Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I still hear loads of people call Tau cheesy even though they have been nerfed loads since 7th.

What are your thoughts?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Remember to say why.

Most of the army no, riptides and crisis/drone deathstars yes.

also why do you have the option to answer yes and no.

What's so bad with crisis suits?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do you mean the Farsight bomb?

SGTPozy wrote:
What's so bad with crisis suits?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do you mean the Farsight bomb?

That or some of the other crisis suit deathstars, they are a bit cheesy.

I would use This as an example

I've already made the Riptide argument many times. Suffice it to say I honestly think unless you want an unkillable brick then there are better things to spend your points on (especially in 7th edition).

That said, they are way too durable for their cost.

Other than that, the Tau codex is just really good. I don't feel like it is "cheesy". All the options just...work.

IMO they never were. The worst cries of cheese seemed to be from players that never understood how the Tau army worked, played on parking lots with no LOS blocks and refused to change their own favorite list to combat it.

Many armies can be crippled if you take out the big targets - a flyer, a heavy tank, a super-melee HQ... With Tau you don't shoot the biggest target first, you take out all the soft targets that support it with Markerlight tokens. No MLs, crippled Tau. You don't need Troops to score in 7th but Tau without Troops will have to get their suits and vehicles out in the open instead, where they can be shot at.

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
What's so bad with crisis suits?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do you mean the Farsight bomb?

That or some of the other crisis suite deathstars, they are a bit cheesy.

I would use This as an example

Are Crisis suit death stars as bad as other armies' death stars like Draigostar, grav bikers, screamerstar etc?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dementedwombat wrote:
I've already made the Riptide argument many times. Suffice it to say I honestly think unless you want an unkillable brick then there are better things to spend your points on (especially in 7th edition).

That said, they are way too durable for their cost.

Other than that, the Tau codex is just really good. I don't feel like it is "cheesy". All the options just...work.

So you're saying that the army is cheesy because of one unit? Are Grey Knights cheesy because of the Dreadknight? Are Space Marines cheesy because of grav bikers? Are Tyranids cheesy because of the Hive Tyrant?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spetulhu wrote:
IMO they never were. The worst cries of cheese seemed to be from players that never understood how the Tau army worked, played on parking lots with no LOS blocks and refused to change their own favorite list to combat it.

Many armies can be crippled if you take out the big targets - a flyer, a heavy tank, a super-melee HQ... With Tau you don't shoot the biggest target first, you take out all the soft targets that support it with Markerlight tokens. No MLs, crippled Tau. You don't need Troops to score in 7th but Tau without Troops will have to get their suits and vehicles out in the open instead, where they can be shot at.

That's always been my view (except for Taudar), as yes they're good, but not OP. I just hear it so often that Tau are called cheesy even now (as you can see by the poll), but I don't really get it.

SGTPozy wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
I've already made the Riptide argument many times. Suffice it to say I honestly think unless you want an unkillable brick then there are better things to spend your points on (especially in 7th edition).

That said, they are way too durable for their cost.

Other than that, the Tau codex is just really good. I don't feel like it is "cheesy". All the options just...work.

So you're saying that the army is cheesy because of one unit? Are Grey Knights cheesy because of the Dreadknight? Are Space Marines cheesy because of grav bikers? Are Tyranids cheesy because of the Hive Tyrant?

No?

So why is Tau cheesy when it is just the Riptide?

First Eldar, second Tau. Then the rest.

SGTPozy wrote:

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
What's so bad with crisis suits?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do you mean the Farsight bomb?

That or some of the other crisis suite deathstars, they are a bit cheesy.

I would use This as an example

Are Crisis suit death stars as bad as other armies' death stars like Draigostar, grav bikers, screamerstar etc?

Yes, Farsight bomb is probably much cheesier than many of the others you listed. and the riptide is a whole block of cheese for its points as well.

SGTPozy wrote:
So why is Tau cheesy when it is just the Riptide?

Did I ever say it was? I specifically typed they are very good, but not cheesy.

The riptide is a 200 point brick. You will take the ion accelerator, because the heavy burst cannon is not at all a good idea. Knowing that, when you do you shoot (assuming no markerlights) you will actually hit what you're shooting at (a tightly packed squad of infantry with a 2+ or 3+ armor save, because if you're shooting anything else then you should be shooting it with another one of the Tau's many many effective weapons that is more suited for the job) less than half the time because BS 3 blast weapons are really bad when you only get to shoot once.

The BS 6 ion accelerator with ignores cover is amazing, but for the same points cost as that riptide I can buy several dual plasma crisis suits that kill a lot more of their intended target with markerlights, and without markerlights it's not even a contest in the crisis suit's favor.

The only advantage the riptide has is that's its stupidly hard to kill.

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:
and the riptide is a whole block of cheese for its points as well.

At least for the Riptide you also have to count the units that support it with Markerlight tokens. Two tokens to Ignore Cover, was it? That's two Stealth or FW squads with upgrades, and they have to hit with the ML too. Easily the Riptide's cost again and they die far easier.

Grav bikers are far easier to exterminate than riptides.

Martel732 wrote:
Grav bikers are far easier to exterminate than riptides.

1 decent large blast and some bad saves and the bikers are gone or a couple lucky hits with sniper rifles, the riptides take forever to die and some players just spam them. 1 is not to bad, when they are shoving 3 into a 1k or lower game it puts it over the top.

 wuestenfux wrote:
First Eldar, second Tau. Then the rest.

Now how exactly would Tau go about beating a Screamerstar or Daemon Factory?

 TheAvengingKnee wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Grav bikers are far easier to exterminate than riptides.

1 decent large blast and some bad saves and the bikers are gone or a couple lucky hits with sniper rifles, the riptides take forever to die and some players just spam them. 1 is not to bad, when they are shoving 3 into a 1k or lower game it puts it over the top.

Grav bikers also destroy the Riptide and half of the armies have access to them through allies. Also, they can easily be tied up or killed in combat (mine quite often ends up like this).

LordBlades wrote:

 wuestenfux wrote:
First Eldar, second Tau. Then the rest.

Now how exactly would Tau go about beating a Screamerstar or Daemon Factory?

Okay, they should be on par with Daemons.
Castle up and using the right target priority schedule should do the trick.

Why so many cheesy threads?

why not just 1 thread listing out what people think are cheesy.

Also no.

Yeah, I probably could have but I wanted to separate them to get exclusive Tau ones here, SM with SM and GK with GK.

I know it looks spammy though.

I would say partially. They're no Tau/Eldar death, but they're still very easy mode and suffer from almost anything in their unit having good synergy with everything else.

 jreilly89 wrote:
I would say partially. They're no Tau/Eldar death, but they're still very easy mode and suffer from almost anything in their unit having good synergy with everything else.

Doesn't good synergy just mean good internal balance? Just like the SM codex has great synergy too.

I'm biased. I inherently dislike any gun line army, even more so when they ignore loads of rules.

 jreilly89 wrote:
I would say partially. They're no Tau/Eldar death, but they're still very easy mode and suffer from almost anything in their unit having good synergy with everything else.

Love it how in 40k a codex with good internal balance is a problem. Kind of sad really. As for "easy mode"... I'm not really sure on that one really. I've played Tau since the original 3rd edition codex came out, although in a pretty noncompetitive meta. We have to do a lot of target selection and we have to make sure we're shooting at the right target with the right gun. One bad round of dice on a shooting phase can screw us because other than guns we have literally nothing else going for us. Our codex is strong I can agree. I just wish other codexes were written as well from an internal balance perspective.

It's still an army that's designed to ignore the movement and assault phases before it goes on to ignore a lot of other rules with plentiful cheap/free upgrades. The combination of somehow still being stuck in schtick-land and being a point-and-click gunline army only makes it worse.

Whatever power level tau happen to be at the moment, they're going to be cheesy regardless, until they get some pretty core stuff fixed.

 Ailaros wrote:
It's still an army that's designed to ignore the movement and assault phases before it goes on to ignore a lot of other rules with plentiful cheap/free upgrades. The combination of somehow still being stuck in schtick-land and being a point-and-click gunline army only makes it worse.

Whatever power level tau happen to be at the moment, they're going to be cheesy regardless, until they get some pretty core stuff fixed.

Would a "run everything forwards and engage" melee army be less "point and click" in that scenario? Such an army would explicitly ignore the shooting phase by design. Just curious because a lot of people talk about close combat like it involves so much more strategy than a shooting army. As someone who has never played any other army I'm honestly not sure. To me it lookes like a lot of close combat armies relied on "deploy as close as possible and bum rush the opponent", much like I imagine most people who don't know Tau see it as "shot everything from across the board and win".

SGTPozy wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
I would say partially. They're no Tau/Eldar death, but they're still very easy mode and suffer from almost anything in their unit having good synergy with everything else.

Doesn't good synergy just mean good internal balance? Just like the SM codex has great synergy too.

Things like "Supporting Fire" are not good internal balance. When you can take any unit, throw it in with something else, and still have a solid army, thats not internal balance. Internal balance implies each unit is viable, at least in terms of doing something well, not "Hey, I can throw A, B, and C into a list with no thought and still have a good army."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 dementedwombat wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:
I would say partially. They're no Tau/Eldar death, but they're still very easy mode and suffer from almost anything in their unit having good synergy with everything else.

Love it how in 40k a codex with good internal balance is a problem. Kind of sad really. As for "easy mode"... I'm not really sure on that one really. I've played Tau since the original 3rd edition codex came out, although in a pretty noncompetitive meta. We have to do a lot of target selection and we have to make sure we're shooting at the right target with the right gun. One bad round of dice on a shooting phase can screw us because other than guns we have literally nothing else going for us. Our codex is strong I can agree. I just wish other codexes were written as well from an internal balance perspective.

It's not internal balance, its everything works with each other with little list thought.

Well, close combat does involve more than gunlining, as you need to actually use the movement phase and make much more use of terrain other than just camping in it. Plus, most choppy armies also usually rely on shooty elements for their assaults to work correctly. It's been three years now since I've seen a green tide, and six since I've seen nidzilla.

Point-and-charge armies, I'd agree, are hardly the apogee of 40k strategy, but they're still better in this regard, and they're still less cheesy for your opponent to play against, as the game doesn't devolve to picking up all your models without doing much with them because they never made it into assault or close-range (or medium range, for that matter). Anybody can play their strategy against an assault army, while little else than other gunlines can do much more than gunline against a gunline.

In any case, the existence of point-and-charge armies doesn't make tau's point-and-click any less cheesy. And that's before we remember that point-and-charge armies are phantoms that scarcely exist anymore while finding a tau gunline is only about as difficult as finding a tau player.

What does cheesy mean? Too good?

If so;

Are they too cheesy? No.

Are they considered too cheesy? Yes.

I didn't ever think they were. There were cheesy builds, but that's true in most armies.