My Tau list so far has included a Skyray. The clarifications on Seeker Missiles made them seem like a tempting include in my eventual Adepticon list. They bring along a pair of mobile marker lights which also seamed like a good enough reason to give them a go. Third, the Skyray box includes the parts to make a Hammerhead, so I could still equip the hull with a rail-gun if it didn't work out.
The first couple of games I used the Skyray it preformed fairly well. It provided more benefit than my Hammerhead or Broadsides. Having mobile marker-lights upgraded to hit on 3+ was a solid addition to the list, and it was devastating to most targets to launch a Marcross Missile Massacre from the Skyray. For most of these battles, I was facing lightly armored foes. Most of the available armored targets could be adequately handled by battle-suit missile pods. In those games my st 10 rail-guns where superfluous. Their low rate of fire meant that they didn't have quite the effect of markerlight boosted st 7 missile pods and st 8 seekers.
The shine wore off the Skyray when I played against Necrons in a Dawn of war game. The first issue that arose was that my Skyray was stuck in support mode while my Pathfinders moved into position early game. This meant that I never had the opportunity to fire any seekers. The second issue was that my missile pods where fantastically useless against Monoliths and only slightly less useless against Quantum Shielding.
This left the whole anti-armor duty for my army onto my two Boadsides and single Hammerhead. I was rolling pretty badly for my rail-guns, and only managed to immobilize one Monolith with them. I was wishing for a third rail-gun equipped unit the whole game.
This was only my 1500 point list. My full 1850 Adepticon list adds in two Piranhas to assist against heavy armor, but that may not be good enough. I'm coming around to the standard reasoning that-no matter how good the Skyray is-it's not as good as anything carrying a rail-gun.
Those two marker-lights the Skyray provides are hard to give up, but I think in the long run having at least one more rail-gun will be more useful. I would like to add in another squad of two Broadsides in place of the Skyray, but practical considerations will probably lead to using an additional Hammerhead instead. If I can get the army completed and painted ahead of schedule, I may convert two additional Broadsides. As it is, I'm not sure I'll have the time to do that.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Monday, December 12, 2011
Eclectic Gamers Unite!
I like to play games. I like to play lots of games. I would like to play more games than I currently get to play regularly While I spend most of my energy on 40K, that doesn't mean I don't like Warmachine, Flames of War, Dystopian Wars, Uncharted Seas, Firestorm Armada, ext, ext... Unfortunately, reality only allows me to play one game system on any kind on a regular basis. Time and money are the big factors for the most part.
Money is pretty significant hurtle to overcome, but over a decade of hobby gaming has allowed me to accumulate collections across a broad spectrum of game systems. I would have a much larger collection if I had not developed some very strict rules on when I allow myself to buy miniature games. Rule 1: I have to have time to paint it. Rule 2: There has to be people to play with.
I've broken this rule a couple of times. This is why I have an unused copy of Space Hulk and both of my Dystopian War and Firestorm Fleets. Following this rule has kept me from double the size of my Dystopian War and Firestorm Fleets and from starting a High Elf Fantasy army. It's also keeping me from getting back into Flames of War.
So really, time is the big constraint. If I have no time to play or paint, then it's a waste of money to get into a game. Wasting money is a big pit fall for me thanks to the sunk cost fallacy. The more I spend; the more I want to spend to justify what I've already spent.
I would like to branch out a little on a regular basis and play other games, but I can't justify the expense if I'm not guaranteed to have the regular basis in the first place. If I knew I could get in at least 2 games a month of Flames or War, I'd defiantly collect some British armor as soon as I finished my Tau.
The ironic thing here is that Indy has a big FoW community. Unfortunately, they primarily play on weeknights at stores that are an impractical distance from my home and office for weeknight gaming. While you might have the occasional gamer that pays for both sides, the communities tend to give each other a wide berth. The Fantasy guys and 40K guys and the Warmachine guys, and FoW guys don't play on the same days. There's practical considerations behind this. Game stores have limited room, and it's not good to have players from a half dozen systems competing for table space.
When I was in college and single, I could spend two or three nights a week at the game store. With a full time job, a full time wife, and at minimum a 30 minute commute to a game store, I can't do it anymore.
So, today I had a thought. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a gaming club that focused on the eclectic gamers of the world. Able Company and Hivefleet do a great job for the FoW and 40K communities respectfully, but I think there is a need for a club that focuses on the entire miniature gaming community.
A primary job for the club would be to organize a gaming schedule. It would pick a day and a local store to set up shop in, and set up a rotational schedule of gaming systems. For example: the first Saturday of the month is 40K/Fantasy, the second is FoW, the third is Warmachine, and the forth is anything goes.
Something like this would allow people with limited gaming time to play all the games systems they like, without having to juggle their schedules so much. It would also help alleviate the often encountered problem of gamer burnout. People just get tired of their games when they play them too much. Spending some time playing something else would give people much needed break. Too often people end up switching games by selling off one army to buy into another game. I've always regretted the times I've done that. I'll eventually want to play the game I sold again at some point.
What are peoples thoughts on this? Is this something anyone but me would be interested in?
Money is pretty significant hurtle to overcome, but over a decade of hobby gaming has allowed me to accumulate collections across a broad spectrum of game systems. I would have a much larger collection if I had not developed some very strict rules on when I allow myself to buy miniature games. Rule 1: I have to have time to paint it. Rule 2: There has to be people to play with.
I've broken this rule a couple of times. This is why I have an unused copy of Space Hulk and both of my Dystopian War and Firestorm Fleets. Following this rule has kept me from double the size of my Dystopian War and Firestorm Fleets and from starting a High Elf Fantasy army. It's also keeping me from getting back into Flames of War.
So really, time is the big constraint. If I have no time to play or paint, then it's a waste of money to get into a game. Wasting money is a big pit fall for me thanks to the sunk cost fallacy. The more I spend; the more I want to spend to justify what I've already spent.
I would like to branch out a little on a regular basis and play other games, but I can't justify the expense if I'm not guaranteed to have the regular basis in the first place. If I knew I could get in at least 2 games a month of Flames or War, I'd defiantly collect some British armor as soon as I finished my Tau.
The ironic thing here is that Indy has a big FoW community. Unfortunately, they primarily play on weeknights at stores that are an impractical distance from my home and office for weeknight gaming. While you might have the occasional gamer that pays for both sides, the communities tend to give each other a wide berth. The Fantasy guys and 40K guys and the Warmachine guys, and FoW guys don't play on the same days. There's practical considerations behind this. Game stores have limited room, and it's not good to have players from a half dozen systems competing for table space.
When I was in college and single, I could spend two or three nights a week at the game store. With a full time job, a full time wife, and at minimum a 30 minute commute to a game store, I can't do it anymore.
So, today I had a thought. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a gaming club that focused on the eclectic gamers of the world. Able Company and Hivefleet do a great job for the FoW and 40K communities respectfully, but I think there is a need for a club that focuses on the entire miniature gaming community.
A primary job for the club would be to organize a gaming schedule. It would pick a day and a local store to set up shop in, and set up a rotational schedule of gaming systems. For example: the first Saturday of the month is 40K/Fantasy, the second is FoW, the third is Warmachine, and the forth is anything goes.
Something like this would allow people with limited gaming time to play all the games systems they like, without having to juggle their schedules so much. It would also help alleviate the often encountered problem of gamer burnout. People just get tired of their games when they play them too much. Spending some time playing something else would give people much needed break. Too often people end up switching games by selling off one army to buy into another game. I've always regretted the times I've done that. I'll eventually want to play the game I sold again at some point.
What are peoples thoughts on this? Is this something anyone but me would be interested in?
Friday, December 9, 2011
Addicted to Plastic
I don't know anybody who regularly plays fantasy, so, if I bought that High Elf army deal from GW, it's not like I would ever get to play with it. Not to mention that I barely have time to finish painting my Tau for adepticon. That doesn't make me want to buy it any less. It's such a good deal.
Of course it wouldn't be enough. I'd still end up sinking hundreds off more dollars into it to get the army just the way I wanted it.
I even want to get back into Flames of War. I know I'd end up spending a few hundred dollars there for maybe only a few games wort of use.
I can't wait for the day when 3D printers are common household devices. It would really make this hobby so much more accessible. It would be so cool to just print off a whole army for a few dollars worth of material and a license fee for the 3D files. We're getting closer every day.
Of course it wouldn't be enough. I'd still end up sinking hundreds off more dollars into it to get the army just the way I wanted it.
I even want to get back into Flames of War. I know I'd end up spending a few hundred dollars there for maybe only a few games wort of use.
I can't wait for the day when 3D printers are common household devices. It would really make this hobby so much more accessible. It would be so cool to just print off a whole army for a few dollars worth of material and a license fee for the 3D files. We're getting closer every day.
Monday, December 5, 2011
Indy GW store
Some of us noticed that GW was doing some retail recruiting in Indy. Look what I found on GW's store locator today: GW Indy Store
Monday, November 28, 2011
I hope Tau isn't the next Codex
After the amazing two games I've played with my Tau, I have to say that I like the army. The variability in their wargear options has allowed them to stay competitive despite the age of the codex. Tau very effectively matches my play style. I've always been a castle type player. I prefer to build a defensive line and make my opponents come to me. This works fairly well in lot of game systems for me, so long as I can find an army that can effectively fight that kind of battle.
When I played Flames or War I used German Grenadiers. They where a very effective defensive force. You couldn't effectively fight them from greater than 16" away, and they had some very good mobile reserve options in the form of Tigers and Stugs. My Cygnar in Warmachine was much the same. They weren't as tough, but they could outrage anything else they would fight. They had a lot of units that weren't good at leading a charge, but where more than adequate to clean up anything that survived a turn or two of trying to march though long gunner fire.
It may seem like a simple way to play the game; just sitting there and roll dice while your opponent marches across the table. It's much harder than you think to do it right. You have to build the defensive line just right so that you can absorb a charge and regroup. You need to build in bait to tempt the enemy to commit their forces where you want them to. You need to have a mobile reserve behind your lines to counter whatever tricks your opponent pulls off.
40K has given me some trouble because I could never build an army that worked that way. The way the armies are designed in 40K you can win games by aggressively driving your assault units into the opposing army. You can't quite do that in other games. In FoW you need to measure your movement out just right to make an assault work. The Defensive Fire mechanic and the deadliness of weapons fire under 16" in that game make miscalculations very painful. In Warmachine you have to protect your own warcaster, so if an all out attack fails, you're probably going to loose to the counterattack. In both games, needlessly sacrificing units can tend to hamper you chances of winning.
In 40K, assault units are relatively cheap, and losing one doesn't loose you the game in most cases. The good assault based units are generally so much better in assaults than ordinary units, that there is no likely chance of failure. In assault unit versus assault unit match ups, mutually assured destruction is usually good enough. It's acceptable to loose an assault terminator squad to take out a Thunderwolves unit.
I'm not a very aggressive player. I think this is a result of Eldar being my first army. I've never held much stock in relying on close-combat for victories since my games always featured my expensive exotic aspect warriors bouncing off of regular old tactical marines.
Tau is the first army that I've played where I think a defensive strategy will work. It has cheap units to absorb charges, and sturdy units that can stand up to ranged fire. Many of the units are also decently fast enough to go on the offensive when the situation calls for it. I can build an army that will force my opponent to think about how to attack it. Or better yet, one that my opponents don't know they have to think carefully about approaching.
Anyway that's my hope. Based on the enormity of my experience(2 games).
So how does this relate to not wanting Tau to be the next codex? I don't want to have to relearn the army for Adepticon. Especially with as late as a march release window for the next codex. I also don't want to have to do any marathon painting sessions to get a rebuilt army ready in time.
I've been rethinking my list a little in the meantime though. I was worried about the Necron solar pulses. A ranged army really doesn't need to loose 2+ turns of shooting, so I removed a few gun drones to fit in some black sun filters. I haven't read the Necron rules, so I would be grateful if someone would confirm if the standard anti-night-fight equipment works against solar pulse.
New list follows:
When I played Flames or War I used German Grenadiers. They where a very effective defensive force. You couldn't effectively fight them from greater than 16" away, and they had some very good mobile reserve options in the form of Tigers and Stugs. My Cygnar in Warmachine was much the same. They weren't as tough, but they could outrage anything else they would fight. They had a lot of units that weren't good at leading a charge, but where more than adequate to clean up anything that survived a turn or two of trying to march though long gunner fire.
It may seem like a simple way to play the game; just sitting there and roll dice while your opponent marches across the table. It's much harder than you think to do it right. You have to build the defensive line just right so that you can absorb a charge and regroup. You need to build in bait to tempt the enemy to commit their forces where you want them to. You need to have a mobile reserve behind your lines to counter whatever tricks your opponent pulls off.
40K has given me some trouble because I could never build an army that worked that way. The way the armies are designed in 40K you can win games by aggressively driving your assault units into the opposing army. You can't quite do that in other games. In FoW you need to measure your movement out just right to make an assault work. The Defensive Fire mechanic and the deadliness of weapons fire under 16" in that game make miscalculations very painful. In Warmachine you have to protect your own warcaster, so if an all out attack fails, you're probably going to loose to the counterattack. In both games, needlessly sacrificing units can tend to hamper you chances of winning.
In 40K, assault units are relatively cheap, and losing one doesn't loose you the game in most cases. The good assault based units are generally so much better in assaults than ordinary units, that there is no likely chance of failure. In assault unit versus assault unit match ups, mutually assured destruction is usually good enough. It's acceptable to loose an assault terminator squad to take out a Thunderwolves unit.
I'm not a very aggressive player. I think this is a result of Eldar being my first army. I've never held much stock in relying on close-combat for victories since my games always featured my expensive exotic aspect warriors bouncing off of regular old tactical marines.
Tau is the first army that I've played where I think a defensive strategy will work. It has cheap units to absorb charges, and sturdy units that can stand up to ranged fire. Many of the units are also decently fast enough to go on the offensive when the situation calls for it. I can build an army that will force my opponent to think about how to attack it. Or better yet, one that my opponents don't know they have to think carefully about approaching.
Anyway that's my hope. Based on the enormity of my experience(2 games).
So how does this relate to not wanting Tau to be the next codex? I don't want to have to relearn the army for Adepticon. Especially with as late as a march release window for the next codex. I also don't want to have to do any marathon painting sessions to get a rebuilt army ready in time.
I've been rethinking my list a little in the meantime though. I was worried about the Necron solar pulses. A ranged army really doesn't need to loose 2+ turns of shooting, so I removed a few gun drones to fit in some black sun filters. I haven't read the Necron rules, so I would be grateful if someone would confirm if the standard anti-night-fight equipment works against solar pulse.
New list follows:
| Unit Name | Upgrades | Qty |
| Shas'el (Commander) | ||
| Missile Pod | ||
| Plasma Rifle | ||
| Multi-tracker | ||
| Hard wired black sun filter | ||
| XV8 Team | 3 | |
| Missile Pod | 3 | |
| Plasma Rifle | 3 | |
| Multi-tracker | 3 | |
| XV8 Team | 3 | |
| Missile Pod | 3 | |
| Plasma Rifle | 3 | |
| Multi-tracker | 3 | |
| XV8 Team | 2 | |
| Twin linked Missle pod | 2 | |
| Black sun filter | 2 | |
| Fire Warriors | 6 | |
| Fire Warriors | 6 | |
| Devilfish | ||
| Seeker Missiles | 1 | |
| Disruption Pod | ||
| Kroot Squad | 10 | |
| Kroot Hounds | 7 | |
| Kroot Squad | 10 | |
| Kroot Hounds | 7 | |
| Pathfinder Squad | 8 | |
| Devilfish | ||
| Seeker Missiles | 1 | |
| Disruption Pod | ||
| Piranha | 1 | |
| Fusion Blaster | ||
| Targeting Array | ||
| Piranha | 1 | |
| Fusion Blaster | ||
| Targeting Array | ||
| XV88 Broadsides | 2 | |
| Team leader | ||
| Hard-wired black sun filter | ||
| Hard-wired target lock | ||
| Drone Controller | 1 | |
| Shield Drone | 2 | |
| Black sun filter | 1 | |
| Hammerhead | ||
| Rail Gun | ||
| Smart Missile System | ||
| Black sun filter | ||
| Disruption Pod | ||
| Multitracker | ||
| Sky Ray | ||
| Smart Missile System | ||
| Disruption Pod | ||
| Black sun filter | ||
| Multitracker | ||
| Targeting Array |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)