[T0nkaTruckDriver]

And now for the most controversial thread ever...* *


For those who may have missed out, this the third article in the "Why you shouldn't use it" series. The first two can be found here:

The Fish of Fury: Why you shouldn't use it
Fireknife XV8: Why you shouldn't use it

My intent with these articles is not simply to be a negative nancy. It's very easy to criticise other people's work, and in general I look unfavorably on "professional critics" who do nothing to enhance a community but instead spend their days telling others why they're wrong. Rather, my intent is to present an alternative view. The units and tactics I've chosen for these articles are generally regarded as "popular" and "good" for one reason or another. Folks new to Tau visit sites like TauOnline for advice and are all told the same thing: "buy Firewarriors, XV8's and Hammerheads"... and they go off and do it without spending the time to think through these decisions for themselves. My goal with these articles is to get people thinking for themselves, rather than just accepting what the general internet community says as gospel.

Onto the good stuff...

[hr]
[hr]

Firewarriors are 1+ in a Tau army, which means we'll never be rid of them entirely, however, many players frequently bring 2, 3, or even 6 units of these little blue guys, and it's my opinion that this isn't the best use of points. Let's do some comparisons with GW's poster-boys, the Marines.

Offensive Capability

Firewarrior shooting at a Marine
0.1111 kills = 0.0111 kills per point

Marine shooting at a Marine
0.1111 kills = 0.0074 kills per point

So as you can see, in pure offensive capability, Firewarriors are more cost efficient than basic Marines. However that's not the entire story... how often are Marines ever "basic"*

Heavy Bolter Marine shooting at a Marine
0.4444 kills = 0.0222 kills per point

The addition of Heavy/Special weapons in a Marine squad (which will ALWAYS be present and will ALWAYS be removed last) drastically increases the squads overall efficiency. In this case, a Heavy Bolter Marine is twice as efficient as a Firewarrior.

Defensive Capability

A Marine costs 50% more than a Firewarrior.

Against S4 AP5/6 weapons a Marine squad will take 50% fewer casualties than a Firewarrior squad on account of the extra point of Toughness and the improved armor save.

When considering the relative abundance and type (assault/heavy/etc) of AP4 vs AP3 weapons, it's clear that AP4 weapons come in much greater quantity, with many more shots than AP3 weapons. This further amplifies the difference between 4+ and 3+ armor, since Marines will actually get to take their armor save much more frequently.

When considering the ability to return fire, the presence of special/heavy weapons in a Marine squad means that a few casualties will do little to reduce their shooting effectiveness. It's not until you remove the absolute last model that the squad can be forgotten. For example, a squad of 10 Marines with a Heavy Bolter and Plasma Gun takes 5 casualties. Since standard bolter Marines will be removed, the squad's shooting effectiveness is actually only reduced by 29%. With Firewarriors, each casualty results in a proportional reduction in shooting capacity, meaning that a 10-man squad of Firewarriors which takes 5 casualties will have its shooting effectiveness reduced by 50%.

When considering morale issues, the value of a shooting unit is largely dependent on it's ability to remain in place under fire. A Marine squad at Ld10 (Chapter Master) has almost exactly the same chance to pass their leadership test as a Firewarrior squad at Ld8 with a re-roll (Ethereal). However, ATSKNF is infinately more useful than Bonding since the re-grouping for ATSKNF happens at the end of their fall-back move rather than at the beginning of the next turn as is the case with bonding, meaning that the Marines can move/shoot/assault as normal, unlike the Firewarriors. Furthermore, the increased Toughness and armor save on the Marines means that it's much more difficult to actually inflict the necessary 25% casualties required to force a break test in the first place.

A similar qualitative analysis could be done for just about any other shooty army's "basic trooper", and you'll quickly see that unless your Firewarriors are unmolested throughout the entire game, their poor defensibility makes them a sub-par choice.

What Role do They Fill?

With S5 guns and no option for special/heavy weapons, the role that Firewarriors fill is largely pre-determined. Anti-infantry and in a pinch anti-light vehicle. In light of the above defensive downfalls, the question we should be asking ourselves is whether or not there are other units available to us which carry the Offensive Capability of the Firewarrior while simultaneously mitigating some or all of the issues with Defensive Capability.

Stealths seem an obvious choice. They're more survivable against S5/6 AP4 weaponry, however since each model is worth 3 times as much, your opponent will mathmatically earn just as many VP's by shooting a Heavy Bolter at a Stealth squad as he will by shooting it at a Firewarrior squad. However, the advantage of Stealths is in their Jet Packs and Stealth Field. The added mobility means it's entirely possible to use terrain to completely deny enemy shooting. If terrain isn't available, careful judgement of distances can allow you to jump beyond 21" with your assault move effectively causing your enemy to fail his night-fight role 58% of the time. Over time, this means that the effectiveness of enemy shooting at a unit of Stealths is reduced by 58%. Not bad. Furthermore, Stealths come with Ld8 standard, infiltrate and deep-strike. In general, Stealths fill the same roll as Firewarriors, but are all around better at it for these reasons.

Kroot are another option for anti-infantry firepower. Infiltrated into a block of woods, they are more durable to enemy shooting than Firewarriors on account of the fact that their 4+ save can't be negated. Mathmatically, Kroot are even MORE efficient at shooting than Firewarriors if brought on the cheap (no shaper, no armor), and are better at assault too. Kroot (when without a shaper) are relegated to Ld7, however the fact that they can be brought in much larger squad sizes and their armor can't be negated makes it much more difficult to inflict the number of casualties required for a morale check, making the morale issue largely moot. Finally, the Fieldcraft special rule means that on tables with large enough woods, you can potentially infiltrate your Kroot 7" in and be entirely immune to downfield return fire.

Another often overlooked source of anti-infantry firepower is "incidental shoots". This includes things like SMS+Target Lock on a Hammerhead, Burst Cannons on Devilfish/Hammerheads, "free" Gun Drones off Devilfish/Hammerheads, etc. Depending on how your list is constructed, this quantity of shots can actually be quite large, often totaling the equivalent of more than an entire Firewarrior squad's worth of shooting. The advantage here is that vehicle-based shooting like this is incredibly resistant to return fire and suffers none of the morale issues associated with infantry-based firepower. Additionally, having 1 or 2 "squads" which consist of a single Burst Cannon or a single SMS is useful for when a lone model remains after a Stealth fusilade and you don't want to waste an entire additional squad to kill off that one guy.

What About Devilfish?

Mounting your Firewarriors in a Devilfish makes them largely immune to casualties and morale issues, but carries with it an entirely new set of risks. Let's tackle these in order. First, you must keep your Devilfish alive. We've got one of the most durable transports in the game, but it can still be brought down. And any army which invests heavily in Devilfish mounted Firewarrior teams will be severely crippled by the loss of 1 or 2 'fish.

Assuming the dice gods are with you and your 'fish all make it to their intended drop zone, you then must find a way to deal with assault and/or shooting on the turn you dismount. While the Fish of Fury can help, I generally have a negative opinion of this tactic, and you can read the reasons why here. I'd much prefer to simply eliminate all enemy models within 12" than rely on skimmer chassis to block assault. However, unless your opponent is fielding small squads of Marines, accomplishing this is actually quite difficult unless you allocate a significant portion of your army to the task.

The final issue an army with large numbers of 'fish borne Firewarrior teams must contend with is a decrease in the number of scoring units present on the table. With so many points invested in non-scoring transports, you must be very careful to protect the limited quantity of scoring units available to you... and frankly, rushing them up and rapid-firing isn't conducive to long life-spans, especially when talking about T3 models with a 4+ save and sub-par leadership.



In conclusion, I've attempted to show that Firewarriors are a poor choice for anti-infantry shooting in the Tau list. Mounting them aleviates some of the issues inherent in their use, but brings with it a whole new set of risks. In general, there are other units available (Kroot, Stealths, "incidental shots") which can provide the required volume of anti-infantry fire without as many of the downsides associated with Firewarriors.

[Shaso Wanax]

outstanding.

FW are there to occupy enemy shooting while the suits, stealth, and tanks clean up. Always been my philosophy. The are infantry afterall...

Wanax

[Andromidius]

Thing is, most opponants won't realise this. Fire Warriors are seen as 'cheese troops' by alot of people, so they'll try to kill them first and totally ignore your more devastating units...

This can't be a bad thing.

~Andromidius

[arguleon-veq]

These do make me laugh.

They are all good articles, and there are no faults I can find in them.......but how do you play dude!? .

We can do this for most armies main tactics and strategies for their main units. Although there would be some faults with some things about them, it would probably still be the best way to use them.

Still, I'm not getting at the post as it is always nice to see a units failings and weaknesses.

Just curious as to how you play though? :P

[Andromidius]

I'm thinking he's a secret Space Marine fanboy

~Andromidius

[wonderboy]

its a good post TTD, but what would you have us replace them with?

kroot wont always be able to be out in some trees, and the stealths are not a troop choice. imo, kroot are worse off than the FW.

[Vash113]

Personally I love my little hooved dudes and have a mighty disdain for kroot and stealths. Stealths, tanks and crisis suits get targeted an awefull lot and though they can deal the damage they become fire magnets. I prefer to have massed small arms fire from several units of firewarriors down my opponents methodically while the enemies shooting is concentrating on my mobile fire groups of drones, stealths and crisis teams aswell as at my hammerheads. The little guys have been the winning factor in the majority of my games, they are in no way a bad option, comparing them to marines is harsh, true marines are the majority of armies that one will usually face but they are superhuman soldiers, the norm is guard and compared to guard our warriors are very good. Fluff wise they are exelent troops, just not marines and I like that. I would rather have 3 full squads blast away at a marine squad and systematicly tear it apart then one group of crazy biologically enhanced mad men raging across the field.

Thats just my oppinion though, you pointed out the weaknesses of the Firewarriors but despite all that they are still good troops and should be the backbone of any Tau army.

[42]

Originally Posted by Shaso Wanax

outstanding.*

Agreed, well thought out argument, +1 karma

FW are there to occupy enemy shooting while the suits, stealth, and tanks clean up.* Always been my philosophy.* The are infantry afterall...

Wanax

But therefore doesn't more Fire Warriors mean a larger distraction? If an army is comprised totally of battlesuits and heavy weapons and the like it can become dangerously low on numbers, fragile (Lets face it our batlesuits aren't unstoppable), and also subject to bad luck more (i.e. there are less wounds and less shots being pumped out, therefore some bad luck can really damage a go).

I agree with Veq that I would like to see your playing style and how it serves you - not a criticism of the article or your style though - just...interested!

I have agreed with your other 'why you shouldn't use them' topics, however this time I'm afraid I am sticking with my FireWarriors. Probably because what isn't broken I don't try and fix - I have a great battling record with my Tau, and a large core of that success comes through a large core of fire warriors, half of those mounted.

I just find it gives me more bulk to play with, me options tactically, and gives me the mass firepower to lay down killzones, set up crossfires and generally allows me to dictate a battle better. However without them I would feel that I would have to be a lot more concious of casualties, and would have to be on the defensive more, concentrating on not loosing people instead of killing them. However both these styles of play - front and end loading? - can work equally well, I just feel more comfortable with my own way, and feel that the compostiion of my army allows me to play in the way that I find most successful for myself!

--42

[cawshis]

I think it is interesting that you compare the FW against Marines in a defensive capability, but not in what role they take on the battlefield. Do you consider Marines to mainly fit into the "anti-infantry role"? When placed side by side with a marine, will a FW kill more or less Imperial Guard? Eldar? Orks? Termagaunts?

Marines don't fill the same role as a Fire Warrior on the battlefield, yet you compare their defense up against each other (and even go so far as to hold a FW up to the tactical flexibility that a marine enjoys! Heavy Bolter indeed! Why not compare a las cannon or melta gun as well!). That isn't a fair comparison. I'd never expect a FW squad to take down a tank or survive an assault, yet marines routinely do so!

Not only that, but you then go on to compare a Stealth Suit (Elite choice!) to a FW (Troop choice) in the role of anti-infantry. The stealth is better because they are supposed to be better. They are elite and you only have 3 slots to put elites into. When facing a Marine army, I wouldn't take any stealth suits, because that Elite slot needs to be filled with a plasma weapon or a missile pod.

The rest of your points are valid though. I think more than 2 FW squads (in a game up to 1850 points) is too much and to ignore the usefulness of Kroot on the battlefield is folly. They do serve a far better anti-infantry role than FWs for the most part….though they don't survive as long in most of my battles.

Nice post Tonka. I really enjoy your layout/essay style.

[Shas lyn]

I'll second TTD on this regard. Game after game I'm more convinced that both Stealth Suits and Kroot Squads are better than Firewarriors - mounted or otherwise. In some instances I even prefer Gun Drone squads to mounted Firewarriors because of the slightly improved accuracy (Twin Link), the JSJ capablity, and the greatly reduced costs for similar mobility.

Firewarrior substitutes:
Stealth Squad: 180 points for a full squad, 12" move (without embark/disembark), doesn't require cover to stay 'hidden' (~21" average), 18 shots @ 18". This is my favorite unit and is my MVP vs. most opponents.

Kroot Carnivores: Parked in a copse of trees protecting my Broadside, these guys are amazing. 4+ inv. cover save is outstanding, and the ample shots at 24 inches rips into advancing troops enough to actually deter advance. One game an IG opponent pounded my 20 'treed' kroot and lone broadside with at least 1 battle cannon blast every turn. At the end of the game I was only down 7 kroot. Absolutely Outstanding.

Gun Drones: For less than the price of one mounted FW squad, I could have 2 full squads of Gun Drones. BS2 TL is actually better than BS3, plus these little babies have JSJ, Deep Strike, and pinning. They have enough shots to penetrate tank rear armour, and adequate enough in CC to occasionally weather assault.

Secondary Weapons from Tanks & 'Sides: Last game I had 3 SMS systems, 1 BC, 2 spare drones, and 2 TL Pulse Rifles. That's 17 'spare' shots (mostly BS4) scattered throughout my army; all of which only cost me ~60 points in additional upgrades (SMS upgrade, Multitrackers, Target Locks, etc).


Sometimes when I look at my 1500 point list and see only 1 squad of Firewarriors, I find that my 'conditioned' reaction is one of concern. However, when I look at it from the point of view of FW equivalents, I find I usually have the combat equivalent of 4 mounted FW squads in a number of unique guises. Once I think of my list in those terms, I find I can close out of Army Builder with confidence.