Tactical Command | View topic

Page 2 of 3

[ 31 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

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

Devilfish w/SMS?

dysartes

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 11:14 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:16 pm
Posts: 908

CS> You can always put stats for a SMS variant in the Collector's Models section, should there be such a desire for it

_________________
The forgotten Champion - AMTL, baby!

Dysartes.com - Resources for the Modern Wargamer - Last updated: December 2004 - Next Update: In Progress

Sentinels are just young titans that haven't grown up yet!

Top

CyberShadow

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 12:28 pm

Swarm Tyrant

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

This is true, but it would then lead to the problem of one vehicle model representing two different sets of stats. As a Collectors Model, this should not be a problem (we could specify that they should be painted differently, etc), but it could cause confusion.

_________________
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

baronpiero

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:53 pm

Brood Brother

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

I would be interested to try this out. Even considering a cost increase, this would make the Firewarrior cadre work better IMO.

- With such a heavy loadout (Burst Cannon and Smart Missiles), the upcoming devilfish would look like an IG Valkyrie rather than a Chimera in design. Not a bad idea.
- The Smart Missiles 30 cm range would marry well with the transported firewarriors 30cm max range.
- The ignore cover ability would help the firewarrior cadre a bit to deal with entrenched infantry (This should be the main purpose of the firewarrior cadre IMO).

Well, I would like we look at it one day.

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 7:12 pm

Brood Brother

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

@BaronP,

"Preach on" and "Amen."

_________________
Rob

Top

asaura

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:06 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 11:34 am
Posts: 481

As a first reaction, I don't like this. It's a powerup, and those are generally bad.

It is my understanding that, in the new 40K Tau Codex, Devilfish can have an SMS as an optional upgrade. That's why you want to include that upgrade in Epic as well. Is this correct? In general, I think the idea is that we don't model everything, but we do make exceptions for flavor and when we want to.

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:38 pm

Brood Brother

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

Quote (asaura @ 20 Feb. 2006 (02:06))

Asaura,

Yep - your correct. Per White Dwarf, SMS will be an option for the Devilfish. Probably a default choice for many tau 40K players, but an option nonetheless. This has been a major complaint amongst 40K players as the Tau transport is undergunned by comparison to their enemy races that do not rely on combat. See Eldar and Imperial Guard 40K transport options.

Its worth noting that E:A has many 40K weapon options as default stats for the E:A version of the vehicle. Its also worth noting that optoions are not always taken when the vehicle is converted over to E:A. It does appear that 'meaningful' weapon system options are converted over to E:A though.

Leman Russ sponson weapons and hull lascannon are options. By default the hull can be a bolter and the main gun a battlecannon with no sponsons at all.

I'm not sure what the base falcon grav tank and wave serpent weapon systems are - something tells me we are playing with upgrades in the Eldar list there too.

Seeker Missles on all tau tanks, light vehicles and aircraft are all optional upgrades. Caveat - the Skyray comes with 6 seeker missles by default - its the one exception that I can think of.

Smart Missle Systems (SMS) are an option for HH tanks.

In fact, SMS are always an upgrade in the current Tau 40K list. Nothing that I can think of comes with them by default. They are optional weapons for the following units in 40K:

1. Devilfish Transports vehicles
2. Broadsides Battlesuit infantry
3. (ion or rail) Hammerhead MBT vehicle

[EDIT] Note the sneak peak 40K pictures on GW's web site do show the Skyray as having SMS - but don't know if that's default or not. In the new codex, anything's possible. [/EDIT]

As Devilfish were considered a bit bland and undesirable in 40K prior to Tau Empires, it would be nice to avoid the same feelings in E:A - especially considering that Firewarriors units themselves have lost a lot of their appeal from 40K to E:A presently. For many of us - the SMS would be a welcomed addition to the FW cadre in E:A.

Cheers,

_________________
Rob

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 8:34 pm

Purestrain

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

Tactica: That's a very good case for why the DF basic loadout for EA need not be the bare-bones 40K version. But it doesn't address why there is a need to add options or why the options would necessarily need to be an upgrade.

The general rule is that unless there is a need in the list, vehicles are single-version. In every case where there is an option, the option is quite distinct in its battlefield role (Pred versions or Russ/Demolisher). It is virtually always an equal-points alternative. Unit upgrades are usually restricted to characters, the sole exceptions being the SM Speeder and the Swordfish.

If there is a need for upgunning the DF or a need for an alternative weapon loadout based on army feel or balance, make the case for it. - preferably a case beyond "well, it would be a neat option."

_________________
Neal

Top

dysartes

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:02 pm

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 12:16 pm
Posts: 908

There's also the question of when in the imeline the Tau Empire 'dex is meant to be coming into play. If it is after the Third Sphere expansion, (IIRC, that be when the Tau list is set), then the SMS may not be available for the Devilfish yet.

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:02 pm

Brood Brother

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

NH,

Point well made. Keep in mind, this is Honda's thread.

I'm simply supporting what I understand to be his original proposition. My reasoning for doing so is,

1) I don't want to see the FW cadre fade from mainstream as it should be capable of being an effective centric element to the E:A Tau list.

2) I don't personally like the feel for the current FW cadre.

3) I don't get the value I expect out of my vision of a E:A FW cadre + DF today for 300 points.

4) Most importantly, "I do think SMS on a devilfish is a neat option!"

Cheers,

_________________
Rob

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:09 pm

Brood Brother

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

Quote (dysartes @ 20 Feb. 2006 (16:02))

D,

I agree.

This is not clear - but its interesting info... GW's Tau Website:

We see the following text in the second paragraph:

While the races of the galaxy tear each other apart, the Tau grow stronger and stronger. On the Eastern Fringe of the galaxy, far from the power of Terra, world after world has fallen to the dynamic advance of the Tau. At the forefront of this rapid expansion ...

And at the bottom of the page on the last paragraph, we see this text:

Special Characters
This section of the book details three renowned Tau characters: the senior Ethereal Aun'Va, the renegade Commander Farsight, and Commander Shadowsun, the emergent heroine of the Tau Third Phase Expansion.

_________________
Rob

Top

nealhunt

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 11:16 pm

Purestrain

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

2) I don't personally like the feel for the current FW cadre.

3) I don't get the value I expect out of my vision of a E:A FW cadre + DF today for 300 points.

Fair enough. Those are good reasons.

2) Why?
3) Why not?

_________________
Neal

Top

Tactica

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:29 am

Brood Brother

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

NH,

2 and 3 are a bit intermingled.

FW in 40K are arguably the best basic infantry of any of the armies. They are highly versitle unless facing the heaviest of armor.

I feel like the FWs are quite static in their uses and very 'blah' or 'bland' in E:A.

FW can have up to 12 models in a unit when the typical IG/Marine unit can only have 10 max. Devilfish hold 12 models too. Therefore FW can mount up more infantry and deliver more all at once in a single transport than IG or marines. This usually helps with Fish of Fury tacitcs, or more importantly, when needing to dump infantry into the side or rear of a vehicle to punch through their armor from an unexpected source.

FW are cost effective and compare very well to a 10-man IG squad in cost but exchange the dependancy on a heavy weapon for mobility and versatility.

FW pulse rifle guns shoot just as much as a bolter or lasgun, but are longer ranged and higher strength. The 30" range on the 40K battlefield allows you to force the enemy to come to you when the typical infantry weapon in 40K is 24". This allows the FW to 'draw' the enemy to them. This is just not realistic in E:A as the range of a formation is determined by its longest weapon - so the FW now go from the longest weapon ranges with the majority of shots to the less than 45cm range and always being forced to be the one to move in a shooting match.

FW/Drone infantry can even hurt light and moderately armored vehicles in the front, and commonly to the rear - even a leman russ and demolisher can be hurt from a large volley of FW shots to the rear in 40K. This is due to their S5 weapons and volume of shots. This is one of my largest griefs/heartburns in E:A with the FW. They'v elost their vehicular threat and with it - some flexability on the E:A battlefield. Tau vs. Dark Eldar, Eldar, Orks, or the backs of many vehicles, Rhinos, and anything with armor 10/11 on any side in 40K are suseptable and must be weary of the FW / Drone formation. In E:A - tau FW have to assault to have a chance at hurting the weakest armor on a wave serpent, basalisk or rhino. The tactic of making that S5 weapon difference from S4 is gone as far as vehicles are concerned. This greatly hinders what the FW can be used for as AT targets are now out of the formations reach.

FW can be bonded which means that even at numbers where IG would run off the field, Tau have the ability to rally and fight on. Bonded doesn't exist in E:A. This is a problem for me as I look at the value of the FW formation in 40K to E:A. (though if the FW cadre gets the Network Drone upgrade, this issue will have been resolved as far as I'm concerned - network drone in E:A scale will pick up where bonded left off at the 40K scale)

FW can be min/maxed to 6 man teams in 40K with marker lights to deliver high amounts of market targets and thus make multiple weapons have 2+ to hit. In E:A, you only give GM's a +1 to hit if marked. This is really a marker light issue for me, not a FW issue but the net effect is the FW has lost more of an use to me.

40K FW are made up of the right combination of enough things in 40K to make them valuable - a lot of that seems lost in Epic.

To me, Tau FW in E:A are relegated to infantry only shooting and have to become the agressor to be effective. Unless you want to risk assault damage, vehicular threats are lost. Tau cannot deal with the BM management issue in E:A as there's no real equivilent to bonding in E:A yet. Their ability to shrug off the worst damage and still rally is lost in E:A (unless network drones or the equivilent is applied to the devilfish.)

So - that's a long way of at least attempting to explain why I feel the way I do about E:A FW as compared to 40K.

So to take this in full circle and back on topic, if there's a boost given to the FW cadre in E:A, I'm all for it right now as they've lost some luster to me going from 40K to E:A.

_________________
Rob

Top

clausewitz

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 12:57 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:02 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Glasgow, Scotland

Tactica, just a thought. All the things that you list as being missing from the FW in their conversion to E:A are to do with the FW themselves, not with the Devilfish transport. So is changing the Devilfish going to change how you feel about the FWs?

Purely as a comparison of view-points, I don't play 40K so my perceptions of the FWs has come from what they do in E:A. From that basis (i.e. not having the expectation of what they do from 40k) the FWs are basic infantry that are unique in having 2 shots with one a disrupt. Point for point in an infantry shooting match I would imagine they would hold their own against most opponents. FWs mounted in Devilfish are a very mobile and fairly resilient Markerlight formation.

There may be an element of the metagame at work here. If your opponents play vehicle heavy armies then the FW won't be quite as powerful.

Top

HecklerMD

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 1:45 am

Brood Brother

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

I am neutral on this, really, but I have some suggestions:

I like that the DF a "non-upgrade" upgrade, in that they cost points but dont take up a upgrade slot. This kind of firepower justifies an upgrade slot and points, but perhaps we can have both.

Keep the DF as it is, and have an upgrade that allows you to add the SMS to 2 DF (You could take it twice like the Swordfish) for XX points, perhaps 25? Pathfinder Contingents and Firewarrior add-on Upgrades can then take it as well. Pathfinder add-on upgrades are S.O.L., sorry.

2 additional AP4+ Ignore cover shots for 25 (4 for 50) seems fair to me, or at least a good place too start.

Top

The_Real_Chris

Post subject: Devilfish w/SMS?

Posted: Tue Feb 21, 2006 2:38 am

Brood Brother

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:45 pm
Posts: 8139
Location: London

I agre agree about the FW seeming lackluster. For basic garrisson infantry I go for the humans, while for aggressive infantry I prefer pathfinders.

With all the neat vehicles, battlesuits and aircraft in the list, and 'specialised' infantry options to complement them the FW are left by the way side. What is their role in the list incidentally? Good saves certainly, but why not use ion hammerheads and pathfinders to shoot up enemy infantry?

Course I wouldn't want to see a more expensive devilfish as this would impact on those highly cost effective pathfinders!

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' Ã¢â‚¬â€œ Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Top

Print view

Previous topic | Next topic

Page 2 of 3

[ 31 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

Devilfish w/SMS?

Who is online