| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Dragonfish initiative? http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5520 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Dobbsy [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
Is the intention for the Dragonfish NOT to have initiative 1+ an oversight or is that the general consensus? It seems odd to have the Shas'o in one formation with 1+ while another has 2+. |
|
| Author: | Honda [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
Well, I'd like to see it have a +1 |
|
| Author: | Tactica [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
Dobbsy & Honda, If something 'seems wrong', its worth looking at but usually there's a root problem if something's not right... First and foremost on my mind - does it need it for rules / game balance? Second, are you avoiding taking it due to the 2+ init when your SC could have 1+ init? Elaborate on your thoughts a bit if you don't mind. Cheers, |
|
| Author: | CyberShadow [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:06 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
To be honest, this is an oversight - due to the upgrading of the Crisis Cadre, and missing the Dragonfish. My gut reaction is that it should be 1+, but Tacticas points still stand. |
|
| Author: | clausewitz [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
This is a bit more of a gray area, as the Dragonfish is actually an upgrade to the Scorpionfish formation (which is initiative 2+, and should be so). I don't think there is any other formation in any army that gets an initiative change from an upgrade unit. I'm not opposed to the Dragonfish having initiative 1+, but it'll need to be carefully worded in the army list. Over to you CyberShadow 
|
|
| Author: | tneva82 [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:22 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||
Black guardians from Ulthwe? 1/3 guardian warhosts have free black guardian upgrade which gives them 1+ initiave. |
|||
| Author: | Chroma [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:41 pm ] | ||||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||||
Black Guardians are now their own seperate formation with different options and upgrades, not an upgrade to the base Guardian Warhost. The only reason I see the Dragonfish having 2+ Init, is that the Shas'O is slightly more busy onboard than jumping around in a Crisis suit... 
|
|||||
| Author: | Steele [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:11 pm ] | ||||||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||||||
Why should he be more busy? In the Dragonfish he might have ample Input from the Battlefield on several screens , but the work should remain the same. He might command just without worrying about beeing shot at while jumping, and the Dragonfish should offer more protection. EDIT: But still, if you think that only a Commander in a Battlesuit should have Ini 1+ , then so be it. Steele |
|||||||
| Author: | Chroma [ Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:50 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||
It's not the Shas'O who has 1+ Initiative, it's Battlesuit Cadres! Any upgrades you add to that cadre will also be going at a 1+, regardless of what they are, it's got nothing to do with a Tau commander's presence. The Dragonfish is just slightly slower to act than Battlesuits, that's all the difference in initiative means and I think it makes sense. Crisis Suits are there to be rapid first-responders to a crisis, hence their improved initiative, that is all. |
|||
| Author: | Honda [ Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
Elaborate on your thoughts a bit if you don't mind. | |
| Author: | HecklerMD [ Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
IMHO, a Stealth Contingent is more justified in 1+ init than the bigFish(s), as they are as "elite" as the Crisis Pilots, if not moreso. SpecOps Battlesuits and such. Its not linked to the commander. |
|
| Author: | Steele [ Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:38 am ] | ||||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||||
Yes I now that , and by chance the SC could have it too, so why not giving it the 1+ ? If the Command Array is destroyed it?s no longer a SC and therefore may revert to 2+. How does it sounds? Cheers! Steele |
|||||
| Author: | Steele [ Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:39 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||
At first I thought that all BATTLESUITS would get 1+. 
|
|||
| Author: | Dobbsy [ Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:25 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? | ||
Sorry Tac' I originally just wanted to ask the question about this for clarification either way, hence my not elaborating...  But...Firstly - I have yet to use it but am seriously looking at it but I would say that a 1+ SC is vital for the Tau list as it stands as they take a lot of BMs and IMO it's needed to compensate for the lists inability in assault. Secondly - Yes, I would avoid taking it with a 2+ initiative My reason is that why would I want a 2+ Initiative Supreme Commander? It seriously hampers Tau battelfield ability. I know first hand that it reduces the Tau effort in-game when you have an SC with a 2+. |
|||
| Author: | CyberShadow [ Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:51 am ] |
| Post subject: | Dragonfish initiative? |
The option that I am favouring currently is making the increased initiative a part of the Tau Supreme Commander special rule. This should apply it to all commanders (Dragonfish and Shas'O) and keep the rule specific and simple. I agree that it is a good idea to add it to these two units, but I think that making all battlesuits 1+ initiative would be going a little too far. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|