Since most people has a misconception that Tau is a relatively weaker codex compared to the new toys, I will be putting up a series of battle reports to illustrate how to play Tau properly against different codex/armies.

First up, the lists :-

Tau 1750 points
Shas El (Missile, Plasma, BSF, HW.M.T.) - 90

3 Crisis Suits (3xMissile, 3xPlasma, 3xM.T.) - 186
3 Crisis Suits (3xMissile, 3xPlasma, 3xM.T.) - 186
3 Crisis Suits (3xMissile, 3xMissile, 3xBSF) - 138

6 Fire Warriors, Devilfish w Pod - 145
10 Kroots, 7 Hounds - 112
10 Kroots, 3 Hounds - 88

1 Piranha (fusion, T.A.) - 70
1 Piranha (fusion, T.A.) - 70
1 Piranha (T.A.) - 65

2 Broadsides (2xT.A.) - 160
2 Broadsides (2xT.A.) - 160
3 Broadsides (3xT.A., Leader, Target Lock, 2 Shield Drones) - 280

Orks 1750 points
Ghazghkull thraka - 225
KFF Mek with burna - 100

5 Lootas - 75
5 Lootas - 75
15 Burnas - 225

17 Shoota Boys, Nob with Klaw and Pole - 142
17 Shoota Boys, Nob with Klaw and Pole - 142
5 Nobs (Cyborks, 2 klaws, painboy, Big Choppa, bosspole, Banner) - 230
BattleWagon (DeffRolla, Big Shoota, RPJ, Armor Plates, Grot Riggers) - 135

BattleWagon (DeffRolla, Big Shoota, RPJ, Armor Plates, Grot Riggers) - 135
BattleWagon (DeffRolla, Big Shoota, RPJ, Armor Plates, Grot Riggers) - 135
BattleWagon (DeffRolla, Big Shoota, RPJ, Armor Plates) - 130

Deployment : Pitched
Primary Mission : Capture and Control
Secondary Mission : VP

Ork player won the roll, and elect to go 2nd as he wants to see which side I deploy so that he can deploy directly opposite, closing the distance.


Ork player fail to sieze.


Tau Turn 1

Pirahnas turboboost to form skimmer wall, attempting to block the movement of BWs.

Devilfish, suits move up to support.

After 7 Railguns and KFF cover saves, only 1 wagon goes down. 4 Burnas got killed in the explosion.
Suits unload on 2 squads of lootas. Both squads are reduced to 2/5. One squad fails morale and run.

Ork Turn 1

Right ork boys disembark and slogs. Burnas + Mek embarks. This wagon rams the piranhna, who fails the dodge and goes down in smoke.

Ghaz's wagon rams into red pirahna who dodges. Ghaz + Nob disembarks.

Left most wagon rams into blue pirahna, who dodges. Boys disembarks.

2 remaining Lootas fire on fish to no effect.

Right most boys runs.

Ghaz+Nob assaults red pirahna, which goes down.

Boys + Nob assaults blue pirahna, scoring a shaken result.

Tau Turn 2

Devilfish and last Pirahna shuffles to continue movement blocking.

7 railguns manage to wreck another wagon.

Red suits wipe out remaining lootas.

Other suits unload into green boys, killing 3-4 and putting a wound on the nob.

Suits jumps away in assault phase to remain > 20" away.

Ork Turn 2

Teal boys green boys move up.
Ghaz+Nobs embark, wagon moves 13 inches around pirahna.
Mek's wagon moves 13" around pirahna, burnas disembarks.
Burnas drop a few templates on kroots, killing 3-4, and then proceed to assault them and win combat by 1. Kroots fail Ld and flees.
Green boys assaulted pirahna and immobilized it.

Tau Turn 3

Suits, and Devilfish shuffles around.
Teal kroots continue to fall back.
GunDrones from pirahna disembarks and jumps up.
All kroots rapid + FWs wipe out remaining 5 burnas.
Between the drones, right suits, and pirahna, 5-6 boys in the green squad goes down after cover.
Right broadsides gets side shot on Mek's wagon, scores 3 pens, 2 of which was saved. The last pen went on to roll a 3 and wreck the wagon.
Other 4 broadsides explode the other wagon without cover.
Red suits kill 2 teal boys and puts a wound on the nob i think.


Ork Turn 3

Ghaz+Nobs and teal boys move up, and run as well.
Green boys, joined by Big Mek later, moves back towards home obj., shoots at drones, wiping them.

Tau Turn 4

Suits & Fish shuffles.
The Deathrains, pirahna, and Devilfish's BC + drones kills another 3 boys and put a wound on the Mek.
3 railguns from blue broadsides puts 3 wounds on Ghaz squad, kills one nob. Ghaz and nob passes cover.
Between 16SMS from broadsides (ignoring LOS cover), and shots from kroots and all other suits, the teal boys is reduced to one member.

Ork Turn 4

Green boys move into cover towards obj.
Ghaz + Teal moves and fleets 6" (Waaagh).
Last layer of kroots gets wiped in assault.

Tau Turn 5

Fireknives move closer to Ghaz's squad.
Deathrain and fish move up towards green boys, and fires into them. They go to ground and loses a boy.
Everything else unloads on Ghaz. All armor ignoring shots from each unit goes into Ghaz, and end up absorbed by the 2++. One more nob dies, and another is wounded.


Ork Turn 5

Ghaz+Nob moves on to destroy 4 Broadsides in assault, consolidates into forest.

Roll for end, but game continues to turn 6.

Tau Turn 6
Deathrains, fish, drones, and pirahna kills another 2 boys after 3+ cover.
EVerything else fires into Ghaz's squad, putting 2 wounds on him and killing another nob.


Ork Turn 6
Ghaz splits off to destroy broadsides, while FWs got swept by nobs. Consolidates into cover.

Game continues to turn 7.

Tau Turn 7.
The nob and Mek got clean up many times over.
Red suits plasma the 2 single wound nobs to death.
Ghaz falls to Shas El + Fireknives plasma as well.

This already sounds like a one sided fight, using a melée heavy army equiped with ranged weaps, against a ranged supirior army? I am kinda new so please correct me if my impression is wrong, but it seems like this match is much similar to a bunch of gorillas with hand guns against seal team 6 with automatic sniper rifles O.o

Rejn wrote:This already sounds like a one sided fight, using a melée heavy army equiped with ranged weaps, against a ranged supirior army? I am kinda new so please correct me if my impression is wrong, but it seems like this match is much similar to a bunch of gorillas with hand guns against seal team 6 with automatic sniper rifles O.o

I am new here too but I couldn't agree more.


I think Orc's greatest weapon against Tau is horde and melee heavy lists.
Especially the current Tau list doesn't have a lot of anti-infantry (correct me if I am wrong), so horde would be an even greater problem here.

4 Battlewagon lists are common in tournaments. This one happens to favor Lootas, Shoota Boys, and Cybork Nobz. You just don't see horde lists in tournaments because of the time constraints. The Shoota Boyz are still more than enough to cut down Tau in assault.

I don't think this Ork list is necessarily optimized, but it is something I would expect to see in a local tournament.

As for this match-up...I think the 7 Broadsides have a good shot of getting around the KFF and ruining the Ork's assault.

Marshal-Gus,
so that is still a relatively effective Ork army?
Seems like too much effort in ranged weapons than there should be. Like trying to out shoot the Tau is as good an idea as out swimming a shark.

I run a similar ork list but I have no burnas nor shoota boyz, so from personal experiance I see already he is going to stick all of his boyz and cybork nobz (with ghazzy) in the battlewagons charge them up forth full speed, when the time is right he will disembark the boyz to the closest thing, declare Ghazzy's WAAAAAAAAAGH in the shooting phase then charge them into combat, making mince meat of your troops (weather in cover or not).

I look forward to seeing this BatRep...

A potential problem could be that if all those weapons are able to get around the sides of the BWs and pop them open. Next thing you know you're walking your happy behind across the table and we all know that isn't a good place to be when facing a gunline like the TAU one.

I know that the Big Mek is effective at blocking shots with his KKF, but as a fellow Ork guy I think this could get very nasty.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:A potential problem could be that if all those weapons are able to get around the sides of the BWs and pop them open. Next thing you know you're walking your happy behind across the table and we all know that isn't a good place to be when facing a gunline like the TAU one.

I know that the Big Mek is effective at blocking shots with his KKF, but as a fellow Ork guy I think this could get very nasty.

I think 7 TL Railguns are more than enough to deal with the BW head on. No need to to get to their sides.

This seems very one sided. Tau have more than enough fusion blasters and railguns to take out only 4 battlewagons, especially since they are open-topped. Wondering if the ork player knew ahead of time he was playing tau.

ceku wrote:This seems very one sided. Tau have more than enough fusion blasters and railguns to take out only 4 battlewagons, especially since they are open-topped. Wondering if the ork player knew ahead of time he was playing tau.

Nope, we were suppose to bring a TAC list, so no tailoring of list.
So do you mean Tau are an auto win to most ork lists? Since Battlewagon builds are typical tournament lists.

I honestly don't know what people are going on about. This doesn't look good for Tau, even a little bit.
- The vast majority of the Ork army has a 21" threat range, even without the Waagh. It will be hard for Tau to outmaneuver the Orks. On a related note, if Orks get the first turn, Tau will have one turn of shooting before the Orks are at the front lines.
- The Tau list is good, but looks like it lacks the firepower to deal with hordes. And barring Railguns, there isn't much that can deal with the Nob squad - even plasma and missiles won't hurt too much.
- The 7 TL Railguns will hurt, but against front armor (which should be all the time, since Broadsides are immobile), they probably won't be able to bring down more than 1-2 Battlewagons a turn. (8/9) hit x (1/2) to glance/penetrate x (1/2) to get past KFF x (5/6) to do anything useful on a penetrating hit. Each Railgun has roughly a 15% chance to hurt.
- And unlike other armies, if the Orks catch anything in combat, it will be wiped out.

I'm not going to be terribly surprised if Isseyfaran can pull a tie/win, but the odds are actually stacked against him.

As for comments on strategy,I don't know if this would be correct, but I might try to deepstrike the Crisis Suits (maybe not all of them). They won't do too much good on turn 1, plus this could give them rear armor shots on the Battlewagons, and force the opponent into making a mistake. If you have Crisis Suits at your 12-o-clock and 6-o-clock, what do you do?

Good luck, Isseyfaran! Enjoyed the last Batrep, looking forward to this one. By the way, do you know what the terrain will be like?

The ork list is definitely your average TAC list. I'm with Siphen in saying this would be a relatively tough battle for the Tau. Even if (if!, KFFs can be expected to keep at least 1 battle wagon alive) Tau manages to destroy all battle wagons PotW will put the orks into charge range by turn three (at the latest). Like Siphen has already mentioned, there is also nothing in the Tau list that can effectively take out Nobs as only the single-shot Railguns have the capacity to insta-gib. Wound allocation is absolutely ruinous to armies that are not effectively equipped.

Rejn: This is actually a very effective orks list (though not completely optimised). The idea is not to stand and shoot the Tau, the idea is to rush up in BW as close as possible, Waaagh! Charge, eliminate the squad, then clean up the remainder of their deployment zone by shooting (assault weapons) and subsequently charging. Lootas are also one of the most effective ranged weapons in the game, against any army. If Tau was running Railheads the Lootas might be in trouble, but as it stands Tau has little in the way of long-ranged AI so they will likely pose a large problem. Fortunately Tau has included enough Kroot to (maybe, depends on the flanking/reserve rolls) eliminate the Loota threat, but even then the damage may have already been done. As you seem to be fond of similes and metaphors, I would say that this matchup is more like a school of piranha vs hulk hogan with a .50 cal. The Tau/Hogan may be incredibly capable at ripping apart certain armies, but this is just an unfavourable matchup.

Slothy: You do not have to be heavy melee to beat Tau in CC, (almost) any melee at all will crush Tau. All you have to make sure is, is that you GET into combat. Once there, it is essentially over. That being said, you are correct in saying horde lists tend to decimate Tau (at least this particular Tau list, Railheads + Pirahna w/ Flechette launchers are a different story altogether).

I think Tau is definitely going to have to muster up some serious Kau'yon skills to pull this win off. Bait and switch, use superior mobility and Piranha move-blocking to pull a win off by plinking away at the mobs, and making them run. Definitely looking forwards to seeing how Issey pulls this win off, as it would be a beautiful thing. Good luck! Looking forward to reading this report.

Isseyfaran wrote:
6 Fire Warriors, Devilfish w Pod - 145
10 Kroots, 7 Hounds - 112
10 Kroots, 3 Hounds - 88

I don't know your plans, so maybe you know something I don't here but I'll be the first to tell you you've spent too much on kroot and not enough fire warriors. I figure you're planning to use the kroot as a speed bump to protect your heavy suits and such, but against orks in BW it's more effective from my experience to stand and shoot. So, while You have plenty of anti tank with 7 tL railguns and 2 BS 4 fusion blasters, you have nowhere near enough anti horde. You need to rework this troop section entirely, something more like:

12 firewarriors sergeant bonded -135
12 firewarriors sergeant bonded-135
6 firewarriors sergeant bonded-75

Even that is a little unoptimized, but this way you have the same immobile speedbump for your suits except this one A has an armor save in case you have to deploy in such a way that you can't get cover, B can carry that 4+ save with it in case your suits have to move, and C can chew thru hordes at up to 30" of just standing and shooting instead of 24 inches that the kroot have. I assume you plan to pop the BW first turn and hope that you can force them to footslog. If that's the case, even with that big mek's field, 30 S5 bs 3 shots are gonna be a lot more effective than 20 S4 bs 3 and 6 S5 bs3 shots. If you need more shots you could even sack the sergeants and knives for an additional 45 points to spend increasing the number of firewarriors you have and increase the shots even more. Right now in the off chance you pull away from an assault or get reduced below half strength, you can still regroup and be a speedbump, but if you drop that you may be able it kill a few more before they inevitably reach you. Either way its gonna do a better job at being a speedbump than your kroot.

dbsamurai wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:
6 Fire Warriors, Devilfish w Pod - 145
10 Kroots, 7 Hounds - 112
10 Kroots, 3 Hounds - 88

I don't know your plans, so maybe you know something I don't here but I'll be the first to tell you you've spent too much on kroot and not enough fire warriors. I figure you're planning to use the kroot as a speed bump to protect your heavy suits and such, but against orks in BW it's more effective from my experience to stand and shoot. So, while You have plenty of anti tank with 7 tL railguns and 2 BS 4 fusion blasters, you have nowhere near enough anti horde. You need to rework this troop section entirely, something more like:

12 firewarriors sergeant bonded -135
12 firewarriors sergeant bonded-135
6 firewarriors sergeant bonded-75

Even that is a little unoptimized, but this way you have the same immobile speedbump for your suits except this one A has an armor save in case you have to deploy in such a way that you can't get cover, B can carry that 4+ save with it in case your suits have to move, and C can chew thru hordes at up to 30" of just standing and shooting instead of 24 inches that the kroot have. I assume you plan to pop the BW first turn and hope that you can force them to footslog. If that's the case, even with that big mek's field, 30 S5 bs 3 shots are gonna be a lot more effective than 20 S4 bs 3 and 6 S5 bs3 shots. If you need more shots you could even sack the sergeants and knives for an additional 45 points to spend increasing the number of firewarriors you have and increase the shots even more. Right now in the off chance you pull away from an assault or get reduced below half strength, you can still regroup and be a speedbump, but if you drop that you may be able it kill a few more before they inevitably reach you. Either way its gonna do a better job at being a speedbump than your kroot.

Though I do agree with the fact that he needs more anti-infantry, I think the intention with the mobile FW and kroot over a static firing line was that he is playing with a TAC (at least in today's meta) list, that can capture objectives with some reliability (objective placement near board edges + flanking kroot).

dbsamurai wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:
6 Fire Warriors, Devilfish w Pod - 145
10 Kroots, 7 Hounds - 112
10 Kroots, 3 Hounds - 88

I don't know your plans, so maybe you know something I don't here but I'll be the first to tell you you've spent too much on kroot and not enough fire warriors. I figure you're planning to use the kroot as a speed bump to protect your heavy suits and such, but against orks in BW it's more effective from my experience to stand and shoot. So, while You have plenty of anti tank with 7 tL railguns and 2 BS 4 fusion blasters, you have nowhere near enough anti horde. You need to rework this troop section entirely, something more like:

12 firewarriors sergeant bonded -135
12 firewarriors sergeant bonded-135
6 firewarriors sergeant bonded-75

Even that is a little unoptimized, but this way you have the same immobile speedbump for your suits except this one A has an armor save in case you have to deploy in such a way that you can't get cover, B can carry that 4+ save with it in case your suits have to move, and C can chew thru hordes at up to 30" of just standing and shooting instead of 24 inches that the kroot have. I assume you plan to pop the BW first turn and hope that you can force them to footslog. If that's the case, even with that big mek's field, 30 S5 bs 3 shots are gonna be a lot more effective than 20 S4 bs 3 and 6 S5 bs3 shots. If you need more shots you could even sack the sergeants and knives for an additional 45 points to spend increasing the number of firewarriors you have and increase the shots even more. Right now in the off chance you pull away from an assault or get reduced below half strength, you can still regroup and be a speedbump, but if you drop that you may be able it kill a few more before they inevitably reach you. Either way its gonna do a better job at being a speedbump than your kroot.

You mentioned firewarriors against kroots. So here are my math.

120 buys me 12 FWs OR 17 Kroots
Assuming single shot, 12 FWs scores 6 hits, 4 wounds, while 17 kroots scores 8.5 hits, 4.25 wounds
If rapid firing, just multiply the numbers by 2.

4+ armor is useless because I have never deployed my kroots in the open before, and most things in current metagame punch through 4+ armor anyway.
30 inches is irrelevant because most of the time, the orks will be within 24inches by turn 2. EVEN if that extra 6" means 1 EXTRA turn of shooting, 2 squads of 12 FWs only means 4 more dead orks (after ork's cover save).

So you speak of FWs firepower being significantly better, but math tells me it is not the case?

I'm going to call a victory for the Tau, however Ork lists can be difficult to fight. The Tau list here is an excellent match up for the Orks. For Tau though, the orks are still a horde! and if each battlewagon can move 1 turn before they die, there will be potentially 5 units in the mid field and that is a lot of troops to shoot down for a focus fire Tau army. I fought a battle like this at 'ard boyz semifinals and ended up with a minor loss because even though all the enemy's speed was reduced, I couldn't handle large model count units coming at me.

On another note, I'd like to see how you fight against some of the real powerful armies out there. Orks don't appear to cut it anymore. Grey Knights are huge at tournaments, but luckily are easy pickings for Tau. I'd like to see a game against Tyranids. They I believe are the bane of Tau.

Even if you're not making a tailored list, at least change one of your Broadside units for a Railhead.

The versatility of the sub is well worth it...

Mar'tacus wrote:Even if you're not making a tailored list, at least change one of your Broadside units for a Railhead.

The versatility of the sub is well worth it...

Maybe because of the metagame i am in, I couldn't convince myself to replace 2 broadsides for a railhead. Every BS4 TL Railgun is so precious to me. Coupled that with the fact that Broadsides each can dish out 4 SMS shots (which is an insurance against hordes in some way), I am always more inclined to choose the Broadsides over the RailHead.

In the current meta-game, MSU-mech is king. Broadside spam is a good counter. They are also effective against death-star units such as Paladins.

Congrats on the victory. The Ork list is a bit weak to what I normally see. Tau struggles against Ork horde. While a Killa-kan wall doesn't pose much of a threat, 180 Ork Boyz will!

SabrX wrote:In the current meta-game, MSU-mech is king. Broadside spam is a good counter. They are also effective against death-star units such as Paladins.

Congrats on the victory. The Ork list is a bit weak to what I normally see. Tau struggles against Ork horde. While a Killa-kan wall doesn't pose much of a threat, 180 Ork Boyz will!

I don't think the ork list is fully optimised according to my standard, but I m not sure if I would say it's weak.

Maybe you can shed some light into what is considered a "strong" wagon list...

A good BW list must include grots.

jy2 wrote:A good BW list must include grots.

Agreed to a certain extent. But a BW list without grots does not make it a "weak" list, or do you agree otherwise?

If the reason to include grots are so that they can secure an obj while the rest of your army goes out to deal with stuff, then every ork list needs a gretchin squad, including kan wall. Don't kan wall armies advance with their full force towards the enemy as well?

Isseyfaran wrote:

jy2 wrote:A good BW list must include grots.

Agreed to a certain extent. But a BW list without grots does not make it a "weak" list, or do you agree otherwise?

No, I agree. A BW list like your opponent's is good.

But a BW list with a unit of grots would be great because it would be more optimized.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Isseyfaran wrote:
If the reason to include grots are so that they can secure an obj while the rest of your army goes out to deal with stuff, then every ork list needs a gretchin squad, including kan wall. Don't kan wall armies advance with their full force towards the enemy as well?

Only if they had the necessary FOC slots available. Usually BW lists don't fill up the FOC's, at least not the troops slot, so they have room for a unit of gretchins. Other lists, such as a 180-boy green tide, just can't fit in the grots.

Isseyfaran wrote:

SabrX wrote:In the current meta-game, MSU-mech is king. Broadside spam is a good counter. They are also effective against death-star units such as Paladins.

Congrats on the victory. The Ork list is a bit weak to what I normally see. Tau struggles against Ork horde. While a Killa-kan wall doesn't pose much of a threat, 180 Ork Boyz will!

I don't think the ork list is fully optimised according to my standard, but I m not sure if I would say it's weak.

Maybe you can shed some light into what is considered a "strong" wagon list...

I don't consider lists that maximize on wagons to be strong. Aside from Deff-wing and Nobz bikers, Orks in general lack decent armor saves. Most of the good Ork lists I've seen are hybrids with a few large squads of Ork Boyz, 1 or 2 Battle Wagons carrying more Boyz or Nobz, KFF Big Mek, Ghazzy, maybe some Lootas and perhaps 1 or 2 squads of Killa Kans, and at least a single cheap grot squad for scoring purposes. As a Tau player, I used to struggle against most lists with a horde aspect. Now that I have 60 - 100 Kroots with or without hounds, I don't struggle as much.

jy2 wrote:Only if they had the necessary FOC slots available. Usually BW lists don't fill up the FOC's, at least not the troops slot, so they have room for a unit of gretchins. Other lists, such as a 180-boy green tide, just can't fit in the grots.

But a kan wall list doesn't have 180, and don't normally use up 6 troops slot. I don't see gretchins in kan wall lists. Any reason?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

SabrX wrote:I don't consider lists that maximize on wagons to be strong. Aside from Deff-wing and Nobz bikers, Orks in general lack decent armor saves. Most of the good Ork lists I've seen are hybrids with a few large squads of Ork Boyz, 1 or 2 Battle Wagons carrying more Boyz or Nobz, KFF Big Mek, Ghazzy, maybe some Lootas and perhaps 1 or 2 squads of Killa Kans, and at least a single cheap grot squad for scoring purposes. As a Tau player, I used to struggle against most lists with a horde aspect. Now that I have 60 - 100 Kroots with or without hounds, I don't struggle as much.

Most of the BW list seen in tournaments (including Dash's) are fully mechanized, without large squads of slogging boys. So you are saying all their list are weak (you used the word WEAK) ?

Isseyfaran wrote:

jy2 wrote:Only if they had the necessary FOC slots available. Usually BW lists don't fill up the FOC's, at least not the troops slot, so they have room for a unit of gretchins. Other lists, such as a 180-boy green tide, just can't fit in the grots.

But a kan wall list doesn't have 180, and don't normally use up 6 troops slot. I don't see gretchins in kan wall lists. Any reason?

Chalk it up to preference. If I was running such a list, personally, I would cut out 40pts to include such a unit, but alas, most people don't design their lists like mine.

I'd hate to leave 30 boyz behind in a C&C mission.

Isseyfaran wrote:
Most of the BW list seen in tournaments (including Dash's) are fully mechanized, without large squads of slogging boys. So you are saying all their list are weak (you used the word WEAK) ?

You are taking my words out of context. I stated your opponent's list is weak.

A good Battle Wagons list consist of multiple units of Boyz and/or Nobz in Wagons with cheap scoring grots unit.

However, I find hybrid lists to be much more effective in the current meta-game. A single unit of 30 Boyz with a Nobz equipped with Boss Pole and Power Klaw can do wonders. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

SabrX wrote:
You are taking my words out of context. I stated your opponent's list is weak.

A good Battle Wagons list consist of multiple units of Boyz and/or Nobz in Wagons with cheap scoring grots unit.

However, I find hybrid lists to be much more effective in the current meta-game. A single unit of 30 Boyz with a Nobz equipped with Boss Pole and Power Klaw can do wonders. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

Yup, heard you - my opponent's list is weak.
BUT, My opponent's list is like what most list looks like in tournaments, except for the grot unit (and even so, not all of them runs grots as well).

So either (1) The non existence of the grot unit brings a BW tournament list from good to WEAK, or (2) this list and most tournament lists ARE weak.

I am not missing anything right?

SabrX wrote:A good Battle Wagons list consist of multiple units of Boyz and/or Nobz in Wagons with cheap scoring grots unit.

OK, NOW i hear your properly. The grot unit is indeed the main factor that brings a BW list from GOOD suddenly to WEAK.

I m sorry that I can't agree with this. Also, you ll see later in this battlereport that a grot unit OR NOT would not have matter.

Seriously, I cant help but feel that you are unnecessarily confrontational. A nice list none the less.

However when most people (at least the ones I know) claim that Tau are weak I think they are talking about the fact that they dont scale very well upto Ard Boyz level of pts.

Isseyfaran wrote:

ceku wrote:This seems very one sided. Tau have more than enough fusion blasters and railguns to take out only 4 battlewagons, especially since they are open-topped. Wondering if the ork player knew ahead of time he was playing tau.

Nope, we were suppose to bring a TAC list, so no tailoring of list.
So do you mean Tau are an auto win to most ork lists? Since Battlewagon builds are typical tournament lists.

Just this ork list because it focuses on av which is what tau are good at taking out; especially with 6 broadsides and piranhas. Who knows though. Maybe those cover saves will make you pull your hair out.

tedurur wrote:Seriously, I cant help but feel that you are unnecessarily confrontational. A nice list none the less.

It depends on how you see it. Notice all I did was to ask people to elaborate what they mean, when they give generic comments like "this is wrong", "this is weak", etc.

If people can give solid replies to back their claims, I m pretty cool with that. Most importantly, I wasn't even defending my own list, so the point on being defensive is kind of moot, no?

Isseyfaran wrote:

tedurur wrote:Seriously, I cant help but feel that you are unnecessarily confrontational. A nice list none the less.

It depends on how you see it. Notice all I did was to ask people to elaborate what they mean, when they give generic comments like "this is wrong", "this is weak", etc.

If people can give solid replies to back their claims, I m pretty cool with that. Most importantly, I wasn't even defending my own list, so the point on being defensive is kind of moot, no?

Where did I say you were being defensive? My point about you being a little confrontational is not dependent on whether you were defending your list or not.
And while I agree that generic comments are fairly useless without any suggestions to back them up it is the way you answer non generic comments that irks me, like for instance: "So you speak of FWs firepower being significantly better, but math tells me it is not the case?" Where a simple, "as you can see that is not really the case." wouldhave sufficed.

Ohwell, not going to derail your thread with this. GL with continouing playing Tau "the right way"

tedurur wrote:And while I agree that generic comments are fairly useless without any suggestions to back them up it is the way you answer non generic comments that irks me, like for instance: "So you speak of FWs firepower being significantly better, but math tells me it is not the case?" Where a simple, "as you can see that is not really the case." wouldhave sufficed.

AHHH, I seriously don't know why "So you speak of FWs firepower being significantly better, but math tells me it is not the case?" would seem impolite to you. Not trolling, but I SERIOUSLY don't think it's the least bit impolite. Nvm, I think different people have different choice of words, and preference in structuring their sentence. I like to use question marks very often so as to encourage feedback, instead of saying things like ".... this is not the case, period" .

tedurur wrote:Ohwell, not going to derail your thread with this. GL with continouing playing Tau "the right way"

Thank you. I m not only going to continue playing Tau the right way, but will educate people about the right way.

So, the thread has deviated from the match-up of these two forces to discussing sentence structure and implied meanings of written text.....this isn't an literature class gents! This is war!

As an Ork Warboss myself I want to see how my boyz did!! I agree that this list has some potential pitfalls against the Tau list shown above, but if they can survive the first volley it should get interesting. As a Kan Wall player that is currently mapping out his Wagon List I've found that almost all Ork lists are based around that one thing.....surviving the volleys before charging.

So, rather than playing internet tough guy with each other over the two armies listed above lets offer up some different strategies. For example....

I know that a lot of people really like the Wagon Rush due to its speed at clearing the table. As a result they invest heavily in the Wagons. The same can be said for the Kan Wall with Kans and Dreads. However, what could an Ork do is either 1. Offer up other targets to shoot at or 2. Combat this superior stand and shoot ability presented by the Tau?

Why not lighten the load in other places to add Koptas or Kommandos or really anything that might cause the Tau to split their fire up. I love the wagons and think that AV14 beats the hell out of my AV11 on my Kans....but if all the Tau have to shoot at is the Wagons then that presents a problem. However, I realize that the point of this game was to represent a TAC list, but I think my point for list adjustments still stands regardless of the opponent. Many Marine lists would give this a run at shooting volleys too. Wolf Longfangs are very popular and could become a nightmare. Guard Tanks and Cannons.....the list goes on. My point is rather than saying ......."without Grots to potentially score they are hosed"......lets think of other opportunities to improve the Ork TAC list.

My Ork Kan Wall for example has no lootas. I realize that this is contrary to popular tactics, but I'm trying to win without them. As a result I play with 2 units of 5 deffkoptas with rockets, but no buzz saws. The reason is that it gives me two good anti tank or terminator units that can be up close on the enemy early. This makes them potentially split their fire. Now, the Koptas I mentioned are both expensive in the unit sizes i mentioned as well as very fragile. They tend to attract a lot of fire and die by turn 2, but that is 2 turns of the wall moving with limited concentrated fire unpon it. So, all lists are open to discussion and my certainly is not perfect.

But rather than discussing the dominating power of railguns and Tau shooting lets think of tactic improvements for either list in a TAC situation.

I like the Tau list, looks about as good as Tau can get. The ork list is good, but not totally optimized. Grots would have been nice, and some chaff units (kopta/buggies) also seem to work well in wagon lists.

The ork list does have a difficult match-up here. Piranha's are great at blocking wagons, and S10 AP1 shooting hurts for open-topped vehicles.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:I know that a lot of people really like the Wagon Rush due to its speed at clearing the table. As a result they invest heavily in the Wagons. The same can be said for the Kan Wall with Kans and Dreads. However, what could an Ork do is either 1. Offer up other targets to shoot at or 2. Combat this superior stand and shoot ability presented by the Tau?

Why not lighten the load in other places to add Koptas or Kommandos or really anything that might cause the Tau to split their fire up. I love the wagons and think that AV14 beats the hell out of my AV11 on my Kans....but if all the Tau have to shoot at is the Wagons then that presents a problem.

Ok, let's see... (please note i m critising your recommendation, not you - in case I get accused of being confrontational again).

You said you want the Tau to split fire into other things and lift some pressure from the wagons, so it's better that we spend some points in things like koptas, kommandos etc.
But you have a cap of 1750 points. If you take away 140 points to buy 2 koptas, that is one less wagon that you can buy. So instead of 4 wagons + lootas, etc, you now have 3 wagons + koptas + lootas, etc. You are merely exchanging one wagon for 2 koptas. Is there some additional benefits in terms of target that I m not seeing here?
In fact, 2 kopta + 3 Wagons is an even worse combination than 4 wagons. Those crisis suits who originally had nothing to shoot at (they cant hurt wagons, lootas will be too far away), suddenly have something to shoot at (the koptas) instead of idling around. This is bad target saturation.

If the Crisis suits have Missile Pods, they can start shooting side armor on the Battlewagons first turn if you deploy well. Utilizing missile pods for anti-vehicle the first few turns also lightens the Tau's reliance on Broadsides so you can take the Railhead with sub-munition I mentioned earlier. *ahem*

Once you do de-mech the Orkz, you have to shift from tank-hunting to horde-killing, and a Railhead sub has the potential to wipe a mob of 'Ard Boyz right off the table.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:
I know that a lot of people really like the Wagon Rush due to its speed at clearing the table. As a result they invest heavily in the Wagons. The same can be said for the Kan Wall with Kans and Dreads. However, what could an Ork do is either 1. Offer up other targets to shoot at or 2. Combat this superior stand and shoot ability presented by the Tau?

Why not lighten the load in other places to add Koptas or Kommandos or really anything that might cause the Tau to split their fire up. I love the wagons and think that AV14 beats the hell out of my AV11 on my Kans....but if all the Tau have to shoot at is the Wagons then that presents a problem.

That is very true and if the player is able to do so and provide chaff for the main force, it would be an excellent idea. HOWEVER,

Isseyfaran wrote:
Ok, let's see... (please note i m critising your recommendation, not you - in case I get accused of being confrontational again).

You said you want the Tau to split fire into other things and lift some pressure from the wagons, so it's better that we spend some points in things like koptas, kommandos etc.
But you have a cap of 1750 points. If you take away 140 points to buy 2 koptas, that is one less wagon that you can buy. So instead of 4 wagons + lootas, etc, you now have 3 wagons + koptas + lootas, etc. You are merely exchanging one wagon for 2 koptas. Is there some additional benefits in terms of target that I m not seeing here?
In fact, 2 kopta + 3 Wagons is an even worse combination than 4 wagons. Those crisis suits who originally had nothing to shoot at (they cant hurt wagons, lootas will be too far away), suddenly have something to shoot at (the koptas) instead of idling around. This is bad target saturation.

THIS, is one of those lists that might not benefit from such tactics. The idea of having many different threats to shoot at rather then 1 or 2 High-Value targets is an excellent idea that many people do use but in certain lists the points just aren't there for the taking. as Isseyfaran points out, adding additional targets could actually help the opposing player by allowing softer targets for those who cant hurt the tougher shtuff.

Of course this is where it gets tricky and where everyone needs to sit back and take these lists with a grain of salt. If i remember correctly, each player was suppossed to field an army that they believed could take on any other army out there. neither player would have had an idea of what they were goin to face, so the inclusion of thus said Koptas might have appeared like a good idea for an all-comers list. when the 2 players would have their fight, however, those 2 Koptas that looked like a good idea, at the time will actually fall flat on their face and start cryin for momma,( ...oh wait.....Orks don't have moms cuz their plants right? ) Although in a different setting/matchup those 2 Koptas might be what decides the game. Although just 2 additional Koptas while losin a BW might appear as a horrible idea when playin against THIS PARTICULAR LIST, it might be exactly what they need in a different fight.

As for accusing people of being "unnecessarily confrontational", we all need to remember that we are from different backgrounds and have different histories and need to take EVERYTHING someone/something says with a grain of salt. If they appear to be overly hostile, i always assume that the person did not appear to be so and that it is mearly a habit of their's that they have always had.

'Course in my opinion, Isseyfaran was probably in a debate team since he is able to see things and spot flaws while backing up his claims

MakersHitstheMark wrote:
So, the thread has deviated from the match-up of these two forces to discussing sentence structure and implied meanings of written text.....this isn't an literature class gents! This is war!

I couldn't have said it better myself! As i like to say, "Make War, not Trollcraft"

Isseyfaran wrote:

MakersHitstheMark wrote:I know that a lot of people really like the Wagon Rush due to its speed at clearing the table. As a result they invest heavily in the Wagons. The same can be said for the Kan Wall with Kans and Dreads. However, what could an Ork do is either 1. Offer up other targets to shoot at or 2. Combat this superior stand and shoot ability presented by the Tau?

Why not lighten the load in other places to add Koptas or Kommandos or really anything that might cause the Tau to split their fire up. I love the wagons and think that AV14 beats the hell out of my AV11 on my Kans....but if all the Tau have to shoot at is the Wagons then that presents a problem.

Ok, let's see... (please note i m critising your recommendation, not you - in case I get accused of being confrontational again).

You said you want the Tau to split fire into other things and lift some pressure from the wagons, so it's better that we spend some points in things like koptas, kommandos etc.
But you have a cap of 1750 points. If you take away 140 points to buy 2 koptas, that is one less wagon that you can buy. So instead of 4 wagons + lootas, etc, you now have 3 wagons + koptas + lootas, etc. You are merely exchanging one wagon for 2 koptas. Is there some additional benefits in terms of target that I m not seeing here?
In fact, 2 kopta + 3 Wagons is an even worse combination than 4 wagons. Those crisis suits who originally had nothing to shoot at (they cant hurt wagons, lootas will be too far away), suddenly have something to shoot at (the koptas) instead of idling around. This is bad target saturation.

I agree with your point and don't feel like you are attacking me, but are actually just addressing the points I raised. So, we are all good.

My point was to try and constructively move along the conversation. Though I agree that in this case taking 70pt Koptas is a bad play in the place of a battle wagon full of guys I was trying to prove a point. The point being that when trying to build an All Comers list we should spend our time discussing what tactics might improve the lists. Personally, at 1750 I probably wouldn't take the 4th battle wagon. I would invest the points in additional lootas to apply suppressing fire to try and keep your crisis suits from getting on the flank of the Wagons. There isn't much that can be done to prevent the broadsides from shooting at them except maybe taking Kommandos. However, that teeters on the idea of list taking based on the opponent. I play a Kan Wall as I mentioned earlier and would definitely benefit from time to time by having them in my force. However, I never consider them for an all comers game.

Thanks for keeping it moving constructively! I'm interested to see the battle report so that we can potentially ID areas that could have improved the Orks chances. This is really important to me as an Ork player, but also with a new TAU codex in the near future it is extra important.

If you drop the burna from the mek and rpj from all wagons and remove one boy, you have 41pts = enough for a gretchin squad. Would make the list better IMO.

When is the report coming anyway?

I'm questioning the 15 Burnas. Isn't that a bit overkill for what Tau is bringing (or overkill for just about anything for that matter)? Granted it's meant to be a TAC list, but couldn't dropping that squad to 10, make room for some Gretchin without really hurting the list?

Sekminara,

I know that orks strength is mostly in thier numbers, and the tau are superiour marksmen. I just still didn't understand why the ork boyz took shootaz instead of the choppaz or betta? But seeing it was a TAC list, I do see the versitility shoota boyz offer over choppa boyz


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Illumini wrote:
When is the report coming anyway?

I second that, where's the BR?

'nuff chattin, I wants to see sum choppin and Dakka, Dakka!
(pun fully intended!)

Ok just gotta say I agree with Jy2, SabrX and anyone saying this is a slightly uphill battle if not more for the Tau. Anyone who would think that Tau will have an easy time against any army after only seeing one Bat Rep out of a guy obviously doesn't know how fragile the Tau really are. I am not trying to bash anyone I am just saying that we really don't know too well how Isseyfaran handles things just yet. And with Tau if you screw up in your movement phase then you are almost guaranteed to lose some expensive units, that you might not have or a turn earlier than planned. Can't wait for this one too! I may be copying your lists soon once I get the rest of my suits.

Ben

Good to see someone else advocating tau as a good army nowadays. My tau came back into play to counter the razor/dread GK spam as they work very well against it.

The differences between my lists and yours are that i find great use in pathfinders, drones on the suits and using wargear on the suits (such as target locks, targetting arrays and black sun filters).

I also don't like firewarriors > kroot. Kroot have always performed brilliantly for me and FWs rubbish (as in i've markerlit for FWs upto BS5 and 12 of them at rapid fire only do ten wounds lol).

Kroot are just so inconsistent for me. In one game a full squad got Sweeping Advanced by ONE Wych, while in another, a less than half strength squad killed Belial in CC. I mean, they're decent shooters and can put up wounds in CC, but they're so fragile. Cover helps them a lot, but if there's an objective in the open, expect them to get mulched.

Mar'tacus wrote:Kroot are just so inconsistent for me. In one game a full squad got Sweeping Advanced by ONE Wych, while in another, a less than half strength squad killed Belial in CC. I mean, they're decent shooters and can put up wounds in CC, but they're so fragile. Cover helps them a lot, but if there's an objective in the open, expect them to get mulched.

I agree with the volatility of Kroot. Its definitely due to the fact of how GW wanted them to play out: meat shields that die in one round of combat so you're beefier units can shoot at whatever just killed the kroot. This resulting fragility definitely makes it tougher to play them outside of what they were intended to do.

Just kinda as a goofy question. Does anyone here play Eldar? The reason I ask is because I have heard that each one of their units has a specific role and pretty much if it leaves that role it will die. Aren't Tau kinda the same way?

Benamint wrote:Just kinda as a goofy question. Does anyone here play Eldar? The reason I ask is because I have heard that each one of their units has a specific role and pretty much if it leaves that role it will die. Aren't Tau kinda the same way?

I play Eldar. Yes, majority of their units is specialized. Howling Banshees and Harlequins are specialized for assault. Fire Dragons is specialized for taking out monstrous creatures or vehicles. Dire Avengers is specialized for medium anti-infantry shooting. There are units that serves other purposes, but the only units that I can think of that performs well against all types of targets is the Jet-seer council and Fire Prism.

Tau is also mostly specialized, but they do have some units, which serves multiple roles and/or performs well against different types of targets. These include Crisis Suits and Rail-head. Some may argue units with markerlights with seeker missiles provides anti-mech to many other units, but it's not particularly effective in game play.

Was this played as an actual tabletop match or purely virtual?

@ SabrX - Duh stupid me... I had already known that you played Eldar but asked anyhow... Oops. The reason I asked that was just because it seemed to me that (at least in Bat Rep and virtual world) that Tau always get plugged as a weaker codex than Eldar (more complaining at least) and that people tend to play/win more with Eldar. Why is this since Tau isn't exactly worse than it? Do players have the wrong mindset?

Aside from Broadsides, there isn't much else in the Tau's arsenal against AV12 and higher. Fusion blaster Prianhas are good, but tends to get shot down by Eldar's range anti-mech. Railgun Str10 gets reduced to Str8 and Fusion Blasters don't roll an extra D6 against Energy Fields Wave Serpents. Eldar heavy support vehicles could have Holofields, which makes them very durable. Deathrains and Fire Knife is effective against AV12 either. Also, Eldar vehicles are all fast. A singe Wave Serpent carrying 5 Fire Dragons can wipe out a Crisis Suit team and many Eldar in general will win assault against Tau infantry. Eldar is latent with psychic powers, which Tau has no defense against. There's also the Jet-seer council, which wreaks havoc against Tau infantry and vehicles a like. I think the best counter to Eldar would be gunline. I've already played a couple mech Tau vs. mech Eldar games and they didn't end well.

Benamint wrote:@ SabrX - Duh stupid me... I had already known that you played Eldar but asked anyhow... Oops. The reason I asked that was just because it seemed to me that (at least in Bat Rep and virtual world) that Tau always get plugged as a weaker codex than Eldar (more complaining at least) and that people tend to play/win more with Eldar. Why is this since Tau isn't exactly worse than it? Do players have the wrong mindset?

Are you talking about Tau and Eldar vs other codex, OR Tau vs Eldar?
Tau has a bad matchup against Eldar.

But anyway, don't hijack my thread? If you fancy a BatRep on that, you got to wait for it.

It's not a bat rep yet, so far it's simply a list of either army, and debate as to the efficiency of those

I was speaking more like Tau and Eldar vs. other codexes. Like why is Tau always complained about and Eldar not so much since they are both very specialized. Though SabrX's misunderstanding kinda explained that in showing why Eldar could beat Tau.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And @Isseyfaran - I wasn't trying to thread jack and mean no disrespect. As a Tau player I am extremely excited to see this Bat Rep! My question has been answered in a round about way by SabrX so no I wait eagerly for the rest of your report!

Well, that ended how I thought it would, but didn't happen like I expected. I anticipated the Tau popping the Wagons open, but aving never played against Tau I hadn't thought about stuffing fast attack stuff into their lanes of advancement. That was probably what changed the course of the game the most because it slowed the Ork advance considerably.

That being said....has this list played an Imperial Guard Mech army yet? I'd love to see Lemans and Manticors going toe to toe with these broadsides and crisis suits. Obviously, the Tau have a speed advantage, but I think the battle would become a shooting war of heavy weight titans throwing haymakers at each other's chins.

I feel that this game could of been decided quicker with a different deployment strategy, just a slight tweak to optimize results, so to speak.

It is of my opinion that if one broadside squad was deployed towards the right/middle of the field, the wagons would go down even quicker. My reasoning behind this conclusion is that the wagons would have to either go for your main fire base and expose their (AV 12?) side armor to the railguns of the lone squad, or split a wagon to go to the other side, minimizing the threat to the main force.

This could be magnified if more units were deployed on the flank, but the counter reaction would be more attention to them.

Another think to consider is having pathfinders in your list, especially at 2000 points to deal with KFFs and the times where you want something gone, just 3 hits and that save is gone on those wagons.

my 2 cents

mythological wrote:It is of my opinion that if one broadside squad was deployed towards the right/middle of the field, the wagons would go down even quicker. My reasoning behind this conclusion is that the wagons would have to either go for your main fire base and expose their (AV 12?) side armor to the railguns of the lone squad, or split a wagon to go to the other side, minimizing the threat to the main force.

I already tried to extend the kroot wall as much as possible. I didn't want to risk exposing my broadsides without wrapping them. If he rolled hot for his KFF (he already was rolling pretty hot), my broadsides will not have a 2nd chance of surviving.

mythological wrote:Another think to consider is having pathfinders in your list, especially at 2000 points to deal with KFFs and the times where you want something gone, just 3 hits and that save is gone on those wagons.

my 2 cents

Agreed. But I tend to prefer to spend the points on more broadsides.

mythological wrote:
It is of my opinion that if one broadside squad was deployed towards the right/middle of the field, the wagons would go down even quicker. My reasoning behind this conclusion is that the wagons would have to either go for your main fire base and expose their (AV 12?) side armor to the railguns of the lone squad, or split a wagon to go to the other side, minimizing the threat to the main force.

I already tried to extend the kroot wall as much as possible. I didn't want to risk exposing my broadsides without wrapping them. If he rolled hot for his KFF (he already was rolling pretty hot), my broadsides will not have a 2nd chance of surviving.

The point is to make the bait as tempting as possible, so you wouldn't want to give those broadsides a kroot wall, in fact, having them die would be preferable then the main ork force getting to your lines (which they eventually did)

I know it is hard to lose units when playing tau, because our units are so expensive, however sometime losing one or two units is preferable to losing the main force.

mythological wrote:
Another think to consider is having pathfinders in your list, especially at 2000 points to deal with KFFs and the times where you want something gone, just 3 hits and that save is gone on those wagons.

my 2 cents

Agreed. But I tend to prefer to spend the points on more broadsides.

You make a good point with having more points spent on broadsides, but usually you only need around 5 at 2000 points (minimum), you have enough broadsides already but you just need something to direct their firepower.

Quality over quantity so to say.

And just to offer a opposing viewpoint. I am only running 4 broadsides at 2000 points. You may ask where are points being spent if not on broadsides, three 6 man firewarrior squads in devilfish (I have 5 troop choices including two kroot squads). Now my overall firepower may be smaller (mind you I still field 12 Crisis Suits), but all that AV 12 vehicles with cover saves means that I have a better chance at winning 2/3 of regular games then you.

mythological wrote:
The point is to make the bait as tempting as possible, so you wouldn't want to give those broadsides a kroot wall, in fact, having them die would be preferable then the main ork force getting to your lines (which they eventually did)

Without that team of broadsides, I wouldnt have taken down ghaz and nobs, so I am pretty sure I want them alive till the very end.

mythological wrote:I know it is hard to lose units when playing tau, because our units are so expensive, however sometime losing one or two units is preferable to losing the main force.

I only lose units i know i can afford to lose. I couldn't afford to lose the broadsides that early this game.

mythological wrote:You make a good point with having more points spent on broadsides, but usually you only need around 5 at 2000 points (minimum), you have enough broadsides already but you just need something to direct their firepower.

But that's your benchmark. I don't think 5 is hardly enough.
I don't understand the part about directing power.

mythological wrote:Quality over quantity so to say.

6 Pathfinders cost 72 points, which is about enough for me to purchase another broadside. I don't have time to go too much into math right now, but 1 broadside + 6 pathfinders on expectation scores a 0.75 unsaved (no cover in this case) hit , while 1 broadside + 1 broadside on expectation scores the same amount of unsaved hit. Of course the larger the squad of the broadside, the higher marginal benefit of the pathfinders.But you hardly use large squad of broadsides to shoot at the same target.
And pathfinder suffer from lower toughness, Lower Ld, shorter range than broadsides, lower saves than broadsides ,etc

mythological wrote:And just to offer a opposing viewpoint. I am only running 4 broadsides at 2000 points. You may ask where are points being spent if not on broadsides, three 6 man firewarrior squads in devilfish (I have 5 troop choices including two kroot squads). Now my overall firepower may be smaller (mind you I still field 12 Crisis Suits), but all that AV 12 vehicles with cover saves means that I have a better chance at winning 2/3 of regular games then you.

Your "better chance" is misleading because my list has no problem winning objectives game as well. This was evident from my first batrep. The firepower more than compensates by crippling the opponent at the key spots.

I have another variant of the list which utilisies 6 troops. You may explore if you are interested.

I would like to see rematch, but with Seize Ground or Capture and Control.

Jefffar wrote:I would like to see rematch, but with Seize Ground or Capture and Control.

This was capture and control

LOL, okay, missed that and couldn't see the well covered Objectives.

So Straight Annihilation and Seize Ground then.

Call me crazy, but I think this battle was over as soon as the Ork player CHOSE to let the Broadside-laden list take the first turn against his BW spam. You said he did this to close the gap to your army faster, but... you know what closes that gap EVEN faster? A turn of movement. And as for the fact that this "strategy" allowed him to see where you were deploying... why should that matter? There is only one objective for him to worry about getting to, and that gets placed before either army deploys.

Kudos to you, though. You definitely played this game the right way... your opponent brought an inferior list, played it poorly, and got tabled. For his sake, I hope that's the last time he voluntarily gives up the first turn of the game... unless I somehow end up playing against him

hilleraj wrote:Call me crazy, but I think this battle was over as soon as the Ork player CHOSE to let the Broadside-laden list take the first turn against his BW spam. You said he did this to close the gap to your army faster, but... you know what closes that gap EVEN faster? A turn of movement. And as for the fact that this "strategy" allowed him to see where you were deploying... why should that matter? There is only one objective for him to worry about getting to, and that gets placed before either army deploys.

Let me be the first one to call you crazy. I hate to doubt that you are actually a 40k player, but do you know that the person who starts first has to deploy first? So if he starts first, he has 2 choices :-

1) Deploy on the right or left side, and HOPE that I am stupid enough to deploy directly opposite him.

2) Deploy in the middle, get 1st turn. And since he is in the middle, he has to expend about 7-8 inches to move to the side I am, and end up only 4-5 inches better of, BUT with the rest of the wagons clogging behind. I wouldnt say that's a much better option.

You mentioned about the objective. You do realize (or maybe you haven't) that if he starts first, it makes it worse because I can place my objective in response to his.
And if you assume he should deploy directly opposite across where my objective is, I can always place it in the middle backfield, and keep my FireWarriors in my fish. Since in this case as he is much further away from me, I don't even have to use my Devilfish for movement blocking. And realize even in this game, my Fish stayed alive till the end of the game.

hilleraj wrote:Kudos to you, though. You definitely played this game the right way...

Thank you

hilleraj wrote:your opponent brought an inferior list,

Enlighten us what is a better wagon list.

hilleraj wrote:played it poorly, and got tabled.

And educate us how he should have played it better.

Don't give vague comments and leave us hanging there. Do elaborate so that everyone can learn from you (assuming your arguments are sound of course).

And pardon me for saying this :- I see that you ve just created an account today, and this is your first post. I can't help it but feel that you are a clone account of someone who just got shot down by my argument.

I may be thinking too much, but doesn't matter, as long as you bring solid argument into the discussion.

but do you know that the person who starts first has to deploy first?

Seriously?!?! Well that changes EVERYTHING!!

Since you're gonna be defensive to the point of insulting my intelligence (through a cleverly-disguised question, mind you), I don't really feel like getting into a long, theoretical blow-by-blow reenactment of how this battle could have gone... but I'll reiterate - you only have one objective, so his BWs need to deploy across from it, and head (relatively) straight for it, letting the green tide roll over everything in its way.

Enlighten us what is a better wagon list.

The need for home objective-holding cheap troops has already been addressed several times in this thread. I can't see how this list would be considered a TAC list without a dedicated unit(s) for the possibility of a capture-and-control mission.

And educate us how he should have played it better.

Apart from the questionable tactic of giving up the first turn, I'd say it became pretty apparent that he forgot what the mission was (understandable when the WAAAAAGH takes hold), since he left his objective alone, and instead decided to try and foot-slog his units into a Tau deathtrap, after losing all his mobility. In this battle, once the BWs were wrecked, I think a smarter move would have been to play for the draw - bubble-wrap the objective, and power klaw anything that comes near. Not the Orky way, but I think it would have ended with a better result.

I can't help it but feel that you are a clone account of someone who just got shot down by my argument.

Definitely an understandable thought-process... but I hope this skepticism is your main reason for being so harsh on a noob like me. First-time posting, but I've been reading this site since I got back into the game less than a year ago. I really liked your first batrep, but I thought this time around there were some really obvious deficiencies in your opponent's tactics, and it didn't seem like anyone else was even questioning it.

With that in mind, I'd like to say that I'm not an Ork player (shocking, I'm sure) - so I'd love to hear from some of the Ork players out there: would you voluntarily give up the first turn in this situation? And as OP so eloquently said: (please) don't give vague comments and leave us hanging there!

hilleraj wrote:
Since you're gonna be defensive to the point of insulting my intelligence (through a cleverly-disguised question, mind you), I don't really feel like getting into a long, theoretical blow-by-blow reenactment of how this battle could have gone... but I'll reiterate - you only have one objective, so his BWs need to deploy across from it, and head (relatively) straight for it, letting the green tide roll over everything in its way.

And i said placing my obj in the middle, did you miss it? So is he going to deploy left, OR right?

hilleraj wrote:Enlighten us what is a better wagon list.
The need for home objective-holding cheap troops has already been addressed several times in this thread. I can't see how this list would be considered a TAC list without a dedicated unit(s) for the possibility of a capture-and-control mission.

He was tabled. Did it make any difference? Like reducing 7 boys to purchase a unit of 10grots + Runtherd?

OH, and having a single squad of Gretchin is the difference between a good BW list and a WEAK BW list? REALLY?

hilleraj wrote:Apart from the questionable tactic of giving up the first turn, I'd say it became pretty apparent that he forgot what the mission was (understandable when the WAAAAAGH takes hold), since he left his objective alone, and instead decided to try and foot-slog his units into a Tau deathtrap, after losing all his mobility. In this battle, once the BWs were wrecked, I think a smarter move would have been to play for the draw - bubble-wrap the objective, and power klaw anything that comes near. Not the Orky way, but I think it would have ended with a better result.

He did exactly that, retreating his boys to the objective, but got wiped.

OH you mean the moment his wagons all got wrecked, EVERYTHING, including his GHAZ + NOB should go back and pray for a draw? Is this how you will play the game?

And if he had retreated another squad of boys instead of EVERYTHING, his Ghaz squad wouldnt have survived till turn 7 given the concentration of firepower, and I could then divert all 9 suits into shooting at the 1 and half squad of boys at the back. And if they don't die, the worse case is a draw for me, and best case is a win for me if he cannot take down my devilfish contesting the obj.

hilleraj wrote:Definitely an understandable thought-process... but I hope this skepticism is your main reason for being so harsh on a noob like me. First-time posting, but I've been reading this site since I got back into the game less than a year ago. I really liked your first batrep, but I thought this time around there were some really obvious deficiencies in your opponent's tactics, and it didn't seem like anyone else was even questioning it.

Fair enough. So I answered your queries. Anything you want to add?

hilleraj wrote:With that in mind, I'd like to say that I'm not an Ork player (shocking, I'm sure) - so I'd love to hear from some of the Ork players out there: would you voluntarily give up the first turn in this situation? And as OP so eloquently said: (please) don't give vague comments and leave us hanging there!

Now tell us. Would you have deployed on the left, the right, the middle, or whereever my objective is? And then we can discuss the pros and cons of your suggestion.

Thanks for your comments anyway.

It is funny, cause 1 month ago, there was the exact opposite thread : ie. a Tau player that was unable to beat an ork BW list.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/415026.page

Concerning the list of the OP's ork player, I think a more competitive list would have boarding planks on the BWs.
Since a skimmer wall seems to be a common solution against BW list, I suppose many ork player add a boarding plank on their BWs, no ?

He was tabled. Did it make any difference? Like reducing 7 boys to purchase a unit of 10grots + Runtherd?

List composition is a completely different subject from the results of this one particular battle. Please keep that in mind when people offer constructive criticism of a particular list. You asked what improvements could be made to this Ork list, and the collective wisdom of the Dakka forums said to at least get a grot squad.

OH, and having a single squad of Gretchin is the difference between a good BW list and a WEAK BW list? REALLY?

Now you're putting words in my mouth, and trying to exaggerate them to make me look foolish. I never said "weak" - in fact, as you've said many times, there are plenty of BW spam tourney lists that can do well. This list, however, is an inferior TAC list (my words), since it does not account for the possibility of all the different scenario types. A similar BW list with a dedicated objective holding squad (I'd go with more than 10 grots, but less than 20, to keep them fearless after taking a few casualties) is a superior list to the one your friend brought to this game.

He did exactly that, retreating his boys to the objective, but got wiped.

He sent one half-destroyed squad of troops back. If he sends the teal squad back as well on turn 3 (instead of running them forward to certain death), there is no way that you will kill them all. Rapid fire (or 18" stand and fire from kroot, can't tell from your diagram and you didn't specify), SMS, and a lack of cover saves chewed through that mob of orks. If he denies you these, you don't have enough fire power to kill both teal and green squad before the game ends (even after going 7 turns).

EVERYTHING, including his GHAZ + NOB should go back and pray for a draw? Is this how you will play the game?

C'mon dude, are you seriously berating me for this one? You asked me how he should have played it better, and I answered. A draw is better than a loss, end of story.

And i said placing my obj in the middle, did you miss it? So is he going to deploy left, OR right?

What you actually said was:

And if you assume he should deploy directly opposite across where my objective is, I can always place it in the middle backfield, and keep my FireWarriors in my fish

That's different from saying "my objective is in the middle", which is a definitive statement. It's capture and control, so your objective MUST go in the backfield. Middle, left, or right makes no difference. You can hide your squad in your transport, regardless of where the objective is placed, so I'm not really sure what your point is. In fact, I don't even know why you're asking this question, other than to try and confuse anyone else who's reading this, in a vain attempt to make it look like you're right, or at least that you know better than me.

He deploys across from your objective. I think I made that pretty clear already.

Fair enough. So I answered your queries. Anything you want to add?

That's really funny, since I didn't ask you any questions. You answered nothing, just questioned my advice (seemingly without taking the time to read it.) However, I've answered every one of your attempts to dislodge my arguments, and left an open-ended question for the rest of the forum, in an attempt to actually gain some insight on the situation.

First of all, no need to get all worked up over toy soldiers, or with someone in the internet who is thousands of miles away from you. There are more important things in life

hilleraj wrote:List composition is a completely different subject from the results of this one particular battle. Please keep that in mind when people offer constructive criticism of a particular list. You asked what improvements could be made to this Ork list, and the collective wisdom of the Dakka forums said to at least get a grot squad.

Ok, so I get you. The existence of a gretchin squad wouldn't make a difference to the outcome of this game.
Thx, this was what I wanted to clarify.

hilleraj wrote:Now you're putting words in my mouth, and trying to exaggerate them to make me look foolish. I never said "weak" - in fact, as you've said many times, there are plenty of BW spam tourney lists that can do well. This list, however, is an inferior TAC list (my words), since it does not account for the possibility of all the different scenario types. A similar BW list with a dedicated objective holding squad (I'd go with more than 10 grots, but less than 20, to keep them fearless after taking a few casualties) is a superior list to the one your friend brought to this game.

Ok so in other words, the list wasn't bad, was good but just not optimal. Yes, No?

hilleraj wrote:He sent one half-destroyed squad of troops back. If he sends the teal squad back as well on turn 3 (instead of running them forward to certain death), there is no way that you will kill them all. Rapid fire (or 18" stand and fire from kroot, can't tell from your diagram and you didn't specify), SMS, and a lack of cover saves chewed through that mob of orks. If he denies you these, you don't have enough fire power to kill both teal and green squad before the game ends (even after going 7 turns).

By Tau turn 4,
Missle and Plasma from 1 squad of Fireknife - 5 wounds, 2.5 dead
Missile from Deathrains - 3.75 wounds, 1.875 dead
Fusion blaster - 0.555 wounds, 0.2777 dead
4 Drones - 1.48 wounds, 0.74 dead
BC - 1 wound, 0.5 dead
Thats average 5.892 dead orks per turn, 23.568 dead orks over 4 turns. The combined number of orks from the 2 squads was only 23 (in fact from my original batrep record was like only 21). I haven't even factored in kroots shooting for 1 turn, But they probably only kill about 2.
So yes, they will die , or have a more than average chance to die; i..e odds are against him.

*I forgot I should discount 1 turn of rapid firing, so minus 3 plasma shots, -0.625 wounds. Oh, and if orks go to ground, the number will drop from 23.568 to about 15. But I haven't even factored in the fact that I can do a desperate assault on turn 7. 6 suits on the charge causes 6 wounds, 5 more dead orks - doesn't matter that the suits die, and if they don't die, next turn 2 more orks goes down on average.

So yeah, there is the chance that these boys survive, with their objective contested, and the ork player loses on Victory point.

That leaves us with 4 more suits and 7 railguns against Ghaz + Nobs. Lets see, just ROUGHLY.
On Tau turn 4, 7 railguns = 5.185 wounds, 2.6 unsaved. Let's assume 1 goes to Ghaz, 1 nob dies. Carry over the half to turn 5
Plasma from Shas El - 0.55 wounds, 0.2777 unsaved
Plasma from suits - 1.25 wounds, 0.625 unsaved
Assume Missiles all saved.

Tau Turn 5, 7 railguns, everything one from each squad goes into ghaz and assume all gets saved. So the balance 4 railgun shots - 2.96 wounds, 1.5 + 0.5 carried over = 2 dead nobs.
Rapid Plasma from Shas El and suits, 2 unsaved wounds.

Tau turn 6. 4 broadsides get wiped by Ghaz+Nob, before getting wiped by 3 railguns and 8 plasma shots. Or IF Ghaz survives, firewarriors get wiped and ghaz goes down on turn 7.

So going by your BRILLIANT strategy, it will be a tabling, OR I win by one objective, and still table the opponent OR I will by Secondary Mission.

hilleraj wrote:C'mon dude, are you seriously berating me for this one? You asked me how he should have played it better, and I answered. A draw is better than a loss, end of story.

Yes, I am, because you are wrong without doing your mathhammer. And you don't win tournaments by playing for draw. True, a draw is better than a loss, but deciding to turtle back that EARLY in the game is never going to make sense to me.

hilleraj wrote:What you actually said was:
That's different from saying "my objective is in the middle", which is a definitive statement. It's capture and control, so your objective MUST go in the backfield. Middle, left, or right makes no difference. You can hide your squad in your transport, regardless of where the objective is placed, so I'm not really sure what your point is. In fact, I don't even know why you're asking this question, other than to try and confuse anyone else who's reading this, in a vain attempt to make it look like you're right, or at least that you know better than me.

He deploys across from your objective. I think I made that pretty clear already.

Got you, the long story was unnecessary though. So he will deploy in the MIDDLE in this case. THen I ll just pull out my previous comment :-

hilleraj wrote:Deploy in the middle, get 1st turn. And since he is in the middle, he has to expend about 7-8 inches to move to the side I am, and end up only 4-5 inches better off, BUT with the rest of the wagons clogging behind. I wouldnt say that's a much better option.

hilleraj wrote:That's really funny, since I didn't ask you any questions. You answered nothing, just questioned my advice (seemingly without taking the time to read it.) However, I've answered every one of your attempts to dislodge my arguments, and left an open-ended question for the rest of the forum, in an attempt to actually gain some insight on the situation.

It's ok :-). I tried again. If it didnt help, feel free to chip in again. . I am always ready.

You have a lot of confidence in mathhammer, Isseyfaran, so much in fact that you are unwilling to consider alternative possibilities.

hilleraj makes some good points with his comments, but I think you are somewhat aggravated at him and you aren't hearing him out, I'll try to reiterate.

I also think that taking first turn could have altered the game significantly for the orks. The point was made that the objectives are placed before deployment, so the ork player could have just saw where you're objective was being placed and deployed right opposite from it, whether it was in the right, middle, or left. He would then get a free turn 1 movement and an almost assured turn 3 charge, turn 2 if the dodge rolls fails.

The ork list wasn't optimal, answering your query. This isn't much of a deal but you are advertising playing the best tau out there so your opponents should have the best possible lists themselves.

Isseyfaran is English your primary language? I'm not asking to be snotty or difficulty. I'm asking to form a frame of reference around the conversation. Reading this thread you are very well spoken (well, written, but you get the idea), but your tone is very harsh. I think that is a lot of the reason that so many people are reacting defensively to your comments.

You asked for feedback and input, but when other players are chiming in to continue the conversation you belittle them or insult their intelligence through subversive questions and snide comments. If you want people to participate maybe stiffle your retorts a hair so that the forum thread doesn't turn into an internet tough guy pissing contest. Remember it is a game fellas.

The truth of the situation is the following....
1. This wasn't a perfect list because the whole army is built around the idea of going and getting stuck in. You mentioned a tournament player would never sit back after losing the wagons and play for the tie. Though that may be true, a tourny list should also expect multiple scenario types and should bring something to hold the fort down while the wagons move on. It could be grots or boys....the point is leaving it open is a poor move.
2. As for deployment....you kept mentioning that the Ork player needed to move where you deployed and that by going first he would have lost the ability to deploy as effectively as he needed to. While that may be true I thought this mission was about objectives. So, if you toss yours in the middle and then deploy left or right of that who cares? He needs the objectives to win. Killing you is a bonus. He obviously can't ignore you because of your range and fire power, but some different decision could have been made was all that hilleraj was trying to point out. In fact, he went so far as to say.....the ork list wasn't perfect, the ork player made some mistakes, and you being a good player with a solid strategy in place around your own list capitalized. There is nothing negative or degrading about your efforts being mentioned there. In fact, it sounded like a compliment. From my experience in playing sports, warhammer, and from being a history buff the side that loses any conflict is most often the side that makes the fewest mistakes and fights/plays the game within the strategy they built. The Ork strategy had holes in it before it ever hit the table and they got worse once the shooting started. The list you played against is a popular themed ork list for tournies so regardless of having a unit to leave at home or not, it was a good test.

Great win! Congrats! It seems like you've got a good list going here. Keep play testing it. I'd love to see it play against some other marine chapters or even a guard list. Being relatively new to the game (I start in June) I've only played against Eldar, Blood Angels, Nids, and UltraMarines. So, seeing reports against some other armies would be great.

Keep having fun guys!

mythological wrote:You have a lot of confidence in mathhammer, Isseyfaran, so much in fact that you are unwilling to consider alternative possibilities.

I didn't. I merely showed why the alternative wasn't a better one.

mythological wrote:I also think that taking first turn could have altered the game significantly for the orks. The point was made that the objectives are placed before deployment, so the ork player could have just saw where you're objective was being placed and deployed right opposite from it, whether it was in the right, middle, or left. He would then get a free turn 1 movement and an almost assured turn 3 charge, turn 2 if the dodge rolls fails.

Since it appears that you and your friend are having trouble visualizing what I have explained (that there is almost minimal net gain in distance), I have replicated your suggestion in vassal.


The net gain for Wagon 1 & 2 was about 6", wagon 3 about 4" and wagon 4 was worse off.
And this positioning actually makes it easier to stagger my skimmers so that wagon 1 and 2 will have to ram through 2 consecutive skimmers ; i.e. a 1/9 chance of success.

mythological wrote:The ork list wasn't optimal, answering your query. This isn't much of a deal but you are advertising playing the best tau out there so your opponents should have the best possible lists themselves.

You are right. My opponent should have the best possible list. When asked how would a squad of gretchin have changed the outcome of this game, you guys said it wouldn't have made a difference to THIS game. Then may I ask :- since nothing is going to change because of the gretchin squad, then how is it going to affect the value of THIS BatRep in illustrating "best Tau". That's my question

Also, as previously mentioned by myself, I actually agree the list wasn't optimal, but NOT because of the gretchin squad, most because of the point sunk in burnas. Sadly, no one actually got that right.


Instead of accusing me of being unwilling to consider alternatives, why not you think deeper into your own suggestions and spend some time with mathhammer (don't be lazy) to reconfirm your claim.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

MakersHitstheMark wrote:Isseyfaran is English your primary language? I'm not asking to be snotty or difficulty. I'm asking to form a frame of reference around the conversation. Reading this thread you are very well spoken (well, written, but you get the idea), but your tone is very harsh. I think that is a lot of the reason that so many people are reacting defensively to your comments.

You asked for feedback and input, but when other players are chiming in to continue the conversation you belittle them or insult their intelligence through subversive questions and snide comments. If you want people to participate maybe stiffle your retorts a hair so that the forum thread doesn't turn into an internet tough guy pissing contest. Remember it is a game fellas.

1) If you had spend the time to read the first 2 page of this thread, there are actually people who agreed that my tone was fine. So my guess is people just aren't happy that I shot down their argument, and accuse me of being rude. If i had merely shot down people without backing up myself with something logical, then you may have made sense. But apparently, i give solid arguments - unless you can POINT to me which part of my comment does not make sense.
2) It's funny that you find my replies insulting, but actually put in the effort to read the whole batrep, thread, and then post this long chunk of comments. I seriously doubt your intentions. If all I am to you is just an internet tough guy who refuse to listen to reasoning, and my batrep has no value to you because I am merely bullshitting, why bother responding to me now? You could have jolly well left in search for better reports. But apparently, this is again not the case.

* OK, maybe you mean well.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:The truth of the situation is the following....
1. This wasn't a perfect list because the whole army is built around the idea of going and getting stuck in. You mentioned a tournament player would never sit back after losing the wagons and play for the tie. Though that may be true, a tourny list should also expect multiple scenario types and should bring something to hold the fort down while the wagons move on. It could be grots or boys....the point is leaving it open is a poor move.

I actually am more interested in how it would have affected THIS GAME, because the intention is how to play Tau better. We can discuss about the gretchin squad over and over again when I am doing my series of Batrep for orks, but not now. But if it would have affected THIS game, then tell me how. Otherwise, quit repeating something that has no value to this BatRep.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:2. As for deployment....you kept mentioning that the Ork player needed to move where you deployed and that by going first he would have lost the ability to deploy as effectively as he needed to. While that may be true I thought this mission was about objectives. So, if you toss yours in the middle and then deploy left or right of that who cares? He needs the objectives to win. Killing you is a bonus. He obviously can't ignore you because of your range and fire power, but some different decision could have been made was all that hilleraj was trying to point out.

POINT is, there was NO WAY he could head for the objective in a straight line because of the terrain. He would have needed to move to the sides no matter what. NOW do you see why it always seems to you that I am shooting you down? Because you guys aren't even getting the BASIC facts right, especially when people took the effort to write a detailed batrep with vassal pictures.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:In fact, he went so far as to say.....the ork list wasn't perfect, the ork player made some mistakes, and you being a good player with a solid strategy in place around your own list capitalized. There is nothing negative or degrading about your efforts being mentioned there. In fact, it sounded like a compliment.

And this reinforces the fact that I aint even looking for personal fame. I am just very particular about what is offered here because I want people to learn the right things, and not be misguided by poor comments. So i make an effort to break down every poor comment here and explain to people what's wrong with them.

mythological wrote:I also think that taking first turn could have altered the game significantly for the orks. The point was made that the objectives are placed before deployment, so the ork player could have just saw where you're objective was being placed and deployed right opposite from it, whether it was in the right, middle, or left. He would then get a free turn 1 movement and an almost assured turn 3 charge, turn 2 if the dodge rolls fails.

Since it appears that you and your friend are having trouble visualizing what I have explained (that there is almost minimal net gain in distance), I have replicated your suggestion in vassal.


The net gain for Wagon 1 & 2 was about 6", wagon 3 about 4" and wagon 4 was worse off.
And this positioning actually makes it easier to stagger my skimmers so that wagon 1 and 2 will have to ram through 2 consecutive skimmers ; i.e. a 1/9 chance of success.

MarkersHitTheMark: When a skimmer succesfully dodges the ramming tank will stop in its' tracks.
Pg 71 "Ramming a skimmer"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just curious, is that big piece of terrain blocking LOS?

If a skimmer successfully dodges, the ramming vehicle (i.e. BW) stops right there. It doesn't go through.

However, my question for me is, does the skimmer still suffer D6 S10 hits from the BW when it dodges?

jy2 wrote:If a skimmer successfully dodges, the ramming vehicle (i.e. BW) stops right there. It doesn't go through.

However, my question for me is, does the skimmer still suffer D6 S10 hits from the BW when it dodges?

No. Hits only take place when the ram is successful. If he dodges the ram, it's not successful.

On a second note, why weren't there any boarding planks on the BWs to get some PK attacks on the skimmers in the event that ramming failed? Not only would it have made a difference in the outcome of this battle but it would have improved the effectiveness of the list being made as a TAC.

just out of curiosity, was this game played in Vassal or in real life then relayed through Vassal?

Sorry if you already said, couldn't find whether you did or didn't

I am always ready.

I hope so...

there was NO WAY he could head for the objective in a straight line

Ok, I see the pattern of problems you're having now. You're inferring waaay too much from what I've written, and getting all worked up over it. Care to show me where I said he should move in a straight line to your objective? You keep misunderstanding what I'm writing, and just fill in whatever you want to make it fit with your points. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and chalk it up to a language barrier. But if you're going to disagree with anything/everything that I say, please at least make sure that I actually said it, and that you weren't just assuming you knew what I meant.

Setting up directly across from your objective, with a large LOS-blocking piece of terrain in front of him, gives him the option of heading either way around the terrain based on your deployment. Alternatively, it lets him split his trucks, making it almost impossible for you to block them effectively with your skimmers (if they're all alive - remember he gets the first turn, and has two squads of lootas... mathhammer it out if you'd like, but at least one, maybe two of the skimmers shouldn't be able to move after his shooting is done). This, of course, means two of his BWs don't get the KFF, but again this would have to depend on your broadside deployment.

The net gain for Wagon 1 & 2 was about 6"

That's all he needs to Waaagh and assault you on turn 2. Splitting one of his BWs (to the right, in your diagram) means that three of his BWs get at least 6". closer to you (and actually more for the one on the right, since it doesn't need to move so far to the side to make room for the others (which is a pretty terrible movement strategy in the first place... one that I assume you used here in your example since it results in the smallest net gain for the Orks, which suits your point perfectly. The left-most BW could move almost the full 13" straight ahead, with the others moving in behind it. But it's your diagram, so I'll go with it). So we now have two BWs in potential turn-2 assault range, although I'd probably wait for turn 3 to Waaagh, depending on how your turn 1 shooting goes. As we saw in your batrep, only 1 BW went down on the first turn, but if it's one of the front-runners, then it's probably better to hold the Waaagh for late, as your opponent did. The difference now is that you're going to have two or three full BWs in your face on turn 2, and practically the entire Ork army assaulting you on turn 3. I believe sums it up nicely.

Ok, so I get you. The existence of a gretchin squad wouldn't make a difference to the outcome of this game.
Thx, this was what I wanted to clarify.

Again, please re-read my statement. Did you notice me say anywhere that you were right about this? I merely pointed out that you were defending a different point than the one you made earlier (originally you asked how to improve this LIST, then jumped to the conclusion that it wouldn't have made a difference in this particular GAME). And since I've enjoyed proving you wrong so far, let's take a look and see how a grot squad might change things in the outcome of this game.

First we need to make a few subtractions from the list to make room:

but NOT because of the gretchin squad, most because of the point sunk in burnas. Sadly, no one actually got that right.

The two go hand in hand. You need to get points from somewhere. And actually, it was YOU who said to drop 7 boys for the gretchin squad, so actually YOU got that one wrong. Dropping two burnas, 2 boys, the big choppa from the Nobz, and a grot rigger off a BW gives you enough for a squad of 14 gretchin and a runtherd. Now that we have the squad, let's see how they might change things a little.

Ork turn 3: (btw, how come the Orks didn't blow up the piranha in Tau turn 3? did he forget to make his 6 PK auto hits on it? another mistake by the Ork player?), the Big Mek and his squad no longer need to fall back to their objective, and can instead join up with the rest of the of the horde. Teal and green can both assault the devilfish, most likely wrecking it, and bringing all three squads under the cover of the KFF (not really necessary for the Nobz squad, unless the one non-cybork is still alive). Tau turn 4 shooting no longer wipes out teal squad, since 1/3 of the SMS wounds are saved. Teal is weakened (or maybe you try to wipe out green, leaving teal mostly unharmed), but now you're dealing with three (maybe 2) squads with PKs. Here's the fun part...

Ork Turn 5: WAAAAAAGH!

Teal and/or Green moves to the edge of the forest, while the Nobz move toward your red squads. All run 6". Teal/Green assaults the 2nd kroot squad, pulling them away from your suits due to pile-in moves. Nobz multi-assault all the red suits, smashing them into a pulp! Kroot most likely die, too (that's what they do best). Things are looking a little different, no? I don't really care to get into how the rest of the match would go, since there are so many possibilities for both sides from here... but I'd wager that the Orks have at least a 50% chance of winning the game, since you will lost your last squad of troops on turn 6, and he still has 3-4 squads of troops left, occupying both objectives... I'd say that's a MUCH better result than what happened in this game, and all because of one little grot squad.

This is fun, let's keep going:

Ok so in other words, the list wasn't bad, was good but just not optimal. Yes, No?

No. Good is a vague word (especially since there has been a lot of misunderstanding of words on your behalf). Good could mean "good enough" to some people, and "it could be better" to others. You want to be up against a reasonable replication of a tournament-worthy list, which this is definitely NOT. I've shown how to improve the list, which is EXACTLY what you asked me to do.


And after all this fun I've had poking holes in every one of your arguments, I decided to go back and read the batrep with a more skeptical eye.

First off, since you stopped posting pictures of the last two turns, and didn't actually mention the result of the game, did you just assume that you won because you tabled your opponent? 5th ed rule book says this is so for a standard mission, but you seem pretty intent on a tournament setting. And every tournament I've played (as well as others that I've read the rules for) say that tabling doesn't award full points - you still have to fulfill the mission objectives, so as to avoid armies that bring two minimum sized squads of troops, and load up on the other slots. So since you're playing with a secondary objective already (which is not part of the standard 5th ed rules) I'd say that what you have done in this game (against an inferior list with poor tactics) is score a minor victory. Is THIS how you play Tau the RIGHT WAY?

And you don't win tournaments by playing for draw

You also don't win tournaments by squeaking out minor victories - it's all but guaranteed that, in a large field of competitors, at least one person will score major victories in all their games.

So maybe big tournaments aren't what you're going for? That's fine. Beating up on inferior opponents can be fun, too (after all, why do you think I keep replying to your posts, and proving you wrong!) In fact, let's go back to your original post:

Since most people has a misconception that Tau is a relatively weaker codex compared to the new toys, I will be putting up a series of battle reports to illustrate how to play Tau properly against different codex/armies.

Hang on a sec...

compared to the new toys

What was that?

compared to the NEW toys

(*emphasis added by me)

I'm pretty sure that the Ork codex was released in early 2008. Now, it's still capable of producing tournament-quality lists that can win with a good player (neither of which you encountered in this batrep). The point being, though, that it's almost 4 years old now, and practically no one who plays competitively is complaining that Orks are over-powered.

I see you copied and pasted your objective statement from your previous batrep - maybe you thought it was so brilliant that it had to be repeated, or maybe you're just lazy.

Ok, maybe that last comment of mine was out of line. I've been berating you for misinterpreting my words this whole time, and maybe I'm the one who wasn't reading your original statement correctly. After all, there is a third option: are you saying your list could perform better than the new armies could against your opponents? If that's the case, I'll ask one of our thread contributors a question:

@Jy2, how do you think your MTO necrons would perform against the Ork list (not Tau... although I would LOVE to see that battle) presented at the start of this batrep? Think you could table him in 6 turns or less? Or more accurately, do you think you could score a Major victory against him in this scenario? Because it looks like that when you play Tau properly, a minor victory is the best you can hope for (in this specific case, at least).

[quote=hillerajOk, I see the pattern of problems you're having now. You're inferring waaay too much from what I've written, and getting all worked up over it. Care to show me where I said he should move in a straight line to your objective? You keep misunderstanding what I'm writing, and just fill in whatever you want to make it fit with your points. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and chalk it up to a language barrier. But if you're going to disagree with anything/everything that I say, please at least make sure that I actually said it, and that you weren't just assuming you knew what I meant.

Isseyfaran, as was mentioned before...you come across as kind of a dick. Mind toning it down a bit?

In other news, does your bubble-wrapped gunline tend to work against most meched-up opponents? I've never thought Piranhas were worth their points. Is it just 180 points dropped into blocking people?

Mar'tacus wrote:Isseyfaran, as was mentioned before...you come across as kind of a dick. Mind toning it down a bit?

In other news, does your bubble-wrapped gunline tend to work against most meched-up opponents? I've never thought Piranhas were worth their points. Is it just 180 points dropped into blocking people?

You do realize it was hilleraj who started with his arrogance, even though he doesn't have the substance to back him up? Ok, maybe you haven't.

And if you think i m such a dick, why bother asking me for advice? I mean isn't it a pain to speak with someone whom YOU THINK is a dick (genuine question)?

Isseyfaran wrote:

Mar'tacus wrote:Isseyfaran, as was mentioned before...you come across as kind of a dick. Mind toning it down a bit?

In other news, does your bubble-wrapped gunline tend to work against most meched-up opponents? I've never thought Piranhas were worth their points. Is it just 180 points dropped into blocking people?

You do realize it was hilleraj who started with his arrogance, even though he doesn't have the substance to back him up? Ok, maybe you haven't.

And if you think i m such a dick, why bother asking me for advice? I mean isn't it a pain to speak with someone whom YOU THINK is a dick (genuine question)?

I wanted to keep my post more or less on topic by asking you a question that I didn't expect an answer to after my initial statement. That was the meat and potatoes of the post. I find you insufferable.

Hey, so I noticed you have a lot of Broadsides in your list. What's your opinion on Broadsides vs. Railheads?

Mar'tacus wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:

Mar'tacus wrote:Isseyfaran, as was mentioned before...you come across as kind of a dick. Mind toning it down a bit?

In other news, does your bubble-wrapped gunline tend to work against most meched-up opponents? I've never thought Piranhas were worth their points. Is it just 180 points dropped into blocking people?

You do realize it was hilleraj who started with his arrogance, even though he doesn't have the substance to back him up? Ok, maybe you haven't.

And if you think i m such a dick, why bother asking me for advice? I mean isn't it a pain to speak with someone whom YOU THINK is a dick (genuine question)?

I wanted to keep my post more or less on topic by asking you a question that I didn't expect an answer to after my initial statement. That was the meat and potatoes of the post. I find you insufferable.

Hey, so I noticed you have a lot of Broadsides in your list. What's your opinion on Broadsides vs. Railheads?

Me too

Isseyfaran wrote:

Mar'tacus wrote: I find you insufferable.

Me too

No need to hijack my thread with your silly emoticons. Not only you won't get any insights from me, you ll just make yourself look stupid.

because how can someone who claim to be experienced in 40k not know this BASIC assault rule?

Yep, I definitely got that rule wrong. My bad, thanks for pointing it out! But you know what else is funny? Once again, you're putting words in my mouth! I never claimed to be a competitive player, or even experienced. In fact, I quite openly admitted that I only started playing the game less than a year ago, and in fact I told you explicitly that I don't even play with the army that you're asking me for advice on!

Ohhh yeah, let's go back to that again, shall we? In your most recent post, you said:

so advocating ways to improve the ork list (IF it wouldnt make a difference to this game) is not what we are looking for

That's really interesting, since the whole reason I got into this discussion was because you asked me for the following:

Enlighten us what is a better wagon list.

Seems to me, improving the Ork list is EXACTLY what you asked me to do. It appears you don't even know what YOU wrote in this thread, let alone take the time to read what other people are writing.

I know your strategy, as I've seen people like you try to use it time and time again. You keep asking question after question, hoping to catch peoples' mistakes, without caring about their correct answers. It's a great way to show your knowledge on the subject, without ever having to admit you're wrong about anything. Well, here's the kicker... everyone is wrong about things ALL THE TIME. Some people acknowledge it, and try to learn from their mistakes. Others try to cover it up by over-emphasizing the mistakes of others. If that makes you feel better, more power to you. But it makes the world a pretty lonely place after a while, because no one will want to have a serious discussion with you. This thread is a great example of that, but it's true the world over. Sorry I can't give you a mathhammer breakdown on this, but there's this:

Let me be the first one to call you crazy

You're the only one to call me crazy. Everyone else has either been agreeing with me, or just disgusted by your general approach.

mostly likely wreck the Devilfish

Assuming 20 Ork shoota boys (I believe you said 23 orks in total, -3 for Nobz and big mek) = 60 Attacks * 1/6 to hit = 10 hits * 1/6 to glance = 1.66 glances

5/18 to immobilize, same chance to stun it. Slightly better than 1/4 chance the PKs auto-hit during the Ork player turn, but that's not very good, so we'll assume it's not immobile yet.

2 Nobz and 1 Big Mek = 12 PK attacks * 1/6 to hit = 2 PK hits * 5/6 chance to pen + 1/6 chance to glance = 1.66 pens + 2 glances combined between all the attacks.

Pens = 1/3 wreck or destroyed, and 1/3 chance you cant move during your next turn. Glances = 1/3 chance you can't move next turn.

So you take 1.66 * 1/3 = 0.55 hits that wreck you, and

0.55 + 2 * 1/3 = 0.55(pens) + 0.66(glances) = 1.21 hits that prevent you from moving next turn.

We'll say the Ork player gets a little unlucky, and doesn't wreck you this turn. On your turn, your fish can't move, and the PKs auto-hit.

9 PK hits = 7.5 Pens and 1.5 glances. I don't think I need to give you the odds here, so I'd say that you're most likely wrecked before the Ork player's next turn.

Maybe I confused you by not expanding on this combat to include Tau turn 4. If so, that's my bad, sorry. However, mathhammer says that fish is a wreck. I think I just assumed that since you're such a fan of the tool, you'd be able to figure this one out on your own. I guess not.

But funny that on one hand you advocated retreating, but after seeing my mathhammer, you turn your argument.

Once again, you're very very confused as to what is going on. I don't think you've even picked up on the fact that we're talking about two different scenarios. My strategy for retreating to the Ork objective was in response to how your opponent could have played HIS LIST better.

My strategy for advancing was in response to how adding a grot squad to his list would change the outcome of the game. Note, these are now two different lists we're talking about, so two different strategies are called for. I did not "turn" my argument. There is no way to interpret this differently.

However, when we talked about how you would deploy if the Orks had the first turn, and your objective was in the middle, YOU said the following:

And if you assume he should deploy directly opposite across where my objective is, I can always place it in the middle backfield, and keep my FireWarriors in my fish. Since in this case as he is much further away from me, I don't even have to use my Devilfish for movement blocking.

And yet, in your lovely diagram, your devilfish is in the middle of the table, blocking the BWs. Seems to me that you're the one who's turning his argument here. Is that because keeping your fish in the backfield was a mistake that you were hoping we'd ignore? Or once again did you just forget what you wrote earlier?

You seem to be having trouble making connections between what you're writing, and what you're putting on your own diagram.

Lets assume my stuff are on one side of the board, as i have already illustrated.

You only showed the placement of two squads (along with the skimmers) on your diagram. Meaning the rest of your army is in reserve? I really don't think this is the case, but if you want me to comment on your diagrams, please provide them complete, instead of making me guess.

Not sure if you know how to read the vassal pics properly.

LOL I just don't know how to see your invisible troops.

If your whole army is on the left side where you placed those two squads (and not controlling your objective in the middle of the backfield), then all the Ork player has to do is move all his BWs to the RIGHT of the LOS-blocking terrain. This prevents you from shooting at his BWs for the first 2 turns, and allows him to sweep up to within about 18" of your objective before you've had a chance to wreck anything. It also gives you only 3 turn (maybe 4, or 5 if you're lucky... but it took you 7 turns in your batrep) to try and kill his forces, move your troops to your objective, AND contest his objective. The Ork player still has 4 full BWs, and hasn't used his Waaagh yet. Wanna show me how you can mathhammer your way out of this one? Good luck with that.

Call me slow, but i don't understand your flow of actions. Would be appreciated if you do illustrate via vassal pics

Did anyone else have trouble figuring out what I've been saying this whole time? Well, seeing as other people have chimed in, trying to explain to YOU what I've been saying, I think that it's just you. You're slow.

Not sure what tournaments you are talking about

http://www.warmasterschallenge.com/2011_40kChallenge
http://www.conquesttoronto.com/

Here are the two tournaments I played in last year, with more than 40 players attending each. In both cases, tabling your opponent did not give you a major victory.

Here are two others I found by quickly googling:

http://gt.bugeatergames.com/40kMissions_FinalPacket.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=3&aId=9500009&start=4&multiPageMode=true

The last one is the 'Ard Boyz tournament, which I hope you are familiar with. Again, neither of them give you a major victory for tabling your opponent.

but i like the Nova 5x5 format

As far as I could tell, Nova format also doesn't award a major victory for tabling your opponent. I'm unfamiliar with the 5x5 system, care to explain?

you indeed do win and advance if you win by primary, secondary, or tertiary

In all of the tournament formats mentioned above, your match seeding is based on the results of your previous games. They take the people who scored minor victories, and pair them up against the people who scored major victories - this is to ensure that the players who scored major victories will not come up against each other until the later rounds of the tournament, making for more meaningful games.

Scoring a minor victory makes it very likely that you'll be up against one of the better armies in your next round. Again, this will make it much more difficult to win. This is their system, not mine, so even if you want to debate the merits of playing it this way, I'm the wrong person to talk to.

Also, most of the tournaments mentioned above use a combined score system, meaning the winners are (usually) the ones who score major victories in all of their games. So you will need to score major victories at some point in the tournament, or else your combined score won't push you to the top.

You weren't even able to score a major victory against a list that isn't tournament-worthy. How do you expect to get major victories over tournament lists with generals who actually know how to play the game?

I thought I would have a pretty decent shot at placing well in the first tournament I went to, since I was consistently beating my friends that I play with. I did not place well - at all (not last, but close). There is definitely a gap between friends who play casually for fun, and competitive tournament players. You start to notice these gaps when you play against both types. I'm really starting to wonder if YOU actually play competitively, since you don't seem to be able to see all of the mistakes that your opponents make. (Or maybe you just don't want to admit that your opponents made a lot of mistakes, since that cheapens your own victory? It MUST have been your brilliance that won you the game, after all)

Come to think of it, you never actually mentioned if you play competitively, or if you've managed to win any tournaments by playing Tau the Right Way. I think people would learn a lot more by seeing some of those batreps, where your tactics are used to beat competitive players with tournament-quality lists.

And seriously, tell us which codex have an easy time scoring major victories every game

Once again, you don't understand what's going on here. I did not say one codex has an easy time scoring major victories. What I said was that, in a large field of competitors, it's pretty much guaranteed that at least one person will score major victories in all of their games. This has practically nothing to do with the codex, and everything to do with player skill, along with the luck of the dice.

I don't know what's the problem with that, but ork is newer than Tau.

You said "new toys", not "newer toys". Again, you really need to check back on what you've written before you try to argue differently. Or are you turning your argument again? The Tau codex is less than 2 years older than the Ork codex. Yes, the Ork codex is newer than the Tau, but relatively speaking, both are old now. In fact, they were both written for a set of rules that is no longer used.

Let me use an analogy, since you seem to have difficulty following what I say: If you bought your kid a 4 year old bike, and told him it was new, you'd be a pretty mean person. If you continued to argue with him that it was a new bike, after he called you out on the fact that it was indeed 4 years old, you'd be a massive prick. (sure, it wasn't a great analogy, but I hope I made my point clear... also, it seems to me that you're the kind of person who WOULD argue with him in this case, and tell him that you got him a "newer" bike than the one he had, so therefore it's new)

You do realize it was hilleraj who started with his arrogance

It's perfectly okay to be wrong - learning from your mistakes is one of the best ways to learn something. Refusing to admit your mistakes, especially when they be come apparent to everyone, is arrogance - something you accuse me of, and yet here I am admitting to the things I'm wrong about, and learning from my mistakes. Care to do the same?

hilleraj wrote:
Yep, I definitely got that rule wrong. My bad, thanks for pointing it out! But you know what else is funny? Once again, you're putting words in my mouth! I never claimed to be a competitive player, or even experienced. In fact, I quite openly admitted that I only started playing the game less than a year ago, and in fact I told you explicitly that I don't even play with the army that you're asking me for advice on!

Nobody ask you for advice, LOL. You came in and started ranting about things, and so I asked you to back up what you claim. So in case you got me wrong, I aint interested in your insights at all, especially from someone who doesn't even know ONE OF THE MOST BASIC RULES

hilleraj wrote:That's really interesting, since the whole reason I got into this discussion was because you asked me for the following:

Enlighten us what is a better wagon list.

Seems to me, improving the Ork list is EXACTLY what you asked me to do. It appears you don't even know what YOU wrote in this thread, let alone take the time to read what other people are writing.

Your comments was obviously made within the context of this game, and obviously my counter argument would be against the same context. Not my fault that you have problem reading things in context. And seriously, improvements that wouldnt have impacted this game would have zero value add to this BAtRep.

hilleraj wrote:I know your strategy, as I've seen people like you try to use it time and time again. You keep asking question after question, hoping to catch peoples' mistakes, without caring about their correct answers.

LOL? Strategy? OMG. Instead of second guessing people's intention, why not reflect upon yourself, if you really are presenting proper facts?

hilleraj wrote:It's a great way to show your knowledge on the subject, without ever having to admit you're wrong about anything. Well, here's the kicker... everyone is wrong about things ALL THE TIME.

You are the one who made all the mistakes about the rule, LOL? I don't think I ve made any mistakes so far? EVen all the mistakes you are ranting about in the BatRep were mistakes that you think the ork player committed. So MAY I ASK, what's my mistake? LOL

hilleraj wrote:Some people acknowledge it, and try to learn from their mistakes.

I hope you did learn your mistake, and be less arrogant next time if you didnt do your homework. Otherwise, it's really embarassing.

hilleraj wrote:Others try to cover it up by over-emphasizing the mistakes of others. If that makes you feel better, more power to you. But it makes the world a pretty lonely place after a while, because no one will want to have a serious discussion with you. This thread is a great example of that, but it's true the world over.

If there is any mistake that me as the Tau player have committed in the BatRep, you can feel free to point them out :-). Giving generic statements like that doesn't bring your argument anywhere.

hilleraj wrote:You're the only one to call me crazy. Everyone else has either been agreeing with me, or just disgusted by your general approach.

AWW. The way you define EVERYONE is not "every single person" in this thread? Because apparently not every single person in this thread agrees with you. But I understand. It's not the first time you use your words loosely anyway .

hilleraj wrote:2 Nobz and 1 Big Mek = 12 PK attacks * 1/6 to hit = 2 PK hits * 5/6 chance to pen + 1/6 chance to glance = 1.66 pens + 2 glances combined between all the attacks.

LOL? I didn't know Big Mek comes default with Power Klaw. AH, doesn't matter. It's not the first time you base your strategy on wrong fundamentals anyway.
But nvm, I am accepting your math on the Devilfish anyway. It becomes wrecked on my turn.

hilleraj wrote:Once again, you're very very confused as to what is going on. I don't think you've even picked up on the fact that we're talking about two different scenarios. My strategy for retreating to the Ork objective was in response to how your opponent could have played HIS LIST better.

REALLY? Let's see :-

hilleraj wrote:Ork turn 3: (btw, how come the Orks didn't blow up the piranha in Tau turn 3? did he forget to make his 6 PK auto hits on it? another mistake by the Ork player?), the Big Mek and his squad no longer need to fall back to their objective, and can instead join up with the rest of the of the horde

EVERYTHING HERE was spoken in the context of the GAME's turn 3. The words in bold were very telling. So either (1) you are covering the fact that you are indeed changing your stance, OR (2) you have trouble putting your thoughts in proper English so that people understand you.

hilleraj wrote:And yet, in your lovely diagram, your devilfish is in the middle of the table, blocking the BWs. Seems to me that you're the one who's turning his argument here. Is that because keeping your fish in the backfield was a mistake that you were hoping we'd ignore? Or once again did you just forget what you wrote earlier?

The comment "I don't even have to use my Devilfish for movement blocking" was an attempt to emphasize how poor your movement strategy is - you are actually in a worse off situation than if you had taken turn 2, to the extent that i could even handicap myself by placing away the devilfish. The words in bold makes it quite clear that it is by no means a definite course of action. I MEAN, is this that hard to understand, to the extent that you have to clarify the intention?

hilleraj wrote:You seem to be having trouble making connections between what you're writing, and what you're putting on your own diagram.

So far, it's more like your problem with the language.

hilleraj wrote:You only showed the placement of two squads (along with the skimmers) on your diagram. Meaning the rest of your army is in reserve? I really don't think this is the case, but if you want me to comment on your diagrams, please provide them complete, instead of making me guess.

I am not obliged to put in that kind of effort for your convenience, especially when you aren't even putting in 50% of the effort to explain yourself properly via diagram.

hilleraj wrote:If your whole army is on the left side where you placed those two squads (and not controlling your objective in the middle of the backfield), then all the Ork player has to do is move all his BWs to the RIGHT of the LOS-blocking terrain. This prevents you from shooting at his BWs for the first 2 turns, and allows him to sweep up to within about 18" of your objective before you've had a chance to wreck anything. It also gives you only 3 turn (maybe 4, or 5 if you're lucky... but it took you 7 turns in your batrep) to try and kill his forces, move your troops to your objective, AND contest his objective. The Ork player still has 4 full BWs, and hasn't used his Waaagh yet. Wanna show me how you can mathhammer your way out of this one? Good luck with that.

Wait wait, is it now 4 wagons to the other side, or one. Make up your mind, and then I ll mathhammer for you.

hilleraj wrote:Did anyone else have trouble figuring out what I've been saying this whole time? Well, seeing as other people have chimed in, trying to explain to YOU what I've been saying, I think that it's just you. You're slow.

No one else replied to your crap, but everyone else commented on my batrep. So it's quite telling. Either people didn't bother to read or understand what you are trying to say, OR they read but they don't understand. I am actually quite amused that you ASSUMED people READ AND UNDERSTOOD what you were trying to say, LOL
It's hilarious that you call me lazy for not putting up complete diagrams, when you yourself can't even be bothered putting up a simple illustration. I shall leave it to the audience to determine who is the lazier chap.
And so without a proper illustration from you, I take it that you are merely spewing crap. And there is no way I can refute crap.

hilleraj wrote:http://www.warmasterschallenge.com/2011_40kChallenge
http://www.conquesttoronto.com/

Here are the two tournaments I played in last year, with more than 40 players attending each. In both cases, tabling your opponent did not give you a major victory.

Here are two others I found by quickly googling:

http://gt.bugeatergames.com/40kMissions_FinalPacket.pdf
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/content/article.jsp?catId=&categoryId=§ion=&pIndex=3&aId=9500009&start=4&multiPageMode=true

The last one is the 'Ard Boyz tournament, which I hope you are familiar with. Again, neither of them give you a major victory for tabling your opponent.

I guess this will bring us to another string of argument, but the format you quoted above are not in my opinion fair and competitive. You are welcomed to open up a thread to debate about this, and i m sure many people will chip one. But the Ard Boys for one, has a tournament format which many deemed to be unfair and less competitive.

hilleraj wrote:As far as I could tell, Nova format also doesn't award a major victory for tabling your opponent. I'm unfamiliar with the 5x5 system, care to explain?

Google/visit Stelek's blog. There was a detailed article on that, or I think BaldandScreaming has something on that too?. I just can't be bothered to explain to you in detail here. I shouldn't be punished for your ignorance.

hilleraj wrote:You weren't even able to score a major victory against a list that isn't tournament-worthy. How do you expect to get major victories over tournament lists with generals who actually know how to play the game?

:-) You assumed the ork list isn't tournament worthy, and the general don't know how to play the game. And you based your assumptions on a single gretchin squad. I am not sure how to refute your assumption, except by empirical evidence - there are dozens and dozens of ork lists who didn't have THAT gretchin squad, and placed well in tournaments.

hilleraj wrote:I thought I would have a pretty decent shot at placing well in the first tournament I went to, since I was consistently beating my friends that I play with. I did not place well - at all (not last, but close). There is definitely a gap between friends who play casually for fun, and competitive tournament players.

I ain't surprise, especially when you don't even know the fundamental rules well.

hilleraj wrote:You start to notice these gaps when you play against both types. I'm really starting to wonder if YOU actually play competitively, since you don't seem to be able to see all of the mistakes that your opponents make. (Or maybe you just don't want to admit that your opponents made a lot of mistakes, since that cheapens your own victory? It MUST have been your brilliance that won you the game, after all)

LOL, didn't need you to tell me that. Unlike you, i play 40k competitively. Unlike you, my opponents from both BatRep come from tournament background, and one actually had placing in Nova last year. So I m pretty sure that the games i will be illustrating will be against players who are at least a notch above you (ok, not that using you as a benchmark adds credibility to my claim ). And with regards to whether it cheapens my victory, I don't really care. Because unlike amateurs like you, personal fame to me is no longer important. Educating people is
So don't just assume everyone has the same mentality as you, desperate for attention and personal fame

hilleraj wrote:Come to think of it, you never actually mentioned if you play competitively, or if you've managed to win any tournaments by playing Tau the Right Way. I think people would learn a lot more by seeing some of those batreps, where your tactics are used to beat competitive players with tournament-quality lists.

My events are mostly in Asia and Australia. I would probably be attending Nova next year, and will definitely be putting up BatReps. :-). But unlike you, I don't get trumped in tournaments

hilleraj wrote:You said "new toys", not "newer toys". Again, you really need to check back on what you've written before you try to argue differently. Or are you turning your argument again? The Tau codex is less than 2 years older than the Ork codex. Yes, the Ork codex is newer than the Tau, but relatively speaking, both are old now. In fact, they were both written for a set of rules that is no longer used.

Not interested to debate on that with you. I actually find it pretty childish that you actually had something to complain about this, especially it has nothing of value to add to the BatRep or learning experience. And anyway, new toys in the context of Tau would mean anything newer than Tau. Accept it, or suck it up. Because obviously no one else have a problem with that introduction, nor the fact that the orks are part of my consideration :-)

hilleraj wrote: It's perfectly okay to be wrong - learning from your mistakes is one of the best ways to learn something.

But it's not alright to be wrong and arrogant at the same time.

hilleraj wrote:Refusing to admit your mistakes, especially when they be come apparent to everyone, is arrogance - something you accuse me of, and yet here I am admitting to the things I'm wrong about, and learning from my mistakes. Care to do the same?

That's great. You finally realize your mistake :-).
As for mine, I am still waiting for you to tell me what did the Tau player (me) do wrong in the BatRep


And since this thread is all about playing Tau the right way, and educating people the right things to do with Tau, I would think it is more useful if you pick out mistakes by the Tau, RATHER than mistakes by the ork player. Because seriously, even if the ork player is doing 100 things wrong, all we are interested in is the one thing that the Tau player did right, OR the one thing that the Tau player did wrong.

reiterating my question, was this list played on Vassal, or replayed through pictures using Vassal?

Yup, actually answering relevant questions - instead of pissing all over each other - would be nice.

Isseyfaran wrote:And since this thread is all about playing Tau the right way, and educating people the right things to do with Tau, I would think it is more useful if you pick out mistakes by the Tau, RATHER than mistakes by the ork player. Because seriously, even if the ork player is doing 100 things wrong, all we are interested

" We " ? That's an assumption on your part.

I'm interested in seeing a tau player beat an opponent who didn't make mistakes, with a cut-throat list (neither of the SW list nor this ork list) and had average dice. With real pictures, not vassal.

Your opponents made some doozy-sized blunders, so your two batreps have been disappointments.

You didn't make mistakes, nor did I see you do anything extraordinary or brilliant. Opponents came at you. You shot them. They made key mistakes. You won (insert a slow/sarcastic clap orky-emoticon).

It's easy to win when the other guy makes mistakes. Colossal ones like mounting up Long Fangs, denying two Turns of shooting when there was a D'fish to shoot, FWs, b-sides ....

Isseyfaran wrote: in is the one thing that the Tau player did right, OR the one thing that the Tau player did wrong.

You played a good game ... against a Baby-Seal SW player and an foolish ork player who didn't leave behind a Troop Unit for a C&C mission and letting your D'fish stay unmolested in his back field.

I'd love to hear from the SW player and how he feels about the game, and why didn't he just *Move& Run* his LFs to better LoS on Turn 1, block/protect them with a Razor/rhino for a that turn and move it away Turn 2? Heck, a BA Baal-pred spam player did that to me today.

I'd like to hear from the ork player about why he left the key portion of the game, his C&C objective, unmanned and unguarded.

How about annotating each pic, not just with a caption on the action, but why you did X or didn't do Y? Posters mercer, jy2 and other dudes do that.

Face it, Issy, you're going to have to get tougher/smarter/better playing opponents and have them play better games than the two you've shown if you want to be taken seriously as a tau player with something to add.

Why are the 2 battle reports played with the exact same terrain set up?

Brothererekose wrote:" We " ? That's an assumption on your part.

I'm interested in seeing a tau player beat an opponent who didn't make mistakes, with a cut-throat list (neither of the SW list nor this ork list) and had average dice. With real pictures, not vassal.

Your opponents made some doozy-sized blunders, so your two batreps have been disappointments.

You didn't make mistakes, nor did I see you do anything extraordinary or brilliant. Opponents came at you. You shot them. They made key mistakes. You won (insert a slow/sarcastic clap orky-emoticon).

It's easy to win when the other guy makes mistakes. Colossal ones like mounting up Long Fangs, denying two Turns of shooting when there was a D'fish to shoot, FWs, b-sides ....

Oh, WE is NOT an assumption because WE does not have to include you. It can simply encompass the few who have responded positively. So yeah, time to brush up on your English

And since you summed it up pretty well that you actually find no value in the BatRep, why are you here in the first place? Ironic? I mean isn't it understood that if you find a certain BatRep useless, you just move on to the next one in search for a better one? So is this just an excuses to vent your anger because I shot down your silly argument of shooting Missiles at 2+ armors? Dude, I only have this to say to you :- YOU ARE PRETTY CHILDISH. Seriously, GROW UP. If you don't find value in my BatRep, feel free to roam elsewhere for others. I have enough requests in my pms (for BatRep against specific army types) that I cannot already handle, so I am not hard up for your thumbs up.

No need to try so hard to get my attention. THat's plain childish.

Brothererekose wrote:I'd love to hear from the SW player and how he feels about the game, and why didn't he just *Move& Run* his LFs to better LoS on Turn 1, block/protect them with a Razor/rhino for a that turn and move it away Turn 2? Heck, a BA Baal-pred spam player did that to me today.

As repeated times and again , you can't interpret the vassal pictures properly. He don't have LOS even if he slogs for a single turn. I am not going to put in effort to explain everything to you when obviously you are the only one who have problem reading my pictures. Also, if you want to discuss the SW batrep, do it in another thread. I m going to report your post if you derail this thread again. That's my warning.

Brothererekose wrote:Face it, Issy, you're going to have to get tougher/smarter/better playing opponents and have them play better games than the two you've shown if you want to be taken seriously as a tau player with something to add.

I love to play TOUGHER opponents of course. But you are certainly not one of them And as a Tau player, I am definitely advocating to place Broadsides in LOS of Long Fangs. . Whether I am adding value to fellow Tau players, I leave it to them to decide after reading my series of BatReps. I am not hard up for anyone's (including YOU) acknowledgement :-). So if my presentations don't suit your needs, COOL! Go somewhere else, I am not begging you to stay . YUp, BYE ???


And let me reiterate once again. Brothererekose, grow up. These are only toys soliders. No need for all these childish act because there are more important things in life :-)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

do you hear the voices to wrote:Why are the 2 battle reports played with the exact same terrain set up?

The intention was to keep everything else constant so that we have the same basis for comparison.
But feel free to suggest otherwise, and explain why. I ll take your suggestion into consideration and make improvements as necessary.

Isseyfaran wrote:

These are only toys soliders. No need for all these childish act because there are more important things in life :-)

Then why do you get so defensive?

Mar'tacus wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:

These are only toys soliders. No need for all these childish act because there are more important things in life :-)

Then why do you get so defensive?

YOUR assumption.

And I remember you too. You have derailed my thread enough with your silly emoticons. You should get the 'bye' too.

That makes sense, but I think it would better showcase you're tactical prowess if you and your opponent each got to place 3 or 4 pieces of terrain wherever you wanted, prior to choosing table edges or deployment methods. That way there is a decent amount of terrain and you could show us different deployment strategies under different circumstances... OR have a third party place terrain in a non-bias, semi random manner.

Isseyfaran wrote:

Mar'tacus wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:

These are only toys soliders. No need for all these childish act because there are more important things in life :-)

Then why do you get so defensive?

YOUR assumption.

And I remember you too. You have derailed my thread enough with your silly emoticons. You should get the 'bye' too.

Says the guy with 9 emoticons in his previous post....

I would still like to see an answer on how the game was played. Was is purely done in Vassal? Or was it a real game with a real person playing the opponent? You should throw some batreps out with real pics. It would look better and give a better overall view of the battlefield.

Dodgywop wrote:Says the guy with 9 emoticons in his previous post....

My emoticons were part of my context - hardly a spam.
His was a single post with a single emoticon and nothing else.

Guess you should get your facts right first in future. If you feel like picking a fight, go somewhere else. Or if you decide you want to ask a question next time, start your message with a more polite tone.
I m sick of entertaining guys like you.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

do you hear the voices to wrote:That makes sense, but I think it would better showcase you're tactical prowess if you and your opponent each got to place 3 or 4 pieces of terrain wherever you wanted, prior to choosing table edges or deployment methods. That way there is a decent amount of terrain and you could show us different deployment strategies under different circumstances... OR have a third party place terrain in a non-bias, semi random manner.

We didnt know the board beforehand. I picked this out from a series of all my games, and i purposely chose the games with the same terrain set up. I reckon there are simply too many combination of terrain set ups to go through, so I decided i shall start with the Nova style FIRST.

If i have time, i ll continue to do Tau BatReps with a different terrain set up.

Isseyfaran wrote: If you feel like picking a fight, go somewhere else. Or if you decide you want to ask a question next time, start your message with a more polite tone.
I m sick of entertaining guys like you.

Isseyfaran, you really don't have any grounds to lecture someone else on taking "a more polite tone". People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. . . and there's quite a number of people, from what I can see, who share the opinion that you aren't precisely the most polite person.

On topic; Well played. The Ork player made a few mistakes, but then if people didn't make mistakes nobody would EVER win, and you certainly took advantage of them. The one thing an Ork player just can't do against Tau firepower is get bogged down like he did.

BeRzErKeR wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote: If you feel like picking a fight, go somewhere else. Or if you decide you want to ask a question next time, start your message with a more polite tone.
I m sick of entertaining guys like you.

Isseyfaran, you really don't have any grounds to lecture someone else on taking "a more polite tone". People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. . . and there's quite a number of people, from what I can see, who share the opinion that you aren't precisely the most polite person.

Funny that you couldnt stand me, but take effort to read my batrep, and comment in my thread. You know what? I actually find it kind of hilarious. Either (1) my Tau BatReps are really excellent, OR (2) they are not, but you just can't help it and felt like you had to come in and say something. Because seriously, I don't remember inviting you here, did I?

Oh and regarding me calling out ork walkers as bad choice in a wagon list, I am not the only one apparently. YOUR friend Jidmah, criticised it in another thread as well .

At least take the time to read the rest of his post...

He complimented you, for Christ's sake!

Isseyfaran wrote: Funny that you couldnt stand me, but take effort to read my batrep, and comment in my thread. You know what? I actually find it kind of hilarious. Either (1) my Tau BatReps are really excellent, OR (2) they are not, but you just can't help it and felt like you had to come in and say something. Because seriously, I don't remember inviting you here, did I?

Oh and regarding me calling out ork walkers as bad choice in a wagon list, I am not the only one apparently. YOUR friend Jidmah, criticised it in another thread as well .

I enjoy reading BatReps, even if I personally dislike the person playing. And hey, you never know from whom you might learn something. You played pretty well, and I said so; you also run your mouth like a middle-school student, and I said so. Honesty is a habit of mine, even online. Perhaps I should work on that.

Regarding 'inviting' me. . . you posted a public thread. I didn't notice any 'By Invitation Only' sign hanging on the door.

I don't actually know Jidmah, but I'm quite aware that a lot of people don't like using walkers in a wagon list; did you think that would be surprising? I've been running 'em off and on for years, I've heard it all. Doesn't bother me.

Of course, that's irrelevant to this particular batrep. . . though it is worth noting that if he'd had a couple Deff Dreads instead of those Lootas, he'd have done better against you.

Hey, guys!

Isn't this a forum for fun discussions about games of toy soldiers??

Keep it cool, eh.

Kilkrazy wrote:

Will there be spankings?

Kilkrazy, didja mean "No more Mont'ka Business"?

Isseyfaran wrote:

Dodgywop wrote:Says the guy with 9 emoticons in his previous post....

My emoticons were part of my context - hardly a spam.
His was a single post with a single emoticon and nothing else.

Guess you should get your facts right first in future.

I did have my facts straight. There were 9 emoticons in your post. Maybe you should try reading your own post again.

If you feel like picking a fight, go somewhere else.

I wasn't picking a fight. I was only pointing out that you are a hypocrite.

Or if you decide you want to ask a question next time, start your message with a more polite tone.
I m sick of entertaining guys like you.

I did ask a question. Which has also been asked by other members as well and you have still yet to answer it. I can't help but thinking you are being deliberate...

If anyone deserves a lecture on using appropriate "tone", it's you. Your constant spam of emoticons and repetitive use of the words "Silly, "Embarass" and "LOL" makes you come off as nothing more than a child with a poor vocabulary.

----

Now, can you answer the question that I asked in my previous post?

Like I have mentioned previously, not going to entertain people like you anymore. I have reported your post to the Mod.

And just an advice for you :- If you want an answer from someone (at least from me), engage with a polite tone. Otherwise, you can never expect to receive an answer, and I don't owe you one. And you are right! I am being deliberate. Well of course, the consolation for you is that you can always feel free to leave for other threads. I am Not going to stop you

And since you find me intolerable, why bother talking to me? Are you that desperate for attention from me? OK, starting from NOW, go talk to someone else

Dodgywop wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:

Dodgywop wrote:Says the guy with 9 emoticons in his previous post....

My emoticons were part of my context - hardly a spam.
His was a single post with a single emoticon and nothing else.

Guess you should get your facts right first in future.

I did have my facts straight. There were 9 emoticons in your post. Maybe you should try reading your own post again.

If you feel like picking a fight, go somewhere else.

I wasn't picking a fight. I was only pointing out that you are a hypocrite.

Or if you decide you want to ask a question next time, start your message with a more polite tone.
I m sick of entertaining guys like you.

I did ask a question. Which has also been asked by other members as well and you have still yet to answer it. I can't help but thinking you are being deliberate...

If anyone deserves a lecture on using appropriate "tone", it's you. Your constant spam of emoticons and repetitive use of the words "Silly, "Embarass" and "LOL" makes you come off as nothing more than a child with a poor vocabulary.

----

Now, can you answer the question that I asked in my previous post?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeRzErKeR wrote:I enjoy reading BatReps, even if I personally dislike the person playing. And hey, you never know from whom you might learn something. You played pretty well,and I said so;

I hope you did learn something. My pleasure.

BeRzErKeR wrote: you also run your mouth like a middle-school student, and I said so. Honesty is a habit of mine, even online. Perhaps I should work on that.

You should. I second that. Maybe it shall start from today.

BeRzErKeR wrote:Regarding 'inviting' me. . . you posted a public thread. I didn't notice any 'By Invitation Only' sign hanging on the door.

FACT is, if you are going to comment about anything not related to the game, then save the comment for yourself. OK, next time I will remember to add this comment to the original post. But now, you are warned.

So if you have 2 comments to make, 1 related to the game and the other not, save the latter for yourself. I m not interested.

BeRzErKeR wrote:Of course, that's irrelevant to this particular batrep. . . though it is worth noting that if he'd had a couple Deff Dreads instead of those Lootas, he'd have done better against you.

Besides the point that DEffdreads aren't even a good complement to wagons in a competitive TAC list (as mentioned by me, by your 'friend' Jidmah, and in fact many others) , I also don't see how that slow moving Dread will do any good to the game. In fact, it will be more of a liability.

And to be frank, one of the way the ork player could have done better in THIS game was to have more lootas (and lootas are excellent choices in TAC list as well), swap the burnas to something else, and create more targets of threats. Burna boys are very poor choice in Ork BW list because they don't have duality. Those lootas ARE very reliable against skimmers, who are mostly light vehicles.

But of course, it is not our intention to start a discussion on ork lists here.

Isseyfaran wrote:Like I have mentioned previously, not going to entertain people like you anymore. I have reported your post to the Mod.

Issy, poster Kilkrazy is the Mod and he's already monitoring things. I refer you to the post with the pretty girl in the white dress. *I* pinged the Mod button last night.

Dodgywop wrote:I did ask a question. Which has also been asked by other members as well and you have still yet to answer it.

Still not answered. I'll repeat the question:
Issy, did you play this game on vassal or was it on a table with models?
I'd like to add:
Could you please post pictures of your models?
Who did you play against?
Was this at a game store?
Is it a GW store, there in Singapore?

Brothererekose wrote:

Isseyfaran wrote:Like I have mentioned previously, not going to entertain people like you anymore. I have reported your post to the Mod.

Issy, poster Kilkrazy is the Mod and he's already monitoring things. I refer you to the post with the pretty girl in the white dress. *I* pinged the Mod button last night.

No need for your reminder. I saw kilkrazy's post. And since Dodgy is persistent with his attitude, I reported his post to the Mod once again.

On your question whether this was played on tabletop, I think between my first batrep and this batrep, I must have repeated this 2 or 3 times. I m going to be a dick this time round and not answer it again, since it is the same few people who repeatedly tries to ask the same question over and over again.

As for your other questions & requests, I don't even think I m obliged to answer you or attend to them? Especially given your previous attitude.
So yeah, go ahead and be unhappy with me, but like I have said to you Brotherereokose - multiple times, I didnt ask you to stay. You are the one who has been desperately trying to get my attention - that's pretty thick-skinned of you I find. There are a few people whom I don't welcome, and sadly you are one of them.

Okay, Tau related question here for the group:
Since you've modeled this list as the ideal way that you've found to play Tau why did you avoid the Pathfinders? I don't play Tau, but I thought that the marker lights were like candy and you needed to be handing them out everywhere.

Without Pathfinders did you use marker lights? If so, where were they? Again, I've never played with or against Tau.

I'll ask my question again, Was this game played on Vassal or wasn't it. I'm sorry if I'm being repetitive, but I'm genuinely curious. If it is in real life, I'm also curious what your army looks like as I'm always looking for inspiration and it seems like you have played Tau for a while and collected a reasonably-sized force.

Again, sorry if I'm being annoying, I just want an answer to my question.

MakersHitstheMark wrote:Okay, Tau related question here for the group:
Since you've modeled this list as the ideal way that you've found to play Tau why did you avoid the Pathfinders? I don't play Tau, but I thought that the marker lights were like candy and you needed to be handing them out everywhere.

Without Pathfinders did you use marker lights? If so, where were they? Again, I've never played with or against Tau.

No. Pathfinders are the only place where you should field markerlights, no where else.

The reason I don't use pathfinders is because of them having a low Ld, are static, and more vulnerable to small arms. I have done the math somewhere else, which shows that the benefit of purchasing a squad of 4 pathfinders (cost 48 points) against purchasing another 0.774 fireknife nets you only an additional 0.5 plasma and 0.5 missile hit or so per turn. This is assuming the markerlight tokens are expended for a team of THREE fireknifes.

So the reason I don't really take them for most of my lists is because I find the cons are greater than the pros.

Isseyfaran wrote:

MakersHitstheMark wrote:Okay, Tau related question here for the group:
Since you've modeled this list as the ideal way that you've found to play Tau why did you avoid the Pathfinders? I don't play Tau, but I thought that the marker lights were like candy and you needed to be handing them out everywhere.

Without Pathfinders did you use marker lights? If so, where were they? Again, I've never played with or against Tau.

No. Pathfinders are the only place where you should field markerlights, no where else.

The reason I don't use pathfinders is because of them having a low Ld, are static, and more vulnerable to small arms. I have done the math somewhere else, which shows that the benefit of purchasing a squad of 4 pathfinders (cost 48 points) against purchasing another 0.774 fireknife nets you only an additional 0.5 plasma and 0.5 missile hit or so per turn. This is assuming the markerlight tokens are expended for a team of THREE fireknifes.

So the reason I don't really take them for most of my lists is because I find the cons are greater than the pros.

That matches everything I had heard from other people at my local shop, but few if any of them are actual Tau players. I have a copy of the current Dex for them and my thought on why you might not have fielded them was two fold:
1. Survivability - The ideal situation would be to place them forward, but if anyone has played against Tau they are going to focus on that unit Turn 1 and probably wipe it. Added to the forward placement is the fact that you can't move and shoot them. If they were able to move and still light stuff up that would change the situation significantly I think.
2. Expense - I know that you have to field a transport with them and that is another 60 to 100 points right there (I don't know the exact point cost)

Anyway, thanks for the reply. I was just curious because it seems like that light thing is a neat idea, but can at times be crippling if you load a pathfinder squad up.