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

Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=5574		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  clausewitz [ Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
In the interest of fairness I should point out..

Marine Scouts have TSKNF, which going by the rest of the SM list is quite an expensive ability.

Scouts also come in an army with a better strategy rating, small difference in cost perhaps.

OTOH

Pathfinders have Markerlights and Coordinated Fire.
Author:  Chroma [ Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
Quote (Hena @ 10 Mar. 2006 (20:35))
PF have devilfishes (30cm, 5+, 6+, 6+, 15cm AP4+, 75cm AT6+ guided and skimmer)

I've never understood why the Devilfish are "free" for the Pathfinders, what's the explanation?
Author:  clausewitz [ Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
There are so many variables when comparing units like this.  How much more value do scouts have when used as cheap deathwind attacks?  How much less value do pathfinders have when theres few GMs in the Tau list?

Dont get me wrong, I do think Pathfinders are better than Scouts.  As "evidence" I would point to their relative commonality in lists.  SMs sometimes use scouts, and rarely in multiples except in drop pod armies.  Tau armies more commonly have pathfinders in them.

Partly thats down to the interaction with the rest of the army.  With markerlights and coordinated fire they are very useful in cooperation with other units.  But thats not a measure of their raw power.
Author:  Tactica [ Sat Mar 11, 2006 7:57 am ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
Quote (Chroma @ 10 Mar. 2006 (15:03))
Quote (Hena @ 10 Mar. 2006 (20:35))
PF have devilfishes (30cm, 5+, 6+, 6+, 15cm AP4+, 75cm AT6+ guided and skimmer)

I've never understood why the Devilfish are "free" for the Pathfinders, what's the explanation?

@Chroma,

JG (or somebody) addressed this question some time in the very very distant past. It was the opinion of the time that the PF's had the DF cost factored into the cost. If you wanted to drop them to get the 4 units into an orca - that was fine, but you were still paying for the DF's.

The formation works for 175 and has proven to be solid for many versions. I'd hate to see any points increase without a balance issue that could be recreated.

@Hena,

The tetra formation is overpriced now IMHO. It used to be in line with the piranha formation but JG had a fear that it might be too cheap. So he wanted to bump it up to test.

When I took the list over prior to CS coming on board, I applied that bump up in points for others to test.

The result is very few people take the formation these days.

So, one could argue that the Tetra is now over priced and that the applied change did not work out.

Its also worth noting that the Tetra formation's increase in price was a rather split issue - so we gave it a try.



Cheers,
Author:  The_Real_Chris [ Sat Mar 11, 2006 8:10 am ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
Certainly of the ground units they are my favourite. As a mainstay though? Well they are just slightly too fragile. Saying that their cost allows me to have redundant formations.

Frequency in list wise how many formations do you think would support a Tau list of 3000 points?
Author:  asaura [ Sat Mar 11, 2006 9:45 am ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
First of all, comparisons across lists are not usually all that fruitful.

The SM scouts' CC4+ and Infiltrate and 1+ Initiative is a very powerful combination. I think this balances the PFs' superior shooting attacks quite nicely. Additionally, you forced the SM scouts to get the Sniper upgrade, which is generally not used by SM scouts. Why don't you compare the PFs to Eldar Rangers? They all have Scout+Sniper?
Author:  baronpiero [ Sun Mar 12, 2006 11:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
Just before leaving on holidays... :cool:

- In fact, PFs Devilfishs are in no way free like space marine rhinos in theory. Remembering the previous discussion on that topic, you should rather consider that you can discard the Devilfish for 'free'. So you have to subtract the cost of the devilfish to evaluate the cost of pathfinder units correctly

- No need to compare to space marine scouts (and it's also dangerous because marines are so special and set apart) to see that pathfinders are a bargain. It's already noticeable in the Tau list when you compare them to firewarriors. I'm in favour of making Pathfinders 200 pts for a long time (same cost as the pathfinder upgrade point-wise).
Author:  Tactica [ Mon Mar 13, 2006 4:32 am ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts
Baronp,

I think the points you note are an accurate reflection of the formation, but I've not heard of them being a problem in the game.

There are multiple 'bargin' formations in every list in this game. I think the pathfinders are one of the tau bargins.

I think they would still be used at 200 points, but I've not heard of a recurring problem that proves that they need to be increased in points.

For now, I'm happy to leave as they've been for quite some time.

If  proved to be needed due to some game imbalance, i'd be all for them going to 200 points - again, if needed.

I just don't see a reason to change them just for the sake of it.
Author:  Honda [ Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Comparison Pathfinders vs Marine Scouts

Tactica, what problems do you need? The unit can have a problem without winning the game with the said problem. If they are cheap and everybody uses them over FW that should prove that there is problem.


Except for the fact that not everyone uses them over FW. If that were true, then you might have a case, but what others are trying to point out is that there isn't a clear case for abuse.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/