Are commanders undercosted?

Use this area for all discussions of the "gaming" aspect of 40K/Tau.
Tanniith
Shas
Posts: 21

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#37 » Sep 12 2017 09:58

Ricordis wrote:Tanniith,Do you think the T'au index is supposed to tell you "Hey, only spam this one unit and ignore all the other fancy things I may offer."


Let me preface this by saying that I'm speaking from a purely competitive viewpoint.

Nope, I don't think that's what the designers intended but unfortunately that's what we got with the T'au index.

Look; I really REALLY wish there were options in the T'au index that I could take to a GT or a Major that would give me a hope of winning outside of Commanders, Coldstars, an Ethereal, and drones but there aren't.

If you're playing casual games sure, the other units are a ton of fun; but when you regularly go up against brimstone/changeling/magnus/aetos, conscript/artillery spam, daemon prince spam, malefic lord spam, guilliman gunlines, etc. there simply are no other options in the T'au index that would have a hope of beating that. For me the only one that has come close is Triple stormsurge/triple skyray but that's outperformed by Commanders as well.

User avatar
Juicy Fruit
Shas
Posts: 18

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#38 » Sep 13 2017 02:37

Glarblar wrote:I think most of us can agree this:

Commanders don't need a nerf, but rather, our army needs targeted buffs


I agree entirely. Based on the codex releases so far it seems like it will only get worse with the 'relic' options for commanders. The ability to give those type of upgrades to riptides, broadsides etc would be best for our codex.
Primum conatus pessimi

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2884

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#39 » Sep 13 2017 03:17

Juicy Fruit wrote:
Glarblar wrote:I think most of us can agree this:

Commanders don't need a nerf, but rather, our army needs targeted buffs


I agree entirely. Based on the codex releases so far it seems like it will only get worse with the 'relic' options for commanders. The ability to give those type of upgrades to riptides, broadsides etc would be best for our codex.

Based on the codex releases we can expect overcosted units to get a drastic point drop and too cheap HQs to get a point increase as well though. Impossible to predict anything specific at this point, just wait for the actual Codex release.

Meshuggah
Shas
Posts: 16

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#40 » Sep 13 2017 04:27

Having 2 commanders wouldn't be a bad idea because you have to put in perspective what other people are doing currently. I just watched my buddies Lamartes kill my Stormsurge in 1 round of melee. I put dents in that guy, but then his Sanguinary Priest keeps giving him wounds back while his Primaris Captain and some Lieutenant reroll hits and wounds. I didn't have a great day for rolls. There are some broken characters in the game for the SM that are very expensive, but in combo, can be very deadly. We are only as good as our rolls, and if we don't take them down with our shots, it's over. Yes I am still new, but the SM and Chaos can do everything. Having some advantage to help take them down is mandatory. I'm afraid to play Adeptus Astartes after what I've seen.

Ricordis
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 308

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#41 » Sep 13 2017 06:00

Meshuggah wrote:but the SM and Chaos can do everything. Having some advantage to help take them down is mandatory. I'm afraid to play Adeptus Astartes after what I've seen.


Last saturday I saw 5 Scouts with Sniper Rifles and 2 Devastors with grav cannons kill my Ghostkeel in one turn. The first took out the stealth drones, the latter...I have to correct myself. It was one Devastor with cherub reload and sergeant buff.
Shouldn't T'au be the masterclass at devastating long range Attacks?

User avatar
Arka0415
Shas'Ui
Shas'Ui
Posts: 1269

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#42 » Sep 13 2017 07:17

Ricordis wrote:Shouldn't T'au be the masterclass at devastating long range Attacks?

I mean, it should be that way, but Tau are a 9"-18" range army for the time being. :neutral:

Meshuggah
Shas
Posts: 16

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#43 » Sep 14 2017 10:03

Ricordis wrote:
Meshuggah wrote:but the SM and Chaos can do everything. Having some advantage to help take them down is mandatory. I'm afraid to play Adeptus Astartes after what I've seen.


Last saturday I saw 5 Scouts with Sniper Rifles and 2 Devastors with grav cannons kill my Ghostkeel in one turn. The first took out the stealth drones, the latter...I have to correct myself. It was one Devastor with cherub reload and sergeant buff.
Shouldn't T'au be the masterclass at devastating long range Attacks?



I was JUST asking myself the same thing buddy. The thing is that there is still a ton of range with vehicles and battlesuits. I just wish that I could use my breachers and learn to play with pathfinders. I still haven't played with pathfinders yet and that seems smarter because drones hitting on a 5+ for markerlights has proven to be poop.

After seeing the melee capabilities of SM, we should continue to have the range advantage because we have such a small percentage chance to survive melee.

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2884

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#44 » Sep 14 2017 11:57

Heh, I actually like T'au being close-mid ranged. That's how I always intended to build my army even back in 7th anyway. Just wish the units with access to Rail weaponry were a bit more viable (aka cheaper) since despite my love for close-mid ranged T'au I also love Rail weaponry and always try to put some as long range fire support for the rest in my list. :P

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 217

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#45 » Sep 14 2017 11:59

Panzer wrote:Heh, I actually like T'au being close-mid ranged. That's how I always intended to build my army even back in 7th anyway. Just wish the units with access to Rail weaponry were a bit more viable (aka cheaper) since despite my love for close-mid ranged T'au I also love Rail weaponry and always try to put some as long range fire support for the rest in my list. :P


Don't you run a 5m squad of railfinders? I know they are squishy but the 15" RF could be devastating

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2884

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#46 » Sep 14 2017 12:03

I do. Actually more than 5. 8 was a good number for a Rail Rifle squad so far (though I didn't try putting them in a Devilfish yet).
And yes getting Marines within 15" of Rail Rifles is very devastating and very satisfying against Deathwatch especially since they are pretty damn expensive. :D

pilky
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 249

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#47 » Sep 14 2017 04:14

A lot of people talk about point changes in terms of nerfing or buffing, but I think a more interesting change to improve a lot of our army would be to make it easier to get +1 to hit with markerlights. Tau have always been overcosted for an army that hits on a 4+ but markerlights have always mitigated that. Being able to bring our main forces up to BS3 without needing 5 markerlights could fix the problems without changing points (especially as it won't benefit non-advancing commanders).

That said, I agree with those who have said commanders aren't undercosted. For what they do they're pretty well matched against most other armies. The only truly undercosted unit in the index is probably the gun drone. I can't see much else getting a points increase when we get our codex

User avatar
relasine
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 68

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#48 » Sep 14 2017 06:47

pilky wrote:A lot of people talk about point changes in terms of nerfing or buffing, but I think a more interesting change to improve a lot of our army would be to make it easier to get +1 to hit with markerlights. Tau have always been overcosted for an army that hits on a 4+ but markerlights have always mitigated that. Being able to bring our main forces up to BS3 without needing 5 markerlights could fix the problems without changing points (especially as it won't benefit non-advancing commanders).

That said, I agree with those who have said commanders aren't undercosted. For what they do they're pretty well matched against most other armies. The only truly undercosted unit in the index is probably the gun drone. I can't see much else getting a points increase when we get our codex

Honestly, I think they should remove the progression table and just let people choose the bonus they want. This would remove the voids that appear in the table if people aren't moving and shooting heavy weapons, firing against targets not in-cover, are affected by the Kauyon Buff/Command Link Drone/Multi-Tracker, or aren't firing off Seeker/Destroyer Missiles. It would seriously fix so many viability (not necessarily balance) issues codex-wide.

If there are concerns about too much leaning into the +1 BS bonus, then make that bonus "cost" two ML tokens.

Examples:

Target has three ML Tokens. Stormsurge is shooting at it. Two MLs are used to give it +1 BS, one is used to let it fire its Destroyer Missiles at BS.

Target has two ML Tokens. Breachers advance and shoot at target. One ML is used to let it advance/shoot Assault weapons without penalty, one is used to let it reroll 1s.

Target has three ML Tokens. Crisis Teams shoots at it. Two MLs are used to give +1 BS, one is used to let the unit reroll 1s.

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 217

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#49 » Sep 14 2017 07:39

that strangely feels like 7th ed

User avatar
Draco023
Shas'Saal
Posts: 37

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#50 » Sep 14 2017 08:30

Glarblar wrote:that strangely feels like 7th ed

Agreed, the ONLY really good thing about marker lights is that the tokens persist the whole turn instead of being "spent"

User avatar
relasine
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 68

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#51 » Sep 14 2017 10:38

Glarblar wrote:that strangely feels like 7th ed

I didn't mean to imply that they are spent traditionally like in 7th and previous editions. Just that each individual unit chooses how they benefit based on the volume of Markerlight tokens on the target.

Sure, it feels like 7th, because it is partially reminiscent of 7th. The fact that this may be the case doesn't bother me a lick as long as it fixes the fundamental problem with Markerlights being an incredibly inefficient method of buffing the ranged output of an army that is ostensibly all about ranged combat despite lackluster median ballistic skill values.

Frankly, if Markerlights returned quite literally to the 7th edition rules-as-written, it'd be a step-up from what we have now.

User avatar
Glarblar
Shas'Saal
Posts: 217

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#52 » Sep 15 2017 10:08

Ah, I understand a little more what you are saying now. While I agree that it would be better for tau players, I think most other armies which have similar things rely on dice rolls to determine which benefits they get or need to be in proximity of a certain unit to get the buff (thinking of guard, necrons, SM, and Admech chants).

If we look at the alternatives of it either being random (which makes no sense) or needing to be in proximity of the ML source (which would buff gunlines but hamper midrange tau), they system we have right now is better IMO, and allows for some SEPT or STRATAGEM based benefits in the future.

Imagine for a moment being able to use 1 CP to increase the number of ML tokens on a unit by 2, or alternatively being within 6" of a pathfinder squad allows you to count the target unit as having double the ML tokens on them (ie 1=2, 2=4, 3=6)

ML are very clunky now, but I can see a path to a much better way

Nymphomanius
Shas
Posts: 37
Contact:

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#53 » Sep 15 2017 02:08

Ot wouldn't be much of a change basically just a few words really instead of when firing at a unit the tau unit "gains a benefit relevant to" the number of markerlight tokens on the target unit.

Change that section to "may choose a number of benefits equal to"

Male Markerlights far more useful.

Though would see Commander ignoring cover like there's no tomorrow

User avatar
Panzer
Shas'La
Shas'La
Posts: 2884

Re: Are commanders undercosted?

Post#54 » Sep 15 2017 03:09

I think the Markerlight table works fine the way it does. Just the bonuses have to be re-worked slightly. Tone it down to 4, make the now 3rd into +1 BS as well (because it's basically that just in bad) and combine the now 2nd and now 3rd into one.
Having access to re-rolling 1s with one Markerlight, +1BS with two Markerlights, ignoring Cover with three Markerlights and +2BS with 4 Markerlights and nobody would complain about our crappy shooting ever again.
Plus if you actually want to take Seeker Missiles you would be able to shoot them at BS3+ (Devilfish, Piranha, Broadside) or BS2+ both with re-rolling 1s just with two Markerlights so it would actually be worth taking them without having to break your neck trying to shoot them properly.

Heck maybe give it a completely new 5th bonus. Buffing Seeker Missiles to 1d3 Mortal wounds and Destroyer missilers to 1d6 Mortal wounds or whatever.

Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests