xmbk wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being twice as effective as a lasgun against T8+ is not very significant as you're twice as effective as possibly the worst choice to kill that kind of unit. And IG can field over twice as many Lasguns as our Pulse Rifles for similar cost.

Also better against T4 and T5. Plus T3, T6 and T7 when compared to S3, the original point. S5 clearly is meaningful.

I don't think anyone is claiming that S5 brings no advantage over S3/4, just that new wound tables have reduced the advantage and much of the time, there is no functional difference between S4 and S5 shooting. It is even clearer in case of Railgun, S10 is for nearly every situation no better than S9.

I noticed our crisis and stealth suits do not have the drone support special rule. What happens when you manta strike/infiltrate a unit of suits with drones?

 lambsandlions wrote:
I noticed our crisis and stealth suits do not have the drone support special rule. What happens when you manta strike/infiltrate a unit of suits with drones?

I believe this is an oversight (one of the many accross all indexes). I'd play you can manta strike/infiltrate with them as normal, or it falls on itself

Yeah, I just assumed you deploy them however you want (deep strike, infiltrate, normally, etc.) and then use them as per normal drone rules.

Also not sure if this has been discussed but riptides can take two support systems. Can they take two advanced targeting systems and get -2 to their AP? AP-2 smart missile systems just seem brutal and ap-4 heaver burst cannon will mow down MEQs.

 lambsandlions wrote:
Also not sure if this has been discussed but riptides can take two support systems. Can they take two advanced targeting systems and get -2 to their AP? AP-2 smart missile systems just seem brutal and ap-4 heaver burst cannon will mow down MEQs.

The Support System table header says that a model cannot have more than 1 copy of the same item

Backfire wrote:

xmbk wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being twice as effective as a lasgun against T8+ is not very significant as you're twice as effective as possibly the worst choice to kill that kind of unit. And IG can field over twice as many Lasguns as our Pulse Rifles for similar cost.

Also better against T4 and T5. Plus T3, T6 and T7 when compared to S3, the original point. S5 clearly is meaningful.

I don't think anyone is claiming that S5 brings no advantage over S3/4, just that new wound tables have reduced the advantage and much of the time, there is no functional difference between S4 and S5 shooting. It is even clearer in case of Railgun, S10 is for nearly every situation no better than S9.

Of course, it all revolves around the cost. I doubt railguns pay much for the S10 over S9, but they do for -4 AP. S5 is still significant army wide over S4, it's just a question of how much is being paid for it. I'd say FW and drones are solid for their price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:

xmbk wrote:
Three games now with a 9-flamer suit team using the homing beacon. Great results against SM and IG. Can really impact your opponent's strategy.

9 Crisis Suits with Flamers?
By the way, Crisis Suits can now use and fire 3 Weapons each. Meaning 9 Suits would be 27d6.
This would also be 69 points per suit, or 621 points. (ATS would be 1 point per suit cheaper, or 612 points)

As far as TriFlamers vs TwinFlamer ATS
vs MEQ
27 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/3 = 15.75
18 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/2 = 15.75

vs GEQ
27 * 3.5 * 2/3 * 2/3 = 42
18 * 3.5 * 2/3 * 5/6 = 35

vs BEQ
27 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 5/6 = 39.37
18 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 6/6 = 31.5

vs TEQ
27 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/6 = 7.87
18 * 3.5 * 1/2 * 1/3 = 10.5

vs Rhino/Dread
27 * 3.5 * 1/3 * 1/3 = 10.5
18 * 3.5 * 1/3 * 1/2 = 10.5

Lol, sorry. 9 flamers on 3 suits. A 9-suit team would be crazy risky in this edition, imo. Points denial and pray for kill points?

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Can't believe this argument is still happening. I realise most people are (sensibly) ignoring it.

It isn't complicated. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only refer to one weapon. If they wanted you to be able to nova charge both they'd have said "use the nova charge profiles for its weapons", or something like that.

Backfire wrote:

xmbk wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

Being twice as effective as a lasgun against T8+ is not very significant as you're twice as effective as possibly the worst choice to kill that kind of unit. And IG can field over twice as many Lasguns as our Pulse Rifles for similar cost.

Also better against T4 and T5. Plus T3, T6 and T7 when compared to S3, the original point. S5 clearly is meaningful.

I don't think anyone is claiming that S5 brings no advantage over S3/4, just that new wound tables have reduced the advantage and much of the time, there is no functional difference between S4 and S5 shooting. It is even clearer in case of Railgun, S10 is for nearly every situation no better than S9.

This was exactly my point, thank you for articulating it better. Exalted.

So yeah, first 8th edition tournament coming up and I'm out of ideas. I don't really have the models for more skewy lists like commander spam or gun drone spam so I was thinking of more traditional approach, a gunline of fire warriors and long range dakka behind it. Probably surge and couple of hammerheads or something. What do you guys think I should compliment the gunline with?

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Please stop polluting the Tactics thread with this, it's not helpful/interesting/useful.

Does anyone have any ideas or would like to make a guess on Tetras?

Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

Pottsey wrote:
Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

With split fire you have the options to mark multiple targets with a small rerolls of 1 buff, or you can go ham and really mark one or two units that need killing.

its flexible but otherwise fair.

Mandragola wrote:

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Again....the written language has perception and tone. Use your own advice and understand basic language:

A Weapon can mean what you say or something else because it depends on what the writer meant. I read it that the writer is explaining in detail what "one" weapon can do, but isn't stating that another of the weapons can't. He may mean that, but it is written in the context of, "I am now talking about one weapon" Writing it better would be to explain the before and after. (example, this weapon can and this weapon can.....followed by.....this weapon can't and this weapon can't). The writer doesn't due to space on the data sheet.

Pottsey wrote:
Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

The biggest thing for me is that we cannot achieve BS2+ anymore, unless the unit has a native BS3+ AND you manage to get 5 MLs (as battle reports are coming out, it's common to notice it's not easy to get the 5th ML hit), not there are cost-effective BS2+ ML sources, like the now dead Mark'O. Also, the juicy benefits (+1 to hit and ignore cover) are too far on the scale, while stuff like seeker missiles need just 2 ML. It makes you use mostly the 1 ML hit. why have a table, then?
If the table at least gave 2 results of improving to hit, it would be way better (prolly at 2 and 4 ML hits).
But it's not dead, just feels weaker.

Mandragola wrote:
Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Using that logic it can only fire a single weapon that has a nova profile period when overcharging and are no longer allowed to shoot the others. Nobody is denying that 'a weapon' is singular, obviously one weapon cannot fire using another weapons nova profile which is what that part of the rule simply states, that weapons that have a nova profile can use it when the nova charge rule is active. However the whole rule isn't talking about single weapons, it is talking about while firing which means all weapons. The key point you are missing is that the first part of the rule that says 'When firing the y'vhara can ...',

Also, your 2nd point is also flawed. If they would have needed to write weapons to allow multiples, they should also have need to write one, or single, to restrict it. To me it reads while(shooting weapons) { if(weapon.hasnovaprofile && novacharged){ weapon.shootwithnovaprofile} else { weapon.shootnormally }}. You are free to play it your way I guess .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:
The biggest thing for me is that we cannot achieve BS2+ anymore, unless the unit has a native BS3+ AND you manage to get 5 MLs (as battle reports are coming out, it's common to notice it's not easy to get the 5th ML hit), not there are cost-effective BS2+ ML sources, like the now dead Mark'O. Also, the juicy benefits (+1 to hit and ignore cover) are too far on the scale, while stuff like seeker missiles need just 2 ML. It makes you use mostly the 1 ML hit. why have a table, then?
If the table at least gave 2 results of improving to hit, it would be way better (prolly at 2 and 4 ML hits).
But it's not dead, just feels weaker.

Also keep in mind almost nothing gets cover anymore, you have to be inside a piece of terrain to get any cover, no more hiding 50% behind buildings or intervening units, so even ignore cover from markerlights isnt a big benefit most of the time.

Mandragola wrote:

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Dude, you are a native speaker...
Grab a dictionary, look up what an indefinite article is.

"She was last seen wearing a blue jacket and a blue and white blouse."
This sentence is not about how many jackets or blouses she wears. It uses indefinite articles, which are used to refer to non specific things.

"May fire using a weapon's nova profile"
This sentence again, uses indefinite articles. It does not specifiy which weapon's nova profile. It neither says how many weapons. The sentence does not limit the amount of nova profiles you may use.

MoD_Legion wrote:

Mandragola wrote:
Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Using that logic it can only fire a single weapon that has a nova profile period when overcharging and are no longer allowed to shoot the others. Nobody is denying that 'a weapon' is singular, obviously one weapon cannot fire using another weapons nova profile which is what that part of the rule simply states, that weapons that have a nova profile can use it when the nova charge rule is active. However the whole rule isn't talking about single weapons, it is talking about while firing which means all weapons. The key point you are missing is that the first part of the rule that says 'When firing the y'vhara can ...',

Also, your 2nd point is also flawed. If they would have needed to write weapons to allow multiples, they should also have need to write one, or single, to restrict it. To me it reads while(shooting weapons) { if(weapon.hasnovaprofile && novacharged){ weapon.shootwithnovaprofile} else { weapon.shootnormally }}. You are free to play it your way I guess .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vector Strike wrote:
The biggest thing for me is that we cannot achieve BS2+ anymore, unless the unit has a native BS3+ AND you manage to get 5 MLs (as battle reports are coming out, it's common to notice it's not easy to get the 5th ML hit), not there are cost-effective BS2+ ML sources, like the now dead Mark'O. Also, the juicy benefits (+1 to hit and ignore cover) are too far on the scale, while stuff like seeker missiles need just 2 ML. It makes you use mostly the 1 ML hit. why have a table, then?
If the table at least gave 2 results of improving to hit, it would be way better (prolly at 2 and 4 ML hits).
But it's not dead, just feels weaker.

Also keep in mind almost nothing gets cover anymore, you have to be inside a piece of terrain to get any cover, no more hiding 50% behind buildings or intervening units, so even ignore cover from markerlights isnt a big benefit most of the time.

Not sure I fully agree with that as although there are less ways to get cover its still easy(assuming you are playing with the battlefield terrain full rules). You don’t just need to be within terrain to get cover. Being on a ruin still gives cover, behind barricades still give cover, same for behind hills still cover.

I would say removing cover is a bigger benefit than ever before. In last edition units with a 3+ save often didn’t care about cover as the armour save was better. Now that +3 armour save becomes 2+ behind cove and if I understand it right 2+ becomes 1+ so surly a lot more people will be trying to make use of cover now, when they didn’t use it in the past.

there is nothing like a 1+.
1 always fails.

Aeri wrote:
there is nothing like a 1+.
1 always fails.

1 always fails but a 1+ save model (say a Terminator in cover) hit by an AP4 weapon only drops to a 5+.

Is this right? A tank with 1 drone attached and the drones dies will cause the tank to take a LD test and if failed the tank is removed?

EDIT: I see that's not right. Drones embarked don't count towards models in a unit so wont trigger a LD.

Pottsey wrote:
Not sure I fully agree with that as although there are less ways to get cover its still easy(assuming you are playing with the battlefield terrain full rules). You don’t just need to be within terrain to get cover. Being on a ruin still gives cover, behind barricades still give cover, same for behind hills still cover.

I would say removing cover is a bigger benefit than ever before. In last edition units with a 3+ save often didn’t care about cover as the armour save was better. Now that +3 armour save becomes 2+ behind cove and if I understand it right 2+ becomes 1+ so surly a lot more people will be trying to make use of cover now, when they didn’t use it in the past.

From I remember reading in the leaks and what I've heard in battle reports you need to be in area terrain for cover (so yes that includes in a ruin) and for vehicles and monsters you also need to be 50% hidden. I think barricades were only mentioned for hand to hand fighting that you can fight over them but hills definitely don't give cover in 8th, no intervening anything ever does. Fair enough this does depend on your board setup how much cover you can get, my buildings are ruins and I have other area terrain, but fortifications like skyshield pad etc all dont give any cover. Your point about cover itself is still true, when something does have it it is more powerful than before, but I think less things will be benefiting from it, at least in my experience you have to leave your area terrain at some point . In either case since every unit has free split fire now its still fairly easy to not overshoot markerlights on targets, if you need cover, just dump lights on it till you have enough. You can even split shooting markerlights from 2 units 50/50 to the same two targets so the 2nd unit shooting can reroll 1's thanks to the first unit.

disclaimer: I'm getting my rule book tomorrow so I might not actually be correct

MoD_Legion wrote:

Pottsey wrote:
Not sure I fully agree with that as although there are less ways to get cover its still easy(assuming you are playing with the battlefield terrain full rules). You don’t just need to be within terrain to get cover. Being on a ruin still gives cover, behind barricades still give cover, same for behind hills still cover.


I would say removing cover is a bigger benefit than ever before. In last edition units with a 3+ save often didn’t care about cover as the armour save was better. Now that +3 armour save becomes 2+ behind cove and if I understand it right 2+ becomes 1+ so surly a lot more people will be trying to make use of cover now, when they didn’t use it in
the past.

From I remember reading in the leaks and what I've heard in battle reports you need to be in area terrain for cover (so yes that includes in a ruin) and for vehicles and monsters you also need to be 50% hidden. I think barricades were only mentioned for hand to hand fighting that you can fight over them but hills definitely don't give cover in 8th, no intervening anything ever does. Fair enough this does depend on your board setup how much cover you can get, my buildings are ruins and I have other area terrain, but fortifications like skyshield pad etc all dont give any cover. Your point about cover itself is still true, when something does have it it is more powerful than before, but I think less things will be benefiting from it, at least in my experience you have to leave your area terrain at some point . In either case since every unit has free split fire now its still fairly easy to not overshoot markerlights on targets, if you need cover, just dump lights on it till you have enough. You can even split shooting markerlights from 2 units 50/50 to the same two targets so the 2nd unit shooting can reroll 1's thanks to the first unit.

disclaimer: I'm getting my rule book tomorrow so I might not actually be correct

It looks like there are two sets of rules for cover and you can choose to play with either. Under the battlefield section there are expanded cover rules.

So got my first game of 8th in on Saturday. Tau vs Tau 2000 point mirror match. We rolled up missions scouring with 12" opposing deployments.

My opponent list: Dylan

Stormsurge w/ Pulse Driver Cannon & -1 rend & Move and Shoot w/out penalty (later he realized the redundancy as storm surges can due this naturally). He should have taken a 4++ shield.
Riptide with Ion Accelerator & Smart Missiles & -1 rend, & Move and Shoot w/out penalty + 2 marker drones
3 crisis suits w/ dual Burst Cannons & -1 rend + 2 marker drones
3 crisis suits w/ ? & Missile Launchers & -1 rend + 2 marker drones
3 crisis suits w/ melta gun and plasma & -1 rend + 2 marker drones
5 Fire Warrior Strikes + 2 marker drones
5 Fire Warrior Strikes + 2 marker drones
5 Fire Warrior Strikes + 2 marker drones
Ethereal
Fire Blade
Farsight

+4 CP

My list:

10 Fire warrior strikes
10 Fire warrior strikes
10 Fire warrior strikes
9 Breachers + Devil Fish
10 Kroot
6 Gun Drones
6 Gun Drones
2 Broadsides w/ HYMP & EWO + 4 Marker Drones
Commander w/ 4 Fusions Guns + 2 Gun Drones
Commander w/ 4 Fusions Guns + 2 Gun Drones
Commander w/ 3 Missile Pods & Drone Controller + 2 Marker Drones
3 crisis suits w/ dual Fusion Guns & 1 with Drone Controller & 2 with re-roll 1's + 2 marker drones
Ethereal w Hover Drone
5 pathfinder plus pulse acceleration drone + 6 " for pulse weaponry.

+ 6 CP

He has 3 objectives scattered across his deployment, I have two in mine. Last objective is in the center.

Deployment: We take turns deploying.

Dylan: Farsight and Crisis Suits are Manta Striking (Deep striking basically). Each of his 5 man warriors get placed on an objective. Ethereal behind the center Fire Warrior squad. Fire Blade behind the right flank Fire Warriors. Storm surge centered. Riptide on left flank. Everything but the Stormsurge is in cover providing terrain.

Mine: Commanders and Crisis Suits are Manta Striking. Kroot is on my right flank. Left Center is a unit of fire warriors, pathfinders + drone , and gun drone squad. Dead Center is my Ethereal and Gun Drones. Right Center is broadsides + Drones and 2 fire warrior squads. Right Center is the devil fish + breachers. Everything but my Ethereal is in cover providing terrain.

Dylan finishes deployment first and I fail to seize.

Turn One: Dylan moves his army forward and drops Farsight (his Warlord) on my far left flank but not into terrain. He also drops his burst cannon suits about 13+ inches from my front line in cover providing terrain. Shooting, his marker light drones fail to hit as he doesn't have a drone controller nearby and he can't roll above a 4. He then fires his small arms fire into several of my Fire Warrior Squads and the Kroot, Killing 10 or so Firewarriors from 3 different Squads and 3 Kroot. The big guns go after my Broadsides but end up killing nearby drones instead (savior protocals). He fails to assault Farsight into a nearby Fire Warrior Squad even after re rolling one of the charge dice and takes 2 wounds from overwatch. Ethereal is within 6" off most of my army and his leadership 9 helps me pass all my morale tests except for the lonely Kroot who only lose 1.

Note EWO only has a 12" range now and since you will likely be screening your broadsides, it is likely that your opponent can deploy an assault troop win the 10" range of one of your units and outside of the EWO threat range. So I don't see this being very useful now unless you are fielding an un-screened stormsurge.

My turn: Ethereal takes the re roll 1 ability for Stationary Battlesuits & Infantry and moves up. 1 squad of gun drones moves towards Farsight while my second depleted squad moves towards the crisis suits. Breachers get out of the devilfish and advance towards the crisis suits but are outside of 5" range :(. Devil fish advanced forward. Kroot advance up slightly and I forget to shoot with them. Crisis Suits + Fusion Commanders and drones deploy in a pocket right of the storm surge and into cover providing terrain; half of the marker drones however have to be placed out of cover. Note: Finding pockets in the backfield that are more than 9" away from all enemy units is going to be tricky. Missile Commander + Drones drops down by my Ethereal. I start with my marker lights, having my drone assisted 2 man marker drones (near the missile commander) fire first on the storm surge so as to get the reroll 1's for my next volley. In the end, my marker lights place 5 hits on the storm surge and 4 on the Bust cannon suits. It takes the combined fire of all three melta-squads and the missile commander to take the stormsurge out. I use a CP to reroll a melta damage roll from a 1 to a 5. Breachers, Broadsides, 1 Gun Drone Squad, and two Fire Warrior Squads fires into the Burst Cannon Crisis Squad for 1 wound. Second Gun Drone Squad and 3rd Fire Warrior Squad take 2 more wounds off of Farsight.

Note: I couldn't utilize MONTKA when I dropped so having the +1 to hit from 5 Markerlights was critical for my melta squad...otherwise I would have failed several to hit rolls and not killed the Storm Surge.

Turn 2: Dylan back peddles his entire army towards my 3 melta squads. His marker lights continue to fail and he only gets 1 hit on the marker drone squad and 1 hit on the crisis suit squad. Really wishing he had some drone controllers now. He uses his small arms fire to remove most of my marker and gun drones, however, I manage to keep 3 alive. Then his riptide fires into my Crisis Suits (Closest Unit) and I pass them off, slaying two more drones. Farsight shoots and slays two pathfinders and dies to over watch when he charges in.

My turn: Ethereal takes the re roll 1 ability for Stationary Battlesuits and Infantry and moves up while still staying within 6" of the pathfinder and broadside unit. Units in my backfield move up except the broadsides and the pathfinders. My melta suits stay still and one of the melta commanders calls Maunta (re roll shooting hits for units that don't move this turn). Marker-light shooting scores 4 hits on Dylan's Melta/Plasma Crisis Squad and 1 hit on his Missile Crisis Squad. Gun Drones shooting the nearest units is pretty fruitless as it ends up bouncing off his Burst Cannon Squad with a 2+ saves due to cover. Dylan uses a CP to re roll a 2+ save. I then proceed to fire all my small arms and wipe out half of his marker drones, particularly the ones near the melta suites and burst cannon suits. Fusion commanders and the 2 remaining fusion suits wipe his missile and melta suites. I use a CP to re roll a melta damage result. Missile Commander and Broadsides wipe his Burst Cannon Suites. We go ahead and call the game as my firepower can wipe all his fire-warriors next turn, leaving him with just two characters and a riptide.

Take away:

I don't see myself going 1st against a whole lot of armies and thanks to drones splitting, I'm going to have a lot of easy kill points for first blood...thankfully the maelstrom cards have a small number of VP for slaying units.

Pathfinders: Seam OK for a cheap source of marker-lights and can also fire over watch. Plus you can get a pulse accelerator drone for 8 points, which is small enough that you should be able to hide it first turn and then move it to support your advancing gun drones or stationary fire base with 6" of additional range.

Ethereal: Real value is in the leadership 9 6" bubble which makes it easy for me to pass or limit morale test damage on either advancing gun drones or strike teams. Hover-board allows gives him FLY and 8" Movement, allowing him to keep up with gun drones and more easily get away from combats that consolidate into him. He does gain Battle-Suite Keyword and thus can't be taken in a Devilfish. Being able to reroll 1's was an added benefit, though redundant with Markerlights. I like him. Dylan who spread his fire warriors out and was always moving had much less benefit from his.

Devil Fish: Lackluster in this game, 12 Str 5 shots at BS 4 and no rend -- that I already had plenty of from far cheaper platforms. Basically provides protection. Can't fire the breachers out of it. You can consolidate drops by combining I'll usually be going second to large number of drops so if the ethereal is not on the table, then I'll be losing morale tests to my opponents alpha strike. Seams like you would be better served with a unit that has more firepower for the points.

Breachers: Lackluster in this game...really hard trying to get in that 5" goodness range as Devilfish sadly is not open-topped and you have to disembark before the Devil Fish Moves so you only have a 14" threat range with the much desired -2 rend unless you advance and take the -1 to hit .

Firewarriors: Seam OK. Cheap, good range and synergized with my ethereal + Pulse Accelerator Drone.

Broadsides: Lackluster in this game...due to lack of rends on Smart Missiles and HYMP combined with poor rolling. Would have benefited more from Advanced Targeting System to boost my rends rather than EWO. As it stayed still, it can synergized with the Ethereal or Montka. Very, very expensive now.

Markerlights: Did well and I didn't feel like I had an excess. Drone controller was key. Was able to get cover reduction and re-roll ones constantly on units I wanted dead. Helps to support my deep-striking units. Also provides soaks wounds for battlesuits in a pinch. Having a unit of Marker drones drop with Battlesuits can keep them from being alpha struck off the table.

Gun Drones: Did well with the drone controller and soaks wounds for battle suits. Fast moving and can be deepstriked if accompanying crisis suits and commanders.

Commanders: Worked well for me. The fusion was better, but having a missile commander in the backfield with the advancing drones was also good. BS 2+ is very good. Being able to call Montka was amazing...but probably situational...how often will you be able to afford standing still with your army? Definitely jealous of armies that have characters that allows re rolls every turn.

Crisis Suits: Dual fusion worked well for me and you can have 6 drones accompany them on the drop. Burst Cannons on Crisis platforms are expensive and it didn't seam worth the investment as you can get that from gun drones.

Farsight: Lackluster. Not really great at close combat, not really great at shooting. Being able to call MONTKA twice in a game is a benifit but seams very situational as the units can't move. He made a mistake by dropping him unsupported. I'll pass.

Riptide: Lackluster this game. I just ignored during the game and passed his best firepower onto my nearby drones. Very expensive platform for little damage output but extremely resilient with a 2+/3++. He suffered 3 wounds this game due to overheating and nova charges.

Stormsurge: Lackluster this game as he died right away to my Beta Strike. Dylan missed out on the 4++ save. Always take that. Better firepower to cost ratio than the riptide and would have survived my alpha if he had had a 4++ save.

Fireblade: Lackluster this game. Dylan's firewarriors were too spread out and too MSU to benefit from this cheap HQ. Also harder to keep up with gun drones as he lacks Fly and only has a 6" move.


On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

 wyomingfox wrote:

On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

I bet they're still playing

 Vector Strike wrote:

 wyomingfox wrote:

On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

I bet they're still playing

I found their lack of devastation disturbing

 Vector Strike wrote:

 wyomingfox wrote:

On the other table was two opposing necron players. When I left they had only lost a handful of models each by turn 4 due to Ghost Arcs allowing a second reanimation roll and Technmancers generating +1 to reanimation.

I bet they're still playing

I think I found some footage from their table:

I know very few people own them but has anyone tried the tidewall drone port? You can load it up with 4 marker drones and put fireblade cadre on top for a source of 2+ markerlights. Even better you can have cadre fire first so your drones are hitting on 2+ rerollable. Because The drones in the tidewall turn 1 they are much harder to alphastrike. You could also put a pathfinder team with heavy weapons and darkstrider for extra markerlights.

I want to play Tidwalls with Drones and that Character for Markerlight spam!

Im new to Tau looking to start so i dont know all the names yet.

Try to get Index Xenos 2 and take some time reading the Tau section. Even if we have less unit options than most of other armies, there are quite a lot nonetheless

Firesight Marksman might be a better idea than Cadre Fireblade, as he's almost half its price, albeit at BS3+.

Pottsey wrote:
Why are people saying markerlights are dead? In a way they seem more powerful than ever before. So 5 tokens means your entire army not just 1 unit gets reroll 1’s, +1Hit after reroll miss’s, no cover save and the rest against that unit.

The cumulative stacking and effecting your entire army is a boost isn’t it?

IMHO Tau are a swiss army knife, each tool has a use and if you multiple units to take down something with 5+ marker lights, your wasting potential.

I've been using 1 markerlight on target. from either Firesights or Fireblades and units with BS3+ or better and getting the reroll and be done with it.

Played my fifth game of 8th last night. I got absolutely steamrolled by Death Guard; battle report is up in the BR section.

But, for those TL;DR folks out there, a couple quick hits:

I took a top heavy army with a Stormsurge at 1000 points. His D Missiles whiffed, even anchored, and Daemon invul saves blocked the majority of his Pulse Driver wounds. Gentlemen, he isn't worth it. You can take 3 Fusion Commanders for that many points, and they will do far more damage than his D Missiles and Pulse Driver will. The rest of his weapons are your standard S5 spam that our infantry do so well.

Darkstrider is amazing. I even forgot his -1T debuff and he was still awesome. 45 Points for a scout move, and more importantly, the ability to Fall Back and still shoot. He works wonders with Breachers.

Speaking of which, I thought Breachers had been usurped by Vespid. Granted, I haven't tried the latter yet but I think they still have a place. 10 Breachers and Darkstrider in a Fish is 252 Points. They can get where they want, storm an objective and take it. And they're low enough on the target priority totem pole that they can survive long enough to do the job.

The 8th terrain rules are terrible. True LOS was elegant and simple. The return of area terrain, with units having to be wholly within to gain cover, and monsters and vehicles needing to be wholly within AND obscured, means that functionally no one ever has a cover save unless they're literally out of LOS. Stupid. I hope they bring the old terrain rules back in 8th ed 2.0 in a year or two.

 The Shrike wrote:
Played my fifth game of 8th last night. I got absolutely steamrolled by Death Guard; battle report is up in the BR section.

But, for those TL;DR folks out there, a couple quick hits:

I took a top heavy army with a Stormsurge at 1000 points. His D Missiles whiffed, even anchored, and Daemon invul saves blocked the majority of his Pulse Driver wounds. Gentlemen, he isn't worth it. You can take 3 Fusion Commanders for that many points, and they will do far more damage than his D Missiles and Pulse Driver will. The rest of his weapons are your standard S5 spam that our infantry do so well.

Darkstrider is amazing. I even forgot his -1T debuff and he was still awesome. 45 Points for a scout move, and more importantly, the ability to Fall Back and still shoot. He works wonders with Breachers.

Speaking of which, I thought Breachers had been usurped by Vespid. Granted, I haven't tried the latter yet but I think they still have a place. 10 Breachers and Darkstrider in a Fish is 252 Points. They can get where they want, storm an objective and take it. And they're low enough on the target priority totem pole that they can survive long enough to do the job.

The 8th terrain rules are terrible. True LOS was elegant and simple. The return of area terrain, with units having to be wholly within to gain cover, and monsters and vehicles needing to be wholly within AND obscured, means that functionally no one ever has a cover save unless they're literally out of LOS. Stupid. I hope they bring the old terrain rules back in 8th ed 2.0 in a year or two.

Are you aware there are 2 sets of terrain rules in the main rulebook and the 2nd set has expanded cover rules. With the 2nd set just being behind a barricade gives cover.

Aeri wrote:

Mandragola wrote:

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Dude, you are a native speaker...
Grab a dictionary, look up what an indefinite article is.

"She was last seen wearing a blue jacket and a blue and white blouse."
This sentence is not about how many jackets or blouses she wears. It uses indefinite articles, which are used to refer to non specific things.

"May fire using a weapon's nova profile"
This sentence again, uses indefinite articles. It does not specifiy which weapon's nova profile. It neither says how many weapons. The sentence does not limit the amount of nova profiles you may use.

How are you firing more than 1 nova charged weapon when the riptide is only allowed to bring either the HBC or the Ion Accelerator? There isn't a ripple fire profile, nor nova smart missiles, etc. you have no point because you are never allowed to bring more than 1 weapon capable of nova charging.

So yes, it can shoot an infinite number of nova profile weapons that it is equipped with, but it can only ever be equipped with 1.

 The Shrike wrote:
Played my fifth game of 8th last night. I got absolutely steamrolled by Death Guard; battle report is up in the BR section.

But, for those TL;DR folks out there, a couple quick hits:

I took a top heavy army with a Stormsurge at 1000 points. His D Missiles whiffed, even anchored, and Daemon invul saves blocked the majority of his Pulse Driver wounds. Gentlemen, he isn't worth it. You can take 3 Fusion Commanders for that many points, and they will do far more damage than his D Missiles and Pulse Driver will. The rest of his weapons are your standard S5 spam that our infantry do so well.

Darkstrider is amazing. I even forgot his -1T debuff and he was still awesome. 45 Points for a scout move, and more importantly, the ability to Fall Back and still shoot. He works wonders with Breachers.

Speaking of which, I thought Breachers had been usurped by Vespid. Granted, I haven't tried the latter yet but I think they still have a place. 10 Breachers and Darkstrider in a Fish is 252 Points. They can get where they want, storm an objective and take it. And they're low enough on the target priority totem pole that they can survive long enough to do the job.

The 8th terrain rules are terrible. True LOS was elegant and simple. The return of area terrain, with units having to be wholly within to gain cover, and monsters and vehicles needing to be wholly within AND obscured, means that functionally no one ever has a cover save unless they're literally out of LOS. Stupid. I hope they bring the old terrain rules back in 8th ed 2.0 in a year or two.

You took a storm surge in a 1k lists?

pumaman1 wrote:

Aeri wrote:

Mandragola wrote:

Aeri wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:
Imho its quite obvious that in the line 'can fire using a weapon's Nova profile' the singular element references the Nova profile and not the weapon. It simple states that when shooting all your weapons, you can choose to use the nova profile (if the weapon has one) to do so, no restrictions that its only allowed for one weapon.

To stay in the farmer example, when meeting farmer John you are allowed to pet his cow(s), but not on head. However, if you give him a tenner, while petting a cow you are allowed to pet a cow's head. How many cows are you allowed to pet on the head?

No need to discuss this any further, he is the only one arguing you can't shoot both an he disqualified himself with that "cow" example that doesn't even fit the situation...

Honestly, look at a dictionary. "A weapon" is the singular. It can only be interpreted one way - one, single weapon. The plural is "weapons". The rules would have said "it can fire its weapons with their nova profiles" if that's what they meant.

If that's not good enough for you then I agree that there's no point discussing this further. If people aren't prepared to accept basic English grammar, there's nothing more to say.

Dude, you are a native speaker...
Grab a dictionary, look up what an indefinite article is.

"She was last seen wearing a blue jacket and a blue and white blouse."
This sentence is not about how many jackets or blouses she wears. It uses indefinite articles, which are used to refer to non specific things.

"May fire using a weapon's nova profile"
This sentence again, uses indefinite articles. It does not specifiy which weapon's nova profile. It neither says how many weapons. The sentence does not limit the amount of nova profiles you may use.

How are you firing more than 1 nova charged weapon when the riptide is only allowed to bring either the HBC or the Ion Accelerator? There isn't a ripple fire profile, nor nova smart missiles, etc. you have no point because you are never allowed to bring more than 1 weapon capable of nova charging.

So yes, it can shoot an infinite number of nova profile weapons that it is equipped with, but it can only ever be equipped with 1.

We are not talking about the riptide.

Vector Strike wrote:Try to get Index Xenos 2 and take some time reading the Tau section. Even if we have less unit options than most of other armies, there are quite a lot nonetheless

Firesight Marksman might be a better idea than Cadre Fireblade, as he's almost half its price, albeit at BS3+.

I think the firesight marksman would reduce the effectiveness of the combo too much.



regarding transport capacity of the droneport:
Not sure how to read it, 10 models max or characters + 1 unit of max 10 models?

 The Shrike wrote:
Played my fifth game of 8th last night. I got absolutely steamrolled by Death Guard; battle report is up in the BR section.

But, for those TL;DR folks out there, a couple quick hits:

I took a top heavy army with a Stormsurge at 1000 points. His D Missiles whiffed, even anchored, and Daemon invul saves blocked the majority of his Pulse Driver wounds. Gentlemen, he isn't worth it. You can take 3 Fusion Commanders for that many points, and they will do far more damage than his D Missiles and Pulse Driver will. The rest of his weapons are your standard S5 spam that our infantry do so well.

Darkstrider is amazing. I even forgot his -1T debuff and he was still awesome. 45 Points for a scout move, and more importantly, the ability to Fall Back and still shoot. He works wonders with Breachers.

Speaking of which, I thought Breachers had been usurped by Vespid. Granted, I haven't tried the latter yet but I think they still have a place. 10 Breachers and Darkstrider in a Fish is 252 Points. They can get where they want, storm an objective and take it. And they're low enough on the target priority totem pole that they can survive long enough to do the job.

The 8th terrain rules are terrible. True LOS was elegant and simple. The return of area terrain, with units having to be wholly within to gain cover, and monsters and vehicles needing to be wholly within AND obscured, means that functionally no one ever has a cover save unless they're literally out of LOS. Stupid. I hope they bring the old terrain rules back in 8th ed 2.0 in a year or two.

I faced Blood Angels in my second 8th edition game. My list was (79PL 1540 pts) 2 fusion commanders, 6 breacher squads in 3 devilfish with Darkstrider, 2 fusion piranhas and a riptide HBC, ATS, EWO. I played the list super aggressively with all 3 fish just blitzing towards him. It was an INCREDIBLY fun list to play, the breachers performed far beyond my expectations.

I think in my final iteration of this list, I will drop the riptide for a squad of plasma crisis suits just so I can play the commanders even more aggressively. Those devilfish held up quite well, and the alpha strike / counterpunch combindation of the commanders and breachers was pretty devastating. Darkstrider did good work in my game too. I VERY much look forward to this new and aggressive style of Tau play. Even if a stormsurge was great, I don't think I'd take one. Why Castle up, when you can have such an engaging aggressive mobile army that is just as effective?

I love this. I will try Vespid once I figure out a usable proxy, but I'm not ready to give up on Breachers. I have 25 of them and a slew of Devilfish. My next 2k game I'm going to run mech with Crisis and Commander support and see where the chips fall.

 The Shrike wrote:
I love this. I will try Vespid once I figure out a usable proxy, but I'm not ready to give up on Breachers. I have 25 of them and a slew of Devilfish. My next 2k game I'm going to run mech with Crisis and Commander support and see where the chips fall.

I'm sure it's possible to build a more competitive tournament list, but you will be hard pressed to build a list that is still relatively strong and plays in such an engaging and aggressive way. It is really a treat to play T'au in this manner. I think I'll give Vespid a go too, but they seem so vulnerable to alpha strike and turn 1 fire. The breachers get nice and protected turn 1 in their surprisingly durable fishes.

Don't forget the vespid have a deep strike I think? Can't get alpha'd if you're not on the board!

So I am looking at breachers vs strikers. Assuming both are backed up with a fireblade or darkstrider.

30-16" strikers do more damage and breachers do none.
11-15" strikers do nearly 50% more damage than breachers do against meqs
6"-10" strikers do the same damage as breachers do against meqs
1-5" Breachers will do about 75% more damage than strikers.

I am not sure if the reward of being in the 1-5" range is worth trying to get into it. I would much rather use my strikers do take pot shots from a distance. Strikers who get two rounds of shooting will out damage breachers who took a turn getting into position. Breachers only are worth it when you start hunting tanks but that is what your fusion commanders are for as they do it better.

 lambsandlions wrote:
So I am looking at breachers vs strikers. Assuming both are backed up with a fireblade or darkstrider.

30-16" strikers do more damage and breachers do none.
11-15" strikers do nearly 50% more damage than breachers do against meqs
6"-10" strikers do the same damage as breachers do against meqs
1-5" Breachers will do about 75% more damage than strikers.

I am not sure if the reward of being in the 1-5" range is worth trying to get into it. I would much rather use my strikers do take pot shots from a distance. Strikers who get two rounds of shooting will out damage breachers who took a turn getting into position. Breachers only are worth it when you start hunting tanks but that is what your fusion commanders are for as they do it better.

My argument is more about how much more engaging the play style for breachers is vs traditional T'au gunline. After having so much fun blitzing those fish up the gut, I am not likely to give regular fire warriors the time on the table that they might deserve otherwise.

Still, each person has fun with different play styles. More than anything we should be happy that all of our troop options are so viable!

Suks wrote:

 lambsandlions wrote:
So I am looking at breachers vs strikers. Assuming both are backed up with a fireblade or darkstrider.

30-16" strikers do more damage and breachers do none.
11-15" strikers do nearly 50% more damage than breachers do against meqs
6"-10" strikers do the same damage as breachers do against meqs
1-5" Breachers will do about 75% more damage than strikers.

I am not sure if the reward of being in the 1-5" range is worth trying to get into it. I would much rather use my strikers do take pot shots from a distance. Strikers who get two rounds of shooting will out damage breachers who took a turn getting into position. Breachers only are worth it when you start hunting tanks but that is what your fusion commanders are for as they do it better.

My argument is more about how much more engaging the play style for breachers is vs traditional T'au gunline. After having so much fun blitzing those fish up the gut, I am not likely to give regular fire warriors the time on the table that they might deserve otherwise.

Still, each person has fun with different play styles. More than anything we should be happy that all of our troop options are so viable!

Breachers, Strikers or Gundrones?

Oh..oh....! Are gundrones forced to split fire!?!

Suks wrote:

My argument is more about how much more engaging the play style for breachers is vs traditional T'au gunline. After having so much fun blitzing those fish up the gut, I am not likely to give regular fire warriors the time on the table that they might deserve otherwise.

Still, each person has fun with different play styles. More than anything we should be happy that all of our troop options are so viable!

Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating a traditional gunline. We have so much mobility in this edition that we really want to be backing up our crisis suits with fish of furry. However, 5" is cutting it very close for a non-assault unit. My main army is Harlequins and we have 6" fusion pistols that are already hard enough to shoot with not counting the fact that we have 16" open top vehicles and 8" regular moves.

Another interesting option would be pathfinders. The cost just the same as strikers and breachers, have one less armor but firewarriors are not really tanking anythign to begin with. The pulse carbine with pulse excelorator drone lets them have 3 shots in 12" with fireblade vs 3 shots in 15" for strikers. Play them as a mobile unit that can also support other units from range.

Grimgold wrote:
You took a storm surge in a 1k lists?

The enemy had a Daemon Prince, and SSs are easier to deal with (as his BR will tell you)

Aeri wrote:
regarding transport capacity of the droneport:
Not sure how to read it, 10 models max or characters + 1 unit of max 10 models?

only 1 unit of normal units and as many characters you want - but the total model count inside must be at most 10 models

So as 8th is developing it seems that tanks, vehicles and multi wound monsters are going to be very strong. As a result I feel fusion blasters are going to be really strong.

For 176 pts we have a commander with 4 fusion and 2 gun drones (would shield drones be better?)
Pros:
BS2+ means most shots will hit and makes best use of markerlights
Deep strike right where you need it
master of war ability is pretty strong

cons:
less wounds than a ghostknell
less mobility that ghostkneel


For 201pts you can have a ghostkeel with 2 stealth drones
Pros:
10 wounds it tough
-1 to hit and -2 to hit from <12" makes it very difficult to hit and makes it a lot stronger than its T6 W10 SV3+ frame would suggest
12" move lets you relocate quickly

Cons:
infiltrate is worst than manta strike
BS4+ is a drag

So was thinking this would be pretty cool if it works, 3 crisis suits, all with drone controller, surrounded by 12 drones within 6", the drones would get 48 shots at BS 2! and act as 12 extra wounds for your crisis guys. Can drone controller stack??

Dawson360 wrote:
So was thinking this would be pretty cool if it works, 3 crisis suits, all with drone controller, surrounded by 12 drones within 6", the drones would get 48 shots at BS 2! and act as 12 extra wounds for your crisis guys. Can drone controller stack??

Some people say they do, but others say it follows a boolean argument - if there's a drone controller around, the drones get +1 to hit; if there isn't, they don't. this line of thinking precludes stacking

 Vector Strike wrote:

Dawson360 wrote:
So was thinking this would be pretty cool if it works, 3 crisis suits, all with drone controller, surrounded by 12 drones within 6", the drones would get 48 shots at BS 2! and act as 12 extra wounds for your crisis guys. Can drone controller stack??

Some people say they do, but others say it follows a boolean argument - if there's a drone controller around, the drones get +1 to hit; if there isn't, they don't. this line of thinking precludes stacking

I guess it's a bit cheesy too, unless your opponent is OK with it.
Was also thinking of taking a few squads of sniper drones, they no longer need to be near the marksman, he just needs line of sight, stick the drones near something with drone controller and they would get a BS boost from the controller and the marksman. Could multiple marksmen stack BS boost? Or is this wishful thinking again?

As a result I feel fusion blasters are going to be really strong.

There were some spreadsheets floating around in the general 40k forum which demonstrate exactly that. Fusion appears to be suits' most efficient weapon choice at the moment.

Was also thinking of taking a few squads of sniper drones, they no longer need to be near the marksman, he just needs line of sight, stick the drones near something with drone controller and they would get a BS boost from the controller and the marksman. Could multiple marksmen stack BS boost? Or is this wishful thinking again?

Sniper Drones seem pretty underwhelming, even with BS boosts. They just don't pack enough punch to justify their cost. I don't think stacking DCs or Firesights actually works, but it'd be nice if it did!

So, working on refining my 2k list. I'm set on running at least one fusion commander. I'd like to run CIBs on Crisis, but am unsure whether I should go 2+ATS or 3 CIB. Also, do I continue using a flamer team? If so, I need Stealths, which have been underwhelming for me. Otherwise, I can run 2 CIB teams.

Also Ghostkeels. I'm thinking 2x Raker/Birst/ATS/TL and 1x Tri-fusion/TL/Shields.

Your thoughts?

Cost efficiency and damage is very similar for 3 CIBs vs 2 CIB + ATS. If you need the 10 extra oints, take the ATS, otherwise 3 CIB.


I am thinking about using 3 Crisis with MP+ATS instead of 1 Broadside, what do you think about it?
Broadside is 210 with ATS vs. 294 for the Crisis.

Crisis have 9 Total wounds, no SMS and only a 3+ save.
They also have 4 more shots with MP instead of only 8 HYMP shots.

Aeri wrote:
Cost efficiency and damage is very similar for 3 CIBs vs 2 CIB + ATS. If you need the 10 extra oints, take the ATS, otherwise 3 CIB.


I am thinking about using 3 Crisis with MP+ATS instead of 1 Broadside, what do you think about it?
Broadside is 210 with ATS vs. 294 for the Crisis.

Crisis have 9 Total wounds, no SMS and only a 3+ save.
They also have 4 more shots with MP instead of only 8 HYMP shots.

Crisis are more mobile and can bring more drones

 Vector Strike wrote:

Aeri wrote:
Cost efficiency and damage is very similar for 3 CIBs vs 2 CIB + ATS. If you need the 10 extra oints, take the ATS, otherwise 3 CIB.


I am thinking about using 3 Crisis with MP+ATS instead of 1 Broadside, what do you think about it?
Broadside is 210 with ATS vs. 294 for the Crisis.

Crisis have 9 Total wounds, no SMS and only a 3+ save.
They also have 4 more shots with MP instead of only 8 HYMP shots.

Crisis are more mobile and can bring more drones

Yes, but the broadside has a couple of SMS as well. More shots in total. You might well argue that we don't need more s5 shooting, but on a platform that already paid for ATS and doesn't need LoS it's quite useful. On the other hand it can be locked down by anyone who charges it.

Honestly I doubt I'd use either. Missiles just seem quite lacklustre in this edition. It may be that they are useful for sustaining damage over several turns from safe ranges, in which case I think crisis suits are probably best at keeping out of trouble.

It's not an obvious choice, which is probably a good thing. I actually think ghostkeels, with CIC, ATS and TL (and either fusion or burst) are a really good option for this job. Ghostkeels ends up costing about the same as a broadside, but seems a lot better - definitely more fun.

Ghostkeels ends up costing about the same as a broadside, but seems a lot better - definitely more fun.

I'd agree with that. Of our bigger suits, ghostkeels are one of the better options. They're still far worse than Commanders, though, unfortunately.

Commanders are the KILLERS
CIB is the best weapon as it performs well against ALL TARGETs. Use ATS to save points, and reduce overheat chance.

Fusion and MP are the 2nd best choice. Use ATS with MP, or triple Fusion. MP is a safe weapon, useful against all targets. Fusion is a specialist weapon, meaning 1 Fusion Commander is plenty.


Ghostkeel are TANKS, their damage output is a little low.

Crisis Suits are too expensive, don't bother... unless you're playing using Power Points, in which case SPAM THEM!

Broadsides with Rails and Plasma are still useful! Use EWO to help protect your army. HYMP sides are pointless, Don't bring them.

Stealth Suits are the best platform to carry Drone Controllers. Take 2 with DC to increase coverage, and 1 with Fusion. Stealth Suits are kinda of poor at everything else.

Hi dakka,
I'm having my first game of 8th on Friday and would like to know whats best. In regards to fire warriors, I don't like the idea of breacher teams as they're too short ranges for tau, and I'm stuck between squads of pulse carbines or rifles. I think pulse carbines are getting more competent due to being able to run and shoot now, albeit at a -1 to hit.

I'd also like to know the strength of the crisis weapons, and what to run them with. I may run them with 3 weapons now opposed to two, but that may not be the case due to the point increases.

My play style in 7th was leaning more towards a static gunline, and as such my models are less mobile, so I have no fishes.

All of this needs to be for a 1500pts list, so if you can help please do.

 Vector Strike wrote:

Grimgold wrote:
You took a storm surge in a 1k lists?

The enemy had a Daemon Prince, and SSs are easier to deal with (as his BR will tell you)

You mean he had an 8 wound HQ unit, nevermind that totally justifies bringing an imperial knight equivalent to a 1k game. If I tried anything that beardy my FLGS would start a gofundme to hire the shame lady from Game of Thrones to follow me around.

MilkmanAl wrote:

Ghostkeels ends up costing about the same as a broadside, but seems a lot better - definitely more fun.

I'd agree with that. Of our bigger suits, ghostkeels are one of the better options. They're still far worse than Commanders, though, unfortunately.

Commanders are great, clearly. They aren't especially survivable though. Going close to the enemy is inherently very dangerous for Tau, and you may not even be able to get to whatever you're trying to kill if your opponent bubblewraps it. Ultimately you don't want to be trading a commander for a rhino. You need something with a bit of reach.

The trouble is, I'm not sure what that is. All the railgun platforms seem outclassed by lascannon platforms. Missilesides with shield drones nearby do chuck out a serious amount of shooting, but even three of them with ATS would be lucky to kill a rhino in a turn. Markerlights would help with that - but add even more to the cost.

 Grimgold wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Grimgold wrote:
You took a storm surge in a 1k lists?

The enemy had a Daemon Prince, and SSs are easier to deal with (as his BR will tell you)

You mean he had an 8 wound HQ unit, nevermind that totally justifies bringing an imperial knight equivalent to a 1k game. If I tried anything that beardy my FLGS would start a gofundme to hire the shame lady from Game of Thrones to follow me around.

You're presuming that Stormsurge's are still competitive choices, after five games I can confirm for you that they are not. They're too expensive. You can take 3 Commanders for those points that do much more damage.

The surge is a casual only choice now; which is fine, because that's mostly what I play these days.

My money is on the following rough army;

Commander strike team (1-4 commanders, with fusion/CIB or MP+DC)

Drone Swarms

Tetras (fingers crossed)

Y'Vahra (1-2+).

Er... replace troops with markerlights, who needs CP anyways The reason why; none of the regular options seem like their very good, crisis suit squads are just too bloaty

 The Shrike wrote:

 Grimgold wrote:

 Vector Strike wrote:

Grimgold wrote:
You took a storm surge in a 1k lists?

The enemy had a Daemon Prince, and SSs are easier to deal with (as his BR will tell you)

You mean he had an 8 wound HQ unit, nevermind that totally justifies bringing an imperial knight equivalent to a 1k game. If I tried anything that beardy my FLGS would start a gofundme to hire the shame lady from Game of Thrones to follow me around.

You're presuming that Stormsurge's are still competitive choices, after five games I can confirm for you that they are not. They're too expensive. You can take 3 Commanders for those points that do much more damage.

The surge is a casual only choice now; which is fine, because that's mostly what I play these days.

It's pretty much like being shocked over a gorkanaut at 1000 points 7th ed.

Sure, its a huge thing for 1000 points, but honestly? you're better off without it.

Mandragola wrote:

MilkmanAl wrote:

Ghostkeels ends up costing about the same as a broadside, but seems a lot better - definitely more fun.

I'd agree with that. Of our bigger suits, ghostkeels are one of the better options. They're still far worse than Commanders, though, unfortunately.

Commanders are great, clearly. They aren't especially survivable though. Going close to the enemy is inherently very dangerous for Tau, and you may not even be able to get to whatever you're trying to kill if your opponent bubblewraps it. Ultimately you don't want to be trading a commander for a rhino. You need something with a bit of reach.

The trouble is, I'm not sure what that is. All the railgun platforms seem outclassed by lascannon platforms. Missilesides with shield drones nearby do chuck out a serious amount of shooting, but even three of them with ATS would be lucky to kill a rhino in a turn. Markerlights would help with that - but add even more to the cost.

Yeah, Commanders' fragility is definitely a huge issue. I plan on keeping them around drones which will mitigate that issue to some extent, but small arms fire followed by medium or heavy weapons will still eat you in a hurry. We may be obligated to go the glass cannon route and plan to mow down anything nearby that'll threaten your Commanders. Given the firepower we can put out on a drop, that's not an unreasonable goal at all. I wish we had more useful backfield anchors. Stormsurges, Riptides, and Broadsides don't do much for me. Hammerheads are close to being fun, given Long strike's presence but are poor choices. Maybe the R'Varna will prove to be a useful, durable gun platform.

Here is what bothers me about Broadsides

70 points for
BS+3 Toughness 7 Wounds 8, Save+3
Has the option of paying 20 points for 6+ FNP and +1 BS

33 points for
48" Heavy 4 Strength 7 AP -1 Damage 2

So 136 points for the same fire power as a HYMP which costs 162 points (without considering the Broadside secondary weapons, which would add another 20-40 points)
Broadsides are BS+4, Toughness 5, Wounds 6, Save+2

Broadsides are stupidly overcosted at the moment!
HYMP should be 30-35 points not 41 points.
Heavy Rail Rifle should be about 50-55 points, not 63 points.
Smart Missile Systems should be about 15 points, not 20 points.

The Chassis should be about 60 points, not 80.

Overall, I would say that Broadsides are about... 40 points Over Priced.

Side Note, Missile Pods should be 15-20 points, not 24 points.

Building my army now (New to tau).

Ghostkeel, do you think support systems are worth it and whats the best setup you think? (I know what weapons are good in general for him, but b.c idk tau well and the army as a while would like to see what you guys think)

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Building my army now (New to tau).

Ghostkeel, do you think support systems are worth it and whats the best setup you think? (I know what weapons are good in general for him, but b.c idk tau well and the army as a while would like to see what you guys think)

Most people agree a target lock is a good option on a ghostkeel so it can fire effectively on the move. If giving it fusion weapons then it may not need any other support system (though several are decent). The ion raker and burst cannons are much improved by the ATS.

The target lock is the eternal question.

If you got one, the 3ML result does nothing, if you dont have one, you NEED 3 ML.

Its a lose/lose situation. I for one don't like it one bit, enough to put me off the unit entirely.

Mandragola wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Building my army now (New to tau).

Ghostkeel, do you think support systems are worth it and whats the best setup you think? (I know what weapons are good in general for him, but b.c idk tau well and the army as a while would like to see what you guys think)

Most people agree a target lock is a good option on a ghostkeel so it can fire effectively on the move. If giving it fusion weapons then it may not need any other support system (though several are decent). The ion raker and burst cannons are much improved by the ATS.

This is what i was going to do, just dbl checking.

Speaking of support systems choices, what are you guys thinking for the Y'Vahra? I'm currently thinking ATS and stims will be the way to go for extra brutality from the flamer and a little cushion from the constant self-winding it'll be doing. The MT I see as a waste, because anything you sail you Y'Vahra towards is likely a priority target that'll have some marker hits on it. I can see taking the TL, even with all the auto hits, too. It already has an invuln, so no need for the shield gen. With one flamer weapon on board, the VT seems a little pointless.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
Building my army now (New to tau).

Ghostkeel, do you think support systems are worth it and whats the best setup you think? (I know what weapons are good in general for him, but b.c idk tau well and the army as a while would like to see what you guys think)

I think the best option is EWO. Ghostkeels are cheap and EWO is a powerful deterrent.

Popping in to inform you that Tau engineering/technical drones from FW will be able to repair Suits' wounds. This may mitigate the Nova-Charge wounds.

 Verviedi wrote:
Popping in to inform you that Tau engineering/technical drones from FW will be able to repair Suits' wounds. This may mitigate the Nova-Charge wounds.

Is this confirmed? Where? Must see!

 Verviedi wrote:
Popping in to inform you that Tau engineering/technical drones from FW will be able to repair Suits' wounds. This may mitigate the Nova-Charge wounds.

This would be huge; points dependent though.

 Verviedi wrote:
Popping in to inform you that Tau engineering/technical drones from FW will be able to repair Suits' wounds. This may mitigate the Nova-Charge wounds.

1 - Sounds... Mediocre... Imps have been able to heal their tanks and Chaos auto heals some of their tanks. It doesn't seem like it's that big of a deal
2 - Sounds... Like it should be standard Tau, not Forgeworld.

I like to think of Forgeworld stuff as being the really gamebreaking stuff. So a bit of healing doesn't seem extremely Forgeworld.

 The Shrike wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
Popping in to inform you that Tau engineering/technical drones from FW will be able to repair Suits' wounds. This may mitigate the Nova-Charge wounds.

This would be huge; points dependent though.

16pts each, default unit is 2 drones
in the shooting phase select a battlesuit unit within 3", on a 4+ one model in that unit may heal d3 wounds

 Talamare wrote:

I like to think of Forgeworld stuff as being the really gamebreaking stuff. So a bit of healing doesn't seem extremely Forgeworld.

You dont own any forgeworld stuff I take it? Majority of the forgeworld units are vastly overcosted and not even terribly good. A handful of models are really strong, but still come with a hefty point cost (e.g. y'vhara).

My first post might as well be here.

I am a T'au player ever since their creation and have experienced the birthing pains and will continue to fight with them until they go the way of the Squats. Long story aside I have excitement and reservations about 8th edition here.

With that said. Talamare awesome stats running for the new edition for the T'au. It was very informative and I appreciate that you took the time to run the numbers.

I do have a question about Kroot option that seems like a useful buffer under the new system. I say this because I would run 2-3 squads in front of the firing line with-in 6in of an etherial so they can mitigate loss due to being shot (min squad is 10). This is strictly a fire warrior, Kroot, and yes put the Drones in there. If you do calculations ignore the cost of the etherial because I see them being a main-stay in my armies even under the MSU mentality.

I would post my current thought about a 2000pt list but I am going to be running it tomorrow agains a friend. (Battle report pending) We are both a little bummed because we both loved bringing the big stuff to the table and duking it out. However thats not happing anymore due to point creep across the board.

MoD_Legion wrote:

 Talamare wrote:

I like to think of Forgeworld stuff as being the really gamebreaking stuff. So a bit of healing doesn't seem extremely Forgeworld.

You dont own any forgeworld stuff I take it? Majority of the forgeworld units are vastly overcosted and not even terribly good. A handful of models are really strong, but still come with a hefty point cost (e.g. y'vhara).

Tetras will likely still be the most efficient way to drop markerlights.

How do you guys feel about gun drones on vehicles now. i've always spent the points on upgrading them to SMSs but I'm thinking in 8th the gun drones might be a decent option.

Vehicle upgrades are really expensive now, with SMS costing you 40 points for the pair. Now that you can let drones take the wounds of nearby infantry and suits it might be worthwhile to save some points and take the drones. Just detach them and let them fly up with your suits to soak up shots.

cmspano wrote:
How do you guys feel about gun drones on vehicles now. i've always spent the points on upgrading them to SMSs but I'm thinking in 8th the gun drones might be a decent option.

Vehicle upgrades are really expensive now, with SMS costing you 40 points for the pair. Now that you can let drones take the wounds of nearby infantry and suits it might be worthwhile to save some points and take the drones. Just detach them and let them fly up with your suits to soak up shots.

I'm not a competitive player but I always like the drones because I used them to harry small enemy units or otherwise confuse the enemy by creating multiple small units of drones; 5 vehicles equals 5, 2-drone units.

I'm working on a 1K mech list, breachers in fish, a few suits, and a couple hammerheads. Probably going to keep the drones. They can disembark with the breachers


Edit: Oh wow, I just noticed something. Read the rules for attached drones:

"When a Hammerhead Gunship is set up, any accompanying Gun Drones are attached and are treated as being embarked. Whilst the Gun Drones remain attached, the Hammerhead Gunship is considered to be equipped with the Drones' weapons in addition to it's own"

That would mean that a the 4 pulse carbines use the vehicle's BS and not their own. And they won't have to fire at only the closest unit since it's the Hammerhead that's actually firing the weapons as if it were their own.

yep, vehicle drones are good even if you want them just to cut costs. SMS are quite expensive now!

So Y'vahras are just over 400pts after upgrades. That seems pretty workable to me. They drop way more firepower than 2 Hammerheads, for comparison. I think I'll find a way to slide at least one of them into my lists to see how it goes.

Now, the Ta'unar. That guy is an interesting case. At ~1200pts, it's obviously a huge portion of your army. However, I'd say it compares pretty well with anything you'd otherwise take with those points. At BS2+ 48 standard S5 shots plus the arm and main weapons is pretty impressive. For ease of comparison, consider a Ta'unar with a pulse ordnance multidriver and fusion eradicators. That's either 16 or 10+2D6 high-strength shots, or roughly the equivalent of 4 fusion Commanders, which cost 640pts. You'd need about 21 drone-controlled Gun Drones to have an equal amount of hits, so that's about 800 pts. In other words, you're dropping about 350-400pts for some extra range and a really durable platform. however, you lose the versatility of being able to drop in at will to fry your targets and of having multiple units to move around. I'm very interested in giving the big guy a shot.

Edit: BTW, I just noticed that the Ta'unar is a battlesuit. Veeeeeeery interesting, indeed!

So what about the Pirhana? It has T6 which is pretty good but I fell like its underarmed for its point cost and actually only 2 Railrifles might be worthwhile

So comparing a match-up of a Taunar with Pulse Ordnance and Dual Tri-Axis Ion Cannons (Plus 4 SS and 4 BC) vs a Revenant with Dual Pulsars and Cloudburst Missiles, the Taunar will do 24 unsaved damage per turn on average (27 if within range of burst cannons & Smart missiles) where as the Revenant will do 34 unsaved damage on average.

Now comparing their power points of 55 for the Taunar vs 60 for Revenant, this seems fair. However if you played match play, the Revenant is 1200 points vs the Taunar at 1202, yet the Revenant has 2 more wounds, +1 toughness, does more damage, and has 16" more movement.

What loadout would you give the Tau'nar? Personally I'm leaning towards nexus missiles and tri-axis ion cannons. The railgun doesn't really seem worth it compared to the other options which both seem pretty decent. For the arms I think that fusion eradicators have a too short range, although their damage is very good.

 Dantioch wrote:
What loadout would you give the Tau'nar? Personally I'm leaning towards nexus missiles and tri-axis ion cannons. The railgun doesn't really seem worth it compared to the other options which both seem pretty decent. For the arms I think that fusion eradicators have a too short range, although their damage is very good.

Vs most titans, the Nexus would average 3 more damage but it has a 24" minimum range, which can be exploited and cost another 27 points. The rail riffle is horrid. A Taunar facing a Revenant armed with the rail cannon does only 16 wounds on average and yet costs 9 points more than the Pulse Ordinance. How the heck GW messed up that weapon option so badly is beyond me. Personally, I would stick with the Pulse Ordinance.

I honestly hadnt looked at anything else in the xenos book prior to posting, but it's pretty depressing that the Revenant is just straight better than the Ta'unar. That seems like a glaring failure, to me.

In any event, it seems like the rail cannon is the black sheep of the main weapons. High-strength, one-shot weapons are to 8th as bombs were to 7th. That is, they don't really do a lot of damage, but GE seems to think they're game-breaking and deserve a massive price tag. Really, S9 is about all you really need, since most tough stuff is T8. The Nexus missiles are good, but the minimum range is crippling. Consequently, the pulse ordnance is really the only option.

 wyomingfox wrote:
So comparing a match-up of a Taunar with Pulse Ordnance and Dual Tri-Axis Ion Cannons (Plus 4 SS and 4 BC) vs a Revenant with Dual Pulsars and Cloudburst Missiles, the Taunar will do 24 unsaved damage per turn on average (27 if within range of burst cannons & Smart missiles) where as the Revenant will do 34 unsaved damage on average.

Now comparing their power points of 55 for the Taunar vs 60 for Revenant, this seems fair. However if you played match play, the Revenant is 1200 points vs the Taunar at 1202, yet the Revenant has 2 more wounds, +1 toughness, does more damage, and has 16" more movement.

Because your a god damned dirty Tau player. We all are. No justice for us. No balance and there never will be.

 Gamgee wrote:

 wyomingfox wrote:
So comparing a match-up of a Taunar with Pulse Ordnance and Dual Tri-Axis Ion Cannons (Plus 4 SS and 4 BC) vs a Revenant with Dual Pulsars and Cloudburst Missiles, the Taunar will do 24 unsaved damage per turn on average (27 if within range of burst cannons & Smart missiles) where as the Revenant will do 34 unsaved damage on average.

Now comparing their power points of 55 for the Taunar vs 60 for Revenant, this seems fair. However if you played match play, the Revenant is 1200 points vs the Taunar at 1202, yet the Revenant has 2 more wounds, +1 toughness, does more damage, and has 16" more movement.

Because your a god damned dirty Tau player. We all are. No justice for us. No balance and there never will be.

I feel like you guys are missing a huge thing here. A revenant has no Invulnerable save if it didn't move. Such as if the tau player went first, it also only gets a 5++ if it wants to shoot since max move is 32 but needs 33 for a 4++.

You also seem to be missing the insane amount of anti horde the taunar brings which a revenant literally has none of. If a taunar was designed to one on one fight a revenant then it shouldn't have 4 burst cammpms and 4 smart missile systems putting out 4 shots each.

Titanicus wrote:


I feel like you guys are missing a huge thing here. A revenant has no Invulnerable save if it didn't move. Such as if the tau player went first, it also only gets a 5++ if it wants to shoot since max move is 32 but needs 33 for a 4++.

You also seem to be missing the insane amount of anti horde the taunar brings which a revenant literally has none of. If a taunar was designed to one on one fight a revenant then it shouldn't have 4 burst cammpms and 4 smart missile systems putting out 4 shots each.

Perhaps. But the Ta'unar was developed to deal with titans. It's weapons aren't real good for that.
For hordes, we already have a lot of tools. For big stuff? The somewhat lackluster rail cannon.

As soon as FW gives Titanic to the AX-1-0, it'll become our go-to titan destroyer. 2 of them are cheaper than 1 ta'unar and fire 4 shots of that weapon

So I got my first game of 8th yesterday, ended up using the multiplayer mission with a couple of mates, so may not be entirely representative, but here are my first impressions:

Marker lights are a lot less important in this edition; re-rolling 1s is nice, but cover is a lot less prevalent and only -1, so ignoring it isn't as critical. If you don't bring seekers one result is useless and to get +1BS takes probably two pathfinder squads firing at a single target, which just feels OTT. I had two 5-man squads of pathfinders and actually ended up using their carbines a lot of the time, as they can move and shoot and I needed the firepower to whittle down Rhinos etc.

Kroot were...meh. Tried some scouting forward to try and tie up backfield units, which they did, but they really seem to be lacing in the attack phase. +1 strength is nice, but with no AP doesn't do a whole lot. Feels like these guys could use an extra attack or a re-roll or something.

Battlesuits were fine, being able to split fire is nice and the loss of JSJ wasn't bad once I'd mentally adjusted to using the fallback move instead. Gives a similar level of mobility but it's just...different. Having a couple of shield drones floating round in the middle was golden, taking las cannon blasts from multiple different squads, these are going to be a must have.

Firewarriors, nothing to report really, didn't feel any different.

Commanders are actually quite competent in melee, which surprised both me and my opponent; S5, 4 attacks on a 3+ was nice. Not a hand to hand monster, but didn't feel like I was getting walked all over either.

Vespids. Oh my giddy stars, Vespids are GOOD! Nasty guns, reasonable armour and that 14" move, with the ability to advance and fire too. These guys remind me of Ork deffkoptas; cheap, fast and dangerous they're great for getting up in your opponent's face on first turn or bouncing across the board as a rapid response team later on.

The one thing that only struck me as I was playing was how much they gutted the war gear; no disruption pods, no signature war gear, no EMP grenades, on and on. It really felt like they've taken a lot of the fun toys away, which left Tau feeling rather plain. Functional and utilitarian (which maybe suits their fluff), but lacking the pazzaz they've had for the last few years.

Not a good sign from FW then. It sounds like, as ever, their rules are all over the place. Players will cherry-pick the stuff that's too good and leave the trash on the shelf. Bit of a shame for those of us whose resin stuff has just moved into the latter category.

Who wins between titans? The one that gets first turn. I expect my falchion would definitely do upsetting amounts of damage if it fired first too. Its main gun does something like 32 damage to a Titan, before it fires its 8 lascannon. Maybe I should buy a void shield generator for it to sit next to. Maybe I should stick it in a cabinet, because models like that just don't work well in 40k.

Hey Guys!

So the Barracuda is one of my favourite Tau models and I had a lot of fun painting it.
Now I REALLY want to use it, since I only had the chance to play it once in 7th ed. ;-)

As we all know, Tau took a big hit and I cannot afford to use "bad" units anymore to be able to stand up to my opponent.
(Mostly Nids, Marines and Necrons).

What do you think of the Barracuda? Is it a viable option?

The all burstcannon loadout comes at approximately ~250 Points. This is very expensive for some long range burstcannons and 2 MPs...
Not viable in my opinion. ALL of its weapons are heavy,except the MP, so it gets -1 to hit all the time.

The Ion loadout comes at approximately ~300 Points.
2 CIBs, 1 Ion Cannon and 2 MPs offers some serious S7 shots, but at the cost of 3 fully equiped CIB Crisis + 6 Drones. (= 6 CIBs + ATS).
The Barracuda is a lot tougher (5+ Invuln) of course and super fast, but has to be deployed on the battlefield.
Also, only the Ion Canon is heavy, so the other weapons hit on 3s. You miss out on 6 Drones with their 24 S5 Shots, but honestly - those are canon fodder anyways ;-)
Wounds wise, if you take in the drones, the crisis actually have more wounds. But if your enemy is smart the drones are gone before they shoot at your suits.
Imho: The Barracuda takes the spot. Its fast, its tough, it hurts. It hits more reliably and can't be charged by ground units.
You could also take 2 Cudas for the points of 3 HYMP XV88, and I think I would all day if I had 2 :-P

The most damage loadout would be CIBs + Railgun for approximately ~350 Points.
Points wise, the Riptide is the contender for the spot here and it still seems the Barracuda wins.
This is a "jack of all trades" loadout, since the CIBs and the Railgun have different preferred targets.

 Jadenim wrote:

Vespids. Oh my giddy stars, Vespids are GOOD! Nasty guns, reasonable armour and that 14" move, with the ability to advance and fire too. These guys remind me of Ork deffkoptas; cheap, fast and dangerous they're great for getting up in your opponent's face on first turn or bouncing across the board as a rapid response team later on.

I had a similar experience although I wasted my Vespids for 2 turns shooting at a truck doing little. Once the Orks got into close combat I just fell back out of close combat 14” which caused me to claim an object and fired at the Orks doing a lot of damage.

It can be hard to use but the bomber can be deadly. In my first game it wiped out one entire Ork squad with a bomb, 5+ mortal wounds then a failed leadership test caused the rest to die. Then the bombers weapons killed another half a squad in the same turn.

Hows the Remora Drones faring? I got a peek at their datasheet, it seems like with how wounding works now the t5 and 4+ save isn't particularly sturdy now flying is only a -1 to hit. Seems like they might get shot down before doing much even with the seekers and burst cannons.

 doc1234 wrote:
Hows the Remora Drones faring? I got a peek at their datasheet, it seems like with how wounding works now the t5 and 4+ save isn't particularly sturdy now flying is only a -1 to hit. Seems like they might get shot down before doing much even with the seekers and burst cannons.

It seems odd a Stealth drone has lost stealth.

Pottsey wrote:

 doc1234 wrote:
Hows the Remora Drones faring? I got a peek at their datasheet, it seems like with how wounding works now the t5 and 4+ save isn't particularly sturdy now flying is only a -1 to hit. Seems like they might get shot down before doing much even with the seekers and burst cannons.

It seems odd a Stealth drone has lost stealth.

It seems like its shrouded abilities were changed to give it "deep strike", which is a pretty bad trade of considering the range of it's guns and high movement.

They also lost their marker lights and their firepower went from six twin linked shots to eight shots, so hardly an improvement.

If the Remoras had the Networked Markerlight thing... Like this they are pretty expensive for 2 BCs.

Well, the entire index is a mess as far as I see on the tau part.

Many things mismatch with the GW index, mismatch with other entries on the forgewrold index itself, outright bizzard, broken (as in, can't even be used RAW) and/or poorly made.

It looks like an hour rush job. I could honestly compile a better list that that within a day had I been paid for it.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, the entire index is a mess as far as I see on the tau part.

Many things mismatch with the GW index, mismatch with other entries on the forgewrold index itself, outright bizzard, broken (as in, can't even be used RAW) and/or poorly made.

It looks like an hour rush job. I could honestly compile a better list that that within a day had I been paid for it.

I agree, and it's not unique to Tau. A TON of things are broken and illogical in the current Forgeworld. People are complaining about problems with every race.

I really hope TOs see that and ban Forgeworld.

So your solution is to punish the guys who own forgeworld models even more than they currently are?

 BoomWolf wrote:
Well, the entire index is a mess as far as I see on the tau part.

Many things mismatch with the GW index, mismatch with other entries on the forgewrold index itself, outright bizzard, broken (as in, can't even be used RAW) and/or poorly made.

It looks like an hour rush job. I could honestly compile a better list that that within a day had I been paid for it.

Unfortunately, I agree with everything you said. Now that all the fundamental books are released, it's plain to see that there are potentially game-breaking inconsistencies across the board, and the Tau index and Forgeworld entries are particularly bad in that respect. We've got some solid entries in our books, but there are plenty of units that are simply totally out of whack. Riptides are flat unusable, and the rest of our suits are not a whole lot better. The Ta'unar seems to be over costed but not heinously so. Regarding the previous discussion, it seems more that the Revenant is dramatically undercosted, and the Ta'unar is maybe 100-150pts too expensive. Many of the forgeworld units are sources of massed fire and thus compete directly with Gun Drones: a competition they lose miserably. Most of others have mediocre big weapons that don't warrant their huge costs. It's a little depressing how ineffective our Forgeworld choices are.

Even the Tetra isn't looking too hot to me either. Their markerlights generate 3 tokens each hit. The only bonuses on the table that aren't situational are at 1 and 5, so using them to stack 3 or 6 on a target seems a bit....meh? Granted having an almost (?) guaranteed full stack of lights if you know there's going to be something big on the board to focus on is one thing, but for their price I think even pathfinders work out better as you can still spread those around to multiple targets for single tokens.

Guys the sky isn't falling. I promise.

 doc1234 wrote:
Even the Tetra isn't looking too hot to me either. Their markerlights generate 3 tokens each hit. The only bonuses on the table that aren't situational are at 1 and 5, so using them to stack 3 or 6 on a target seems a bit....meh? Granted having an almost (?) guaranteed full stack of lights if you know there's going to be something big on the board to focus on is one thing, but for their price I think even pathfinders work out better as you can still spread those around to multiple targets for single tokens.

Almost guaranteed? You are hitting on 5s if you decide to use thier speed.
They are wonky and extremely unreliable, I'd much rather have 3 regular shots over the triple mark shot.

I can't imagine why one should take Tetras and not pathfinders, and considering I've got Tetras and no pathfinders, that's rather sad.

the sensor tower seems better than tetras, except its immobile xD
for half the points you get the same markerlight.
Since you never want to move your tetras anyways, this seems the way to go (of you dont stick to pathfinders or markerdrones)

 doc1234 wrote:
Even the Tetra isn't looking too hot to me either. Their markerlights generate 3 tokens each hit. The only bonuses on the table that aren't situational are at 1 and 5, so using them to stack 3 or 6 on a target seems a bit....meh? Granted having an almost (?) guaranteed full stack of lights if you know there's going to be something big on the board to focus on is one thing, but for their price I think even pathfinders work out better as you can still spread those around to multiple targets for single tokens.

I agree, they aren't great. Previously very very mobile & multi twin-linked shots gave you great odds of at least a few tokens.

I'll stick with a Mark'O squad (it's not dead!)

BoomWolf wrote:
I can't imagine why one should take Tetras and not pathfinders, and considering I've got Tetras and no pathfinders, that's rather sad.

Same here

Aeri wrote:the sensor tower seems better than tetras, except its immobile xD
for half the points you get the same markerlight.
Since you never want to move your tetras anyways, this seems the way to go (of you dont stick to pathfinders or markerdrones)

It seems to be a good option. However, you cannot make a squadron of it - so each one eats up a Fortification slot...
Let's see: at BS4+, you'll need 2 for a statistical hit. 54p for 2 of them turrets. 54p/3 hits = 18p per markerlight. Pathfinders are 16p per ML hit
2 turrets = 54p, T6 W6 Sv 4+ (AFAIK, cannot get cover or it's very hard to... but it's not a building!); requires 2 fortification slots
6 pathfinders = 48p, T3 W6 Sv 5+ (can get in cover and tidewalls); requires 1 fast attack slot

So, the towers are tougher, but less economical in detachments (a problem in tourneys). For casual play they might be a nice option!

Razerous wrote:I'll stick with a Mark'O squad (it's not dead!)

From BS2+ to BS4+ re-rolling 1s (when there's already a ML token) isn't the same thing :(

Here are some thoughts on the FW options. Most of them are not positive, unfortunately. :(

R'Myr: A waste of points. He has 2 plasma rifles. Whee. Use a normal Commander for 20pts less.

R'Alai: He's an interesting choice due to his range and durability. T6 with a 3++ is no joke. He's fairly light on the offensive side, though. I think I'd still opt for the "standard" quad CIB or fusion Commander.

XV81: Obligatory S5 weapons on your Commander are no bueno, even if they're SMS.

XV84: As above but with markers. BS2+ weapon slots are not to be wasted on marker lights these days.

Hazard suits: Overcosted trash...still. Disappointing.

Y'Vahra: Really good! You'll have to be a little crafty to keep it from being a 400pt suicide unit, but both of its weapons are brutally powerful.

R'Varna: I'm willing to give it a shot. It's fairly durable and packs a punch from range. Taking a wound to reroll your 6d3 shots(!) basically buys you an extra couple shots per turn, and given the weapons' power, that could make a huge difference. The EM shockwave seems a bit underwhelming, but it'll help prevent the R'Varna from getting swarmed.

Ta'unar: As discussed above, it's a little overcosted but not horribly so. I'm looking at pulse ordnance and tri-axis cannons as the way to go, but the fusion eradicators seem pretty cool, too. If you can make sure there are juicy fusion-worthy targets in range every turn, that'd be a good option.

Tetras: Junk. Pathfinders are a much better option.

Piranha TX-42: Dual rail rifles is a potentially interesting option, but at 114pts, it's a little steeply priced. Fusion Commanders are better, but if it's mobility you want, they may work.

Heavy Gun Drones: Not awful. You're paying 2pts for an extra wound on your drones. They might actually be a good way to fill heavy support choices on the cheap.

Heavy Bombardment Hammerhead: 44pts more expensive at baseline...why? It'd be mediocre without the price hike. I mean, it's a tougher HYMP Broadside. Not impressed.

Fire Support Hammerhead: 54pts more expensive at baseline...why? GW is just determined to prevent people from using these models.

Remoras: Terrible. Lots of points for S5 shots! Yay!

Barracuda: As discussed above, it's okay but too expensive with any weapon configuration.

Tiger Shark Fighter-Bomber: Transporting drones is fairly useless, in my opinion, so the skyspear missiles are a great upgrade. At 515pts when decked out with railguns, it seems like a worthwhile option.

Tiger Shark AX-1-0: While the rail cannon is a mediocre option on the Ta'unar, it gets way better when you can take multiple of them. At 583pts, it's a solid option for killing big targets. I'd say it compares well with fusion Commander drops. Adding seekers is a nice touch for taking down tough stuff, since anything worth dedicating 2 rail cannon shots to probably has 5 markers on it.

Orca: If we really needed to transport things, it'd be fantastic. Maybe it'd be cool to load up with Breachers? Flamer suits? I dunno, I don't see much of a use for it.

Manta: Eh, whatever. I haven't bothered to read too much into its effectiveness because I'll never, ever use it. Nor will most people. It looks pretty weak for the cost, and again, transporting Tau is not really very useful.

Sensor Tower: It's mentioned above as an okay-ish marker source. Being a fortification is very limiting. Maybe taking one for the rerolls of 1s could be useful.

Sentry Turret: Missile pods are the only reliable choice here which makes them 68pts apiece. I'm not terribly impressed.

I disagree with the Barracuda transporting drones not to be worthwhile. It can take 14 Drones. But it does not say which. If you can drop a drone Controller somehow you can easily bring 28 BC into the backline of something which would seriously hurt.

For normal Gundrones this sucks a little as you cant bring a cadre along but I like it. The Skyspears are great add of firepower and I will try the model. Basically anything that is tough loses in cases of firepower to gundrones. we all know that but the Barracuda might live for more than one round in the open.

The Hazards with Burstcannons and ATS are nearly as effective as a Commander and with 5 Markers actually better for less points though yeha all weapons except the burst cannons are actually complete trash and for a Wound/Pts value you get from it they are worse than the commander. But they are playble and better then Crisis in my opinion.

The Part on the Hammerheads... I really don't get the base costs they are normal Hammerheads nothing more. Twin Plasma might actually be good if the base cost was still 117.

You raise a good point regarding transporting Heavy Gun Drones. That could be pretty useful, especially considering that they're somewhat more durable than their more pedestrian counterparts. Maybe dropping a Commander with a DC near them or having some Stealth Suits roll up to assist them would be the way to go?

The Hammerheads are a shame, because both would be at least worth playing around with if they had the same base cost as the index version.

MilkmanAl wrote:
Hazard suits: Overcosted trash...still. Disappointing.

Piranha TX-42: Dual rail rifles is a potentially interesting option, but at 114pts, it's a little steeply priced. Fusion Commanders are better, but if it's mobility you want, they may work.

Heavy Gun Drones: Not awful. You're paying 2pts for an extra wound on your drones. They might actually be a good way to fill heavy support choices on the cheap.

Sentry Turret: Missile pods are the only reliable choice here which makes them 68pts apiece. I'm not terribly impressed.

I agree with most of your assessments, but with these ones I disagre a bit.

- Hazard suits
Can take 4 drones per unit. A unit of 2 XV9s (1 ATS, 1 dc) with 4 drones and equipped with DBBC are just plain better than a unit of 3 XV8s with 3 BCs each and 2 drones; they cost the same (1p difference):


Maybe spamming 1 model with 4 drones could be an interesting proposition. I concur the other 3 weapon choices are bad, but the DBBC looks fine.
Finally, they are way cooler models

- TX-42
Rail Rifle option is close to 2x5 Pathfinders with 3 Rail Rifles in a Devilfish or in 2 Shieldlines (342 x 321 x 334)
3x TX-42 will have W21 at T6 Sv3+ at 16", while the pathies are W10 T3 Sv5+, but with either encasing W12 T7 Sv3+ at 8" (total W22) or W20 T6 Sv4+ at 6" (total W30).

TX-42 are forced to fire at the same target (so max 3 targets), while Pathfinders can either have 12 S5 shots (and 2 drones around) to help or return mortal wounds...
As shieldines are too slow, pathies in them have a different job of those in the Devilfish - I believe the latter are competing with the TX-42.

So, it's 3 W7 models at 16" vs 10 W1 models + 1 W12 model at 12" (degrading); the pathies have 9" on their disembarking turn.
I think the TX-42 has the edge here, for having 16" speed everytime can get them where they can use the rail rifle better (characters and multi-wound models with no invuls, fiddly vehicles on the backline).

- Heavy Gun Drones
They're really bad. As their base cost doesn't include the burst cannons, you have to buy them. They're 12 ppw, while a normal gun drone is 8.
The minimal unit size of the HGD is 2, at 76p. The same point cost brings out 9.5 Gun Drones. 9 Gun Drones fire 4.5x more shots than HGD, have (total) W9 instead of W6 and are better at protecting models against multi-wound weapons. I see absolutely no reason to field HGD at all.

- Sentry Turret
They're a bit similar to the HGD, but have T6 and don't compete for Heavy Support slots. They lost deep strike, however now can be buffed by a Drone Controller!
Their job now is to hold objectives in your backfield. They got the old CDS (5+ on overwatch)


The PR version is competitive with the BC for anything T4+ Sv2+ (T6 4+ is a relevant exception), but when under 12" it's better against T3+ Sv4+ and up. FB and MP are too costly in my view.

4 PR turrets are 168p. 3 crisis with 2x PR each are 192p. They'll fire 2/4 less shots and won't do much more if a DC is nearby the turrets

However, 168p are 21 Firewarriors...

Phew Tau are stinky in this edition...GW did a total gut job to this army, and it really shows. But hey, at least we can spam 100 drones or 100 kroot hounds!

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Phew Tau are stinky in this edition...GW did a total gut job to this army, and it really shows. But hey, at least we can spam 100 drones or 100 kroot hounds!

While I agree some of the units are massively overpriced Tau still have some powerful builds. Fusion is absolutely deadly when used well. Over the course of my last game 2 Monster creatures charge my commander in close combat. Drones absorbed the wounds then I fall back and fired everything I had doing 10+ wounds, -4 AP per turn almost every turn. I killed 2 MC’s, 1 Nid warrior squad and a bunch of gaunts this way.

Stealth teams with -1 to hit also performed excellent. Didn’t lose a single one due stealth and drones absorbing wounds. Burst cannons + fusion proved deadly both against big things and large mob squads. Fly + Drone absorption is so far working excellent for me.

EDIT@ Vespid are also great being highly mobile and deadly with -2 AP.

Somehow, I missed the extra gun costs on the HGD. Man, that's awful.

Plasma turrets might not be terrible, but given that they're immobile, I feel like you probably wouldn't get to take advantage of their rapid fire very often. Missile pods are cripplingly expensive this edition. I really hope they get revised some, but they might be the only fully usable option.

Maybe the TX-42s are fairly decent. They're quite durable for the cost. I want rail rifles to be good, but they're kind of weird tweener weapons. They'll be great for eliminating tough infantry and light vehicles, but they lack punch against medium and heavy targets. S6 is kind of a kick in the pants against the latter, but it'll be great against bikes and the like. With the S5 and fusion spam I've got drawn up, Terminator equivalents are a weak-ish point. That is, I can't deal with "massed" 2+ saves all that well. Maybe some 42s with rail rifles are a plausible solution?

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Phew Tau are stinky in this edition...GW did a total gut job to this army, and it really shows. But hey, at least we can spam 100 drones or 100 kroot hounds!

You said it. Adding up all the battle reports for this week compared to last week (I am adding up every batrep of Tau I can get my hands on) the tau have risen from an 86% loss rate to a 87% loss rate. I wonder if the same thing will happen again. The things we have that are "good" really can't compare to anything that's even so-so in another codex let alone their best stuff. Tau need a complete rebalance almost across the board.

The armies we seem to be having the most trouble with are Dark Eldar, Tyranids, and Necrons. Orks are seen as kind of weak in 8th too and everyone gives them outpouring of support. Tau are absolutely TERRIBLE in 8th and everyone tells us this is what we deserve. No justice and there never will be.

Tau have one of the worst codices in GW history now.

MilkmanAl wrote:
Somehow, I missed the extra gun costs on the HGD. Man, that's awful.

Plasma turrets might not be terrible, but given that they're immobile, I feel like you probably wouldn't get to take advantage of their rapid fire very often. Missile pods are cripplingly expensive this edition. I really hope they get revised some, but they might be the only fully usable option.

Maybe the TX-42s are fairly decent. They're quite durable for the cost. I want rail rifles to be good, but they're kind of weird tweener weapons. They'll be great for eliminating tough infantry and light vehicles, but they lack punch against medium and heavy targets. S6 is kind of a kick in the pants against the latter, but it'll be great against bikes and the like. With the S5 and fusion spam I've got drawn up, Terminator equivalents are a weak-ish point. That is, I can't deal with "massed" 2+ saves all that well. Maybe some 42s with rail rifles are a plausible solution?

I believe the best solutions to 2+ are either AP-4 weapons or overcharged CIBs

This codex is so bad I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt that they were not going to be so emotional in destroying the Tau. Did we have a strong codex last edition? Yes? Do we deserve to be hate targeted by the designers and balances this edition? No we don't. Necrons, Space Marines, Chaos Deamons, and Eldar are all good indexes in this edition despite all being far stronger than Tau in 7th.

The more I think about this I think this is purely an emotional discriminatory attack by those in power. From a rational perspective I simply can't see them justifying any of this.

I have quit 40k all together and AoS. No more of my Tau, DE, or Deathwatch armies. No work being done on my AoS projects either. I can't trust GW and those in balance that they won't just yank the rug out from under me and stick a knife in everything I have at any second in an internet filled hate reaction.

This move has put me off the entire hobby and I'm about to quit it entirely and hang up everything and dive into some other hobby instead.

There is only one thing making me not pack it up and in. GW the new one listens to feedback. I am hoping that they are sincere about ongoing balancing to existing units and that we see a timely balancing pass done on the Tau in a month or two.

If it wasn't for that small insignificant hope I wouldn't even be wasting my time where I am clearly not wanted.

I do not feel anywhere near as strongly about Tau in 8th as you do, but it's pretty clear that we got chopped down a bit too far in most areas. I've mentioned before that I figure the FLG dudes' involvement in playtesting had a lot to do with that, but if it's an emotional reaction that's responsible for our big suits' fall from grace, I would have expected Eldar to follow suit. In other words, I think they just screwed up.

Tau seem pretty weak overall, but we've got some shining stars in the mix. Gun Drones, in particular, are exceptionally good. Fire Warriors are very strong troops. Pathfinders are solid force multipliers for their cost. Commanders are potent offensive machines. Y'Vahras eat large units, especially vehicles like nothing else. Vespids are speedy and great for heavy infantry and light vehicles. It's not all bad.

Unfortunately, that's pretty much where the not-badness ends. We have far too many overcosted units to be diverse. We're like Tyranids were in 7th, in a lot of ways.

Need I remind you that reece and co. in frontline where a major player in the beta testing?

As in, the guys who's stance about tau is that its better off if we didn't exist, and that even pulled off direct rule-contradicting nerfs to the army (despite it not even being on top, and never EVER giving a spesific nerf to another army)


I really hope fires of cyrax will fix tau's forgeworld department, because right now they best it can offer is "not overly terrible" with the burst XV9s, and anything else is simply unplayable, either due to sucking or due to the rules actually not functioning as written.

I mean, FFS, 3-in-1 markerlights? who the heck though that was a good idea?
Railshark can't fire his heavy rail cannons if it moves, and it can't not move.
outlandish point costs.
Units refer to wargear they don't have.
Gear that does nothing, or identical to other, differently named gear (an "upgraded shield generator" is identical to a "shield generator", remoras may or may not have target locks, etc)

Its like they took all the errors in the GW index and thought to themselves "how can we feth this up further"?

 BoomWolf wrote:
Need I remind you that reece and co. in frontline where a major player in the beta testing?

As in, the guys who's stance about tau is that its better off if we didn't exist, and that even pulled off direct rule-contradicting nerfs to the army (despite it not even being on top, and never EVER giving a spesific nerf to another army)


I really hope fires of cyrax will fix tau's forgeworld department, because right now they best it can offer is "not overly terrible" with the burst XV9s, and anything else is simply unplayable, either due to sucking or due to the rules actually not functioning as written.

I mean, FFS, 3-in-1 markerlights? who the heck though that was a good idea?
Railshark can't fire his heavy rail cannons if it moves, and it can't not move.
outlandish point costs.
Units refer to wargear they don't have.
Gear that does nothing, or identical to other, differently named gear (an "upgraded shield generator" is identical to a "shield generator", remoras may or may not have target locks, etc)

Its like they took all the errors in the GW index and thought to themselves "how can we feth this up further"?

You don't need to remind me. I've been calling out some of their dubious decisions from the start but it's only starting to pick up momentum that they might be wrong about stuff. Also even things that don't directly affect the Tau. The only thing protecting Tau from being nuked more in the ITC is the fact the the voters didn't put up with their BS too much. With GW side stepping the voting and letting them have all that power we end up with this. Geez.. I am so surprised. That is sarcasm for the tone deaf.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Need I remind you that reece and co. in frontline where a major player in the beta testing?

As in, the guys who's stance about tau is that its better off if we didn't exist, and that even pulled off direct rule-contradicting nerfs to the army (despite it not even being on top, and never EVER giving a spesific nerf to another army)

I'm curious when did Reece say this? Because I listen to Signals all the time at work and have never heard him say that.

Wow, I am surprised to see all the hate. I have to admit that I was a little down and skeptical before 8th dropped, but after my 3rd game, things are looking up in a BIG way. I've taken some strong wins away already. Do I play my Tau the same way that I did in 7th? NO! Is that a bad thing? HECK NO!

The list that I have been taking consists of 8 breacher squads in 4 devilfish, darkstrider, 3 fusion commanders with gun drones, and 3 crisis suits with gun drones. (Notice, no marker light support? I don't need it. It is too much baggage!)

This is a very simple list that plays EXTREMELY aggressively. It is fun to play, challenging and engaging to play, and it is very strong. The trick comes in positioning your devilfish to support your alpha striking commanders and crisis suits. The breachers are crazy deadly, and the fish are durable enough to get them where they need to be. Bonus points, the devilfish can drop off more drones for the commanders to soak up, AND they can charge enemy units to keep them from charging and (sometimes) shooting.

This list, more than any other wins in the movement phase. You HAVE to be thinking a turn ahead for your breacher placement.

I have not tried Vespids yet, but I would love to try them to either augment alpha strike with fusion and crisis, or replace crisis all together, depending.

GW has given us reason to have faith that they will adjust points and strength as needed. Put your riptides and broadsides up on the shelf, and wait for them to come back. Until then, dust off some devilfish, and have some fun playing a completely reworked army in an engaging and fun style. I'm kissing them for these changes, not cursing them. I can't be the only one that loves tau, but hated the point and click style of old?

I miss my elegant jump suit jump crisis. I loved getting right in close and dancing away. I could also play troop heavy Tau well. Any tau, but overall I preferred the jsj days. Now it's just gunline and in your face gunline.

 Gamgee wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Phew Tau are stinky in this edition...GW did a total gut job to this army, and it really shows. But hey, at least we can spam 100 drones or 100 kroot hounds!

You said it. Adding up all the battle reports for this week compared to last week (I am adding up every batrep of Tau I can get my hands on) the tau have risen from an 86% loss rate to a 87% loss rate. I wonder if the same thing will happen again. The things we have that are "good" really can't compare to anything that's even so-so in another codex let alone their best stuff. Tau need a complete rebalance almost across the board.

The armies we seem to be having the most trouble with are Dark Eldar, Tyranids, and Necrons. Orks are seen as kind of weak in 8th too and everyone gives them outpouring of support. Tau are absolutely TERRIBLE in 8th and everyone tells us this is what we deserve. No justice and there never will be.

Tau have one of the worst codices in GW history now.

Spoiler:

Why are those a problem? Only faced Tyranids out of those 3 and I am currently running 100% win against Tyranids. Unlike last edition my suits can survived a round of close combat against a monster creature and unlike last edition I can kill monster creatures in 1 turn just from a single crisis suit or single commander. Fusions and Overcharged CIDS are deadly towards Nids and the drones absorb the hits I take. CIDS and Burst take out the mob squads. The Fly rule is way more powerful then the old JSJ rule. A Flying MC charged my commander the Nid player not realising he couldn't kill or even wound my commander in 1 round of combat due to drones and not realising I could Fly back and kill his MC in 1 round just from my commander. Even a basic suit with fusion can do the same thing.

I lost my first game terribly with Tau but once I got the hang of the new advantages Tau seemed powerful. With a change in play style Tau seem good now. Although I do agree some units over priced, I no longer use railguns.

EDIT: Don't forget Tau Plasma is now dirt cheap any deadly. A triple Plasma suit with a marker drone to absorb wounds and make 1s a reroll works great.

I'm glad you're making it work. It's kind of more of a fun challenge than lining up riptides was, and that's cool. Long live fish of fury 2.0.

That does not excuse the dreadful design of our stuff - like railguns being effectively the same as lascannons but we can only afford one for every three that imperials get. Our big suits are just ridiculous now.

I just want one RIptide to be viable but not a whole swarm. I love my RIptide model a lot and barely got to use it in 7th. My Y'vahrah will probably get more use than ever yay.

Suks wrote:
Wow, I am surprised to see all the hate. I have to admit that I was a little down and skeptical before 8th dropped, but after my 3rd game, things are looking up in a BIG way. I've taken some strong wins away already. Do I play my Tau the same way that I did in 7th? NO! Is that a bad thing? HECK NO!

The list that I have been taking consists of 8 breacher squads in 4 devilfish, darkstrider, 3 fusion commanders with gun drones, and 3 crisis suits with gun drones. (Notice, no marker light support? I don't need it. It is too much baggage!)

This is a very simple list that plays EXTREMELY aggressively. It is fun to play, challenging and engaging to play, and it is very strong. The trick comes in positioning your devilfish to support your alpha striking commanders and crisis suits. The breachers are crazy deadly, and the fish are durable enough to get them where they need to be. Bonus points, the devilfish can drop off more drones for the commanders to soak up, AND they can charge enemy units to keep them from charging and (sometimes) shooting.

This list, more than any other wins in the movement phase. You HAVE to be thinking a turn ahead for your breacher placement.

I have not tried Vespids yet, but I would love to try them to either augment alpha strike with fusion and crisis, or replace crisis all together, depending.

GW has given us reason to have faith that they will adjust points and strength as needed. Put your riptides and broadsides up on the shelf, and wait for them to come back. Until then, dust off some devilfish, and have some fun playing a completely reworked army in an engaging and fun style. I'm kissing them for these changes, not cursing them. I can't be the only one that loves tau, but hated the point and click style of old?

Heck yea its a bad thing!

The few things that actually work with "8th tau", are simply not tau at all.
That's not how tau are supposed to be! you are playing like SoB or something.

spamming commanders as anti-tank solutions, zero marker support, pure aggressive infantry advance-does any of this sounds like tau to you? because it doesn't to me.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Heck yea its a bad thing!

The few things that actually work with "8th tau", are simply not tau at all.
That's not how tau are supposed to be! you are playing like SoB or something.

spamming commanders as anti-tank solutions, zero marker support, pure aggressive infantry advance-does any of this sounds like tau to you? because it doesn't to me.

I understand what you are saying. I hear people saying that nothing works in Tau right now, and I'm here to tell you that there is stuff that works, it is just different. I am a bit over excited because this is the playstyle that I wanted to make work all of 7th and couldn't. I never liked the static gunline.

However, to say that Tau can't be played aggressively because it is un-Tau-like is crazy. Fusion is the best Tau option right now, so if you're not taking them, then you are crazy. I hardly call 3 commanders spam. In competitive play, I'm sure that many top tau players will be taking 5+ commanders at a minimum. They are simply too points efficient not to take them.

I get it that my list isn't going to be the list that most Tau players choose, but at the same time, I'm not sure that complaining that nothing works in the Tau index, then writing my thoughts off as invalid since they are not traditional tau play style is the answer either (even though traditionally Fish of Fury has been a totally valid Tau build).

Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

 BoomWolf wrote:
Need I remind you that reece and co. in frontline where a major player in the beta testing?

They weren't the only ones. They're only the most "internet famous". The TO's for Adepticon and the Nova Open had the same amount of playtesting and input.

 D6Damager wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
Need I remind you that reece and co. in frontline where a major player in the beta testing?

They weren't the only ones. They're only the most "internet famous". The TO's for Adepticon and the Nova Open had the same amount of playtesting and input.

I guessing the reason they've been left off the hook as mustache twirling villains is because he doesn't know their names.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Suks wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Heck yea its a bad thing!

The few things that actually work with "8th tau", are simply not tau at all.
That's not how tau are supposed to be! you are playing like SoB or something.

spamming commanders as anti-tank solutions, zero marker support, pure aggressive infantry advance-does any of this sounds like tau to you? because it doesn't to me.

I understand what you are saying. I hear people saying that nothing works in Tau right now, and I'm here to tell you that there is stuff that works, it is just different. I am a bit over excited because this is the playstyle that I wanted to make work all of 7th and couldn't. I never liked the static gunline.

However, to say that Tau can't be played aggressively because it is un-Tau-like is crazy. Fusion is the best Tau option right now, so if you're not taking them, then you are crazy. I hardly call 3 commanders spam. In competitive play, I'm sure that many top tau players will be taking 5+ commanders at a minimum. They are simply too points efficient not to take them.

I get it that my list isn't going to be the list that most Tau players choose, but at the same time, I'm not sure that complaining that nothing works in the Tau index, then writing my thoughts off as invalid since they are not traditional tau play style is the answer either (even though traditionally Fish of Fury has been a totally valid Tau build).

I'm also excited this aggressive style works now. I quit Tau awhile ago because it was no fun for me or my opponent to play them the regular JSJ/gunline way. I always viewed it as sitting on someone's chest and hitting them with their own arm. Fun for the bully and no one else.

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

Just becuase part of the Army was gutted it doesnt mean all of it was. Suits based around plasma or Fusion are way more powerfull then before and plasma is cheap. Its only 33pts to take 3 plasma weapons. 18 Plasma shots from 3 suits can cut though most things.

So one of my favorite units right now is crisis suits with plasma rifles and gun drones. They can drop down and really wipe out a ton of infantry models. s6 ap-3 is just good at mowing down infantry. Due to manta strike you can put them where you want in that 12" double tap range, pumping out a ton of damage turn 1 but on turn 2 you are usually out of double tap range and their effectiveness drops down.

In comparison our riptide can pump out 12 s6 ap-3 shots a turn, the big difference is that these shots are 36" compared to the plasma rifle's 12/24". In my games the riptide has been great at shooting down marines popping out of their transport after my commanders blew a whole in the tank. While crisis suits do more damage the turn they drop down, the riptide is sustained fire that will do more over two or three turns.

I think that they may be a little much for low point games but I do feel that they a place in our army. Of our big suits I think ghostneels is the best (though commanders do their job better) but I think riptides are second, better than broadsides (who I think suffer from too few support slots) and stormsurges which I feel need markerlight support I don't feel like taking.

Pottsey wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

Just becuase part of the Army was gutted it doesnt mean all of it was. Suits based around plasma or Fusion are way more powerfull then before and plasma is cheap. Its only 33pts to take 3 plasma weapons. 18 Plasma shots from 3 suits can cut though most things.

I see a theme happening with Tau and the other armies I play (Necrons & IG). It looks to me like GW has made it such that the best builds will require you to play models that collected dust in 7th. For Necrons that means I need 2x to 4x the number of warriors I currently own and probably another doomsday ark (the only one I do own saw the tabletop once since 5th). And over in IG I think you're going to see heavy artillery lists. A buddy of mine and I have very similar lists - I just don't own all of the tanks and bassilisks required to run it yet (15 bassies, russ's, manticores and wyverns). So I feel GW figured out a way to get us to buy stuff that we either don't have at all or don't have enough of to be competitive - and screw play style...

Love everything you said Suks! Can't wait to run Fish of Fury augmented by Flamer Crisis and Y'Vahras. Long live aggressive Tau!

 The Shrike wrote:
Love everything you said Suks! Can't wait to run Fish of Fury augmented by Flamer Crisis and Y'Vahras. Long live aggressive Tau!

Can't wait to read some of your battle reports with Fish of Fury! Thanks for being an inspiration to the Tau community. I still have PMs in my dakka inbox from back in 5th or 6th edition filled with advice for me from you when I was starting my Tau force! It makes me happy to hear some other positive voices!

 BoomWolf wrote:
Need I remind you that reece and co. in frontline where a major player in the beta testing??

And yet here we have an edition where flamers are a legitimate weapon choice for attacking airplanes moving at supersonic speeds, and you shoot at full effectiveness through your own friends at a target you can only see 5% of.

Makes me wonder, did Reece and co. drink GWs cool-aid, were they overruled, or did they just do a poor job too.

Pottsey wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

Just becuase part of the Army was gutted it doesnt mean all of it was. Suits based around plasma or Fusion are way more powerfull then before and plasma is cheap. Its only 33pts to take 3 plasma weapons. 18 Plasma shots from 3 suits can cut though most things.

Mathematically incorrect.

Fusion was FAR better in 7th, when you could actually preform a "deep" strike, rather than a "close" strike. 3 crisis suits with 3 fusions each clock at 315 points, and will merely get about 60% to take out a lousy rhino. that is NOT a viable answer to armor.
Sure, its better against MCs than it used to be, but tanks? don't make me laugh. in th two double-fusion suits were an actual threat to most tanks in the game, now 3 triple-fusion are not, and both suit and gun increased by cost massively.

As for plasma, math shows its not a good weapon, and being cheap doesn't help when the platform is overpriced. it's only mediocre in rapid range, but horrible outside of it and it just falls flat compared to the CiB.
In fact, anything a plasma suit does, a gun drone does better. every single target in the game.

 BoomWolf wrote:

Pottsey wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

Just becuase part of the Army was gutted it doesnt mean all of it was. Suits based around plasma or Fusion are way more powerfull then before and plasma is cheap. Its only 33pts to take 3 plasma weapons. 18 Plasma shots from 3 suits can cut though most things.

Mathematically incorrect.

Fusion was FAR better in 7th, when you could actually preform a "deep" strike, rather than a "close" strike. 3 crisis suits with 3 fusions each clock at 315 points, and will merely get about 60% to take out a lousy rhino. that is NOT a viable answer to armor.
Sure, its better against MCs than it used to be, but tanks? don't make me laugh. in th two double-fusion suits were an actual threat to most tanks in the game, now 3 triple-fusion are not, and both suit and gun increased by cost massively.

As for plasma, math shows its not a good weapon, and being cheap doesn't help when the platform is overpriced. it's only mediocre in rapid range, but horrible outside of it and it just falls flat compared to the CiB.
In fact, anything a plasma suit does, a gun drone does better. every single target in the game.

Homing beacon lets you deep strike within half range which means 2 fusion wounds on average will do 10 damage and blow up the rhino. My Stealth team only has 2 Fusions and when backed up with a rerolling 1’s they had no problem blowing up tanks. A Crisis team with way more Fusions should be even more effective.

How do you work out the math that 18 shots from drones at BS5, S5 beats 6 plasma shots at BS 4, S6 at -3 AP. Worse chance to hit, worse chance to wound and the target gets a 3+ armor save against the drones. While plasma has a better chance to hit, better chance to wound and often no armor save. Do you have a spreadsheet or a program to compare? I would have thought the extra survivability, with extra damage made the suits better than the drones at long and short range. In the games I have played so far the suits have outperformed the drones by a large amount.

Pottsey wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Pottsey wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

Just becuase part of the Army was gutted it doesnt mean all of it was. Suits based around plasma or Fusion are way more powerfull then before and plasma is cheap. Its only 33pts to take 3 plasma weapons. 18 Plasma shots from 3 suits can cut though most things.

Mathematically incorrect.

Fusion was FAR better in 7th, when you could actually preform a "deep" strike, rather than a "close" strike. 3 crisis suits with 3 fusions each clock at 315 points, and will merely get about 60% to take out a lousy rhino. that is NOT a viable answer to armor.
Sure, its better against MCs than it used to be, but tanks? don't make me laugh. in th two double-fusion suits were an actual threat to most tanks in the game, now 3 triple-fusion are not, and both suit and gun increased by cost massively.

As for plasma, math shows its not a good weapon, and being cheap doesn't help when the platform is overpriced. it's only mediocre in rapid range, but horrible outside of it and it just falls flat compared to the CiB.
In fact, anything a plasma suit does, a gun drone does better. every single target in the game.

Homing beacon lets you deep strike within half range which means 2 fusion wounds on average will do 10 damage and blow up the rhino. My Stealth team only has 2 Fusions and when backed up with a rerolling 1’s they had no problem blowing up tanks. A Crisis team with way more Fusions should be even more effective.

How do you work out the math that 18 shots from drones at BS5, S5 beats 6 plasma shots at BS 4, S6 at -3 AP. Worse chance to hit, worse chance to wound and the target gets a 3+ armor save against the drones. While plasma has a better chance to hit, better chance to wound and often no armor save. Do you have a spreadsheet or a program to compare? I would have thought the extra survivability, with extra damage made the suits better than the drones at long and short range. In the games I have played so far the suits have outperformed the drones by a large amount.

What Gun Drone statline are you invoking that provides exactly 18 shots as a comparison to a triple Plasma Crisis Suit?

Wait... 11 points each, plus the Crisis Suit base, = roughly 75 points per Plasma suit.

Divide 75 points by the 8 points per gun drone, and you have just over 9 drones...

Oh god, you don't think Gun Drones only have a single Pulse Carbine, do you?

They have two. TWO carbines, or roughly double the firepower you seem to think they have.

No wonder the Drones have been underperforming in your games - you're only using half their shooting potential!

And even if that weren't the whole case, the question remains whether the drones perform proportionally better for their points - if you're using a lot of crisis suits, you're almost by definition spending a lot of points. I happen to be of the opinion that Tau armies should have ubiquitous drones, but its dangerous to assume that from other people's lists... But the main point is that a LOT of points of inefficient firepower can still outperform, on an actual-damage-dealt level, smaller amounts of points of efficient firepower. 16 Drones are going to be put out more efficient firepower compared to almost anything else (I'm not Boomwolf, who can defend his "in all cases" situation himself, since I haven't exhaustively checked the mathhammer on it), but three triple plasma suits are almost twice the point costs, so even if they slightly outperformed those 16 drones (say, by killing their average 5 MEQs versus the Drones' average of ~4.7, and yes, that's the math when both parties are unboosted), they're not nearly as EFFICIENT at killing MEQs.

And even beyond that, Drones have access to more potential boosts to their firepower - even if their floor is lower (and I don't believe that to be the case), the ceiling is significantly higher for the Drones (can get an extra +1 to hit from DCs, can get an extra 1 or 2 shots per Drone if near a Fireblade) and the things useful for boosting only drones are relatively cheap (DC) or are decent in their own right and/or in conjunction with other parts of our list (Fireblade).

The Targeting Priority may be an issue with them, which means you need to bring the tools to deal with stuff that's less-efficient-than-they-could-be was targets for massed S5/0/1 fire - things like Fusion, CIB, Rails, etc. to remove high toughness good save blocker models - tools you'd want to bring regardless.

TL;DR: Look again at the Drone rules, and reconsider their efficiency in light of their raw capabilities (good) and overall potential (insanely awesome).

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

Pottsey wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

Pottsey wrote:

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
Honestly, I want to play with my expensive suits, and so does every other Tau player, and I want to still have a viable, effective army while doing so. The people advocating running 100 kroot hounds just make me cringe, because this apparently is the most effective build for the Tau in an army that used to be highly flexible. Anyone saying that this army wasn't gutted with a rusty knife needs some medication.

Just becuase part of the Army was gutted it doesnt mean all of it was. Suits based around plasma or Fusion are way more powerfull then before and plasma is cheap. Its only 33pts to take 3 plasma weapons. 18 Plasma shots from 3 suits can cut though most things.

Mathematically incorrect.

Fusion was FAR better in 7th, when you could actually preform a "deep" strike, rather than a "close" strike. 3 crisis suits with 3 fusions each clock at 315 points, and will merely get about 60% to take out a lousy rhino. that is NOT a viable answer to armor.
Sure, its better against MCs than it used to be, but tanks? don't make me laugh. in th two double-fusion suits were an actual threat to most tanks in the game, now 3 triple-fusion are not, and both suit and gun increased by cost massively.

As for plasma, math shows its not a good weapon, and being cheap doesn't help when the platform is overpriced. it's only mediocre in rapid range, but horrible outside of it and it just falls flat compared to the CiB.
In fact, anything a plasma suit does, a gun drone does better. every single target in the game.

Homing beacon lets you deep strike within half range which means 2 fusion wounds on average will do 10 damage and blow up the rhino. My Stealth team only has 2 Fusions and when backed up with a rerolling 1’s they had no problem blowing up tanks. A Crisis team with way more Fusions should be even more effective.

How do you work out the math that 18 shots from drones at BS5, S5 beats 6 plasma shots at BS 4, S6 at -3 AP. Worse chance to hit, worse chance to wound and the target gets a 3+ armor save against the drones. While plasma has a better chance to hit, better chance to wound and often no armor save. Do you have a spreadsheet or a program to compare? I would have thought the extra survivability, with extra damage made the suits better than the drones at long and short range. In the games I have played so far the suits have outperformed the drones by a large amount.

What Gun Drone statline are you invoking that provides exactly 18 shots as a comparison to a triple Plasma Crisis Suit?

Wait... 11 points each, plus the Crisis Suit base, = roughly 75 points per Plasma suit.

Divide 75 points by the 8 points per gun drone, and you have just over 9 drones...

Oh god, you don't think Gun Drones only have a single Pulse Carbine, do you?

They have two. TWO carbines, or roughly double the firepower you seem to think they have.

No wonder the Drones have been underperforming in your games - you're only using half their shooting potential!

And even if that weren't the whole case, the question remains whether the drones perform proportionally better for their points - if you're using a lot of crisis suits, you're almost by definition spending a lot of points. I happen to be of the opinion that Tau armies should have ubiquitous drones, but its dangerous to assume that from other people's lists... But the main point is that a LOT of points of inefficient firepower can still outperform, on an actual-damage-dealt level, smaller amounts of points of efficient firepower. 16 Drones are going to be put out more efficient firepower compared to almost anything else (I'm not Boomwolf, who can defend his "in all cases" situation himself, since I haven't exhaustively checked the mathhammer on it), but three triple plasma suits are almost twice the point costs, so even if they slightly outperformed those 16 drones (say, by killing their average 5 MEQs versus the Drones' average of ~4.7, and yes, that's the math when both parties are unboosted), they're not nearly as EFFICIENT at killing MEQs.

And even beyond that, Drones have access to more potential boosts to their firepower - even if their floor is lower (and I don't believe that to be the case), the ceiling is significantly higher for the Drones (can get an extra +1 to hit from DCs, can get an extra 1 or 2 shots per Drone if near a Fireblade) and the things useful for boosting only drones are relatively cheap (DC) or are decent in their own right and/or in conjunction with other parts of our list (Fireblade).

The Targeting Priority may be an issue with them, which means you need to bring the tools to deal with stuff that's less-efficient-than-they-could-be was targets for massed S5/0/1 fire - things like Fusion, CIB, Rails, etc. to remove high toughness good save blocker models - tools you'd want to bring regardless.

TL;DR: Look again at the Drone rules, and reconsider their efficiency in light of their raw capabilities (good) and overall potential (insanely awesome).

What on earth makes you think that I am using gun drones as single pulse carbines? For 75pts its 1 suit or 9 drones so 18 gun shots V up to 6 plasma shots. For 18 drones you can afford 2 suits and 2 suits will outperform those drones by a lot against MEQs.

How are you getting an average of 4.7 wounds against MEGS from 9 drones it’s more like way under 2 isn’t it? Not got a spreadsheet on hand but it’s something 1 suit kill around x3 more MEGS than the those drone. Unless I just made a mistake the suits are x3 more efficient if not better.

Actually I do have a spreadsheet of just how many wounds are expected from quite a few units, their various setups, and their correlating point efficiency against a wide veraity of targets, at each level of ML benefits.

So i can outright say-a team of stealth suits with 2 fusions, and 4 burst cannons should not really be able to take down a rhino, as that takes 9 fusion blasters to accomplish.

With rerolls of 1 AND being in half range, 2 fusions and 4 bursts should do about 2.5 wounds on average to a rhino.


As for drones vs plasma, lets assume the target is a space marine.
I know i need to spend 27 points into drones for each 1 average wound.
Crisis with triple plasma require 90, 45 is half range,
Commander with quad plasma does it in 64.8, or 32.4 if in half range.

When you compare drone VS plasma, even against T5 in 2+ save, who is pcractically the worst scenario possible for the drone comparison here, the drone outpreform. the plasma is THAT bad.


So yea, the commander with plasma can't keep up with the gun drones.
The crisis suit is outright garbage, it NEVER manages to keep up with the commander unless you compare pure flamer outfit, in fact the crisis suit rarely bring out viable results in any setup against any target, only with the fusion against heavy targets or with flamers against light targets they bring anything remotely useful.
And the fusion role is simply outdone by the commander, even with full 5 markers that the commander does not benefit from.


As for homing beacon letting you DS within 9 inches, that's nice and dandy, but requires a SECOND unit to be a delivery method, while not being cheap, and not actually being all that reliable.
And I'm talking rhino here, not land raider or IK. a simple rhino that used to die to 2-3 fusions, now take 9.
And each of said fusions costs more, and are harder to bring into the melta range.

Not that the melta range is all that better actually, unlike before the difference between half and full range isn't great.

Pottsey wrote:


What on earth makes you think that I am using gun drones as single pulse carbines? For 75pts its 1 suit or 9 drones so 18 gun shots V up to 6 plasma shots. For 18 drones you can afford 2 suits and 2 suits will outperform those drones by a lot against MEQs.

How are you getting an average of 4.7 wounds against MEGS from 9 drones it’s more like way under 2 isn’t it? Not got a spreadsheet on hand but it’s something 1 suit kill around x3 more MEGS than the those drone. Unless I just made a mistake the suits are x3 more efficient if not better.

You ARE using single carbine drones x_x
9 drones=36 shots. not 18.
Drones throw buckets of dice at the enemy.
They win by sheer numbers.

Crisis can deepstrike, do not have to target the nearest enemy unit, have toughness 5, 3w, and can bring drones with them for more ablative wounds for commanders.

These things also matter. I'm not disputing that gun drones are stupid points efficient right now, and that certainly gives them an edge over some other stuff, but it's not enough of a reason to take an army comprised of ONLY them. GW has stated that they will adjust points on a somewhat regular schedule (annually maybe?), so I would look for gun drones to come up in cost at that point.

Okay, what are you fellas running on your Commanders? I'm really liking quad fusion, but I'm willing to give triple CIB and ATS a whirl. As I recall from the spreadsheets posted in GD, that was the second most effective set-up overall after fusions. My army doesn't have a whole lot of high strength, high RoF options, so I figured I'd give it a whirl. The weapons other than the CIB and fusion just don't seem worthwhile, given that you can drop down on your chosen target at will. Missile pods are excruciatingly expensive, and as above their range isn't as big of a boon as it once was.

 BoomWolf wrote:
“So i can outright say-a team of stealth suits with 2 fusions, and 4 burst cannons should not really be able to take down a rhino, as that takes 9 fusion blasters to accomplish.

With rerolls of 1 AND being in half range, 2 fusions and 4 bursts should do about 2.5 wounds on average to a rhino.”

That seems wrong although I dont have a spreadsheet for 8th yet. On average I would expact 1 fusion wounding per volley and that fusion alone would do around 4 to 5 damage per wound at half range. Then the burst cannons on top. If both fusions hit on the same turn with burst cannons you expact to do over 10 damage that volly and bow the rino up. If I am wrong please explain where so I can learn.

As for drones I apologize big time. I see what you mean which means all my other numbers are way off. It also means when I was last playing against nids with half my army as drones and the rest as fusion I won without using half my drone shots! So I am still confused at why people are saying nids are one of the hardest to play against as Tau.

As long as you keep away from the bad units like the railguns and Riptide Tau seem pretty good this edition. Although I do agree half the Tau codex is bad.

So I think it is really easy to just look at damage output vs pt cost and consider something the best unit. But you need to take into consideration survivability and versatility. Drones dish out a ton of damage but they also die much easier than crisis suits. In addition your swarms of drones flee battle after a few die (why do drons have poor leadership when they are bots?). If you are playing tactical objectives, deep striking your crisis suits backed up with some drones is going to be a lot better than trying to get your drones over there an hold it down with a pile of drones. Whats more I am not sure you realize what a pain shooting the closest target is. If a unit of marines jumps out of their rhino and the rhino goes in front of them all of a sudden you are having to shoot down a rhino and not the marines which would be a better target for the drones. If that rhino popped smoke you will be having an even worst time. When doing your damage calculations do you consider that crisis suits are almost always going to be able to shoot at the target (where drones will often be out of range or have to shoot at something else) Do you consider how many drones you will have if your opponent goes first or if they steal the initiative? Drones and crisis suits play two very different roles in the army.

Minor rules question. I don't play Tau but faced them for the first time this weekend and was doing some reading today on them. Found some....oddities.

A commander can have 4 guns....seems fair, but whatever. I figured fusion blaster, plasma rifle, missile pod, burst cannon...you know the standard Crisis loadouts.

What is stopping me (aside from common sense and a sense of fair-play) from paying 244 points and putting 4 cluster rocket systems on him? 16D6 S5 shots? At BS 2+?

Or 4 railguns? 228 points for 4 railgun shots on a "character" platform so he can lurk behind troops?

Am I missing something here? Tell me I'm wrong, please.

Pottsey wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:
“So i can outright say-a team of stealth suits with 2 fusions, and 4 burst cannons should not really be able to take down a rhino, as that takes 9 fusion blasters to accomplish.

With rerolls of 1 AND being in half range, 2 fusions and 4 bursts should do about 2.5 wounds on average to a rhino.”

That seems wrong although I dont have a spreadsheet for 8th yet. On average I would expact 1 fusion wounding per volley and that fusion alone would do around 4 to 5 damage per wound at half range. Then the burst cannons on top. If both fusions hit on the same turn with burst cannons you expact to do over 10 damage that volly and bow the rino up. If I am wrong please explain where so I can learn.

Think of it generally, you're looking at 2 fusion shots and 16 burst shots per shooting turn, with sliiiiightly-better-than-half accuracy, which need to wound, get through armor, and roll damage (where applicable). Realistically, you're looking at 1 fusion hit and 9 or 10 burst cannon hits per shooting round. Against a Rhino, you're now looking at 2/3 of a fusion wound and roughly 3 burst cannon wounds (of which, 2 will be saved by the Rhino).

Fusion within half range average approximately 4.5 damage per roll. Overall damage is thus expected to be 4.5 x (2/3) +1 ~=4 wounds. Not sure where BoomWolf got his math, but its possible I missed a step in there...

As for drones I apologize big time. I see what you mean which means all my other numbers are way off. It also means when I was last playing against nids with half my army as drones and the rest as fusion I won without using half my drone shots! So I am still confused at why people are saying nids are one of the hardest to play against as Tau.

Drones are just that awesome. As I mentioned, they also have a high potential - they can be outputting 5 or 6 (depends on rule interpretation) BS 3+ (reroll 1s) pulse shots a turn for so few points a pop, on a reasonably durable platform, with reasonable speed... and they're cheap enough that sacrificing them as ablative wounds for infantry and battlesuits (because sometimes you need 4 BS2+ Fusions more than 2+ Pulse Carbines).

As long as you keep away from the bad units like the railguns and Riptide Tau seem pretty good this edition. Although I do agree half the Tau codex is bad.

Mostly agreeable sentiment, but then, that's part of what we're trying to do here in this thread: Sort the wheat from the chaff, find the gems in the rough, and generally figure out what works for Tau when, and why.

Part of that process is going through the potential gems and trying to find not only their overall worth (their tier) but their unique value (what they can do in the right circumstances).

That's all we're trying to do here: figure out the proper tools that COULD be used for the job, and determining which among those tools is best, whether that's generally, in specific circumstances, or rarely both.

 Carnage43 wrote:
Minor rules question. I don't play Tau but faced them for the first time this weekend and was doing some reading today on them. Found some....oddities.

A commander can have 4 guns....seems fair, but whatever. I figured fusion blaster, plasma rifle, missile pod, burst cannon...you know the standard Crisis loadouts.

What is stopping me (aside from common sense and a sense of fair-play) from paying 244 points and putting 4 cluster rocket systems on him? 16D6 S5 shots? At BS 2+?

Or 4 railguns? 228 points for 4 railgun shots on a "character" platform so he can lurk behind troops?

Am I missing something here? Tell me I'm wrong, please.

Commanders (and all suits) only have access to the ranged weapons list which only includes the usual suit weapons (plasma, fusion, burst, ion blaster, AFP, flamer, and missiles)

Have no fear of railguns on suits or cluster rockets on anything but a surge.

 Carnage43 wrote:

What is stopping me (aside from common sense and a sense of fair-play) from paying 244 points and putting 4 cluster rocket systems on him? 16D6 S5 shots? At BS 2+?

The rules of the unit, a crisis commander can put 4 weapons on him, but all of them must be from the section "ranged weapons and support system". Here you have a limited selection of weapons, not all the tau weapons, you know, mostly "the standard Crisis loadouts".
Your commander can put 16 S5 shots, but not 16D6 S5, unless, of course, he use a Ta'Unar suit, those robots are so absurdly cramped with weapons to blush an ork engineer.

 Carnage43 wrote:
Minor rules question. I don't play Tau but faced them for the first time this weekend and was doing some reading today on them. Found some....oddities.

A commander can have 4 guns....seems fair, but whatever. I figured fusion blaster, plasma rifle, missile pod, burst cannon...you know the standard Crisis loadouts.

What is stopping me (aside from common sense and a sense of fair-play) from paying 244 points and putting 4 cluster rocket systems on him? 16D6 S5 shots? At BS 2+?

Or 4 railguns? 228 points for 4 railgun shots on a "character" platform so he can lurk behind troops?

Am I missing something here? Tell me I'm wrong, please.

If its anything like the SM book it will say you may take items for the X weapon list which lists what weapons you can take

otherwise i would be mounting 4 hammer head rail cannons on that bastard.


damnit ninjaed

Theoryhammer aside, Tau have outperformed every other army I've seen played so far. The list:

IG, with 2 conscripts blobs
Nids
Space Wolves (undefeated against everything not Tau)
Vanilla Marines
Eldar 1-(Avatar, squads, and psykers) 2-(aspects)

Tau look good. Commanders are nasty and flexible. Kroot and FW have great troop synergy. Drones fit their role well, fluff and tabletop-wise. Triple flamer suit units dropped with a Homing Beacon are versatile, nasty, and can wreck an assault. Drop them and Commanders behind an army charging your static shooting. They can destroy enemy big guns, or the second wave of an assault. Between screens and Fall Back, you can absolutely run a combined arms force that has the flexibility to win different missions and match up against different army types.

Is it just me, or are skyrays unable to perform the air defense role they're built with under the new rules.

You get six seeker missiles. Assuming you've got markerlight hits and they all hit their target, that's six wounds, total. It's nice that you get to inflict a mortal wound, ignoring armor and invul saves, but six total wounds doesn't cut it anymore - you can't kill any real vehicle with six wounds. (Sure, you can take out an ork buggy, trading your 150 point tank for their 75 point one)

Ork fighters, pretty much flying wrecks, have 12 wounds. A Flying Hive Tyrant has 10. These used to be a Skyray's bread and butter targets. Now, it can't take either one out.

What reason is there to take this tank now?

 Redbeard wrote:
Is it just me, or are skyrays unable to perform the air defense role they're built with under the new rules.

You get six seeker missiles. Assuming you've got markerlight hits and they all hit their target, that's six wounds, total. It's nice that you get to inflict a mortal wound, ignoring armor and invul saves, but six total wounds doesn't cut it anymore - you can't kill any real vehicle with six wounds. (Sure, you can take out an ork buggy, trading your 150 point tank for their 75 point one)

Ork fighters, pretty much flying wrecks, have 12 wounds. A Flying Hive Tyrant has 10. These used to be a Skyray's bread and butter targets. Now, it can't take either one out.

What reason is there to take this tank now?

I have to agree. Skyrays are trash. But, if you can get a bead on a character, slap a couple of markerlights on him...

Very iffy, but a possible use. I'm still not planning on running Skyrays myself.

 Redbeard wrote:
Is it just me, or are skyrays unable to perform the air defense role they're built with under the new rules.

You get six seeker missiles. Assuming you've got markerlight hits and they all hit their target, that's six wounds, total. It's nice that you get to inflict a mortal wound, ignoring armor and invul saves, but six total wounds doesn't cut it anymore - you can't kill any real vehicle with six wounds. (Sure, you can take out an ork buggy, trading your 150 point tank for their 75 point one)

Ork fighters, pretty much flying wrecks, have 12 wounds. A Flying Hive Tyrant has 10. These used to be a Skyray's bread and butter targets. Now, it can't take either one out.

What reason is there to take this tank now?

Skyrays are the worst now
I'm disappointed because they have been my favorites for a long time.

Seeker Missiles need to be d3 Mortal Wounds to be anywhere near viable. Even then it's questionable.
The silliest aspect of the Skyray? It costs 2 more points than the Hammerhead

or maybe the Skyray regenerated 3 Seeker Missiles every turn.

xmbk wrote:
Theoryhammer aside, Tau have outperformed every other army I've seen played so far. The list:

IG, with 2 conscripts blobs
Nids
Space Wolves (undefeated against everything not Tau)
Vanilla Marines
Eldar 1-(Avatar, squads, and psykers) 2-(aspects)

Tau look good. Commanders are nasty and flexible. Kroot and FW have great troop synergy. Drones fit their role well, fluff and tabletop-wise. Triple flamer suit units dropped with a Homing Beacon are versatile, nasty, and can wreck an assault. Drop them and Commanders behind an army charging your static shooting. They can destroy enemy big guns, or the second wave of an assault. Between screens and Fall Back, you can absolutely run a combined arms force that has the flexibility to win different missions and match up against different army types.

I am curious what this Space Wolf players list looked like?

Thanks for explaining everything Unusual Suspect.

Now I know most consider broadsides poor but could 1 single broadside with early warning system be good under certain circumstances? As far as I can see there is no limit to how often the override can trigger per turn so if a lot of units deep strikes that’s a lot of extra shots. Also spore mines when they miss count as a unit being setup mid battle so you can wipe them out for free without wasting other units.

The EWO is good. On a stormsurge it's really good. In fact I'd say it's the one possible justification for taking a surge. With a shield generator, ATS, EWO and pulse driver cannon the stormsurge ought to do some good, sat on an objective somewhere.

The trouble with putting it on a broadside is that it wants an ATS and the firepower it has on its own probably isn't enough. You'll deter scions but not much more.

Pottsey wrote:
Thanks for explaining everything Unusual Suspect.

Now I know most consider broadsides poor but could 1 single broadside with early warning system be good under certain circumstances? As far as I can see there is no limit to how often the override can trigger per turn so if a lot of units deep strikes that’s a lot of extra shots. Also spore mines when they miss count as a unit being setup mid battle so you can wipe them out for free without wasting other units.

EWO is the only thing that makes Broadsides still viable

Even if it doesn't get a shot off, if it acted a deterrent that pushed enemies away it succeeded

Well, the results of the first few ITC tournaments of 8th are in and the doom and gloom crowd have been subtly rebuked, nor are we top tier.

Tau come in just outside the top 10 (of 34 collected in the data), a crowded space, at about 58 points per player. This is only 202 players worth of data, surely this will change. I think we need to see a larger event like NOVA, with a talented general or two choosing Tau in order to make a real judgment.

106,4 Adeptus Ministorum 1

93,5 Knights Renegades 1
91,5 Militarum Tempestus 3
90,4 Grey Knights 3

69,4 Adepta Sororitas 6
68,3 Chaos 6
65,7 Imperium 7
64,2 Chaos Daemons 7
61,2 Death Watch 2

58,7 Dark Eldar 6
58,2 Tau Empire 11
57,7 Tyranids 17
56,9 Death Guard 3
56,1 Ynnari 7
55,8 Dark Angels 5
54,8 Cult Mechanicus 5
52 Harlequins 8
51,5 Adeptus Astartes 11
51,3 Aeldari 6
50,8 World Eaters 2
50,5 Genesteler Cult 4

49,6 Necrons 13
49,6 Imperial Knights 3
49,4 Ultramarines 3
48,5 Astra Militarum 13
46,3 Blood Angels 13
42,7 Space Wolves 5
40,6 Orks 14
40,3 Chaos Space Marines 12

32,5 Thousand Sons 1
32,5 Asuryani 1
32,5 Imperial Fists 1
31,7 Adeptus Costudes 1
31,3 Skitarii 1

For now, I maintain my stance that Tau are competitive in 8th, perhaps with a narrower selection for competitive list construction than some other factions. Once again, I stress to the doom and gloom crowd that we couldn't scratch the top tier Daemon/Imperial Soup builds of last edition so even if many of our units have been nerfed, we should be pleased to at least have a shot in this edition even if it's a long shot measured against Militarum Tempestus or Knights.

The data becomes more promising if you take GW at their word and consider that points updates will be coming in the codices to regress the statistical outliers at present to the mean. For example, despite Orks being declared "Back" they are near the bottom of the per-player scores. The hope in the data however stems from the large pool in the middle of per-player scores hovering between 49-69. This is where most factions live and where GW should want to push those currently at the top and bottom of the curve.

GW has completely overhauled the game. When Sigmar released there was doom and gloom as well. People laughed at how bad the game was. We should fee lucky we've avoided that. Now its core rules are the foundation for both games. It may take an 8th ed 2.0 next year, or simply a gradual release of codices, but I'm confident this is a step in the right direction. We should exercise patience as GW listens to the data, and give them the opportunity to make the necessary tweaks.

like many have pointed out: too few matches to make any statement about army performance.

 Redbeard wrote:
Is it just me, or are skyrays unable to perform the air defense role they're built with under the new rules.

You get six seeker missiles. Assuming you've got markerlight hits and they all hit their target, that's six wounds, total. It's nice that you get to inflict a mortal wound, ignoring armor and invul saves, but six total wounds doesn't cut it anymore - you can't kill any real vehicle with six wounds. (Sure, you can take out an ork buggy, trading your 150 point tank for their 75 point one)

Ork fighters, pretty much flying wrecks, have 12 wounds. A Flying Hive Tyrant has 10. These used to be a Skyray's bread and butter targets. Now, it can't take either one out.

What reason is there to take this tank now?

Sky Rays are now character killers (if you can target them, of course). Although, in great numbers, Sky Rays become much more dangerous (3 of them will fire 18 mortal wounds shots)... But for that price we can take a Y'vahra, for example

Aeri wrote:
like many have pointed out: too few matches to make any statement about army performance.

I agree, but Tau were I think the third most taken army? So one of the larger sample sizes to analyze.

 The Shrike wrote:
Well, the results of the first few ITC tournaments of 8th are in and the doom and gloom crowd have been subtly rebuked, nor are we top tier.

Tau come in just outside the top 10 (of 34 collected in the data), a crowded space, at about 58 points per player. This is only 202 players worth of data, surely this will change. I think we need to see a larger event like NOVA, with a talented general or two choosing Tau in order to make a real judgment.

106,4 Sisters of Battle 1
91,5 Imperial Guard - Tempest 3
90,4 Grey Knights 3
68,3 Chaos 6
65,7 Space Marines 7
64,2 Chaos Daemons 7
58,7 Dark Eldar 6
58,2 Tau Empire 11
57,7 Tyranids 17
51,3 Eldar 6
50,5 Genesteler Cult 4
49,6 Necrons 13
48,5 Imperial Guard
46,3 Blood Angels 13
42,7 Space Wolves 5
40,6 Orks 14
31,3 Skitarii 1

Refined to list only the 'big armies', changed the name of a few of them to their more commonly known names. It's pretty tricky now, since a lot of armies are really open these days.

 Vector Strike wrote:

Sky Rays are now character killers (if you can target them, of course). Although, in great numbers, Sky Rays become much more dangerous (3 of them will fire 18 mortal wounds shots)... But for that price we can take a Y'vahra, for example

I wouldn't be surprised if a Railhead dealt 6 mortal wounds per game...

 The Shrike wrote:

Aeri wrote:
like many have pointed out: too few matches to make any statement about army performance.

I agree, but Tau were I think the third most taken army? So one of the larger sample sizes to analyze.

Seems to be about 8th most taken

Shrike - For us uneducated folk, can you explain how to read the data above?

ArmchairArbiter wrote:


I am curious what this Space Wolf players list looked like?

WG with Arjac
Bjorn
Ven Dread with axe and shield
Iron Priest on wolf
TWC with Canis and Harald

Bjorn is a beast, WG are nasty and Arjac is great support for them, and TWC with char support is a juggernaut. 3++ everywhere.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Talamare wrote:

Pottsey wrote:
Thanks for explaining everything Unusual Suspect.

Now I know most consider broadsides poor but could 1 single broadside with early warning system be good under certain circumstances? As far as I can see there is no limit to how often the override can trigger per turn so if a lot of units deep strikes that’s a lot of extra shots. Also spore mines when they miss count as a unit being setup mid battle so you can wipe them out for free without wasting other units.

EWO is the only thing that makes Broadsides still viable

Even if it doesn't get a shot off, if it acted a deterrent that pushed enemies away it succeeded

I've always been partial to the Broads, but they seem overcosted now. Fusion Commanders just seem better for the points, the mobility is a big difference. But if you go static, the Broads can easily be protected by drone/Kroot from deep strikers.

I take it that the second number is the number of players who took the army? In that case sisters of battle seem very good, but not as dominant as the one player getting 104 would appear. IG and GKs look excellent though.

It's very early to be making much analysis of performance. The sample sizes are very small and most people won't have had time to produce new armies.

This applies a lot to Tau, who need quite different stuff to do well under the new system. Fish of Fury is now the way to go, but I only own one devilfish - and 0 breachers! I'm actually in the position that making a good Tau army would effectively mean making a whole new army from scratch - so different would it be to what I have now. That might not be so bad, actually.

I think that the synergy between crisis suits and gun drones might mean that suits continue to be good; possibly better than they were in 7th. Suits with plasma or CIBs provide an alternative source of dakka to breachers. They are pricey, but not outrageously so, don't need to get within 5" to maximise effectiveness and don't require a transport.

I'm curious to see how ghostkeels fit in. I'm not convinced that crisis suits and commanders don't just do the same job, better.

Quick question about stealth drones and Ghostkeels.

There seems to be a big weakness that, because the Stealth Drones (and in fact all drones) count as a separate unit, whats to stop someone just targeting the two stealth drones with some light weapons, killing them, then firing on the Ghostkeel without the -2 modifier?

It seems you'll never get the accumulated -2 to hit defence as its not going to be hard to blow away 2 drones. It's always going to be -1 to hit

Same goes for using gun drones as ablative wounds. they'll be quickly targeted and removed, or am I missing something?

 obsidianaura wrote:
Quick question about stealth drones and Ghostkeels.

There seems to be a big weakness that, because the Stealth Drones (and in fact all drones) count as a separate unit, whats to stop someone just targeting the two stealth drones with some light weapons, killing them, then firing on the Ghostkeel without the -2 modifier?

It seems you'll never get the accumulated -2 to hit defence as its not going to be hard to blow away 2 drones. It's always going to be -1 to hit

Same goes for using gun drones as ablative wounds. they'll be quickly targeted and removed, or am I missing something?

Nothing.

except hiding it behind something so they cant shoot it.

You shouldnt expect to get first blood unless you are going first.

 obsidianaura wrote:
Quick question about stealth drones and Ghostkeels.

There seems to be a big weakness that, because the Stealth Drones (and in fact all drones) count as a separate unit, whats to stop someone just targeting the two stealth drones with some light weapons, killing them, then firing on the Ghostkeel without the -2 modifier?

It seems you'll never get the accumulated -2 to hit defence as its not going to be hard to blow away 2 drones. It's always going to be -1 to hit

Same goes for using gun drones as ablative wounds. they'll be quickly targeted and removed, or am I missing something?

At least for basic drones that doesn’t matter. If the drone is targeted and removed it’s still done the same job as moving a wound from a suit to the drone. Same result either way, the drone gets the wound and dies leaving the suit to blast away.

Suks wrote:
Shrike - For us uneducated folk, can you explain how to read the data above?

Sorry, should have mentioned this in the first post. The first number is the average battle points earned for each player who ran that faction; the second is number of players who took the faction.

I've just been having a look at the Forgeworld index. Cool that they have made an epub version.

XV9s seem decent - at least with some load-outs. The twin-linked burst cannons seem best, though they do provide yet more S5 shooting, which may not be required. You get decent efficiency by putting an ATS on them. The photon launchers that give opponents -2 on their charge ranges makes going within 18" of the enemy (or closer) a lot safer.

Meanwhile the pulse submunitions rifle has a 30" range and strength 6, in exchange for half as many shots as the burst cannons - and is a bit cheaper. I've got a couple of these (made by sticking rail rifles from the TX-42 onto hazard suits). They appear to be reasonably good, though not amazing.

Fusion cascades are an interesting option. You get comparable firepower to a commander, with less range - and obviously not the 2+ BS. They are a fair bit cheaper than commanders though, and you have a support system slot that you could use for a shield generator or DC. Much more expensive than the other guns though.

I'm going to look and see if I can find the twin-burst cannons I didn't use on my suits and maybe stick them on the hazards after all. Might even run the actual TX-42s with the rail rifles, as they seem like decent little toys now.

Mandragola wrote:
I've just been having a look at the Forgeworld index. Cool that they have made an epub version.

XV9s seem decent - at least with some load-outs. The twin-linked burst cannons seem best, though they do provide yet more S5 shooting, which may not be required. You get decent efficiency by putting an ATS on them. The photon launchers that give opponents -2 on their charge ranges makes going within 18" of the enemy (or closer) a lot safer.

Meanwhile the pulse submunitions rifle has a 30" range and strength 6, in exchange for half as many shots as the burst cannons - and is a bit cheaper. I've got a couple of these (made by sticking rail rifles from the TX-42 onto hazard suits). They appear to be reasonably good, though not amazing.

Fusion cascades are an interesting option. You get comparable firepower to a commander, with less range - and obviously not the 2+ BS. They are a fair bit cheaper than commanders though, and you have a support system slot that you could use for a shield generator or DC. Much more expensive than the other guns though.

I'm going to look and see if I can find the twin-burst cannons I didn't use on my suits and maybe stick them on the hazards after all. Might even run the actual TX-42s with the rail rifles, as they seem like decent little toys now.

I'd say only the TBBC build is really worth it. FC build is worse than the Quad Commander; the other 2 options are plain worse than the TBBC

How do people go about drone herding? Specifically I'm talking about Drone Controllers for more reliable shooting.

Commanders are probably a no-go. BS2+ is too good to waste on fewer weapons.

Stealth Battlesuits bring lots more S5 Dakka and the odd Fusion gun. Doesn't seem great.

Crisis Suits seem a bit better, but those weapon/support option slots are precious.

Ghostkeels seem to have good synergy. Shoot at the Ghostkeel, miss a lot and drones self-sacrifice. Shoot at the drones and Ghostkeel rolls up with lots of Fusion firepower.

Ghostkeels, Stealth Suits, Hazards or any of the big suits, as they don't lose slots for DCs

 John Prins wrote:
How do people go about drone herding? Specifically I'm talking about Drone Controllers for more reliable shooting.

Commanders are probably a no-go. BS2+ is too good to waste on fewer weapons.

Stealth Battlesuits bring lots more S5 Dakka and the odd Fusion gun. Doesn't seem great.

Crisis Suits seem a bit better, but those weapon/support option slots are precious.

Ghostkeels seem to have good synergy. Shoot at the Ghostkeel, miss a lot and drones self-sacrifice. Shoot at the drones and Ghostkeel rolls up with lots of Fusion firepower.

Stealthsuits are considered the 'goto' Drone Controllers at the moment

Yeah, Stealth Suits are my choice. They're really the only suit that doesn't have a significantly better use of their support system slot. Commanders and, to a lesser extent, Crisis Suits need weapons (and maybe an ATS), while big suits need ATS, shield generators, target locks, etc. Stealth Suits don't really need any of that.

XV9's with the rifles?

MilkmanAl wrote:
Yeah, Stealth Suits are my choice. They're really the only suit that doesn't have a significantly better use of their support system slot. Commanders and, to a lesser extent, Crisis Suits need weapons (and maybe an ATS), while big suits need ATS, shield generators, target locks, etc. Stealth Suits don't really need any of that.

Yeah, I can only see a Ghostkeel running Fusion Collider + Twin Fusion Blaster ignoring ATS, but not Target Lock. Maybe if you're willing to bring Shield Drones along as well you might get away without a Shield Generator. Darn Tau have too many Fast Attack slots I want to use. I suspect Outrider Detachments will be popular...

Just had my 9th game of 8th. 6-3 so far in the new edition. Played the vaunted Ynnari.

Quick takes:

-Soulburst can be maneuvered around. It is powerful, but if your opponent has to spread out as in Maelstrom, he's not going to have a ton of units eligible for the extra action. Split fire is also a big key to this. If you can kill would-be eligible units with say, one big Crisis team, he's outta luck because your single unit's shooting attacks at disparate units resolve simultaneously. That's probably clear as mud, but the point is, big units of Crisis are really good against Ynnari. The more elite you are, the less of your dead units trigger Soulburst, and the more of his units you can kill in one go with split fire, the less of his units will trigger it.

-Flamer crisis and Darkstrider+Breachers in a fish are staples of mine. They are reliable, cheap and effective.

-Markerlights are meh unless you have a Stormsurge, then they're essential.

https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-DE/Tau-Experimental-Battlesuit-Cadre

Is this worth it for 8th?

I think a unit of 3 XV9s with x2 double bursts are sound on paper for their costs; 93 points a suit that throws 16 shots each with 5 wounds each, photon nade launcher, and they don't pay for their subsystem(RAW). So 48 shots all total, with -1 AP possible with ATS.

O'Ralai's ammo is redonk as well, being able to throw 4 mortal wounds on a vehicle, or dink something valuable from 36" away at str 9. Yeah his marker lights are bunk, but they come with and just add more to the pool.

With a surge and long strike on over watch, an xv109 rocking gak mid field, all with pathfinder support(rapid fire rail rifles anyone?)

Everyone wants to throw 4 fusion guns on 2 commanders, take a ghostkeel, and stealth suits and call it a day without exploring more unconventional options.

Or maybe I'm just taking crazy pills and the phrase High Density Sabot just gets me off.

Gibs55 wrote:
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/en-DE/Tau-Experimental-Battlesuit-Cadre

Is this worth it for 8th?

I doubt it. The two big suits are decent but it's annoying that you get XV9s with different weapon load-outs. It's a collection more for painters than gamers I think. If you've got 8 spare burst cannons, and are good at conversions, you could do well.

Big units of suits are an intriguing thought. So far I've only really been thinking of using them in 3s, but there are clear advantages to running lots together. A fair few disadvantages as well, of course.

I second that. Lots of cash for a weird smorgasbord of suits.

BTW, I know plasma is largely regarded as a bad idea for our suits, but the R'Varna unveiling really sealed that coffin for me. An average of 12 shots from long range each with D3 is basically impossible for even Commanders to compete with.

May already have been asked. How do Drones interact with kill points?

Drones count as a separate unit for kill points. So a pair of Drones would be a kill point.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Drones count as a separate unit for kill points. So a pair of Drones would be a kill point.

Its pretty much a given that you will give up first blood and kill points.

you just need to kill them faster and harder to make up for it.

Does the velocity tracker bonus stack?
For example if I have 2 Boradsides, each equipped with a VT.

The rules simply state, that you add +1 to hit rolls for the unit when attacking flyers.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Drones count as a separate unit for kill points. So a pair of Drones would be a kill point.

This is why ITC kill points are better. You actually give up the Power Level of the unit killed, so a Y'Vahra is 20 and a five-man fire warrior unit 2.

 The Shrike wrote:

 Crimson Devil wrote:
Drones count as a separate unit for kill points. So a pair of Drones would be a kill point.

This is why ITC kill points are better. You actually give up the Power Level of the unit killed, so a Y'Vahra is 20 and a five-man fire warrior unit 2.

Honestly thats interesting idea.

though what happens with something like a piranha that dumps out a bunch of drones. i dont recall how you purchase them.

How does the ITC scoring work with units that don't fit full power levels, e.g. 7 firewarriors. Power levels are listed for 5 or 10. Do you round up?

So the battle report is pending. I sent it over to my friend for review
Here are a few takeaways I want to post here.

I ran an MSU army: Now and forever until things change.

The fist is Etherial's: With an Etherial in range of any MSU T'au unit, yes put it on a drone to keep up with the Drones. You will never need to roll for moral. Example: 5 model Strike Team, loose 4, auto pass on natural six, so 5+4 = 9 hay that’s the leadership of my Etherial. Works with Drones as well.

Sniper drones and their Marksman got overlooked in battle. If the sniper drones are by a DC they are then hitting on a 3+, marksmen just need to see the unit you are shooting. Both are cheep options to fill Heavy and Elite slots. Pot shooting an important character to death is fun.

If you are not going first and having a large number of guys in your face Shadowsun and another commander using Kauyon is epic. It happened to me and the auto reroll failed hits is nice… super nice.

The Fireblade is a yes for any force sitting a home objective marker. +1 shot for those pule rifles and carbines.

Marker lights are generally not worth it. I ran 4 marker drones, I won't ever run more than 6. One drone was attached to different Strike teams. I will not take a pathfinder team just for marker lights anymore... unless I really want to mark farther away units. They are better taking a heavy gun MSU and sitting in cover.

My Breacher team in a devilfish did stuff. They were overlooked the first round and lived to the end. Paired up with a Darkstrider they will in all likely hood survive a round of Hand-to-hand to then either shoot again or get back into the transport and move on. I didn't run Vespid but may do so in the future, Breacher + Vespid (squad in reserve) makes a good go get that point option.


I ran 2 DC's and 1 VT on my stealth suits I will invert that for future games. My drones never left the 6in radius of the center suit. VT's are cheaper and aid in the random Airborne shooting.

Command points at a 2000 point game I had 13 command points. Without fear of needing to make a leadership check I used the exclusively to reroll my heavy weapons hits and wounds. I rarely accepted a 3 wounds or less on my rail gun hits. Being MSU T’au should have no problem maximizing their FB, HRR, and RG shots.

Asura Varuna wrote:How does the ITC scoring work with units that don't fit full power levels, e.g. 7 firewarriors. Power levels are listed for 5 or 10. Do you round up?

You round up to the nearest increment of PL they give you.

In your example, the nearest increment of PL for Breachers is 5 Fire warriors, but with 7, you need to round up to 10. You would pay 10 firewarrior's worth of PL for your 7 Firewarriors.

Its basically a "nothing is going to stop you for putting every goddamn model you own on the table, but incomplete squads are gonna be treated as complete squads, so its gonna be inefficient to do so."

Ishotfirst wrote:So the battle report is pending. I sent it over to my friend for review
Here are a few takeaways I want to post here.

I ran an MSU army: Now and forever until things change.

The fist is Etherial's: With an Etherial in range of any MSU T'au unit, yes put it on a drone to keep up with the Drones. You will never need to roll for moral. Example: 5 model Strike Team, loose 4, auto pass on natural six, so 5+4 = 9 hay that’s the leadership of my Etherial. Works with Drones as well.

That's definitely a benefit of MSU these days. I don't plan on running infantry/drones in numbers higher than 8 per unit (edit: Kroot being a rare exception) for exactly that reason...

Sniper drones and their Marksman got overlooked in battle. If the sniper drones are by a DC they are then hitting on a 3+, marksmen just need to see the unit you are shooting. Both are cheep options to fill Heavy and Elite slots. Pot shooting an important character to death is fun.

Cheap to fill a Heavy Slot is about the only kind thing I can think to say about the Sniper Drones, but I haven't actually played them yet.

In your battle, how many characters did the Sniper Drones take out? What effect did it have on the game? Did their presence/position modify your opponent's strategies? Was it hard to hide from the Firesight Marksman?

Command points at a 2000 point game I had 13 command points. Without fear of needing to make a leadership check I used the exclusively to reroll my heavy weapons hits and wounds. I rarely accepted a 3 wounds or less on my rail gun hits. Being MSU T’au should have no problem maximizing their FB, HRR, and RG shots.

I was under the impression that each CP ability could only be used once per phase (or was it turn)?

That means you're getting a maximum of, what, 6 or 7 rerolls per game, if you're just using it to reroll shots/hits/wounds/damage... Maybe 6 or 7 if you use a CP to reroll in every enemy's charge phase (rerolling overwatch shots/to-wound/whatever).

Since, as you've stated, morale isn't really an issue... you could probably modify your list to have less CP and be basically fine without it!

Take this with a grain of salt as we know customer response teams are never the most accurate source of information. I sent this email to Forgeworld

"Hi there,


Apologies if this is the wrong place for this.


In your Index: Xenos it list the Tiger Shark AX-1-0 as having a Heavy Rail Cannon which is the Macro type.


Macro type weapons cannot be fired if the model has moved unless it has the Titanic keyword.


The Tiger Shark is a Flyer that must move a minimum of 20''. It does not have the "Hover" special rule allowing it to stop.


It also does not have the "Titanic" keyword.


Does this mean its main gun is completely useless, it can't fire it?"

I got this response:

"For now the tiger shark rules are as follows
For the Tiger Shark it should have the following text: Titan-killer: A model with this rule may fire a Macro type weapon whilst moving even if it is not Titanic, but on any turn in which the controlling player elects to fire a Macro weapon while moving it may not fire weapons other than those with the Macro type until the start of the controlling player's next turn."

I'd rather have Titanic, but that is better than not being able to fire the HRC at all.
I'd use only the cheapest configuration, though

Ishotfirst wrote:

I ran 2 DC's and 1 VT on my stealth suits I will invert that for future games. My drones never left the 6in radius of the center suit. VT's are cheaper and aid in the random Airborne shooting.

No need to put more than 1 VT in your units. 1 already gives its benefit to the entire unit!

Sniper drones and their Marksman got overlooked in battle. If the sniper drones are by a DC they are then hitting on a 3+, marksmen just need to see the unit you are shooting. Both are cheep options to fill Heavy and Elite slots. Pot shooting an important character to death is fun.

Cheap to fill a Heavy Slot is about the only kind thing I can think to say about the Sniper Drones, but I haven't actually played them yet.

In your battle, how many characters did the Sniper Drones take out? What effect did it have on the game? Did their presence/position modify your opponent's strategies? Was it hard to hide from the Firesight Marksman?

It was rather easy to hide them. They just took the place of where the pathfinders would have been. (edit here) Should have been more descriptive. Most players will see our snipers as weak because we do not dole out mortal wounds like the others. Given that, many opponents do not then renegotiate their tactic. However, once you start hitting their character's they will change their tune really quick. The sniper drones do have an added benefit to impose a -1 to hit roles as long as they are not the closet unit. The imposing of a -1 modifier is super powerful considering re-roles occur before modifiers are taken into account. So if you hit on a 3+ and role a 3 you don't re-roll (if you had the ability to do so normally) and just miss. They could target the spotters but they receive +2 from cover instead of +1. Snipers Drones are a good option to play with, but not focus on, because they will make a player choose between shooting the obvious heavy guns or trying to pick off the Character killers. (end of Edit)

Command points at a 2000 point game I had 13 command points. Without fear of needing to make a leadership check I used the exclusively to reroll my heavy weapons hits and wounds. I rarely accepted a 3 wounds or less on my rail gun hits. Being MSU T’au should have no problem maximizing their FB, HRR, and RG shots.

I was under the impression that each CP ability could only be used once per phase (or was it turn)?

That means you're getting a maximum of, what, 6 or 7 rerolls per game, if you're just using it to reroll shots/hits/wounds/damage... Maybe 6 or 7 if you use a CP to reroll in every enemy's charge phase (rerolling overwatch shots/to-wound/whatever).

Since, as you've stated, morale isn't really an issue... you could probably modify your list to have less CP and be basically fine without it!

I will look again at the rules again but it looks like you can use them whenever you want to make a re-roll so long as your not breaking the only 1 re-roll only ever rule.

Ishotfirst wrote:

I was under the impression that each CP ability could only be used once per phase (or was it turn)?

I will look again at the rules again but it looks like you can use them whenever you want to make a re-roll so long as your not breaking the only 1 re-roll only ever rule.

No, each stratagem can only be used once per phase. Rerollling a dice using CP is a stratagem so you cant do it more than once per phase.

That Tiger Shark ruling is crippling. Wow. You basically get to pay for the extra weapons but never use them. So it's now nearly 600pts for 2 bigass guns? We can do a lot better than that. That firepower is certainly on a durable frame, but man, an Y'Vahra is going to lay down way more damage than that for 2/3 the price.

The FW Hammerheads confuse and sadden me. We briefly mused over their increased costs earlier, but it's hitting home how much that sucks. They'd both be pretty decent tanks if they cost the same as their codex counterparts at baseline. Maybe we'd have a reason to run vehicles for the first time in 3 editions.

MilkmanAl wrote:
That Tiger Shark ruling is crippling. Wow. You basically get to pay for the extra weapons but never use them. So it's now nearly 600pts for 2 bigass guns? We can do a lot better than that. That firepower is certainly on a durable frame, but man, an Y'Vahra is going to lay down way more damage than that for 2/3 the price.

For anything that isn't a Titan, that's probably true. Macro seems like it might make the difference if you've got Imperial Knights or the like in your sights.

The FW Hammerheads confuse and sadden me. We briefly mused over their increased costs earlier, but it's hitting home how much that sucks. They'd both be pretty decent tanks if they cost the same as their codex counterparts at baseline. Maybe we'd have a reason to run vehicles for the first time in 3 editions.

Then I have some Good News! Apparently the FW Hammerhead point costs in the index reflect their default weapons in their cost.

Rejoice!

Makes them potentially manageably useful, rather than horribly overpriced.

For anything that isn't a Titan, that's probably true. Macro seems like it might make the difference if you've got Imperial Knights or the like in your sights

True. That's a lot of hurt on exceptionally big targets.

Then I have some Good News!

Woohoo! So...that basically makes the Heavy Bombardment option an outright better Broadside? I guess you lose ATS and drone protection, but that's a relatively small price to pay for more toughness, double the wounds, and BS2+, assuming Longstrike. I like the sound of the twin plasma cannon, too.

My Good News is, alas, limited to them correcting the point issue - no word on whether they correct the keyword problems that prevent the FW Hammerheads from benefiting from Longstrike.

The Twin Heavy Burst Cannon seems quite impressive, I must say. That's Riptide levels of firepower coming out of half a Riptide's point cost. *sigh*

MoD_Legion wrote:

Ishotfirst wrote:

I was under the impression that each CP ability could only be used once per phase (or was it turn)?

I will look again at the rules again but it looks like you can use them whenever you want to make a re-roll so long as your not breaking the only 1 re-roll only ever rule.

No, each stratagem can only be used once per phase. Rerollling a dice using CP is a stratagem so you cant do it more than once per phase.

I am failing to see where that is stated in the rules. Can you give me the page it is on? Or was this something later posted in developers commentary?

The rules stated are: ... You can spend CP to use a stratagem before or durning a battle. Each time you use a Stratagem, reduce you CP total by the appropriate amount. If you do not have enough CP for the specific Stratagem, you cannot use it. Unless otherwise stated, you can use the same Stratagem multiple time during the course of a battle.

The different Stratagems available to players depend on the mission they are playing. Players can always use the three Stratagems presented below, but some missions, battle zones and expansions my introduce additional Stratagems to you battles.

Ishotfirst wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:

Ishotfirst wrote:

I was under the impression that each CP ability could only be used once per phase (or was it turn)?

I will look again at the rules again but it looks like you can use them whenever you want to make a re-roll so long as your not breaking the only 1 re-roll only ever rule.

No, each stratagem can only be used once per phase. Rerollling a dice using CP is a stratagem so you cant do it more than once per phase.

I am failing to see where that is stated in the rules. Can you give me the page it is on? Or was this something later posted in developers commentary?

The rules stated are: ... You can spend CP to use a stratagem before or durning a battle. Each time you use a Stratagem, reduce you CP total by the appropriate amount. If you do not have enough CP for the specific Stratagem, you cannot use it. Unless otherwise stated, you can use the same Stratagem multiple time during the course of a battle.

The different Stratagems available to players depend on the mission they are playing. Players can always use the three Stratagems presented below, but some missions, battle zones and expansions my introduce additional Stratagems to you battles.

Well, you make a fair point, since the page detailing CP (224, I think) doesn't mention a limit, does it?

Chalk that up to GW formatting.

In the book, take a look at what my photocopy suggests is page 215, in the box "Matched Play Mission Rules":

Under "Strategic Discipline" you'll find the rule limiting the same Strategem from being used more than once during any single phase.

This was also mentioned as a restriction in GW's teaser article on Strategems (among the last paragraphs).

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

MilkmanAl wrote:
That Tiger Shark ruling is crippling. Wow. You basically get to pay for the extra weapons but never use them. So it's now nearly 600pts for 2 bigass guns? We can do a lot better than that. That firepower is certainly on a durable frame, but man, an Y'Vahra is going to lay down way more damage than that for 2/3 the price.

For anything that isn't a Titan, that's probably true. Macro seems like it might make the difference if you've got Imperial Knights or the like in your sights.

The FW Hammerheads confuse and sadden me. We briefly mused over their increased costs earlier, but it's hitting home how much that sucks. They'd both be pretty decent tanks if they cost the same as their codex counterparts at baseline. Maybe we'd have a reason to run vehicles for the first time in 3 editions.

Then I have some Good News! Apparently the FW Hammerhead point costs in the index reflect their default weapons in their cost.

Rejoice!

Makes them potentially manageably useful, rather than horribly overpriced.

If and when they'll make it official, the FW hammerheads would become quite powerful choices.

The problem is, these do not compute. if you take the base hammerhead cost, and add the weapon costs of these variants, you DONT get the price listed there.

So whatever is going on, its not the "armed and ready" price listed in the model list.

Yeah, just more FW shoddiness. They did an awful job with these releases. It's really too bad.

The costs listed for the FW HHs are about what they should be including the main weapons. That notion speaks volumes to the rest of the codex units the Hammerheads compare to, such as the Broadsides and Riptides mentioned above.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
My Good News is, alas, limited to them correcting the point issue - no word on whether they correct the keyword problems that prevent the FW Hammerheads from benefiting from Longstrike.

The Twin Heavy Burst Cannon seems quite impressive, I must say. That's Riptide levels of firepower coming out of half a Riptide's point cost. *sigh*

Agreed. An XV9 + 4 drones is hidden win-sauce, you get a very effecient fielding of the 8pt dual pulse carbine gun drone + the dual THBC.

The big guy tanks the wounds, the little guys can tank the bigger multi-D wounds.

All for the low low price of 130-ish points.

 Unusual Suspect wrote:

Ishotfirst wrote:

MoD_Legion wrote:

Ishotfirst wrote:

I was under the impression that each CP ability could only be used once per phase (or was it turn)?

I will look again at the rules again but it looks like you can use them whenever you want to make a re-roll so long as your not breaking the only 1 re-roll only ever rule.

No, each stratagem can only be used once per phase. Rerollling a dice using CP is a stratagem so you cant do it more than once per phase.

I am failing to see where that is stated in the rules. Can you give me the page it is on? Or was this something later posted in developers commentary?

The rules stated are: ... You can spend CP to use a stratagem before or durning a battle. Each time you use a Stratagem, reduce you CP total by the appropriate amount. If you do not have enough CP for the specific Stratagem, you cannot use it. Unless otherwise stated, you can use the same Stratagem multiple time during the course of a battle.

The different Stratagems available to players depend on the mission they are playing. Players can always use the three Stratagems presented below, but some missions, battle zones and expansions my introduce additional Stratagems to you battles.

Well, you make a fair point, since the page detailing CP (224, I think) doesn't mention a limit, does it?

Chalk that up to GW formatting.

In the book, take a look at what my photocopy suggests is page 215, in the box "Matched Play Mission Rules":

Under "Strategic Discipline" you'll find the rule limiting the same Strategem from being used more than once during any single phase.

This was also mentioned as a restriction in GW's teaser article on Strategems (among the last paragraphs).

I would agree that is true if you were playing a Matched Play format as opposed to an Open Play or Narrative Play.
As a side note If you are a Psychic based army Matched Play is super terrible for you because similar restrictions apply.

Ah, I had assumed we were discussing Matched Play (since that seems to be the default gameplay mode), but you're right that Narrative and Open play don't have that restriction.




So, now that we can reconsider the FW Hammerheads (though not with any particular focus, given the discrepancy between their stated point presumption and the actual point costs of the new weapons and the hammerhead's chassis), do any weapons stand out as worth taking?

Longstrike providing his buff seems required for these Hammerheads to actually contribute meaningfully, in the same way that ANY Hammerhead basically needs a Longstike buff, so for hypothesizing purposes I'll presume from now on that Longstrike can provide his buff.

Twin Fusion Cannon: To be honest, it seems underwhelming. For ~25 points more than a HRR Broadside, you get a 3+ to hit (2+ Longstrike) at much shorter range. You really don't want your Hammerheads generally within 12" of the enemy, so the extra damage roll from fusion seems mostly wasted... Seems generally decent if you expect a lot of in-your-face Enemy Armour (and we probably should expect that reasonably often), and can move reasonably far and (with some ML support) still fire very accurate Fusion. Still, it really isn't impressing me greatly, given that Multimeltas on sponsons are not uncommon, and they're indistinguishable...

Twin Plasma Cannon: More Missile Pod equivalent shots (roughly - more reliable damage stat, of course), with nearly table-length range and decent AP.

Two HYMP: More expensive chassis than the Broadside, with more wounds... The question is whether the native additional accuracy (and presumed Longstrike additional boost) is worth the extra points you put in, and whether the more than double number of wounds and higher toughness is worth the loss of Ablative Drones. Still, that's a lot of high S low AP med D shots with high accuracy... that does a number on almost anything's day, and it really does have the range to reach out and TOUCH whatever needs to be touched. The Hammerhead also has much higher potential mobility - it is limited to ML to maintain its accuracy advantage, but the Hammerhead's speed really helps for emergency re-positioning.

Twin Heavy Burst Cannon: Good god, the dakka. The problem is that low-mid to mid strength (5-6) weaponry with D1 is something we as Tau tend to have a plethora of - I'd rather have S7 or 8 if tank hunting (S6 is no better than S5 against T7&8, and S5 is absurdly plentiful), but even then, that is a LOT of high accurate anti-infantry/light vehicle fire...

Razerous wrote:

 Unusual Suspect wrote:
My Good News is, alas, limited to them correcting the point issue - no word on whether they correct the keyword problems that prevent the FW Hammerheads from benefiting from Longstrike.

The Twin Heavy Burst Cannon seems quite impressive, I must say. That's Riptide levels of firepower coming out of half a Riptide's point cost. *sigh*

Agreed. An XV9 + 4 drones is hidden win-sauce, you get a very effecient fielding of the 8pt dual pulse carbine gun drone + the dual THBC.

The big guy tanks the wounds, the little guys can tank the bigger multi-D wounds.

All for the low low price of 130-ish points.

He was speaking about the Hammerhead variant, not the XV9. But your point is correct

How are Kroot looking for Tau right now? I have 20 of them sitting in a case and would rather them not be wasted for this edition. Are they better or worse than Fire Warriors / Breachers?

MilkmanAl wrote:
That Tiger Shark ruling is crippling. Wow. You basically get to pay for the extra weapons but never use them. So it's now nearly 600pts for 2 bigass guns? We can do a lot better than that. That firepower is certainly on a durable frame, but man, an Y'Vahra is going to lay down way more damage than that for 2/3 the price.

The FW Hammerheads confuse and sadden me. We briefly mused over their increased costs earlier, but it's hitting home how much that sucks. They'd both be pretty decent tanks if they cost the same as their codex counterparts at baseline. Maybe we'd have a reason to run vehicles for the first time in 3 editions.

Where is this posted? Links to rulings and clarifications are appreciated.

They seem worse than FW, to me, but they're great for screening out early drops and the subsequent charges. 120pts is nothing to protect your big dudes. Some argue that Kroot Hounds do the same thing for cheaper, but the 2 main problems with that philosophy as I see it are: 1) Kroot Hounds don't shoot and 2) Kroot hounds are damned expensive monetarily and hard as hell to find.

 Retrogamer0001 wrote:
How are Kroot looking for Tau right now? I have 20 of them sitting in a case and would rather them not be wasted for this edition. Are they better or worse than Fire Warriors / Breachers?

I don't know. I have 30+ Kroot myself and a squad of hounds collecting dust as well. My best thought is to run them with an etherial and go get them into h-2-h asap as a defensive/ objective blocking measure. However, this would require a early mont'ka which then puts a commander potentially out in the open without cover. They will get shot and assuming you will lose ~half, or all if they flamer it, the unit before they even see combat. The benefit is that they will force a shooting priority choice early on which may give and extra round to your heavy support. Personally I may run them my next game because I want to see how aggressive I can get with the combat rules.

Statistically speaking I believe they are worse than Fire Warriors and Breachers.... However, it really depends on the function you are looking them to preform.
Forward moving, threatening blob? Then yes. However this can also be accomplished with Drones and Stealth squad just with less h-2-h potential but this cost more.
Objective taking unit threatening? Then probably breachers in a truck (yes its expensive) aside from that Vespid have that covered well.
Home objective holding? Fire Warriors or Drones.... Lots and Lots of drones. (God I hope they bring the drone box back and don't adjust their points.)

MilkmanAl wrote:
They seem worse than FW, to me, but they're great for screening out early drops and the subsequent charges. 120pts is nothing to protect your big dudes. Some argue that Kroot Hounds do the same thing for cheaper, but the 2 main problems with that philosophy as I see it are: 1) Kroot Hounds don't shoot and 2) Kroot hounds are damned expensive monetarily and hard as hell to find.

Hounds don't get the pregame move, which is important for several reasons, but mostly to reduce consolidation issues. Hounds are great for screening DS, and claiming objectives.

I think 10-man units of kroot look like a pretty good option for screening DS and other shenanigans. There are various ways to use them to hold enemy units back.

You can do some of the same stuff with ghostkeels and stealths, but it's a bit different. Your opponent might potentially drop his own infiltrators first, blocking yours, which he can't do to kroot.

On the other hand ghostkeels in particular are pretty fast, and fly. If you get to drop a ghostkeel early on you can actually put it right on the edge of the other guy's deployment zone (if he hasn't put anything there yet), ready to get up to all kinds of mischief (charging their artillery, shooting their characters and so on). This approach is not recommended against Tyrannids.

Kroot provides a lot of bodies on the Table for cheap
Unlike other Horde Armies however

Kroot are actually subjected to the effects of Morale
So, Kroot Blobs will magically disappear significantly faster than those belonging to other armies.

What are people's opinions on Shadowsun vs a FB Commander? Trying to decide if I want multiple Commanders or Sunny.

I prefer the Commander. He's a little tougher and has much better offensive output for a minimal increase in cost. 2 Kauyons is a nifty ability but doesn't warrant losing 2 fusion blasters, in my opinion.

How about this for a mostly suit list?

Vanguard Detachment 1

Commander (4 Fusion Blasters)

Ghostkeel (Cyclic Ion Raker, 2 Flamers, Homing Beacon)
Ghostkeel (Cyclic Ion Raker, 2 Flamers, Homing Beacon)
Ghostkeel (Cyclic Ion Raker, 2 Flamers, Homing Beacon)

6 Stealthsuits
6 Stealthsuits


10 Pathfinders
10 Pathfinders

Vanguard Detachment 2

Commander (4 Fusion Blasters)

3 Crisis suits (9 Flamers)
3 Crisis suits (9 Flamers)
3 Crisis suits (9 Flamers)

Total = 1998pts
5 CP's

On the fence between AT's for each Ghostkeel or the 3 additional Pathfinders.

Originally I had marker drones in there, but I think the pathfinders and stealth suits might be better screening units vs some stuff.

So, long time tau player here, with some additional observations....

From playing against the tau....let me explain...

A couple of friends in my gamer group also play tau, and one of my buddies wanted a small game to get into 8th. I offered to play against him (I have more than just tau).

He had a nice rounded list, with a variety of unit, as he was getting the hang of 8th (he is a good experienced player, had just not played 8th yet).

I played marines, as I had not given them a whirl yet in 8th, and wanted to see how they did.

A few observations;

* Crisis suits - a LOT more durable then we give them credit for. the bump to T5 is awesome. Most basic weapons and attacks are s4 - the bump to T5 really helps here. These suits survived a lot of basic bolter fire, and even survived CC (multiple times) to jump out and shoot. I was impressed.
* Pathfinders die - cover is a lot harder to come by, and smart players are going to erase your pathfinders. His fireblades were better sources of markers, as I could not target the characters in the back (tau snipers suck, but marine snipers are not much better)
* The bonding knife - this is a pretty big deal. Helped out the firewarrios multiple times.
* Sunshark - not bad at all. The bomb can indeed be useful against tough troops - and the missile pods and ion rifles don't suffer from him moving. Overall nice. I may have to give them more use.
* Psychic power - our lack of psychic powers is bad. really bad. In fact, smite is so powerful now, that honestly, I think the armies without access to it really need a buff.
Yeah, tau have markerlights, necrons have wbb, ad mech has canticles and de have drugs - some of these are decent, but some don't even come close to the power of smite).

More on smite;
Smite just wrecks things - even things that are normally hard to kill (THSS termies, necron wraiths, zonethropes, etc.). it is even effective when trying to kill those stealth suits hiding in cover at that objective. After playing with and without smite, I really think they need to adjust this.

Oh, and as a side note - dreds are indeed back - yeah, makes our broadsides feel like garbage. :(

Yaknow, people praise a bump to T5 and an additional wound as if crisis are so much harder to kill.

But personally? I find they were FAR harder to kill when it was nigh-impossible to get a firing line on my guys as long I maneuvered myself well.


Saying smite is OP though makes me laugh as my other army is TS, and I find psykers as a whole very lacking.

Kicking around a few ideas for a decent Tau list:

2 Y'Vahra
2 10-man Kroot Squads
1 Breacher Squad
2 Commanders (still deciding on loadout)
3-4 Gun Drone Squads

Looking for more suggestions, but flooding the board with infantry units and drones with Y'Vahra support seems decent. Still wondering if more Breacher squads with Devilfish support is worthwhile, or if I need more Commanders / Crisis Suits.

That's basically what I'm planning on running next time I play, except I have Strikers and some Pathfinders. What can I say? i love rerolling 1s.