Actually, Rikimaru, I quite enjoy the occasional debates that we hold. You're one of few LO members who consistently goes into great detail about the points that you support. Admittedly you're a bit straightforward about it, but you're very convincing. And I enjoy writing the lengthy responses, for even if my claims are ill-founded, so long as I back them up it allows us to dig deeper and find working solutions for the Greater Good :dance: And I must confess, some of my examples were not the best, but I had to get those basic examples out of the way so that I might present the more specific examples. Now, back to the issue(s) at hand!
rikimaru said:
Well I have always found that taking some ML's does increase the efficiency of the list. However as you have rightly said you have to gauge just when the downsides outweigh the benefits. I do however feel that ML's have a much more justified place in 5th then they did in 4th. I will try to explain why by answewring your points, prepare for a long post.
1st of though I will make the point that those dependable units can be made even more dependable by the judicous application of a few Ml tokens, FW's and their FOF are the prime example of this, just 1 ML can up thier hit rate by 20-25%.
I strongly agree with you here, rikimaru, Markerlights got worlds better with the dawn of 5th edition. Cover saves now abound, and Relentless allows Marker drones to be much less hindering and more versatile in our ever-present jetpack squads. A single markerlight hit, at most, will increase as squad's hit rate by 19.4%, in the case of Gun Drones, but most commonly a single hit boosting Bs will increase the hit rate on a Bs3 squad by 16.7%. The larger the volume of fire, the more shots hit as a result of this, and to cite your example, a FOFing full fire warrior squad at Bs3 will statistically get 12 hits; at Bs4 they will achieve 16 hits.
rikimaru said:
One simple fact applies here, whatever squad size you take you are going to get more hits. More hits = more casualties which = less return fire. Also the advantage of reducing cover saves for units which would usually not get a save against AP5 weaponry cannot be ignored. That 4+ save is knocked sown to 5+ with just one ML and that makes a real difference. If you can find the points to take ML's (for instance by taking the PF Devilfish for FW's and thus not paying for one of their own) then nothing is really lost by taking them. I am not really sure what you are trying to get at with the number of shots point, because to be quite frank a unit like Stealths will not be taking the ML just to benefit themselves and this is the beauty of a networked ML, you can help other units. For the cost of one Stealth you can up the BS of the whole unit or help another unit. I take a Drone on my full strength Stealth unit and it has been nothing but good so far.
If you are having to really decrease the efficiency of another unit to take ML's then obviously you need to re-think, but careful planning and careful selection of just where the ML's are going to be placed are the key rules. For instance an ML Drone is wasted on a FW squad but they really work well (and are worth the points) in jetpack equipped units.
Yes, taking two equal squads and boosting one with a markerlight token will see the boosted unit to be the superior unit, however if you took the points needed to get that markerlight token and gave those points into bulking up the non-markerlight squad, you would find the two squads to be more or less equal, the non-markerlight squad would have more wounds (hence less morale checks and harder to destroy), and the non-markerlight squad would be more dependable. My issue with single markerlights is that you're essentially tossing a coin and betting the squad on the results of that coin toss. With a large squad you're tossing a dozen coins, and the more coins you toss the more likely you are to get a 50/50 result (speaking from the angle of probability). I would personally much rather be able to depend on a squad's performance level than squeeze my eyes shut and wish really hard that I'd get a favourable result. "Hope is the first step on the road to despair", as I'm sure you've all read plenty of times, and I'd rather not let that hope for a fortunate roll cause me to make a poor choice in the name of luck.
I'm a bit confused on your usage of Marker drones, the way I'm hearing this you seem to be telling me that the Marker Drone may fire at a separate unit from its owner, and this is quite simply not the case. Yes, the Marker Drone does fire
before it's master, however, it is still a member of the squad and must obey normal shooting rules (unless some sneaky Tau general snuck around and put target locks on all of the marker drones)
Reducing a cover save does indeed make a noticeable difference... when firing at squads in cover. I tend to fire at the more immediate threats, as I often play against assault based armies, and eliminating the most pressing threat is often the closest threat, and that threat many times does not move through cover so that they might get into close combat a turn sooner. I am also shooting from cover the majority of the time, so in a pissing contest with my opponent I can rely on my generally superior weaponry to win the day anyways. A markerlight comes in, once again, as a handy bonus for me, rather than a necessity. And, once again, there are the units with armour superior to their cover, making markerlights redundant for the purposes of reducing saves.
rikimaru said:
This efficiency rule is true of any unit and to be quite honest is not really any more of an issue than for any other unit. If we thought this way then we would never take any units. As for the fall back, yeah it is quite true that in smaller units Drones can be a factor in fall back; however again this can be nullified by careful and selective choice of units they are placed with. For instance I have ML Drones attached only to my 2 Deathrain squads and my Stealths, why? Well because the Deathrains are always at max distance (pref behind cover) and the Stealths have the stealth field. THis makes them hard to target and thus casualty loss is not really a problem. Stick an ML Drone in a 6 man FW squad and you have problems. Also the other way to alleviate casualtie loss is to take Markerlights, not Drones.
What you also have to consider is ML's make the business of killing easier which reduces the effectiveness of the opponents units, if you are upping BS of your units and negating his cover saves (or even pinning) then you are reducing the chances of you actually losing models
Unfortunately, True LOS has made hiding such a squad very difficult unless they were hiding behind a wall, however this would imply an area of terrain, forcing a dangerous terrain check upon all models that leave the terrain in their movement phase to see past the wall and shoot, and a further dangerous terrain check when the squad moved back into the terrain so that they could hide from return fire. That's a 1/3 chance of inflicting an unsaveable wound upon yourself
per turn. Awful odds as far as I'm concerned, and once again, the Marker Drone has to target the squad that the Deathrains are targeting.
The stealth squad with markerlights and marker drones is quite an effective choice, but it is hardly efficient in my eyes, for two reasons: You're paying an absolutely ludicrous price for the squad, and by mixing Marker Drones into the squad you're dividing the purpose of the stealth team. A pure stealth team will have a solid role as an anti-infantry and Indirect Fire destruction infiltration unit, a mixed unit will either be shooting to kill a squad or shooting to support another squad's shooting. A squad with a confused purpose and a massive points cost has no place in my lists.
Ha, and you cite me for poor examples. Of course a 7-strong unit of infantry drawing constant attention is going to have problems, I would honor the unit were it to survive the length of the game! I have indeed taken that markerlights "make the business of killing easier", however, I always weigh this against the benefits that having however many points I would be spending on said markerlights spent on another unit instead, hence my 9-Fire Warriors and a drone vs. 12 Fire Warriors example. Taking markerlights does reduce my chance of losing models, but having more models that are doing the same amount of work without the markerlight does "make the business of killing easier" and make the losses that I do inevitably sustain have less of an impact. 5/9 is much worse than 5/12 in terms of losses.
rikimaru said:
Nah bub, if you can get BS5 on a Hammerhead take it. Hammerheads are targeting the oppositions armour and the quicker that can be stopped the better. One thing I know from experience against other Tau players is this, if I have ML's and he doesn't (or I have more) I WILL win the battle against his Hammerheads, no end of times I have seen 1 or 2 rolled on the die and I have rolled a 2. To me that would be enough in its self but the reduction of scatter is important as well. If anyone tells you an inch is not important (ask your Girlfriends or Wifes) they are wrong, it can make all the difference against those big Nid or Ork units.
Hammerheads may be, but I personally would be using them much more often against groups of infantry thanks to the new blast rules. Broadsides have gotten a new lease on life with True LOS, and despite the potential for their target having a cover save, I've got multiple shots coming out of the Broadside squad to compensate. This is a situation where I would indeed gladly accept the assistance of a markerlight or two, hence why I field a total of four: they're useful, just not
that useful. Deathrains are much cheaper and do a fine job against most vehicles, and with their higher volume of shots and greater arcs of fire they'll be dealing with most of the targets that are within their abilities to damage, leaving the tougher units to the railguns. Personally, against those big Nid or Ork units, I prefer massed pulse fire, but that's neither here nor there.
rikimaru said:
Well if they have better armour then why would you use the valuable ML hit to reduce the cover save? Use it to help another unit. Also plenty of units in 40K will have worse saves than the cover save (or no save at all) and this can be a real problem if you are wanting to hurt units that are moving up field fast, the reduction of the cover save can make all the difference. There will usually be a unit that can benefit from an ML token and that is the thing something will benefit, if you do not have ML's then nothing benefits.
Like I said earlier, getting the obvious examples out of the way first. It's a bit frustrating, you keep speaking of Markerlights as though they're free. If I walked up to a person who really loved cake (you know one) and said "you can have a cake for $10, or a cake and a flashlight for $10" the person would definitely take the cake and the flashlight because it's all benefit and no cost (plus, what if it's dark and they can't see their cake???). The thing about Warhammer 40,000 is that it's NEVER all benefit and no cost, a cost is always present, and the costs and benefits guide us in the army choices we make. You're a seasoned Tyranid player also, rikimaru, and let me bring this up as an example:
Genestealers.
Ooh, does everybody love Genestealers, they're awfully dangerous. Scuttlers is quite a handy biomorph, especially with the new rules, and it's a great biomorph to have, so let's say we take Scuttlers on our 12 strong brood. Extended Carapace is practically a must! Being able to save against standard infantry weapons helps a ton. And who doesn't love scything talons? 4 attacks on the charge? Heck yes!
But now, our 192 point brood without biomorphs has become a 324 point brood. For that cost, you could have 20 regular genestealers, and this factor is always in my mind. Sometimes, it's effective to take all of the biomorphs, but you'd often be better served by simply having more of the bare-bones models. In my eyes, the markerlights are the scything talons; sure you're getting more attacks, but instead of buying those additional attacks I could just by more models and get a similar amount of attacks with many benefits outside of close combat by taking the larger brood.
If you do not have a markerlight, something DOES benefit, just not in the "it's awesome right now" sort of way
rikimaru said:
Please do not take this the wrong way but why are you stating the blindingly obvious as a reason for not taking ML's. True a TA equipped (though why anyone would do that is beyond me) XV88 will not need the ML token to hit; however that nice STR10, AP1 hit means nothing when the vehicle passes a 4+ cover save, that ML hit can reduce that to 5+ which means a much better chance of killing the target
I would, as I much value the near-guaranteed hit rate (also consider what I said earlier).
rikimaru said:
Deathrains do not really need the Ml token to hit but again the cover point applies, also having a BS5 re-roll when a hit is desperately needed can be a real bonus. I take the Drone with my Deathrains because it is networked and can help both the DR or another Tau unit and is a safer place for the ML. It makes for a versatile, useful unit that can pop armour with 4 accurate shots and provide Ml support for another unit, at 146pts I class that as a bargain.
Changing a 88.888% chance to hit with four shots to a 97.222% is barely going to have an effect, and I pray that you never find yourself in a situation where you actually need it. That being said, once again, being Networked does not give the Marker drone a free target lock (unless I'm completely ignorant of something not in the codex), and a TA equipped Deathrain should never have need of such services on a regular basis.
rikimaru said:
Markerlights have no place in FW squads in 5th (if they ever did anyway), to equip a FW squad with a ML costs 20pts (25 if you take a TL) and nerfs the movement of the FW squad; so why pay that much when you can get a networked ML Drone for 30pts that you can give to an XV8 or XV25 and have mobility to boot. Markerlights on FW's are never worth the cost, FW's benefit from ML tokens generated by other units and FOF FW units are probably the best use for tokens.
That depends entirely on what you use the Fire Warrior squad for. I personally enjoy fielding them as static firepower elements, and I assume that you would take a Shas'ui team leader with bonding knife on a full squad, hence why I consider them to not be so much of a points sink on a Fire Warrior squad. I say movement nerfs the shooting of a Fire Warrior squad, so why take a transport that you can't shoot out of? I've known you to be a proponent of FOF squads for quite some time, and it's quite simply not up my alley, so I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on this one.
rikimaru said:
Oh c'mon dude the ML has a 36 inch range. I have rarely not had a target for the PF squad but the point you miss is we now have so much more choice of where to put the ML's. The mobility of ML's attached to XV8 and XV25 squads makes it very very unlikely you will not fraw LOS on a unit. ALso the Skyray is very effective at gaining LOS for its ML's. When you consider that an XV8 has an effective ML range of 42" and the Skyray 48" then it is going to be a very rare occasion that LOS is going to be a problem.
Also as far as cover goes it is true that this can be a problem for static ML squads but that has always been the case, we can now take more mobile ML's so it has actually got better for us not worse.
I agree that they will often have range and LOS on a unit, and I support pathfinders in that they adhere to a single purpose, but once again taking a marker drone on a XV8 or XV25 squad is simply a way of debilitating that squad in my eyes (for the third time, unless someone snuck target locks onto all of them). I do support Sky Rays as they are efficient for their points, durable, and versatile.
rikimaru said:
The ONLY squads, dude you just named the majority of the Tau army. Also Hammerheads, Skyrays, Seekers, all benefit from ML tokens. Ml Drones are not actually that expensive now, in 4th they were because they made units less efficient due to movement restrictions. However having a highly mobile networked ML for 30pts that does not hinder the unit carrying it can only be a bonus. Like I said if you can find the points then they will be helpful (how can they not be). Yep a 50% miss rate is less then ideal but it only takes one ML hit to pay for itself, just killing two Marines pays for it. If you do as I have and take the ML Drone in units that can keep it safe then you will usually get two hits a game and that is enough to usually ensure they have been worth taking. Sure there will be times they do nothing but this can be said for any unit/wargear etc.
As for the wasted shot syndrome, does this not apply to every single unit in the game? funny how you never see players saying "damn that's it I am not taking Pulse rifles again, I missed with 5 shots in that turn" but for some reason an ML missing is somehow much much worse, why? a missed Ml does nothing but so does a missed gun shot.
rikimaru said:
Wooah reduced to four functions, why? can you not use the ML in night fight anymore? I know I have used it plenty.
rikimaru said:
No night fight is still totally valid use for the ML, so we have lost one thing TP and who ever used that anyway? I know I never did.
rikimaru said:
They are not expensive if you take a Skyray and with the new outflank rule and the ability to take an infiltrating ML with Stealths, the Seeker has just become a very good way of taking down those pesky tanks that like to hide at the back of the field. A couple of Seekers on a Devilfish can be very useful.
rikimaru said:
The ONLY squads, dude you just named the majority of the Tau army. Also Hammerheads, Skyrays, Seekers, all benefit from ML tokens. Ml Drones are not actually that expensive now, in 4th they were because they made units less efficient due to movement restrictions. Wow thats a long paragraph for a situation that will rarely come up. One thing always bugs me with examples like this though "Marines" OK yes it is hard to kill Marines, but what about all the non Marine stuff thats say TGH3 and has a 5+ save. It suddenly does not sound to stupid to have that Gun Drone squad out there using their carbines does it. A Drone squad will kill a damn sight more than 1 of that unit and the ML token (or tokens) will make pinning easier to achieve. You se this is what bugs me, you are using one limited example to rubbish the ML's pinning enhancement and this is just not right. A large majority of units are vulnerable to pinning weapons (and by the way the AFP is going to see a lot more use in 5th), so clever use
That depends a bit on your army. Would it be better if I labeled all of the squads that do not need Markerlight support for the purpose of Bs? Commander, Retinue, Ethereal and honour guard, Crisis suits with twin-linked weapons (or template/blast weapons), Kroot, Pathfinders, Broadsides, Hammerheads, and Skyrays. I'm leaving out Piranhas and Sniper Drone teams as they're hardly used, and Devilfish because they are debateable as Warfish (though I will no longer use them as such) and not worth the markerlight either way. Did I not concede that these units can benefit from ML tokens despite not needing a Bs boost?
I use "Marines" as an example because they are a good medium, the "middle of the road" unit as it were. Let's recount all of the units immune to your pinning tests, hm?
Tyranids (hello Synapse)
Orks in squads of decent numbers.
Monstrous Creatures
Fearless squads
Vehicles
This leaves us with maybe half of every army out there at most that can even be affected by pinning. And while there are admittedly Imperial Guard squads, Eldar Guardians and Dark Eldar (and don't forget other Tau! Wait, 5+ sv, nevermind), however, there are plenty of squads that are nigh immune to such shooting (Terminators, Bikers, or basically any unit with a decent T or Sv value). You're fishing for three kinds of fish in an ocean of sharks, and it doesn't really support take-on-all-comers gaming. Admittedly a harassment unit has its uses, and that is what a Gun Drone squadron is, however, I would rarely be dedicating the resources needed to create favourable odds that I would pin a squad, and I tend to pay more attention to the more common threats.
There, I've covered most of the units in the game "to rubbish the ML's pinning enhancement". I would like to observe this "large majority" that you speak of, for I find the units that I think you speak of (Guardsmen) tend to hide in tanks. We probably play against quite different opponents.
I agree that the AFP will be much more prominent in 5th edition, and forcing two leadership tests is always better than forcing one, however actual effective pinning is few and far between, and it's not something I can rely on at all.
rikimaru said:
Which is exactly why the ML is so good for us. That preponderance of AP4 and worse weapons means that every single hit is valuable; so every boost to BS is valuable because it means an increase in hits, which means more wounds and more failed saves. If no ML's are taken you are stuck with average BS with average AP weaponry. Also again why would anyone be stupid enough to use ML tokens to reduce cover saves of units with better armour saves. This is simply not a good argument against ML's, what it does is assume players are idiots. The main use of the ML for cover saves is going to be against units shielded by other cheaper units, for nerfing the cover saves of obscured vehicles and for helping to reduce the advantage offered to units that have crap armour saves who now have for all intents and purposes the chance to obtain a 4+ or 5+ invulnerable against our weapons. Believe me if you have a wave of Orks or Nids running your way and your nice 30" AP5 rifles shots are bouncing of cover then you will be grateful for the ML tokens believe me.
Once again, every single hit is indeed valuable, and there are two ways to achieve this: either increase the rate of hits, or increase the number of shots. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes, and enough bullets will find you hitting quite often. Every additional shot is valuable because it means another chance to hit, which means more wounds and more failed saves. Less markerlights lead to more shots, this isn't a cake vs. cake+flashlight world, it's a biomorphs vs. no-biomorphs world. And, once again, simple examples first. I honestly can't think of why anyone would reduce the cover of a squad with a superior armour save, perhaps they've got sufficient AP? I agree that Markerlights will be useful for reducing the abundant cover saves in this edition. And I do recall mentioning that such squads would be a thing to note, especially with the "Gaunt Wrapping" tactic being brewed in the Tyranid forum, so markerlights can be useful. I'm not saying that Markerlights should be ignored like the plague, but to bump a Fire Warrior squad's Bs to 4 and then eliminate the enemy squad's cover saves you would need a full squad of pathfinders backing them up. Admittedly in FOF range this can be useful, but that's 100 points plus transport being dedicated to a single purpose, to pump out 24 shots, 16 hitting and 11 enemy gaunts dead. What of the retaliation? In all likelihood the Fire Warrior squad will be assaulted, as well as the tank, and both will be severely mauled if not destroyed. Then you've got 100 points of pathfinders who no longer have a squad to support. 12 Fire Warriors rapid firing, or 30 Fire Warriors blasting away at range. I'd much rather be able to whittle my enemy away (especially with the new assault rules) than bank a couple hundred points on a single turn's shooting.
rikimaru said:
No they will not be getting cover saves so you use the ML token to up the BS of the shooting unit and kill even more of the exposed unit. Win win situation applies here bud. Remember that ML's have 5 uses not one.
Alright, I admit that markerlights on turn 1 of a Dawn Of War battle can do a bit to help, but it's a rare use, and as I've said, pinning is hardly something I'd bank on. In my mind Markerlights only have three uses: Bs Boost, Cover Save reduction and Seeker Missiles.
rikimaru said:
I find this amusing you slate the ML drone for its costly BS3 ML and you then tell us you pay 25pts for the basically same thing but with less mobility, non networked ML and the nice side effect of limiting your FW's mobility. You slate ML's and yet you use probably the least efficient manner of taking them. I am not surprised you are not bananas on them if this is how you field them. Sorry to sound harsh but c'mon you cannot argue against ML Drones when you take these.
I pay 15 points to make my Fire Warrior squads courageous enough to stand and stop them from running off the board if they break at five models or less. I spend another 15 points to allow the team leader to donate markerlight tokens to other units in need, or to help deal with an unexpected amount of enemy tanks or monstrous creatures (see an Armoured Company or Godzilla list for examples). Should my stealth team be firing at an enemy squad, or perhaps my other Fire Warrior squad is in need, I'll use my markerlights to provide some additional support. You say it limits my mobility, I say it supports my firepower and versatility. It may be an ineffecient way to take markerlights in your mind, but I'm not under the false impression that Marker Drones have target locks. I don't want to purchase a Pathfinder squad, that's too many markerlights on one unit if I take a whole squad and too few models in the unit if I take a minimal squad (breaks with every casualty), plus I'm forced to take a transport that I doubt I'll use. I don't take Marker Drones on my suits as my suits often don't need the support, and I don't take a markerlight on my stealth team leader as it would split the unit in its role. I don't take Sniper teams for their markerlights, it's only one markerlight per squad and I value the Heavy Support slot too much for such things. A Fire Warrior squad is an acceptable place for a Markerlight to me, because I'm already paying the points for the option to take it when I purchase my boosted leadership and bonding knife, and a single pulse rifle will hardly be missed from a squad's ranged shooting. A Sky Ray is a good place to take Markerlights, because you can move at Cruising speed while firing most of, if not all of your weapons, and it allows your Fire Warrior squads a heavy weapon option. It absorbs a lot of fire for not having much independent worth, and with a high front armour value and Disruption Pods it can take that kind of punishment. I can argue quite well against Marker Drones; they're damned expensive and impractical to field most of the time. I'd much rather be taking two markerlights on my Fire Warrior squads than one Marker Drone on any other squad.
rikimaru said:
Hmmm a little contradictory methinks, you earlier said that Seekers were not a good reason to take ML's and then go on to list an extensive number of uses for the Marker light, most of which you argued against earlier. No body should rely on ML's and you have basically made the argument for ML's in your last paragraph. They are indeed a handy bonus but you are wrong, those Flashlights can and do win wars or to be more precise they make the odds of winning a lot more favourable.
When exactly did I say this? I can't find it on this page, the closest thing I said was this:
lLonginus said:
Seeker missiles are indeed useful, but they can get expensive and pale in comparison to the heavy firepower of our railguns.
However, I said that they were useful. I do believe that if you're taking Markerlights simply so that you can use Seeker Missiles, you're quite daffy, as the cost of seeker missiles quickly stacks up and their value isn't as great when weighed against Missile Pods and Railguns. I do use a Sky Ray, not inherently for its Seeker Missiles but for everything about it, it's a versatile and useful tank, and I choose to also make use of the attached Seeker Missiles.
I made the argument for Markerlights? I think a better phrase would be I made the argument against not using markerlights. Any great debater takes into consideration the "opposition"'s side in the debate; he tries to walk in his opponent's proverbial shoes. Why would he think like this, what would cause him to think like this, and so on. I'm not saying Markerlights are entirely bad, I'd say Spore Mine Clusters are entirely bad, don't ever take them unless you want to lose. What I'm saying is that markerlights aren't bad, but they aren't great either. They aren't the messiah of Tau weaponry, they won't win wars on their own and at the end of the day, you may have been better off with more guns and more models. You've got to look past just the shooting, the % rates and so forth, because 90% of 10 is 9, and 50% of 100 is 50, and even though 50% is less than 90%, you had a lot more go to the 50%. Warhammer 40k is a game of risks, rolling dice and hoping that you get lucky. You can see markerlights as a way of reducing risks, I see them as a way of compounding them: not only do you pay to have a 50% chance of an effect, having that 50% chance of an effect can cause players to make unnecessary gambles in their play. That's why people play the lottery! They think to themselves "oooh it's a long shot, but if I get lucky I'll win big!". In 40k you're playing with squads, and markerlights can encourage that gambling nature that can lead to losses.
Markerlights: take them, but never depend on them.