Welcome to Librarium Online!
Ok first things first! I have updated the guide to Markerlights, units and uses, I have included how 5th has affected how ML's are utilised and how it affects units that take them. Linked here >>http://www.librarium-online.com/foru...tml#post934673
While I was updating the guide a problem with the Skyray hit me.
In 4th the Skyrays Markerlights were immune to weapon destroyed results, I think this was deliberate as it allows the Skyray to always be able to launch its own seekers. This is reinforced by the fact that the Markerlights are networked. So a Skyray that is not stunned or shaken could fire its Seekers even if no other Markerlights were included in the list.
Well in 5th the rules changed and now anything classed as a weapon can be removed by a weapon destroyed result and this includes the Markerlights on a Skyray. This means that potentially a Skyray could lose both its Markerlights in the first turn and be left with six Seeker missiles that it cannot launch. If no other ML's are in the list then you have six Skyray ornaments. I find it hard to believe that GW would have deliberately set out to give us the option to take a vehicle that can be rendered effectively useless in one turn.
If the Skyrays ML's are removed it obviously cannot mark with the ML's and it has next to no offensive ability, secondary weapons systems do not offer that much and I for one do not like paying 165pts+ for what would in effect be a Devilfish without transport capability if its ML's are destroyed.
I can think if no other tank that can be rendered utterly ineffective so easily. I am rethinking the wisdom of taking the Skyray which is a gaddamned shame because in 4th it was an awesome unit. I am going to contact GW about this because I truly believe that this is an oversight by GW,
If you take a Skyray you better make sure that you have plenty of other ML support in the list or you may well end up with a mobile terrain piece.
I wouldn't be too distraught, I always take Skyrays with a pair of Burst Cannons. Four not-very-aggressive weapons on a tank aren't going to pose much of a threat compared to the arsenal wielded by your Hammerheads, so I don't suspect the Sky Ray will be taking very much incoming fire either way. If they are, that's less fire going at your Hammerheads and Devilfish, which I consider to be a more direct threat, and would personally target them before targeting a Sky Ray were I facing Tau.
My gaming group's new motto: That army you're using is overpowered because it hurts my guys, codex is broken and needs a rewrite.
Ehm, seeing how I don't have a 5th edition book handy to me (still need to buy one, deciding whether I want fluff or non-fluff), do the weapons destroyed result destroy defensive weapons? Seeing that's what the markerlights are classified as... and I'm guessing there's something special about that, maybe...
(Or... maybe it just means they can be fired as well as the main weapon... bleh. I need to get that book.)
It basically means that you are forced to take other ML sources to try to ensure that the Seekers can be utilised and not everyone wants to take multiple ML's. I find it hard to believe that GW ever intended the Skyray's ML's to be eligible for removal.
A couple of google searches later~
"also note, markerlights are NOT considered weapons as they have no S value. this means that an enemy cannot decide to destroy a markerlight."
(Mind you I'm not going to declare this as biblical truth until I have a brb to look over myself. >w> )
editedit: Er, wait, when was 5th edition brought out anyways? o3o; (Geh, google is really hating me today for finding the right answers I want, instead of feeding me all this unrelated crap about people destroying weapons thanks to a marker light guided railgun. -3-;
editeditedit: Damn. Must be under the old codex, since I found a post of you mentioning the same thing. *sobs* I only wanted to be helpful and get attention. D:
Last edited by Pixie; February 25th, 2009 at 08:59. Reason: Yay! Google phailz again!
I honestly don't see the big deal riki. A railhead can get neutralised with one weapon destroyed result. So it is a little worse off than in 4th Ed, but it only really brings it into balance with other vehicles.
Mirage Arcana Podcast
The "A Smart Player Will..." theory is a complete paradox. If we make an assumption that everything we do is outsmarted, then theoretically we can never win.
No other vehicle has this disadvantage and it means that you really have to take other ML sources if you want to take a Skyray, unlike in 4th where you could use a stand alone Skyray with no fear of losing its ML's and its ability to fire its Seekers.
I am not making a big deal out of it, what I am doing is pointing out an oddity that may well have been overlooked by GW, because I cannot belive that they intended the ML's to ever be eligible for removal because the Seekers are rendered useless if they are removed.
I also have another point regarding the ML's but I need to check something in the codex first (I am at work so cannot check yet).
This losing of the SR's Markerlights also occurred to me some time ago while reading through the 5th Ed book and cross-checking the new stuff with our Tau Empire Codex contents, Riki. The fact that the SR could only ever fire a twin set of missiles per turn IF its MLs were in range to an enemy target always made me ensure that there was at least one other major source of MLs in the army to enable more Seekers to be fired off ASAP.
Some folks don't/didn't go down the road of Alpha Missile Strike, preferring to retain some or most of the nasties for opportune targets throughout the game. However, now that it is possible to lose the NWMLs from the SR, my own preference has been to revert to the Alpha Strike method of firing off at least 4 of the Seekers in the first Turn, thus leaving me with a couple of opportunist shots but also having used up a greater percentage of my available firepower so that it is not lost to me.Well, perhaps not quite rendered totally useless, as they can be fired by another ML source, but therein lies the rub that you have to expend more points to ensure the existence of another ML source. Granted most of us do indeed field the likes of Pathfinders/Stealth Marker Teams, so the availability of ML sources is going to be there but it's nicer to have the SR able to target two different enemy units itself rather than have a Pathfinder unit target one enemy unit with about 6 MLs (sheesh, I wish my PFs were that accurate!) and have the SR's seekers techically potentially "wasted" on one unit.Originally Posted by Rikimaru
"Tau Commandment #226: Participants who use Velocity Trackers in the Tau Clay Pigeon Tournament will be disqualified"
[shrug] I brought this up last October, and you even replied in-thread, riki! This shouldn't be a surprise to you.
I still use the Skyray. I even still use it without any additional markerlight support (in my current 1500 pts list, anyway). It's still a great asset to the army, I have noticed very little real change, though losing a markerlight really does hurt. But it's surprising (to me, anyway) how many people choose to remove the SMS first!
I'm much more upset when I lose the railgun off the hammerhead. As skarsgard noted, I find that to be a much more crippling blow than losing one or even both markerlights off the Skyray. (And I've only ever lost both markerlights in one game so far. [touch wood]
ninjabackhand: point and click, again, really? even after i give you an military term "shock tactic" you still call it point and click.
RIP Warhammer 40,000: 21 Sep 1998 - 24 May 2014
I actually stopped using the Skyray for quite a long time as I have been experimenting with other list layouts pre 5th edition. I created a new 2000pt list with a Skyray and the first game I lost the Skyrays ML's by turn two (don't ask) and if just hit me that if I had not had the Stealth ML team I would not have been able to fire any of its remaining 5 Seekers. All kudos to you dude, you did indeed notice the fact the ML's can be removed before I did, It just hit me how absurd a situation it is.
One thing I find a bit odd is you say you have noticed no real change but then go on to say that losing an ML really hurts, I would call that noticing