How many points should a Fire Warrior cost?

[Lord Bob]

With the new 6th rules, how many points should a fire warrior cost?

Considering that it has a profile worse than an imperial guard, but better armour and weapon, I'd say that it should be 7pts:
IG guard ~5 pts + 1pt for the armour +2pts for the weapon -1pt for the profile and the fact that the plasma syphon exists = 7pts

I considered that markerlights and orders cancell each other.

I'll leave a poll and all your thoughts are wellcomed.

[A.T.]

IG guard ~5 pts + 1pt for the armour +2pts for the weapon -1pt for the profile and the fact that the plasma syphon exists = 7pts

IG grenadier in carapace armour ~10 pts, +1 for notably superior basic firepower, -1 for lack of special weapons = 10 pts ... & grenades (since everyone gets them these days)

No, but seriously IG grenadiers are overpriced, it seems to be a carapace thing - even GK warrior acolytes with carapace armour and boltguns (weaklings) cost just a point less than the current firewarriors and the decent carapace armoured 3rd ed stormtroopers were no cheaper.


I'm going to have to say 9 on the assumption that other aspects of the army (i.e. transport costs, squad options, etc) are also brought into line, but only as you are comparing them to other units which - in carapace - also cost 9 or more points. As with all things the cost goes down or up relative to the rest of the codex or - if written by cruddace - simply because they are not guard.

As i've said before when this has come up though - the underlying firewarriors are solid, they just don't have the options/support that elevate other units over them.

[Hendarion]

+2 points for the weapon? 1 point for each additional strength point? Doesn't sound right to me, not even factoring in the very useful long range in 6th. So imo 9+. I'd trade my 12 points Dire Avengers any time

[megatrons2nd]

With their currant abilities I am going with 8pts. Guard with carapace armor are going to pay a premium for the upgrade. The Firewarrior is the basic trooper so should not be costed at the same premium for that save. The marines don't and they are better all the way around, buy your example marines should end up costing somewhere within 19-21 points. If Tau get a benefit to firing overwatch, or receive a BS4 in their update I would say 10pts would be fair.

[Abaddonshand]

7 point fire warriors would be insane. Tau would be able to match ork green tide hordes man for man! The only worse part of their startling compared to IG is I being one lower (and possibly WS, I don't remember). To compensate for this they get 4+ armour, which is vastly superior to IG flak jackets. The reason GW puts a premium on carapace is because it means the difference between getting a 50% chance to live when a bolter wounds you, or no chance to live. With Khorne berserkers getting heavy chain swords, Tau with their I2 are actually better than guard in combat with them. Therefore, I'd say the tau base profile should be sitting at 6 points before considering armour or weapons.

GW consider a 3 point per model cost of giving BS4 IG veterans carapace armour to be the going rate. Tau only have BS3, so we'll say 2 points per model for them, bringing them to 8 points. Now, GK pay 20 points for a squad to take strength 5 stormbolters. Tau pulse rifles are rapid fire with 6" more range than the stormbolters. The changes to rapid fire have made them essentially 30" assault 1 or 15" assault 2 guns (minus the charge at the end, which lets face it, fire warriors wouldn't do anyway, especially now they can overwatch). The extra range and st5 justifies another 2 points per model, giving us 10 point fire warriors, and a steal at that!

[Eldarin Hope]

If FW were 7 points then Guardians would have to be somewhere round Grot cost

[Azulthar]

4+ save is a notable step up from 5+, which is negated by the oh-so-common bolter fire. Strength 5 opens up a lot of new targets for the unit: they can take on light vehicles and Monstrous Creatures with massed fire. Not to mention the 30" range and defensive grenades being a good upgrades for a shooty unit.

I'd price them around 10-11 points, also taking into account that rapid fire units have become a lot more useful in 6th.

[Grocklock]

There is an inherit problem with working out the cost of an individual unit entry model out of one dex t oanother. As alot of dex's points costs are internally balanced against options within their army dex. There was an old white dwarf which did go though this. So while comparing the cost of a standard model to another may on the serface look like a good idea. It is inheritly flawed. There is also the factor of pricing models not only on there effectivness but also there avalibility within the army. That is why on the face of it kroot warriors are over costed because it represents a lack of combat effectivness of the army but it still able to field combat troops. Sorry a little hard to explain.

[A.T.]

With their currant abilities I am going with 8pts. Guard with carapace armor are going to pay a premium for the upgrade.

The old carapace armoured troops choice vets (DH/WH stormtroopers) cost exactly the same as the current grenadiers.

It is high for what you get, but then again tau would be much better than grenadiers if not for the special weapons and cheap transports - BS3 pulse rifles cause a lot more damage than BS4 lasguns.


Worth keeping in mind that new edition prices go both ways - DE got bumped up a point but got a little stronger, SoBs got bumped up a point and got somewhat weaker. Sometimes you just get screwed.

[Snowflake]

You know, this question could be rephrased as "how much do you value shooting of a strength less than 7 or 8." Your answer will result in your opinion of their proper cost. There are really two camps here.

1) The people that believe that light weapons (bolters and the like) do next to nothing in a game. These people will most likely consider a pulse rifle to be slightly less crap, but still crap, and as a result will think that Fire Warriors are overcosted to almost the point of uselessness at their current 10 points. This would be the group that thinks they should be 7 or 8 points. Fundamentally this is because they think the pulse rifle fire will have a minor, if any, effect on the game. This group will tend to take the minimum number of fire warriors needed, and are more likely to hide them out of sight or in the backfield. They won't lose sleep if their fire warriors never get to shoot.

2) The people that think that light weapons fire serves a purpose and is effective. These people look at the pulse rifle as an improved version of something they already value, and therefore put a higher mental price point on it. This group will tend to think 10ish points is a good price for fire warriors, because they believe the weapon will have an impact on their game. This group will also tend to be more aggressive with the fire warriors, and make serious attempts to get them into good shooting positions.

Myself, I think light weapons fire is the cornerstone of an army's killing power. Heavy weapons will crack tanks and take out MC's, but the objective is almost always centered around the scoring capabilities of troops. Remove their troops and you win, and massed light weapons fire is exceedingly good at that. In my eyes, this makes Fire Warriors kind of the cream of the crop in terms of cheap shooty troops, and I think that they are correctly pointed at 10 points.

[alextroy]

1 Shas'ui and 4 Fire Warrior with Pulse Rifle, EMP Grenades and Photon Grenades standard: 60 points
Per Additional Fire Warrior (up to 7 additional): 10 Points each

[Stonerhino]

I was actually tore on this one. I went with 8 but feel 8-10 would be good based on their support costs. Untill we know the new point costs for Crisis suits and tranports we can't really give an good measure.

Currently 10 points w/photon grenades would be about right. Emp grenades are looking a lot better thou.

Edit:
10 pts w/ both grenades is to cheap.

[Noserenda]

10 Pts with Photons and a "Free" Sergeant/Bonding Knife would be ok, photons are of debatable value ofc, I use a lot of Fire Warriors in games though and they are often a bit lacklustre compared to other troops choices, unless you get a tall ruin, then they are golden

[Damocles8]

looking at just the unit, I can see keeping their current point cost, giving them grenades (defensive, maybe an emp option for the squad or the shas'ui, maybe give them the option of a free drone at 6 man squad, another at 12.

[GodofWarTx]

Firewarriors are a steal at their current price in 6th edition, and some of you want them as cheap at 6-7 points? Come on.

In that case, i feel my trygon should be 92 points. Heh.

[Importman]

Who cares how much a Fire Warrior costs since there is only 2 Tau players here!

Jokes aside 9 points per FW should be about right IMO. Sure 6th Ed have made shooty armies that much better but then again they die just as easily as before when you can get to them in CC. Put plenty of terrain on the table and you should be okay. Playing Tau with minimal terrain is not a lot of fun...

[Snowflake]

Who cares how much a Fire Warrior costs since there is only 2 Tau players here!

Jokes aside 9 points per FW should be about right IMO. Sure 6th Ed have made shooty armies that much better but then again they die just as easily as before when you can get to them in CC. Put plenty of terrain on the table and you should be okay. Playing Tau with minimal terrain is not a lot of fun...

I just don't understand how you would justify them going down to 9 points. They're the same points as a Kabalite Warrior, which nobody has ever accused of being overcosted. For the same price you get a better armor save and a much better weapon, and lose 1 bs, some ws, which doesn't matter at all, and some initiative, which also only matters if you let someone get into cc. Basically for a shooty unit you trade one bs for a better weapon and armor save, seems like a fair trade to me for the same cost.

[Stinkfoot]

I would say that Fire Warriors price per model is about right as things currently stand. Fire Warriors' problem is that their squads are too one dimensional. I think if FWs could take, say, a melta or flamer for every 6 goats in the unit they'd see a lot more time of the tabletop as they would be helpful in variety of uses rather than just used as gun line fodder.

[LeonidasL]

it surprises me that people scream at FWs awesomeness, but at the same time they forget that they are Ld7, and with a shas;ui for +10pts, they get the standard 8 Ld.
Just a question: have you ever faced FWs or you are speaking out of your non-existent experience?
Tau, is the only army in 40k that acctualy knows what is that little stat at the end of the profile called Leadership.
A FW as is at the time, should cost more or less 8pts per model because of his 4+save and his gun.
A unit of FWs in my opinion, should cost 60 pts for 5 FWs and a shas'ui, all armed with pulse rifle, photon grenades and emp grenades.
Shas'ui should be an upgraded FW with +1BS and +1LD, not +1A and +1LD.
A debatable option would be FWs at 10pts/model with photons and +1BS.

[smileyface]

If the next eldar codex doesn't do something good with the shuriken catapult, I'm going to get a tau codex and use all my guardians as allied fire warriors. Whatever price they are now is fine by me, because they're massively superior to guardians and avengers at the things troops are supposed to be useful for.

This does also give the lie to the idea that you can't compare things across codexes. You can and should, because I can include fire warriors in my eldar army.