With the release of SM, eldar, necrons. I for sure thought tau were going to get turned up to 11, but so far the units that have been leaked are very subpar.
JinxDragon wrote: I approve of the less then over-powered nature of the leaks we have seen, as Game Workshop needs to work on their 'power creep' problem anyway.
that's what I mean, like it's fine to release normal stuff that's not OP and what not, but if you already have army's that are OP why would you release something not as good. Tau were already really good and were able to keep up with the current meta, now they just moved down the ladder.
You know Tau are one of the biggest armys to rely on synergy right? Also we havent seen the book thus have no idea what formations and squadron bonuses theyll get.
Dont be such a funpire. Your freinds will secretly hate you less.
Do you understand how 'power creep' works, Dman137? What you are suggesting, granting over-powered things to ensure a Faction remains over-powered, is the exact problem!
It's hard to see an inkling of a return to some sort of semblance of sanity as disappointing. It's not even that these things are particularly bad, they're just not massively overpowered. It's hard to take complaints about that particularly seriously. Nor should it be unexpected if it holds true, as GW appears to change design philosophy every 12-18 months.
That said, we still don't know too much about the book as a whole, nothing about wargear changes, other unit changes, detachments, formations, etc, and Tau units typically have rarely been "omg broken" on their own in most cases, it's historically been in concert with other units.
JinxDragon wrote: Do you understand how 'power creep' works, Dman137?
What you are suggesting, granting over-powered things to ensure a Faction remains over-powered, is the exact problem!
yeah release good units, so they can keep up with all the other good armys
lonestarr777 wrote: You know Tau are one of the biggest armys to rely on synergy right? Also we havent seen the book thus have no idea what formations and squadron bonuses theyll get.
Dont be such a goob. Your freinds will secretly hate you less.
Fixed for you! Haters in full force! xD
No, but Dman137 does have a point. There is no power-creep from the new kits released, aside the Ta'unar, that is a point and click unit.
But then, the Tau have always been about synergy in nature. I'll reserve judgment when the Codex comes out, but basically my Tau friend is collecting SW at the minute and nothing about the up-coming releases (FW aside) makes him want to stop collecting TWC.
I have to listen to this same 'boo hoo all MY army suck, EVERYONE ELSE is OP, boo hoo hoo' in my gaming group all the time.
My point is youre basing all this on three leaked units in a vaccume. Would I rather the the Stormsurge could wreck face solo like a wraithknight? Duh. Do I think it cant wreck face at all? Feth no, that thing is going to be delightfully destructive with proper support.
Sure the breachers are meh by their lonesome. Use them as a screen and supoorting fire for your gunline might be a touch more scary with as close as people wanna get before the charge.
You seem connvinced that because we havent seen a wraithknight or skyhammer yet the entire books going to suck. Give it tme buttercup.
JinxDragon wrote: Do you understand how 'power creep' works, Dman137?
What you are suggesting, granting over-powered things to ensure a Faction remains over-powered, is the exact problem!
yeah release good units, so they can keep up with all the other good armys
Don't Tau have tons of good units? Why can't Orks get anything good? Why can't anyone love me...
Dman137, The Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit itself. We do not need over-powered Units being given to more powerful Factions, as that is creating the creep in the first place!
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
But then he won't be able to beat everyone easily using his SCAT bike spam and other OP gak and will start complaining that the Eldar are under powered.
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
But then he won't be able to beat everyone easily using his SCAT bike spam and other OP gak and will start complaining that the Eldar are under powered.
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
While I agree with this sentiment in theory, you would be hard pressed to find many people who actually see Tau as "low-tier".
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
But then he won't be able to beat everyone easily using his SCAT bike spam and other OP gak and will start complaining that the Eldar are under powered.
your clearly helpless, not to meantion a FAAC player, with that said. GW making tau bad just means more people will complain about the other top tier army's, you want to Balance the game then bring all codexs up to eldar and necron level.
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
While I agree with this sentiment in theory, you would be hard pressed to find many people who actually see Tau as "low-tier".
if what has been leaked is any indication of what's to come, then you can be sure that tau will be at the bottom holding hands with harlequins
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
But then he won't be able to beat everyone easily using his SCAT bike spam and other OP gak and will start complaining that the Eldar are under powered.
your clearly helpless, not to meantion a FAAC player, with that said. GW making tau bad just means more people will complain about the other top tier army's, you want to Balance the game then bring all codexs up to eldar and necron level.
Or bring all codexes down to a reasonable level. Eldar and to an extent Necrons should not be the baseline for future armies, because that just leaves some armies even further in the dust as they wait to be brought up to the 'standard' power level, without even the guarantee they will be, seeing how arbitrarily GW handle the power levels.
Honestly I'm OK with tau being "subpar". If they just remain at their upper-mid tier, I'll be fine. I don't want my army to be overpowered, and they more balanced armies the better. Besides, I've had enough of people complaining about "tau are OP", especially nowadays where they are decent, but anything but OP.
And honestly, only the stormsurge is really disappointing to me, as it does something that tau already do in spades, anti-horde/ 5,5 shooting. I'm loving the ghostkeel, and it's too early to tell with breachers (their viability is really going to depend on the Devilfish).
JinxDragon wrote: Do you understand how 'power creep' works, Dman137?
What you are suggesting, granting over-powered things to ensure a Faction remains over-powered, is the exact problem!
yeah release good units, so they can keep up with all the other good armys
Don't Tau have tons of good units? Why can't Orks get anything good? Why can't anyone love me...
Psh, before GW gives any more attention to dirty xenos or traitors, they will obviously grace the fighting men of their beloved imperium with the newly discovered STC for S8, rending, shred, lasguns, and Leman Russ D-stroyers.
JinxDragon wrote: Dman137,
Which Faction the Unit is being released for matters more then the 'power level' of the Unit in question.
Already powerful Factions do not need even more powerful Units, bring the low-tier factions up to par first!
But then he won't be able to beat everyone easily using his SCAT bike spam and other OP gak and will start complaining that the Eldar are under powered.
your clearly helpless, not to meantion a FAAC player, with that said. GW making tau bad just means more people will complain about the other top tier army's, you want to Balance the game then bring all codexs up to eldar and necron level.
Or bring all codexes down to a reasonable level. Eldar and to an extent Necrons should not be the baseline for future armies, because that just leaves some armies even further in the dust as they wait to be brought up to the 'standard' power level, without even the guarantee they will be, seeing how arbitrarily GW handle the power levels.
GW has made it clear that they don't care what we all think, they know that rules sell models (the more powerful the better) as for the army's like sisters of battle and other low tier army's, if there not selling then GW isent going to waste there time. If I doesn't sell GW will get rid of it. Cough cough WHFB.
JinxDragon wrote: Do you understand how 'power creep' works, Dman137?
What you are suggesting, granting over-powered things to ensure a Faction remains over-powered, is the exact problem!
yeah release good units, so they can keep up with all the other good armys
Don't Tau have tons of good units? Why can't Orks get anything good? Why can't anyone love me...
Psh, before GW gives any more attention to dirty xenos or traitors, they will obviously grace the fighting men of their beloved imperium with the newly discovered STC for S8, rending, shred, lasguns, and Leman Russ D-stroyers.
Honestly these threads and the supporters of them are getting annoying. We have seen what? 3 units now. So people are saying it sucks and isn't op. There is nothing wrong with having a balanced codex. That means the game would be more....whats that word...FUN. All the little taubabies that want a roflSTOMP codex need to at the least wait and see the whole thing.
I'd never say that Tau will be at the bottom with Tau, that's pretty much an ignorant thing to say.
"Yeah, I dont think Tau will be super OP neither, I think they're shoosti will be in line and the power creep will halt as well! Also, LoWs with Squadrons aren't OP mang! The things us Tau collectors are getting aren't nearly as OP as I'm SURE CSM will get when their codex gets released!"
Enough of that nonsense now, because having played Tau before 6th and actually being considered one of those generals who HAD to make decisions in a game like throw away expendable Kroot, Fire Warriors and Pathfinders in order to secure objectives, now Tau armies simply have the mentality of "Bigger & More is better". 150 shot volleys against everything 36" away makes for dull games and even duller opponents when they creep up next to you trying to exclaim "If you just, JUST took X army, you'd have done much better" when the reality is, if you play a shooting army, your costs are generally cheaper, your bodies are generally more expendable, and what ever you decide to point at tends to disappear much faster than what ever is trying to beat your face in.
My only problem with "dialing back the power creep" is that it doesn't really accomplish much as long as the top armies stay the same power level. So, for example, making the new Tau Codex less powerful than current top tier armies doesn't balance the game any better or really do anything besides giving players that want a competitive army one less option.
Especially once the profit figures for the "balanced codex release" start coming in and it turns out no one wants to buy $500 worth of new models that suck for an army that's just going to lose to all the overpowered crap that's already out there - then GW's going to turn the next release up to 12 just to make up for the money they lost.
Honestly, if GW is going to insist that they're strictly a model company and not give game development any more attention than they do, I wish they'd just stick to making models and contract game development out to a company with a better track record. Personally, I'd love to see what Privateer Press could do with 40k.
I see you're back, Dman137. Unfortunately, I've been waiting for you.
Dman137 wrote: if what has been leaked is any indication of what's to come, then you can be sure that tau will be at the bottom holding hands with harlequins
Somebody clearly hasn't read Jimsolo's Freakshow tactics articles. Harlequins are excellent as allies, and more than capable of holding their own. they' just don't do well as a solo codex due to a lack of units.
Weren't you the one raving about the Ghostkeel before you took a break from this forum? I'm sensing a bit of cognitive dissonance here.
Dman137 wrote: your clearly helpless, not to meantion a FAAC player, with that said. GW making tau bad just means more people will complain about the other top tier army's, you want to Balance the game then bring all codexs up to eldar and necron level.
If you played Orks, you'd be feeling pretty helpless in this edition too.
What does "FAAC" mean? Fluff at all costs? If there is anything GW does besides sell models, it's create a game that tries to reflect the lore on the tabletop as much as possible. See why Eldar Distortion weapons became D-weapons.
While I agree that some of the design philosophies that inform the 7.5 edition codexes (Decurion-style detachments, multitudes of formations) should be given to all armies, bringing all armies up to Eldar or Necron or Space Marine levels of power is not the answer. That just encourages more power creep and imbalance in games.
Here's an idea: why don't we wait until the Tau codex has been released or fully revealed to decide whether or not it sucks or is overpowered.
Ah Dman, please don't take this as a personal attack but stop posting threads like this or your going to get them. I understand this forum is about speaking your mind on 40k stuff, but constantly saying that your army isn't as OP as everyone says/else's isn't winning you friends.
I have a soft spot for tau and back when they were released had a small army, so I'm not going to be biased :-P they should be a middle rate army. I think they'll be pretty great once the dex is out but for now I think it's great the leaks have been a little BALANCED.
The power creep is a massive issue at the moment and I hope formations will be the levelling factor for army's but that may have to wait for 8th edition (I estimate this time next year)
What were you expecting? D-weapon spam from 60" away? Really? It's already shaping up that with a couple Stormsurges, Hammerheads, and the Tidewall raillguns, you may actually have a VIABLE Str 10 spam.
Aside from that, my most initial observation was that I'd be playing Tau a little differently than before. The close range of the Stormsurge's D-weapon and the Fire Warrior Breacher load out shows a style of gameplay where you'll want to be relatively close to devastate your opponents. But it's looking like you'll also have options to respectively shoot from a distance.
The new Tau are shaping up to be this...you can either sit back and shoot, just like before, OR you can be a little more risky/aggressive and get close for higher damage attacks.
If markerlights don't receive any nerfs in the new codex, then this style of gameplay could be amazing for Tau players.
Could you imagine if they made tau OP but only at 12 inches, that would be pretty cool, get close and hope you kill everything before you get charged. Wait that's not OP it's interesting :-P
Well, let me put things this way:
If GW keep on releasing OP codexes then they will stop being OP because this stupid level of power we are already at will be considered the norm, which in turn means that the next codex that comes out and is considered OP will be EVEN MORE powerful, turning the stupid metre up to 12.
So I feel that, if the lack of OPness is true, GW are finally doing the right thing and taking things in the right direction. Just so long as they forget to tone things down around the time that they update the IG codex of course
Im disappointed in the lack of "Empire" elements in the Tau Empire but the rules for the new releases seem alright to me (the default gun on the stormsurge is laughably bad so far). Tau are dependent on synergy so we have no idea what markerlights, Ethereals, support systems, signature systems, and this new "Fire Team" rule does which could greatly impact a units potential power. Also the Necron release was absolutely in the above average section of the power curve except when you factor in the Decurion which shot them up to OP land. The Taucurion could have some crazy rule about getting an extra shot on each weapon, multiple units benefiting from the same markerlights, shoot and run, or even having army wide "fighting retreat" to fall back after overwatching.
JinxDragon wrote: Do you understand how 'power creep' works, Dman137?
What you are suggesting, granting over-powered things to ensure a Faction remains over-powered, is the exact problem!
yeah release good units, so they can keep up with all the other good armys
Don't Tau have tons of good units? Why can't Orks get anything good? Why can't anyone love me...
To be fair the last time I tried to love an ork it didn't end well.
No the CSM Release thread was the opposite, people thought CSM were broken because of 1 unit and terrible "Star aligning" charts we COULD roll on, when reality struck 99.99% of people quickly ran onto the forums and deleted all their own posts in a shameful act of self pity for believing that CSM might once again, be competitive outside FW.
On a positive note, did you guys hear about CSM / Daemonkin becoming the new CSM dex and CSM not actually being a Dex anymore?! I sure didn't! And I'm 100% happier about it
GoliothOnline wrote: No the CSM Release thread was the opposite, people thought CSM were broken because of 1 unit and terrible "Star aligning" charts we COULD roll on, when reality struck 99.99% of people quickly ran onto the forums and deleted all their own posts in a shameful act of self pity for believing that CSM might once again, be competitive outside FW.
On a positive note, did you guys hear about CSM / Daemonkin becoming the new CSM dex and CSM not actually being a Dex anymore?! I sure didn't! And I'm 100% happier about it
*skips off into a field of posies*
Believe me, I am too. Splitting the CSM codex up into god-specific books would have been a travesty. What about Legions that follow Chaos Undivided or have mixed units?
I don't think Tau will be broken from what we've seen, only balanced against the other 7.5 codexes.
Dman137 wrote: With the release of SM, eldar, necrons. I for sure thought tau were going to get turned up to 11, but so far the units that have been leaked are very subpar.
So whats it like being in the future with the Codex in hand?
Dman137 wrote: With the release of SM, eldar, necrons. I for sure thought tau were going to get turned up to 11, but so far the units that have been leaked are very subpar.
So whats it like being in the future with the Codex in hand?
Oh wait..
I'll fire up my time machine and travel forward in time to spoil the Tau codex if enough people copy the quote in my signature. I need to get it warmed up anyway; I'm feeling hungry for tomorrow night's leftovers.
Dman137 wrote: With the release of SM, eldar, necrons. I for sure thought tau were going to get turned up to 11, but so far the units that have been leaked are very subpar.
So whats it like being in the future with the Codex in hand?
Oh wait..
I'll fire up my time machine and travel forward in time to spoil the Tau codex if enough people copy the quote in my signature. I need to get it warmed up anyway; I'm feeling hungry for tomorrow night's leftovers.
This entire BS about Tau being 100% 'the suck' makes my head hurt...
But then, I can remember when the same types of people were claiming that the new Daemons codex at the time was so bad & full of unplayable "LolzRanDUMB!" that only drooling idiots would ever be hoodwinked into actually playing the army...
3-4 weeks later, and those same people were back screaming about how OP and broken Daemons were.
Here's my prediction:
1. The codex will come out, and within hours it will be declared the worst and most massively under powered thing GW has ever released.
2. Within a few weeks, the forum will be filled to bursting with threads about how the Tau Decruion/Formation synergies are now the most hideously OP thing GW has ever released.
Dman137 wrote: With the release of SM, eldar, necrons. I for sure thought tau were going to get turned up to 11, but so far the units that have been leaked are very subpar.
This thread and your original post actually make my heard hurt, honestly I'm not sure you could have engineered a more hilariously stupid thread if you tried. With that in mind, I'll just clear the air for everyone here with a number of points as to why this thread is silly;
1) How competitive are the new units taken in isolation? As you yourself stated in an earlier thread (contradiction much?) the Ghostkeel borders on being over-powered, I personally think it is a very strong but not imbalanced unit. It has fantastic durability, good mobility and firepower, a very powerful situational defensive rule, the ability to defend itself in melee decently well and a super low cost. It is pretty widely considered to be a great unit. The Stormsurge is not - as the general community seems to believe - a terrible unit as any of the big-name pro players will tell you. If it was such a crap unit, why would both Reecius and Frankie (the guys who run ITC and Frontline Gaming) have predicted that competitive Tau lists in ITC events will commonly field a unit of two Stormsurges? I might be wrong but if two of the worlds' most respected and well-known competitive players believe that many Tau lists will spend over 720+ points on Stormsurges, it probably doesn't suck as you and others seem to believe. As for Breachers, lots of people have gone over this in another thread; they have a fine rule-set themselves, but they are entirely reliant on delivery options (i.e. the Devilfish) to be competitive. If they had Drop Pods available to them they would be incredibly good units, but they don't so we have to wait and see what the Devilfish is like in the new codex. In any case, taken on their own merits all three units are not "subpar" just because they aren't Wraithknights/Windriders/Centurions. You'll find a lot of codices would kill for the firepower offered by a Stormsurge given that almost no Gargantuan Creature matches it for shooting while it remains pretty cheap by GMC standards, while you could plug a Ghostkeel into any codex and expect it to be popular. Breachers are entirely codex-dependent because they need a good cheap transport to function competitively but then you could also argue sort of argue that the same would be true of Centurion Devastators. Try putting them in an army that can't teleport them around, buff them that much or give them a form of alpha strike (i.e. a Drop Pod) and all of a sudden their presence in the competitive meta plummets as any kind of AP2 shooting will ruin their day before they get to shoot.
2. Tau are based on synergy. Of all the armies in 40K, none are based around combos and synergy quite as much as Tau. Markerlights are the most obvious force-enabler as they turn what can often be a decent shooting phase into a super-powered one that few armies can match, but they aren't the only ones. The firepower of a Riptide is actually the best example of this; take a Riptide by itself with the Ion Accelerator and look at it what it outputs damage-wise. Three S7 AP2 shots at BS3 or one S8 AP2 Large Blast with BS3 and Gets Hot, plus a twin-linked secondary weapon - usually a smart missile system for four S5 AP5 shots that Ignore Cover and don't require line of sight. For the nearly 200 points you pay, the firepower is actually really weak when you think about it as its main gun is hilariously inaccurate, the blast variation of the same weapon is prone to missing or being rendered null by easily accessed cover saves and just generally it's not going to do much. Now, throw Markerlights into the mix and it is an entirely different story; that S8 AP2 Large Blast goes from maybe killing a few models (provided it hits something) to wiping out entire units with near guaranteed accuracy through some Markerlight hits due to the juicy combo of improved Ballistic Skill and Ignores Cover, while the three single shots become much more effective for trying to snipe vehicles or monstrous creatures given that they should hit and ignore any saves they have. Similarly, bunching up Fire Warriors might be a bad idea in a lot of cases and leave them prone to multi-charges, but chuck an Ethereal and the Supporting Fire special rule in and you have yourself a fire-base that puts out utterly ridiculous amounts of Strength 5 shooting. If you get within 15" of the Fire Warrior group - let's say three teams of ten as this still errs on the side of being cheap - you'll be struck by ninety Strength 5 AP5 shots due to Storm of Fire. That's not all though; if you try to charge one of the units, you'll get hit by another ninety shots (assuming no casualties) in Overwatch due to the Supporting Fire rules that actually gives them a reason to bunch up. You might try and say "oh but 45 Strength 5 AP5 hits on average is not that bad (LOL)" but then you throw six Markerlight hits into the mix, two per unit; those ninety shots split at thirty per unit with the potential to hit three different targets all of a sudden become so, so much scarier when they are all fired at Ballistic Skill 5. Unlike other codices you actually have HQs designed entirely to support the army that don't pay for any kind of combat stats, namely the Ethereal and "Buffmander", while Tau are also the only army in the game to feature units that have the sole purpose of making the rest of the army operate more efficiently (units wielding Markerlights such as Pathfinders and Tetras).
With all that in mind, especially considering we don't specifically know what upgrades are available for these units, how Markerlights function, what the various support HQs do now, what the Fire Team rule constitutes and how the "Relics" will be incorporated into codex, automatically dismissing the three new units as "subpar" and using that as an excuse to proclaim that Tau are getting a weak codex is not only insulting, it is downright laughable. If you are actually a Tau player and know a damned thing about what you are talking about, you will know that Tau units traditionally aren't the best on their own - the major and only exception to the rule being Broadsides with High Yield Missile Pods and Smart Missile Systems, though to a lesser extent you could also include the Skyray. As mentioned above, the firepower of a Riptide is pretty poor for the points you pay for, but once "enabled" by Markerlights it becomes absolutely terrifying for almost any army. How could you possibly know the same won't be true for something like the Stormsurge? Heck, we could be here a few months from now complaining about how powerful the Stormsurge is because we don't know the full story yet.
3. We don't know what the formations will be like. Here's the kicker which further proves you have absolutely no idea what constitutes a Necron or post-Necron 7th Edition codex. Every single one of the armies that criteria fits is designed with formations and alternate detachments in mind, meaning a lot of their power comes from using those methods of building a list that don't involve Combined Arms detachments. Competitive Necrons are built almost entirely around specific formations as part of the Decurion detachment. Competitive Eldar are often built around the Craftworld Warhost detachment because it enables them to take whatever they want - such as five Wraithknights in an 1850 point list - all the while gaining massive buffs to all of its constituents. One of the most competitive Space Marine builds going around is the Battle Company as part of a Gladius Strike Force as there aren't many armies in the game that can compete with a Gladius in what 7th Edition is designed for; generating victory points through objectives. Those death-stars you often see in Imperium of Man combined lists are often assisted by a Librarius Conclave. Additionally, remember that little army called the Adeptus Mechanicus? Their combined force in a War Convocation is one of the most powerful armies in tournaments right now. Oh, and as for Tau, you do know that one of the biggest parts of any competitive Tau list is the very first formation they - or any army - received; the Firebase Support Cadre. Whether that specific formation still remains in the new codex is irrelevant as the standard has been set very high not only by the FSC but also by the many, many competitive formations and alternative Decurion-style detachments we have seen in recent codices. Proclaiming that the Tau book is going to suck before seeing these is inane and stupid given that if you take - for example - the Space Marine codex to a tournament where death-stars are either banned or over-nerfed, you're not going to have the best time with just a CAD as the top-tier armies are usually built around formations. In the case of Space Marines, a mix of Battle Company via Gladius and a Skyhammer Annihilation Force is instantly more competitive than any pure-Space Marines (i.e. one codex) army list you could come up with if death-stars are weakened as they often are in a lot of big tournaments, and that is all achieved through the power of formations. If Tau follow that example, we will have a good base codex - which we already do possess (the people that say Tau suck are actually oblivious to reality) - that is made so much stronger by formations.
4. Your suggestion that Tau will be a bottom-tier codex alongside Harlequins is downright idiotic. As mentioned above, the current Tau codex - when you allow for Farsight Enclaves and the Firebase Support Cadre - is still quite strong. It was a top-tier 6th Edition codex and it is now an upper middle-tier 7th Edition codex pre-update. The army hasn't scaled well into 7th Edition tournaments for two main reasons; it struggles to deal with rampant death-stars and it has no Battle Brothers to allow for ridiculous shenanigans. This keeps them from being right at the top-tier but they are still a devastating army to play against for a lot of armies; a well designed Tau list can still compete for 3rd or 4th at major tournaments as I believe at least one recent report has indicated. They are currently in a way better position than most codices and they manage to stay strong even despite being an older codex with access to just one formation, meaning the diversity of their lists is lacking. For Tau to be "alongside Harlequins" as a pure army would require two things; the current army list to be completely smashed to pieces by nerf upon nerf, and their support elements to either be removed or reworked into an inferior state. If you somehow believe a codex that features Riptides, Skyrays, Broadsides, Ethereals and "Buffmanders" to be trash-tier, you probably have no idea what constitutes a good codex. The problem with the army is that the 6th Edition codex specifically favours static builds which doesn't mesh well with 7th Edition at all, while as mentioned prior they absolutely cannot deal with psychic death-stars; they can punish top builds like Ravenwing that are reliant on cover saves, but otherwise the army lists that dominate tournaments give Tau a lot of problems. When said lists aren't present though, Tau are still incredibly strong and a nightmare to face for many armies; all of the middle tier and lower tier codices get face-stomped by Tau, and they give the stronger codices a run for their money on a regular basis.
Additionally, if we go off the actual general assumptions of the competitive scene on the new Tau units, the actual belief surrounding the Tau codex is optimism; they expect a good codex that lines up perfectly with other Necron and post-Necron codices for build variety and overall competitiveness. There were a lot of people that thought Space Marines wouldn't be that great because they didn't change much, even though the reality is that Space Marines are arguably the strongest tournament army in the game because of - guess what - those hidden unit combinations (i.e. Centurion Devastators given all the support you can afford) and formations (the Battle Company, the Skyhammer Annihilation Force, etc) that we currently have no actual clue of with regards to Tau. So far we are confirmed to have one very strong unit (the Ghostkeel), one decent to good unit (the Stormsurge), and one unit that could be really good or just mediocre depending on what the codex holds for it (the Breachers). We also know that like those other codices, the real power of the army will be made apparent once we have all the knowledge available and can start working out those juicy unit combinations and formation bonuses; this is even more important in the case of Tau because the entire army is balanced around unit synergy. As such, if you seriously believe Tau will be the new Harlequins (as an aside, you see Harlequins pop up in some tournament builds for Eldar and Dark Eldar, just an FYI) you are not only absolutely clueless and jumping to conclusions based on evidence that doesn't in any way support said conclusion, you are probably one of those people that doesn't even understand what makes Tau a good army.
Dman137 wrote: With the release of SM, eldar, necrons. I for sure thought tau were going to get turned up to 11, but so far the units that have been leaked are very subpar.
So whats it like being in the future with the Codex in hand?
Oh wait..
I'll fire up my time machine and travel forward in time to spoil the Tau codex if enough people copy the quote in my signature. I need to get it warmed up anyway; I'm feeling hungry for tomorrow night's leftovers.
This entire BS about Tau being 100% 'the suck' makes my head hurt...
But then, I can remember when the same types of people were claiming that the new Daemons codex at the time was so bad & full of unplayable "LolzRanDUMB!" that only drooling idiots would ever be hoodwinked into actually playing the army...
3-4 weeks later, and those same people were back screaming about how OP and broken Daemons were.
Here's my prediction:
1. The codex will come out, and within hours it will be declared the worst and most massively under powered thing GW has ever released.
2. Within a few weeks, the forum will be filled to bursting with threads about how the Tau Decruion/Formation synergies are now the most hideously OP thing GW has ever released.
So, normal codex release will be normal!
This sums it up to a tee for those that don't want to read my ultra long post. These kinds of reaction threads are almost always exaggerated and outright wrong. People thought the new (whether 6th or 7th) Space Marines were weak too and thought Centurion Devastators were too limited to be competitive....and look where we are now with Centurion Devastator death-stars still being a top-tier build. Regarding the Stormsurge, what amazes me is that when the 6th Edition Eldar codex leaked there was actually a big chunk of the community that thought the Wraithknight was sub-par because of one or a number of reasons; too expensive, not quick enough, not tough enough, not enough firepower, not good enough in melee, vulnerable to Instant Death, etc and the list goes on. People were so focused on any particular individual aspect of the model that they failed to realize that the overall profile of the Wraithknight was actually really good, hence why a lot of 6th Edition Eldar builds featured two of them.
The amazing thing about Chaos Daemons is that people to this day still look at the codex and think it is weak. It absolutely boggles my mind that anyone thought it would be weak. Granted, I had no idea just how strong it would prove to be but even I could tell it was at the very least a strong codex. Heck, there were people even complaining about bloody Dark Angels being a nerfed version of the Space Marine codex even though Ravenwing have catapulted to being one of the strongest armies in the game! Honestly, the general community rarely has a good grasp of what constitutes a competitive codex as has been proven time and again, especially with the recent codices. The only book I can think of that everyone universally cried "OP" for is Eldar, and that's more due to Destroyer Weapons/Wraithknights/Windriders than anything else even though you can still make extremely powerful builds without using more than one of those elements.
I'd just like to point out that my initial reaction about the BA codex is still my opinion of the BA codex. However, the Tau codex seems much more intricate, so we should reserve judgment.
Martel732 wrote: I'd just like to point out that my initial reaction about the BA codex is still my opinion of the BA codex. However, the Tau codex seems much more intricate, so we should reserve judgment.
I feel your pain but honestly could you say the same thing about any of the Necron and post-Necron codices? I'm sure most of the community couldn't.
JinxDragon wrote: I approve of the less then over-powered nature of the leaks we have seen, as Game Workshop needs to work on their 'power creep' problem anyway.
that's what I mean, like it's fine to release normal stuff that's not OP and what not, but if you already have army's that are OP why would you release something not as good. Tau were already really good and were able to keep up with the current meta, now they just moved down the ladder.
Look what happened to Astra Militarum and Grey Knights. Having said that though Grey Knights are actually quite competitive IMO.
JinxDragon wrote: I approve of the less then over-powered nature of the leaks we have seen, as Game Workshop needs to work on their 'power creep' problem anyway.
that's what I mean, like it's fine to release normal stuff that's not OP and what not, but if you already have army's that are OP why would you release something not as good. Tau were already really good and were able to keep up with the current meta, now they just moved down the ladder.
Look what happened to Astra Militarum and Grey Knights. Having said that though Grey Knights are actually quite competitive IMO.
It hasn't happened to any codex with a "Decurion" in it yet so I'd be amazed if Tau bucked the trend. Besides, both Astra Militarum and Grey Knights got hit hard by the 6th and 7th Edition rulebook changes which were compounded by their redone codices. Tau sort of got hit by 7th Edition but not to the extent those other two armies were.
Also again another highlight of "Tau...now they just moved down the ladder" by @Dman137. Ugh. Assuming a codex is bad because you've seen the rules for a grand total of three units, all of which are entirely new to the faction.
The units are all pretty good so far, as they all bring something new to the table without actually completely nullifying older units that existed. The fact that you can actually have a debate about whether the Ghostkeel is better or worse than two Broadsides with HYMP, without an actual definitive answer, is pretty awesome.
It also probably shows they're trying to balance the game somewhat, because Tau is already in that weird tier 1.5 section that is very healthy, as opposed to just overpowering things to push sales.
What did you expect? The only reason why eldar was tuned up to 11 was to keep the powergamers happy.
Since 3rd, all codex cycles has been the same, with some miserable army at the bottom, and eldar at the top of the cycle, other than the great nerfing of 5th (eldar was not updated, so they can keep their easy-mode army status)
this cycle will end with guard, CSM or tyranids at the bottom, be prepared for that.
If anyone hasnt seen the pictures yet, Tau have a massive Tower point defense system much like a D-Line but it has a bloody Rail Cannon, and not the small ones neither, its about the size of the stupid ones on that FW model carrying 3 of them.
As someone who hates the Hammerhead currently, I'm actually very excited for the new defensive fortification, even if it's just armed with a twin-linked rail gun in the same way the Hammerhead is, for the same points. Not only because it's twin-linked, but it also provides defense for your units, and as rumour has it, it comes with four drones of your choice... That's like a four man drone squad on a Rail Gun that's twin-linked, and can block for your Strike Squad D:
Co'tor Shas wrote: No, it's a regular railgun, just twin-linked. It's the same one that's on the hammerhead.
Looks must deceive then. Rules are stupid too, but hey, w/e floats the Tau boat.
Not really, the railgun is pretty damn big. But the ones on the tau'nar are so big as to be ridiculous. They are probably twice the length of a rail-gun at minimum.
And we don't actually have the rules AFAIK, so theres no way to tell if they are stupid or not.
Co'tor Shas wrote: We don't know if he railgun had changed at all in the new codex though.
The old rail gun was fine, it's just the platform it came on was super expensive compared to the Skyray and only had one shot a turn. I think if you did the math on it, even without the submunition rounds you'd have to value the rail gun on the hammerhead as something like 70pts, which is awful.
I'd be able to get on board if they replaced the drones on the Hammerhead with two Heavy Rail Rifles, without changing the points, as at least then it would have three powerful shots a turn, with one being extra strong.
Edit: Heck, even if they just gave it more drones and a shield field, like they did with the fortification, I could get behind it :p
LucidNinja wrote: Could you imagine if they made tau OP but only at 12 inches, that would be pretty cool, get close and hope you kill everything before you get charged. Wait that's not OP it's interesting :-P
I think the problem is that every round of codicies at least two are "misses". One gets either ignored or nerfed too hard and one goes OTT (recent choices BA, then GK, then Crons, then Tau, then Eldar, then amazingly Eldar again). At worst I think Tau are being brought back into line. If it wasn't for the giant stupid easy button Eldar, I feel like 7th would be possibly the most balanced edition in a long time.
Lobukia wrote: I think the problem is that every round of codicies at least two are "misses". One gets either ignored or nerfed too hard and one goes OTT (recent choices BA, then GK, then Crons, then Tau, then Eldar, then amazingly Eldar again). At worst I think Tau are being brought back into line. If it wasn't for the giant stupid easy button Eldar, I feel like 7th would be possibly the most balanced edition in a long time.
7th has a lot more problems than just Eldar, as much as I'd love to just be able to pin it on them. Between unkillable Necrons, SM's with infinirerolls and Grav-spam, and a host of other issues, 7th's balance issues are pretty legion.
Lobukia wrote: I think the problem is that every round of codicies at least two are "misses". One gets either ignored or nerfed too hard and one goes OTT (recent choices BA, then GK, then Crons, then Tau, then Eldar, then amazingly Eldar again). At worst I think Tau are being brought back into line. If it wasn't for the giant stupid easy button Eldar, I feel like 7th would be possibly the most balanced edition in a long time.
7th has a lot more problems than just Eldar, as much as I'd love to just be able to pin it on them. Between unkillable Necrons, SM's with infinirerolls and Grav-spam, and a host of other issues, 7th's balance issues are pretty legion.
It's Apocalypse, balance goes out the window. Jervis has stated he doesn't like balance in wargames, it get's in the way of putting your minis on the tabletop.
Lobukia wrote: I think the problem is that every round of codicies at least two are "misses". One gets either ignored or nerfed too hard and one goes OTT (recent choices BA, then GK, then Crons, then Tau, then Eldar, then amazingly Eldar again). At worst I think Tau are being brought back into line. If it wasn't for the giant stupid easy button Eldar, I feel like 7th would be possibly the most balanced edition in a long time.
7th has a lot more problems than just Eldar, as much as I'd love to just be able to pin it on them. Between unkillable Necrons, SM's with infinirerolls and Grav-spam, and a host of other issues, 7th's balance issues are pretty legion.
It's Apocalypse, balance goes out the window. Jervis has stated he doesn't like balance in wargames, it get's in the way of putting your minis on the tabletop.
That's pretty insane as you can create a world where there is balance, and tons of awesome minis to field. The two are simply not mutually exclusive.
Edit: That's like saying "Hey, we can try to make balanced rules for all of these cool models, although we might not always get it right, so we're not even going to try..."
At least give it a shot when it comes to balance, worst case scenario is you end up where you were in that stupid statement of not trying to balance things at all.
Why do people let Dman troll so hard on this forum every new tread he makes he just sits there going trolololololol he is the master hypocrite and always thinks everyone else is a goob honestly though I love reading his threads for exactly this reason haha.
I'm hopeful that the new Tau codex will turn out to be good, But not OP. I'm not sure I belive that, But I hope it will be so.. I love Tau, And I realy dont want them to get another super OP codex. I know they will always be the single most hated army in the entire game no mather how weak they get, But I'm hoping that if they get a well balanced not OP codex they might be slightly less hated and you might get slightly less hate for playing them..
I'm pretty sure the OP plays Eldar, for one, and is only disappointed that nothing looks grossly overpowered yet because they were hoping Tau would steal some of the hate away from Eldar.
I've been a Tau fan since 2006 and I think the new units are fine. Breachers are kinda meh but I don't think any of it "sucks" yet. If anything I'm deathly afraid the book will be overpowered if for no other reason than I'm sick and tired of people constantly bitching about my fething army and I want it to stop.
Tinkrr wrote: That's like saying "Hey, we can try to make balanced rules for all of these cool models, although we might not always get it right, so we're not even going to try..."
Bingo. You just described exactly the GW design studio's attitude.
Makumba wrote: Can't they just give him a pension or something, and remove him from the design team?
Maybe the tau will get great formations or suit support systems. They could still be good.
After Alessio left, it seems he's been given free reign. I lot of people blame Kirby et al for the direction of 40K and GW, but it's probably got more to do with Jervis than anything else
I'm sick and tired of people constantly bitching about my fething army and I want it to stop
Seems very much like a "If you run into an donkey-cave in the morning, you ran into an donkey-cave. If you run into donkey-caves all day, you're the donkey-cave." kind of situation.
If one person bitches about your army, he's a problem. If everyone bitches about your army, your army is the problem.
With the current Tau army choices (not including the new few units we've seen lately) they are still a very competitive force even measured up against Newcrons, SM, and Eldar.
I really hope GW doesn't crack out the upcoming new codex. They don't NEED to get more power creep.
If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Armies with a powerful shooting phase that normally don't lost a lot of models are never popular. Tbh, shooting in any game that doesn't cater to it exclusively is not popular.
So in 40k, this means that Tau are hated. At least against guard you get to remove models and you feel like your stats matter. Tau can, through support, wound on 3's or better and hit on decent chances from down town. Their creation coming at a bad time didn't help.
In WMH, Cygnar (who isn't even a strong faction) garners a lot of hate. It is also a mobile shooty skirmish force.
In most fighting games, people hate zoners.
Tl:dr, It's not about cheese, Tau aren't fun to play against.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
I agree. It's ok to hate GW's ruleset Tau (and a couple of other outliers, but we'll stick to Tau for this example), and their very negative impact on game balance - but don't blame the player, that's ridiculous. The army is extremely appealing aesthetically to many, and when a lot of people began their Tau collection, they were drastically underpowered. On top of that, playing the strongest race in the game doesn't make you an donkey-cave, it's which models you bring to the table. And even THEN, there is nothing wrong with building your army to the height of its strategic potential, in fact I wouldn't enjoy victory half as much if my opponent had to gimp down his army and play easy mode for me - but for some I think they'd rather any sort of win than take a loss. I play Nids and there is nothing I enjoy more than the challenge of trying to take down my buddies super duper beefed up Tau list.
Ideally, Tau wouldn't be so strong (and maybe they won't be come next release and they might be a bit more sensible). But I play this game competitively, and hardcore Tau is in the game, so pretending they aren't and playing against easy mode Tau does nothing for me. Neither does calling someone an donkey-cave for playing with the tools GW gave them.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Armies with a powerful shooting phase that normally don't lost a lot of models are never popular. Tbh, shooting in any game that doesn't cater to it exclusively is not popular.
So in 40k, this means that Tau are hated. At least against guard you get to remove models and you feel like your stats matter. Tau can, through support, wound on 3's or better and hit on decent chances from down town. Their creation coming at a bad time didn't help.
In WMH, Cygnar (who isn't even a strong faction) garners a lot of hate. It is also a mobile shooty skirmish force.
In most fighting games, people hate zoners.
Tl:dr, It's not about cheese, Tau aren't fun to play against.
I think this is just wrong. If this was the case than DE would be the most hated race in the game. The fact is, balance comes into play. Tau is just too damn cost efficient. If Ork Boyz were all T6 and just steamrolled you at face to face range without barely losing numbers, they'd be just as hated. Fact is Tau isn't just an annoying style of play - it's a proven tournament golden child, one of the more broken races in the game. This is what makes them hated.
In your example for fighting games, let's look at MKX for an example, where the characters who've done copped the most hate from the competitive player base in the games lifespan are Kung Lao, Tanya and Shinnok, with honourable mentions to Erron Black, Raiden and Kung Jin, all very aggressive high pressure characters, while people spent a lot of time demanding buffs for underpowered characters like Kenshi and Kitana, the zoners. Street Fighter IV, most hated character? Blanka hands down and he doesn't even have a projectile, he's all mix ups and unpredictability. Look at Starcraft, most hated race is hands down Protoss for their perceived number of aggressive options which can be super challenging to learn to recognise competively, while Terrans annoying walling up is mostly laughed at. I think for the most part, competitive players complain about the stuff the identify as OP not the stuff that annoys them, everyone has a little bitch about the annoying stuff but for the most part recognises people have different play styles and balance is more important. Of course, there WILL always be morons who just can't handle losing and complain about dumb stuff, but that's part of everywhere.
I love how everyone wants this balanced game and nothing op and what not, in case everyone hasn't noticed GW has never takin what the players and collectors had to say in to consideration. They just do what they want, it's always been like this, not to meantion that in every edition there's always something for people to complain about. It's a game and everyone just needs to adapt to it, if your just a collector/painter then you still have a lot of cool minis you can build and paint. If your a player then you just have to go with the flow, everyone hates on army's when they feel there to strong (and some are) but know one is forcing you to play against them (except in events, but that's what your bring to events, strong armys) there's no real stat for how many people play for fun and how many people play competitively, it up to your gamin group to pick what kind of games you want to play.
Fluff players can play there games and make house rules on things they find a bit over the top and that's fine, but it's not fair to bash competitive army's or players just because you might not like something, everyone has there own version of what they find fun.
I don't understand the whole 'just make everything OP' argument. If everyone becomes super powered then the game TRULY becomes about that first turn role to see who's OP units can kill the other guys first. The game phases would be:
1) deploy
2) roll for first turn
3) congratulate winner
4) pack up
Not as much fun IMHO. I'd rather a largely balanced list of factions with a couple outliers than a game where everything is cranked up to over 9,000.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
I agree. It's ok to hate GW's ruleset Tau (and a couple of other outliers, but we'll stick to Tau for this example), and their very negative impact on game balance - but don't blame the player, that's ridiculous. The army is extremely appealing aesthetically to many, and when a lot of people began their Tau collection, they were drastically underpowered. On top of that, playing the strongest race in the game doesn't make you an donkey-cave, it's which models you bring to the table. And even THEN, there is nothing wrong with building your army to the height of its strategic potential, in fact I wouldn't enjoy victory half as much if my opponent had to gimp down his army and play easy mode for me - but for some I think they'd rather any sort of win than take a loss. I play Nids and there is nothing I enjoy more than the challenge of trying to take down my buddies super duper beefed up Tau list.
Ideally, Tau wouldn't be so strong (and maybe they won't be come next release and they might be a bit more sensible). But I play this game competitively, and hardcore Tau is in the game, so pretending they aren't and playing against easy mode Tau does nothing for me. Neither does calling someone an donkey-cave for playing with the tools GW gave them.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Armies with a powerful shooting phase that normally don't lost a lot of models are never popular. Tbh, shooting in any game that doesn't cater to it exclusively is not popular.
So in 40k, this means that Tau are hated. At least against guard you get to remove models and you feel like your stats matter. Tau can, through support, wound on 3's or better and hit on decent chances from down town. Their creation coming at a bad time didn't help.
In WMH, Cygnar (who isn't even a strong faction) garners a lot of hate. It is also a mobile shooty skirmish force.
In most fighting games, people hate zoners.
Tl:dr, It's not about cheese, Tau aren't fun to play against.
I think this is just wrong. If this was the case than DE would be the most hated race in the game. The fact is, balance comes into play. Tau is just too damn cost efficient. If Ork Boyz were all T6 and just steamrolled you at face to face range without barely losing numbers, they'd be just as hated. Fact is Tau isn't just an annoying style of play - it's a proven tournament golden child, one of the more broken races in the game. This is what makes them hated.
In your example for fighting games, let's look at MKX for an example, where the characters who've done copped the most hate from the competitive player base in the games lifespan are Kung Lao, Tanya and Shinnok, with honourable mentions to Erron Black, Raiden and Kung Jin, all very aggressive high pressure characters, while people spent a lot of time demanding buffs for underpowered characters like Kenshi and Kitana, the zoners. Street Fighter IV, most hated character? Blanka hands down and he doesn't even have a projectile, he's all mix ups and unpredictability. Look at Starcraft, most hated race is hands down Protoss for their perceived number of aggressive options which can be super challenging to learn to recognise competively, while Terrans annoying walling up is mostly laughed at. I think for the most part, competitive players complain about the stuff the identify as OP not the stuff that annoys them, everyone has a little bitch about the annoying stuff but for the most part recognises people have different play styles and balance is more important. Of course, there WILL always be morons who just can't handle losing and complain about dumb stuff, but that's part of everywhere.
This is a great post, but come on. Hands down, I would rather fight Shinnok and Raiden than Scorpion if anyone gets my blood boiling, it's the fact that Scorpion's movesets have unblockables that go right into his teleport BS.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Dman137 wrote: I love how everyone wants this balanced game and nothing op and what not, in case everyone hasn't noticed GW has never takin what the players and collectors had to say in to consideration. They just do what they want, it's always been like this, not to meantion that in every edition there's always something for people to complain about. It's a game and everyone just needs to adapt to it, if your just a collector/painter then you still have a lot of cool minis you can build and paint. If your a player then you just have to go with the flow, everyone hates on army's when they feel there to strong (and some are) but know one is forcing you to play against them (except in events, but that's what your bring to events, strong armys) there's no real stat for how many people play for fun and how many people play competitively, it up to your gamin group to pick what kind of games you want to play.
Fluff players can play there games and make house rules on things they find a bit over the top and that's fine, but it's not fair to bash competitive army's or players just because you might not like something, everyone has there own version of what they find fun.
Dman, it's easy to say "just adapt to it" when you play one of the strongest armies in the game.
I have about 6 different army's and play with all of them.
SM Tau
Eldar
Orks
CSM IG Necrons
And do really well with all of them, even in the current meta
godswildcard wrote: I don't understand the whole 'just make everything OP' argument. If everyone becomes super powered then the game TRULY becomes about that first turn role to see who's OP units can kill the other guys first. The game phases would be:
1) deploy
2) roll for first turn
3) congratulate winner
4) pack up
Not as much fun IMHO. I'd rather a largely balanced list of factions with a couple outliers than a game where everything is cranked up to over 9,000.
I agree, but you can be defensively OP as well as offensively. Riptide is a good example of a model whose damage output really wouldn't be that insane for the points, if he wasn't impossible to put down with an equal amount of points and kept firing just as hard until the last wound dropped. If the same amount of Firepower was sat on 4 Firewarrior bodies for the same amount of points he'd be fine.
Either way, just slamming the power creep up to full speed doesn't solve the problem . "If everyone is OP, then nobody is OP!". Sure, if everyone is made equally OP. But that's not alternative to just addressing RAMPANT balance issues, you have to do both, and doing the latter makes the former much less relevant and just likely to change the nature of the game itself, entirely unnecessarily. Compared to years ago everyone IS op now - except due to the ignoring of gameplay balance, there is still massive outliers. We can ramp everyone up to 110% (like what has already been done) but if we don't focus on making them equal in power, there will still be outliers. It's not a hard concept, and the most efficient and effective way to balance the entire game scape would be to find the most common level of power that the majority are floating around, and focus on bringing the outliers towards this, by bringing down the power level of the OP demes and beefing up the weaker ones. Arguing otherwise just makes me think you want an another easy-win button.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Armies with a powerful shooting phase that normally don't lost a lot of models are never popular. Tbh, shooting in any game that doesn't cater to it exclusively is not popular.
So in 40k, this means that Tau are hated. At least against guard you get to remove models and you feel like your stats matter. Tau can, through support, wound on 3's or better and hit on decent chances from down town. Their creation coming at a bad time didn't help.
In WMH, Cygnar (who isn't even a strong faction) garners a lot of hate. It is also a mobile shooty skirmish force.
In most fighting games, people hate zoners.
Tl:dr, It's not about cheese, Tau aren't fun to play against.
I think this is just wrong. If this was the case than DE would be the most hated race in the game.
There was a point where DE weren't exactly well loved, but they've never been the most powerful zoners. They also have, traditionally, died to a stiff breeze and don't have a lot of synergy in their lists that makes their shooting ignore stats (unless you mean poison on weapons?). They don't use the castle/turtle strategy most people equate with zoners.
You're going to have to explain how DE are less fun to fight than Tau, or are better ranged fighters. Because, quite frankly, I think that is just wrong.
The fact is, balance comes into play. Tau is just too damn cost efficient. If Ork Boyz were all T6 and just steamrolled you at face to face range without barely losing numbers, they'd be just as hated. Fact is Tau isn't just an annoying style of play - it's a proven tournament golden child, one of the more broken races in the game. This is what makes them hated.
Well, of course balance comes into play. That goes without saying, and is why Eldar have been hated in nearly every edition of this game. The Chaos 3.5 dex still draws hatred from non-chaos players for its power levels.
But that doesn't really apply to Tau. They have been strong, been weak, but outside of a brief time they were never top of the pack. They've usually been the bottom of the higher tier, or top of the middle. But usually hated despite their power level. Marines have been hated for being the golden boys, Eldar for being op....people have different reasons for hating. But for Tau? It's their playstyle.
In your example for fighting games, let's look at MKX for an example, where the characters who've done copped the most hate from the competitive player base in the games lifespan are Kung Lao, Tanya and Shinnok, with honourable mentions to Erron Black, Raiden and Kung Jin, all very aggressive high pressure characters, while people spent a lot of time demanding buffs for underpowered characters like Kenshi and Kitana, the zoners.
I am not a MK player, not the recent ones really, but I was always under the assumption that the most hated character to fight was scorpion. The teleports and spear are really annoying.
OP characters will always be hated, but zoners are hated regardless of power levels.
Street Fighter IV, most hated character? Blanka hands down and he doesn't even have a projectile, he's all mix ups and unpredictability.
He is the projectile . Blanka is also very strong and easy to play, and uses a turtling strategy, which is associated with zoning characters.
Other hated characters, in most SF games, are Sagat, Akuma, Ken, Ryu. They are easy to play and have strong zoning abilities, especially Sagat and Akuma.
In MVC, nobody likes it when you pick zoners or characters with long range. Zero might be one of the best characters in the game, but nothing is more annoying than Doom's missile assist BS.
If you want another fighting game where zoners are hated, take a look at SSB4. I've had people suicide when I pick Megaman, who isn't even that good. People also hate on duck hunt and link a lot, and they aren't top tier characters. Diddy, post nerf, gets a past, as does Shiek. Probably the only other character that gets a lot of hate is ZSS, because she is insanely easy to play and hard to punish.
Look at Starcraft, most hated race is hands down Protoss for their perceived number of aggressive options which can be super challenging to learn to recognise competively, while Terrans annoying walling up is mostly laughed at. I think for the most part, competitive players complain about the stuff the identify as OP not the stuff that annoys them, everyone has a little bitch about the annoying stuff but for the most part recognises people have different play styles and balance is more important. Of course, there WILL always be morons who just can't handle losing and complain about dumb stuff, but that's part of everywhere.
I'm not sure if you mean starcraft 1 or 2?
In both, terrans where everyone's least favorite matchup for a while. I can't speak for the current meta.
In 1, terrans were probably the weakest race (protoss were the strongest and easiest to play) but their castle strategies made everyone despise playing them. Not to mention sending a stealthed unit to a map corner and making your enemy comb the entire place with detectors to find it. Terran games lasted a very long time compared to games against the other races.
In 2, which I have less experience in, it was my understanding that terran were hated more for similar reasons. The castle strategy is seen as a pain to deal with. You know you'll win, but this match will take 3 times as long as everyone else.
I can't see how you can call any race in SC a zoner, since everyone uses guns. If you mean castling strategies are annoying (which zoners in most games use) than these games kinda prove my point.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Armies with a powerful shooting phase that normally don't lost a lot of models are never popular. Tbh, shooting in any game that doesn't cater to it exclusively is not popular.
So in 40k, this means that Tau are hated. At least against guard you get to remove models and you feel like your stats matter. Tau can, through support, wound on 3's or better and hit on decent chances from down town. Their creation coming at a bad time didn't help.
In WMH, Cygnar (who isn't even a strong faction) garners a lot of hate. It is also a mobile shooty skirmish force.
In most fighting games, people hate zoners.
Tl:dr, It's not about cheese, Tau aren't fun to play against.
I think this is just wrong. If this was the case than DE would be the most hated race in the game.
There was a point where DE weren't exactly well loved, but they've never been the most powerful zoners. They also have, traditionally, died to a stiff breeze and don't have a lot of synergy in their lists that makes their shooting ignore stats (unless you mean poison on weapons?). They don't use the castle/turtle strategy most people equate with zoners.
You're going to have to explain how DE are less fun to fight than Tau, or are better ranged fighters. Because, quite frankly, I think that is just wrong.
The fact is, balance comes into play. Tau is just too damn cost efficient. If Ork Boyz were all T6 and just steamrolled you at face to face range without barely losing numbers, they'd be just as hated. Fact is Tau isn't just an annoying style of play - it's a proven tournament golden child, one of the more broken races in the game. This is what makes them hated.
Well, of course balance comes into play. That goes without saying, and is why Eldar have been hated in nearly every edition of this game. The Chaos 3.5 dex still draws hatred from non-chaos players for its power levels.
But that doesn't really apply to Tau. They have been strong, been weak, but outside of a brief time they were never top of the pack. They've usually been the bottom of the higher tier, or top of the middle. But usually hated despite their power level. Marines have been hated for being the golden boys, Eldar for being op....people have different reasons for hating. But for Tau? It's their playstyle.
In your example for fighting games, let's look at MKX for an example, where the characters who've done copped the most hate from the competitive player base in the games lifespan are Kung Lao, Tanya and Shinnok, with honourable mentions to Erron Black, Raiden and Kung Jin, all very aggressive high pressure characters, while people spent a lot of time demanding buffs for underpowered characters like Kenshi and Kitana, the zoners.
I am not a MK player, not the recent ones really, but I was always under the assumption that the most hated character to fight was scorpion. The teleports and spear are really annoying.
OP characters will always be hated, but zoners are hated regardless of power levels.
Street Fighter IV, most hated character? Blanka hands down and he doesn't even have a projectile, he's all mix ups and unpredictability.
He is the projectile . Blanka is also very strong and easy to play, and uses a turtling strategy, which is associated with zoning characters.
Other hated characters, in most SF games, are Sagat, Akuma, Ken, Ryu. They are easy to play and have strong zoning abilities, especially Sagat and Akuma.
In MVC, nobody likes it when you pick zoners or characters with long range. Zero might be one of the best characters in the game, but nothing is more annoying than Doom's missile assist BS.
If you want another fighting game where zoners are hated, take a look at SSB4. I've had people suicide when I pick Megaman, who isn't even that good. People also hate on duck hunt and link a lot, and they aren't top tier characters. Diddy, post nerf, gets a past, as does Shiek. Probably the only other character that gets a lot of hate is ZSS, because she is insanely easy to play and hard to punish.
Look at Starcraft, most hated race is hands down Protoss for their perceived number of aggressive options which can be super challenging to learn to recognise competively, while Terrans annoying walling up is mostly laughed at. I think for the most part, competitive players complain about the stuff the identify as OP not the stuff that annoys them, everyone has a little bitch about the annoying stuff but for the most part recognises people have different play styles and balance is more important. Of course, there WILL always be morons who just can't handle losing and complain about dumb stuff, but that's part of everywhere.
I'm not sure if you mean starcraft 1 or 2?
In both, terrans where everyone's least favorite matchup for a while. I can't speak for the current meta.
In 1, terrans were probably the weakest race (protoss were the strongest and easiest to play) but their castle strategies made everyone despise playing them. Not to mention sending a stealthed unit to a map corner and making your enemy comb the entire place with detectors to find it. Terran games lasted a very long time compared to games against the other races.
In 2, which I have less experience in, it was my understanding that terran were hated more for similar reasons. The castle strategy is seen as a pain to deal with. You know you'll win, but this match will take 3 times as long as everyone else.
I can't see how you can call any race in SC a zoner, since everyone uses guns. If you mean castling strategies are annoying (which zoners in most games use) than these games kinda prove my point.
Holy crap I spent forever typing a reply on my iPad and then it randomly crashed so I'm pissed. However, I like your style, let's just leave it at that. I might type it again when I get back to the PC. Maybe not tho. fething frustrating. More frustrating than playing some twisted combination of Riptides that Flameport out of their Terran walls and cancel into Blanka balls.
For now, I'm liking the Ghostkeel and the Tidewall. Breachers are too niche and Stormsurge doesn't do what it should do. Hope the codex has a lot of nice, but not OP, things.
As long as Tau codex is on par with SM one, minus the free transports for everybody (unnecessary, in my view), I'll be quite ok.
As I recall, you bragged about them, but never showed any proof in the same thread you got caught lying about 'your amazing sportsmanship score,' in whatever tournament that was
Quit while you're ahead, kid.
Sidstyler wrote: If you're suggesting it's my army specifically then you're wrong. I never ran a "cheesebuild" so that's not the issue. The problem is that people have viewed Tau in general as a cheese army, and assume that you're an donkey-cave if you bring them to the table at all. And that's an attitude that will only get worse if GW doesn't make some attempt to reign the bullgak back in and not try to make every codex like Craftworlds.
Which is always pretty funny when you're running an army that was bulit in fourth edition with good, chunky metal models and none of the new stuff, and someone gets their panties in a bunch about you being 'oh, another flavor of the month player.'
so my multiple best general awards and best over all awards mean nothing.? Clearly lol
What you and 8 of your best friends do on the weekend aren't impressive to me, no. I have a "2nd Place in a Baby Beauty Contest" that has yet to get me laid.
Dman137 wrote: so my multiple best general awards and best over all awards mean nothing.? Clearly lol
Can't top my million bazillion award. They mean squat... seriously.
You can't say a codex is bad till it's leaked or released.
Now go back to your place under the bridge you troll
so then anyone that has ever won a award means nothing.? Clearly you have never won anything so I guess you have nothing to make yourself feel good about. As for the tau, I have clearly stated that "if the new you it's that have been leaked are any indication of what's to come" the. Yes tau will be crap
How is there honestly any room for discussion on new Tau when there is no codex? Seeing a few new unit leaks leaves little to hypothesize off of, just be patient and wait for the release. No need for any more "the sky is falling" rhetoric that seems so popular these days.
clamclaw wrote: How is there honestly any room for discussion on new Tau when there is no codex? Seeing a few new unit leaks leaves little to hypothesize off of, just be patient and wait for the release. No need for any more "the sky is falling" rhetoric that seems so popular these days.
Agreed, but it's been posted 4+ times and Dmin7 isn't the type to listen to reasonably reasonable reasons.
Dman137 wrote:I have about 6 different army's and play with all of them.
SM Tau
Eldar
Orks
CSM IG Necrons
And do really well with all of them, even in the current meta
And yet somehow, you're always complaining about Eldar not doing well. Funny that we never hear about your Orks/IG/CSM winning tournaments; it shouldn't be such a problem if you're the great general that you say you are.
Based on what you've said in the past, I get the impression that you simply bandwagoned onto those armies when they were the current flavor-of-the-month in terms of the meta.
Tactical_Spam wrote:
Vryce wrote: Odd you started this thread OP. Considering a little over a week ago you started the thread talking about how awesome the Ghostkeel is.
Tell me, how does it feel to be the living embodiment of contradiction?
Dman137 wrote: so my multiple best general awards and best over all awards mean nothing.? Clearly lol
Can't top my million bazillion award. They mean squat... seriously.
You can't say a codex is bad till it's leaked or released.
Now go back to your place under the bridge you troll
so then anyone that has ever won a award means nothing.? Clearly you have never won anything so I guess you have nothing to make yourself feel good about. As for the tau, I have clearly stated that "if the new you it's that have been leaked are any indication of what's to come" the. Yes tau will be crap
For all we know, the Riptide got buffed to high heaven and Markerlights got turned to solid cheddar. It's far too early for anyone to start making predictions about the power level of the upcoming Tau codex.
Also, bit of a PSA: if Dman137 says something really offensive again, make sure to quote him in your response. The Mods can remove the original text, but to my knowledge they can't do the same to quoted text. Disclaimer: I am not responsible for the use or abuse of this technique. Use at your own discretion. Please don't get mad at me mods.
Tinkrr wrote: That's like saying "Hey, we can try to make balanced rules for all of these cool models, although we might not always get it right, so we're not even going to try..."
Bingo. You just described exactly the GW design studio's attitude.
That just shouldn't ever be the case. Especially when they have access to so many great community resources that will happily provide them with data and input, such as the ITC guys.
And I know they tried doing FAQ sticker things in the past and it failed, but that was way back before we had as much technology as we do now. I feel like with digital codices and the majority of people having smart phones, it's not unreasonable to do an FAQ update once every three months or so to try to balance things a little.
Back on topic... GW needs a shake up. I don't know what it would be. Buy out? Top management replaced? Jervis retiring?
But I really think a panel of 3 top tournament players and 3 top TOs could make a 2 page errata document that after a couple months of playtesting would bring the game into a very close approximation of balance... how does GW not have 2 paid rules design guys with 4 interns/volunteers that playtest constantly to see how rules interact on the table?! And if they do, FIRE THESE GUYS, because they are horrible at their job.
It would be nice to see some consistency between the rule sets, we have 3/4 books in one style 3/4 books in another all in the same release set... But on topic the new Tau book looks good, more on par with the rest of the set pre Necrons (obvs in a competitive environment that means nothing) but there are still gonna be markerlights and Riptides, throw in the Stormsurge and they will have some good shooting across the board, Tau players I wouldn't worry I would guess itll be the current Tau dex +1.
Tinkrr wrote: That's like saying "Hey, we can try to make balanced rules for all of these cool models, although we might not always get it right, so we're not even going to try..."
Bingo. You just described exactly the GW design studio's attitude.
That just shouldn't ever be the case. Especially when they have access to so many great community resources that will happily provide them with data and input, such as the ITC guys.
And I know they tried doing FAQ sticker things in the past and it failed, but that was way back before we had as much technology as we do now. I feel like with digital codices and the majority of people having smart phones, it's not unreasonable to do an FAQ update once every three months or so to try to balance things a little.
But they don't. If you go back and read the GW-published BatReps, you will notice that they don't even play the game by the rules they publish. They will literally make up rules and permissions to hold a game under. They say that this is how they intend the game to be played, which is why they don't write FAQs any more. If there's a problem? "Fix it yourself amongst your mates" is GW's line.
Tinkrr wrote: That's like saying "Hey, we can try to make balanced rules for all of these cool models, although we might not always get it right, so we're not even going to try..."
Bingo. You just described exactly the GW design studio's attitude.
That just shouldn't ever be the case. Especially when they have access to so many great community resources that will happily provide them with data and input, such as the ITC guys.
And I know they tried doing FAQ sticker things in the past and it failed, but that was way back before we had as much technology as we do now. I feel like with digital codices and the majority of people having smart phones, it's not unreasonable to do an FAQ update once every three months or so to try to balance things a little.
But they don't. If you go back and read the GW-published BatReps, you will notice that they don't even play the game by the rules they publish. They will literally make up rules and permissions to hold a game under. They say that this is how they intend the game to be played, which is why they don't write FAQs any more. If there's a problem? "Fix it yourself amongst your mates" is GW's line.
That just baffles me to no end, because they can easily have both as an option. I know I bring up MtG a lot around here, but I have to do it again here, as MtG does have very set rules for multiple modes of play, but it constantly acquires new player generated content. There are several formats now which players just came up with, that were popular enough for the company itself to adopt and support. So why on Earth would GW believe that simply if they made standardized rules of play (such as the ITC or others) it would hurt people having the option to play the game outside of those rules? Especially since we have multiple examples where despite strict highly functioning rules being in place people still come up with amazing new ways to play a game outside of those rules.
Tau s are already OP and they will be even better for sure... Please stop crying about your new codex and try to imagine how those poors orks, chaos space marines, dark eldars, tyranids and imperial guards feel since a long time .... Maybe its your turn to play with an ugly codex after all? Join us !
Tau are not OP. They are on the upper-mid tier, but not OP. They used to be in 6th with shenanigans (and even then it was mostly taudar), but not in 7th.
Edit: also, ever hear about our previous codex? Don't talk to me about "your turn to play an ugly codex".
Tau probably also get a bad reputation because of the Firebase Cadre, not for their own army, but because it can be taken by other armies that generally lack fire power in order to almost completely nullify that issue. So it's like they're OP as long as they aren't actually playing Tau D:
JinxDragon wrote: I approve of the less then over-powered nature of the leaks we have seen, as Game Workshop needs to work on their 'power creep' problem anyway.
Yeah, GW tried that and released a years worth of stinker dexes before cranking it back to 11 with crons. Guess sales weren't doing so hot. But whatever, its only 20% of their customers that play the game, what do we know.
JinxDragon wrote: I approve of the less then over-powered nature of the leaks we have seen, as Game Workshop needs to work on their 'power creep' problem anyway.
Yeah, GW tried that and released a years worth of stinker dexes before cranking it back to 11 with crons. Guess sales weren't doing so hot. But whatever, its only 20% of their customers that play the game, what do we know.
Problem is that they can crank out Codexes as fast or as slow as possible, once a book is out then you're stuck with it for however many months GW decides to come back around to you. If you've got a good book, great! If not, you're out of luck. That's why the one thing I do like about Age of Sigmar is that all the rules came out at the same time (and are free), so if something is overpowered, then it can be edited easily for balance purposes.
Of course, then there is the whole 'still waiting on that Necron FAQ' thing floating about.
Frozocrone wrote: Problem is that they can crank out Codexes as fast or as slow as possible, once a book is out then you're stuck with it for however many months GW decides to come back around to you. If you've got a good book, great! If not, you're out of luck. That's why the one thing I do like about Age of Sigmar is that all the rules came out at the same time (and are free), so if something is overpowered, then it can be edited easily for balance purposes.
Of course, then there is the whole 'still waiting on that Necron FAQ' thing floating about.
Buddy, we've been waiting on FAQs for everybody for quite some time now. Problem is FAQs don't make GW money, so GW does not publish FAQs anymore. I'd be willing to be that there will be at least one issue in the new Tau codex that will require some kind of clarification.
alex0911 wrote: Tau s are already OP and they will be even better for sure... Please stop crying about your new codex and try to imagine how those poors orks, chaos space marines, dark eldars, tyranids and imperial guards feel since a long time .... Maybe its your turn to play with an ugly codex after all? Join us !
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
I'm desperately waiting for the day when Chaos Marines finally get themselves something better than an Autocannon & Plasma gun as our most optimised upgrades! I would kill for GW to finally release the other plastic Greater Daemons - especially the LoC!
That doesn't mean however that I think Tau players or anyone else should get a gakky release just because my favourites are still likely years away.
If anything, I'm personally excited to see what Tau players are getting, as their model releases (re-vamped Fire Warriors & Crisis Suits), could possibly mean that when Chaos Marines eventually (if ever mind you), get a much needed update, that we could see the likes of our basic grunts + other long suffering kits get a badly needed face lift!
And if the Tau codex turns out to be more of a synergy based book, rather than a "spam units X/Y/Z = win" book, then that's even better... Not only will it mean that Tau will be more fun to play against than obnoxious bullgak like Thunderdome/Scatbike spam/etc..., but it might be a sign that Chaos Marines will end up in a similar boat too!
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
The problem is that the same few armies always get left at the bottom, nids (only average in 4th), orks (never good), IG (average, till 6th, then bad), CSM (Only good in 3rd), DA (never good) in every codex cycle.
The same few armies are also always on the top of the cheese pile every edition. Eldar has been massively overpowered for 25 years, and even the nerfing edition of 5th completely missed them (their codex did not get updated). Tau has been strong since 4th with Fish of Fury, average in 5th, then powerful from then on, especially with the riptide. Necrons has always been strong, just not eldar strong.
The rest are stuck in the middle, with some marine variant being above average each edition, but never coming close to eldar, crons or tau.
Now, this sees one of the top armies moving to average, but the whole purpose of the exercise is to buff eldar and keep the powergaming cheesemongers happy. Its no surprise that now, at the end of the good cycle, the only codexes left to update are the aforementioned bad ones. Expect rules like synapse to work by removing every model not covered by it, CSM somehow even becoming more bland, 13pt ork boys, etc.
alex0911 wrote: Tau s are already OP and they will be even better for sure... Please stop crying about your new codex and try to imagine how those poors orks, chaos space marines, dark eldars, tyranids and imperial guards feel since a long time .... Maybe its your turn to play with an ugly codex after all? Join us !
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
I'm desperately waiting for the day when Chaos Marines finally get themselves something better than an Autocannon & Plasma gun as our most optimised upgrades! I would kill for GW to finally release the other plastic Greater Daemons - especially the LoC!
That doesn't mean however that I think Tau players or anyone else should get a gakky release just because my favourites are still likely years away.
If anything, I'm personally excited to see what Tau players are getting, as their model releases (re-vamped Fire Warriors & Crisis Suits), could possibly mean that when Chaos Marines eventually (if ever mind you), get a much needed update, that we could see the likes of our basic grunts + other long suffering kits get a badly needed face lift!
And if the Tau codex turns out to be more of a synergy based book, rather than a "spam units X/Y/Z = win" book, then that's even better... Not only will it mean that Tau will be more fun to play against than obnoxious bullgak like Thunderdome/Scatbike spam/etc..., but it might be a sign that Chaos Marines will end up in a similar boat too!
That's not what he's saying at all. There is a power level that the majority of the game sits at, and Tau is well above that. Acting like Tau will suck if they are nerfed is what the guy you quoted is mocking, especially since they will still likely be above the majority of the game.
It's not about wanting other people to have a gak codex. It's about wanting other people not to have a stupidly OP codex that ruins the balance of the game. Nids and Guard are very strong, and I really don't think DE and CSM are bad at all either.
Look guys... Dboy has the best awards of all time! Let us not forget his sacrifice of eldar trickery, his dice rolls of eldar cheese, and his gloating of eldar pride. All forget about.. Who? Oh, dboy, that's right
That's not what he's saying at all. There is a power level that the majority of the game sits at, and Tau is well above that. Acting like Tau will suck if they are nerfed is what the guy you quoted is mocking, especially since they will still likely be above the majority of the game.
It's not about wanting other people to have a gak codex. It's about wanting other people not to have a stupidly OP codex that ruins the balance of the game. Nids and Guard are very strong, and I really don't think DE and CSM are bad at all either.
I can get from a general perspective that overall power can be relative/subjective, but a lot of what you have said here is objectively false.
Tyranid Monstrous Creatures are in many cases overcosted and not durable enough compared to their counterparts. The army relies on unit synergy and massed numbers, but has only limited options with which to use these concepts. There is a reason why competitive Tyranid armies revolve around taking as many flying hive Tyrants as possible; by virtue of being undercosted the unit is actually effective for its points, which cannot be aid for a majority of tyranid units that aren't gaunts.
Chaos Space Marines lack virtually any form of inter-army or even unit synergy. Their units are in many cases overcosted compared to equivalent units form other armies, and lack any sort of flexibility in army composition. The only reason CSM are taken competitively is for the use of one of their few good units, the Heldrake, and as a means of taking Bel'akor as allies for your Chaos Daemons army.
While Dark Eldar are in a decent position regarding power alone, they pale in comparison to the utter overpoweredness of Craftworld Eldar. Their units also don't put out enough firepower to justify their low durability, and they are meant to be an assault army in an edition that heavily favors shooting.
Imperial Guard are in a sorry state indeed. The game now heavily favors mobility, which the Imperial guard must now buy in the from of overcosted and ineffective transports. On average, their Orders are less reliable than psychic powers, espcially if all psychic dice are spent in one power. IG tanks are overcosted both for their firepower and their durability.
Disparage them all you will, but tournament rankings are an effective means of sorting out the power level of various armies. Taking into account flukes such as the occasional Ork win, Tyranids having one solid easily spammed unit, and Eldar being nerfed via house rules, as well as ignoring the use of allies, Chaos Space Marines and Imperial Guard are consistently ranked last.
Tau are a powerful codex, but compared to the top-tier books they are a mid-level army. The only way they appear overpowered is if they bring the cheeseiest combinations against armies and factions that have no effective answers, such as CSM, IG, and non-Flyrant-spam Tyranids.
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
The problem is that the same few armies always get left at the bottom, nids (only average in 4th), orks (never good), IG (average, till 6th, then bad), CSM (Only good in 3rd), DA (never good) in every codex cycle.
The same few armies are also always on the top of the cheese pile every edition. Eldar has been massively overpowered for 25 years, and even the nerfing edition of 5th completely missed them (their codex did not get updated). Tau has been strong since 4th with Fish of Fury, average in 5th, then powerful from then on, especially with the riptide. Necrons has always been strong, just not eldar strong.
The rest are stuck in the middle, with some marine variant being above average each edition, but never coming close to eldar, crons or tau.
Now, this sees one of the top armies moving to average, but the whole purpose of the exercise is to buff eldar and keep the powergaming cheesemongers happy. Its no surprise that now, at the end of the good cycle, the only codexes left to update are the aforementioned bad ones. Expect rules like synapse to work by removing every model not covered by it, CSM somehow even becoming more bland, 13pt ork boys, etc.
Think you might want to check up your history there friend, IG were considered top tier for atleast a while during 5th, eldar were rather low tier during 5th, and tau were perhaps the worst army in the game (on par with chaos and nids) once fish of fury disappeared until 6th ed came out. To be honest the only "always top" faction has been necrons, with space marines always being atleast solid to good.
Yes though, dark angels and chaos always get shafted and trolled
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
The problem is that the same few armies always get left at the bottom, nids (only average in 4th), orks (never good), IG (average, till 6th, then bad), CSM (Only good in 3rd), DA (never good) in every codex cycle.
The same few armies are also always on the top of the cheese pile every edition. Eldar has been massively overpowered for 25 years, and even the nerfing edition of 5th completely missed them (their codex did not get updated). Tau has been strong since 4th with Fish of Fury, average in 5th, then powerful from then on, especially with the riptide. Necrons has always been strong, just not eldar strong.
The rest are stuck in the middle, with some marine variant being above average each edition, but never coming close to eldar, crons or tau.
Now, this sees one of the top armies moving to average, but the whole purpose of the exercise is to buff eldar and keep the powergaming cheesemongers happy. Its no surprise that now, at the end of the good cycle, the only codexes left to update are the aforementioned bad ones. Expect rules like synapse to work by removing every model not covered by it, CSM somehow even becoming more bland, 13pt ork boys, etc.
Think you might want to check up your history there friend, IG were considered top tier for atleast a while during 5th, eldar were rather low tier during 5th, and tau were perhaps the worst army in the game (on par with chaos and nids) once fish of fury disappeared until 6th ed came out. To be honest the only "always top" faction has been necrons, with space marines always being atleast solid to good.
Yes though, dark angels and chaos always get shafted and trolled
This is also sadly incorrect. Necrons were trash in 5th Edition until the actual 5th/6th Edition codex written by Matt Ward came out. The only army that is consistently decent to good is Space Marines to my knowledge with maybe the exception of 4th Edition.
Chaos Space Marines were uber-strong in 3.5, while Dark Angels have a powerful new codex, so neither of those qualify either.
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
The problem is that the same few armies always get left at the bottom, nids (only average in 4th), orks (never good), IG (average, till 6th, then bad), CSM (Only good in 3rd), DA (never good) in every codex cycle.
The same few armies are also always on the top of the cheese pile every edition. Eldar has been massively overpowered for 25 years, and even the nerfing edition of 5th completely missed them (their codex did not get updated). Tau has been strong since 4th with Fish of Fury, average in 5th, then powerful from then on, especially with the riptide. Necrons has always been strong, just not eldar strong.
The rest are stuck in the middle, with some marine variant being above average each edition, but never coming close to eldar, crons or tau.
Now, this sees one of the top armies moving to average, but the whole purpose of the exercise is to buff eldar and keep the powergaming cheesemongers happy. Its no surprise that now, at the end of the good cycle, the only codexes left to update are the aforementioned bad ones. Expect rules like synapse to work by removing every model not covered by it, CSM somehow even becoming more bland, 13pt ork boys, etc.
Think you might want to check up your history there friend, IG were considered top tier for atleast a while during 5th, eldar were rather low tier during 5th, and tau were perhaps the worst army in the game (on par with chaos and nids) once fish of fury disappeared until 6th ed came out. To be honest the only "always top" faction has been necrons, with space marines always being atleast solid to good.
Yes though, dark angels and chaos always get shafted and trolled
Eldar hiave historically been at the top of the power pyramid in every edition they've gotten a codex produced in, which is every edition except 5th. IG were only ever considered a top tier army for one edition and were laughably bad in 3E and 4E, and have always had one of the worst internal balance schemes of any army in the game.
FMC Commander just got leaked! Thoughts? No Smash or Vector Strike but could be very interesting depending on our new support/signature systems.. Comes with a High Output Burst cannon and Missile Pod
You seem to forget all their power came from formations, not new units. Necrons and space marines and even dark Angels got nothing. Stop whining about not getting the riptide 2.0
alex0911 wrote: Tau s are already OP and they will be even better for sure... Please stop crying about your new codex and try to imagine how those poors orks, chaos space marines, dark eldars, tyranids and imperial guards feel since a long time .... Maybe its your turn to play with an ugly codex after all? Join us !
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
I'm desperately waiting for the day when Chaos Marines finally get themselves something better than an Autocannon & Plasma gun as our most optimised upgrades! I would kill for GW to finally release the other plastic Greater Daemons - especially the LoC!
That doesn't mean however that I think Tau players or anyone else should get a gakky release just because my favourites are still likely years away.
If anything, I'm personally excited to see what Tau players are getting, as their model releases (re-vamped Fire Warriors & Crisis Suits), could possibly mean that when Chaos Marines eventually (if ever mind you), get a much needed update, that we could see the likes of our basic grunts + other long suffering kits get a badly needed face lift!
And if the Tau codex turns out to be more of a synergy based book, rather than a "spam units X/Y/Z = win" book, then that's even better... Not only will it mean that Tau will be more fun to play against than obnoxious bullgak like Thunderdome/Scatbike spam/etc..., but it might be a sign that Chaos Marines will end up in a similar boat too!
That's not what he's saying at all. There is a power level that the majority of the game sits at, and Tau is well above that. Acting like Tau will suck if they are nerfed is what the guy you quoted is mocking, especially since they will still likely be above the majority of the game.
It's not about wanting other people to have a gak codex. It's about wanting other people not to have a stupidly OP codex that ruins the balance of the game. Nids and Guard are very strong, and I really don't think DE and CSM are bad at all either.
Well if the avarge good codex is eldar or necron. Then necron are the suck. Being better then the worse books doesn't suddenly make a codex good. Tau are better then IG, and probably still will be. But if they aren't at least just as good as necron or eldar, they kind of are the suck, there is acting needed.
Dioxalyn wrote: FMC Commander just got leaked! Thoughts? No Smash or Vector Strike but could be very interesting depending on our new support/signature systems.. Comes with a High Output Burst cannon and Missile Pod
That armour better give +1 Toughness/EW or else one melta or groundin check and you can say goodbye to it
Our formations are going to have to be amazing for us to be seen in competitive lists and teams.
Somehow I got the feeling GW is going to mess that up too. Every single new thing we've seen has been basically a lemon. The best of the units is the mediocre Stormsurge and the good side grade of the XV95.
Well, assuming the high output burst cannon is more shots on a burst cannon, and missile pods stay the same, I can feel happy that there are no FMC meltas or plasmas going around
Dioxalyn wrote: FMC Commander just got leaked! Thoughts? No Smash or Vector Strike but could be very interesting depending on our new support/signature systems.. Comes with a High Output Burst cannon and Missile Pod
That armour better give +1 Toughness/EW or else one melta or groundin check and you can say goodbye to it
Hah yeah right after I posted that I thought about that. I'm sure it will. Putting a shield gen and Stim injector on a FMC commander could make him pretty tough and able to kill stuff solo. as a FMC his attacks are AP2, giving him some decent close combat capabilities too. Im hoping the HOBC has a higher str than the reg BC, maybe its the riptides burst cannon without the nova charge, str6 ap4 assault 6
Edit: Whoops sorry guys didn't realize Smash is what made a MC's attacks AP2, ignore that part
He doesn't get smash. Shield Generator could be useful, but FnP I'm iffy about.
DE: Razorwing Dark Lance
Eldar: Crimson Hunter Pulse Laser
Orks: Traktor Kannon, mass Rokkits
Tyranids: S8 Vector Strike
DoC: S8+ Vector Strike
IoM: Stormraven Multi Melta and Fire Raptor
Tau: Skyray Seeker Missile
There is a lot of S8 Skyfire out there. Couldn't think of one for CSM but they do have Helldrakes which can easily cause a groundin check.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gamgee wrote: Our formations are going to have to be amazing for us to be seen in competitive lists and teams.
Somehow I got the feeling GW is going to mess that up too. Every single new thing we've seen has been basically a lemon. The best of the units is the mediocre Stormsurge and the good side grade of the XV95.
Out of curiousity, what would you do if Tau turned out as rubbish overall?
Tyranid Monstrous Creatures are in many cases overcosted and not durable enough compared to their counterparts. The army relies on unit synergy and massed numbers, but has only limited options with which to use these concepts. There is a reason why competitive Tyranid armies revolve around taking as many flying hive Tyrants as possible; by virtue of being undercosted the unit is actually effective for its points, which cannot be aid for a majority of tyranid units that aren't gaunts.
Well, that's because people are playing Tyranids wrong. Maxing out on Flyrants may be a popular to play but its not the only way to play, nor is it necessarily the strongest. Sean (OrdoSean on here) has had more success at high profile tournament than any other Nid player, and he maxes out on Lictors and Mawlocs. In my opinion I am sure the best way to play Nids is only 2x Flyrants and a strong mixed ground force with Carnifexes and Exocrine, rolling for Onslaught and the 1/3 chance of Master of Ambush, I've never lost a game that I rolled MOA (anecdotal tho it's undeniably crazy). Tyranid codex may have terrible internal balance, but outside of the outliers like Eldar and Tau, I do not think some of our better MC's are overcosted or outclassed at all, Carnifexes, Mawlocs and maybe an Exocrine are great units. Regardless, 5 Flyrant might be the quick and easy generic tourney list, but it has some big holes and bad match ups, I think this is just a misassumption about the Nid dex from how you've seen the internet groupthink mentality translate onto the battlefield. There is much more to the dex than Flyrants and thinking otherwise is objectively incorrect.
I personally think CSM and their bikes are one of the most if not the absolute most underrated army in the game, that's just my opinion though
TheNewBlood wrote: While Dark Eldar are in a decent position regarding power alone, they pale in comparison to the utter overpoweredness of Craftworld Eldar.
That's exactly my point bro. Eldar is one of the outliers as well, even more so, I don't see how you can think otherwise on that.
Dioxalyn wrote: FMC Commander just got leaked! Thoughts? No Smash or Vector Strike but could be very interesting depending on our new support/signature systems.. Comes with a High Output Burst cannon and Missile Pod
That armour better give +1 Toughness/EW or else one melta or groundin check and you can say goodbye to it
Hah yeah right after I posted that I thought about that. I'm sure it will. Putting a shield gen and Stim injector on a FMC commander could make him pretty tough and able to kill stuff solo. as a FMC his attacks are AP2, giving him some decent close combat capabilities too. Im hoping the HOBC has a higher str than the reg BC, maybe its the riptides burst cannon without the nova charge, str6 ap4 assault 6
No smash, and it looks like the rules for the armour are right there in the entry, so...
Frozocrone wrote: He doesn't get smash. Shield Generator could be useful, but FnP I'm iffy about.
DE: Razorwing Dark Lance
Eldar: Crimson Hunter Pulse Laser
Orks: Traktor Kannon, mass Rokkits
Tyranids: S8 Vector Strike
DoC: S8+ Vector Strike
IoM: Stormraven Multi Melta and Fire Raptor
Tau: Skyray Seeker Missile
There is a lot of S8 Skyfire out there. Couldn't think of one for CSM but they do have Helldrakes which can easily cause a groundin check.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gamgee wrote: Our formations are going to have to be amazing for us to be seen in competitive lists and teams.
Somehow I got the feeling GW is going to mess that up too. Every single new thing we've seen has been basically a lemon. The best of the units is the mediocre Stormsurge and the good side grade of the XV95.
Out of curiousity, what would you do if Tau turned out as rubbish overall?
Keep playing them, but very grumpily and with lots of angrish involved. I wouldn't say our group plays at a tournament level but we do play semi-competitively. If that makes any sense. You won't see triple Riptides but you might see one or two flyrants and equivalent cheese of the factions played. But not an entire list dedicated to cheese top to bottom. I've been known to bring a Riptide and Y'vahrah in one list so it's pretty good list. Then again I also bbring Kroot because those guys look cool.
Rubbish was the wrong word to use, I should have said less-competitive but I didn't brain today.
Quite jealous of your meta. All of my friends have jumped on triple Canoptek Harvest/triple Helldrake/Thunderdome and I'm hesistant to buy my 4th Flyrant.
I have to say, the Thunderdome player used to play Tau - and nothing is changing his mind, apart from the Ta'unar.
"Yeah why would someone ever release something that decreases the power of something OP. How dare they let Tau move down the unbalanced ladder. "
Oh god some people....
Well you think it is a bad release because the units are not autoincludes? Well you might judge a release by the power level.
I on the other hand is happy. I see a successful release as something that released cool looking models where their power level is according to their lore and that their points is adjusted to be a balanced unit. Well balanced is relative with GW so asking as it's not op or gak I am more than happy
Frozocrone wrote: Rubbish was the wrong word to use, I should have said less-competitive but I didn't brain today.
Quite jealous of your meta. All of my friends have jumped on triple Canoptek Harvest/triple Helldrake/Thunderdome and I'm hesistant to buy my 4th Flyrant.
I have to say, the Thunderdome player used to play Tau - and nothing is changing his mind, apart from the Ta'unar.
My Chaos friend brings two Helldrakes. So like I said we play fairly balanced.
Yeah I want the Ta'unar pretty badly (but its banned in the ITC and we try stick to their guidelines). I would only use it if my opponents had some equivalent units of power and they don't or don't want to bring them. If I get the Ta'unar its not going to see the table that frequently. Only thing stopping me from grabbing one is the limited edition Tidewall fortification coming out. It's limited and it looks like it could be effective if they give it some good rules.
Chaos Space Marines lack virtually any form of inter-army or even unit synergy. Their units are in many cases overcosted compared to equivalent units form other armies, and lack any sort of flexibility in army composition. The only reason CSM are taken competitively is for the use of one of their few good units, the Heldrake, and as a means of taking Bel'akor as allies for your Chaos Daemons army. .
I've always called the CSM book the 'NEW UNITS BUY THEM NOW' book. And even then GW dropped the ball as the Mutilators, Warp Talons and arguably the Dinobots all turned out to be a pile of gak. You literally bought cultists and Heldrakes, splashed in Nurgle liberally and that was your army. Which was pretty much a huge slap in the face (again) for anyone with a pre 5th edition CSM army. And to make matters worse, the hobby section (as pitiful as it is now in the newer books) still seems to want to encourage people to use slapdash mishmash armies that look like a unicorn hopped up on some sort of hallucinogen spewed out a pack of skittles. Even their 'studio' Black Legion army is a train wreck as no one seems to have told them that having a consistent basing scheme improves an armies appearance by 50% easily - it wouldn't be so bad if they decided to continue with the changed basing scheme (from grey ash with static grass to that drab earth colour) but they didn't even do that - their new Warp Talons and Mutilators suddenly had static grass back on the bases.
Nevermind the fact that they seem to have these poor red and black CSM who can't decide whether they are World Eaters (vehicles in the 3.5 codex), Red Corsairs (5th ed codex) or Daemonkin.
Sure, the new Tau stuff doesn't look that hot.
But hey, at least you're getting a consistent looking painted army out of it. You could always be CSM with their mishmash basing scheme and constantly repainted models.
This kind of attitude is just as bad as those claiming the new codex is "the suck" 3 weeks before it's even released...
Yes, a few armies are always left in the dust eating poo sandwiches while agonisingly awaiting their turn at an update. That's no reason however to suggest or even wish that another army has to get a terrible book, just to make you feel better about your current out of date/under powered codex.
The problem is that the same few armies always get left at the bottom, nids (only average in 4th), orks (never good), IG (average, till 6th, then bad), CSM (Only good in 3rd), DA (never good) in every codex cycle.
The same few armies are also always on the top of the cheese pile every edition. Eldar has been massively overpowered for 25 years, and even the nerfing edition of 5th completely missed them (their codex did not get updated). Tau has been strong since 4th with Fish of Fury, average in 5th, then powerful from then on, especially with the riptide. Necrons has always been strong, just not eldar strong.
The rest are stuck in the middle, with some marine variant being above average each edition, but never coming close to eldar, crons or tau.
Now, this sees one of the top armies moving to average, but the whole purpose of the exercise is to buff eldar and keep the powergaming cheesemongers happy. Its no surprise that now, at the end of the good cycle, the only codexes left to update are the aforementioned bad ones. Expect rules like synapse to work by removing every model not covered by it, CSM somehow even becoming more bland, 13pt ork boys, etc.
Think you might want to check up your history there friend, IG were considered top tier for atleast a while during 5th, eldar were rather low tier during 5th, and tau were perhaps the worst army in the game (on par with chaos and nids) once fish of fury disappeared until 6th ed came out. To be honest the only "always top" faction has been necrons, with space marines always being atleast solid to good.
Yes though, dark angels and chaos always get shafted and trolled
nope. 5th was the nerf-edition, starting with the DA blandex. Eldar players are always ultra-quick to remind evereyone within earshot how they got "nerfed" by not having a codex, when in fact, they missed the entire edition of nerfing, and were as usual, at the very peak of the powercurve, maybe slightly closer to the rest of the pack, but that is unacceptable to them, because it made eldar too hard to play for them.
Pray, tell, why was IG considered good during 5th?
This is also sadly incorrect. Necrons were trash in 5th Edition until the actual 5th/6th Edition codex written by Matt Ward came out. The only army that is consistently decent to good is Space Marines to my knowledge with maybe the exception of 4th Edition.
Chaos Space Marines were uber-strong in 3.5, while Dark Angels have a powerful new codex, so neither of those qualify either.
False.
Did you forget living metal and monolith spam in 3rd? Did you forget that all their stuff could glance anything to death? Did you forget reanimation protocols? The only thing that was bad was pariahs.
4th edition space marines had chapter tactics which made them extremely modular and responsive, it was their best dex if you ignore grav-spam. people keep saying SM were powerful, yet there were hard counters every edition, especially from eldar. SM has been solidly middle-class, never even coming close to touching eldar. Do you play eldar? This falsehood is often propogated by eldar players.
CSM was one of the top in 3rd with IW oblit/basilisk spam, good in 4th with lash prince, and average with hellturkey after that. Always a 1-trick pony with all other units being crap. Cult marines has been consistently bad, except sometimes with plague marines good once in a long while. They're the most similar to tyranids, except tyranids being much worse.
LOL @ DA being powerful. confirmed for eldar player.
So I would have to say that out of the current new releases that the Ghostkeel is easily the best one so far while the rest personally I find really cool, when breaking it down:
Breachers: Despite the hate they have recieved I still think they are a really good choice, especially when paired with Devilfish (basing this if their stats remain the same or if other releases have shown us gotten cheaper). They are really fluffy and i feel they can be quite devastating if used correctly.
Ghostkeel: As Mentioned above easily the best out of the new releases so far. With an amazing cover save on top of a T5 3+ armor save and the fact they can be taken in squadrons is really quite awesome! Their Weapon options are really the only thing I would say is a not so good due to the fact that the Fusion Small Blast weapon will probably never be used. The Ion weapon (x6 S7 AP4 Shots) is pretty damn amazing, especially when taken in a squadron and with Marker Light support and with the Cover shenanigans they should be able to stay alive barring they get caught in CC.
Stormsurge: Biggest complaint that I have about this guys is that I feel he is overcosted on top of having so many other units in the Codex that cand do what he can do for much cheaper points wise (based on the old Codex and when comparing to recent releases I dont see any super huge changes being made to weapons overall). Also being listed as a "Titan Killer" is comical when he only has a 10 inch range D weapon! Despite this I think it is still an awesome model and it can be best used decently as an anti-armor units (excluding Imperial Knights, Titans and Superheavies) thanks to a double shot S10 AP2 Ordnance Weapon but it does excel at killing infantry.
Coldstar Commander Suit: Honestly very lacking in terms of effectiveness when you break it down. 60pts. for your Commander Suit to become a FMC however with it lacking Vector Strike, Smash and Causing fear it really is underwhelming, especially since it is limited to only taking a Missile Pod and High Yield Burst Cannon (new weapon however not expecting anything crazy since it is a Burst Cannon) on top of only x2 Support Systems and access to drones, which if you decide to Swoop the Drones are removed from the battlefield! From a fluff and perspective side however this is awesome and very fluffy, the idea of my commander zooming through the skies dueling Flyers and Flytyrants is pretty badass, from a "competitive" or more tactical standpoint it is very underwhelming.
That being said however as mentioned we do not know the full extent of changes to the Codex so it is much to soon to make any final and definite guesses to the overall perfomrance of the book. Also it is WAY to early to right off the Codex and even these units, however I do feel that some Formation Special Rules are in order to truly make some fo these effectve. I do not mind if we end up being more of a middle tier Codex, maybe FINALLY Imperial Players will stop crying about how "OP" we are (we know were not!) and I personally welcome the challenge if we are left facing an uphill battle.
At 60 points and it's limitations, it's far from an auto include but I can see myself taking a second commander in a list for this upgrade and flying into my opponents backfield to rear armor light vehicles or force jink saves.
As long as i can still get a target lock, this FMC would clock in around 150 points, and that's not too bad.
@dman please stfu your giving us csm players a bad name please I'd quite happily take my csm vs you and I'd probably slaughter you lol. From the impression I g you don't understand tactics and rely on raw power to win
Champion of Slaanesh wrote: @dman please stfu your giving us csm players a bad name please I'd quite happily take my csm vs you and I'd probably slaughter you lol. From the impression I g you don't understand tactics and rely on raw power to win
This sentence was difficult to read.
It's hard to form an opinion on the new Tau until I have read the new codex. We've seen several leaks on various new units (Breechers, Ghostkeel, Stormsurge and now the commander crisis suit). Anyone that plays Tau know that it's all about the wargear and how the units work together that make/break the army. We still don't know if Markerlights have been changed, how Supporting Fire may or may not work yet, support weapons, etc. etc.
When those questions are answered, THEN we can say how awesome/disappointing the Tau are.
This is also sadly incorrect. Necrons were trash in 5th Edition until the actual 5th/6th Edition codex written by Matt Ward came out. The only army that is consistently decent to good is Space Marines to my knowledge with maybe the exception of 4th Edition.
Chaos Space Marines were uber-strong in 3.5, while Dark Angels have a powerful new codex, so neither of those qualify either.
False.
Did you forget living metal and monolith spam in 3rd? Did you forget that all their stuff could glance anything to death? Did you forget reanimation protocols? The only thing that was bad was pariahs.
4th edition space marines had chapter tactics which made them extremely modular and responsive, it was their best dex if you ignore grav-spam. people keep saying SM were powerful, yet there were hard counters every edition, especially from eldar. SM has been solidly middle-class, never even coming close to touching eldar. Do you play eldar? This falsehood is often propogated by eldar players.
CSM was one of the top in 3rd with IW oblit/basilisk spam, good in 4th with lash prince, and average with hellturkey after that. Always a 1-trick pony with all other units being crap. Cult marines has been consistently bad, except sometimes with plague marines good once in a long while. They're the most similar to tyranids, except tyranids being much worse.
LOL @ DA being powerful. confirmed for eldar player.
Did you read my post at all? I said Necrons in 5th Edition before the Matt Ward codex. They were trash tier in 5th Edition until they got updated, end of story.
I didn't say Space Marines were the strongest faction, I said they were arguably the most consistent in that they've never had a poor codex for an edition. Eldar were mediocre in 5th Edition. Again, simple logic.
How does your Chaos Space Marine talk disprove my point that Chaos Space Marines were exceptionally strong in 3.5 which was itself a response to another poster saying Chaos Space Marines have always had bad codices?
Regarding Dark Angels, you're either oblivious or just trolling. Ravenwing are one of the hottest new builds in the competitive scene and numerous respected tournament players/personalities have all attested to this. To say they don't have a strong codex now is outright wrong.
I'm also not an Eldar player. Quit acting like a child.
They were hard to play with, but people were wining GT sized events with footdar. Show me a GT sized event won, by realy mediocre armies in 5th like old IG or DE or DA?
Gamgee wrote: Our formations are going to have to be amazing for us to be seen in competitive lists and teams.
Somehow I got the feeling GW is going to mess that up too. Every single new thing we've seen has been basically a lemon. The best of the units is the mediocre Stormsurge and the good side grade of the XV95.
All of the major tournament players I've spoken to heavily disagree with you. All of the major tournament players I've seen that have shared their opinions on the new units have had very hopeful thoughts. Hell, Reecius and Frankie both predicted the "mediocre" Stormsurge would become a fixture of competitive Tau lists in ITC events in units of two. If they were so "mediocre", why would those two suggest players would spend 720+ points on them for their tournament lists?
Besides, even if we go by your logic that the new releases are terrible and that this must mean the codex is going to be awful, stop and use your brain for just a second. How do the rules for a handful of new units have any bearing on the codex? Do you know what Broadsides/Riptides/Fire Warriors/Skyrays/Kroot/Vespid/Pathfinders/etc are in the new codex? No? Do you have any actual evidence that any of our good units are being nerfed? Additionally, do you have any evidence that are bad units aren't getting buffs? You don't, so stop spreading this preposterous pre-release hate for a book you haven't even read.
I don't buy into the "Tau are going to be over-powered" talk either but this kind of behaviour is just laughable. You have absolutely no idea about the individual datasheets of 20+ units, the general wargear rules, the relics, the formations, the unique detachment or darn near anything that constitutes the majority of a codex. If you want to keep trash-talking a codex that hasn't released yet, go ahead and do so. Or, if you want to have a proper discussion about the facts when they become available for a product we have no real knowledge of, join in on the fun in a week or two. If they end up sucking, cool, your opinion will be vindicated. It won't change the fact that you're jumping the gun over nothing.
I'm sorry if it sounds like a personal attack as I don't mean it to be that way, but honestly, I'm so sick and tired of this kind of reaction. It's the same damn thing every time a codex is about to be/is released. The difference here is we haven't even seen anything from the codex aside from the profiles of four new units, when we have an existing roster of twenty-four units. I get that you're a Tau player and you don't like most of the new releases, that's fine. But damning a codex before you've even read it and implying that the codex will be dead in the water unless they get uber-good formations? Come on.
They were hard to play with, but people were wining GT sized events with footdar. Show me a GT sized event won, by realy mediocre armies in 5th like old IG or DE or DA?
They were still considered widely mediocre because of the difficulty of playing them, meaning the best tournament players could get big wins with them but the vast majority of players couldn't do squat with them. Take the current Tyranid book for example, people have been getting big wins with Lictor-oriented/Flyrant-oriented lists, but it doesn't change the fact that the codex is mediocre.
One thing that remains to be seen with the Coldstar is whether the battlesuit itself confers certain benefits that wouldn't be listed in the WD snapshot.
As it is currently, the army list entry lists the particular Battlesuit worn by the unit, and then you have to flip to the Wargear section to see what that particular Battlesuit does.
Dr. Delorean wrote: One thing that remains to be seen with the Coldstar is whether the battlesuit itself confers certain benefits that wouldn't be listed in the WD snapshot.
As it is currently, the army list entry lists the particular Battlesuit worn by the unit, and then you have to flip to the Wargear section to see what that particular Battlesuit does.
It's possible seeing as the wargear for the stock Commander simply reads "Crisis Battlesuit" which would imply there is a section detailing what each battlesuit comes with, just like with the current 6th Edition codex. I'm a bit on the fence though seeing as the Coldstar entry does state it comes with a Multi-Tracker and Blacksun Filter, meaning there likely won't be a part for it in that aforementioned battlesuit section.
kburn wrote: LOL @ DA being powerful. confirmed for eldar player.
I guess I must be an Eldar player too even though I don't have a single space elf miniature because I say that the new DA codex IS powerful. If you disagree I'm guessing that you haven't played against Ravenwing or SuperFriends yet.
Pretty much @Lammikkovalas. I can't believe people still think Dark Angels are weak, it's almost as bad as the whole "Chaos Daemons have a weak codex" stuff.
kburn wrote: LOL @ DA being powerful. confirmed for eldar player.
I guess I must be an Eldar player too even though I don't have a single space elf miniature because I say that the new DA codex IS powerful. If you disagree I'm guessing that you haven't played against Ravenwing or SuperFriends yet.
Yup DA is very powerful now. Which I personally think is a good thing since they have finally gotten a codex that doesn't suck.
Dr. Delorean wrote: One thing that remains to be seen with the Coldstar is whether the battlesuit itself confers certain benefits that wouldn't be listed in the WD snapshot.
As it is currently, the army list entry lists the particular Battlesuit worn by the unit, and then you have to flip to the Wargear section to see what that particular Battlesuit does.
It's possible seeing as the wargear for the stock Commander simply reads "Crisis Battlesuit" which would imply there is a section detailing what each battlesuit comes with, just like with the current 6th Edition codex. I'm a bit on the fence though seeing as the Coldstar entry does state it comes with a Multi-Tracker and Blacksun Filter, meaning there likely won't be a part for it in that aforementioned battlesuit section.
The previews in WD are fairly reflective of the eventual unit entry, but they don't include everything. The new Dwarf character lacked any armour listed in his WD entry but he had gromril in the Dwarf book, for example, and the 'Fire Team' rule on the Ghostkeel isn't defined in its entry. Those are just two examples, I'm sure there are others.
Also true, I'm personally hoping if anything it has Toughness 5 as otherwise it just takes one failed grounding test/lucky Strength 8 hit to insta-gib what is probably a decently expensive unit. In contrast, Strength 10 isn't nearly as common so it would have a much easier time that way.
If you took a snap shot of the Wolf Lord entry in the Space Wolf book and saw the upgrade to a Thunderwolf, you would have no idea what that really did.
The Coldstar could easily modify several stats and we wouldn't know it just by the snap shot. I like the idea of a suit with FMC maneuverability. The loss of a few MC rules is not that big of a deal to me, and the best part is that the unit doesn't have to start in reserve and can join another unit during deployment.
I'm seeing a lot of "waahhhhh my tau won't become the new eldar" which is a great thing as this game needs to start being more balanced and not lets spam all the most powerful units in the game so I can roflstomp everyone I come across.
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote: I'm seeing a lot of "waahhhhh my tau won't become the new eldar" which is a great thing as this game needs to start being more balanced and not lets spam all the most powerful units in the game so I can roflstomp everyone I come across.
Balance being brought in by a new codex? HERESY!
Quoted and exalted for truth. The most powerful codexes need to be toned down, and the least powerful need to be brought up.
Ideally, once 8th edition drops, everyone will be updated at the same time.
Dozer Blades wrote:There is a rumor riptides can take coldstar upgrade.
IG was by far the top tier army in 5th.
Holy....that would be insane! I'm guessing it's not true.
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote:I'm seeing a lot of "waahhhhh my tau won't become the new eldar" which is a great thing as this game needs to start being more balanced and not lets spam all the most powerful units in the game so I can roflstomp everyone I come across.
Balance being brought in by a new codex? HERESY!
I'm hoping for a Space Marine-tier codex, meaning very good and flexible.
This has probably already been said but the thing that makes all the other new codices so good is the formations and "decurions" which we haven't seen for tau yet.
At this point with previous releases we maybe new Space marines hadn't really change much apart from dreads and scouts, Necrons hadn't either apart from reanimation becoming FNP+, Eldar got their GC and a couple interesting little changes but it would have all been just as disappointing if not more so than what we know of the tau update.
No ones got anywhere near the number of new releases Tau are getting and i'm sure their "decurion" will be just as effective as the Decurion, Battlehost, Lions Blade and Gladius when we find out about it, so there's no real grounds to say its disappointing so far compared to the other army updates.
Taffy17 wrote: This has probably already been said but the thing that makes all the other new codices so good is the formations and "decurions" which we haven't seen for tau yet.
At this point with previous releases we maybe new Space marines hadn't really change much apart from dreads and scouts, Necrons hadn't either apart from reanimation becoming FNP+, Eldar got their GC and a couple interesting little changes but it would have all been just as disappointing if not more so than what we know of the tau update.
No ones got anywhere near the number of new releases Tau are getting and i'm sure their "decurion" will be just as effective as the Decurion, Battlehost, Lions Blade and Gladius when we find out about it, so there's no real grounds to say its disappointing so far compared to the other army updates.
Exalted. How people are legitimately writing this codex off already when we know so little is almost beyond belief.
This is also sadly incorrect. Necrons were trash in 5th Edition until the actual 5th/6th Edition codex written by Matt Ward came out. The only army that is consistently decent to good is Space Marines to my knowledge with maybe the exception of 4th Edition.
Chaos Space Marines were uber-strong in 3.5, while Dark Angels have a powerful new codex, so neither of those qualify either.
False.
Did you forget living metal and monolith spam in 3rd? Did you forget that all their stuff could glance anything to death? Did you forget reanimation protocols? The only thing that was bad was pariahs.
4th edition space marines had chapter tactics which made them extremely modular and responsive, it was their best dex if you ignore grav-spam. people keep saying SM were powerful, yet there were hard counters every edition, especially from eldar. SM has been solidly middle-class, never even coming close to touching eldar. Do you play eldar? This falsehood is often propogated by eldar players.
CSM was one of the top in 3rd with IW oblit/basilisk spam, good in 4th with lash prince, and average with hellturkey after that. Always a 1-trick pony with all other units being crap. Cult marines has been consistently bad, except sometimes with plague marines good once in a long while. They're the most similar to tyranids, except tyranids being much worse.
LOL @ DA being powerful. confirmed for eldar player.
If you aren't even going to read the posts you respond to, you should probably just stop arguing incessantly.
Also, the irony of how bad you mock Eldar for being brainless and OP, going as far as saying "lol Eldar player confirmed" in response to a opinion you deem outlandish (never mind that it's a very accurate one and shows how out of touch you are) is not lost on me, considering your original argument is that Tau shouldn't be so crippled to be playing 40k amongst the majorities power level, and we shouldn't be whining if you guys are allowed to compete with Eldar in brokenness again. The dualistic nature of your two statements due to personal bias is pretty hilarious.
Also, am I wrong in think that Eldar are one of the armies best suited to deal with the things that make DA so strong? Making that statement just nothing but pure biased nonsense?
Caederes wrote: Reecius and Frankie both predicted the "mediocre" Stormsurge would become a fixture of competitive Tau lists in ITC events in units of two. If they were so "mediocre", why would those two suggest players would spend 720+ points on them for their tournament lists?
Well, I'm not saying that Stormsurge is lacking at all, but a fair answer to that question would be "because they are two average players who are better suited to making interesting blogs and batreps?"
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Resin Glazed Guardsman wrote: I'm seeing a lot of "waahhhhh my tau won't become the new eldar" which is a great thing as this game needs to start being more balanced and not lets spam all the most powerful units in the game so I can roflstomp everyone I come across.
Taffy17 wrote: This has probably already been said but the thing that makes all the other new codices so good is the formations and "decurions" which we haven't seen for tau yet.
At this point with previous releases we maybe new Space marines hadn't really change much apart from dreads and scouts, Necrons hadn't either apart from reanimation becoming FNP+, Eldar got their GC and a couple interesting little changes but it would have all been just as disappointing if not more so than what we know of the tau update.
No ones got anywhere near the number of new releases Tau are getting and i'm sure their "decurion" will be just as effective as the Decurion, Battlehost, Lions Blade and Gladius when we find out about it, so there's no real grounds to say its disappointing so far compared to the other army updates.
Exalted. How people are legitimately writing this codex off already when we know so little is almost beyond belief.
Welcome to DakkaDakka, where the sky is always falling, and if a new book isn't Eldar x10 then it's obviously CSM -1,000,000!
Gamgee wrote: Yeah I want the Ta'unar pretty badly (but its banned in the ITC and we try stick to their guidelines). I would only use it if my opponents had some equivalent units of power and they don't or don't want to bring them. If I get the Ta'unar its not going to see the table that frequently.
I love you right now. This is how you should play with big units, don't force them down your opponents throat, see if they want to play with them/have units of equivalent power.
I can be nice if my opponent is. Also the ITC has voted in experimentals. Which means free reign on my Y'vahrah and R'varna suits. Muahaaha! Let the reaping begin!
They were hard to play with, but people were wining GT sized events with footdar. Show me a GT sized event won, by realy mediocre armies in 5th like old IG or DE or DA?
They were still considered widely mediocre because of the difficulty of playing them, meaning the best tournament players could get big wins with them but the vast majority of players couldn't do squat with them. Take the current Tyranid book for example, people have been getting big wins with Lictor-oriented/Flyrant-oriented lists, but it doesn't change the fact that the codex is mediocre.
In one format that favors the list greatly, nerfs invisbility and everything eldar. In all other tournaments, like the ones in europe, the list does not work at all.
Welcome to DakkaDakka, where the sky is always falling, and if a new book isn't Eldar x10 then it's obviously CSM -1,000,000!
I am still waiting for the updates to IG told, posters promised me and the streamlining of other armies. On the other hand. Or at least for someone to explain to me again why the IG codex is fine.
Balance being brought in by a new codex? HERESY!
How do the tau balance anything. Do they keep in check eldar or necron or grav marines, so other armies can get a better chance?
I'm disappointed in the look of the new stealth suit....thing.
All the new suits are looking the same now a days they should each visually differ I mean they could have given the new suit a stealth look just for aesthetics like hard corners like a stealth bomber I know it won't make sense in the world but it would give it a different look to yet another thrown together from spare tau parts battlesuit
Eh, I like it, it's in line, visually, with XV25s. Although it's head it pretty stupid, either go along with the built in head, or the robot head, not both.
No, kidding aside, how can we possibly tell if Tau are top , mid or shelf tier without a full codex, full playtestng, tourney battles, allies-in, nerfs and new rules to be tested?
Hope....dangles on a string, like slow spinning perfection.....
All the new suits are looking the same now a days they should each visually differ I mean they could have given the new suit a stealth look just for aesthetics like hard corners like a stealth bomber I know it won't make sense in the world but it would give it a different look to yet another thrown together from spare tau parts battlesuit
Also when do we get:
That's already out. It's called Dropzone Commander.
Seriously now, is that scratch built or an actual mini? If so from where? First thing I saw that, I thought of Heavy Gear.
All the new suits are looking the same now a days they should each visually differ I mean they could have given the new suit a stealth look just for aesthetics like hard corners like a stealth bomber I know it won't make sense in the world but it would give it a different look to yet another thrown together from spare tau parts battlesuit
Also when do we get:
That's already out. It's called Dropzone Commander.
Seriously now, is that scratch built or an actual mini? If so from where? First thing I saw that, I thought of Heavy Gear.
Looks like it was put together using bits from (at least) 2 piranha kits and a hammerhead/skyray kit, probably more.
How do the tau balance anything. Do they keep in check eldar or necron or grav marines, so other armies can get a better chance?
He's saying them getting nerfed is one less army up there with Eldar thus improving balance
If it even happens. Which remains to be seen
It doesn't improve anything, if the army to beat is eldar and necron. If a new army comes and can't do this. Then necron and eldar are still at the top, and at best you get less balance, because suddenly the weaker armies have a harder time. Balance can be achived in two ways. Either all armies are bad, but then the game wouldn't probably be fun. Or if all armies are OP. You can't have more balance by having one army dominate others, and maybe two keeping up with it, while others are downright worse.
Bronzefists42 wrote: Good.
That's one less army that's pounding 75% of the other armies into oblivion with repetitive cheesey units.
Then bad news for you: the new Tau releases are disappointing because they are not cheesy enough to keep up with the 25%. They are still at least a league above the 75%, don't worry about that.
For example, a Stormsurge with the mega-shotgun and the Skyfire support system just annihilates Tyrannids of all shape and form. It hard-counters Flyrants so hard, it isn't even funny. Yet, in these forums, it is considered a "subpar" unit .
I'm pretty confidant that the Tau's Decurion set-up and their various formations will put them on an equal footing against the other 7.5 ed. codices... Combined alongside their basic advantages such as their Supporting Fire/Overwatch bonuses, Markerlights and various wargear, I'm willing to bet wearing a bloody Maple Leafs jersey that Tau will quickly be declared even more OP than Kraftworld Cheesedar within a few days of the codex release.
Wait. We are complaining that Tau suck even before the codex is released? Just look what happened last time. Codex was released, Tau was boring and sucked.
We all know how that turned out for a while, lots of crying and gnashing of teeth because of how Over Powered Tau were at the time.
Davor wrote: Wait. We are complaining that Tau suck even before the codex is released? Just look what happened last time. Codex was released, Tau was boring and sucked.
We all know how that turned out for a while, lots of crying and gnashing of teeth because of how Over Powered Tau were at the time.
Well, isn't Dakka's no.1 hobby to constantly b**** & whine that the sky is always falling?!
Still, I'll give Dakka some incredibly slight credit... We're only saying that the new Tau are obviously going to suck. When Daemons were coming out, the amount of elitism and "proof" that they were 1000% unplayable and would auto-lose every single game was something to truly behold...
Followed up of course by those same vocal geniuses crawling back barely a couple weeks later and bemoaning how Daemons had just broken 40k with their OP cheese.
Champion of Slaanesh wrote: @dman please stfu your giving us csm players a bad name please I'd quite happily take my csm vs you and I'd probably slaughter you lol. From the impression I g you don't understand tactics and rely on raw power to win
Hahahah you give yourself a bad name. As for you beating me, yeah man your the best #1 haha I only play against real generals and by the sound of it you sound like your a 13 year old kid who just got his first army. Play a few games get some experience and then you can play me.
If there's anyone who seems like they're coming into the wrong side of puberty, it's you Dman137.
Experiment 626 wrote:
Davor wrote: Wait. We are complaining that Tau suck even before the codex is released? Just look what happened last time. Codex was released, Tau was boring and sucked.
We all know how that turned out for a while, lots of crying and gnashing of teeth because of how Over Powered Tau were at the time.
Well, isn't Dakka's no.1 hobby to constantly b**** & whine that the sky is always falling?!
Still, I'll give Dakka some incredibly slight credit... We're only saying that the new Tau are obviously going to suck. When Daemons were coming out, the amount of elitism and "proof" that they were 1000% unplayable and would auto-lose every single game was something to truly behold...
Followed up of course by those same vocal geniuses crawling back barely a couple weeks later and bemoaning how Daemons had just broken 40k with their OP cheese.
Welcome to DakkaDakka, where everything is terrible until proven OP.
At least there are some voices of reason around here willing to point out that we barely know anything about the new Tau. For all we know at this point, they could end up being more powerful than Craftworld Eldar (shudders).
Davor wrote: Wait. We are complaining that Tau suck even before the codex is released? Just look what happened last time. Codex was released, Tau was boring and sucked.
We all know how that turned out for a while, lots of crying and gnashing of teeth because of how Over Powered Tau were at the time.
Well, isn't Dakka's no.1 hobby to constantly b**** & whine that the sky is always falling?!
Still, I'll give Dakka some incredibly slight credit... We're only saying that the new Tau are obviously going to suck. When Daemons were coming out, the amount of elitism and "proof" that they were 1000% unplayable and would auto-lose every single game was something to truly behold...
Followed up of course by those same vocal geniuses crawling back barely a couple weeks later and bemoaning how Daemons had just broken 40k with their OP cheese.
Welcome to DakkaDakka, where everything is terrible until proven OP.
At least there are some voices of reason around here willing to point out that we barely know anything about the new Tau. For all we know at this point, they could end up being more powerful than Craftworld Eldar (shudders).
Personally, I'm expecting that once the dust settles and the non-knee jerking Tau players spend some time with the new codex, that their Decurion/Gladius style detachment will at least put them on a fairly even footing against the new Vanilla/DA/Necron codices.
Who knows, they might even get a formation or two for the likes of Pathfinders and/or a Firebase Cadre that makes Scatbike spam & Ravenwing shenanigans cry!
In all fairness, when Tau came out the knee jerk reactions was that the ability to deal with heavy armored vehicles would be really nerfed and that it would boil down to a few major builds.
For example, Broadsides and Riptides both have 2 weapon options with one being obviously superior.
Targeting arrays were gone and cover removal was easier so marker light spam would be a thing.
For the most part the knee-jerk reaction was right. Though a lot of Tau's power came from allies and the supplement later anyways.
The Tidewall and Ghostkeel are going to make tears. You know. i think I got a position I want to sit a Stormsurge in. Or better yet a Ta'unar.
Muahah! The rules are out and holy feth is it amazing.
I knew you couldn't give us complete crap GW, you just has to throw out one really powerful unit or fortification in this case. I'm so... SOO... glad I preordered mine. Pathfinders just got 10x more useful with this wall.
Gamgee wrote: The Tidewall and Ghostkeel are going to make tears.
As a Tau player it actually makes me upset how good that wall is.
It's a fortification that moves, redirects shots in the worst way, and lets units shot as if they haven't moved.
For mobile Tau fortifications, I just wanted wall emplacements that you deepstrike after turn 1.
I fully support the new Tearwall. I might buy a Stormsurge now because of it. It all depends on if it gets save. I got my Tearwall in the first few seconds of it being online. Muhahaha.
How do the tau balance anything. Do they keep in check eldar or necron or grav marines, so other armies can get a better chance?
He's saying them getting nerfed is one less army up there with Eldar thus improving balance
If it even happens. Which remains to be seen
It doesn't improve anything, if the army to beat is eldar and necron. If a new army comes and can't do this. Then necron and eldar are still at the top, and at best you get less balance, because suddenly the weaker armies have a harder time. Balance can be achived in two ways. Either all armies are bad, but then the game wouldn't probably be fun. Or if all armies are OP. You can't have more balance by having one army dominate others, and maybe two keeping up with it, while others are downright worse.
The fact is there isn't perfect balance, but we can be happy when we get closer. Endarterectomy is ridiculously OP, having a couple. Armies that compete with them doesn't improve balance, having them on the majority of the rest of the games level and drawing back towards it like I hope the new Tau release has done, does much more to improve balance.
You don't normalise the entire rest of the game in the direction of the outlier. You tweak the outliers back in line with the majority. Elder need nerds, is simple as that. If they don't get nerds, making a couple of other armies just as OP to compete with them just throws out balance even further.
You don't normalise the entire rest of the game in the direction of the outlier. You tweak the outliers back in line with the majority. Elder need nerds, is simple as that. If they don't get nerds, making a couple of other armies just as OP to compete with them just throws out balance even further.
I dont know about needing Nerds. They already have their fair share of fanboys/fangirls, probably even a few geeks, and even a few wierdos who go all in for the pointy ear thing. But Nerds. Surely not.
I'm pretty sure you meant to say nerfs. But its late, and I'm tired, and maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Eldar do need more Nerds.
You don't normalise the entire rest of the game in the direction of the outlier. You tweak the outliers back in line with the majority. Elder need nerds, is simple as that. If they don't get nerds, making a couple of other armies just as OP to compete with them just throws out balance even further.
I dont know about needing Nerds. They already have their fair share of fanboys/fangirls, probably even a few geeks, and even a few wierdos who go all in for the pointy ear thing. But Nerds. Surely not.
I'm pretty sure you meant to say nerfs. But its late, and I'm tired, and maybe I'm wrong. Maybe Eldar do need more Nerds.
Whoops, this stupid iPad doesn't realise "nerf" is a word haha
You don't normalise the entire rest of the game in the direction of the outlier. You tweak the outliers back in line with the majority. Elder need nerds, is simple as that. If they don't get nerds, making a couple of other armies just as OP to compete with them just throws out balance even further.
When was it the last time GW made eldar bad, when they got a new codex ? Oh yes, never. So the only way to get any form of balance is not to hope that one day GW will nerf eldar and that is good that other armies are weaker, but to give all other armies good enough rules to play vs eldar, and other armies. I don't see the logic of weaker armies bringing more balance to the game, when we know that when the time comes for eldar to get a new book it will be powerful again.
You don't normalise the entire rest of the game in the direction of the outlier. You tweak the outliers back in line with the majority. Elder need nerds, is simple as that. If they don't get nerds, making a couple of other armies just as OP to compete with them just throws out balance even further.
When was it the last time GW made eldar bad, when they got a new codex ? Oh yes, never. So the only way to get any form of balance is not to hope that one day GW will nerf eldar and that is good that other armies are weaker, but to give all other armies good enough rules to play vs eldar, and other armies. I don't see the logic of weaker armies bringing more balance to the game, when we know that when the time comes for eldar to get a new book it will be powerful again.
Their 4th edition codex literally shoehorned them into abusing one specific build due to how bland & otherwise mediocre everything else was... But then that's what happens when Jervis decides to do a 180 within a week of the final codex draft being completed, and wants to instead simplify the crap out of everything.
So we got bland'tastic & overly simplified codices for Eldar, Dark Angels & Chaos Marines, then a shift towards 'more options but still relatively simplified' with Orks & Daemons, before the flood gates opened and Marines - Guard - SW's - BA's - DE - GK's - Newcrons.
And yes, you never go ahead and ramp everything up to the nines with super power creep! That's exactly how GW successfully destroyed 7th edition Fantasy, which became the single worst edition that game had ever seen!
I don't think the Mr. Missile Arm suit is over priced, it's just compared to the eldar version he looks over costed. I find it to be a remarkably balanced model.
Davor wrote: Wait. We are complaining that Tau suck even before the codex is released? Just look what happened last time. Codex was released, Tau was boring and sucked.
It is Dakka where every codex is either completely discounted or wishlisted to death before it sees the light of day. The people doing the former are then thrilled because their favorite book is actually better than all that. The latter are never pleased because there is no way that GW will EVER meet the wishes of those people in a given book.
As with everything I will wait and see what the book looks like before complaining about it.
Tau seem to already be pretty damn good without the updated codex. They really ought to focus on the armies that are in need of serious help, not the ones that can already stand on their own two feet.
I'm all about the nerf bat coming down on Tau however.
A thread where people jump to conclusions when the release and all the rules aren't out? Unheard of. Might wanna wait for the army selection bonuses you get by adhering to the Tau "decurion."
Next to that I can't fathom where someone got the idea of Tau being worse off than before. Getting new units nerfs an army when they weren't there before? Unlogical. Say Tyranids got a new unit suddenly, does it make them nerfed? Doesn't make any sense.
Tau is getting more powerful than they were before.
Well the first wave of rule leaks are out and they are all bad for the Tau.
Coldstar commander CANNOT take iridium armor, no other bonuses, and his "upgraded burst cannon" is 18", 5/5, 6 shot TL.
pathfinders are the same cost
Devilfish is 80 points (WAY too much still)
and on the modeling side, each set of 3 crisis suits only contain 4 of each weapon, so that may mean no more doubling up the same weapons (or have to try and find extra weapon bits)
and on the modeling side, each set of 3 crisis suits only contain 4 of each weapon, so that may mean no more doubling up the same weapons (or have to try and find extra weapon bits)
IIRC, this is an improvement, as so far it was 1 weapon of each/suit.
Otherwise, this is pretty much "news at 11" category: nothing changes and a flavorful option is really just a flavorful option (what a shock!).
The Crisis Suits always came with one of each weapon, which is rather annoying since a kit of three currently provides me with enough weapons for 1.5 Crisis Suits.
Tau wasn't nerfed, it just didn't get some changes that could have been good for it. Such as reduced Devilfish costs and some changes to the Pathfinders.
and on the modeling side, each set of 3 crisis suits only contain 4 of each weapon, so that may mean no more doubling up the same weapons (or have to try and find extra weapon bits)
Poor Tau players, they only get at least one of every single unit option in their new kit...
Meanwhile there's some of us who don't even get 50% of our unit's basic options in our basic kits.
kronk wrote: Until we see the formations, reports of the demise of Tau are premature.
Their formations can be literal potatoes and they'd still not be a bad army at this point. Tau are a tier 1.5 army not because they aren't good, but because they have too much difficulty with Deathstars. Though even then the second place finish in the Nova Open was a Tau'dar army, heavy on the Tau.
You don't normalise the entire rest of the game in the direction of the outlier. You tweak the outliers back in line with the majority. Elder need nerds, is simple as that. If they don't get nerds, making a couple of other armies just as OP to compete with them just throws out balance even further.
When was it the last time GW made eldar bad, when they got a new codex ? Oh yes, never. So the only way to get any form of balance is not to hope that one day GW will nerf eldar and that is good that other armies are weaker, but to give all other armies good enough rules to play vs eldar, and other armies. I don't see the logic of weaker armies bringing more balance to the game, when we know that when the time comes for eldar to get a new book it will be powerful again.
By the same logic, when have GW ever released a really OP Dex, and then released all the subsequent codexes and had them ALL be on the same power level as the current strongest one? Never, and they never will. The fact is, even if Eldar is buffed FURTHER next Dex, it's still a good thing if the rest of the game is balanced as sensibly as possible amongst itself. Just because they choose to make games completely unbalanced in one matchup for the rest of the game, doesn't mean we need two or three ridiculous match ups making it even more unbalanced, just because Kelly has a hard on for his Eldar and is incapable of winning games with fair odds. In fact, considering that what we both agree on here is that GW will always keep Eldar strong from this point, if by some outlandish possibility the entire rest of the cast which is Fairly Well balanced amongst itself as is, was all buffed up to Eldars level, then you know the next Eldar Dex they'd just shave like a third of the points off everything and 1-up the case again. Eldar sits where it does because this is what they've decided is where they should sit balance wise for them, 1 Dex could be a mistake, 2 in a row means it's cemented until direction/management changes. If they decided everything needed a power ramp, there's no reason to believe they wouldn't include Eldar in it too. What you are doing is just power creeping.
Regardless, it's beside the point, because one outlier is better than two or three, and Tau coming back down a little and improving like 10 match ups balancewise does more for balance overall than just throwing it out the window in regards to the rest of the game, just to put them on even footing with the outlier, which just... Creates another outlier.
By the same logic, when have GW ever released a really OP Dex, and then released all the subsequent codexes and had them ALL be on the same power level as the current strongest one? Never, and they never will. The fact is, even if Eldar is buffed FURTHER next Dex, it's still a good thing if the rest of the game is balanced as sensibly as possible amongst itself. Just because they choose to make games completely unbalanced in one matchup for the rest of the game, doesn't mean we need two or three ridiculous match ups making it even more unbalanced, just because Kelly has a hard on for his Eldar and is incapable of winning games with fair odds. In fact, considering that what we both agree on here is that GW will always keep Eldar strong from this point, if by some outlandish possibility the entire rest of the cast which is Fairly Well balanced amongst itself as is, was all buffed up to Eldars level, then you know the next Eldar Dex they'd just shave like a third of the points off everything and 1-up the case again. Eldar sits where it does because this is what they've decided is where they should sit balance wise for them, 1 Dex could be a mistake, 2 in a row means it's cemented until direction/management changes. If they decided everything needed a power ramp, there's no reason to believe they wouldn't include Eldar in it too. What you are doing is just power creeping.
Regardless, it's beside the point, because one outlier is better than two or three, and Tau coming back down a little and improving like 10 match ups balancewise does more for balance overall than just throwing it out the window in regards to the rest of the game, just to put them on even footing with the outlier, which just... Creates another outlier.
I dunno. For plenty of armies, every book after Necrons was a case of the opposition suddenly getting much stronger.
Eldar are not the only outlier in this edition. There's HexFlyrants, Centstars, Thunderdome, War Convocation with BS taxi service, Gladius, and plenty more. What makes Eldar different is thatthey can be just as powerful without having to use allies shenanigans.
All of the things I listed are example of things being above the power curve of 7th edition. Tone down the offending units in every case, meaning Scatbikers, D-weapons, and Wraihtknights for Eldar, and things start to look much better in terms of balance.
Gamgee wrote: I fully support the new Tearwall. I might buy a Stormsurge now because of it. It all depends on if it gets save. I got my Tearwall in the first few seconds of it being online. Muhahaha.
Plethora of ignores cover. Now you're wall and models are crying. So easy to come by
Oh wow, Tau get buffed and all the players can do is whine. Tell you what, I will swap my Chimeras for your Devilfish. For a mere 25 points more I am going from being a tracked 12/10/10 12 man capacity tank with two useless guns to being a skimmer with 12/11/10, some actual firepower, way more accuracy and a few other minor buffs. I am now faster, can sacrifice my shooting to get a 3++ save, can boost to go even faster, ignore most terrain when moving over it, can actually provide fire support for my troops and no longer have to worry about basic infantry shooting me to death from the flanks.
Tau are NOT bad. It is doubtful that they WILL be bad. We have not seen the full codex yet so quit your whining and grow a pair.
master of ordinance wrote: Oh wow, Tau get buffed and all the players can do is whine. Tell you what, I will swap my Chimeras for your Devilfish. For a mere 25 points more I am going from being a tracked 12/10/10 12 man capacity tank with two useless guns to being a skimmer with 12/11/10, some actual firepower, way more accuracy and a few other minor buffs. I am now faster, can sacrifice my shooting to get a 3++ save, can boost to go even faster, ignore most terrain when moving over it, can actually provide fire support for my troops and no longer have to worry about basic infantry shooting me to death from the flanks.
Tau are NOT bad. It is doubtful that they WILL be bad. We have not seen the full codex yet so quit your whining and grow a pair.
Yep. I hardly imagine Tau are going to be the CSM of 7th.
The only actual buff I've seen was the Piranha getting +1 BS base. The rest of the codex is apparently not changing much if any and the new units we already have rules for.
But HRR, stealth suits, sniper drone teams, Kroot hounds outside the first, Krootox, Kroot shapers, Vespid, Devilfish, Hammerheads (especially since a fortification apparently does the same job better), and the fighter/bomber still have a huge risk of being fairly unusable. Adding in some new units that are mostly over costed kits doesn't really fix the problem. Especially since drones are going to cost $12 for a pair.
Tell you what, I will swap my Chimeras for your Devilfish.
This is the silliest argument that gets repeatedly used. Devilfish are limited to three units that can go inside them. Firewarriors, Kroot, and Pathfinders. Kroot have deployment options and can't take it dedicated. Pathfinders and firewarriors both suffer drawbacks from being embarked due to their long range and pathfinders having heavy weapons. The devilfish costs twice as much as the minimum squad size.
You also forgot to mention units capable of going in your transport thanks to the allies rule.
And again, just because the chimera is bad does not mean that other transports have to be good by default. If you're going to complain at least be logically consistent with it.
For a mere 25 points more I am going from being a tracked 12/10/10 12 man capacity tank with two useless guns to being a skimmer with 12/11/10, some actual firepower, way more accuracy and a few other minor buffs.
debatable on what you consider actual firepower. The range is limited to 18". More accurate? It's BS3 and the drones are T/L BS2, but I'm guessing you're assuming this is all BS5 and ignoring cover with no consideration for the cost of support units.
, can sacrifice my shooting to get a 3++ save
So you took the disruption pod without factoring in the extra 15 points?
Tau are NOT bad. It is doubtful that they WILL be bad. We have not seen the full codex yet so quit your whining and grow a pair.
Stop being insulting. Your arguments are half thought out and ignore key issues with transports, ie what units can go inside. You throw in upgrades and buffs as if they were free. To top it all off you routinely fall back to whining about how bad your army has it. So right back at you, quit whining and grow a pair.
A, its a skimmer, it can jink
B, good call, I had forgot that Tau where not auto BS 5 ignores cover. So in other words my BS is the same but my firepower has increased.
C, Actually the only units that we have which can purchase a transport are Command Sections, Infantry Sections (regular and Veteran) and Scion Sections. Oh and Ogryns but who actually uses them?
D, And tau cant have allies because?...
E, I am not being insulting, I am merely pointing out the fact that Tau are no where near as worse off as certain people keep trying to tell us they are.
F, and BTW you have just been given the Stealthtide and the Biggertide. Those units are considered buffs, given their stats.
Problem with the Devilfish is that it is priced fairly accordingly to its stats and weapons but what it has is a mix of being a medium combat vehicle and a transport when most people want one or the other. As a transport for Fire Warriors its incredibly expensive for a "go to point A to B" vehicle. For a Combat vehicle it has some firepower but it doesn't really do anything that other Tau units do. Also passengers can't shoot out of the vehicle so it is wasting all that shooting potential when they stay inside the fish. Fire Warriors are also cheap, have long range shooting, and lack special weapons that it becomes a case of buying a very expendable unit a fairly expensive transport it doesn't really need all that much. Pathfinders have zero synergy with the Devilfish given the pathfinder's purpose to be a markerlight source which is heavy.
Jink provides a 4+ cover with Disruption pod (15 points extra) adding +1 to that.
C, Actually the only units that we have which can purchase a transport are Command Sections, Infantry Sections (regular and Veteran) and Scion Sections. Oh and Ogryns but who actually uses them?
But you're not counting ally abuse. For example the DE fast open topped skimmers that Eldar can readily use.
Tau have no options outside of Kroot, Firewarriors, and Pathfinders to consider for this. The Chimera can have other units embarked on it. Is there any unit that could embark on this transport and gain a notable benefit?
D, And tau cant have allies because?...
Battle Brothers to be specific. AM have lots and lots. Tau have 1 that is not affected at all since they have Devilfish as well.
E, I am not being insulting, I am merely pointing out the fact that Tau are no where near as worse off as certain people keep trying to tell us they are.
You referred to complaints as whining and that people who complain can grow a pair. This is done after doing a fair bit of whining yourself in literally the exact same manner.
F, and BTW you have just been given the Stealthtide and the Biggertide. Those units are considered buffs, given their stats.
The Stormsurge occupies a LoW slot and the Ghostkeel the elite slot. All Tau FOC slots are very thin in options and it's nice to receive any. However the elite slot has a stealth unit that is not getting fixed to be usable and the Stormsurge really doesn't do anything besides advocate a static style of play and gunlining that is often complained about by other players. The Stormsurge's firepower is rather balanced for what it is, but if the Ion Accelerator isn't toned down it doesn't really correct key issues with the army.
The addition of new units that can be used and have a legitimate role in an army is fine. However there are still plenty of units that needed rules tweaking to be worth taking. This is a problem game wide. This is a problem that is fair to voice and should not be accepted as the norm.
ignore cover is honestly too good for 2 tokens and in my opinion it actually hinders opponent choices in a bad way.
One proposed change that I like is that 2 tokens removes cover granted by terrain. That way units that pay for things like stealth and shroud get the bonus and units can go to ground but both are still hindered.
Maybe make an option to use more markers or for HQs to grant ignore cover, but as it is currently it's just slightly excessive.
No changes to markerlights as far as I can tell. Guess I won't be playing Tau for some time (unless other things are nerfed).
What needed to change with Markerlights..?
Only issue I can see is how 2 markerlights can ignore 2+ worth of cover saves but honestly with how easy it is to kill most markerlight sources it isn't a huge deal (and I say this as an Ork player).
No changes to markerlights as far as I can tell. Guess I won't be playing Tau for some time (unless other things are nerfed).
What needed to change with Markerlights..?
Only issue I can see is how 2 markerlights can ignore 2+ worth of cover saves but honestly with how easy it is to kill most markerlight sources it isn't a huge deal (and I say this as an Ork player).
Good, cover saves are too strong and to easy to get.
I say old chaps, do any of you happen to be in possession of blurry, low-qualite photographic images of these Codex statistics? Because it would be jolly well and good if the fine citizens of DakkaDakka would give me such materiel.
No changes to markerlights as far as I can tell. Guess I won't be playing Tau for some time (unless other things are nerfed).
What needed to change with Markerlights..?
The god damn ignores cover on 2 markerlights needed to change.
If they'd just change it to -1 cover for each markerlight spent, it would be so much better. On models without stealth/shrouded, it be a nerf, but a slight one (seeing as they'd end up having a 6+ cover instead of none). However, on units that do have these special rules, it makes all the difference in the world. I pay a good amount of points to have units with stealth/shrouded and in case of Tyranids, you actually need it make up for your horrible armor saves and lack of invul saves unless you're playing pentyrant stuff.
HOWEVER, Tau are just like "Nope, I'll just counter the very mechanic your army is built around". I haven't had a single fun Tyranid game against Tau (where markerlights were involved).
Same deal with Skitarii, unless you're taking ultra-competitive allied drop pod shenanigans, you're basicly screwed unless you're fighting nothing but firewarriors.
The old system of 1 token for -1 cover didn't work in 5th and since then cover has become more plentiful with the addition of defense lines, going to ground, jink, stealth and shrouded.
This is also while the pathfinder lost out on durability with it's armor save.
So I don't like that idea at all. Marker tokens just become too scarce to do anything. In fact all it would do is just make big units that can remove lots of models more of a standard.
There needs to be fixes with the Riptide's IA along with Markers getting a slight toning down.
Savageconvoy wrote: The old system of 1 token for -1 cover didn't work in 5th and since then cover has become more plentiful with the addition of defense lines, going to ground, jink, stealth and shrouded.
This is also while the pathfinder lost out on durability with it's armor save.
They never should have had 4+ to begin with. They should have been 5+ with Stealth, same as their Eldar equivalent(Rangers).
So I don't like that idea at all. Marker tokens just become too scarce to do anything. In fact all it would do is just make big units that can remove lots of models more of a standard.
I really don't see this ever being the case. Never have I been in a situation where the other guy is hurting for Marker Tokens--but then again, the Tau player I commonly play against is bringing 3 full 10 man squads of Pathfinders with no upgrades beyond a couple of their drones.
There needs to be fixes with the Riptide's IA along with Markers getting a slight toning down.
Right, and the problem with Markerlights is that they are cumulative and allow no defense. Literally, there is NOTHING that you (as a player facing a Tau army) can do except not be in that 36" range to avoid being hit by Markerlights. They're the definition of nonsense.
They should be a flat bonus, incorporating multiple aspects of the "Token" system for each token used but not allowing the craziness that exists now.
I've gone over this before repeatedly and still feel that the best thing for Markerlights given the bonuses they give you now?
+1 BS, rerolls on To Hit/To Wound(both), and subtract a point of Cover from the target for all Tau units firing at a Marked target.
Give Pathfinders the "Target Lock" Support System, allow each Pathfinder to designate a different target. Make it so that they cannot Snap Fire Markerlights.
Voila. Tau become amazingly less annoying to play against for anyone who are running lists that rely upon Cover saves--and Tau players actually have to start bringing "Ignores Cover" weaponry to Ignore Cover.
It is kinda funny, the best army for dealing with Tidewall Tau is going to be more Tau. Honestly, I can't say I see what the big issue is with their codex remaining largely the same. Tau weren't broken before. They were upper mid-tier to lower upper-tier. Besides the Riptide (which can be killed fairly easily), not a whole lot of the codex was OP.
The worst part of the news coming out is that I want to travel back in time and stop Past Me from not starting Tau instead of one of my Space Marine armies.
I wouldn't call the Riptide easy to kill for most lists. In fact, it takes very specific weaponry that's not even available to many lists to really engage them efficiently. In fact, it's damn near impossible for a list like BA to kill them if the Tau player is savvy.
The way I see it is that Tau are deficient in some important areas right now, and overly competent in others. This is what keeps them out of the top tier.
Martel732 wrote: I wouldn't call the Riptide easy to kill for most lists. In fact, it takes very specific weaponry that's not even available to many lists to really engage them efficiently. In fact, it's damn near impossible for a list like BA to kill them if the Tau player is savvy.
It isn't easy, but it can be done. A squad of Death Company with make mincemeat out of it, especially if a chaplain equipped with the Angel's Wing is with them. Dante, an Angel's Wing Sang Priest, and a squad of Sanguinary Guard will be able to make a dent in one too. Needing to snap shot Interceptor makes it hard to hit the BA guys. Bubble wrap changes things a little, though.
Martel732 wrote: I wouldn't call the Riptide easy to kill for most lists. In fact, it takes very specific weaponry that's not even available to many lists to really engage them efficiently. In fact, it's damn near impossible for a list like BA to kill them if the Tau player is savvy.
It isn't easy, but it can be done. A squad of Death Company with make mincemeat out of it, especially if a chaplain equipped with the Angel's Wing is with them. Dante, an Angel's Wing Sang Priest, and a squad of Sanguinary Guard will be able to make a dent in one too. Needing to snap shot Interceptor makes it hard to hit the BA guys. Bubble wrap changes things a little, though.
None of those units will live to engage a Riptide in assault. Assaulting the thing is right out. It's grav or bust.
Martel732 wrote: The way I see it is that Tau are deficient in some important areas right now, and overly competent in others. This is what keeps them out of the top tier.
Pretty much. They are still very vulnerable to Assault and Psychic Phase.
Martel732 wrote: I wouldn't call the Riptide easy to kill for most lists. In fact, it takes very specific weaponry that's not even available to many lists to really engage them efficiently. In fact, it's damn near impossible for a list like BA to kill them if the Tau player is savvy.
It isn't easy, but it can be done. A squad of Death Company with make mincemeat out of it, especially if a chaplain equipped with the Angel's Wing is with them. Dante, an Angel's Wing Sang Priest, and a squad of Sanguinary Guard will be able to make a dent in one too. Needing to snap shot Interceptor makes it hard to hit the BA guys. Bubble wrap changes things a little, though.
None of those units will live to engage a Riptide in assault. Assaulting the thing is right out. It's grav or bust.
it's a good thing we can take Grav bikes then, huh?
I still think there needs to be a Grav Cannon Razorback turret.
Martel732 wrote: The way I see it is that Tau are deficient in some important areas right now, and overly competent in others. This is what keeps them out of the top tier.
Pretty much. They are still very vulnerable to Assault and Psychic Phase.
I think Tau are pretty resilient to assault, actually. What they lack is good ranged anti-armor, which is frankly not that important. Also, deathstars that reach a certain level of resiliency just run over the Tau. But BA trying to assault Tau? I just die to overwatch and my assaults are wasted on sacrificial units so the real units can shoot me some more the next turn. That's after sucking up turns of Tau fire. The two surviving marines can't kill the entire Tau army, so BA lose this pretty much every time with no real say in the matter.
Martel732 wrote: The way I see it is that Tau are deficient in some important areas right now, and overly competent in others. This is what keeps them out of the top tier.
Pretty much. They are still very vulnerable to Assault and Psychic Phase.
Martel732 wrote: I wouldn't call the Riptide easy to kill for most lists. In fact, it takes very specific weaponry that's not even available to many lists to really engage them efficiently. In fact, it's damn near impossible for a list like BA to kill them if the Tau player is savvy.
It isn't easy, but it can be done. A squad of Death Company with make mincemeat out of it, especially if a chaplain equipped with the Angel's Wing is with them. Dante, an Angel's Wing Sang Priest, and a squad of Sanguinary Guard will be able to make a dent in one too. Needing to snap shot Interceptor makes it hard to hit the BA guys. Bubble wrap changes things a little, though.
None of those units will live to engage a Riptide in assault. Assaulting the thing is right out. It's grav or bust.
it's a good thing we can take Grav bikes then, huh?
I still think there needs to be a Grav Cannon Razorback turret.
Grav bikes that the Tau ace from 60" away. You mean those grav bikes? After they are dead, the Riptide is immortal, which means death for BA lists. Against bottom tier codices, the IA is just obscene.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The German translations people have found from the new codex might have nerfed Supporting Fire severely, so it might be different now.
Well that gives Tau back a weakness that they are supposed to have, at least. Although, in the scheme of things, it's somewhat unwarranted because Tau should be shootier than Eldar and that's just no longer true. To be honest, I don't know where the Tau codex should be. Part of me thinks they should be able to compete with Eldar, because SOMEONE should be able to do that, but by definition, that's another codex I can't have a good game against with BA.
Orock wrote: The only ignores cover weaponry is the flamers though-hence why marker lights were developed.
Tau actually have four sources of Ignore cover weaponry. However, one of them is currently limited to one per army, unless you take it on a LoW (airbursting frag projector), one is on a unit that is typically better used as a heavy infantry/heavy vehicle hunter (flamer), one is only usable via markerlight designation (seeker missile) & one is a prohibitively expensive upgrade on already expensive vehicles, or secondary weapons systems on models where they don't always synergize well with their primary armament (SMS).
As to the complaint about only needing 2 markerlights to remove all cover, if any of the conversations I've had about Pathfinders on these forums is actually the norm, it sounds like many Tau armies don't have a plethora of marker tokens per shooting phase anyway, so if they're reducing cover, they may not have many left over to make the shooting at that target terribly accurate.
I don't necessarily have an issue with tokens going back to the old system of -1 cover per token, but completely redesigning the markerlight mechanic that has been fairly static since the army was released 14 years ago - a core army mechanic as well - simply because people think it OP is a bit ridiculous.
I don't think Tau removing cover for 2 marker lights (That's four marker light shots) is crazy at all. Especially with the new DA codex running around. The DA run my BA over like chumps (BA are nominally a CC list, but we can't do anything to DA), I can only imagine what would happen to Tau without ignore cover tech.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The German translations people have found from the new codex might have nerfed Supporting Fire severely, so it might be different now.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The German translations people have found from the new codex might have nerfed Supporting Fire severely, so it might be different now.
[Citation Needed]
It was in the news thread. Again, it is a translation. I am not going to hunt it down since it is not a sure thing. What units are eligible to fire due to Supporting Fire may have changed.
casvalremdeikun wrote: The German translations people have found from the new codex might have nerfed Supporting Fire severely, so it might be different now.
[Citation Needed]
It was in the news thread. Again, it is a translation. I am not going to hunt it down since it is not a sure thing. What units are eligible to fire due to Supporting Fire may have changed.
This has been proven incorrect. In the german translation the wording is mixed up. It is the same as the previous codex.
Savageconvoy wrote: The old system of 1 token for -1 cover didn't work in 5th and since then cover has become more plentiful with the addition of defense lines, going to ground, jink, stealth and shrouded.
This is also while the pathfinder lost out on durability with it's armor save.
They never should have had 4+ to begin with. They should have been 5+ with Stealth, same as their Eldar equivalent(Rangers).
So I don't like that idea at all. Marker tokens just become too scarce to do anything. In fact all it would do is just make big units that can remove lots of models more of a standard.
I really don't see this ever being the case. Never have I been in a situation where the other guy is hurting for Marker Tokens--but then again, the Tau player I commonly play against is bringing 3 full 10 man squads of Pathfinders with no upgrades beyond a couple of their drones.
There needs to be fixes with the Riptide's IA along with Markers getting a slight toning down.
Right, and the problem with Markerlights is that they are cumulative and allow no defense. Literally, there is NOTHING that you (as a player facing a Tau army) can do except not be in that 36" range to avoid being hit by Markerlights. They're the definition of nonsense.
They should be a flat bonus, incorporating multiple aspects of the "Token" system for each token used but not allowing the craziness that exists now.
I've gone over this before repeatedly and still feel that the best thing for Markerlights given the bonuses they give you now?
+1 BS, rerolls on To Hit/To Wound(both), and subtract a point of Cover from the target for all Tau units firing at a Marked target.
Give Pathfinders the "Target Lock" Support System, allow each Pathfinder to designate a different target. Make it so that they cannot Snap Fire Markerlights.
Voila. Tau become amazingly less annoying to play against for anyone who are running lists that rely upon Cover saves--and Tau players actually have to start bringing "Ignores Cover" weaponry to Ignore Cover.
So basically, just remove all abilities that make tau unique compared to other armies, right? lol
No changes to markerlights as far as I can tell. Guess I won't be playing Tau for some time (unless other things are nerfed).
What needed to change with Markerlights..?
The god damn ignores cover on 2 markerlights needed to change.
If they'd just change it to -1 cover for each markerlight spent, it would be so much better. On models without stealth/shrouded, it be a nerf, but a slight one (seeing as they'd end up having a 6+ cover instead of none). However, on units that do have these special rules, it makes all the difference in the world. I pay a good amount of points to have units with stealth/shrouded and in case of Tyranids, you actually need it make up for your horrible armor saves and lack of invul saves unless you're playing pentyrant stuff.
HOWEVER, Tau are just like "Nope, I'll just counter the very mechanic your army is built around". I haven't had a single fun Tyranid game against Tau (where markerlights were involved).
Same deal with Skitarii, unless you're taking ultra-competitive allied drop pod shenanigans, you're basicly screwed unless you're fighting nothing but firewarriors.
So you say you "pay a good amount of points to have units with stealth/shrouded". Well guess what? 3 full squads of pathfinders cost 330 points and die terribly easily. You think its fair for you to pay a small amount of points to make your entire army that has terrible saves have 4+ cover saves, but it is OP/unfair/ridiculous to spend WAY more points in an attempt to remove cover saves?
casvalremdeikun wrote:the Riptide (which can be killed fairly easily), not a whole lot of the codex was OP.
casvalremdeikun wrote:It isn't easy, but it can be done.
Hi, walking contradiction! =)
Riptide is literally the tankiest invement of the points that you can get that I can think of. Never mind that it gets amazing firepower and mobility, it's tankiness is absurd.
And of course "it can be done". Killing a Heirophant can be done. That doesn't make it balanced at <200 pts.
Regardless, how bout you share what Dark Eldar or Nids or Orks can do to trade effectively with Riptide? Rather than just telling us what SM can do.
Martel732 wrote:
casvalremdeikun wrote: The German translations people have found from the new codex might have nerfed Supporting Fire severely, so it might be different now.
Well that gives Tau back a weakness that they are supposed to have, at least. Although, in the scheme of things, it's somewhat unwarranted because Tau should be shootier than Eldar and that's just no longer true. To be honest, I don't know where the Tau codex should be. Part of me thinks they should be able to compete with Eldar, because SOMEONE should be able to do that, but by definition, that's another codex I can't have a good game against with BA.
You are right, Tau should be more shootier than Eldar. But the correct way to fix this would be making Eldar less shooty, not making Tau more insane. They are already better than the majority of the game. Eldar is just ridiculous, and everyone needs something more in comparison to them.
I don't see Eldar getting less shooty any time soon. Eldar players aren't going to magically stop using the official codex, so that puts us in an awkward position. The only option left to us is making Tau insane. Eldar are what they are.
Martel732 wrote: I don't see Eldar getting less shooty any time soon. Eldar players aren't going to magically stop using the official codex, so that puts us in an awkward position. The only option left to us is making Tau insane. Eldar are what they are.
That's terrible logic because it stuffs like 10 match ups to fix one. Eldar are what they are. Let's not make that sentence Eldar AND Tau are what they are. One game ruining codex is enough.
Bach wrote: The new codex is coming with 9 new formations, how is that not a big deal?
That is A LOT of potentially good options for list building and formation bonuses.
And that looks like it's the only thing that is coming out as far as new rules go. Latest rumors say that it will be a reprint with formation and the new rules for the 3-4 models that will be released.
Not a bad thing since the Tau codex as has been mentioned before is still a powerful one, the addition of formation will probably close the gap between them and the new necron/eldar/marine codexes
Martel732 wrote: I don't see Eldar getting less shooty any time soon. Eldar players aren't going to magically stop using the official codex, so that puts us in an awkward position. The only option left to us is making Tau insane. Eldar are what they are.
That's terrible logic because it stuffs like 10 match ups to fix one. Eldar are what they are. Let's not make that sentence Eldar AND Tau are what they are. One game ruining codex is enough.
So by your logic, only eldar, necron, da, and vanilla dex are allowed to win. The rest of us can't be brought up to their level because that would break the game. I get it now.
That Markerlights are insanely good and as one of those people whos army relies upon cover to survive I can confirm that they are brokenly good. A -1 per token spent would be okay, to a minimum of a 6+ cover save but I can confirm that removing entire handfuls of my models as the Tau blitz my stuff from left to right, especially as they are shooting at a range where I cannot even hit them, is not anywhere close to fun.
And that looks like it's the only thing that is coming out as far as new rules go. Latest rumors say that it will be a reprint with formation and the new rules for the 3-4 models that will be released.
Not a bad thing since the Tau codex as has been mentioned before is still a powerful one, the addition of formation will probably close the gap between them and the new necron/eldar/marine codexes
No, there are more changes than that. The latest rumours, which aren't rumours at this point, say that you can use the campaign book in conjunction with the old codex to play, or buy the new codex. That doesn't mean they didn't change all units, as we know they changed a few things already, but rather that those changes will be listed in the campaign book, in addition to the new formations, and new unit rules.
Vash108 wrote: Girls, girl, you're both pretty. Back to the topic!
Martel732 wrote: I don't see Eldar getting less shooty any time soon. Eldar players aren't going to magically stop using the official codex, so that puts us in an awkward position. The only option left to us is making Tau insane. Eldar are what they are.
That's terrible logic because it stuffs like 10 match ups to fix one. Eldar are what they are. Let's not make that sentence Eldar AND Tau are what they are. One game ruining codex is enough.
So by your logic, only eldar, necron, da, and vanilla dex are allowed to win. The rest of us can't be brought up to their level because that would break the game. I get it now.
It means that codex power level should be balanced towards the mean, not towards the outliers. Especially not towards the outlier (eldar) that exists so far out that you have to redesign your entire graph to accommodate it.
The codexes you listed should be nerfed back towards the mean. Other codexes should be buffed towards the mean. That is how you make a balanced game, not by making every new codex the new best.
master of ordinance wrote: That Markerlights are insanely good and as one of those people whos army relies upon cover to survive I can confirm that they are brokenly good. A -1 per token spent would be okay, to a minimum of a 6+ cover save but I can confirm that removing entire handfuls of my models as the Tau blitz my stuff from left to right, especially as they are shooting at a range where I cannot even hit them, is not anywhere close to fun.
Why minimum of 6+? The -1 per marker with no limit was never a problem. We had 7 years of that without it being "broken".
I was following the Tau rumors, and was nearly convinced to go that way. However, Iafter seeing the Raven Guard (mixed in that release & rumor thread) I actually am going to do a Raven Guard army instead.
Also, little confused why GW is doing what it's doing with the Tau codex. Seems kind of lazy (IMHO).
master of ordinance wrote: That Markerlights are insanely good and as one of those people whos army relies upon cover to survive I can confirm that they are brokenly good. A -1 per token spent would be okay, to a minimum of a 6+ cover save but I can confirm that removing entire handfuls of my models as the Tau blitz my stuff from left to right, especially as they are shooting at a range where I cannot even hit them, is not anywhere close to fun.
Why minimum of 6+? The -1 per marker with no limit was never a problem. We had 7 years of that without it being "broken".
Because if I am hunkered down in a trench in all honesty shining some fancy laser pointers at my cover should do nothing at all. Likewise, removing all the cover makes no sense.
Ehh, it's upper mid tier. Has been since 7th hit. Although it certainly can be strong if you spam riptides and your opponent isn't ready to deal with it.
"The codexes you listed should be nerfed back towards the mean"
But....that's not happening. The best we can hope for is for all future codices to be at the same level. We can shift the mean as well. My logic is this: Eldar aren't giving up their book, so everyone needs to be able to give Eldar a run for their money. As they exist now, not a nerfed version of Eldar.
master of ordinance wrote: That Markerlights are insanely good and as one of those people whos army relies upon cover to survive I can confirm that they are brokenly good. A -1 per token spent would be okay, to a minimum of a 6+ cover save but I can confirm that removing entire handfuls of my models as the Tau blitz my stuff from left to right, especially as they are shooting at a range where I cannot even hit them, is not anywhere close to fun.
Why minimum of 6+? The -1 per marker with no limit was never a problem. We had 7 years of that without it being "broken".
Because if I am hunkered down in a trench in all honesty shining some fancy laser pointers at my cover should do nothing at all. Likewise, removing all the cover makes no sense.
That's... not a good reason.
First, they aren't "fancy laser pointers" they are target designation, that appear to also scan 3-d environments, and are fed into a hyper-advanced battlefield computer which automatically calculates momentum and trajectory allowing units to tap into that information and make shots that can be feats that outmatch the greatest human snipers (that it to say, unmodified human). and are at frequency that the human eye can't precive (although that varies if the writer want to do the 'laser beam on the head' thing).
Second, game mechanics trump fluff and. There is no reasonable reason they should be limited to that. -1 cover per marker is how they were for 7 years with no complaints (perhaps longer, I never played their 3rd edition dex). It works, and has always worked. I personally would like to see them be brought to exactly their old markers (-1cover, +1bs to maximum of 5, -1ld on unit for that shooting, 1 to fire seeker).
-1 cover OR +1 BS and I would be fine with it. Also, there is no way in hell that even with all that data a gunner is going to magically avoid all the cover.
master of ordinance wrote: -1 cover OR +1 BS and I would be fine with it. Also, there is no way in hell that even with all that data a gunner is going to magically avoid all the cover.
Why does IG even care? Most Tau weapons aren't that efficient vs IG targets .
Actually, very much yes. Because, and this is important, this is things obscuring them, not blocking their line of sight (LOS blocking terrain). This is stuff like your head poking over a wall, or hiding in the leaves, stuff like that. Not that they literally can't see them at all.
Then how does a Plasma gun hit a target marked by a few Auspexes navigate the same problem? With far less computational power, targeted manually?
The same could be said for many cover reducing/removing options (Not all - wouldn't apply to Perfect Timing). The remaining odds of hitting cover are considered to be closer to 0 than 1/6, effectively.
edit:I'm always confused by that myself though, I've always had a hard time killing them. The only real ways I've seen people to it easily are grav-bikers, and occasionally scaring it off the table.
master of ordinance wrote: -1 cover OR +1 BS and I would be fine with it. Also, there is no way in hell that even with all that data a gunner is going to magically avoid all the cover.
Why does IG even care? Most Tau weapons aren't that efficient vs IG targets .
Yeah I know, all they do is outrange us, wound us on a 2+, ignore our armour completely....
master of ordinance wrote: -1 cover OR +1 BS and I would be fine with it. Also, there is no way in hell that even with all that data a gunner is going to magically avoid all the cover.
Why does IG even care? Most Tau weapons aren't that efficient vs IG targets .
Yeah I know, all they do is outrange us, wound us on a 2+, ignore our armour completely....
Yeah on the parts of the IG that are supposed to die. If they are wasting marker lights to ignore cover against guardsmen, you've already won.
if anyone gets my blood boiling, it's the fact that Scorpion's movesets have unblockables that go right into his teleport 
. Blanka is also very strong and easy to play, and uses a turtling strategy, which is associated with zoning characters.
I'm so... SOO... glad I preordered mine. Pathfinders just got 10x more useful with this wall.
