PDA

View Full Version : Another nerf to skimmers?



ObiWan
12-02-2008, 23:22
Maybe I just missed it, but I can't find a note saying that skimmers do not block line of sight, maybe it's assumed on the as of now general rule of models blocking LOS, but if this remains that way and I didn't miss that part, then mechanized tactics AKA fish of fury have been efectively nerfed for Tau and Eldar.
I haven't seen this commented somewhere else, if it has mods feel free to delete.

eyeslikethunder
13-02-2008, 00:22
no you are right the fish of fury looks like it is history

Kirasu
13-02-2008, 02:13
Eldar actually have assault troops so this helps.. Honestly as a long time eldar player I much rather be able to HIDE banshees or any other troops inside the transport rather than have it only be beneficial to dire avengers

intellectawe
13-02-2008, 03:28
Finally, Skimmers return to their Hey Day of power during 3rd edition.

I can't wait until Skimmers block line of sight!!!!

Gensuke626
13-02-2008, 03:31
I wouldn't call fish of fury history...I mean...techinically you can model the transports to float a little higher on "More Stable Flight Stems" and allow models eye to spot under the skimmers...

Captain Micha
13-02-2008, 03:32
yes but then the enemy can see them and shoot back if you do.

Varath- Lord Impaler
13-02-2008, 03:38
yes but then the enemy can see them and shoot back if you do.

Which is, of course, part of the whole point.

Captain Micha
13-02-2008, 03:40
That makes it different than fish of fury as it stands. :p

which also destroys how fish of fury works. :D

question, does this mean firewarriors are going to get a 4+ coversave from this if you did it that way?

intellectawe
13-02-2008, 03:42
Which is, of course, part of the whole point.

But they don't want to make sensible points! They just want to power game!

"Tau... hmmmm... this army is hard to use and requires tactics....

Wait...

Oh I found it.... hide my troops behind their transports! How genius! Now I can bypass any tactics the army requires and just power game my way to victory! Fun! Too bad I can't field Falcons with my Tau...."

Captain Micha
13-02-2008, 03:45
actually this might make things -worse- in some regards. since you can still shoot the other guy in the face when your transport goes pop. Instead of fish of fury, now you are going to get, devilrush.

not everything is about powergaming. also if you get a coversave for being behind the fish now, technically fish of fury is still better than fielding firewarriors without the fish. even though this means you can't use the fish for it's fluffy purpose of being a gunship and transport now.

Varath- Lord Impaler
13-02-2008, 04:01
That makes it different than fish of fury as it stands.

which also destroys how fish of fury works.

question, does this mean firewarriors are going to get a 4+ coversave from this if you did it that way?

Quite possibly, the unit counts as obscured if the weapons fired at them cant hurt the vehicles armour facing.


But they don't want to make sensible points! They just want to power game!

"Tau... hmmmm... this army is hard to use and requires tactics....

Wait...

Oh I found it.... hide my troops behind their transports! How genius! Now I can bypass any tactics the army requires and just power game my way to victory! Fun! Too bad I can't field Falcons with my Tau...."

Actually i never minded the fish of Fury tactic. it made sense in Tau background.

This rule actually gives them a few boosts. Through True LoS they can still see under the vehicle.

They are obscured so gain a 4+ cover save

They can still fire and the enemy can still return fire.

Whats funny is when a tau unit uses fish of fury against me. They drop down Fire the shots, cause casualties. A single shooting phase then drops the fish and Indirect S6 Ap4 Ordinance takes care of the fire warriors.

Captain Micha
13-02-2008, 04:03
heh, you mean you've never popped a fish and taken out the firewarriors behind it? god that is ******* awesome when it happens (even when I'm on the receiving end... come on it's just funny. even better when it pops the banshee squad coming to rape my poor fws) the fish is the tau's greatest ally and it's greatest weakness :p

also, I think FoF is a viable and fairly sensible tactic. Especially given the cost, and given they are not the only army that can do something similar (rhino sniping comes to mind, but that one doesn't bother me either... )

Varath- Lord Impaler
13-02-2008, 04:21
heh, you mean you've never popped a fish and taken out the firewarriors behind it? god that is ******* awesome when it happens (even when I'm on the receiving end... come on it's just funny. even better when it pops the banshee squad coming to rape my poor fws) the fish is the tau's greatest ally and it's greatest weakness

No, but i have popped fish with Ordinance and killed all the Warriors IN it.

THATS a keeper memory

Captain Micha
13-02-2008, 04:23
Ouch. how'd you pull that off? Turn one shot?

Varath- Lord Impaler
13-02-2008, 04:30
Ouch. how'd you pull that off? Turn one shot?

My basilisk, turn 5, the Devilfish was suppressed and hiding from my Autocannon squad, Dropped an earthshaker on it and rolled a 6 to Penetrate *BOOM*

Same turn i dropped the ethereal and his bodyguard with a pair of heavy Mortar shots (Yes, i have 5 Ordinance weapons and 2 demo charges in 2000 points. A tradeoff for not ever taking infantry heavy weapons)

Shasolenzabi
13-02-2008, 08:45
[[[ Well, the pdf does not say either way if the skimmer blocks LOS or not. in 3rd and 4th it did not ever convey a cover save for the firewarriors behind it, IF this interpretation of the rule is workable, then hey, at least we still keep FoF, and now get a 4+ cover save from enemy shooters? a bright spot in that pdf!!! Now, if only I could find a place for the cup holder in my Devilfish!

intellectawe
13-02-2008, 15:57
Actually i never minded the fish of Fury tactic. it made sense in Tau background.


So you are telling me that the Fish of Fury tactic is in Tau background? The same tactic where Tau can hide behind a Tank and never be assaulted due to game rules?

So you are telling me, there is fluff in the Tau book ( I dont own it ) where Tau are huddled behind a Tank, and when Berserkers try to assault them, the Tau Squad Leader say "Sorry, you can't assault us because you would be a foot away from our tank, and you can't be that close to another unit unless you assault it as well!" Thus, the Berserkers just stand there and look stupid?

That sounds like some interesting fluff!

TaintedSpam
13-02-2008, 16:22
Fish of Fury will still be doable after a fashion, if the PDF rules hold. Remember, casualties can be pulled from out of LOS and range, so if you can position your firewarriors so they can all see ONE guy JUST within range, you can let him have it and he has to pull casualties for all unsaved wounds inflicted. GW is pushing the whole "rushing forward" thing. The key here is that he doesn't have to pull that one guy within 12 inches, so the problem is not LOS, it's getting assaulted afterwards.

Brother Loki
13-02-2008, 16:34
FoF never protected the firewarriors from shooting, just from assaults. If you're using true LOS, it strikes me that skimmers often won't block LOS anyway - they'll be above the models eye view. I don't really see what has changed, other than the possibility of cover saves for intervening models, which frankly makes a certain amount of sense (try shooting through the down-draft of a hovering Harrier jump jet sometime - I'm sure it will affect your accuracy). I'd suggest that FoF will still work in 5th, but maybe not quite as effectively as now.

Ravenous
13-02-2008, 16:54
But they don't want to make sensible points! They just want to power game!

"Tau... hmmmm... this army is hard to use and requires tactics....

Wait...

Oh I found it.... hide my troops behind their transports! How genius! Now I can bypass any tactics the army requires and just power game my way to victory! Fun! Too bad I can't field Falcons with my Tau...."

That is a tactic :rolleyes:

List building is just as tactical as anything you do in game, next you'll be telling us that wearing camo is for powergamers because its unfair to the enemy.

Fluff or Cheese army you can still be a prick with your tactics either way.

Hoagiex
13-02-2008, 16:55
This rule actually gives them a few boosts. Through True LoS they can still see under the vehicle.


Not really, Since there are also flying bases that are too low to allow this.

Modelling you tank on a higher base to allow something like this is the same as modeling your bigger models lying down to prevent getting shot.


But how about this:
Skimmer hovers over a forest... and a tank on the ground wants to ram it... :wtf:

GW still has a looooooong way to go with the rules...

Azzy
13-02-2008, 19:43
But how about this:
Skimmer hovers over a forest... and a tank on the ground wants to ram it... :wtf:

There's nothing in 4th edition that prevents a tank on the ground from tank shocking a skimmer hovering over a forest.


GW still has a looooooong way to go with the rules...

And we haven't seen the finalized version of the rules, either.

Hoagiex
14-02-2008, 09:07
There's nothing in 4th edition that prevents a tank on the ground from tank shocking a skimmer hovering over a forest.

There's not much about tanks-tank shocking-tanks in 4th to begin with... but I'll replace the 'skimmer' with 'jetbikers' and go into your point.

But the problem is:
- Models can hover 'over' terrain.
- Models usually cannot physically be placed 'on top' of a dense forest.
- Their actual placement is in the tank shocking / ramming path, their 'real' location is not'

'3D-wise', the attacking tank cannot hit the higher target in it's 'straight line' if it cannot pass over terrain itself.... it's the actual placement that is the problem-causer here.

Azzy
14-02-2008, 09:19
There's not much about tanks-tank shocking-tanks in 4th to begin with...

Not much, but it's there.


but I'll replace the 'skimmer' with 'jetbikers' and go into your point.

But the problem is:
- Models can hover 'over' terrain.
- Models usually cannot physically be placed 'on top' of a dense forest.
- Their actual placement is in the tank shocking / ramming path, their 'real' location is not'

'3D-wise', the attacking tank cannot hit the higher target in it's 'straight line' if it cannot pass over terrain itself.... it's the actual placement that is the problem-causer here.

I'm not making any comment about it making sense, I'm just showing that 5th edition isn't the cause of this particular oddity.

Hoagiex
14-02-2008, 09:24
New rules are made to hunt down, kill and detroy oddities and locking gaming-situations.

A good ruleset would not require a single FAQ.

Azzy
14-02-2008, 10:05
New rules are made to hunt down, kill and detroy oddities and locking gaming-situations.

A good ruleset would not require a single FAQ.

In a perfect world, no. Realize, however, we're not looking at the finalized product--the PDF is still a preliminary playtest document.

Hoagiex
14-02-2008, 10:23
I've been around long enough to see GW screw up a number of times...

For once ... just once ... they should do nothing else then:
- release test version
- let everyone play
- get feedback

... and loop this process.

The trial assault rules/vehicle rules was a joke ... they release test-rules ... and did NOTHING with the feedback. They changed them based on their own studio findings.... and now we have the lamest, most broken assault rules of any edition.

they need to go over the above mentioned process about 30-50 times ... that's how you get PERFECT rules.

Gazak Blacktoof
14-02-2008, 13:10
Modelling you tank on a higher base to allow something like this is the same as modeling your bigger models lying down to prevent getting shot.





My brother's steel legion heavy weapons already are lying/ crouching down

Meriwether
14-02-2008, 15:21
If skimmers to in fact block LOS, I see this as a buff and not a nerf in most cases. The tau can always come out to one side and obliterate the closest squad, using the length of the tank to protect them from other nearby squads...

...or they could plug the gap with one squad and shoot with the rest, concentrating on anything within 12" of the gap-pluggers.

So the tactic _can_ work, but will have to be modified a bit and has some change of failure and/or give-and-take (God forbid...)

Meri