantry on the crisis and broadsides - i.e. all battlesuits, I have no idea why you reverted back to LV and then added walker. Even Nealhunt said crisis (at least) should be infantry. The evidence is overwhelming to make them infantry. If you think they are too powerful as infantry, I'd personally rather lower their power than make them an aircraft, a armored vehicle or anything else than what they are - which is infantry. Many have also modeled their army already and LV and Armoured vehicles are 1 per stand. Having multiple crisis or broadsides on a stand and then adding drones - like we would with infantry, but then calling them LV's is not only confusing, but also makes many army mountings now out of kilter with the norm... LV on crisis and broadsides... I'm dissappointed in this. Please reference the many threads on this and consider the majority Tau player opinion as well as the other development champions and comments from the SG forum on this topic in general... Epicomms LV Battlesuit debate Specialist Games LV design Principles 17) You left "Tau" in the front of all datasheet names. Why? We took that out in the WIP list because it was repetative, ?because the 'Army List' names of the units didn't say "Tau" Hammerhead Gunships, "Tau" Gun Drones... etc... the Army List names should match the Data Sheet names for consistency, and because your eye has to read beyond Tau each time in the datasheets just to find what you are actually looking for - i.e. Piranha, Tetra, etc... 18) God love ya - you put the Dragonfish in with 2 Supreme Commander Rerolls!! You just gave many of us a moment to rejoice, however - we'd I'd be remiss if I didn't tell you that it was determined early on that there's no way Jervis or the development community as a whole will let this fly... so we took out the extra SC ability from the get go when the unit was brought over from the collectors edition. Afterall, it's a SC WE already. There's at lest two different threads here on the epicomms board on this topic: Epicomms Dragonfish cmd vehicle discssion 1 Putting this back in with 2 SC rerolls, as much as we'd like to see it, seems like a step backwards from these discussions. Further discussion on the latest direction with this unit is here: Epicomms Dragonfish cmd vehicle disscussion 2 19) Kroot Great Knarloc as an LV again. See battlesuits. I can see this being an LV easier than the battlesuits... one unit type in a whole formation of kroot that can be targetted by AT fire will make this unit completely obsolete in our list. Why take them if the enemy can pick them out of 20 other models? 20) Gue'vesa pulse rifles should have a different name to be inline with Jervis' development principle -- all weapons with different stats should have different weapons - i.e. TL = +1, Long barrelled +15cm, etc... if nothing more, I would call these "Gue'vesa Pulse Rifles" or "Limited Pulse Rifles" or "Sparce Pulse Rifles"... vs still taking another sentece in the Notes section to explain them as inferior... Inferior was used to get rid of the sentence explanation - when all it really needs is another name for the weapon. 21) You kept the Tiger Shark with variant upgrade - so the "Whiteshark data sheet" is no longer valid. It should be removed from the unit list of Tau air caste units all together. It cannot be selected anymore. 22) You kept the Orca Drop ship at 8 carrying capacity instead of 9 which was JG's and tau community's recomendation for v4.2. Why did you lower it back to 8? 23) Nit - picky coment ![]() 24) Nit - picky comment again - on the moray, you took off the plural "s" on Railcannons and changed it to Railcannon... on the Manta, you left them plural... ? ![]() ![]() 25) AHHH! Why did you add Slow and Steady to the Hero Notes??? No, no, no... that's all wrong! Please tell me that was an accident! All Tau planetfall operations will immediately go to Turn 3+ - LOL, we'll be the joke of the Killing Strike community for sure! Seriously - please fix. 26) Nerroth will have issues with spaceship fluff - I'll let him comment. 27) Slow and Steady on Or'es El'leath good call. 28 and 29) Collector exploerer and bombardments were updated per Nerroth's recomendations as he's the resident expert on such matters. I'll leave it to him to tell you why you shouldn't go back to the way it was in v4.1... or you can go look at the Tau WIP v4.2.4 thread that was sticky... he went to great lengths to explain all this to me/us: Tau WIP v4.2.4 thread where Nerroths comments can be found Hope this was helpful CS, |
Author: | CyberShadow [ Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
Phew! OK, thanks for the comments guys. I will go through this list when I get time (hopefully very soon). I will say now that it seems that a lot of things just crept through and are not necessarily 'decisions' by myself. I will work through the variou discussions and post the next update based on that. I would like to have frequent list updates. Due to personal reasons, I was absent from the boards for a short time, and I think that I missed the tail-end of the Dragonfish discussion. I will catch up. Also, I seem to have missed the demise of the Lionfish! I liked that little guy! ![]() Thanks. |
Author: | Legion 4 [ Wed Nov 16, 2005 5:29 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
Well you had a good go at C/S ! ?Keep up the good work ! ?My recent experience with discussing Tau online was very informative and I'll get to work on my TO&Es ! ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Author: | nealhunt [ Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:31 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
15 & 16) The majority of the Tau community like infantry on the crisis and broadsides - i.e. all battlesuits, I have no idea why you reverted back to LV and then added walker. Even Nealhunt said crisis (at least) should be infantry. The evidence is overwhelming to make them infantry. |
Author: | colonel_sponsz [ Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
I think there are some of these mysterious 'balance issues' going on with the infantry/LV issue. Some of the Tau playtest community consider that crisis are 'cracked' as LV (especially as that's what FW have them as in their infamously borked Taros list). ![]() Edit: Oh, yeah! Please stop comparing 40k and Epic, there are some things that don't translate over very well. ![]() Orde (DISCLAIMER: I am not resposible for the actions of anyone who chooses to take this post seriously!) |
Author: | nealhunt [ Wed Nov 16, 2005 6:44 pm ] | ||
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one | ||
![]() |
Author: | Dobbsy [ Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:15 am ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
Wow! not keen on them being put back to LV Crisis are infantry and can go where infantry go as per 40K rules. If we're making comparisons to the new 40K minis here (sorry Col. I like peril ![]() Keep them infantry please CS! otherwise the SC becomes awfully vulnerable due to the fact that every man and his dog can now shoot at them. ![]() edit - Sorry to harp on but I need to make another point for my argument: Dreadnaughts are walkers in E:A. Dreadnaughts are NOT infantry in 40K. Dreadnaughts are NOT the same as Crisis suits ergo, why should Crisis suits be walkers in E:A? |
Author: | Tactica [ Thu Nov 17, 2005 1:39 am ] |
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one |
CS, Glad to hear it. Col_Sp, Dobbs NH, I've said my piece on the crisis/broadside LV issue. So has the majority of regularly active community. I can only hope CS hears the majority. IMO - development is not democratic per se, but the opinions of a few should not outwiegh the opinons of the many. Especially when a franchise prcident and clear history are being challenged for no appearent reason. If rules need to be adjusted to keep them balanced as infantry - then that's what should be done, but infantry should always remain infantry where possible for the same reason that aircraft should remain aircraft, vehicles should remain vehicles and WE's should remain WE. The battlesuits (crisis, stealths, and broadsides) units have playtested as infantry for quite some time by several parties. They aren't even broken as infantry in EA - they work just fine - even in the eyes of the unbiased from my experience. In fact, they have playtested as problematic and weak when LVs. That's the opinion of not only those that play tau, but have played against them on regular occurences. Cheers, |
Author: | Steele [ Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:22 am ] | ||
Post subject: | Updated force list, phase one | ||
So did I and my friends. And I play against playtest lists as well there might be some tweaking issues to do. See BL or the Eldar "Sub-" Lists. So speaking, Tactica - AMEN! Steele P.S.: If playtest is again needed to keep them Infantry - I do it. |
Page 1 of 7 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |