|
Post by hyv3mynd on Oct 29, 2015 14:51:37 GMT -5
Not gonna get into the primary debate but re:nettik - commander remains infantry:character, not MC. If you upgrade to coldstar suit, it becomes a FMC but no longer an IC. No, Tau aren't going to break the MC rules or break the game with their new rules.
Just relax until everyone has their books, and GW & ITC have a chance to FAQ.
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Oct 29, 2015 14:55:51 GMT -5
GW isn't faq anything. and if they all become one unit it doesn't matter if they are an IC or not.
|
|
|
Post by koszkamade on Oct 29, 2015 15:09:18 GMT -5
I can't wait to field a coldstar suit.
I love how it has a multitracker, but only has one gun. hahaha.
This rule situation only makes me want to smash that buff commander even harder during the game. Should be interesting.
Also, If I use a neuroweb jammer or cast objuracis mechanicum on one of those units, do they all suffer from gets hot then? hahaha
|
|
|
Post by Taydan on Oct 29, 2015 20:13:44 GMT -5
This rule situation only makes me want to smash that buff commander even harder during the game. Should be interesting. Don't blame my model for GW's complete apathy for the game!
|
|
|
Post by theblackknight on Oct 30, 2015 9:24:01 GMT -5
As someone who plays primarily close combat armies, I am already scared for my armies lives.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Oct 31, 2015 17:15:43 GMT -5
After reading the codex, I believe the rule is meant to include sharing wargear effects such as CnC node, MS3, etc. there are several formations and effects that allow units to combine firepower like this and they're all worded similarly. They even say that the combined firepower group shares marker light effects.
It's not broken or OP imo. You have to commit 3 units to target the same unit, and the formations that have this ability will be fairly rare, not popular or an eventual bandwagon build.
|
|
|
Post by theblackknight on Nov 1, 2015 21:00:11 GMT -5
As long as all of them don't get the buffs from each other unit I'd be fine with it. But if it turns out to be like that I think its kinda dumb. Like the article says reading 1 is pretty confusing and reading 2 makes more sense with all of the units shooting and getting the overall buff while keeping their individual buffs to themselves. That makes the most sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Nov 1, 2015 21:17:48 GMT -5
Well gw will never faq this, hopefully the GTs realize how the rule is writen
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 26, 2015 23:42:31 GMT -5
I've removed myself from most online sources like dakka and bols... Have ITC ruled on the coordinated firepower rule as it pertains to sharing abilities like MSSS, penchip, CnC mode, drone controller, etc.
I'm starting to draft non highlander lists for the first time in a long time and tournament ruling on that detachment is gonna have a big effect on lie construction.
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Nov 27, 2015 7:43:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 27, 2015 8:20:13 GMT -5
Idk about broken. The rule says the units combine firepower and resolve as if they were a single unit, and those wargear pieces share the benefit with their respective unit.
The detachment is more restrictive than a CAD. There's a min of 3 troops instead of 2, and you must take 1 fast, elite, and heavy. There's only 1 way to take an ethereal, and it comes with a bodyguard tax. There is no possible way to take farsight, darkstrider, or a skyray (without taking 3 hammerheads first). And nothing gets objective secured within the detachment.
Yeah, combining firepower and special rules can be powerful, but there's plenty of drawbacks and restrictions, just like necron decurion.
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Nov 27, 2015 8:39:17 GMT -5
You make it seem like the tax is bad, Crisis suits, Pathfinders, Broadsides what tau player doesn't use those? The 3 hammer head formation is pretty good as well.
Also the fact that you can do it more than once is extremely good.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 27, 2015 9:45:54 GMT -5
Yes, as a rule taxes are bad. The added minimum requirements prevent people from spamming even more by requiring additional point expenditures. The tau fast attack options are pretty lame unless you like piranhas ? , so some dudes are surely pissed about that tax cutting into their spamming of the mini formations. Ask the guys who use decurion or nemesis strike force, or BA detachments, you do lose games here and there for lack of obsec units.
|
|
|
Post by nettik189 on Nov 27, 2015 10:43:06 GMT -5
I played Decurion, its not that bad until you play the sm version of it. We both know piranhas are amazing. I feel its broken because you can do it as many times as you want in a turn, so if you have 21 units you can do it to 7 different units that's not including if you have gun drones to increase that number.
|
|
|
Post by hyv3mynd on Nov 27, 2015 12:32:06 GMT -5
For me the decurion is about as bad as it gets. Playing tau, I don't have anything that can beat necrons in assault or sweep them. When I played against Garner's decurion, I think I killed 6 models, only had 6 of my own models left, yet still managed a draw thanks to obsec. Still, the decurion's resilience against shooting made it unbeatable for me.
Can the Gladius strike force fit in 1250pts? I'm pretty much only concerned about the brawl this year.
I drafted my first MSU hunter contingent and it doesn't look like much on paper. I'll have to get some test games in to see if its competitive. My 2014 daemon list and 2015 tau list both gave me a good "gut feeling" before the brawl. My hunter contingent drafts don't do that yet.
|
|