Net Epic Armageddon is supported on Taccmd. All references and supporting material is found there. I am using the approved Tau 6.8 version. Tau Third Phase Expansion Force v 6.8.pdf Quick Reference Sheets v 6.8.pdf All points are calculated with Army Forge tool.
Normally I keep paper records, with the move back I have lost or can't find some of my notes. Final a switch to digital or dual notes has to happen at some point. This entry is mostly for me to reference in the future. Maybe next time it will be faster to develop a list.
Disclaimer; The army and play style has to match your psychology. If not you will fight each other.
Secondary objective is the study of the army's characteristics. Learning the right tool for the right job. Knowing the army back heart and all the rules effecting it and how they all interact. Memorized!
I started off with the idea of mirrored Broadsides. Broadsides have always been difficult for me. I never could apply them properly, or earn their points back. I never liked them due to their speed. Broadsides seem to always be out of position. Being difficult to use I rarely took them. Until this tourney rotation, it was time to learn painfully how to apply them.
My theory is others pick and choose their detachments based on handling of one type of threat priority with another detachment switch hitting secondary threat priority. More likely it is what is in their collection. Which allows for a solid guess at a higher percentage of facing a select number of detachments Vs a planned action. Either way the duality of match threat capability is limited. The duality is best displayed/experienced against Knights. Except the duality is army design created, due to the limited detachment options.
The idea of mirrored units, is to present multiple threats. The same threats in different areas or concentrated area of denial. In this way forcing a tough choice with little to no damage to my over all game plan. This will all go straight to the shit if I pork objective placement or deployment.
First I tried garrisoning them on overwatch. Except one had to be my BTS. Garrisoning the BTS was too much of a gift. Being on overwatch created fear, and established a large area of denial. In terrain they are as dug in as a tick.
The double Orcas and the AX-1 took the focus away from the Broadsides. They were dropped.
I changed the supporting elements around a core of 2 FW, 2 Crisis, 2 Broadsides. These 6 detachments will never change throughout the learning process.
Second time out the Broadsides rode the Orca bus. Again dropping off your BTS all up in someone's face, or get it shot out of the sky is a gift wrap present.
The Broadsides made it through the flak but completed the same job as a stealth detachment would. The risk wasn't worth the reward.
The Recon felt like the weak detachment. It accomplished nothing, provided zero threat only an extra activation.
The Skyrays shot once, broke first turn, and stayed that way. The 6 AA shots are wonderful. The unit benignly 3 deep is a prime target turn one. It cost more to spread them out. What to do?
Now the third time out, a comedy of errors.
The major change was 3 detachments of cudas. I wanted those cudas to go on "cap" and give me air superiority. It was a good lesson as Thawks don't care, making the cudas just as useless.
I completely forget to field a detachment of Path Finders. Also forgot the drone upgrade.
My favorite dish of FWs and drones served up in an Orca is doing the normal damage.
Both Broadsides detachments survived and remained unbroken. This occurrence was due to the Crisis suits acting as a QRF. The Crisis by threat or acting as a blocking force denied an engage.
300 points of Cudas are cut for a stealth detachment and Skyway upgrade.
This list was played twice over a weekend. It remained the same except the Recon contents changed. The first game they continued their uselessness. Second game with the 3 x 3 mix did create a threat and got a crossfire off. Then quickly eliminated.
It got a tie and a win. The recon will be dropped for kroot. It has a larger break point, threat range roughly the same, but one less marker light. I will use them as a QRF or first strike option. I expect it to cut an activation turn 1 by breaking something.
During the second game the PF's sniper ability was used to kill the SC. This was a first. I will try the trick again.
I played Strike. The Kroot did not perform so well. The mission and the Kroot was not a great example of what would happen.
Command and Control has 8 objectives that are scored each round, accumulative scoring! The objectives opposite your edge worth more. This scenario is designed to force your army to be more aggressive. The 3 objectives in your half would give you 5 points a turn, opposite 9 a turn. Those on the 50 yard line are a possible 2 points. This scenario will favor an air assault or durable list.
Deployment and fire lines to control my objectives will be key. I will use the stealth suits tellie-ing to delay the advance for my objectives. The Ocra will get my one 5 pointer. The rest of the game I will castle up to deny high VP points.
Strike has an increased deployment zone, double in size, and 10 possible objectives. Also a VP for each unit in the enemy's deployment zone (30cm) and 1 VP for BTS. VPs across the 50 are worth more. Another aggressive scenario! This one does not trouble me as much.
The increased number objectives should provide confusion. If there is a mismatch in the number of objectives placed, 3 to 5 (the min/max), in my favor the game is up to the dice or reverse out come forces a activation killing game. If exactly the same number of Objectives, same old, same old. In any out come of objectives or roll of the dice the BTS and deployment zone VPs will be key to winning
The enemy being closer does help marker lights but does not help delaying the advance. I will try to play a 3rd of the table and swing the focus from long edge to short edge.
No comments:
Post a Comment