Why the hate on the tau? I have found zero evidence that they suck although I haven't been playing that long. Perhaps people with more knowledge on the matter will enlighten me. Why do you think they suck? (discluding kroot and vespid... they are not really tau anyways)

2 reasons i think.

1) Ppl dont like anime styled armies

2) Ppl like grim dark macho close combat units,
Tau isnt very heroic and sit back to pew pew.

okay so tau aren't heroic. I guess your right. But isn't that kinda nice? If every army was as one dimensional as the space marines, being tough, racist manly men that blow crap up and pummel things smaller then them, wouldn't this game have no variety?

thedarkside69 wrote:okay so tau aren't heroic. I guess your right. But isn't that kinda nice? If every army was as one dimensional as the space marines, being tough, racist manly men that blow crap up and pummel things smaller then them, wouldn't this game have no variety?

I like Tau personally. Lack of variety yet have tons of tough manly man? (GW calls them Space Marine and their many variety of chapters lol)

My reasons for saying the Tau SUCK are:

1-they are so annoying and always foil my plans
2-they are such Deleted by mods, Orks will keep fighting because that is all they want in life, Marines never retreat due to Duty, Valour and Faith, Eldar will keep fighting for their survival, Dark Eldar will always be out to torture everyone, Tyrandids just keep on devouring anything in their path and the Guard will fight because they have to. But Tau will pull out once things go Pear-Shaped and will always rely on better weapons, stealth and armour to defeat their enemies.
3-Deleted by mods

Keep it polite. Dakka Rule #1. - Iorek

you can paint 100 ants multiple different colors but in the end they are still ants.

edit

wow just realized how bad of an example this was lol

I like the Tau. Which is good because I sometimes play them. I think they have a great visual style, a compelling background, and fill a role/style rule-wise that no other 40k army does. People don't like them, IMO, because they don't have the best written codex (which one is the best written is a matter of complete speculation) and can be hard to play if you're used to playing Orks or SM.

JubJubMarine wrote:My reasons for saying the Tau SUCK are:

1-they are so annoying and always foil my plans
2-they are such pussies, Orks will keep fighting because that is all they want in life, Marines never retreat due to Duty, Valour and Faith, Eldar will keep fighting for their survival, Dark Eldar will always be out to torture everyone, Tyrandids just keep on devouring anything in their path and the Guard will fight because they have to. But Tau will pull out once things go Pear-Shaped and will always rely on better weapons, stealth and armour to defeat their enemies.
3-they look like Homos!!!!

Yes , a perfect example of Tau hater! xD

I like the Tau. However IN GAME they leave a lot to be desired. To vulnerable to CC. Some non cost efficient options, well more then a few. Tend to be one of the worst overall armies in the game from a tourney stand point. I know one guy who uses them well and can beat quite a few people with them. However with his other armies he is a very difficult player to beat. So that is why most don't like them. Plus they tend to attract the anime kids and that brings its own problems. Still like them even if they are not very effective. But that would be my guess as to why SOME people do not like them.

The Tau fire warrior is required, and is 10ppm for a T3 BS3 unit. Far too much. They have a 4+ armor save, but every unit in 5th edition has a 4+ save in cover, if not better.

Their only saving grace is their S5 AP5 weapon. S5 may seem like a lot for an infantry weapon, but since tau crumble in CC that means they shouldn't rapid-fire, or will only get one rapid-fire per game and then die, meaning you get like 6 S5 hits max unless you're suiciding. Not impressive at all.

Tau crisis suits are decent, but expensive and are just MEQs. a Krak missile kills one instantly.

Broadsides are strong but are just 75-80ppm terminators that can't move and fire.

Hammerheads are 1-shot wonders, at BS4 that's 4 hits per game, average 2 pens against AV14.

Devilfish are half as useful as their counterpart, the wave serpent, for roughly the same points.

Markerlights are Heavy 1, they make the Tau a viable army, but can't move and shoot except on vehicles and stealth suits.

Kroot are actually pretty good, 7 points for a bolter on a unit that has a 3+ cover save in forests, can infiltrate and outflank, and is decent in CC is not bad at all.

So in your whole codex you have 3 decent units: Crisis suits, Stealthsuits, and kroot. and you HAVE to buy a squad of fire warriors that is either a free KP to the enemy, or 180 points to make the squad decent.

I never get why people dislike the Tau on a visual basis. Just because they look like/influenced by anime mecha shouldnt invalidate them more than any other race. I actually tried to get into 40k when I was much younger because of the slick look of the Tau. Conversely, I dont like the IG aesthetically cause Im not fond of WWII style armies.

Oh well, different strokes for different folks.

I dont get it either, I picked Tau as my first army because of their visuals, and the only anime i've ever watched is pokemon.

Canonness Rory wrote:
So in your whole codex you have 3 decent units: Crisis suits, Stealthsuits, and kroot. and you HAVE to buy a squad of fire warriors that is either a free KP to the enemy, or 180 points to make the squad decent.

i do agree that fire warriors suck but piranas(?) are very useful, a nice unit if the person knows how to use them

I picked them initially because of the look, and because they were the only alien race not already played by multiple people at the club. It's nice to have some variety...

Of course i occassionally get some light teasing about running away, when i use my suits' extra jump, and about me being inexperienced with assaults (as though i'm completely new to the rules of assaults).

Tau are quite good at tailoring their army to counter their opponent. Making a great all comers tourney list is slightly more difficult for us, i think, than it would be for most other races.

Canonness Rory wrote:The Tau fire warrior is required, and is 10ppm for a T3 BS3 unit. Far too much. They have a 4+ armor save, but every unit in 5th edition has a 4+ save in cover, if not better.

Good point forgot about cover saves being ridiculous in this edition.

I personally think that a 10 point model that has strength 5 and a range of 30 inches is good. And why are hammerheads considered one hit wonders? They have front armor 13, that's not half bad. Disruption pods for 5 points make so that it is obstructed which is quite amazing. I mean sure it's not as sturdy as a land raider but at least you can bring hammerheads to the table and not reek of cheese.

why have a hammerhead while broadside battle-suit equipped with rail guns are far superior?

A friend of mine had tried doing a tau army a few months ago but he eventually said the hell with it. he couldnt stand using an army that would just shoot and run lol. Plus I think what really sealed the deal was when we played a game of 1000 pts of tau vs my Anggrath and I utterly destroyed him and still had 4 wounds left lol.

Gutteridge wrote:why have a hammerhead while broadside battle-suit equipped with rail guns are far superior?

hammerhead has sub munition for anti horde. But it can also be used as anti tank, so in that way it is equipped to deal with different scenario's in the battle field. Plus one lascannon equals one dead broadside.

But yes I take broadsides in addition to hammerheads. And I do agree in an anti tank sense broadsides are far superior and more cost effective.

The Tau borrows many visual apsects of Animes such as Macross. But that mostly cause GW was trying to appeal to potential Eastern players.

IMO, they look more Star Wars-y, and they should borrow more from Gundam.

They suck for several reasons:

1. They have crappy troop choices. Kroot are alright, but firewarriors are junk. While a strength 5 gun is pretty good, the basic firewarrior has no way to deal with a tank or monstrous creature. In objective missions they cannot take objectives by themselves, requiring help from other places in the tau army.
Considering 2 out of 3 scenarios require objectives, this is painful for Tau.

2. Drones are extra kill points, making some units like fish with drones and piranahs not worth it.

3. With tougher vehicles and faster infantry and outflank, range and shooting have taken a huge hit. This game still favors hand to hand.

4. New terrain rules have kicked suits in the nuts. Once able to poke out, shoot something, and then jump to safety, but with true line of sight that is no longer true. Plasma took a huge hit as well, since everything has cover.

Fire warriors still have access to EMP grenades which each have a 50% chance of rolling on the damage table, assuming the vehicle didn't move. Devilfish can also take a SMS in place of drones, and as you've stated this would only be a problem in 1/3 scenarios. I don't think it's worth swapping them anyway. Not really sure what your point is in #4.

EMP's don't stop monstrous creatures and require you to move into assualt with a vehicle. If a vehicle is that close and your firewarriors are killing it that way, you've failed, and the contents inside the vehicle will destroy you. Nevermind the 3 points per emp you have to pay for.

Crisis suits suck in this edition compared to before. That was my point in #4. Not only is their shooting less effective, but they can't use move shoot move to take no damage in return. On top of that, everything in the game moves quicker, so it's easier to get to hand to hand against them.

Tau rekindled my affair with GW. It brought me back into the fold just as my annoyance with marines was pushing me away. I think they have a well thought out background and have a brilliantly elegant look and modus operandi. None of this barbaric in your face hitting of stuff, all problems are solved at a distance with precision

My biggest problem with them is that all the primary support weapons are concentrated on the battlesuits. Now this is fine in theory, however with the proliferation of anti-tank weapons in the game it makes them rather vulnerable to being instant killed.

I have a mate who plays Tau, and uses them well, thinkning ahead. I dont see where all the Tau hate coes from, and the one I like the least is "they run away".

I dont particualrily like Tau, but I have nothing against them. ANd they always give me a run for my money

My 2 Cents

thedarkside69 wrote:If every army was as one dimensional as the space marines,

Smurfs aren't one-dimensional at all; they can be built to work any number of different ways, and unless the list sucks you'll always find them tough opponents.

Tau don't suck, either. Alien Ninja-Commies with flying MBTs and little man-dog-birds that do the CCing for them. They're pretty cool. Not to mention they're devastatingly effective on the table.

pepl think tau suk cuz prolly more that half the pepl who play 40k play as spess marienz. you guys are right tau arent "heroic" but when they wipe the board clear of enemies from the super-blitz of fire power that doesnt matter. the only pepl who think tau weapons are weak/suck have never played a proper tau list on tabletop.

i think tau are the only ones who can put out as much firepower is my IG. yey IG.

Tau don't suck, people who play them suck. I've seen Tau devastate almost every major army out there list wise.

Tau can mechanize like nobodies business and have access to one of the best vehicle wargear in the game (disruptions 4+ invulnerable).


People keep stating the Broadsides are better , but a Hammerhead is cheaper has more options and can get a 4+ invulnerable.

Tau probably suffered more from the 5e changes than any other codex but they can still be competitive in the right hands.

Canonness Rory and a couple of other people summarised the problems.

If you want to see how to 'unsuck' Tau, there is a long "How To Fix Tau" thread in Proposed Rules.

Of course there are players who hate Tau because they are too young to appreciate the importance of contrast, or maybe their friends at school hate them and they are just going along.

I mean, it's a bit sad to hate a bunch of plastic parts and some fluff fiction.

Fire warriors aren't that bad because of their price. Back them up with enough broadsides and you don't have to worry about a mech list overrunning you before you get your shots in. The problem is that if your opponent makes it into cc with just about anything the whole line crumples.

One memorable game I had against them was with a very good Tau player. I was playing foot slogging orks. He had wiped out about 3/4s of my army before I made it into close combat with him. I think I managed to take out one unit of fire warriors with shooting. I tabled him in one round of CC.

You only get 3 units of Broadsides and each unit can only shoot it's Railguns at one target per turn, which means if someone turns up with more than 4 vehicles your Broadsides are a bit scunnered.

Fireknife Crisis Suits and Kroot are the answer. A unit of 10 Kroot costs only 10pts more than a unit of 6 Fire Warriors, and 10 Kroot will do a lot more good than 6 or 8 Fire Warriors, without sucking up precious points that you could be spending on nastier general-purpose stuff that's dangerous against more than AV11 and footslogging hordes with poor armour saves.

Frank Fugger wrote:You only get 3 units of Broadsides and each unit can only shoot it's Railguns at one target per turn, which means if someone turns up with more than 4 vehicles your Broadsides are a bit scunnered.

Uhm...Team Leader Hardwired Target Lock?

There is so much misinformation in this thread that it's painful to read.

Focusedfire had a really good long thread buried here in the Tactics forums about Tau in 5th ed, and is pretty close to the mark. Some of what everyone else has said is good info as well.

Tau Advantages in 5th
- Tau Vehicles can all have a 4+ save from Disruption pods
- Tau Vehicles get Flechette Launchers, which are very nasty against infantry assaulting tanks, especially Orks!
- Railguns are AP1 and so become even better at punching tanks open
- Pathfinder's can give up their devilfish to another squad, making their buy-in better, and their markerlights are essential to reduce prevalent cover saves.
- Kroot and Stealthsuits can outflank
- Tau Vehicles do not become destroyed when immobilized if moving up to 12" (This effects eldar as well)
- Positional Relay can be useful in objective missions or for a well timed Fusion Blaster strike. (Deepstriking cheap monats with TL Fusion Blasters are the bees knees against mech!)

Tau Disadvantages in 5th
- Firewarriors are expensive and do not have much weapon variety
- True LOS kills Crisis and Stealth Suit JSJ tactics
- Tau have no psychic defense
- Tau have no CC ability (Save Farsight) and cannot really take advantage of 5th edition's brutal Assault Phase.
- Too many elite choices competing for your 3 Elite slots.

I'm sure there are more, but those are a pretty good summation of why the Tau struggle a little bit more than some of the other armies in 5th edition.

scuddman wrote:They suck for several reasons:

1. They have crappy troop choices. Kroot are alright, but firewarriors are junk. While a strength 5 gun is pretty good, the basic firewarrior has no way to deal with a tank or monstrous creature. In objective missions they cannot take objectives by themselves, requiring help from other places in the tau army.
Considering 2 out of 3 scenarios require objectives, this is painful for Tau.

The idea with Fire Warriors is that instead of carrying large & cumbersome heavy weaponry with them, they just carry little markerlight and use it to target Seeker Missiles against tough targets. Whilst this sounds nice on paper, rules-wise it is not that effective:

-You need to take a Shas'ui with Markerlight, and that costs you 20 points extra - 25 if you also take Target lock.
-Even tough Seeker Missile has BS5, you need BS3 Markerlight to shoot it with - combined with cost of Seeker Missile, essentially you will be paying 30 points from one-shot BS2.5 missile. Not great!
-Markerlight is Heavy 1, making it even more cumbersome to use.

Also, Tau infantry has no power weapons or equivalent. Kroot are ok in close combat but also have no such weapons, making them pretty useless against low-save targets: also, they are restricted to LD7 unless you buy horribly overcosted Shaper. Most other armies have, if everything else fails, strong special characters for close combat, but Tau has only one such character and he brings such limitations that most players don't want to use him.

As for vehicles...Devilfish is good, but restricted to S5AP5 armament, restricting its offensive capabilities compared to transports of other armies. Hammerheads are cost-effective, but don't scale well to large points games. Piranhas are somewhat overcosted.

If I was to fix Tau, I'd start by improving Markerlights: Marker Drones should be cheaper, Markerlight for Shas'ui should cost only 5 points, and all Markerlights should be networked. Also, blast mode for Seeker Missile.

I like Tau. I brutally tabled an IG player yesterday with them without losing a unit, and i took 2 of 3 objectives.

Kroot are MONSTERS in CC against low-save units. They'rre excellent against IG and (dare I say it) Orks in CC, as long as they arent too outnumbered. Take come kroot hounds and you've got an exellent assault squad.

10 Pirahnas w/ Target and Fusion guns with Displacement is brutal. Which is even more beneficial as you get 20 Gun Drones as well. Add in a Pathfinder squad and you have basically taken 5 fast attack options.

Drones are not bad at all.


Having messed around with the Pirahna swarm I wish we saw more of it. Being able to take 2 squads of 5 and get 5 fast attack options is disgusting.

whitedragon wrote:

Frank Fugger wrote:You only get 3 units of Broadsides and each unit can only shoot it's Railguns at one target per turn, which means if someone turns up with more than 4 vehicles your Broadsides are a bit scunnered.

Uhm...Team Leader Hardwired Target Lock?

Well yeah, but...

artyboy wrote:Fire warriors aren't that bad because of their price. Back them up with enough broadsides and you don't have to worry about a mech list overrunning you before you get your shots in.

My point was that 9 Broadsides can only do so much damage and so relying on them to stop a fast moving army getting into H2H with your Fire Warriors is a gunline tactic, and one that doesn't really hold up well anymore. You CAN rely on them because they're wicked-awesome, but if your list didn't have Fire Warriors in it you wouldn't have to. Broadsides are made to scare people and kill stuff, not to babysit Fail Warriors who can't handle themselves in a fist fight.

I think the basic thing to remember is that Fire Warriors are never the answer, because no matter how well you back them up they're still the weak link in the chain. You're far better served sucking up the mandatory 6-man squad and spending the extra 10pts for 10 Kroot for your second Troops choice, then just throwing the rest of your points into your other FoC slots because they're the ones that will win you games.

People think that Tau suck because they are wrong. Tau are one of the most useful armies in the game, up there with Guard, and Dark Eldar.

I don't know why. I really like the style of gameplay for the tau. It gives a feeling of teamwork and can be very easy to win.People probly hate them as there are not alot of armies that can execute this(save necrons maybe guard)And they can be very heroic. For example the kroot that infiltrate,They are going to get killed,yet they still fight on for the commanders and let the tau advance to help with the destruction of the enemy.

I find Fish of Fury Tactic is pretty useful if you give your FWs photon grenades. Not much can survive rapid firing pulse rifles.

Oh yeah, fish of fury! very nice tactic. Have 3 devilfish in a triangle while the tau are in a play pen, very nice!

deadratman wrote:Oh yeah, fish of fury! very nice tactic. Have 3 devilfish in a triangle while the tau are in a play pen, very nice!

Most FoF tactics only use 2 Devilfish.

People hate tau because they fail to understand how the army functions. This is a combined arms army it must be assembled correctly and used correctly to be successful. Each unit has its place and if used to support others the army wins. If not well... People don't seem to grasp this. We have a marine sargent who plays in our group. He is amazing. He utilizes tau just like his rifle platoon for real. Concepts like mutual support, bounding overwatch, and focused fire still work in 40k. This must be understood to be successful playing tau and it seems beyond the realm of thought for some, which is why they complain

Yup that is why alot of players underestimate tau. Just because they help each other doesn't mean that they are weinies.Give that Sarge my regards(hey it rhymes!).

@whitedragon: FoF works better if there are 3,just in case one is destroyed.

Canonness Rory wrote:The Tau fire warrior is required, and is 10ppm for a T3 BS3 unit. Far too much. They have a 4+ armor save, but every unit in 5th edition has a 4+ save in cover, if not better.

Their only saving grace is their S5 AP5 weapon. S5 may seem like a lot for an infantry weapon, but since tau crumble in CC that means they shouldn't rapid-fire, or will only get one rapid-fire per game and then die, meaning you get like 6 S5 hits max unless you're suiciding. Not impressive at all.

Tau crisis suits are decent, but expensive and are just MEQs. a Krak missile kills one instantly.

Broadsides are strong but are just 75-80ppm terminators that can't move and fire.

Hammerheads are 1-shot wonders, at BS4 that's 4 hits per game, average 2 pens against AV14.

Devilfish are half as useful as their counterpart, the wave serpent, for roughly the same points.

Markerlights are Heavy 1, they make the Tau a viable army, but can't move and shoot except on vehicles and stealth suits.

Kroot are actually pretty good, 7 points for a bolter on a unit that has a 3+ cover save in forests, can infiltrate and outflank, and is decent in CC is not bad at all.

So in your whole codex you have 3 decent units: Crisis suits, Stealthsuits, and kroot. and you HAVE to buy a squad of fire warriors that is either a free KP to the enemy, or 180 points to make the squad decent.

Well lets see...Crisis take shield drones with a 4+ invulnerable save to take the rocket hit, plus a wise player with JSJ will give you either no LoS or at least themselves a cover save.

Broadsides can move at slow and purposeful and still fire.

Hammerheads can also fire submunitions for a 6S large blast.

Devilfish can pack some good firepower when you take smart missle system with the built in burst cannon.

The trouble is that a lot of tau players just suck. To play tau well you have to be very, very careful with your movement cause you can't make the mistake of getting caught. Played right they are very tough to catch.
You can also get some beastly special weapons for the crisis commander.

One reason as to why i think people dont like them is they are are a guerilla type army. Tau only seem to be good at one thing hit and run tactic. Personally i think its a very effective strategy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One reason as to why i think people dont like them is they are are a guerilla type army. Tau only seem to be good at one thing hit and run tactic. Personally i think its a very effective strategy.

DOUBLE POST!!!!!!!

If we're talking tournaments, Tau have some added disadvantages. It's much easier to get big wins with hand to hand than shooting. I also find it sad that some armies like Eldar and IG can outshoot them.

In objective missions it's almost required to use contesting as your main strategy instead of taking. THat means in objective missions you don't win big.

Lastly, the army requires a combined arms approach. If i'm a smart general, I know ahead of time which units to take out first. If i'm playing mechanized and I knock out the anti-tank first, the rest of the army can't do anything.

Those reasons, in my opinion, are why Tau haven't had a good showing at any tournament for a long time.

Personally I think people say Tau suck, simply because they arnt a very strong tourny army. Same with Necrons, witch hunters so on and so on. Those are all good armies in their own right. None of them actually suck, but to play them against a modern power player style, they cant hold up.
Tau in a normal gaming setting, are pretty good, like the other armies

People saying disruption pods are Tau's saving grace seem to forget that the current metagame is MELTAS MELTAS MELTAS and in melta range disruption pods dont work.

aren't tau one of the best forces out there at the moment?

They bring some of the best mech and anti mech units in the game. They have insane mobility and while they might crumple in assault, you usually won't even be able to get into assault with them. Yes, you might get into one of their fire warrior or kroot squads but with new 5ed consolidation rules, you're going to get shot to pieces as soon as you kill them.

We aren't still playing 4th ed. In which I agree tau were definitely kinda weak but with the changes in 5ed I would say mech tau rival council/mech eldar for being the best army out there.

Tau are cool because they have some of the best guns and most guns for one unit the battlesuits are awesome.

Tau suck because they can dish it out but can't take it. and I play with lil model women with flamers.

screw close combat. I'd much rather roast the guppies in their precious cover.

They were made to be good in 4th ed. 5th really screwed them up because it outdated most of the wargear and tactics that made them good.

Frank Fugger wrote:You only get 3 units of Broadsides and each unit can only shoot it's Railguns at one target per turn, which means if someone turns up with more than 4 vehicles your Broadsides are a bit scunnered.

Fireknife Crisis Suits and Kroot are the answer. A unit of 10 Kroot costs only 10pts more than a unit of 6 Fire Warriors, and 10 Kroot will do a lot more good than 6 or 8 Fire Warriors, without sucking up precious points that you could be spending on nastier general-purpose stuff that's dangerous against more than AV11 and footslogging hordes with poor armour saves.

You can take 9 broadsides if you like. Their shots are twin-linked. And with a target lock on a team leader you can shoot at up to 6 different targets, 3 of the targets get two shots. I usually run 6 broadsides in three teams of two, each with a team leader and hard wired target lock which allow me to shoot a single twin linked shot at 6 targets. Broadsides are one of the best heavy support choices in the game, along with obliterators.

I think that firewarriors are a decent troop selection.

Tau have a great elite choice in crisis suits that can be customized to handle a whole lot of situations.

They were made to be good in 4th ed. 5th really screwed them up because it outdated most of the wargear and tactics that made them good.

I don't see how Tau were "screwed" by 5th edition. All armies had to adjust to true LOS. What wargear and tactics are outdated now? Do you play Tau?

Bottom line is that Tau don't suck. If deployed and played competently they are a top tier army.

I guess some people think they suck because they have not ever given the codex a good look over or had not ever played against a good tau player.

Frank Fugger wrote:You only get 3 units of Broadsides and each unit can only shoot it's Railguns at one target per turn, which means if someone turns up with more than 4 vehicles your Broadsides are a bit scunnered.

For 15 extra points (30 extra points if you don't have any team leaders in each unit), you can potentially spread your railguns over 6 targets with a few target locks. If you chose them as your primary support system, that's 9 different targets per turn. I usually give one to team leaders.

Edit: looks like i was beaten to the post, and i didn't even notice page 2.

spartanghost wrote:Kroot are MONSTERS in CC against low-save units. They'rre excellent against IG and (dare I say it) Orks in CC, as long as they arent too outnumbered. Take come kroot hounds and you've got an exellent assault squad.

Thats 5+ and 6+ low save is 2 or 3 (aka power armor and the like).

The tau are gay cause they run away standpoint is completely rediculous. Could somebody remind everyone what "Combat Tactics" lets you do?

Kilkrazy wrote:Tau probably suffered more from the 5e changes than any other codex but they can still be competitive in the right hands.

forgive my ignorance but i keep hearing this statement and i dont understand it. can some1 explain to me how 5th ed screwed tau? im not that familiar with them.

The Angry Commissar wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:Tau probably suffered more from the 5e changes than any other codex but they can still be competitive in the right hands.

forgive my ignorance but i keep hearing this statement and i dont understand it. can some1 explain to me how 5th ed screwed tau? im not that familiar with them.

See my above post.

Basically, having to only take objectives with Troops hurts because Tau troops cannot win a battle of attrition in the same way that other unit's troops can. They are wimply in CC as well, and the CC phase became alot more brutal in 5th. Vehicle survivability improved, and AP 1 bonus helps Railguns be even more awesome. On the other hand, part of the awesome power of Crisis suits was their ability to shoot and then jump behind LOS blocking terrain, making them nigh invincible to shooting, where as now the TLOS rules negate that advantage. The lack of IC protection from shooting killed the Torgoch'el, but instead means that you can basically treat your HQ's like an extra crisis team, however, and then use Elite slots for stealths.

iamthecougar wrote:

spartanghost wrote:Kroot are MONSTERS in CC against low-save units. They'rre excellent against IG and (dare I say it) Orks in CC, as long as they arent too outnumbered. Take come kroot hounds and you've got an exellent assault squad.

Thats 5+ and 6+ low save is 2 or 3 (aka power armor and the like).

The tau are gay cause they run away standpoint is completely rediculous. Could somebody remind everyone what "Combat Tactics" lets you do?

It's kind of depressing that so many people think that tau suck because they're good at NOT GETTING ASSAULTED. 40K is not "hey lets get into CC and hit each other alot", it's "Hey let's use strategy based on our army's strengths and weaknesses to defeat each other." To say Tau suck because they avoid CC and favour shooting is like saying a basketball player sucks at horse riding because he's too big.

Our local meta is geared towards assault and trying to kill 10 plague bearers takes an entire Tau army to kill off only 6-7.

spartanghost wrote:its kind of depressing that so many people think that tau suck because they're good at NOT GETTING ASSAULTED. 40K is not "hey lets get into CC and hit each other alot", it's "Hey let's use strategy based on our army's strengths and weaknesses to defeat each other." To say Tau suck because they avoid CC and favour shooting is like saying a basketball player sucks at horse riding because he's too big.

QFT

spartanghost wrote:It's kind of depressing that so many people think that tau suck because they're good at NOT GETTING ASSAULTED. 40K is not "hey lets get into CC and hit each other alot", it's "Hey let's use strategy based on our army's strengths and weaknesses to defeat each other." To say Tau suck because they avoid CC and favour shooting is like saying a basketball player sucks at horse riding because he's too big.

Actually, many people thinking Tau suck can be a good thing sometimes. Although it means that there might not be so many new Tau players. It does mean that there will be some surprised people if their army is defeated by the Tau. It's like that Ninja Tau strategy, it will only work once. But, it is a free advantage. I don't know how people can't get it though. Tau are not about CC, therefore they suck at it. How difficult can it be to understand?

It's a weakness that is already well known to the Tau player and they will try to cover that weakness by avoiding CC. Just like the opponent will think that Tau suck at everything. Although occasionally killing big things with Kroot can be a fun surprise for them. The opponent might also think that it was great if they wiped out the Kroot unit. But, more likely it would have just been the Tau players way of making them easier to shoot at by making them slow down.

One change I like in 5th is that you can no longer consolidate into CC

I think the problem that tau have is that they dont do enough damage in the shooting phase to counter how badly they need to stay out of CC. To be fair, I play horde orks generally, and have only played against one Tau player in 5th, but I noticed a similar trend in 4th edition when there were 4 tau players I gamed with, semi-regularly.

My opponents all had the same problem, their fire warriors just fail to put out the damage needed to stop a CC geared army before it crashes into their lines. And, with tau, it is generally all or nothing, they dont win CC against anything. Except grotz when I roll poorly. Even focusing fire, though it may wipe out a unit, will mean nothing if there were 3 units closing in to begin with.

As for Kroot, I have heard alot about how great kroot are, but I just dont see it. A flamer completely runs their day. They are not that good in combat, as they are t3 and have no armor save. At I3, they dont even assault before most assault troops. I am not considering the enemy troops assaulting into cover because, most dedicated assault troops have frag grenades. I have rarely seen kroot do anything but die horribly.

In 5th, you need troops to win 2/3 of your games. When your troops are as fragile as fire warriors or kroot, you will have real problems holding objectives, and keeping your troops alive till the end of the game.

Yeah, it's not that they suck at close combat, it's they suck at close combat in a game that favors close combat. Honestly, shooting won't get it done.

At least in 4th there was less cover and units weren't scoring below half.

Now everything is faster and has cover.

Another hit to fish of fury is how weak fishes are to hth now. Used to be with skimmer moving fast and armor 11 or 12, hth had no chance against a fish.
Not anymore.

Bottom line is Tau can't compete against top lists at any point level, and struggle against many 2nd tier lists. In your normal day to day play they're fine, but they have too many holes. It's not even that they suck in CC, they aren't that great at shooting either. The army is all about quality shots in an edition that's all about quantity of shots. And if they do go quantity of shots, suddenly they're surprisingly short ranged. Where are the units the put out warwalker level of shooting without requiring marker lights and other junk?

scuddman wrote:Yeah, it's not that they suck at close combat, it's they suck at close combat in a game that favors close combat. Honestly, shooting won't get it done.

At least in 4th there was less cover and units weren't scoring below half.

Now everything is faster and has cover.

Another hit to fish of fury is how weak fishes are to hth now. Used to be with skimmer moving fast and armor 11 or 12, hth had no chance against a fish.
Not anymore.

Bottom line is Tau can't compete against top lists at any point level, and struggle against many 2nd tier lists. In your normal day to day play they're fine, but they have too many holes. It's not even that they suck in CC, they aren't that great at shooting either. The army is all about quality shots in an edition that's all about quantity of shots. And if they do go quantity of shots, suddenly they're surprisingly short ranged. Where are the units the put out warwalker level of shooting without requiring marker lights and other junk?

They aren't that great at shooting?????????? Really? How are they not great at shooting? With the proper use of markerlights you should always have BS of 4 hit on 3's and wound on 2's. Rail guns are disgusting and smart missile systems are very usefuly. Squads can fire at different units. I think Tau can take down any mech list out there. Its very important to be able to read how your opponent sets ups.

The number one weakness i have experienced using my tau are drop pods, when used correctly it because very hard to get a clear shot at the troops that were in the drop pod that are hiding behind the drop pod.

Tau have problems in general.
This is caused by being forced to advance and secure objectives. Firewarriors simply cannot do it. In a fish they are ok at taking an objective provided they aren't hit to hard from range and for 180 pts that isnt saying much. Kroot are cool and all in a forest but god help you if there isnt a forest near the objective. T3 and no armor mean you fold like a wet rag to shooting and combat.

Tau are a great spoiler army though. If the mech IG, mech marines, and battlewaggon orcs do end up owning the tournament circut then tau can come out and compete with them.
A good tau army can kill 3-4 chimeras and 2 russes in one turn prety consistently, and they are extremely good at advancing up the flanks to do even more damage to venerable sides of said tanks.
Unfortunately, tau have nothing to deal with drop pod marines and hoard orcs. Lootas/pooding meltas kill their tanks and suits dead and the firewarriors will not reliably kill enough to turn it arround.

ummm. . . because Tau are pew pew and just about everyone else is ROARGONNAEATYOUALIVE!

augustus5 wrote:

Frank Fugger wrote:You only get 3 units of Broadsides and each unit can only shoot it's Railguns at one target per turn, which means if someone turns up with more than 4 vehicles your Broadsides are a bit scunnered.

Fireknife Crisis Suits and Kroot are the answer. A unit of 10 Kroot costs only 10pts more than a unit of 6 Fire Warriors, and 10 Kroot will do a lot more good than 6 or 8 Fire Warriors, without sucking up precious points that you could be spending on nastier general-purpose stuff that's dangerous against more than AV11 and footslogging hordes with poor armour saves.

You can take 9 broadsides if you like. Their shots are twin-linked. And with a target lock on a team leader you can shoot at up to 6 different targets, 3 of the targets get two shots. I usually run 6 broadsides in three teams of two, each with a team leader and hard wired target lock which allow me to shoot a single twin linked shot at 6 targets. Broadsides are one of the best heavy support choices in the game, along with obliterators.

Agreed on all points. See my last post for the disclaimer.

I think that firewarriors are a decent troop selection.

I still reckon the Kroot are far better.

Take your pick:

Some people don't think their background is '40k'.
Some people don't like the models' designs.
Some people like to look forward to the assault phase (which is a third of the game and arguably the way to kill the most models).
Some people like to have an uber unit or two and spam them. Tau don't have that.

My thoughts:
Tau have mediocre LD in a game where most armies have units with stubborn, fearless or ATSKNF. One could stick an ethereal out there to see him get shot, but most would agree that isn't a winning strategy.
Tau generally don't win 'big'. One can win, but the changes in 5th ed with troops scoring, the plethora of cover saves, running, and coming in from the board's sides make it a challenge to win games based on KPs or objectives.
The metagame has changed, but the codex hasn't. I enjoy playing a mech army, but with so many armies going mech, it can get boring to see every opponent spamming troops in transports and heavy support being vehicles.
Relying on markerlights seems like a cheap gimmick to me. Wipe out the the pathfinders and one is well on the way to neutering the firepower of the Tau.
Stealthsuits just aren't as good with true LoS and running as they were in 4th edition.
Wound allocation really is cumbersome if one is so bold as to run a large Farsight list with the different equipment ala Nobz bikers.
Several codexes now seem to have a S10 option in their lists. That used to be a for most intents a Tau exclusive, but I believe Space Marines, Guard, and Eldar are now rocking them as well either due to changes in their codex, or the metagame making Fire Prisms more effective.

In the current game Tau have to rely on board control and applying firepower. That is very difficult to do, probably more difficult to do than some people will find worthwhile.

I say Tau suck at shooting relatively, because other armies that aren't only based on shooting can outshoot Tau. For an army that only does one thing, it doesn't do that one thing majorly better than other armies. I've seen dark lance spam rape Tau even when the Tau went first.

Yet, the army has leadership problems and folds in hth quickly.

Tau have some issues:

True line of sight & the changes in skimmer rules killed 2 of the favored tactics in 4th editon JSJ & Fish of Fury.

Kroot are the only real effective HTH force the Tau have, however with I3, rapid fire weapons, no armor save, the inability to get power weapons on a shaper, & LD7 they still arn't AMAZING. Yes Kroot hounds can help with I5, but that can only do so much. Assaults are more brutal and tend to happen sooner in 5th edition due to the additional rules of outflanking, running, and how moral checks are calculated at the end of an assault.

Firewarriors, battlesuits, and Devilfish are all overcosted IMO.

However, the biggest issue I have with the current Tau is that they tend to only deal with 1 side of the Meta game per build. If you are geared to take down a full mech IG list with Broadsides, fusion suits, & pirahanas you will have hard work taking out an ork mob of 180 boys without flamers, the subnumition shot, & burst cannons.

I love playing my Tau army and I think that with an update they could be very effective. However, from a purely competive standpoint they do have some issues. I've won more games then I've lost with them, but in a tournament enviroment you need to be able to have a force that can win big, which Tau seem to have a hard time with at 1500-2000 points. 'Ard Boys allows Tau to bring so much to the table that they have a shot of scoring a massacre, 2500 points of Tau with a couple turns of shooting can cause problems for most armies unless they are played well.

Besides, nothing is more fun then over 100 kroot charging necrons and forcing turn 2 phase out!

thehod wrote:Our local meta is geared towards assault and trying to kill 10 plague bearers takes an entire Tau army to kill off only 6-7.

...or one squad of firewarriors to blast those PBs off the board before they ever get a chance to assault.

I've seen dark lance spam rape Tau even when the Tau went first.

I'd love to play against someone spamming dark lances as I only use a single vehicle in my tau army (the devilfish I must take with my pathfinders)
All those lances means less multi-shot mid-strength weapons firing into my line.

One other thing about scoring troops is the change in 5th edition to the random game length. I used to go second and just shoot the opponent off the objectives and then zoom in with a vehicle or a suit to claim them. Can't do that any more.

I think the bottom line is that Tau have some issues, but those are mostly due to being out codexed and out editioned. The army can be very competitive in friendly games, but can suffer in hardcore tourneys. A really good general can still use them well, but your average player won't have the patience and/or skill to get the most out of the combined arms approach of the Tau.
I have a feeling that when they get an update the complaint will be that the Tau are broken (just like every army with a fresh codex).

I'm a fairly new player, and I chose Tau as my main army. Why? Because around here, EVERYONE EITHER PLAYS SPACE MARINES, ORKS, OR IG. Tyranids seemed unappealing, and Necron, Chaos and Eldar stuff is hard to come by at the game shops around here unless you order it.

Another reason why people choose to play Tau from the Tau players I met around here: they don't like like the macabre, skull-wearing look of the other armies, and like the Tau for their streamlined, high-tech look.

I think pure shooty armies like Tau and Necrons, should, when they get a rewrite, get some type of upgrade that ignores all the damn cover saves. And Im not talking about flamers lol
Some way to get some shots around the cover saves.

augustus5 wrote:

thehod wrote:Our local meta is geared towards assault and trying to kill 10 plague bearers takes an entire Tau army to kill off only 6-7.

...or one squad of firewarriors to blast those PBs off the board before they ever get a chance to assault.

Dont forget they usually are having a +4 cover save ontop of FNP.

Dal'yth Dude wrote:Some people like to look forward to the assault phase (which is a third of the game and arguably the way to kill the most models).

I look forward to the Assault Phase, although my opponents refer to it as the second Movement Phase.

KingCracker wrote:I think pure shooty armies like Tau and Necrons, should, when they get a rewrite, get some type of upgrade that ignores all the damn cover saves. And Im not talking about flamers lol
Some way to get some shots around the cover saves.

Tau have markerlights that can negate basically any cover save. That's not good enough?

I've always liked the look of Tau but always felt them a sub optimal choice to other armies.

In another thread people stated Tau are too 'anime fan' to really fit into the GRIM/DARK that is 40Hams. But Tau aren't anywhere near as anime fan as Eldar are. But people like Eldar and hate Tau. Oh well. Beats me.

Yea some sort of upgrade or even wargear that almost every unit can take that negates cover saves. We can call them Marker Lights, and you could even put them on drones. The drones would of course then be called Marker Drones.

Seriously this is standard fare here at Dakka. Forum threads like this are everywhere, an army is analyzed by people who have no idea what is even in the codex. They base their experiences on the horrible players they must have faced in the past.

I count about 3 posts in a 3 page thread where someone has useful input and KNOW the material in the Tau codex.

Tau will continue to improve in the metagame as more and more armies go full mech.

asugradinwa wrote:TFirewarriors, battlesuits, and Devilfish are all overcosted IMO.

I think that this right here is the biggest problem that the Tau have. Their stuff isn't bad, it just costs too much.

Firewarriors aren't worth more than 6 points a piece, for example.

You have to take the units really that are incredibly cost efficient, Kroot, cheap crisis suits, Pirahnas( they give free gun drone squads in groups of 5).

I'd list it in this order.

Tau Fire Crisis w/ the assault missile launcher twinlinked, target lock.

Kroot w/ Kroot Hounds

PathFinders

Pirahna are incredibly point efficient in groups of five you get 10 gun drones.

Broadsides are not point efficient at all. Theyre to expensive.

Hammerhead to a degree.

augustus5 wrote:

thehod wrote:Our local meta is geared towards assault and trying to kill 10 plague bearers takes an entire Tau army to kill off only 6-7.

...or one squad of firewarriors to blast those PBs off the board before they ever get a chance to assault.

1 Squad of fire warriors rapid-firing at BS5 into a squad of 10 PBs:
24 shots.
20 hits.
10 wounds. (S5 vs T5)
5 pass the cover save. (4+ Cover, it IS 5th edition after all)
2.5 pass FNP. (4+ FNP)

If not in cover:
10 wounds.
7-8 Pass the 5+ Invuln
3-4 Pass FNP

120 points of fire warriors with 2 markerlights can kill 30 points of plaguebearers, or with 3 markerlights can kill 45-60 points. And then every single one dies in assault.

Canonness Rory wrote:Congrats, you just made yourself look like an idiot.
Well... I helped.

You seem to have forgotten your previous warning. Click on the Rule #1 link in my sig. Go ahead, I'll wait.



This is a personal attack and will not be tolerated here on Dakka, and you have been warned about this before. If you continue to do so, it will result in a temporary suspension.

Thank you.

I have found them to be a weak opponent.

Whenever someone shows up with Tau, I have been allowing them about 300 extra points to make it challenging for me.

Even then, it's too easy. Might have to up the handicap.

I always find people taking these ten man squads of Tau Fire warriors. i prefer minimum squads so as to free up more points for vehicles.

You can have two squads of ten in a warfish or two squads of 6 in two warfish with 120 points left over for more warfish or kroot.

Sure take the minimum required troops in 5th ed. Go ahead. 66% of the time I'll only need to kill 12 T3 4+sv guys to stop you from winning the game. Sure, you'll say "Well, I also take a ten man kroot squad." Ok, now I have to whack 10 basically naked T3 guys. Sure your motor pool collection of suits and fish varients might kill my army (doubtful), but even if you do the best you can hope for is a draw.
Sorry for the vent, but nothing gets my goat like minimum Troop armies. Best change in modern 40K is making Troops the sole objective holders (for the most part).

I think people say Tau suck because most Tau armies don't have enough kroot !

Redwunz wrote:Sure take the minimum required troops in 5th ed. Go ahead. 66% of the time I'll only need to kill 12 T3 4+sv guys to stop you from winning the game. Sure, you'll say "Well, I also take a ten man kroot squad." Ok, now I have to whack 10 basically naked T3 guys. Sure your motor pool collection of suits and fish varients might kill my army (doubtful), but even if you do the best you can hope for is a draw.
Sorry for the vent, but nothing gets my goat like minimum Troop armies. Best change in modern 40K is making Troops the sole objective holders (for the most part).

THIS.

Nothing like getting consistently laughed at for wanting to field large numbers of tactical marines and then winning a game handily by killing the only two scorers on the other side of the field.

I don't think Tau suck per say, as I have seen them compete and beat in tournies, everything from horde ork to Mechvets, I think that the army in 5th has been made much much more difficult to play, and if you make one mistake now you will lose the game. Much like Dark Eldar they are a "glass cannon" they can take out almost anything with their shooting, but their own survivability is very suspect unless you can keep your oppenents army from bring the bulk of its force to bear on you, which is very very hard to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also to fix Tau fire warriors, take a page from Warhammer fantasy, let them stand and shoot

Redwunz wrote:Sure take the minimum required troops in 5th ed. Go ahead. 66% of the time I'll only need to kill 12 T3 4+sv guys to stop you from winning the game. Sure, you'll say "Well, I also take a ten man kroot squad." Ok, now I have to whack 10 basically naked T3 guys. Sure your motor pool collection of suits and fish varients might kill my army (doubtful), but even if you do the best you can hope for is a draw.
Sorry for the vent, but nothing gets my goat like minimum Troop armies. Best change in modern 40K is making Troops the sole objective holders (for the most part).

That is a major problem with Tau in 5th. Fire Warriors and Kroot are very specialized only capable of going for light/medium infantry. But, with the advent of mech Fire Warriors and Kroot are becoming less and less desirable. That is why most Tau armies don't take a lot of troops as they need the points in Elites and Heavy to deal with the MC, 2+ save units, and Vehicles which have become the norm nowadays. Tau has never been a troop heavy army and is really being punished for it, in objective games at least.

for those who do not play fantasy the rule is as follows, when you charge a ranged unit, most times they have the ability to unload a free round of shooting at you on the way in, people will think twice about charging with 5 assualt marines knowing they will end up needing 12 or 13 armour saves before they even hit combat

Scariest Tau I ever played had almost 40 fire warriors and a nicely balanced set of support choices. Very mobile, very shooty. Two games in a row my only survivor was my Chaplain. That guy probably needed a shrink after the beatings he witnessed.
This Tau player had an answer for every challange, and had the mobility and durability to not only all but table me, but to hold most of the objectives in both games. I almost started a Tau army after that.
That being said I reaffirm my first post and say that they can be hard to use, but can still compete.

Oh yeah. That's at 1500pts

doubled wrote:I don't think Tau suck per say, as I have seen them compete and beat in tournies, everything from horde ork to Mechvets, I think that the army in 5th has been made much much more difficult to play, and if you make one mistake now you will lose the game. Much like Dark Eldar they are a "glass cannon" they can take out almost anything with their shooting, but their own survivability is very suspect unless you can keep your oppenents army from bring the bulk of its force to bear on you, which is very very hard to do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also to fix Tau fire warriors, take a page from Warhammer fantasy, let them stand and shoot

Not familiar with Fantasy, what are you on about?

Redwunz wrote:Sure take the minimum required troops in 5th ed. Go ahead. 66% of the time I'll only need to kill 12 T3 4+sv guys to stop you from winning the game. Sure, you'll say "Well, I also take a ten man kroot squad." Ok, now I have to whack 10 basically naked T3 guys. Sure your motor pool collection of suits and fish varients might kill my army (doubtful), but even if you do the best you can hope for is a draw.
Sorry for the vent, but nothing gets my goat like minimum Troop armies. Best change in modern 40K is making Troops the sole objective holders (for the most part).

Minimum troops as in Squad Size not Minimum Troop allotment.

3 6 Man Squads in 3 Warfishes is 120 points cheaper and pays for itself time and again.

Add in 2 20 man kroot squads.


Like people said its the Tau Mobility taht reigns.

I think 6 w/ a fitted warfish is 175 x 3 + 200 points of kroot still leaves PLENTY of points left over for other items.

My son is 12 and has set aside his just-begun Ultramarines for a Tau army. He is not an Anime buff at all. He just thinks they are cool and look more futuristic than our grim 'deathretro' WWI style assault armies (which I prefer). He also always wanted to play his Marines as a shooty long-distance army anyway! This is a great thread for me to help him build up a nice little force. My son says "Tau don't suck!!"

Hollismason wrote:

Minimum troops as in Squad Size not Minimum Troop allotment.

Fair enough, Troop issues are just my personal beef with the meta out there right now, and while I understand the need to conserve points I also feel that most people just see Troops as something that they have to take to get to the good stuff. I will admit that the Tau Troops choices aren't the sexiest beasts out there, but generally speaking your Troop choices are where the game is won. How many squads/guys/equipment/ect. It's kinda funny, but the more Mech gets hyped, the more comfortable I feel. When 70 pts of guardsmen can kill any single vehicle in the game, that = win in my book. Take all the broadsides and crisis teams you want, but if your opponent has 200 ork boys you are up a creek if you don't have a healthy contingent of Fire Warriors to help thin the horde.

Anyway rant over. It's a game, swing it in whatever way is fun for you.

Well really the benefit of the Tau Transports is that they can still claim objectives with the troops inside.

So 3 Devilfishes with Min squads and kroot is a good choice.

Sure the transport/obj rule is a nice up for the Tau. Fish are decent transports, not great, but not bad.

Point for point, fire warriors are worse at "thinning the horde" than most of the other options that Tau have...

Your argument about taking more than minimum fire warriors seems to swing from "this is how 40k should be played" which of course is just you trying to assert your own preferences onto other people, and "fire warriors are necessary to kill stuff" which I think most people can tell from statistics and in-game use of fire warriors is not true. Fire warriors are bad at killing things, and bad at surviving.

If we're going to point the opinion finger, your post is just your idea about the topic. This is a online forum. It's all about espousing your opinions. I believe Fire Warriors used properly can be effective for their cost. I'm not saying that they are the be all and end all, I just think they are an under used resource. Hell, I'd kill somebody to get a few squads of 4+ sv guys with a S5 guns in my guard army. I've already acknowledged that there are flaws in the Tau army, and as I posted earlier I think after they get codexed they will be truely scary.

Tau are the reason I got back into 40k.

Tau are a little hard to get the hang of at first. I'll admit that I was struggling to figure out how to play them as I usually played IG and Ultramarines (yes, I love em). But eventually I got the hang of them and as other posters have already said, they play very differently than other armies.

You have to play Tau where everything compliments each other. I've found out the hard way that one unit alone is going to get the snot kicked out of him unless you help em out.

For me, once I started to adapt and use similar tactics like I used w/my IG, I did a lot better.

Firewarriors - Use cover to your advantage. That 30'' shot means I'll be shooting you before you shoot me. Get w/in 15'' and I'll unload 24 S5 hits on you. +4 cover save complimented w/some Crisis Suits and your unit most likely will go bye-bye.

Basically, I've learned no unit can operate by themselves w/o the support of the others. Play like the Tau think and preach and you'll do a lot better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redwunz wrote:If we're going to point the opinion finger, your post is just your idea about the topic. This is a online forum. It's all about espousing your opinions. I believe Fire Warriors used properly can be effective for their cost. I'm not saying that they are the be all and end all, I just think they are an under used resource. Hell, I'd kill somebody to get a few squads of 4+ sv guys with a S5 guns in my guard army. I've already acknowledged that there are flaws in the Tau army, and as I posted earlier I think after they get codexed they will be truely scary.

Exactly.

Doombot001 wrote:Tau are the reason I got back into 40k.

Tau are a little hard to get the hang of at first. I'll admit that I was struggling to figure out how to play them as I usually played IG and Ultramarines (yes, I love em). But eventually I got the hang of them and as other posters have already said, they play very differently than other armies.

You have to play Tau where everything compliments each other. I've found out the hard way that one unit alone is going to get the snot kicked out of him unless you help em out.

For me, once I started to adapt and use similar tactics like I used w/my IG, I did a lot better.

Firewarriors - Use cover to your advantage. That 30'' shot means I'll be shooting you before you shoot me. Get w/in 15'' and I'll unload 24 S5 hits on you. +4 cover save complimented w/some Crisis Suits and your unit most likely will go bye-bye.

Basically, I've learned no unit can operate by themselves w/o the support of the others. Play like the Tau think and preach and you'll do a lot better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redwunz wrote:If we're going to point the opinion finger, your post is just your idea about the topic. This is a online forum. It's all about espousing your opinions. I believe Fire Warriors used properly can be effective for their cost. I'm not saying that they are the be all and end all, I just think they are an under used resource. Hell, I'd kill somebody to get a few squads of 4+ sv guys with a S5 guns in my guard army. I've already acknowledged that there are flaws in the Tau army, and as I posted earlier I think after they get codexed they will be truely scary.

Exactly.

Remember that Rapid Fire allows you to shoot twice at 12", regardless of the range of the weapon... and that's the biggest problem with fire warriors. If you're in rapid-fire range, then your opponent is in assault range the next turn, and even with marker light support, they just aren't killy enough to wipe out most enemy units on their own. Yes, you can combine fire, and block assaults with flechette discharger fish and piranhas, but that seems like a lot of effort to support one lackluster unit.

I think that the Tau are one of the scarier armies out there... but honestly, it's the people who give the advice that lots-of-firewarriors is a good way to run an army that keep many Tau players from being competitive.

I still say every unit but kroot need to be BS4.

Canonness Rory wrote:I still say every unit but kroot need to be BS4.

I think that would be a good idea for Tau. It wouldn't increase the effectiveness of the already-great units by a whole lot (broadsides and hammerheads) but it would help units that are a bit overcosted.

I'm not sure that BS4 is the best answer, but it sure would make WS2 a lot easier to take

willydstyle wrote:

Doombot001 wrote:Tau are the reason I got back into 40k.

Tau are a little hard to get the hang of at first. I'll admit that I was struggling to figure out how to play them as I usually played IG and Ultramarines (yes, I love em). But eventually I got the hang of them and as other posters have already said, they play very differently than other armies.

You have to play Tau where everything compliments each other. I've found out the hard way that one unit alone is going to get the snot kicked out of him unless you help em out.

For me, once I started to adapt and use similar tactics like I used w/my IG, I did a lot better.

Firewarriors - Use cover to your advantage. That 30'' shot means I'll be shooting you before you shoot me. Get w/in 15'' and I'll unload 24 S5 hits on you. +4 cover save complimented w/some Crisis Suits and your unit most likely will go bye-bye.

Basically, I've learned no unit can operate by themselves w/o the support of the others. Play like the Tau think and preach and you'll do a lot better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Redwunz wrote:If we're going to point the opinion finger, your post is just your idea about the topic. This is a online forum. It's all about espousing your opinions. I believe Fire Warriors used properly can be effective for their cost. I'm not saying that they are the be all and end all, I just think they are an under used resource. Hell, I'd kill somebody to get a few squads of 4+ sv guys with a S5 guns in my guard army. I've already acknowledged that there are flaws in the Tau army, and as I posted earlier I think after they get codexed they will be truely scary.

Exactly.

Remember that Rapid Fire allows you to shoot twice at 12", regardless of the range of the weapon... and that's the biggest problem with fire warriors. If you're in rapid-fire range, then your opponent is in assault range the next turn, and even with marker light support, they just aren't killy enough to wipe out most enemy units on their own. Yes, you can combine fire, and block assaults with flechette discharger fish and piranhas, but that seems like a lot of effort to support one lackluster unit.

I think that the Tau are one of the scarier armies out there... but honestly, it's the people who give the advice that lots-of-firewarriors is a good way to run an army that keep many Tau players from being competitive.

I agree that taking the load of firewarriors is wrong. Take enough where you're comfortable and don't forget to take something to compliment them. Basing your Tau army solely on FW's is a big mistake. I've learned that whatever it takes, don't get into CC w/them. If it looks like they're going to get assaulted, move away fast. Get some pinning shots so the baddies can't pursue. It's good to hassle the baddie w/your Crisis Suits and Broadsides.

Too bad I've seen many of my Firewarriors get chewed up by Daemon Princes or get run over by an Eldar War Walker...

Doombot001 wrote:
Too bad I've seen many of my Firewarriors get chewed up by Daemon Princes or get run over by an Eldar War Walker...

That is a pain that all of us who play non-assault armies know all too well.

Here is a great idea to make firewarriors not suck. Never disembark them...

Canonness Rory wrote:

augustus5 wrote:

thehod wrote:Our local meta is geared towards assault and trying to kill 10 plague bearers takes an entire Tau army to kill off only 6-7.

...or one squad of firewarriors to blast those PBs off the board before they ever get a chance to assault.

1 Squad of fire warriors rapid-firing at BS5 into a squad of 10 PBs:
24 shots.
20 hits.
10 wounds. (S5 vs T5)
5 pass the cover save. (4+ Cover, it IS 5th edition after all)
2.5 pass FNP. (4+ FNP)

If not in cover:
10 wounds.
7-8 Pass the 5+ Invuln
3-4 Pass FNP

120 points of fire warriors with 2 markerlights can kill 30 points of plaguebearers, or with 3 markerlights can kill 45-60 points. And then every single one dies in assault.

giving firewarriors the benefit of markerlights is a waste, better off with battlesuits or hammerhead/broadside for reduced cover and hopefully negation of FNP.

Linkdead wrote:Here is a great idea to make firewarriors not suck. Never disembark them...

If devilfish had firepoints (and plenty of them) this statement would be true. As it is, while they are onboard a vehicle, they have no way to do damage. Any time you spend points in an army list, it should be on a unit that can damage the enemy (in my opinion at least). Therefore, fire warriors that never have a potential to hurt the baddies still suck.

Here is one for you then. Firewarriors are a 60 point devilfish upgrade that makes it count as scoring.

Pretty Much exactly that.

1 Pathfinder Squad w/ Devilfish

6 Fire Warriors w/ Devilfish

6 Fire Warriors w/ Devilfish

6 Fire Warriors ( get inside Pathfinder Devilfish)

10 Kroot w/ 10 Kroot Hounds


Gives you 4 Scoring Units. Is inexpensive and has plenty of Fire Power. I go SMS to ignore LOS.

Or go with 2 and more Kroot.

Linkdead wrote:Here is one for you then. Firewarriors are a 60 point devilfish upgrade that makes it count as scoring.

Even in an objective mission, having lots of scoring units that can't destroy your opponent's scoring/contesting units is not a reliable way to win. Firewarriors suck.

willydstyle wrote:Firewarriors suck.

Congrats on finally catching up, that's why you only take 6 of them and never let them out of the fish they came in or better yet borrow from pathfinders. Your only compelled to take 6 firewarriors in a list.

In a mech heavy meta game their is no reason tau shouldn't be top tier.

Linkdead wrote:

willydstyle wrote:Firewarriors suck.

Congrats on finally catching up, that's why you only take 6 of them and never let them out of the fish they came in or better yet borrow from pathfinders. Your only compelled to take 6 firewarriors in a list.

In a mech heavy meta game their is no reason tau shouldn't be top tier.

Aren't you the one who is catching up since you've been trying to convince me that 5 of them is worth 60 points for a few posts now You have to take a squad of 6. If you have to spend those points anyways, then you're right, turning a devilfish scoring is useful, but it's not 60 points useful, and it's not enough to make them not suck.

People don't like tau for the Same reason people don't like Chaos, Imperial Gaurd, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Orks, Tyranids, and Necrons. Everyone has differing outlooks and opinions on the game. But people don't like Space Marines because they hog the limelight.

Kroot really are preferable and you can keep them off the board with positional relay.


I dont have my codex handy there is some way to do it involving positional relay, and just not picking the unit so they come in later.

I love TAU first army that got me into the Gameswork-shop universe, why becasue tehy look awesome. plus TAU are a great army as it is a very tactical army to use with great units liek battlesuits using their extra move(Tau Dancing) you cna set youself up for more killing or even tempt your oppenent to charge you then setting yourself up for a BBQ. They area great army and should not be slandered and if used right can own any army out htere even the new broken Guard army

I say this as an owner of about 2k in Tau, repeating a sentiment someone had earlier on in the thread: Tau simply aren't shooty enough for their frailty. And to mech up, you pretty much have to seriously kit out your devilfish, which makes your AV12 transport push rediculous point levels. And, to quote another previous comment, the current melta metagame still makes your 125 point transports pop like 40 point rhinos. I will agree that you don't get a whole lot more anti-mech than 3 broadsides with Advanced Stabilization Systems, but between prevalent cover saves and even more prevalent outflankers/deep strikers, those broadsides are pretty much sitting ducks.

When a sit and shoot army is easily outshot by a rediculously mobile version (eldar) or rediculously inexpensive version (IG), I'm just buying their capability as an army.

shadowseer92 wrote:I love TAU first army that got me into the Gameswork-shop universe, why becasue tehy look awesome. plus TAU are a great army as it is a very tactical army to use with great units liek battlesuits using their extra move(Tau Dancing) you cna set youself up for more killing or even tempt your oppenent to charge you then setting yourself up for a BBQ. They area great army and should not be slandered and if used right can own any army out htere even the new broken Guard army

1. Tau is not an acronym, nor does it need to be shouted. you capitalize the first letter, not the entire word.
2. Spellcheck is your friend, but more importantly, it is the friend of everyone who has the grossly unenviable privilege of reading your posts.
3. JSJ is a well-known tactics that comes from 4th edition terrain rules, it is also good in 5th edition, but it is by NO means hard to beat, battlesuits are MEQs that cost twice as much as terminators for about 175% of the firepower.
4. For something to be slander it has to be untrue.
5. Every army ever, if used right, can scratch a victory against newer armies played by morons.
6. How is the new Guard broken by any stretch of the imagination? Yes, they have some great units, but they do not have anything easily abusable like chaos or orks, anybody who says another army is broken is simply trying to make themselves feel better for losing against it.

Canonness Rory wrote: 1. Tau is not an acronym, nor does it need to be shouted. you capitalize the first letter, not the entire word.
2. spellcheck is your friend, but more importantly, it is the friend of everyone who has the grossly unenviable privilege of reading your post.
3. JSJ is a well-known tactics that comes from 4th edition terrain rules, it is also good in 5th edition, but it is by NO means hard to beat, battlesuits are MEQs that cost twice as much as terminators for about 175% of the firepower.
4. For something to be slander it has to be untrue.
5. Every army ever, if used right, can scratch a victory against newer armies played by morons.
6. How is the new Guard broken by any stretch of the imagination? Yes, they have some great units, but they do not have anything easily abusable like chaos or orks, anybody who says another army is broken is simply trying to make themselves feel better for losing against it.

Okay, so for starters, way to be a tool. Second, if you're going to get on somebody for the gammatical quality of their post could you at least double check yours.

Canonness Rory wrote:I still say every unit but kroot need to be BS4.

Having BS3 but weapon S5 kind of balance each other out. You hit less often but you wound more often. But you can couple this with markerlights and raise that BS to 4 or 5 or remove cover saves and the shootyness of your firewarriors becomes that much more deadly.

I reluctantly used kroot at one time. I didn't like the models at all but felt I needed some kind of screen for my firewarriors and crisis suits to hide behind to slow an enemy's advance. This tactic can work but these days I don't take any kroot or devilfish and instead take more firewarriors. My army performs better now IMO. The only transport I have comes with my pathfinders and I'll load up some firewarriors in it and keep them out of sight until late in the game to seize an objective with.

Canonness Rory wrote:

shadowseer92 wrote:I love TAU first army that got me into the Gameswork-shop universe, why becasue tehy look awesome. plus TAU are a great army as it is a very tactical army to use with great units liek battlesuits using their extra move(Tau Dancing) you cna set youself up for more killing or even tempt your oppenent to charge you then setting yourself up for a BBQ. They area great army and should not be slandered and if used right can own any army out htere even the new broken Guard army

1. Tau is not an acronym, nor does it need to be shouted. you capitalize the first letter, not the entire word.
2. spellcheck is your friend, but more importantly, it is the friend of everyone who has the grossly unenviable privilege of reading your post.
3. JSJ is a well-known tactics that comes from 4th edition terrain rules, it is also good in 5th edition, but it is by NO means hard to beat, battlesuits are MEQs that cost twice as much as terminators for about 175% of the firepower.
4. For something to be slander it has to be untrue.
5. Every army ever, if used right, can scratch a victory against newer armies played by morons.
6. How is the new Guard broken by any stretch of the imagination? Yes, they have some great units, but they do not have anything easily abusable like chaos or orks, anybody who says another army is broken is simply trying to make themselves feel better for losing against it.

Pedant: (ped⋅ant)

-noun

1. a person who makes an excessive or inappropriate display of learning.
2. a person who overemphasizes rules or minor details.
3. a person who adheres rigidly to book knowledge without regard to common sense.
4. Obsolete. a schoolmaster.

Now, normally I'd say you're being a pedant but apparently you're not nearly as learned as you'd like to pretend (See the second point in your list for proof of this.)

Lighten up. The guy was just letting us know he luffs the TAU.

Now, normally I'd say you're being a pedant but apparently you're not nearly as learned as you'd like to pretend (See the second point in your list for proof of this.)

Other than the fact that I forgot to capitalize spellcheck I fail to see any problem with it.

Okay, so for starters, way to be a tool. Second, if you're going to get on somebody for the gammatical quality of their post could you at least double check yours.

Sorry, i had to.

Canonness Rory wrote:

Now, normally I'd say you're being a pedant but apparently you're not nearly as learned as you'd like to pretend (See the second point in your list for proof of this.)

Other than the fact that I forgot to capitalize spellcheck I fail to see any problem with it.

Okay, so for starters, way to be a tool. Second, if you're going to get on somebody for the gammatical quality of their post could you at least double check yours.

Sorry, i had to.

"Every army ever, if used right, can scratch a victory against newer armies played by morons. "

The sentence above is written awkwardly, with a subordinate clause interrupting the main thrust of your thought. At first glance it seems as though you were writing a sentence and decided to write another sentence after your subordinate clause. This is a basic compositional mistake. If you want to ignore the fact that you were being pedantic, I'll just keep going.

I haven't even been posting here that long and I've noticed that you seem to enjoy thrashing other users for their grammatical shortcomings. At the very same time you claim innocence when others call you out on it. You're an English language bully.

You are correct in that I made a mistake, and I apologize for it.
However, you are ignoring the other points of my post, and at the same time making a personal attack against me. You want to see pedantic? That is called an ad hominem and is a logical fallacy, ignoring my arguments and my points in favor of personal attacks. If you wish to have a discussion with me, you may attempt to make some form of argument against my actual points.

Furthermore, I was not making any attacks towards the original poster's grammar. I was telling him to use spellcheck to make his posts somewhat less painful to read.

Attacking a poster's grammar is the easy and super cool way to win arguments on the internets these days.

I know, i used to think I was good at it too ;_;

Canonness Rory wrote:

Okay, so for starters, way to be a tool. Second, if you're going to get on somebody for the gammatical quality of their post could you at least double check yours.

Sorry, i had to.

Hey, If you think my use of gammatical was an accident. . . Yeah. Okay, it was totally an accident.

Is it pronounced Tau like OWL with a Towel.

Or D OW like Dow chemical?

Hollismason wrote:Is it pronounced Tau like OWL with a Towel.

Or D OW like Dow chemical?

I've always pronounced it T-ow as in ouch or cow.

I pronounce it like you would say ow! Only with a 't' at the beginning.

There has been much discussion in the proposed rules section on how to improve Tau. Like it has been mentioned, they have to become a better shooty army. IG can throw down a crazy amount of fire, has the best tanks, and many expendable units. Tau has none of this (maybe good tanks). They really need to be more durable to shooting have the ability to wipe armies at range. Heck, they need more access to anti-tank. Tau is one of the few armies that cannot kill vehicles with troop units. That needs to be fixed.

WRONG

People tend to hate tau because they dont like thier style of play.
if used right they can be a pretty serious army.
nothing else in 40k can set up a gunline like tau can.
plasma weapons that dont overheat means meq get toasted at high speed.
rarely need LoS on some weps due to markers.

suits that can nail a unit then run off before getting shot back.

you say tau suck in cc... well then enter commander farsight!
\

Farsight is cost heavy, and the style of play doesent really suit tau atall.
why play a shooty army if you plan on getting close?

and farsight is far from a hinge in battle, he will never really swing a game your way unless your opponant is dumb enough with his deployment.

Krubb Da Dakka Bringa wrote:WRONG

Krubb, this post counts as spam, which is a violation of the Dakka rules. Click on Rule #1 in my sig for a list of the Dakka rules.

Also, as far as punctuation, spelling and grammar go, please read this post.

Thank you.

One of my early battles was Vs. Tau (my SoB). He had a lot of Kroot combat squads. The Tau had drones that helped them shoot better. I thought it was a very useful/strong opponent. Although they only beat a bunch of Girls.

JD21290 wrote:Farsight is cost heavy, and the style of play doesent really suit tau atall.
why play a shooty army if you plan on getting close?

and farsight is far from a hinge in battle, he will never really swing a game your way unless your opponant is dumb enough with his deployment.

Farsight's a fun model to take on occassion. And they're XV8 battlesuits. They're rarely further than 24" away from the enemy and often take weaponry suited to being up and close. Farsight makes assaulting units less threatening.

I'm not a Tau hater, but I can't say I'm a big fan of the list.

It lacks focus.

It is really difficult to make a balanced list to be effective at Tourney level. XV suits are basically a 2 wound MEQ, which gets killed quite easily.
The tanks are all weak for their points - they only get one shot per turn and Hammerheads are prime targets.

Not to mention - for all the firepower, Tau can't hit the broadside of a bus.

Farsight is kool however and I like his army mods, but not not enough to go and buy an army.

I always like the Pirahna / Kroot Spam
Some dude

As many Kroot as possible

3 x 30 man Kroot w/ Hounds

15 Pirahnas

Honestly i just don't have fun playing against them. Its not a matter of wining or losing or them avoiding CC , but ever time I play them is them shooting for a turn or two then its run and catch the rest of the game its always vary liner and most of there list work this way.

When I had a Tau army, the only army I had fun playing against was the Ork. Only for the comical way I used to win games.

I won a game where a charging Warboss plowed into a full squad of Gun Drones and LOST!!!

Other than that the entire army was just really boring to play.

Honestly, I think Tau Suits are the key here, and many, many pathfinder teams.

Sure, crappy BS3, but with enough Pathfinders you've got some markerlights to disperse around.

I don't see why Tau infantry need anti-tank, or how Tau somehow lack it. Railguns, Fusion Blasters, Hell, Rail Rifles at rear Armor, Plasma Guns, Missile Pods, you name it.

What's nice about Battlesuits is the flexibility they offer. I can take Anti-Tank, Anti-Infantry, or both on 1 suit and can take a squad of 3! Plus, unless I remember incorrectly, I'm pretty sure you can give suits a shield drone for a 4+ invul (IIRC, I don't know)

The drone has a 4+ invulnerable, but the suit does not. The only invulnerable saves the suits get is from shield generators, which take up a hard-point.

Ahhh, so that's what that is.

Thanks.

Still, I think it's worth it.

For 15 points for an ablative Invulnerable wound? Yes, its worth it.

I actually like tau. I don't play them but I like the way they look and even the way they play. Or how my opponent plays them...
Have always a fun battle against them.

Linkdead wrote:Attacking a poster's grammar is the easy and super cool way to win arguments on the internets these days.

I'd say it's the fastest way to make yourself look like a dumbass
You're very likely to make the exact same mistake you're compaining about in the same sentence.

As has been stated, there are very mixed opinions with tau:
Long story short, they need a new codex, immediately, because with the advent of 5th, many pieces of wargear suddenly became pointless, like ASS which formally aloud Broads to move and fire, but in 5th all jet packs have relentless so whats the point?

There is no point for markerlights to be heavy weapons, on the units that are firing them, they only hit half the time anyway and being able to use them on the run makes sense as tau is meant to be a highly mobile army and yet another point is that they have no fast transports...According to fluff, makes no sense.

Crisis, stealth, broads, FW and Pathfinders are way overpriced. Crisis should be 75% of their current cost, broads only need a close shave, FW and PF should be 2-3 points less.

Kroot are debatable. I like them as is, but they can be in a bad way if used improperly. In fact the only thing I would change for kroot is to make their guns assault 1 or 2, 18", as with the new rapid fire rules, and being a CC oriented unit, their guns are practically useless thanks to new rapid fire. Kroot guns(as in on the backs of krootox) should be 48" Heavy 2, and a krootox should have S6 T6. perhaps throwing a save in there could be good as well, and they should be relentless, but still be able to assault.

Almost all vehicles need a price drop. Especially devilfishes if they dont either make them fast or give them something else to make them more useful.

Oh I forgot to mention: Pathfinders, why do they not have some sort of stealth rule or technology...they dont even have infiltrate...they are scouts, but dont scout ahead or blend in? Pointless...

Anyways just my 2c


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Forgot to add, gun drone squads and maybe pathfinders as troops, price drop the drone squads make them stubborn ( they are machines after all, they no fraid o shiza) I mean the idea of a bunch of fast flying drones for cheap is cool, maybe drones could move 12" !! and still have their assault move!!! Woa, crazy thinking!

So where in the Codex does it state broadsides have a jet pack and are relentless?

Dal'yth Dude wrote:So where in the Codex does it state broadsides have a jet pack and are relentless?

Nowhere, but i do believe they have Slow and Purposeful. Could be wrong, don't have the 'dex beside me.

They dont, my point was that ASS makes them relentless but with a difficult terrain move and takes up a hardpoint, where as now in the new rulebook, jet packs grant relentless meaning if thye had access to heavy weapons, crisis and stealths would be better equipped than broadsides who would need the upgrade in order to move and shoot. Contradictions is the idea...

Someone pointed out the only thing that does is make it so that suits can move and fire markerlights.

That is a pointless rule that has been already discussed. Also, the Codex trumps the rulebook by saying you can't move and fire.

Its a weird thing they put in it makes not a damn bit of difference to any army and no army can use the rule

I don't expect GW to make broadsides have relentless any time soon. They certainly don't have it now. They want you to pay extra for the optional move and fire.

If you want to talk useless wargear look at target lock.

Oy do you people even read the codex. Firstly Broadsides don't have jetpacks it states in their codex that they have been removed to facilitate heavy weapons.

Second you need ASS on broadsides so you can fire on turn 1 in dawn of war missions. If you don't take them you lose your first and arguably most important tau shooting phase of the game.

Finally you don't need to take ASS on regular crisis suits because none of them can field heavy weapons.

Codex trumps rulebook is a great argument when you actually read your codex. Crisis teams and Stealth teams are jump infantry and now have the relentless special rule per 5th edition BRB. This also makes marker drones purchased for those squads jump infantry. If you read your codex you would know on page 31 marker drones are the same unit type as their owners. So relentless marker drones can fire their markerlights and still move. Nowhere in the codex does it say you can't move and fire with your marker drone that was a 4th edition rule.

Its been fun reading the back and forth here.

I'd like to take the time to point out that IMHO the Tau are still viable but do not respond well to the super competitive tourney Spam list type of building.For a strong Tau list you have to build a very general list without 3 of the same unit in every choice. When you Spam units in a Tau list it weakens the army, IMO.

I will even postulate that the Tau shouldn't be able to become a top tier competitive army, even with a new codex, unless there is a shift in tournament philosophy away from a system that rewards spam lists. This is because the base Tau philosophy is about teamwork and interdependence. If the Tau could spam a unit and take all comers then that unit would be overpowered for the Tau army. Once again, just my opinion so take it for whatever it is worth.

Someone mentioned the Tau tactica thread. Maybe I'll resurrect it when I'm done writing my Tau Fan-dex. I do agree that the current codex has some very problematic wording and is in need of an update but none of the problems make the army unplayable

BTW,Anyone interested in my progress on the fan-dex can pm me or visit the 29 page how would you fix the Tau in 5th ed page by Mythicalmothman. I'm about 70% done and when I finish I'll still have to transcribe into a pdf format.

later


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ridcully wrote:The drone has a 4+ invulnerable, but the suit does not. The only invulnerable saves the suits get is from shield generators, which take up a hard-point.

Absolutely sure about that? You might want to reread the shield drone profile. There is some of that problematic wording that I've mentioned there. Something about, "shield drone always have the same toughness and armour save as the individuals they accompany" .

focusedfire wrote:
Absolutely sure about that? You might want to reread the shield drone profile. There is some of that problematic wording that I've mentioned there. Something about, "shield drone always have the same toughness and armour save as the individuals they accompany" .

Is that a joke? Right below the close protection rule in bold print is the Invulnerable Save entry that states it has a 4+ Invulnerable save.

Linkdead wrote:

focusedfire wrote:
Absolutely sure about that? You might want to reread the shield drone profile. There is some of that problematic wording that I've mentioned there. Something about, "shield drone always have the same toughness and armour save as the individuals they accompany" .

Is that a joke? Right below the close protection rule in bold print is the Invulnerable Save entry that states it has a 4+ Invulnerable save.

Sort of a Joke. GW told everyone to play them as conferring the inv save upon their controlling model when the Codex came out. This is a problem from 4th edition that no longer exists in 5th. Back in 4th, Inv and Coversaves were all written up under the heading of Armour Saves. This made them all a type of Armor save and thus allowed such to occur. This is because of how the close protection rule was worded. There are still players playing them out of habit like that not realizing that the 5th ed rules have changed this. You can still go in and some stores tell you to play them as conferring the invulnerable.

The overall wording of the drones is still problematic when you realize that they are listed as wargear and there is nothing that says you have to buy a drone controller to buy drones. As the rules are worded the drone controller only limits the number of drones and that any drones under the command of a drone controller then count towards having to take a morale test when assessing casualties. This is just me kicking a dead horse.

Later

ok im currently assembling my Tau army, and looking at other armys stats had me reasonably concerned "whoa wait what! all of your army's units have better stats than mine? what in the greater good am i going to do!?" but i started looking at my weapons and played a small sample game with a friend to learn the rules (he plays marines) and i whomped him the first go and he beat me the second time but we were unbalanced, pointless story short... juggernauts are fairly mean. i have a feeling iv got a challenge on my hand and have to reeealy stratagize what im going to do, as well as gear up right, which is great, i like putting alot of thought into what i do, especially my games, gives me something fun to focus on. Im starting to get excited about my army iv never played and have began investing in, though when i came across this forum all i could think was "why did i have to pick the underdog again" actually iv noticed this opinion of Tau in many places but i am reminded that i like playing an unappreciated class in games so i can show people how high their potential for greatness is when applied appropriately, (I played a Dragoon in FFXI while they were the most disrespected and disregarded classes in the game and after most parties people would message me that they had no idea we could be that powerful.) so i look forward to laying my Tau out on a table top.

i propose one question, how many Tau players here think they suck and wish they had a new army, and how did the new rules effect JSJ? whats the difference between TLOS and LOS? ok that was two...no wait three....blast

response: Tasslehoff

they don't suck, but i'd still like some clarifications in the rules, and maybe some 5th edition re-balances(points or power lvl, or even marker-light usage).

1) JSJ: Gotta be more careful about using that.

Solution: use maximum range, or use solid cover(your own vehicles also work too)

2) LOS: 4th edition rules restricted LOS by making Area Terrain a semisolid obstruction, an Abstraction of terrain features.

TLOS: 5th Ed: Get your head down and LOOK from your model's viewpoint.

some good and some bad things occur.
good: you can shoot anything that you can see
bad: so can they
good: no more target priority(as if anybody actually tried using it)
bad: TLOS is model specific(your group can see the target, but your special weapons guy is sitting behind a wall)

Why do people hate Tau?

Because people take the game too seriously. Its a game.

We have the same problem in the UK with football [US-soccer]. The majority of the population only want to see their team win massive victories all the time. They have no patience and are bereft of vision. In fact, they miss the point of the game. Huge victories are hugely boring.

To me, 40k is about winning with style and panache. Tau are one of the armies who let you do that. They are not an army for power players. That is why I have a Tau army.

As Gwaar! pointed out to me once, the Crisis suits have their own version of relentless that doesn't cover heavy weapons. Page 27 of the codex. But, they don't really get the choice of heavy weapons anyway so I don't see why that even had to be mentioned in the codex >_>

n0t_u wrote:As Gwaar! pointed out to me once, the Crisis suits have their own version of relentless that doesn't cover heavy weapons. Page 27 of the codex. But, they don't really get the choice of heavy weapons anyway so I don't see why that even had to be mentioned in the codex >_>

Because some of their weapons (plasma rifles ect) are rapid fire, they can move and shoot full distance rather than half range.

Tau are at a disadvatage in 40k because they have a very limited scope of units, here is a list of deficiencies:

Morale Vulnerability
No effective assault units at all
No Psychic abilities
No Psychic Defence
No High staying power units
Insufficient quantity of anti tank units

Trying not to degenerate into the minutiae of specific units or army building, I'd like to summarize generally and say the best armies in the game have options for all effective tactics in the rules, but particularly effective assault units (often HQs and Fast Attack Choices), psychic, magic and morale special abilities, and troop choices with staying power (ATSKNF, FNP, Fearless, Squad leaders with CC powers etc.) the entire Tau codex is missing an option for any of that.

Generally that is why they are sub par (in a game play sense).

n0t_u wrote:As Gwaar! pointed out to me once, the Crisis suits have their own version of relentless that doesn't cover heavy weapons. Page 27 of the codex. But, they don't really get the choice of heavy weapons anyway so I don't see why that even had to be mentioned in the codex >_>

Forge world has crisis suits that have SMS's on them. XV 84 i believe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Augustus wrote:Tau are at a disadvatage in 40k because they have a very limited scope of units, here is a list of deficiencies:


Insufficient quantity of anti tank units

a 72 inch ST 10 AP 1 twin linked infantry weapon is not sufficent anti tank? Meta's on deep striking infantry units? meta's on fast skimmers. 32 inch ST 7 assault 2 weapons on jump troops. The only thing that the tau don't have for AT is an ordanence weapon.

@VoxDei- Rail guns are good but not as good as meltas in the current gaming, 4+ coversave on vehicle, enviroment.

Also think abot how many other armies have transports with Anti-light vehicle str 7 weapons where the Tau don't have such.

I have built an army with as much anti-tank as possible and run againt BTs that put everything into transports and landspeeders. Against an assault oriented army that has gone completely mech there just aren't enought shots to get the job done.

Also, Forgeworld pieces are useless if there are no rules in the codex to support how they are equipped.

VoxDei wrote:

n0t_u wrote:As Gwaar! pointed out to me once, the Crisis suits have their own version of relentless that doesn't cover heavy weapons. Page 27 of the codex. But, they don't really get the choice of heavy weapons anyway so I don't see why that even had to be mentioned in the codex >_>

Forge world has crisis suits that have SMS's on them. XV 84 i believe.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Augustus wrote:Tau are at a disadvatage in 40k because they have a very limited scope of units, here is a list of deficiencies:


Insufficient quantity of anti tank units

a 72 inch ST 10 AP 1 twin linked infantry weapon is not sufficent anti tank? Meta's on deep striking infantry units? meta's on fast skimmers. 32 inch ST 7 assault 2 weapons on jump troops. The only thing that the tau don't have for AT is an ordanence weapon.

That seeker missile system is delicious by the by. I can't find an option to equip it in the codex though. It's mentioned, profiled, but not costed.

I think what it comes down to is that the Tau aren't going to blow anybody out and that's just not everyone's cup of tea.

That's the SMART missle system. And you can't buy it but it is part of some suits by default such as the XV88 broadside and if you are playing forge world rules it's part of one of their suits.

VoxDei wrote:

Augustus wrote:quantity of anti tank units

a 72 inch ST 10 AP 1 twin linked infantry weapon is not sufficent anti tank? Meta's on deep striking infantry units? meta's on fast skimmers. 32 inch ST 7 assault 2 weapons on jump troops. The only thing that the tau don't have for AT is an ordanence weapon.

In practice, I dont think they do. 12 inch guns, or 72 inch guns, with no other options besides missiles (36 S7 isn't to bad), but they have to take kamikaze units like drop suits or Pirahnnas, or the tank with the rail gun, or the heavy suits.

No assault units to kill tanks, no troop choices with tank killing ability, no transports with tank killing power.... There are a LOT of holes in the list actually, they only get tank kiling options in Elite Fast and heavy selections , and really the meltagun type units are so melee vulnerable, expensive, and risky if dropped that I think they are all to difficult to get a return on.

It could be potentially very effective, but its not consistent and leaves the Tau player at a disadvantage. Wheres the squad based heavy weapon like imperial armies, or the antitank weapon troop transport to answer a waveserpent or a razorback.

No Gots.

It's a substandard army.

Tau are a finely balanced army IMO, very difficult to play but quite effective if you know how to do it. They have average/good mobility themselves but they are very very good at controlling enemy movement, with piranhas and kroot. They are the only race able to have a decent chance to remove smoke screened land raiders from play with marker lights + railguns and have access to a crap ton of str 7+ weapons with the right build of crisis suits. My dark eldar are terrified of well played Tau and perhaps Eldar...even with specialist assault units avaliable to me I struggle to get them into play vs my friend's Tau unless I use a WWP..assaulting kroot shields don't count unfortauntely =/.

@Augustus- I have to disagree on the no troops with tank killing ability. Emp grenades rock and are better at taking down a monolith than meltas. What other army has such a weapon freely available to its basic trooper.

Now it is true that the cover save bonanza in 5th has cut down considerably on the railguns punch but deepstriking melta squads work pretty well and aren't as suicide as you might think.

I do agree that there need to be improvemed in the midrange weaponry. Either the Ion family or Burst Cannons should get rending.

Speaking of burst cannons they should go up to 24" range for the standard and all devil fish should get the long barreled variety, IMO.

Doing something like this just would cure that mid-range deficiency.

Tau are OK for now but by the time GW gets around to updating them again they will be in dire need of the redo. Best case scenario puts the next update somewhere in the 2011-2012 range as rumors currently stand.

focusedfire wrote:@Augustus- I have to disagree on the no troops with tank killing ability. Emp grenades rock and are better at taking down a monolith than meltas. What other army has such a weapon freely available to its basic trooper.

This was hard to not write as either humor or cynicism, assault with Tau? even vs a tank, that's ludicrous. I have never seen a Tau assault where they used the grenades in all my 5th edition games ever. I think that's an absurd idea.

Now it is true that the cover save bonanza in 5th has cut down considerably on the railguns punch but deepstriking melta squads work pretty well and aren't as suicide as you might think.

Deep striking into 6 inch range with a melta squad? Not sound strategy, unknown arrival time from reserves to DS, risky deployment, expensive unit, and eats up an elite choice, average deviation for DS is 7 inches, that's precisely enough to land you on your target (at 6 inches away) and mishap, or move you out of effective melta range most of the time. I don't even think it is a 50% chance, just to land where you need to be. Also, not a good unit.

I do agree that there need to be improvemed in the midrange weaponry. Either the Ion family or Burst Cannons should get rending.

Indeed

In the meantime, us Tau players do get in some really good practice. Nothing hones your skills like playing at a disadvantage, neh?

(Of course, I'm totally selling out. After my Tau army is done, I'm doing Imperial Guard).

Augustus wrote:This was hard to not write as either humor or cynicism, assault with Tau? even vs a tank, that's ludicrous. I have never seen a Tau assault where they used the grenades in all my 5th edition games ever. I think that's an absurd idea.

I always field a squad armed with the EMPs and carbines just to keep the deep striking monoliths and the drop pod dreadnoughts honest. Have killed both types in game on second turn because of this.

Augustus wrote:Deep striking into 6 inch range with a melta squad? Not sound strategy, unknown arrival time from reserves to DS, risky deployment, expensive unit, and eats up an elite choice, average deviation for DS is 7 inches, that's precisely enough to land you on your target (at 6 inches away) and mishap, or move you out of effective melta range most of the time. I don't even think it is a 50% chance, just to land where you need to be. Also, not a good unit.

Deepstriking within 6" is no problem if the Pathfinders Devilfish is in the right location. My 92 pt "Suicide" Crisis team has a 90% kill ratio and about a 60% survivability rate these days.

The REAL issue with Tau is this.

YOU CANNON MAKE A TAKE ON ALL COMERS LIST!

You can make a list that annihilates MEQs but is decimated by GEQ or Orks.

You can make a list that slaughters horde armies before they usually even get close (kills 75% of their enemy before they can even get there) But then this list would be slaughtered by any Mechanized or MEQ list.

So in a club or small gaming grp where you know what you playing ahead of time, Tau are amazing. However in any situation where you don't know what army your playing before you play them, things will be difficult.

Red_Lives wrote:The REAL issue with Tau is this.

YOU CANNON MAKE A TAKE ON ALL COMERS LIST!

You can make a list that annihilates MEQs but is decimated by GEQ or Orks.

You can make a list that slaughters horde armies before they usually even get close (kills 75% of their enemy before they can even get there) But then this list would be slaughtered by any Mechanized or MEQ list.

So in a club or small gaming grp where you know what you playing ahead of time, Tau are amazing. However in any situation where you don't know what army your playing before you play them, things will be difficult.

Old school gun-lines are still very strong with the Tau.......one or two Broadsides.......2-3 squads of fire warriors, a Crisis team with flamers.....and a Pirana Squad with anti-tank.......sounds generic, but strong against most lists.........build a good list against an Ork Truck list and you will do well against MEQs as well. Broadsides blow up the Truck/Rino/Chimera and then overwhelm the unit with 30 St5 shots at 30".......even against SMs you will flood them with dice till they drop.

Tell me that the Eldar have an easier time making a All Comers list..........we have it even worse, our units are TOO specialized.......

I agree with Red_Lives -it extremely difficult to field a cadre which can compete on tournaments, since you have to balance the exact amount of heavy anti-tank weaponry against masses of pulse rifle shots for infantry hordes and stay mobile at the same time. But it is possible.
Sadly, other armies answer that problem with E-fists, swords and claws. Its far easier to beat up people than to shoot them in 40k.

I played Tau from their very beginning and I was very happy about their new Codex, the older one was really bad, giving you a list that could not compete with armies that fielded 3+armour en masse, units were even more expensive and had less options than now.

However, I noticed that a good fireplan with markers in all firewarrior units and a squad of pathfinders makes your shooting phase devastating.
I played on a tournament which mission used night fighting in the first turn and all my opponents gave me that turn just to see what the new marker light rules did to their armies. Night fighting does not bother you and cover becomes obsolete if you use your markers correctly.

@t focusedfire: I never used Carbines and EMP- grenades but I think your idea how to use them is great.

You know, it seems like the Tau are a decimal point army. Not a 3 or a 4 on a d6 but a 3.4-3.5 army. To build a good all comers list you end up with a army that is very succeptible to the vagries of chance. That if your dice deflect by a tenth of a percentage point it will mean the difference between a decent win or heavy loss against an equally skilled opponent.

Not sure if my meaning is getting through. I'm still happy with my Tau(Rules wording is a different matter) and I win more than I lose. Just seems that when you build an all comers generic list with them that they are a little more chancey than some other armies.

Its early and I'm probably rambling.