[40k] Is *ANYONE* using transport vehicles any more?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>I've played 4 games @1500 pts since 4th edition came out, all of them
using >the
>"Gamma" rules. Here's the total transport count for those games:
>2 Devilfish
>2 Wave serpents & 1 Falcon
>And that's it. The Devilfish were seen in 2 separate games, and both
times >they
>were transporting a Pathfinder squad. Recall that Tau Pathfinders
are >REQUIRED
>to have a Devilfish!

Which raises the question: Why were they using Pathfinders instead of
Fire Warriors unless they planned to use the Devilfish? No one's going
to pay an extra 80pts + 2ppm, lose pulse rifles and suffer a reduction
in maximum squad size just for the option to take rail rifles or for a
couple of extra markerlights. The very fact that the Tau player used
Pathfinders suggests that he wanted mobile infantry, and took them
because he felt Pathfinders make better mobile infantry than Fire
Warriors in a Devilfish.

Philip Bowles

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

pbowles@aol.com (Philip Bowles) wrote in
news:587631d1.0501100836.73c3d756@posting.google.com:

>>I've played 4 games @1500 pts since 4th edition came out, all of them
> using >the
>>"Gamma" rules. Here's the total transport count for those games:
>>2 Devilfish
>>2 Wave serpents & 1 Falcon
>>And that's it. The Devilfish were seen in 2 separate games, and both
> times >they
>>were transporting a Pathfinder squad. Recall that Tau Pathfinders
> are >REQUIRED
>>to have a Devilfish!
>
> Which raises the question: Why were they using Pathfinders instead of
> Fire Warriors unless they planned to use the Devilfish? No one's going
> to pay an extra 80pts + 2ppm, lose pulse rifles and suffer a reduction
> in maximum squad size just for the option to take rail rifles or for a
> couple of extra markerlights. The very fact that the Tau player used
> Pathfinders suggests that he wanted mobile infantry, and took them
> because he felt Pathfinders make better mobile infantry than Fire
> Warriors in a Devilfish.

I rather like Pathfinders in a Devilfish, although the rule that skimmers
don't block line of sight irritates me to no end. Still, the free move in
a Devilfish can put my Pathfinders deep into the battle, and if they get
out into cover they can change the shape of the fight for a good long
time. And then afterward I've got a mobile burst cannon, which tends to
make up its points cost in my opponent's wasted shots. I don't know what
it is, but there's a certain OMG MUST KILL TANK mentality that's amusing.
The DF isn't any more lethal than, say, a stealth battlesuit, but it
draws a disproportionate amount of fire. It's nice when squads pass up
shooting the Pathfinders so the lascannon in the squad can shoot at the
DF.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Philip Bowles" wrote
> >And that's it. The Devilfish were seen in 2 separate games, and both
> >times they were transporting a Pathfinder squad. Recall that Tau
> >Pathfinders are REQUIRED to have a Devilfish!
>
> Which raises the question: Why were they using Pathfinders instead of
> Fire Warriors unless they planned to use the Devilfish? No one's going
> to pay an extra 80pts + 2ppm, lose pulse rifles and suffer a reduction
> in maximum squad size just for the option to take rail rifles or for a
> couple of extra markerlights. The very fact that the Tau player used
> Pathfinders suggests that he wanted mobile infantry, and took them
> because he felt Pathfinders make better mobile infantry than Fire
> Warriors in a Devilfish.

Good point. The D-fish did have a pair of seeker missiles and was used to drop
the Pathfinders & drones in a tactically useful spot.

Then again, both those games [Tau vs. Necron, Tau vs. Eldar] ended with one
surviving Tau model on the table, so this may not represent an optimum choice
for the Tau...
--
- Ward.
wardcb at earthlink dot net

The "upper crust" is a bunch of crumbs held together by their dough.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On the 10 Jan 2005, pbowles@aol.com (Philip Bowles) wrote:

<snip>

> Which raises the question: Why were they using Pathfinders instead of
> Fire Warriors unless they planned to use the Devilfish?

Possibly stuck in a 3rd Ed mindset, forgetting that you can now move and
shoot with rapid fire weapons. He may have intended them as mobile fire
support - this was the purpose of my second Fire Warrior squad, which
has six pulse rifles and six pulse carbines, until the 4th Ed. rules
came along.

He might also have had a few seeker missiles in his army, and needed
something to spot for them.

--
Jades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm
The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web.

nospam@jades.org /is/ a real email address!