Tactical Command | View topic - EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Page 3 of 5

[ 64 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

View unanswered posts | View active topics View unread posts | View new posts | View your posts

EA Tau Version 4.3.3

CyberShadow

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:42 pm

Swarm Tyrant

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

Yes, the activation is based on the core formation, no matter what you add to it (so adding Crisis to a Fire Warrior Cadre doesnt give them an increased initiative).

_________________
https://www.cybershadow.ninja - A brief look into my twisted world, including wargames and beyond.
https://www.net-armageddon.org - The official NetEA (Epic Armageddon) site and resource.

Top

Tactica

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:19 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

Is there a precident for mixing initiatives in the same formation? If not, we may want to consider this for the eventual FAQ.

Its not really a rule, just the way it works... the 'contingent' or 'cadre' that you are activating has an initiative, everything else uses the initiative value of the 'contingent' or 'cadre' they are part of.

Obviously that's not the suggested text, just the point.

I think its inferred knowledge, but perhaps something that may deserve some clarity for some.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob

Top

HecklerMD

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 3:18 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 5:42 am
Posts: 201

Quote (Tactica @ 17 Jan. 2006 (11:19))

Is there a precident for mixing initiatives in the same formation? If not, we may want to consider this for the eventual FAQ.

Not that I can think of.

What I want to know is how to deal with mixed initiatives in combined actions, like an IG Mech Co with a Titan in a combined assault, or a Crisis Cadre doing a CF with a AMHC? What if the AMHC has a blast marker?

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Wed Jan 18, 2006 3:12 pm

Purestrain

Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:52 pm
Posts: 9617
Location: Nashville, TN, USA

What I want to know is how to deal with mixed initiatives in combined actions

I think the rules are pretty clear. It's the Commander's formation that is attempting to activate, so you use that formation's initiative.

_________________
Neal

Top

baronpiero

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Fri Jan 20, 2006 4:23 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm
Posts: 186

Congrats CS, I like the way you're shaping things up overall.

There's a few things on which I have immediate before-game comments to make:

- Manta Firefight 4+: I am a bit scared of this change. :wow:

The Manta has already proven itself very good defensively due to 4+ Reinforced armor and the ability to ignore extra CC MW attacks.
Increased Firefight also makes planetfalling less of a risky action now. Maybe broken

- Moray Firefihgt 5+: this one is fine.

- Whiteshark: This is the kind of firepower I would expect for 175 pts. However, 4+ to hit does not represent the weapon properly. Since the basic railgun is AT3+, I would expect that any heavier version of the weapon is at least MW3+, 2+ if twin-linked.

- Crisis Cadre initiative increased to 1+ is a nice surprise! :8):

I find it very characterful and not imbalancing at a first glance.
However, this change impacts the army as a whole because coordinating fire becomes easier. We have to be wary about that but it's not necessarily a bad thing. Indeed, pathfinders have proven themselves to be far better for the job, so I'm okay with it on paper.
Last but not least, air dropped Crisis teams now appear as a serious alternative to Broadsides.

- Hammerhead ?leader? upgrade: I like the way you introduced the leader ability as networked drone I.A. Very simple and very characterful.

- Skyray: heavy anti-air but poor ground abilities for the points seem fine.

- Hammerhead: huh?

Why did you make the Ion cannon AP3? Ionheads are very popular already, so I'm not sure this was needed.

- Scorpionfish/Dragonfish: 20cm or 25cm? Orcas are quite heavy looking to tau standards both miniature-wise and stat-wise, so I would rather say 20cm. However, I would have said 25 cm if theywould have been made available as an upgrade to another faster formation.

Top

Tactica

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 1:53 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

@BaronP,

I'd suggest giving the threads a review. There are very long dicussions and playtest which answer everyone of your questions about the v4.3.3 decisions.

Regarding the White Shark specifically, it was at MW3+ for awhile. You missed it!

See the currently open Tiger Shark thread for the latest - its an ongoing discussion. There are still disentors with the current version.

_________________
Rob

Top

Steele

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2006 10:30 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany

@BaronP and Tactica,

as much as I appreciate Your Avatars , but I can?t differ You guys at first glance. I repeatedly wanted to reply to a post in which statements were done by one of You and then revoked later. With your Avatars so close to beeing similar, would one of You mind changing? Ok it?s OT but hey, I?am old and my Eyes are deaf and my Ears are blind.....

Cheers!
Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo

Top

baronpiero

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Sun Jan 22, 2006 12:17 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 1:38 pm
Posts: 186

@Tactica:

I did not found much answers by performing a search:
- Manta's Firefight. One discussion found (opinions mitigated). No battle report found dealing with the issue

.
- Ion cannon: nothing found about the AP3 thing.

I understand that Cybershadow might want to make us playtest the other edge of the coin on the Manta issue, especially when the opinions are mitigated. But the change on the Ion cannon really quirks me. To my knowledge, ion cannon was rather percieved okay or too good. Maybe this bump is due to the new skyray's statline? Please give enlightment.

Regarding the White Shark, I would not want to see 2x MW3+ bought back. I was lobbying for one TL-railcannon at MW2+. It would do about the same as 2x MW4+ and retain more consistency. See you in the Tigershark thread...

Steele
With your Avatars so close to beeing similar, would one of You mind changing?

It's a bit complicated you know to catch a hammerhead in its natural environment. Always hiding, never sleeping :laugh:

Top

CyberShadow

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:04 pm

Swarm Tyrant

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

What is the general opinion here? Should I bundle up the current version for the vault, or should we do one more round of changes (I slightly favour one more round of discussion)?

Thanks.

Top

Steele

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:28 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 423
Location: Duisburg , Germany

Quote (CyberShadow @ 23 Jan. 2006 (17:04))

What is the general opinion here? Should I bundle up the current version for the vault, or should we do one more round of changes (I slightly favour one more round of discussion)?

Thanks.

I would say put it in the Vault , as we already made changes that impact much of the Gameplay in comparison to 4.1 and that are solid ones. IMO , the TS beeing the the toughest thing that is left to discuss , but with your Stat change is it is already remedied for now a bit.

Cheers!
Steele

_________________
Quid pro Quo

Top

Nerroth

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:51 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada

If you make one more round, I'd re-iterate my requests to:

*return the Hero missile strength to 6,
*let 2 Piranhas or 3 Tetras fit per Manta vehicle space,
*Perhaps leave a note in the modelling section with suggestions for relevant models (the case I mentioned before was using the Protector model without the bridge piece as the Moray, but things like using the missile Hammerhead as a Stingray could fit here also)

Gary

_________________

Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.

Top

Tactica

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 7:16 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 12:12 am
Posts: 2241

@Nerroth,

Your last recomendation probably would not be a 'best fit' recomendation for the list. If you look at the Moray's description, its modeled off of the Manta and looks almost identical, but smaller.

Also, when originally developed, JG used the Emissary as the model the vision was based upon.

Thus, if any recomendation would go into the list, the Emissary should probably be the recommended model over the protector.

_________________
Rob

Top

CyberShadow

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2006 10:21 pm

Swarm Tyrant

Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:22 pm
Posts: 9350
Location: Singapore

Thanks. Nerroth, your first two suggestions seem fairly uncontroversial. As to minis, I dont really want to officially recommend a mini, and I would rather leave this up to the player. I am happy to have a section with a display of suggestions in a gallery-type section.

Top

Nerroth

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:28 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:00 pm
Posts: 573
Location: Canada

So I'll use the Protector, while Tactica uses the Emissary.

Sounds fair enough (until we annoy FW into making a specific Moray model!)

Also, will you be adding in the Tau names for each unit type?

Gary

_________________

Gue'senshi: The 1st Kleistian Grenadiers

v7.3 pdf

Human armed forces for the greater good.

Top

fracas

Post subject: EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Posted: Mon Feb 06, 2006 11:25 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 6:28 pm
Posts: 30

Thanks to CS i found this thread
and thanks to CS i will probably rehash what has already been settled on :;):

why were hammerheads made into a core cadre?
being a core cadre, why is there still an option to take them as a contingent, an equally independent but more restrictive option. ?the contingent cannot take other contingents option AND cannot take gun drone upgrade (as well as networked drones)! When would one take the contingent instead of the cadre?!?
and speaking of, isn't a gun drone upgrade unecessarily powerful for hammerheads? ?I would think the ability to absorb hits without blast markers pretty significant.

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 3 of 5

[ 64 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:

EA Tau Version 4.3.3

Who is online