So the new codex is out and I'm actually a bit surprised by the changes, and surprised by the lack of changes. Some may remember the 14 page thread from a few months ago, and I thought I'd take a look at what Tau currently have available now as far as troops. Starting off, I find it odd that our troop slot is the most limited and optionless slot we have. Honestly, we have more named characters than troop choices. We have two total troop options in an enviornment filled with armies that are able to take a variety of troops. This seriously leaves me wondering if this was a fully worked on codex of if it was a rushed attempt to sell just a few high priced models. I digress though, on to the discussion of our main troop.

I'll try to list out the changes (correct me if I'm wrong or inform me if I forgot anything)
What's the same?
-We still have the same abysmal statline.
-Weapons are still the same, with the exception of pulsecarbines being assault 2 now.
-Sargeant upgrade is still 10 points, for a total of 19 points for a single model with LD8.
-Still the two drone limit and no actual change to the drones as far as firepower is concerned.
-Still only one transport and it's still expensive at 80 points minimum.
-Markerlight and target lock are the same price, but can't be purchased seperately anymore.

What changed?
-Bonding knives are now more expensive at 1ppm (so atleast 1 point more expensive than previously). I also believe that it's not nearly as useful as VoTLW or ATSKNF which are both priced about 1ppm.
-Haywire grenades are available for a decent price.
-HQ units can buff firewarriors. Fireblade and Darkstrider buff 1 unit while Ethereals buff units within 12"
-Marker drones got dropped by 18ppm. They no longer buff their own squad anymore however.
-Firewarriors can no longer take Blacksun Filters, though I'm not sure if anyone did this before hand.
-Supporting fire gives FW a better chance in CC.

So where do we really stand?
Firewarriors themselves don't really change that much, nor how they play. The Sarge upgrade is insane, and in no way worth 19 points especially with a distinct lack of wargear. The only reason I could see one being purchased would be for the addition of markerdrones, however they may as well just be purchased by the squad for 17ppm for all the good the sarge does.

Haywire grenades are nice, I will admit that, but I find that vehicles tend to be equipped with weaponry that is far better at taking down FW than FW will be at taking down vehicles. 11ppm isn't much for the unit, but the problem still lies in the execution and footslogging firewarriors tend to be easy targets.

Markerlights are more heavily required now that that Tau seem to have some good blast weapons with low AP, but even more so restricted than before. With markerdrones no longer providing for their own squad and the reduction to pathfinder armor, markers will probably just as scarce as always, with very few being left available for FW. This is also compounded by the issue that the favored suit build will be using two weapons at BS3 with no option out of ML to increase. Easiest way to look at it is needing 3 markerlights per squad for BS4 and no cover, meaning 6 pathfinders. As you can see, makerlights can quickly become exhausted. However markerlight drones attached to units may provide extra tokens to allow other units to try and finish them off, this will still probably leave FW last in line.

The Devilfish is still absurdly priced, costing now 95 points to bring with a disruption pod and no significant change to weapons. Burst cannons changed to Heavy4 and SMS got increased range, they also ignore LOS but few armies have 5+ save units so it is almost negligible. One issue that must be addressed is that Tau vehicles are not able to move and fire like fast skimmers, so this becomes a problem when having a transport designed to move units downfield rapidly. The devilfish body is also 5.5" long, meaning that any vehicle wanting to move forward will have issues with terrain unless it's .5" thick and right infront of the fish or else they will not be able to fire. I know some folks would point out using sensor spines, but when the problem is costing too much you can't solve the issue by throwing more points down this sink hole. Another issue with this is that Firewarriors are a unit with no heavy weapons, relying on the strength of the unit shooting to compensate for the lack of plasma, melta, and such. Units like this could benefit more from an open topped transport they could fire from while still protecting the unit, much like the Necron Ghost ark but without all the A13 insanity. To sum it up, the devilfish is still too expensive on top of troops that are still pricey. To compare, Kroot are cheaper than FW and have a much better delivery system, that I will cover later.

Supporting fire has me lost at the moment. It's a nice addition, but more than likely will have little effect. Tau units, Firewarriors in particular, have been easy to shoot down with CC just being the finishing blow. Supporting fire may seem nice right now, until players learn that you can sit in cover for 1 more turn to make sure as many units are dead before getting into CC. This is also a double edged sword because you group units closer to benefit from the supporting fire, but make your units more vulnerable to blasts.

HQ support for firewarriors leaves me kinda confused currently. For me Firewarriors are a unit that's best left alone, and any attention they draw reduces their numbers significantly. Darkstrider and Fireblade don't seem to be as effective as ethereals due to their single unit limitations, while the ethereal manages to boost multiple units and make better use of the new supporting fire rule. Truthfully I don't like these options and feel that the suit commanders will probably be the most prevelent HQs due to their ability to assist the more vital units of the army in better ways.

What I truly think is the nail in the coffin for FW is the fact that Kroot got a lot more useful. Recon drones can allow a unit to outflank from the board edge they are 6" from, including the back table edge. With a pathfinder devilfish rush, you could bring Kroot that are able to swap between Rapid Fire and Sniper rounds as they need. Coming in on the opponent's table edge can cause enough of a distraction to limit an opponent's advance or even focus to claim a critical objective. They are cheaper, have better options, and can get just about anywhere thanks to infiltrate and outflank. Now that Kroot can also benefit from markerlights and carry non limiting weapons thanks to the Krootox, I see them being far more useful and game changing than firewarriors.

Overall I think it's hard to really gauge all the changes, but I think it's safe to assume that FW are very lackluster and will take a more passive stance of just "holding the line" while units like Crisis suits and Kroot try to actually win the battle.

at least you arent forced to take the sergeant!
Chaos Cultists Champions are required cost 14 points and suck more.

Don't forget we got defensive grenades for free. Which I find to be a nerf, because if my FW get in CC, I want them to die and not survive the turn. if they survive, just means they die on my turn and my opponent get away scott free from being shot to death while in my battlelines. Damn GW and forcing bad equipment options on us.

Are we still forgetting the gun? its all about the gun! No one has this gun! Pulse rifles get that lovely 30" range at a potential 36" threat range, or a 42" threat range when deployed from a devilfish. And its S5. wounding on a 2+ or a 3+ after you get BS5 from markerlights is alot. Sure DE might be better stated, but their guns only wound on a 4+. even against crap guardsman. Guardsman can barely wound anything, and now a FW with an ethereal or a fireblade can almost match their firepower and you dont even need to worry about failing orders. On top of that they have a 4+ save which means theres alot less armor pen for them (im looking at you 5+ save, you rarely get rolled) since almost everything is AP5. Thats still a huge advantage. Plus there that magic synergy of markerlights. Sure you need another unit to make it work, but how many armies can have their basic troops ignore cover? Or raise their BS for any reason? All in all i say while FW did not get a huge boost, and their sarges totally suck, they themselves do not, infact suck.....except their leadership, which is my only complaint. I would think lifelong trained future warriors and ideological zealots who would commit suicide if an ethereal asked them to would merit better than an almost enslaved guardsmen or a mentally challenged Ork.

Outside of that though, id say Firewarriors are awesome, and like everything in the Tau Empire and the greater good, the individual does not prosper without the sum of everyone around him; only through teamwork, cooperation, and sacrifice shall there be victory. So markerlights and ethereals for everyone!

IG can effectively ignore cover, or make it not as good with orders, they can also get TL with orders, and more shots. And the units that give these orders do things other then just give orders. They also shoot and kill stuff as well. Comparing Tau to IG is a fail, because IG do the same thing, without the penalties and extra costs to be honest. They also can have troops that start with SB4 and take special weapons.

I like everyone Tau fanaticism, but some people take it too far. Firewarriors didn't really get good enough to be a solid troops, they went from mediocre to slight less medicore but still not good.

 generalchaos34 wrote:
Are we still forgetting the gun? its all about the gun! No one has this gun! Pulse rifles get that lovely 30" range at a potential 36" threat range, or a 42" threat range when deployed from a devilfish. And its S5. wounding on a 2+ or a 3+ after you get BS5 from markerlights is alot. Sure DE might be better stated, but their guns only wound on a 4+. even against crap guardsman. Guardsman can barely wound anything, and now a FW with an ethereal or a fireblade can almost match their firepower and you dont even need to worry about failing orders. On top of that they have a 4+ save which means theres alot less armor pen for them (im looking at you 5+ save, you rarely get rolled) since almost everything is AP5. Thats still a huge advantage. Plus there that magic synergy of markerlights. Sure you need another unit to make it work, but how many armies can have their basic troops ignore cover? Or raise their BS for any reason? All in all i say while FW did not get a huge boost, and their sarges totally suck, they themselves do not, infact suck.....except their leadership, which is my only complaint. I would think lifelong trained future warriors and ideological zealots who would commit suicide if an ethereal asked them to would merit better than an almost enslaved guardsmen or a mentally challenged Ork.

Outside of that though, id say Firewarriors are awesome, and like everything in the Tau Empire and the greater good, the individual does not prosper without the sum of everyone around him; only through teamwork, cooperation, and sacrifice shall there be victory. So markerlights and ethereals for everyone!

It's all about the gun? That sums up just about every non-Tau player's opinion of Tau. Bolters get that lovely 24" range at a potential 30" threat range, plus special/heavy weapons, plus the option to take a cheap transport they can still fire from! S5 shots don't really do that much T4/3+, at least not enough to be cost effective. If you are counting BS5, then you're having to factor in 2 markerlights or 4 pathfinders for another 44 points that just won't get that much wounds out. 12 shots, getting 10 hits, getting 6.67 wounds, ending in 2.22 unsaved wounds. That's 152 points to kill 2 marines, while a hammerhead (either varient) would be far better suited for the task.

Meanwhile 152 points of marines gives you about 10 tacticles with just enough left over for a melta gun. The squad is far more versatile and let's see how much damage it does to firewarriors in return. 10 marines shooting at BS4, 6.67 hits, 4.44 wounds, 2.22 unsaved wounds. So one slot vice two, a stronger and more survivable unit, better leadership, better armor save, and a special weapon can be tossed in while also being better in CC. If FW are so awesome, why do they rely on another unit to bring them up to MEQ performance with bolters?

And don't give me the tired excuse that IG can't do anything with lasguns. IG aren't taken for lasguns. They're taken for the blob numbers or heavy firepower or both. I'm sorry but I just can't stand when people compare IG to Tau. And then you follow up with this little gem

Guardsman can barely wound anything, and now a FW with an ethereal or a fireblade can almost match their firepower and you dont even need to worry about failing orders

So if I take an HQ I can run one FW squad that are almost as good as IG at twice the cost?

Firewarriors do get a 4+ save, but it's not valuable on a troop that is expensive, in small squads, and with generally poor leadership. It's actually a hinderance because it makes the unit cost much more than it should, especially when cover can make up for lack of armor.
And I understand that Firewarriors aren't alone in the army, but the point still remains that most games FW are simply ignored because they are more of a pest than a threat. If you do anything to try and buff the unit, such as bringing HQs or using markerlights on them, then you're more than likely hurting the composition of your army. Using markerlights to let Firewarriors ignore cover is pretty silly, since just about any other unit could do a better job compared to firewarriors while most armies will get a better armor save than 5+.
Like most good armies, the troops are the foundation from which the rest of the army is built upon. The Tau however rely so heavily on elites and heavy slots that the troops generally fill in what's left.

Ive been playing tau and IG for quite a while, and I simply think you are underestimating them. Ive never played a game where people think of FW as a hindrance and usually when they ignore them it comes back on them with full force, usually when i pop the side armor of their transports or chimeras, and that was with the old codex! While i understand comparing IG is not a good analog, I have played games where you fire literally hundreds of lasguns and with almost no effect, AT ALL. Guard orders are dandy, when they work. You forget that one bad leadership roll kills of the chain of orders, and your entire army, if it is order dependent, can completely lose all of their special abilities. This is a real pain. Not to mention most guns in the game ignore your armor saves, so you are depending on a meatshield to keep your special weapons alive and hoping that you wont fail your leadership save and fall back, or be stuck in cover the whole time. Tau are about mobility, and moving and having a lot more range on your opponent means you can keep away from him. That extra 6" means that your opponent may not be able to shoot at you, or you force them to move out of their comfy cover to shoot you, or better yet, they send something far more valuable to shoot your FW, instead of attacking your more valuable crisis suits or heavy support. You also need to take into consideration the supporting fire special rule. Overwatch has been know to not be that big of a deal. But with supporting fire, it is. One squad double tapping snapfire S5 isnt much, but if you play smart you should have 3 squads doing that. This will more than likely kill a few models in the enemy unit, and render the charge out of range. Now you have a unit sitting right in front of your 3 strategically placed FW squads with their thumbs in less than respectable orifices, ready to die. For the Greater Good!

With the new Tau HQs i can reliably get special powers akin to FRFSRF, stubborn, and snapshooting whilst running, as well as a nice leadership bubble. The leadership bubble of the ethereal i think is really important, in that you can keep your firewarriors from running away, something they are traditionally famous for (sometimes i think i lost more FW in 5th to falling off the board than i did to enemy shooting). In order to get this same ability you would have to put a regimental standard on a CCS, which is a notoriously squishy unit. At least the ethereal can hide himself behind some FW and shield drones, or even in a devilfish.

By themselves FW are weak compared to other troops in other armies. Thats not the point of Tau. FW are better when used with the rest of their army, and best of all, most of the things that boost them boost all the other units in the Tau army. Some armies have stellar troops, but their other slots are lacking. Tau have stellar everything else except troops, and their other units make FW better.

While I can kind of understand people's problems, this seems like a symptom of Space Marines being far too common.

In the 40k universe, BS3 is a trained soldiers skill with a gun. A decent fit and healthy warrior is S and T 3. A basic set of armour is 5+ and a good set is 4+. Even Ld 7 in humans reflects a certain amount of training and resolve!

Tangent: This is why I think Chaos Cultists should be WS and BS 2 with Ld 6.

But people keep comparing to Space Marines as though they are the baseline. Space Marines are meant to be horrifically more skilled and powerful than the average soldier in this galaxy.

But I suppose arguing from Fluff for Rules isn't going to make any difference... I just don't understand why everyone seems to want all solider to be superheroes in this game. There should be far more 'lackluster' units in my opinion.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:
While I can kind of understand people's problems, this seems like a symptom of Space Marines being far too common.

In the 40k universe, BS3 is a trained soldiers skill with a gun. A decent fit and healthy warrior is S and T 3. A basic set of armour is 5+ and a good set is 4+. Even Ld 7 in humans reflects a certain amount of training and resolve!

Tangent: This is why I think Chaos Cultists should be WS and BS 2 with Ld 6.

But people keep comparing to Space Marines as though they are the baseline. Space Marines are meant to be horrifically more skilled and powerful than the average soldier in this galaxy.

But I suppose arguing from Fluff for Rules isn't going to make any difference... I just don't understand why everyone seems to want all solider to be superheroes in this game. There should be far more 'lackluster' units in my opinion.

Isnt that what grots are for?

 generalchaos34 wrote:

Isnt that what grots are for?

And I love them!

FW are very lackluster and will take a more passive stance of just "holding the line" while units like Crisis suits and Kroot try to actually win the battle.

You nailed it. Kroot > Fire Warriors and it's not even close.

 generalchaos34 wrote:


Outside of that though, id say Firewarriors are awesome, and like everything in the Tau Empire and the greater good, the individual does not prosper without the sum of everyone around him; only through teamwork, cooperation, and sacrifice shall there be victory. So markerlights and ethereals for everyone!

People often make this mistake; Leadership checks from shooting and close combat aren't supposed to represent just cowardice. It also represents the units deciding that "Maybe it would be tactically advantageous to retreat out of range of this hailstorm of bullets" or "Perhaps we can lure these orks into the path of fire of our buddies behind that wall"

Having a low morale don't necessarily mean that the unit is full of cowards, from a fluff or gameplay standpoint. Or else, why would artificially autonomous drones have a low leadership?

davou wrote:

People often make this mistake; Leadership checks from shooting and close combat aren't supposed to represent just cowardice. It also represents the units deciding that "Maybe it would be tactically advantageous to retreat out of range of this hailstorm of bullets" or "Perhaps we can lure these orks into the path of fire of our buddies behind that wall"

The best/only real example of that is Vanilla Marines' Chapter Tactics where they can actually choose to fail and fall back only to regroup automatically next turn.

Most armies only have 1-2 troops choices:
-Chaos Marines: CSM and Cultists
-Dark Angels/Black Templar/Space Marines: Tac Marines and Scouts
-Dark Eldar: Warriors and Wyches
-Grey Knights: Termies and Strike Squads
-Necrons: Warriors and Immortals
-Orks: Boyz and Grots
-Sisters: Battle Sisters
-Space Wolves: Grey Hunters and Blood Claws (but who uses Blood Claws?)

Of course, of those armies, all of them have the options to do FOC switches with certain characters (with the only exceptions being Necrons and Sisters).

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:
Most armies only have 1-2 troops choices:
-Chaos Marines: CSM and Cultists
-Dark Angels/Black Templar/Space Marines: Tac Marines and Scouts
-Dark Eldar: Warriors and Wyches
-Grey Knights: Termies and Strike Squads
-Necrons: Warriors and Immortals
-Orks: Boyz and Grots
-Sisters: Battle Sisters
-Space Wolves: Grey Hunters and Blood Claws (but who uses Blood Claws?)

Of course, of those armies, all of them have the options to do FOC switches with certain characters (with the only exceptions being Necrons and Sisters).

That's a little disingenuous to say that those are the only troop choices while mentioning how the FOC can be shifted, especially when a lot of it can be done without special characters.

From memory, that list should look more like:
-Chaos Marines: CSM, Cultists, Berzerkers, Plague Marines, Noise Marines, Thousand Sons
-Dark Angels: Tac Marines, Scouts, Terminators, Bikes
-Space Marines: Tac Marines, Scouts, Bikes (not too sure?) (plus with Forgeworld, you can get Terminators and definitely Bikes) (also you can get scoring, but not troop, Sternguard)
-Dark Eldar: Warriors, Wyches, Wracks, Hellions
-Grey Knights: Termies, Strike Squads, Henchmen
-Necrons: Warriors and Immortals
-Orks: Boyz, Grots, Nobz, Bikes, Deff Dreads
-Sisters: Battle Sisters
-Space Wolves: Grey Hunters, Blood Claws, Wolf Guard

And of those, CSM, DE, and Orks don't even have to use named characters to expand their selections. Tau are weak in the troops department, but I think there is enough strength in the book to back it up. Obviously that'll really come to light in the coming months, but I think it's ok to admit that that is a flaw the book has, and instead of arguing over whether their troops are weak (they are) focus more on how to compensate for it.

This seriously leaves me wondering if this was a fully worked on codex of if it was a rushed attempt to sell just a few high priced models.

Yeah, they took ten years rushing this codex out...

Coyote81 wrote:
Don't forget we got defensive grenades for free. Which I find to be a nerf, because if my FW get in CC, I want them to die and not survive the turn. if they survive, just means they die on my turn and my opponent get away scott free from being shot to death while in my battlelines. Damn GW and forcing bad equipment options on us.

IMO this is not true anymore. If your about to be charged and you have an Ethereal nearby he can make all the units stubborn. All of the sudden this fragile unit of FW can become a tarpit if they survive the hits using the Etereal's LD and its reroll. Overwatch and def grenades should soften the blow of a charge and while you might not win but tie him up for a few rounds.

thejughead wrote:

Coyote81 wrote:
Don't forget we got defensive grenades for free. Which I find to be a nerf, because if my FW get in CC, I want them to die and not survive the turn. if they survive, just means they die on my turn and my opponent get away scott free from being shot to death while in my battlelines. Damn GW and forcing bad equipment options on us.

IMO this is not true anymore. If your about to be charged and you have an Ethereal nearby he can make all the units stubborn. All of the sudden this fragile unit of FW can become a tarpit if they survive the hits using the Etereal's LD and its reroll. Overwatch and def grenades should soften the blow of a charge and while you might not win but tie him up for a few rounds.

I was going to post something very similar. I don't think people are really considering the defensive grenades within the scope of all the other changes. It is much more likely now that after being hit by an entire gun line of overwatch you are only left with a couple of dudes reaching CC, ie few enough where the FW can hang around and tar pit...and might actually even win, against.

Edit: Also I think people are completely forgetting the 8" stealth this gives them. Won't always come into play, but it can certainly help when taking close range fire or pre-assault fire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

HQ support for firewarriors leaves me kinda confused currently. For me Firewarriors are a unit that's best left alone, and any attention they draw reduces their numbers significantly.

This doesn't make any sense at all. So you think Fire Warriors suck, but don't want to make them any better because then people might shoot at them?...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Devilfish is still absurdly priced, costing now 95 points to bring with a disruption pod and no significant change to weapons.

So a 25% increase in damage isn't "significant"? Weird.

It's hard to tarpit with 12 man teams that can't hit back and take heavy wounds. Besides, as Coyote pointed out, you want them to fail on the charge so you can hit them with as much shooting as you can your turn. Of if you want to keep a unit tarpit for a round next to a fragile HQ, it's your choice.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
It's hard to tarpit with 12 man teams that can't hit back and take heavy wounds. Besides, as Coyote pointed out, you want them to fail on the charge so you can hit them with as much shooting as you can your turn. Of if you want to keep a unit tarpit for a round next to a fragile HQ, it's your choice.

You are still appraising this with a 5th edition mindset and their 4th edition codex. I think you are severely underestimating what a competently built and placed Tau gunline can do during Overwatch.

Why do i have the feeling that people wants the firewarriors to stay "bad"?

Anyway, the firewarrior arent that bad, you hit on 4+ with 30" range and 2 shots at 15" have a 4+ save, and all of the HQs can actually be very helpful, and the Devilfish can be upgraded to have a 4+ cover save for only +15 points.

I got a feeling that players view on points costs are a bit screwed, so far the Tau is balanced in compairson to some stronger armies ( such as New Necrons ) and some weaker ( such as Tyranids )

Yeah, I wonder what people think an AV 12 4+ (3+ when TurboBoosting) cover save that can shot 8 S5 shots Skimmer is suppose to be worth? It's not a Rhino. It's Faster, better at shooting, and more resilient. Why do people think it should cost the same?

Yes firewarriors still suck. They still are not worth their points because in the long haul of things, they still cannot do their job. 6-12 wounds, T3, 4+ save LD7/8 just cannot be relied upon to hold objectives and that is their main job.

What makes Firewarriors good is the HQ options. Sadly you only can have two of them and 6 units of firewarriors. Now, imagine if firewarriors were actually good and the addition of HQ units made them great. Now your talking about an army that has staying power. Two great troop units and 4 good ones sounds so much better.

However, even though I feel that firewarriors are still a bad unit, it doesn't mean they are useless. 4 6 man firewarrior squads can bring 8-12 markerlights that other much more powerfully hitting units can utililize to do maximum carnage. A suicide unit of firewarriors with EMP grenades can destroy any non-flyer vehicle/walker in the game.

The question becomes though, just how many points are you willing to pay for what ifs. Is paying 2 points for EMP grenades worth it? Against landraider rushes, probably, against Nids - yeah, thought not. 19 points for LD 8 might be worth it for forward moving troops. However, its wasted if you have campers with an ethereal near by.

I think the trick to using firewarriors is to know just how much fat to include so that the unit either helps or draws even in their usefulness of the battle plan.

72 Firewarriors will probably murder the hell out of the Green Tide. They will do nothing against IG Chimera parking lot spam.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShadarLogoth wrote:
Yeah, I wonder what people think an AV 12 4+ (3+ when TurboBoosting) cover save that can shot 8 S5 shots Skimmer is suppose to be worth? It's not a Rhino. It's Faster, better at shooting, and more resilient. Why do people think it should cost the same?

No one said it should cost Rhino points. But is there any reason it should cost 25 more points than a Chimera? 4 BS3 shots and 4 BS1 shots is not nearly as impressive sounding as 8 S5 shots. (it doesn't matter what strength the gun is if half your shots need 6s to hit)

When I said you don't want to draw attention to firewarriors I mean you don't want to offer up both an HQ and a troop in one easy to crush package. Especially if you happen to make it your warlord.

The Devilfish is silly at 95 points for a 4+ save, when it was barely taken at 90 points for a 3+ save and could move and shoot its weapons. Now it can't move and shoot its weapons if it ever intends to clear an obstacle due to its length. For something that's as large as it is it can only carry 2 more troops than a rhino, but has far inferior firepower compared to a razorback at a higher cost. The problem is you're paying higher points for a transport that's really inferior to just about every other transport in the game.

I really don't want firewarriors to be bad, but they are. They haven't changed much since the previous edition while the competing Kroot got much better synergy and options.

I won't get into the Mathhammer, but to make a long story short: Ld 7-8 on 12 wound units at T3 with 4+ save are not survivable. BS3 S5 shots are not amazing when they lack specialized fire from heavy/special weapons. Tau are outclassed in just about every aspect and excell at a tactic that is not beneficial in objective based games.

No one said it should cost Rhino points. But is there any reason it should cost 25 more points than a Chimera? 4 BS3 shots and 4 BS1 shots is not nearly as impressive sounding as 8 S5 shots. (it doesn't matter what strength the gun is if half your shots need 6s to hit)

It's more resilient, faster, and has better guns. So how much is all of that worth?

Where are you getting its faster than a Chimera? It can move 12" and flat out another 6, just like any other non-fast vehicle in the game. Yes it does have a jink save if it moves and it can be increased to a 4 plus putting the tank at 95 points. Yes skimmers float over difficult terrain (yet still must test if it stops in it). Chimeras can take hull/turret heavy weapons (Multi-laser and Heavy Bolters anyone?), Chimeras have 6 fireports where BS4 vets can shoot special/heavy weapons of their choice out of. Again, why should the 0 fireport, +1 side armor, just as slow D-fish cost 25 more points?

Heck its only 35 points cheaper than a base Ghost Arc that has AV13 on the front and sides and is immune to T4 assaults.

I won't get into the Mathhammer, but to make a long story short: Ld 7-8 on 12 wound units at T3 with 4+ save are not survivable. BS3 S5 shots are not amazing when they lack specialized fire from heavy/special weapons. Tau are outclassed in just about every aspect and excell at a tactic that is not beneficial in objective based games.

For 9 points/model T3 4+ is plenty survivable, particularly when you can tack 6+ FNP on top of it. You have access to Ld 10...so...use it, I guess?

I really don't know what the last statement means. They are one of the best shooting troops in what everybody likes to tell me is a "shooting edition."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jayden63 wrote:
Where are you getting its faster than a Chimera? It has a jink save if it moves and floats over difficult terrain (yet still must test if it stops in it). Chimeras can take hull/turret heavy weapons, Chimeras have 6 fireports where BS4 vets can shoot special/heavy weapons of their choice out of. Again, why should the 0 fireport, +1 side armor, just as slow D-fish cost 25 more points?

Sorry, instead of faster I should say "more maneuverable." The 0 firepoint deal is mostly a non issue in an edition where leaving your dudes in the vehicle for extended periods of time is generally a bad idea, as crew shaken/stunned gets shared by the unit. And again, they have a superior cover save as well. So more manuevarable, better weapons, more resilient. You have to pay for those things.

As far as the cost of the transport is concerned: yes, it is "better" in many regards to many cheaper ones. But sometimes you don't need/want frills and gimmicks. Sometimes you just want a bunker to plop your guys in to get them from A to B twice as fast as footslogging will. A marine player can pump a list full of rhinos and not be hurting for points. A Tau player cannot do the same.
I'm not saying its a bad thing though. If every army was the se, it would be dull. The Tau are, by the cost/design of their transport, not supposed to be a zippy army.
On the Fire Warrior: two of my first few real matches were my crons vs tau. I think I shot three squads off the table turn 1 in one of those games. I'm rather surprised more hasn't been done to help their morale.
Once again, one can only intuit that FW are not meant to be "hold the line!" types. Much like my Necron Warriors, they are fairly easy to drop if they are not well supported. So....support them, I guess? It's going to come down to tactics and army composition determining if they are actually worth the points you spend on them.

There is only a certain amount that you can pay for stuff to be 'more maneuverable' or 'slightly tougher' before it starts cutting into points that you need to pay for raw killing power.

Devilfish don't have killing power; they bring only weapons which can be sourced easily elsewhere in the army. They don't provide good firepower on the move compared to other tanks with firepoints. They just pile on all these potentially useful things which you could possibly use in the right circumstances, but cost points that would be better spent on more railguns.


...
Firewarriors on the other hand, I think are fine. A lot of people I think underestimate the firepower that they can put out at 15/30" on the move. 15" rapid fire is really cool: teamed with an ethereal this is a significant amount of shots and you're relatively safe from being assaulted at 15", unlike if their rapid fire was 12".

I find it amusing how people assume defensive grenades is a bad thing because you want to lose combat hard enough to enure you brake.
Between the cover against the pre-charge shooting saving you a few deaths, and the improved overwatch abilities of tau and denying extra attacks fro the enemy, you should be aiming to WIN melee by now, simply by making whatever gets to you outnumbered too much.
A true assault unit will still cut through you like hot knife through butter, but now not every random guard who got close can.
Hell, even with the last codex I managed not only to fight off enemy assault, but at times to eliminate the enemy entirely, i expect it to improve this codex by requiring actual assault units to threat my army in melee.



As far as the drones go, gun drones doubled their firepower, and marker drones no longer need to stand still to shoot right (though its only BS2 anyway)
This also extends to the devilfish, who between improved drones and improved burst cannon moved from a 5 shot to an 8 shot transport, almost double the firepower.
Sure, its not amazing, but it helps.

EMP grenades-they are not there to blow up enemy tanks, you don't take them and attempt to reach enemy armor.
Its there to discorage enemy armor from coming to you, knowing that any tank, even a mighty land raider, can be taken out with relative ease from charging fire warriors. (8 EMP warriors should be enough for a land raider, 6 should be enough for anything with 3 hull points)



No, a fire warrior is not a space marine, but he costs so much less.
Think of them as buffed up guardsman rather then space marines, because they cost and are equipped as such.


As for their HQs, both are intended to help you hold objectives one way or another.

Fireblade allows you to extract more firepower out of a backfield objective sitter, and better resist attempt to remove them with improved leadership and extra firepower.

Darkstrider is an objective taken (when teamed with warriors), making their guns in effect S6 is HUGE, and his team can either outflank or scout ahead, with a devilfish included, allowing you to remove an enemy unit off an objective and claim it for yourself, see my post on ATT about the Flankfish for more information.

Ethereals are not FW spesific, but can also join them, and can give a slew of interesting tactical choices from powerful rapid fire, to increased livability, and even running and shooting (I don't know any other method to do this), not too sold about the stubborn one, but when you get to choose each turn from 4 abilities, you don't complain if one is iffy.

And if after all that you still have a hard time holding objectives, then you must only need to remember that:
You don't need to hold as many objectives as possible, just more objectives then your opponent. if you hold only 1 and he holds 0, its still your win.

Like you said, we're unlikely to win combat against any kind of combat oriented troops. Against most armies, a great result would be causing a single casualty in combat. Everything strikes before us, hits us first, hits us harder.
We're in a better position than we were last codex because of supporting fire, but we're worse off against whatever makes it to combat.
Against nearly any unit in the game, we'd be lucky to score a single casualty in combat. That's not a good start to *win* combats.

As far as markerlights go, I think the best delivery system for them is a commander suit with a drone controller. Attach him to a full squadron of marker drones and they all get BS5. This should ensure that you're dropping cover saves and bumping BS for a number of different units on a particularly problematic target so thre should be something left for the FWs. Target lock also allows the commander to fire at other things.

IMO, no, but only in small numbers.

As your mandatory troops Fire Warriors are decent. They won't hold any objectives (that's why you have allies), but a couple squads of them provide some decent anti-infantry shooting for their points. You have to take troops anyway, and they're certainly less of a waste of points than Kroot (which continue to be utterly useless). You might even consider taking full-size squads to make the mandatory troops a bit more effective for a reasonable cost.

As more than mandatory troops Fire Warriors are mediocre at best. We have so many better options for pure shooting and allied troops cover the objective holding role, leaving no real place for Fire Warriors.

From what I've seen in the new Tau codex firewarriors are pretty damn good. So what if you need to bring support to make them truely effective, welcome to the Eldar's world. I usually focus on CC and getting there is going to be a pain, pretty much every gun in the Tau army can take out transports and when I do get there, I'll probably have 72 overwatch's at me, and probably the nearby broadsides as well. Sure you could shoot them apart, but its Tau, good luck. As to the Devilfish, Av12 is a lot better than av11, it turns it into something that actually needs concentrating on, a rhino you can just ping a missile at it and its sorted.

Warlord Sniksgraga wrote:
So what if you need to bring support to make them truely effective, welcome to the Eldar's world.

The point is that other units don't need support to be effective, you just point them at something and remove it from the table. Therefore Fire Warriors will fill the FOC minimums, and allies will provide the rest of our troops.

As to the Devilfish, Av12 is a lot better than av11, it turns it into something that actually needs concentrating on, a rhino you can just ping a missile at it and its sorted.

One missile at a Rhino is not even close to a guaranteed kill. Devilfish are decent (but pretty expensive) for your mandatory units, but not so amazing that you want more than two of them.

Fire Warriors weren't overpriced at 10 ppm and they certainly aren't overpriced at 9 ppm with better wargear options, free defensive grenades, and Supporting Fire. You have to know how to make up for their weakness (low Leadership), but once that is sorted Fire Warriors are a very strong unit. My only criticism of the unit is that the bonding ritual, a key part of Tau fluff, will rarely if ever be seen. I think it should have provided +1 Leadership in addition to Heroic Morale.

 Slaanesh-Devotee wrote:

Tangent: This is why I think Chaos Cultists should be WS and BS 2 with Ld 6.

would be fine if they were 3 points per model and didnt have to take a chump 10 point champion mandatory.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShadarLogoth wrote:

Sorry, instead of faster I should say "more maneuverable." The 0 firepoint deal is mostly a non issue in an edition where leaving your dudes in the vehicle for extended periods of time is generally a bad idea, as crew shaken/stunned gets shared by the unit. And again, they have a superior cover save as well. So more manuevarable, better weapons, more resilient. You have to pay for those things.

but you are forgetting, the Chimera is amphibious!

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
And of those, CSM, DE, and Orks don't even have to use named characters to expand their selections. Tau are weak in the troops department, but I think there is enough strength in the book to back it up. Obviously that'll really come to light in the coming months, but I think it's ok to admit that that is a flaw the book has, and instead of arguing over whether their troops are weak (they are) focus more on how to compensate for it.

Does more troop choices == better troops? I don't think so.
Look at Chaos daemons. They have bloodletters, daemonettes, plague bearers, horrors, and nurglings. Five choices to pick from, and yet the 6 point ork boy is still a better troop.

I'm not saying firewarriors are good or bad -- I'm just saying having only a few choices for troops does not mean they are bad.
If firewarriors are still lacking special/heavy weapons then they suffer from a disadvantage to other troops -- flexability. A squad of marines can shoot bolters at infantry, have a MG for vehicle threats, and have a ML for long range threats.

When you look at FW by themselves they are not impressive. Its the sum of the whole army that can make them much more effective. Yes, they do not have special weapons, thats what crisis suits are for! What other army has an incredibly nimble platform for special weapons that can actively relocate to reinforce an entrenched position? So lets say your FW have a termie squad barreling toward them? you redirect a squad of Crisis suits with TL plasma, you blow them away, FW fall back to a more defensible position, crisis suits are free to get back to what they were doing during assault moves. I like to think of Tau in terms of a modern warfighter in todays military. Rarely do they carry a variety of heavy weapons outside of a SAW, so they will call in support of bombers, artillery, and helicopter gunships when they need support. Obviously you cannot expect them to easily take out enemy armor, thats what close air support is for. For the Tau, crisis suits, hammerheads, and broadsides are their close air support and should be played in that manner to make them more successful.

I also dont care much for comparing Chimeras to Devilfish, since Chimeras a pretty undercosted for what they do (the fireports are just a tad overdone, considering the original intention was that they could only use the little lasguns on the tank itself). Additionally, Rhinos/Razorbacks are cheap, but they can also be easily killed by the basic gun of the Tau's basic troop at a range greater than any other army, that says alot in itself. Now im not saying devilfish are great, they have their own problems, not being able to fire fast being one of them, but its a still a solid choice none the less. And before you complain about the size of the devilfish, that in itself is an advantage. Many times ive wedged a Devilsih into a tight squeeze between a building or other obstacle, and its forced my opponent to either go around or waste their firepower trying to kill it. Since i moved it slightly, it gets a cover save, making it just that much harder to kill and more likely to become a wreck and a hindrance to my opponents mobility while i get to hover around with sensor spines and go where I please.

I play Eldar so I know a thing or two about lackluster troops . While Fire Warriors are, for the most part, good enough, what kills them for me is the Ld7. These are units that, in most cases, you want in your backfield away from the main action, and they are too susceptible to running off the board. This makes the Shas'ui upgrade pretty much mandatory, unless you want to spend an HQ slot on an Ethereal, which to me are still pretty underwhelming.

I don't own the Tau book, so I can't comment on particulars. But if the Chimera is the standard for transports, then that's what the Devilfish must be compared to. The same argument is what people try with the Vendetta and Stormraven. But the Vendetta and Chimera both exist, and so they are legitimate standards of comparison.

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
I play Eldar so I know a thing or two about lackluster troops . While Fire Warriors are, for the most part, good enough, what kills them for me is the Ld7. These are units that, in most cases, you want in your backfield away from the main action, and they are too susceptible to running off the board. This makes the Shas'ui upgrade pretty much mandatory, unless you want to spend an HQ slot on an Ethereal, which to me are still pretty underwhelming.

How anyone can think the new Ethereal is underwhelming. One of them, just one, solves all the resiliency, firepower, and leadership issues of your entire gunline. As 50 point unit that covers all of your troops weaknesses while at the same time maximizing on their strengths is "underwhelming?" Weird.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

And before you complain about the size of the devilfish, that in itself is an advantage.

Exactly. Another thing that the vapid comparisons to Chimeras are completely ignoring is what the Fish does for its army. An easily re-deploy able LOS/Cover Wall in an army full of Jump/Shoot/Jump units? I can't for the life of me imagine how that might be useful...

ShadarLogoth wrote:

How anyone can think the new Ethereal is underwhelming. One of them, just one, solves all the resiliency, firepower, and leadership issues of your entire gunline. As 50 point unit that covers all of your troops weaknesses while at the same time maximizing on their strengths is "underwhelming?" Weird.

This. Get used to taking a mandatory Ethereal.

And for all those hating on Supporting Fire, invest in a large unit of kroot. I call it the Kroot Defense Line (KDL see what I did there?). Take a big unit of kroot (you can get up to 33 models jeez) and stretch that out in front of your advancing gun line. And voila every unit in your army is going to be 6" from that line if someone charges it, and 12-15" in front of your line is going to be a kill zone. I shamelessly stole this one from Yakface's battle report.

Unfortunately, taking an ethereal means you lose 3 battlesuits.

As others have said, Fire warriors need the support of the rest of the army to take on things they can't.

Heavy armoured troops? Crisis Suits/Riptides.

Tanks? Broadsides/Hammerheads/Crisis Suits

No unit in most armies is an island. They all need the rest of the army supporting them to get the most out of them.

Plus being on the receiving end of 3-4 (even 6) units of rapid firing fire warriors would not be pretty for the opponent, even without markerlight buffs.

Also, while you are complaining about your 9pt, WS 2 BS3, 4+ armour, range 30" s5 weapon toting fire warriors who get free grenades, how about we trade for my 8pt WS3 BS3, 5+ armour, range 12" S4 weapon toting guardians who don't have any options for grenades at all?

Sure, we get the a heavy weapon platform but it is still BS3 and doesn't make up for the woefully short range of the shuriken catapults which means we have to be on the enemy doorstep before we can fire them.

Did I mention guardians suck in combat only slightly worse than fire warriors?

Guardians and Fire Warriors are primarily objective holding and gunline units imo. At least the Fire Warriors can shoot all their weapons while doing it!

rohansoldier wrote:
As others have said, Fire warriors need the support of the rest of the army to take on things they can't.

Heavy armoured troops? Crisis Suits/Riptides.

Tanks? Broadsides/Hammerheads/Crisis Suits

No unit in most armies is an island. They all need the rest of the army supporting them to get the most out of them.

Plus being on the receiving end of 3-4 (even 6) units of rapid firing fire warriors would not be pretty for the opponent, even without markerlight buffs.

Also, while you are complaining about your 9pt, WS 2 BS3, 4+ armour, range 30" s5 weapon toting fire warriors who get free grenades, how about we trade for my 8pt WS3 BS3, 5+ armour, range 12" S4 weapon toting guardians who don't have any options for grenades at all?

Sure, we get the a heavy weapon platform but it is still BS3 and doesn't make up for the woefully short range of the shuriken catapults which means we have to be on the enemy doorstep before we can fire them.

Did I mention guardians suck in combat only slightly worse than fire warriors?

Guardians and Fire Warriors are primarily objective holding and gunline units imo. At least the Fire Warriors can shoot all their weapons while doing it!

This. Tau is the army of support. Almost all of it's units are lackluster on their own, but when supporting each other they become amazing. That's the basis of the FW, the FW is a terrible troop choice on it's own but when you put it in context with the rest of the army you start to see where the use comes in. This is only enforced with the new Supporting Fire special rule, encouraging gunlines and things

EDIT: Also, he is right on the count of Guardians. You think you guys have it bad for troops, the Eldar don't have any reasonable options to be honest. At least Tau troops have the possible utility

ShadarLogoth wrote:

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
I play Eldar so I know a thing or two about lackluster troops . While Fire Warriors are, for the most part, good enough, what kills them for me is the Ld7. These are units that, in most cases, you want in your backfield away from the main action, and they are too susceptible to running off the board. This makes the Shas'ui upgrade pretty much mandatory, unless you want to spend an HQ slot on an Ethereal, which to me are still pretty underwhelming.

How anyone can think the new Ethereal is underwhelming. One of them, just one, solves all the resiliency, firepower, and leadership issues of your entire gunline. As 50 point unit that covers all of your troops weaknesses while at the same time maximizing on their strengths is "underwhelming?" Weird.

Ok, I guess underwhelming is the wrong word, maybe disappointing. It's basically a tax for having effective troops, and while 50 points isn't so bad a cost for that, an HQ slot is. That's one less slot you have for a drone Commander, or for Farsight or Shadowsun. It makes an ethereal almost a mandatory choice, and that doesn't sit well with me, especially not when they're T3, 2W and have no save. Also, I'd still argue that aside from the extra shot one, none of the elemental powers are very good.

 washout77 wrote:


This. Tau is the army of support. Almost all of it's units are lackluster on their own, but when supporting each other they become amazing. That's the basis of the FW, the FW is a terrible troop choice on it's own but when you put it in context with the rest of the army you start to see where the use comes in. This is only enforced with the new Supporting Fire special rule, encouraging gunlines and things

EDIT: Also, he is right on the count of Guardians. You think you guys have it bad for troops, the Eldar don't have any reasonable options to be honest. At least Tau troops have the possible utility

I secondly agree with this statement. I think they really embodied the ideal of the Tau in the codex units themselves. All the fluff speaks about relinquishing your identity so that the whole may prosper, and it really comes out with troops that appear to lacking on thier own, who really end up shining when used to support and be supported by other units in the codex. For those who argue that the codex feels rushed, there appears to be alot more internal balance within the army itself that we have yet to fully discover.

rohansoldier wrote:
As others have said, Fire warriors need the support of the rest of the army to take on things they can't.

Heavy armoured troops? Crisis Suits/Riptides.

Tanks? Broadsides/Hammerheads/Crisis Suits

No unit in most armies is an island. They all need the rest of the army supporting them to get the most out of them.

Plus being on the receiving end of 3-4 (even 6) units of rapid firing fire warriors would not be pretty for the opponent, even without markerlight buffs.

Also, while you are complaining about your 9pt, WS 2 BS3, 4+ armour, range 30" s5 weapon toting fire warriors who get free grenades, how about we trade for my 8pt WS3 BS3, 5+ armour, range 12" S4 weapon toting guardians who don't have any options for grenades at all?

Sure, we get the a heavy weapon platform but it is still BS3 and doesn't make up for the woefully short range of the shuriken catapults which means we have to be on the enemy doorstep before we can fire them.

Did I mention guardians suck in combat only slightly worse than fire warriors?

Guardians and Fire Warriors are primarily objective holding and gunline units imo. At least the Fire Warriors can shoot all their weapons while doing it!

That's a silly argument. Other armies get tough troops, fast troops, versatile troops, or combinations there of. Even most horde troops come poorly equipped but are tougher due to having more wounds for cheaper prices and generally higher leadership or buffs. Tau troops on the other hand have a useless transport for their troop type, while marines that can take special weapons get fire points. IG get special weapons and get fire points. Necrons with solid unit shooting get a transport they can fire from.

And the next part I don't understand. How can you compare firewarriors to Eldar troops? It's a 4th edition codex! Let me just compare 6th edition Tau to a second edition codex while we are at it.

So overall the most of what I see saying that firewarriors are decent troops is that you weigh them against the army as a whole. I do that, and they are terrible. As strong as the rest of the army is, I can't use firewarriors to claim objectives. Firewarriors can barely be kept on their own objectives without using an HQ slot just to stop troops from running, while any other HQ would be more synergistic with the rest of the army. Firewarriors are just expensive and require additional support to make them comparible to another troop choice when you aren't factoring in special and heavy weapons.
Other troop choices quickly gain ground when you throw in special weapons, a more useful and cost effective transport, and higher survivability.

At this point I know a lot of people are probably just going to reply with "Well they can't all be marines" even though 50% of armies out there are marines and the ones that aren't don't seem to have the problems that Firewarriors have. Except Eldar, but there is no point in trying to say that a 4th edition codex is anywhere near the standard. I'm not going to say what troops we should have gotten or wish list or something like that. I'm just saying that in an objective game we are still at a disadvantage since other armies can bring more durable and cost effective troops and offer them protection via transports at better cost effeciency. Other armies can bring versatile and customized troops to handle a variety of tasks and can deliver them easier wether via transports, bikes, or drop pods. But the only option Firewarrior gets is a leadership buff and raising BS score? An HQ and spamming Pathfinders to make Firewarriors good? How is a crutch/reliance/handicap considered synergy? How is this viewed as strength?

I think they're good ...for their points.

Sorry dude, everybody can't be Grey Hunters or Belial and Terminators or whatever...

This is what makes Fire Warriors good;

1. Their longer range, higher strength guns.
2. Slightly higher squad sizes for a few more shots.
3. A 50pt Ethereal to buff easily 2 squads.
4. There's some other HQ that also gives extra shots to the squad he's in.
5. There's a potential to have 48 S5 shots -per squad- at 15"
6. 12 Fire Warriors and the Ethereal come in at a total of less than 160 pts. or so. That's pretty damn good.
7. 72 Fire Warriors will set you back about 600 points, in a 2000pt. match that leaves plenty of room for a Commander w/ Iridium Armor, Drone Controller, both bodyguards, 3 Hammerheads (1 w/ Longstrike) a Riptide and some other stuff that isn't Vespids or their Flyers.

NOTE: I'm not counting Shasui's as they can quickly become to expensive and the -only- reason to take them is for the slightly less crappy Leadership.

I can't think of other troops that can stack that many shots at that range for that price.

I'd have to look at the codex, but it sounds like Fire Warriors may be more efficient than BA ASM at this point.

 Savageconvoy wrote:
The Devilfish is still absurdly priced, costing now 95 points to bring with a disruption pod and no significant change to weapons.

Lol, wut? Burst cannons went up 1, as did pulse carbines, meaning what used to have 5 shots now has 8.

Don't buy it a disruption pod, but get it a sensor spine so it can drive into cover (or wherever it wants).

I'm not saying it's fantastic, but it's not awful, either. I call it "appropriately costed".

I had to laugh when someone complained about devil fish being over cost because you want them to be a pill box... Seriously? If you want a pill box buy a cheap little thing called a bastion or better yet pile all those turkeys into a fortress of redemption and watch your opponent cry as you have suits JSJ from behind oh and btw notice yet that that foolish riptide can see clear over the ramparts? Even if you'd prefer a transport with fire points get real, it would only have a couple like a rhino, even 5 like a chimera means your wasting extra Pulse rifles.

I hate why people continue to post a 95 pt cost on DF..... its not 95 friken points, its 80. If you stupidly decide to inflate its cost with a 15 pt upgrade that's your fault. Its like if I complained that chaos rhinos where 50 points for demonic possession lol. Its my own fault for wasting points on that upgrade.

The more reasonaly comarison is a razor back, actually two. Two bolter backs are 90 points and hold the same number of bodies total, while never getting a jink save and having less armor. DF gets more shots half of which cause pinning though lacking TL but costing 10 less points.

Firewarrior with 30" or 15" rapid fire 5s 5ap
Devilfish with a 4 shot 5s 5ap and the option to take SMS ( ignore cover 4 shots 30" range ) and the ability to pick +1 cover save ( netting a devilfish to a total of 105 points, disruption pods for 15 and the SMS for 10, and the ability to pick 2 seekers for 8 each )

And the ethereal having a 12" range whereas he gives his leadership to anything in range, and the ability to give stuborn, feel no pain, extra shot and fire after running. for the mere price of 50 points.

Also, you can pick the Pulse carbine, 18" Assault 2 5S 5AP with Pinning, and haywire grenades.

You have quite a few options to support a firewarrior, maybe the single model of itself its not as impressive, The few troops choices in the Tau army i believe is there to force a Tau to play like a Tau instead of a Space marine: "With the combination of your units you will gain success for the greater good"

Ethereals are high-risk high-reward. When they work, they're great. When they get killed in one shot by a Griffon or a Colossus or a Vindicare Assassin, give up a bonus point, and cause you to lose the game, they aren't. One important consideration when weighing Ethereals against Cadre Fireblades is that the Fireblades front-load their damage buff (improving your alpha strike), while the Ethereals work up close, typically improving later turns of the game.

Can the Ethereals use their abilities and leadership while inside a Devilfish?

 Red Corsair wrote:
I had to laugh when someone complained about devil fish being over cost because you want them to be a pill box... Seriously? If you want a pill box buy a cheap little thing called a bastion or better yet pile all those turkeys into a fortress of redemption and watch your opponent cry as you have suits JSJ from behind oh and btw notice yet that that foolish riptide can see clear over the ramparts? Even if you'd prefer a transport with fire points get real, it would only have a couple like a rhino, even 5 like a chimera means your wasting extra Pulse rifles.

I hate why people continue to post a 95 pt cost on DF..... its not 95 friken points, its 80. If you stupidly decide to inflate its cost with a 15 pt upgrade that's your fault. Its like if I complained that chaos rhinos where 50 points for demonic possession lol. Its my own fault for wasting points on that upgrade.

The more reasonaly comarison is a razor back, actually two. Two bolter backs are 90 points and hold the same number of bodies total, while never getting a jink save and having less armor. DF gets more shots half of which cause pinning though lacking TL but costing 10 less points.

Who said they wanted an 80 point pillbox? I've only heard complaints that the transport is too expensive to rapidly deploy units past the deployment area and that it's load out is very unsuited for firewarriors. But you bring up a good point with why even bother with transports when all you're going to do is gunline firewarriors? Which is what the core issue has been all about. For their price you're getting a unit suited for one role and one role only. You can try and argue that you could give them emp grenades and they can assault tanks, but that's silly. Most tanks that you'd need to glance to death are going to be far more suited to killing Firewarriors from a distance.

And you misunderstand the comment about firepoints. Firepoints are given to units that benefit from firepoints, like marine and ig which can take special weapons. Meanwhile Necrons get transports they can shoot from, because they have no special weapons and instead have good squad level shooting. Tau get neither, and instead get put into a transport that is expensive for what it does, with only standard level of shooting for the army.

The only reason why people would mention the Devilfish is 95 points is because it's 95 points to get it back to the 4th ed level of protection, while the proliferation of heavy weapons have spread and their costs have gone down. So now the devilfish has gone up in price in an enviornment where it's easier than ever to take it down. That's not justified in the slightest.

Your comparison to the Heavy Bolter razorbacks is a bit silly though. It only works as a comparison if you ignore that Razorbacks can take a variety of weapons including anti-tank options while the devilfish is stuck with only S5 AP5 at a variety of 2 ranges and one can ignore LOS. I think this is the part that most people try hard to ignore.

Most problems that people will complain about Tau is the lack of variety and being forced to take a basic army build in order to bring a TAC army with deviation from the standard will only make the army flimsy in doing so. While other armies get options to bring bike troops, terminator troops, marine troops, or cult marine troops the Tau are forced to choose only two troop units, both of which are fairly weak when the fire gets focused on them. In comparison the Necrons get only two troops, but they are very durable, have good transports, and have weapons that fill a multiple roles inlcuding anti-tank and anti-horde while maintaining a decent statline.

So I guess I can put it this way. The Tau Codex is fine as they are. The problem is the objective games are unfair because other troops are tougher. Fire warriors are well equipped and it's just the armies that can take a variety of weapons are unfair and over powered. The Devilfish is fine and sets the standard for transports. It's the silly cheap tanks and flying transports that are way too good for how cheap they are in comparison and can take a variety of weapon load outs. The Tau Synergy is fine because you need to dedicate an entire FA slot to bringing your army past the point of BS3, which is fine for a shooting army. Other armies are way too overpowered because they get BS4 for free, access to a variety of weapons across the FOC, and get to fill the FA slots with things that aren't dedicated to synergy.

In comparison a few real advantagse Tau have now is an AP3 template tank, which has to trade out the army's one real option for anti-tank weaponry, and the Riptide's AP2 template. Both units can benefit heavily from markerlights and the ability to remove cover, which gives Tau weaponry a distinct advantage since they've always had significantly less low AP weapons that can actually benefit from the markerlight usage. Crisis suits also got a points reduction and tweaking to make the Plasma/Fusion build actually worth taking now. There are a lot of good things in the Tau codex, and I understand that. That's not my issue. My issue is just that Firewarriors, or the tougher and more durable of the two units simply because the 19 point Shas'ui is a better deal than the 21 point shaper, are not really worth the points for a game based around advancing and claiming objectives. You can try to make the claim that Firewarriors are good at this task because Pathfinders can buff Riptides, which can then clear out entrenched enemy units while Broadsides take out flyers and enemy tanks. I've heard this argument before and it's basically just the argument that Tau don't need objective holders when they can just table the enemy. I think I'm done with arguing this however. In a few months I know that Firewarriors will be viewed as a tax again once people try the useless little HQ gimmicks. I know that we will be relying entirely on Heavy Support and Elites to do the real damage and win the game, while FA will be for the sole purpose of aiding those two. The only real change I actually see is the Kroot are probably going to be dealing out more damage and will probably overtake FW because they are cheap infiltrators with sniper weapons.

Firewarriors went from a terrible choice to merely a poor one. Sure, you can buy HQs to make them more effective, but ultimately they suck because they don't fill any useful role well enough to take.

You need something to hold your objectives? Kroot (or allies) can provide cheaper troops that can hide in cover and meet that goal more effectively.

You want fire support? You'll note few other armies bother spamming Str 5 shooting, even if it's an option (say, marine razorbacks or IG Heavy Bolter fire teams). Why? Because it's not very useful. You pay a lot for the versatility or strength 5, but it's not that great. Again, a bunch of kroot firing str 4 shots to kill troops and a crisis team shooting missiles for AT is better than 2 firewarrior squads trying to do both.

Devilfish suck because firewarriors suck. IG has tons of troops, so throwing some away in a suicidal chimera rush, especially when they have special weapons that give them a useful role, makes chimeras useful. That, or it allows a cheap IG squad to move around and hide to take objectives, and you lose very little from the fight when a 50 point IG squad and 55 point chimera do nothing but try to take an objective.

A squad of firewarriors and a devilfish is a bigger point investment, so it hurts more to dedicate them to just moving and seizing an objective. They need to get close to rapid fire and do decent damage (and gain objectives), but they die to most units in assault, and aren't too tough against shooting, either. They're too expensive to spam or throw away, but you need SOMETHING to move up and grab objectives...so you're screwed.

I think of Tau like water, flowing around the field, searching for enemy weaknesses and retreating from advances, firing the whole time. The new codex took away a lot of that effective mobile firepower, helped the good Kroot squads but didn't help firewarriors enough.

The problem is the objective games are unfair because other troops are tougher.

Stop saying this. It is dead ass wrong. Learn how to calculate RPP. FW, and especially Kroot, are in the same neighborhood of resiliency per point as every single other troop in the game. Like another poster said, if you are saying this because you only bring MSU squads, then its your inability to properly craft a list that is hurting your objective claiming capabilities, not the FWs/Kroot.

A squad of firewarriors and a devilfish is a bigger point investment, so it hurts more to dedicate them to just moving and seizing an objective.

Wait, why do they have to be spending the whole game in the Fish? You realize they can stay on the gun line and pewpew and only jump in the Fish late game to cap objectives right? You realize that the Fish is more resilient, and maneuverable, and therefore better at the role of getting a unit into position to take an objective late game then the Chimera is right? You realize that the Fire Warriors are just as, if not more resilient to shooting the the IG you are comparing them to right?

Or did you not realize any of those things? Which is cool. It's true though. So embrace it, I guess?

Another thing people seem to completely ignore about the Fish is it is relatively resilient mobile LOS/Cover. Anybody think an army filled with JSJ units and things like Aun'va might be able to take advantage of putting an AV12 3+ Cover Wall in front of them? Anybody? Am I really having to point this out to people? I spend 20 points more on a GA that is almost exactly as resilient as the Fish just to use it for that purpose and repairing Warriors.

I think I'm done with arguing this however. In a few months I know that Firewarriors will be viewed as a tax again once people try the useless little HQ gimmicks.

I completely disagree. In a few months good players will realize that the sum of the Tau parts put their Troops equal to or above other troops, and will build their armies accordingly. Meanwhile, people stuck in the mindsets of 5th edition will continue to field crappy lists with 2x6 Fire Warriors, and rage quit because "their new codex sucks."

Also, please define "gimmick" for me. Is a Librarian a "gimmick"? Is a Haemonculus a "gimmick"? How about a Blood Priest? Because...the mechanics of the Ethereal are just as ..."gimmicky" as any of those other HQs (or elites for the BP), which just so happen to all be considered must takes for their respective army. I always love it when people try to use the word gimmick to somehow arbitrarily draw an imaginary line between legitimate game mechanics and what they perceive as inferior options.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

You want fire support? You'll note few other armies bother spamming Str 5 shooting, even if it's an option (say, marine razorbacks or IG Heavy Bolter fire teams). Why? Because it's not very useful. You pay a lot for the versatility or strength 5, but it's not that great.

Immortals don't spam S5? The only other reason that other armies don't spam S5 is because they can't bring entire troop selections with it (or have to pay a hefty price for it, GK). 9 Points for a 30" Rapid fire S5 is "expensive"? ...I, just...I don't even know how to respond to that. Marines must absolutely suck ass then, having to pay 13 to 15 points for a gakky ass Bolter.

ShadarLogoth wrote:
Stop saying this. It is dead ass wrong. Learn how to calculate RPP. FW, and especially Kroot, are in the same neighborhood of resiliency per point as every single other troop in the game. Like another poster said, if you are saying this because you only bring MSU squads, then its your inability to properly craft a list that is hurting your objective claiming capabilities, not the FWs/Kroot.

Which would actually mean something if this "RPP" number was anything other than an arbitrary value.

Also, please define "gimmick" for me. Is a Librarian a "gimmick"? Is a Haemonculus a "gimmick"? How about a Blood Priest? Because...the mechanics of the Ethereal are just as ..."gimmicky" as any of those other HQs (or elites for the BP), which just so happen to all be considered must takes for their respective army. I always love it when people try to use the word gimmick to somehow arbitrarily draw an imaginary line between legitimate game mechanics and what they perceive as inferior options.

A gimmick ability is something that sounds good when it works, but isn't practical in reality. For example:

BA priests are not a gimmick because FNP is consistently effective and a significant upgrade to the squad.

Precise shots from sniper rifles is a gimmick because it's so inconsistent and trying to use it as a strategy is less effective than just bringing consistent (if boring) shooting.

The Etheral falls somewhere in between the two: a situational upgrade to a mediocre unit isn't the most efficient thing you can do with your points and FOC slots, but it does provide a meaningful upgrade and is much more consistent than a lot of other 'gimmick' options. Whether or not it will be considered worth it remains to be seen.

"BA priests are not a gimmick because FNP is consistently effective and a significant upgrade to the squad. "

Not so sure about that. It's a fairly expensive T4 W1 IC. Etherals sound a hell of a lot better than BA priests to me.

I'd hate to sound like a naysayer but, as much of a buff as they got in general, other codices are more self-sufficient and less ally dependant.

Which would actually mean something if this "RPP" number was anything other than an arbitrary value.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

God man, you must love the taste of your own foot.

Precise shots from sniper rifles is a gimmick because it's so inconsistent and trying to use it as a strategy is less effective than just bringing consistent (if boring) shooting.

None sense. You shoot 20 shots, you're almost guaranteed to get at least 1, if not 2, and should average 3. Again, Peregrine, not being able to grasp simple concepts is a fairly poor piece of supporting evidence.

The Ethereal falls somewhere in between the two: a situational upgrade to a mediocre unit isn't the most efficient thing you can do with your points and FOC slots, but it does provide a meaningful upgrade and is much more consistent than a lot of other 'gimmick' options. Whether or not it will be considered worth it remains to be seen.

Um, and Ethereal giving 6+ FNP to an entire gun line is completely superior to a BP or Haem giving 5+ to one unit. I know that concept will just fly right over your head like the others, but its true regardless if you want to acknowledge it or not. Of course, the Ehtereal also gives the entire gun line the highest leadership value you can have in the game, and can swap the FNP into devastating firepower once units get close enough, two things a BP or a Haemie don't do. Ethereals are very good right now. I feel stupid having to explain this to people.

Sounds better than a Sanguinary Priest to me. People seem to magically forget that the sanguinary priest only gives one buff of any consequence now.

Ethereal "invocation of the elements" is "Every friendly non-vehicle unit from this codex within 12" "

Just wondering if he can use this ability inside a devilfish.

ShadarLogoth wrote:
God man, you must love the taste of your own foot.

So where exactly in the game is RPP defined then, if it isn't just an arbitrary value?

None sense. You shoot 20 shots, you're almost guaranteed to get at least 1, if not 2, and should average 3. Again, Peregrine, not being able to grasp simple concepts is a fairly poor piece of supporting evidence.

20 shots = 3.333 precise shots, but only 1.666 will wound and only 0.55 will be an AP 2 wound. Once you account for armor/cover/FNP/LoS your chances of being able to kill a specific target model are well into "gimmick" territory.

Um, and Ethereal giving 6+ FNP to an entire gun line is completely superior to a BP or Haem giving 5+ to one unit.

And let's just ignore that the Ethereal takes up an HQ slot, and only gives 6+ FNP, and most of the units getting it are only T3 (so it's ignored a lot more frequently than FNP on MEQs). Not that it really matters, since I didn't say that the Ethereal's FNP bonus was just a gimmick.

I know that concept will just fly right over your head like the others, but its true regardless if you want to acknowledge it or not. Of course, the Ehtereal also gives the entire gun line the highest leadership value you can have in the game, and can swap the FNP into devastating firepower once units get close enough, two things a BP or a Haemie don't do. Ethereals are very good right now. I feel stupid having to explain this to people.

I guess reading isn't your strong point? How do you manage to turn "lots of FWs and the Ethereal's extra shot bonus is somewhere between 'legitimate' and 'gimmick'" into "Etherals suck"?

This discussion is shockingly pathetic. Seriously, some people need to stop their pity parties and move on like adults.

9 pts for a firewarrior is overpriced? How the hell do you figure that? Let's compare it to a guardsman, which are regarded as amazing troops for their cost.

Now, 10 guardsman cost you 50, so you can assume they're around 5 points each. Probably a little less as they get a free sergeant but lets assume maybe 4.5 each then.

Fire warriors have one less WS. I don't know about you guys, but my guardsmen hit EVERYTHING on a 4+ anyway. And everything that wants to hit them gets 3+. So small loss.

A worse initiative. Big deal on units focused completely on shooting.

A better armor save. And I know everyone pretends that everything not at least 3+ is useless and every unit at all times has 3+ cover, this is a big deal. Veterans pay 30 points to give this to 10 men, meaning they value it at 3 pts per model. A 4+ armor save is a huge difference to rapid fire small arms.

Free defensive grenades. Plague marines get these and it makes a big difference. Its true that there are times when you'd rather a unit get wiped out, but one less attack per model can be a huge difference, especially if they're getting hit by a strong overwatch. They also have a often overlooked +1 to cover saves within I think 8 inches. At least 1 pt per model I'd say.

A completely and utterly superior gun. People who think 30" isn't a big deal over 24" have not seen it in action. It makes fire warriors almost have long range shooting, and a greater range for their mid range. Str 5 is a very nice weapon that can wound anything in the game. I get disappointed when my 50+ guardsmen can't FRF monstrous creatures who get Iron Arm. And an AP5 to slaughter light infantry which are a lot of players. Easy 2-3 pts per model.

And Support Fire. The whiners are quick to try and say how little it matters, but a few extra hits and a few extra kills each turn make a big difference.

Now, I'm not arguing that Firewarriors are absolutely better than guardsmen. I love guards; in masses they really can't be beat, and obviously guard generally can bring better heavy weapons (I'd make the arguement that firewarriors don't need heavy weapons in an army that has some of the best and heaviest firepower, but I won't get into that) But pretending Firewarriors are woefully points inefficient is childish. At worst, they are a reasonable costed unit. At best they pretty damn good point for point.

Another common complain seems to be against the Devilfish and how terrible it is. Really? While I do agree a vehicle with a few firepoints could be more suited to Tau tactics, I've still seen them used well. They are a mobile firetank that protects the squad inside for several turns as they make their way up the field. And they do that well.

Let's compare it to a 55 pt Chimera.

80 points base. Of course, what people love to overlook is the two free gun drones attached. In a kill point game, they're as useless as nipples on a breastplate, but otherwise how can you not love this? My friend commonly has them detach and float in front of the firewarriors as a speedbump against chargers. And free firepower. So let's take those 24 pts for the drones out. Now we're at 56 pts.

Chimera Pros in Comparison
-5 Firepoints. Very nice pro! Main reason they rule
-???

Devilfish Pros in Comparison
-Skimmer. Free 5+ cover save at all times. Cheap upgrade to increase cover save.
-Great upgrades in general. Lots of strong options.
-Better armor. 11 on the side makes a big difference. I rarely get to use a Chimera's 12 front armor =/

So you have a vehicle that I would agree isn't quite as handy as a Chimera would be in your army. I get that. But pretending its a bad vehicle is foolish. Its a very well costed transport. It does what its supposed to do very well.

Btw, you forgot that the TL pulse carbines on the drones with the devilfish also have pinning.

so 4 shots assault from the burst cannon, and 2x2 TL pulse carbine pinning on the drones.

So where exactly in the game is RPP defined then, if it isn't just an arbitrary value?

There's nothing arbitrary about it. Units have point costs, right? Units have several other values that dictate how hard they are to kill, right? Okay. So here's how it works. Saying unit A is "tougher" then Unit B is meaningless without taking into account it's point value. For Example, a C'Tan is infinitly tougher then a single IG model. However, outside of S3 weapons, 200 points of IG are much tougher to take down then a single C'tan. You calculate things like RPP because people will have perceptions that unit A is super resilient because they will overvalue a certain stat (like an extra wound or a 2+ save), but when you really break it down the fact is they are paying so much for that extra stat (and some other things too, like PFs on terms) that actually end up being less resilient then their bog standard counterparts.

20 shots = 3.333 precise shots, but only 1.666 will wound and only 0.55 will be an AP 2 wound. Once you account for armor/cover/FNP/LoS your chances of being able to kill a specific target model are well into "gimmick" territory.

/sigh There's nothing gimmicky about it. When you are trying to take out a crucial Banner/Heavy/Special weapon out of a squad (ie, models that don't have LoS), 20 precision shots has a pretty good chance of doing so. I don't what else to tell you.

And let's just ignore that the Ethereal takes up an HQ slot, and only gives 6+ FNP, and most of the units getting it are only T3 (so it's ignored a lot more frequently than FNP on MEQs). Not that it really matters, since I didn't say that the Ethereal's FNP bonus was just a gimmick.

Who cares if it takes up and HQ slot. You realize you get two of those, right? Were people maxing out HQ slots with the old Tau codex? And it does more for your army then any other HQ for the price you pay. All HQ's take up HQ slots. Its kind of there thing.

Also, you didn't say that the Ethereal's FNP was just a gimmick, although you did say you would never ever use it...which is just weird.

I guess reading isn't your strong point? How do you manage to turn "lots of FWs and the Ethereal's extra shot bonus is somewhere between 'legitimate' and 'gimmick'" into "Etherals suck"?

So sorry. So where exactly is the "gimmick" with the Ethereal?

Well, if you think the etherial is too bad, use Aun`va who ignore AP1, and can use 2 elemental abilities a round and rerolls all leadership stuff as long as he is alive.

100 points for him and 2 guards.

80 points base. Of course, what people love to overlook is the two free gun drones attached. In a kill point game, they're as useless as nipples on a breastplate, but otherwise how can you not love this? My friend commonly has them detach and float in front of the firewarriors as a speedbump against chargers. And free firepower. So let's take those 24 pts for the drones out. Now we're at 56 pts.

EXACTLY. This. So THIS. Excellent post all around Unreg1stered, but this is so true. You effectively get 3 units out of one FOC (FW+Fish+Drones). In 5 out of 6 games, you have no reason NOT to detach them.

ShadarLogoth wrote:
There's nothing arbitrary about it.

Of course it's arbitrary because you just arbitrarily declare that all factors are equal and apply to all weapons. For example, this means that you over-value cover saves if flamers are common because your arbitrary RPP value doesn't account for how often a defensive stat can be taken. Similarly it over-values the difference between T4 and T3 against weapons that wound both on a 2+. The fact that non-arbitrary numbers went into calculating RPP doesn't make it any less arbitrary.

/sigh There's nothing gimmicky about it. When you are trying to take out a crucial Banner/Heavy/Special weapon out of a squad (ie, models that don't have LoS), 20 precision shots has a pretty good chance of doing so. I don't what else to tell you.

Do the math. 20 snipers shooting at MEQs in the open have a 60% chance of getting a single un-saved precise shot. If the MEQs are in 5+ cover that number drops to only 53%. When it takes a unit of 20 to barely manage a 50/50 chance of success you're solidly into "gimmick" territory.

Who cares if it takes up and HQ slot. You realize you get two of those, right? Were people maxing out HQ slots with the old Tau codex? And it does more for your army then any other HQ for the price you pay. All HQ's take up HQ slots. Its kind of there thing.

The point is that Tau now have amazing HQs, where in the old codex they just had BS 4 crisis suits. Shadowsun hands out 2+ cover saves, Farsight has the shooting death star from hell, Fireblades give +1 shot at all times instead of a conditional +1, Darkstrider gives you outflanking scoring units, and even the generic crisis suit commander gives your choice of squad tank hunters, twin-linked weapons and ignores cover or gives you a blob of BS 5 marker drones. These are all powerful options that compete with the Ethereal.

So sorry. So where exactly is the "gimmick" with the Ethereal?

I didn't say that there was one. I said that the +1 shot bonus (the context where 'gimmick' was used by someone else) is somewhere between gimmick and legitimate. It's better than gimmick abilities like sniper rifles or pinning, but not as good as consistent powerful abilities.

For me, the single thing to make Firewarriors 100% more effective is to give them a Raider (really a tau equivalent). An open topped skimmer to shoot out of, and assault with grenades. All of a sudden, the pulse rifle matters more and their fragility matters less. They can also pick up some slack on anti-armor and more of a reason to use carbines (an assault weapon).

Too bad it'll never happen/take another 10 years to happen.

Do the math. 20 snipers shooting at MEQs in the open have a 60% chance of getting a single un-saved precise shot. If the MEQs are in 5+ cover that number drops to only 53%. When it takes a unit of 20 to barely manage a 50/50 chance of success you're solidly into "gimmick" territory.

So every other turn removing the most important model in a unit is a gimmick? Are lascannons gimmicks too? Any idea on the success rate of a single lascannon?


Fair enough on the rest of your post though. I agree Tau have good HQ options, but that certainly doesn't make the Ethereal any worse. I think every smart general will do Ethereal+Something else, just like DEldar do a Haemie slot+something else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Of course it's arbitrary because you just arbitrarily declare that all factors are equal and apply to all weapons. For example, this means that you over-value cover saves if flamers are common because your arbitrary RPP value doesn't account for how often a defensive stat can be taken. Similarly it over-values the difference between T4 and T3 against weapons that wound both on a 2+. The fact that non-arbitrary numbers went into calculating RPP doesn't make it any less arbitrary.

It's just a piece of the puzzle. To fully flesh it out you have to look at the entire resiliency matrix, ie the RPP values against all weapon types (or at least all the most common profiles). Once you have done this, you will realize that Fire Warriors are more resilient to some forms of fire power then other troops, and less resilient to others, but overall they will all fall into roughly the same neighborhood.

 Unreg1stered wrote:

9 pts for a firewarrior is overpriced? How the hell do you figure that? Let's compare it to a guardsman, which are regarded as amazing troops for their cost.

Oh?! I can't wait to count the ways this will be wrong.

It is a big deal though. These two stats make it so non cc oriented troops have a significant bonus to firewarriors. IG can safely assault Firewarriors knowing they will destroy them, instead of just trying to tarpit them. How is this not an advantage in the IG's favor? Can we just just do this with everything? Will a Terminator's T4 be negligible to a FW's T3 simply because most weapons with AP2 will wound on a 2+ as well?

You mean IG can assault a unit with defensive grenades and a superior armor save and weather the storm of an entire armies worth of Overwatch, and "they will destroy them?" Do you have any idea how dead ass wrong that is?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

My second favorite tired argument. How much are veterans with 4+, better stat line, and better weapon options? The problem isn't the 4+, but rather the unit's small size and generally poor leadership. The 4+ save won't save enough models in a 12 man T3 unit to prevent morale tests, and their leadership buff is expensive at 19points for one sarge.

Or a 50 point Ethereal that buffs the entire army. Also, you pay 10 points for the Sarge, not 19. You've already paid the price for his Firewarrior stats and weapon. It is, technically, a 19 point model before upgrades (more gears), but that distinction is purely academic.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The +1 to cover saves is almost negligible since a unit can still be within charge range and shoot at the unit, if the unit even shoots at them before charging. Free defensive grenades make them only marginally more survivable since the base statline is so poor that they will generally always lose combat which is then subtracted from a base7 (I'm assuming the sarge either got killed in challenge or declined, either way it's ignored). If the unit fails, which is highly probable, then the I2 check to get away comes into to play and even guardsmen will have a better odd to overrun them. The defensive grenades may have just been given to a flyer for all the good it would do.

If there was only some way to make them Leadership 10 and stubborn to make everything you just said untrue. Hmmm. Let me check the codex. I'm sure I'll find it somewhere.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

My favorite argument! I love how you completely pretend the IG don't have heavy weapon and special weapon teams like crazy. Seriously this is the point that bothers me the most, because you're assuming IG are only there for lasguns which makes me think you run them like that. Nice try, but you missed the point so hard you may as well be comparing IG to Chaos Spawn in this thread for all the good it does.

So what? Those Heavies and Specials cost points, and up the cost of the IG squad, making them inherently less resilient. Fire Warriors are really 9 points/model, not lets pretend 6 points/model but really more because you'r upgrading gak. Once and IG squad loses it's Heavies/Specials it's basically a scoring unit and nothing else. Fire Warriors aren't dependent on one or two models to do meaningful damage.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the problem is that 6" really restricts your army and really discourages spreading your units out. Units that are particularly vulnerable to templates. I will say the ability is nice, when utilized right. But it still isn't enough to really make the Firewarriors a tough troop base.

LOL. Supporting fire, when combined with competent placement, it's absolutely deadly. Sorry. And spreading your units out makes supporting fire better, not worse, you just have to keep one gimp within 6" of the other gimps. Pia Plates aren't 6" wide, and templates aren't really that big of a deal when they are hitting 1 or 2 dudes from two different units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

2 drones are laughably easy to kill for a speed bump and since they no longer deny objectives they are better suited at just staying on the tank for survivability. But I love how you just randomly subtract the points from it. Why not subtract the cost of the heavy bolter and multi-laser from the Chimera? Pretending the drones are a free purchase along with the tank is silly, just because you can produce a single unit of 2 gun drones that... well... they can't join any other unit, they can't go for objectives, and it's laughably easy to kill off. So let's just go ahead and not randomly change the numbers because we feel like it. 80 points base, thanks for trying though.

Those drones will be a hundred times more useful to the army detached then attached. The fact that you don't realize that says a lot about your tactical acumen. You are going to waist a whole units worth of firepower to kill a couple dinky drones? Awesome. Way to play directly into my hands.

Ethereals are amazing. Anyone who can't see that is blind. Farsight is ok and Shadowsun is good but neither force multiply the way Ethereals do.

20 sniper Kroot might not ensure a model dies, but you arent limited to 20. Also vs. non Marines your chance of sniping increases quite a bit. Def. has its uses vs Xenos who have become more popular since 6th started.

I do believe FW are slightly overcosted. I'd like to have seen 8 pts a piece. But 9 isn't bad either. A mix of FW and Kroot can be sufficient to run pure Tau, but I wouldn't leave home without Ethereals. At times I'd consider two.

Having a high point cost makes it hard to toss those "nice" upgrades onto it. 15 points for +1 cover save is somewhat high and it's arguably the best. This alone brings it up to 95 points and it won't be hard to get over a hundred points with just a few upgrades. How much would you expect from a transport with basically 18" heavy bolter and one twin-linked 18" heavy bolter? But again, you're missing the key issue that the devilfish doesn't compliment the troops. It makes the unit ineffective as long as it's in the transport, meaning that an expensive unit with a long range gun is not on the table firing and making it more of an added tax to your army. The Chimera compliments troops with special weapons. The Rhino compliments units with special weapons. The Ghost Ark compliments units with solid unit shooting. How hard is this to understand? It does what it's supposed to very well? How? Why would I spend points on the devilfish when I could just bring more Firewarriors and they would be more survivable. I could just put them in a bastion for a better cost.

Um, your Fire Warriors have an effective 36" threat range, they don't need the Fish to augment that. What do they need? A fast durable skimmer to help them cap objectives late game. What does the army need? Mobile, hard to bring down, LOS/Cover Walls to JSJ behind, and a extra fodder to throw in the way of CC units. What does a Devilfish bring? All of those things.

I'm not saying Fish are amazing, or a must take, but they do a lot more for the army then just transport FWs and shoot burst cannons. If your appraisal stops there, your appraisal is basically meaningless.

Why do you think using Ethereals is not attractive?

Although he is weakest among almost ICs in 40K with his statline and gives extra VP when dead, IMO he is still worth to take.

Ethereal is most cheap HQ choice in the codex, and buffs all units within 12" of him, makes all units within 12" ld 10 in default.

When you take Ethereal, it means you focus on footslogging forces like FWs and Pathfinders, and ethereal boosts their effectiveness than any other HQs.
While other HQs like tau commander, fireblade, and darkstrider can benefits only 1 unit(not in case of Shadowsun, she can give cover to 1 unit and re-roll 1 to 1 unit) , ethereal boosts all of units within 12", at least half of your FWs and PFs in most cases.
Taking ethereal when you focus on Seven Samurais of Farsight or suits with shadowsun will be less fancy, but IMO still have its worth to take him when you going to field at least 3 units in your deployment zone.

Do you feel 6+ FnP is just a gimmick? How about when It gives 6+ FnP two Riptides? 5+ FnP of 2 Riptides are already 70 pts and takes up each a support system of them.
6+ FnP also benefits many of FWs and PFs, they are tend to take fires from small arms, rather than big guns stronger than S6.
You can roll to save them with even heavy flamethrower, although many of them are cannot be saved.


Focusing on the main theme of the thread, I do not agree with FWs are overpriced.

Maybe FWs are not the best statline in their points but FWs are designed to boost their effectiveness with rest of army, while devilfishes are not.

FWs can improve their cons by taking several factors during list building, while they have great firepower than any other troops in 40k.

First, low Ld can be improved by taking ethereal. Some people insist ethereals are not good as other choices but as above I do think taking ethereal is worth it. Taking a ethereal is much better than taking shas'uis with its 2+ roll of LoS. Although there is cases taking ethereal make FWs more vulnerable than taking Shas'uis like when hit by Psychic Shrike or Malanti of Doom, it happens scarcely.

Second, 4+ armor can be improved by taking ADL.
although AP4 barrage or Ignore cover can kill FWs straight on 2+ on most cases, peoples do not widely using AP4 barrage or Ignore cover weapons in tournament list because of their ineffectiveness against MEq, at least they may include some of the weapon but they will not focus on dealing with 4+ sv rather than dealing with 3+sv unless your local meta is no marines at all or all termies.
Also, T3 is still weak but 6+ FnP can be given. might not very helpful, but it will save about 1 more model against salvo of bolters.
If you like math, here is proof, 10 marines shoot rapid fires then 4.44 of your fire warriors will fail their save and 0.74 among your men will stand up and fight again.

Third, I do not think their lack of ability to deal with big target is big problem.
That is why other slots like Elite, Fast Attack and Heavy exists which abundant with Tau, and in return of loss of their big gun they have S5 long ranged rapid firing guns, superior than any other troops. Also its gun makes them manages to deal with light vehicle up to AV 11 or T8 creatures.
And versatile troops sounds good, but IMO in most cases they are always waste some of their firepower. When fire against infantries they waste big guns and when fired against big targets they waste their rapid fire weapons.

You mean IG can assault a unit with defensive grenades and a superior armor save and weather the storm of an entire armies worth of Overwatch, and "they will destroy them?" Do you have any idea how dead ass wrong that is?

Ignoring that the enemy sarge can more than likely carry a power weapon and would win a challenge, ignoring that the guard would go first, pretending that an entire army would be able to fire overwatch instead of maybe a few lucky wounds, ignoring that IG have much larger squad size and therefore able to take a few overwatch wounds. Is this a wrong off, because I think you'd win. IG hit more often, and hit first while FW will only really deal wounds in overwatch which will not aid in combat resolution. How's about we look at it like this. IG can charge firewarriors and have the odds in their favor of winning the assault alone, despite the better save of the firewarriors. Firewarriors have nothing they could really charge against and hope to reliably win. Is this easy enough to understand?

Or a 50 point Ethereal that buffs the entire army. Also, you pay 10 points for the Sarge, not 19. You've already paid the price for his Firewarrior stats and weapon. It is, technically, a 19 point model before upgrades (more gears), but that distinction is purely academic.

So then 10 points for +1 leadership is good? What about the ethereal? So all your army is within a 12" bubble? How will you defend your objectives and move forward while staying within 12"?

If there was only some way to make them Leadership 10 and stubborn to make everything you just said untrue. Hmmm. Let me check the codex. I'm sure I'll find it somewhere.

In a slot that's very competitive? I'm sure you will. So Firewarriors need a vulnerable HQ and Pathfinders to make the unit up to standard. That's the defense? Is that why Marines are good? Is every squad only good when they have an HQ attached and a fast attack unit to buff their shooting? Also why just stubborn? The unit won't be much of a tarpit really for long and it just makes the unit survive until the end of your turn, which benefits the enemy more.

So what? Those Heavies and Specials cost points, and up the cost of the IG squad, making them inherently less resilient. Fire Warriors are really 9 points/model, not lets pretend 6 points/model but really more because you'r upgrading gak. Once and IG squad loses it's Heavies/Specials it's basically a scoring unit and nothing else. Fire Warriors aren't dependent on one or two models to do meaningful damage.

But the IG squad is cheap. So the addition of heavy and special weapons isn't that much of a problem. But you also get special and heavy weapons throughout the army, while it's completely devoid from the troops of Tau and most FA is dedicated to assisting other units.

LOL. Supporting fire, when combined with competent placement, it's absolutely deadly. Sorry. And spreading your units out makes supporting fire better, not worse, you just have to keep one gimp within 6" of the other gimps. Pia Plates aren't 6" wide, and templates aren't really that big of a deal when they are hitting 1 or 2 dudes from two different units.

1/6 chance to hit, with 2/3 chance to wound, with 2/3 chance to save against the standard unit is deadly? You could spread your unit out and make a line of 12 firewarriors, but that still means only a few units will be able to assist and crisis suits will only assist with one weapon thanks to the wording of the multi-tracker. You could argue that markerlights will assist in overwatch, which is still 1/6 chance to hit and that will only slightly increase the chances of hitting in overwatch for another unit. But again, I'm not saying it's bad, just not really as game changing as some people assume it is. The problem is that it still encourages armies to be grouped up and running gunlines to make the most of it while advancing units will benefit less from it. I digress however and concede that it is a nice addition and certainly helps justify bringing firewarriors, provided you're getting assaulted. However if the assault doesn't happen, which is entirely in the enemy's control, then it's a rather useless ability for me.

SF is nice, I definitely wouldn't build around it, but it has done some really nice things for me in playtesting. Generally my backlines do stay within 12" of the Ethereal and it hardly gimps me as I use my allied Orks to push the midfield objectives (I tend to favor a 5x5 styled objective set-up, like NOVA) so being able to push midfield is more important to me than being able to reach enemy deployment.

This was my basic troop set up with fast attack choice from the last codex, which I go up or down due to point size of army list. I also use a great deal of drones in my army list

48 fire warriors 4 squads in Troops = 10x48 = 480 points
24 drones 8 models in 3 FA choices = 12x24 = 288 points total = 768

New Codex

48 fire warriors 4 squads in Troops = 9x48 = 432 points
24 drones 8 models in 3 FA choices = 14x24 = 336 points total = 768

However if you add 2 drones to per FW squad (which I do) then the difference is a +2 points per Drone which means that the FW +2 Drones is more 4 points more expensive in cost, per squad in the new codex than the old.

If they would have kept the drone cost down then it could have made up for some of the short comings of the Kroot.

I'll stand by my other posts concerning this new codex. 3 out of 5 stars I give because the Tau makes a great Ally detachment. The rip tide does not bother me one bit. The nerfing of vehicles does. The Space pope not an IC, Aun`shi being a meh IC now. Playing static lines and hiding around large pieces of terrain (ADL lines as well) gets rather boring after awhile.

The Tau had so much potential but these little nerfs brings the whole army down. Fire Warriors and a couple of other units hides those overall nerfs within this codex. But for what they do and what you need to fight MEQ's they are over priced.

Death by a thousand cuts.

I think being able to fire Str. 5 at ~36" range is pretty nice. Allows FW to be pretty nice backfield scorers that can contribute in a pinch.

Definitely not pushing as one of the best Troops around but I think that they are worth taking in almost any Tau list.

ShadarLogoth wrote:

Um, your Fire Warriors have an effective 36" threat range, they don't need the Fish to augment that.

I know. That's why it hurts them to be inside the fish, because it takes away their shooting. Marines and other units that get special weapons often get fire points they can shot those nice special weapons from and still get to be useful.

What do they need? A fast durable skimmer to help them cap objectives late game.

Can we throw cost effective in there? Because the skimmer could do all that and cost 350 points and it would still be fine by your standard.

What does the army need? Mobile, hard to bring down, LOS/Cover Walls to JSJ behind, and a extra fodder to throw in the way of CC units.

Hard to bring down is debatable since they are so points heavy they can't be spammed like a rhino wall. I don't see how mobile they are, since the length of the body actually makes them hard to maneuver around especially if they try to clear any intervening terrain. But durable, so I'm assuming you're talking about a disruption pod and since it's mobile sensor spine equpped fish. That's 100 points! And it moves just as fast as a rhino while the rhino has nearly the same carrying capacity but is easier to hide. Cover walls for JSJ troops? Because no other army can do the turtle defense, and far cheaper? Because somehow terrain is not a part of the game and we need to pay 80 points for it's equivalent? What absurd claims.

What does a Devilfish bring? All of those things.

Yeah, if you all of those things plus a price tag and a transport that is not compatible with it's troops is "all of those things", but whatever.

I'm not saying Fish are amazing, or a must take, but they do a lot more for the army then just transport FWs and shoot burst cannons. If your appraisal stops there, your appraisal is basically meaningless.

Oh my... I think you just broke my brain. You just threw that out there and didn't even bother trying to explain it. I take it that you just threw that out there and no matter what anyone said in response you'll just make some silly argument about how we are too blind to use a transport right. Well, I'm not buying it. Mobile terrain? Anything works for that, so it's nothing the devilfish has special. Keeping a scoring unit alive? Keeping them in reserves and hiding them is far more cost effective. Moving units to claim back field objectives? Firewarriors are just fine on foot for the points it saves and Kroot can infiltrate. But I'm sure you'll make the comment that I'm missing some deep insight that you seem to have.

I think he (Shadar) means you can use Devilfish for things such as movement blocking and screening, which can be very effective for an army that primarily relies on shooting to do its lifting. I will say that I believe Piranha can do this much better and bring some nice shooting as well.

I, uh. I'm out. I can only talk to a brick wall for so long. Have fun losing games with your 2x6 Fire warrior squads dude. Just stubbornly stick to the extremely restricted tactics you know and don't open your mind to effective possibles if it makes you feel better about yourself, I guess.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LValx wrote:
I think he (Shadar) means you can use Devilfish for things such as movement blocking and screening, which can be very effective for an army that primarily relies on shooting to do its lifting. I will say that I believe Piranha can do this much better and bring some nice shooting as well.

Very fair point. You lose the transporting capability, but you trade it for more bodies and better shooting. Of course, you have to have the FA slot open as well.

So supporting fire is pretty much the "Close Order Drill" Doctrine from 4th ed IG?

ShadarLogoth wrote:
I, uh. I'm out. I can only talk to a brick wall for so long. Have fun losing games with your 2x6 Fire warrior squads dude. Just stubbornly stick to the extremely restricted tactics you know and don't open your mind to effective possibles if it makes you feel better about yourself, I guess.

You do realize that Tau can take allies, right? On top of the best objective-clearing ability in the game? Taking minimum Fire Warriors really isn't a liability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShadarLogoth wrote:
So every other turn removing the most important model in a unit is a gimmick? Are lascannons gimmicks too? Any idea on the success rate of a single lascannon?

It's not every other turn. With 20 snipers shooting for two turns you still only have an 85% chance of success (78% if they're in 5+ cover). So, after two turns you pretty much snipe something on a 2+, but after two turns of fire with a conventional unit you've probably just killed the entire target unit anyway. This makes sniping a gimmick.

Also, who cares about single lascannons? Nobody takes just one lascannon.

It's just a piece of the puzzle. To fully flesh it out you have to look at the entire resiliency matrix, ie the RPP values against all weapon types (or at least all the most common profiles). Once you have done this, you will realize that Fire Warriors are more resilient to some forms of fire power then other troops, and less resilient to others, but overall they will all fall into roughly the same neighborhood.

It's still an arbitrary value since you're combining several similar factors with your choice of weight for each of them (even if it's just all = 1). It might give some useful insight into how a unit works, but you can't just quote RPP values and declare that they're a final answer in the way that, say, average MEQ kills per turn is a final answer.

To start with, I'm ignoring the chunk of the discussion focusing on assault and defense against assault. Mobility and firepower have always seemed more effective than mobility and assault-based armies, and shock of shocks, Tau are going to suffer against good, shooty armies, so that assault point is almost moot. I do disagree with the statement that Firewarriors are vulnerable to assault from basic, non-assault troops like IG...overwatch, grenades, and most importantly +4 armor makes that fight a stalemate.

ShadarLogoth wrote:

Stop saying this. It is dead ass wrong. Learn how to calculate RPP. FW, and especially Kroot, are in the same neighborhood of resiliency per point as every single other troop in the game.

This is easy to compute, but harder to apply to games, because a lot depends on what role you have the troop in question filling, enemy movement and weapons, etc. I do like the idea of a couple kroot squads in cover guarding near objectives more than firewarriors, although there is risk from things that ignore cover.

A squad of firewarriors and a devilfish is a bigger point investment, so it hurts more to dedicate them to just moving and seizing an objective.

Wait, why do they have to be spending the whole game in the Fish? You realize they can stay on the gun line and pewpew and only jump in the Fish late game to cap objectives right? You realize that the Fish is more resilient, and maneuverable, and therefore better at the role of getting a unit into position to take an objective late game then the Chimera is right? You realize that the Fire Warriors are just as, if not more resilient to shooting the the IG you are comparing them to right?

Or did you not realize any of those things? Which is cool. It's true though. So embrace it, I guess?

What kind of opponents do you play? The newbs with 40 tactical marines walking across the board towards your line? There's no way I'm going to get within range of your static firebase with anything it can hurt (or I care about losing), so I'll plink at range or target your actual few dangerous units for the first few turns. You can certainly walk out of cover to get in range, but T3 +4, even at medium range, is too squishy to be out in the open, especially with model cost so high that you're not spamming 20+ size units like orks (that, and 12 model cap). Plus, you've got a 80-95 point devilfish sitting next to the squad waiting? That's an effective use of that many points? If they're planning to move forward eventually, I assume they have a squad leader, as they'll be away from the ethereal?

Again, using IG as the comparison, for the about the same price as 12 firewarriors, squad leader and devilfish, I can get:
2 squads with autocannons
platoon command with 1 flamer
chimera
(plus, with a handful of points, I can make it much more effective by adding more flamers or special weapons).

Now I have several mid-strength guns (autocannons and multilaser, maybe a heavy bolter) that have greater range and are much harder to hide from. As the firewarriors benefit from an ethereal, the troops benefit from a command squad...not as reliably, but with useful, versatile benefits. The troops are less armored, but the near objective campers hide in cover (and have several more wounds) while the small platoon command is safe from small arms in the chimera, and can use it as cover once it gets to an objective. As guardsmen die, the majority of the squad's killing power (autocannons) function fine, while firewarriors lose a greater proportion of their firepower with every casualty. Everything has something to do every turn and contributes to the fight, except possibly the platoon command, which is 35 points invested in moving towards objectives and flaming anything that presents itself.

Now, every codex's troops will have different things they're good at, whether a specific role or skill as generalists. Orks are great, with very cheap grots to hold close objectives, freeing more points for boyz squads to advance and fight. There is risk, but I prefer not to have a large squad of boyz in the back field waiting all game on objective. Firewarriors fill the least important role in the game: efficiently killing light infantry and threatening light armor, and even the first part of that is suspect as kroot are about as good, point-efficiency-wise, at killing troops. They aren't tough enough (numbers-wise, T or armor, cover/stealth, etc) to hold near objectives, they are expensive and soft for advancing to take objectives, they are short-ranged and underpowered for a firebase...they don't even really sacrifice themselves to affect enemy deployment or movement like, say melta/plasma biker squads would.

But please, prove me wrong with your tournament batreps with large firewarrior firebases.

Another thing people seem to completely ignore about the Fish is it is relatively resilient mobile LOS/Cover. Anybody think an army filled with JSJ units and things like Aun'va might be able to take advantage of putting an AV12 3+ Cover Wall in front of them? Anybody? Am I really having to point this out to people? I spend 20 points more on a GA that is almost exactly as resilient as the Fish just to use it for that purpose and repairing Warriors.

Wait, I thought the devilfish sat by your firewarrior squads while they pew-pewed? How many of these things are you bringing to a fight? Say, at 1850 points? They're big, but even with the lowest flying stands, it could be tough to hide many suits behind devilfish completely. Maybe my lack of vision is to blame, but I can't envision how a Tau list is constructed and generally operates to be successful against a wide variety of opponents.

I completely disagree. In a few months good players will realize that the sum of the Tau parts put their Troops equal to or above other troops, and will build their armies accordingly. Meanwhile, people stuck in the mindsets of 5th edition will continue to field crappy lists with 2x6 Fire Warriors, and rage quit because "their new codex sucks."

Also, please define "gimmick" for me. Is a Librarian a "gimmick"? Is a Haemonculus a "gimmick"? How about a Blood Priest? Because...the mechanics of the Ethereal are just as ..."gimmicky" as any of those other HQs (or elites for the BP), which just so happen to all be considered must takes for their respective army. I always love it when people try to use the word gimmick to somehow arbitrarily draw an imaginary line between legitimate game mechanics and what they perceive as inferior options.

Anytime you have the "sum of parts" argument, you need to be careful. Sometimes it works well, as the various parts do their roles well, and the army functions effectively. The problem with Tau appears to be the synergy depends on several lynchpins, and if those are knocked out, the army suffers greatly. Markerlights were a "gimmick" in the last edition...expensive system to establish, and while helpful, not really worth the points. Plus, markerlights were clumped into certain units (pathfinders), so if they were potentially going to be a problem, and enemy could kill a few GEQs in the woods at under 36". The new codex is slightly better in this regard, but I think ultimately spending points on markerlights to make existing guns more effective isn't going to be as efficient as other armies' just taking more guns.

The ethereal is along the same lines...the leadership bubble is great, but the shooting boost is for small arms, which, again, is the least important in the game, and it comes at the cost of potential suits with special/heavy weapons.

Immortals don't spam S5? The only other reason that other armies don't spam S5 is because they can't bring entire troop selections with it (or have to pay a hefty price for it, GK). 9 Points for a 30" Rapid fire S5 is "expensive"? ...I, just...I don't even know how to respond to that. Marines must absolutely suck ass then, having to pay 13 to 15 points for a gakky ass Bolter.

I could have sworn that Necron guns had other special rules, like always glancing on a "6". That makes a huge difference. Now the unit can threaten any unit on the board, and it is very tough to kill. Firewarriors have neither ability.

I think a good Tau list can mask the "weaknesses" of Fire Warriors by presenting more pressing targets to focus on. If you spend all game ignoring Broadsides/Riptides/etc., they will end up doing a large amount of damage.

I do agree that FW will have a difficult time advancing to take objectives, but I also think using them in such a manner is a bad idea. If you need to use a unit for pushing up the field it should be Kroot. They do pretty well at camping objectives because they can GTG for a great save. Of course, certain units can ignore cover saves, but if they are focusing down Kroot the rest of your army should be in decent shape.

I find it nice to have a backfield scoring unit that can lend a hand in shooting due to having 30" range guns.

Also, BS3 isn't terrible. I keep seeing people act as though BS3 is so bad that it cannot be relied upon and that due to such low BS, Markerlights are absolutely necessary to function. I don't agree with this at all. Broadsides for example, function well without Markerlights as BS3 TL is actually better than BS4. If you army is built around Broadsides as supporting fire I really don't see why you MUST have ML support in order for them to function. I think it is perfectly viable to build Tau armies that make no use of MLs and instead bring extra firepower to bear.

In my experience, i've spent a lot of time with my Pathfinders going to ground to keep them alive and thus not being able to make full use of my Markers and yet i've still had plenty of success. I think that believing that MLs are the only way to build a good force is a bit narrow-minded and will lead a lot of players to building weaker armies by taking LESS guns than needed and focusing too heavily on support options.

I don't understand how someone can say small arms are the "least important" in the game.

I ask you this: have you seen lists that have been winning large events in the US? Many of them rely heavily on large amounts of Infantry because 6th has upped the importance of capturing and holding objectives. This change in how people list-build has made, IMO, infantry small arms one of the most important weapon types in the game.

For example, Tony Kopach, the wunderkid is now playing this monstrosity:
2 Rune Priests
Primaris Psyker
2x PCS (nude)
2x 50 Guard blob with Power Axes and no additional upgrades
5 GH
2x Manticore
3x Vendetta

Against such a list it is extremely important to have lots and lots of Str. 4-6 in order to be able to focus down those large blobs that will move to midfield in order to capture what is often the most important objective in a game (middle). Hell, his army does most of it's heavy lifting with Str.3 Lasguns. How can you say that it is the least important type of weaponry then? Check out Andrew Gonyo's GK/IG builds. Very similar. Large focus on Storm Bolters and Lasguns because both of those guns, in large numbers, do a very good job of stacking wounds on infantry (IMO, the name of the game currently).

I didn't say having light anti-infantry WASN'T important...every successful army has to be able to deal with hordes. I just said it was the least important of the army requirements, after addressing things like grabbing and holding objectives, dealing with fliers, dealing with light armor spam, etc.

In the example list above, several units have multiple roles. You've got a couple very cheap scoring units (PCS) to go in the vendettas to grab distant objectives (I assume, they could also run along and do Move Move Move and FRFSRF). The large blobs threaten a very wide range of units, and serve roles of both grabbing objectives and killing enemy units.

The manticores also address multiple threats, both armor and infantry.

What do firewarriors do? They're an expensive, limited-role unit. Against the list above, they get nuked by the manticores (possibly killing the ethereal, as it's all indirect and can snipe him) and are quickly a non-factor.

I realize infantry are becoming a larger factor in games than they were in 5th edition, but any weapon can act in an anti--personnel role, even if excessive/inefficient for the role. Not every weapon can go from hurting troops to hurting vehicles or monstrous creatures.

Str.5 is particularly efficient at killing infantry and it can threaten up to T8 monsters which can be helpful. It also wounds T6 on a 5+ which is nice. So I do believe that FW can deal with a nice variety of things, more than a blob outfitted with all Lasguns can. Of course the blob is bigger, but it also costs quite a bit more (consider the HQs attached, etc).

Anyway, if a Tau list were to play that list, they could kill Manticores with weight of fire and also have things like SMS to deal with the blob. It doesn't hurt that your standard gun wounds the guardsmen on a 2 and that you can buff your shooting in both BS and number of shots.

I'd disagree that dealing with flyers and light armor spam is more important than dealing with infantry. I think 6th ed. Tourney results will back that up. Infantry heavy armies are the ones winning, so anti-infantry firepower takes precedence over anti-Mech. At the first 6th ED. NOVA I only saw one flyer heavy army in the top 8 and that was Neil Gilstrap, who afterwards switched the army up quite a bit. I played vs two Necron air forces and easily beat both because neither had enough firepower or ground presence to capture more objectives than I.

IMO, 6th favors infantry-heavy armies and favors those armies that can take out infantry efficiently. FW aren't great troops but they can do well and you've got to take either them or Kroot, so you make what you can of it.

If anyone is interested:

Lootas will wound Tau at 48" at an average rate of 5/9 or 5pts of wounded damage, ignore armor, cover saves will vary.

At 30-18.1" FW's will wound Lootas at an average of 1/3 or 5 pts wounded damage, ignore armor, vary cover save.

At less than 18 (after movement even) 2/3 or 10 points wounded.

Shootas will wound Tau at 18" at 4/9 or 4 pts per wound but not ignore armor.

At 18" tau will wound, and ignore armor, at 2/3 or 4 pts per wound, cover saves will vary.

So compared to the Orks at least for shooting wounding purposes, not factoring in cover saves, FW's are priced EXACTLY the same as the Orks 2 most taken (overwhelmingly) units.

Please tell me that Shootas and Lootas are OVERCOSTED, and convince GW while you're at it.

And they all have Ld base of 7.

Yes, I setup very specific conditions but not horribly so. Realistic IMHO.

Fire warriors cost 9 points, DE warriors cost 9 points
DE warriors have higher initiative, fleet, WS, BS, Ld and a splinter rifle
Fire warriors have grenades, a 4+ save, and a pulse rifle.

the pulse rifle has +6" range and is better against armor, T2,3,4
the splinter rifle is better at T6, 7, 8.
They are even at T5, although even there the pulse rifle has +6" range.
With the BS adjustment, the firewarrior is better at shooting T3 and AV10, 11.
With the BS adjustment, the DE warrior is better at shooting T5+
Both are equal at killing T4 assuming range is not an issue.
DE are better in assault, but without grenades they still suck pretty hard.

The extra WS and fleet are not much use for the DE
The 4+ save is pretty great for Tau.

Comparing those two I would say the Fire warrior certainly isnt under priced

There's lots of AP 5 shots thrown around by troops. I'd say the 4+ armor is pretty nice compared to the 5+ of the DE warrior. The look DE players get when I start lobbing the incindiary whirlwind rounds is priceless. Especially from behind a building or something.

 PipeAlley wrote:
If anyone is interested:

Lootas will wound Tau at 48" at an average rate of 5/9 or 5pts of wounded damage, ignore armor, cover saves will vary.

At 30-18.1" FW's will wound Lootas at an average of 1/3 or 5 pts wounded damage, ignore armor, vary cover save.

At less than 18 (after movement even) 2/3 or 10 points wounded.

Shootas will wound Tau at 18" at 4/9 or 4 pts per wound but not ignore armor.

At 18" tau will wound, and ignore armor, at 2/3 or 4 pts per wound, cover saves will vary.

So compared to the Orks at least for shooting wounding purposes, not factoring in cover saves, FW's are priced EXACTLY the same as the Orks 2 most taken (overwhelmingly) units.

Please tell me that Shootas and Lootas are OVERCOSTED, and convince GW while you're at it.

And they all have Ld base of 7.

Yes, I setup very specific conditions but not horribly so. Realistic IMHO.

Comparing them with lootas isn't fair, because the lootas job does not include staying alive long enough to be scoring in round six. Likewise, the boy's have the ablative capacity to do it without help.

I don't think FW's are overcosted, but this comparison is weak.