-Lack of new chassis vehicle or variant on current chassis: C'mon, it can't be ALWAYS SUITS ALL THE TIME. Surely the devilfish chassis could've received a pulse driver/missile platform?
-Ghostkeel not being a HQ choice. :( The Tau elite slots (if playing CAD) are cramped enough as it is
-Alien auxiliaries: Maybe the more recently encountered species said "Sorry but no" when confronted with the greater good
-Lack of walker vehicle. I'm talking like a mech warrior equivalent like the KX139 and so on but crossed with say, an AT-TE.
The new kits are on the whole pretty well done though I won't be getting any. The redesigned drone sprue is excellent (huge fan of the tau drone) though it'd be nice if they were 4 to a sprue and could make 4 of gun/shield/marker drones.
I agree with all what SpincCycleDreadnought said.
Just a bit disappointed by some of the formations, which seems a bit overpowered (always hitting the vehicle in the rear without any cover ? Seriously ? )
If I had to make Tau, it will be an infantry and vehicles heavy army (this kits are so beautiful).
But Tau walkers aren't vehicles, they're MC's. It's like you want to run the risk of your unit being crippled or one-shotted by enemy anti-tank.
The distinction between Walker and MC is bizarre. In the case of Tau Battlesuits, they initially wanted them to be treated as what amounted to Bikes(being 'ridden' rather than 'piloted').
But then we get this Supremacy Armor and the Stormsurge, both of which rebuff the standard caveat of the Battlesuits(them being single pilots directly interfacing with the wargear) by having multiple crew members.
Supremacy Armor and Stormsurge both should have been Superheavy Walkers.
Honestly, I think Walker and Monstrous Creatures should be more strictly defined: Walkers should be represented by large, piloted suits whereas Monstrous Creatures should be biological creatures (with the exception of Kastellans and maybe Daemon Engines which I honestly think should be monstrous creatures, especially Heldrakes as that would simplify their rules) , non-piloted models of a particularly large size. Riptides/other big Tau suits, and Dreadknights should be walkers imho. Regular Battlesuits are small enough to be considered large suits of powered armour, I guess.
As I've said earlier, the new Tau are at about the same level of power as Space Marines. The have a really nasty formation in the Hunter Contingent, and an overpowered unit in the form of the Buffmander. The main difference with Tau is that they only reach peak OP if you use both together; take either without the other, and they suddenly become much more balanced.
rowboatjellyfanxiii wrote: Problem with that is it basically makes every Tau list vulnerable to melta even more.
gg
Not really?
If the Stormsurge and Supremacy Ballistic Suits went SHW, they're the only ones which would be inherently vulnerable to Melta's Armour Penetration bonus.
TheNewBlood wrote: As I've said earlier, the new Tau are at about the same level of power as Space Marines. The have a really nasty formation in the Hunter Contingent, and an overpowered unit in the form of the Buffmander. The main difference with Tau is that they only reach peak OP if you use both together; take either without the other, and they suddenly become much more balanced.
This seems a pretty accurate assessment of their current power level, IMO.
Strong but not broken by any means in their un-formation lists, but with the bonuses they quickly get out of control.
Seems to be the trend with codexes post necrons. If you don't take the silly formation that gives a ton of nonsensical bonuses the game becomes much more balanced.
Tau is the new eldar and more, by far it's at the top of the power tier. Which is good because now maybe people will stop complaint about eldar so much lol
HoundsofDemos wrote: Seems to be the trend with codexes post necrons. If you don't take the silly formation that gives a ton of nonsensical bonuses the game becomes much more balanced.
Well, yes and no.
Necrons, Da, Tau, and SM, barring formations, are not bad against each other. I'd probably rank Necrons as the strongest but not by a lot. Maybe 55-45 matchup favor.
Eldar are still way too strong barring formations. I'd expect to see house rules in place that limit them unless formations are allowed, in which case the kid gloves can come off.
Many of the weaker dexes, with or without formations, still don't get to play with the newer dexes, formations or no. The game is better without them, but its also better without BA, Eldar, Chaos Marines, possibly DE and IG too.
I'd say Orks, but removing Orks is heresy.
nudibranch wrote: People are overreacting. The Hunter Cadre is devastating against death stars and decent against everything else.
No people are obviously not overreacting. Tau was just about the only 6th edition book that did not need an update. Sure, they are currently bottom top-tier/ higher mid-tier and not "OMG-Eldar-OP". However, I currently play 4 armies: Skitarii (played as Dark mechanicum), Chaos space marines, Tyranids and Necrons. Unless I'm playing necrons, I know I'm unpacking most of my models just to put them back where they came from.
Whether I move my bikers (for example) or not, it matters not, they're not going to reach their intended target, and neither is the other 1/2 of my army.
nudibranch wrote: People are overreacting. The Hunter Cadre is devastating against death stars and decent against everything else.
No people are obviously not overreacting. Tau was just about the only 6th edition book that did not need an update. Sure, they are currently bottom top-tier/ higher mid-tier and not "OMG-Eldar-OP". However, I currently play 4 armies: Skitarii (played as Dark mechanicum), Chaos space marines, Tyranids and Necrons. Unless I'm playing necrons, I know I'm unpacking most of my models just to put them back where they came from.
Whether I move my bikers (for example) or not, it matters not, they're not going to reach their intended target, and neither is the other 1/2 of my army.
People have been calling them 'the new Eldar'. You said they are not that. Therefore you agree with me that people are overreacting.
I'm, disappointed, but not in their power level. We got what is essentially a paid FAQ/errata. Also, Devilfish stayed the same price, so that's annoying. And it looks like stealthsuits are still overpriced as well. On the other hand, 9-man crisis suit teams is pretty ridiculous. And the ability to take the tanks in 3 man squadrons it pretty cool. The fire-team rule a neat addition, it will defiantly help my playstyle.
The new Tau really don't seem like anything different from their 6E shenanigans. Either full Crisis Team squads or gunlines. Either way, I'm disappointed. Their new formations seem rather broken (like most other formations from 7E) and are in general just going to be another pain in the ass army to play against.
In general the Tau releases have been decent for rules but its such a huge missed opportunity to fix some of the units like the Kroot, Vespids, Flyers, Snipers, and Skimmers who just don't get a lot of usage compared to the Manta load of mechs. GW's general lack of creativitiy again results in more big mechs instead of trying to breathe life into the more unique and cool concepts like the Tau Auxiliary Forces/Races. All that being said they didn't really break anything in the Codex (kind of hard to break anything with a copy paste) and some of the formations seem interesting so its a positive outcome in my book although GW has made it so I have to set the codex bar REALLY low to not get perpetually disappointed.
Vankraken wrote: In general the Tau releases have been decent for rules but its such a huge missed opportunity to fix some of the units like the Kroot, Vespids, Flyers, Snipers, and Skimmers who just don't get a lot of usage compared to the Manta load of mechs. GW's general lack of creativitiy again results in more big mechs instead of trying to breathe life into the more unique and cool concepts like the Tau Auxiliary Forces/Races. All that being said they didn't really break anything in the Codex (kind of hard to break anything with a copy paste) and some of the formations seem interesting so its a positive outcome in my book although GW has made it so I have to set the codex bar REALLY low to not get perpetually disappointed.
Some of the formations are downright dumb. I will agree, I would love to see less Riptides and more Kroot/Vespids/Flyers. It would make games against Tau more enjoyable.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I'm, disappointed, but not in their power level. We got what is essentially a paid FAQ/errata. Also, Devilfish stayed the same price, so that's annoying. And it looks like stealthsuits are still overpriced as well. On the other hand, 9-man crisis suit teams is pretty ridiculous. And the ability to take the tanks in 3 man squadrons it pretty cool. The fire-team rule a neat addition, it will defiantly help my playstyle.
Stealthsuits on their own may be overpriced, but put them in the Optimized Stealth Cadre, and they have BS4 (5 if using combined fire), Ignore Cover, and Always hit back armor of vehicles. I would say that is decent enough for 30 points lol.
9 man crisis teams is not as good as three, 3 man crisis teams. You get more mobility and even if you want all them to fire at the same target, they all get +1 BS which they do not if in one squad of 9.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I want stealthsuits to be good by themselves, they shouldn't have to be put in a formation to be good.
Also, I said ridiculous, not 'good'.
That's my beef right there. Play these formations or you are going to be the same. I guess I am disappointed and delighted at the same time.
I want to field three Riptides and one Stormsurge with my crisis suits, I don't want firewarriors or kroot. Guess I need to wait for the Farsight treatment.
I'm wondering if a strong counter to the new Tau is just the good old fashioned MSU armies. Tau's greatest strengths seem to come from multiple units targeting the same unit (in most cases this means 3 units as near as I can tell). Do you really need 3 units to take down a rhino and 5 marines?
Now each of those units that didn't get fired on just need to concentrate fire to drop specific Tau units to less than 3 models. Now, they loose even more bonuses.
I also think because of the way these combined units are necessary, there may be a lot of wasted fire. I think it will actually take some pretty good forward thinking to get the most out of these combos. The army does not seem as plug and play as some of the other more powerhouse armies. Also because of this, I think a clever general should be able to come up with ways making the most of the kinks in the over all armor as it were.
I think this codex actually brings back a little tactical thinking to the game.
Well I mean the fact of the matter is, the army already still works as it was. so this ONLY INCREASEs the options. It did nothing to detract, at all.
The danger with new codex's is to dilute the core strengths of a codex with gimmics. The Librarian Conclave IS really cool but in the end, its like all glass hammers and not a lot of people are going to play that unless its a themed battle. Most would agree that its gimmick is cool, COULD cause some armies a problem...but ultimately is a gimmicky kind of thing that suffers against a plethora of opponents because of the points sync that it is.
The same goes for 130 point GhostKeels. I don't have a certainty in my mind about how good they will be, but their gimmick is trumped by the same thing ALL Tau get trumped by: We hate getting cauth in melee!
So the balance will be struck and some really cool things are going to happen andf lots of variety will happen which makes me happy. But I would really encourage the munchkins on this forum (and yes, lots of not-munchkins are on here so im not calling anyone specific out) to remember that you cant hit what isnt there and you cant shoot when your face is full o fist. A little balance nd a strong plan B are necessary for the Tau empire because LOOOOOTS of enemies are dropping from the skies and giving the Tau Empire frighteningly little time to do their grisly work.
But Tau walkers aren't vehicles, they're MC's. It's like you want to run the risk of your unit being crippled or one-shotted by enemy anti-tank.
What I meant by that is a mech that has more than two legs- in place of say, a huge walker like the storm surge, the tau place all that fire power on a mech platform with 4 or so legs- like a non chaotic pulse firing defiler tank.
I would not be quick to judge that. We got some powerful options there, and the full effect has yet to be seen.
The stealth cadre is rather nasty, and counters eldar and necron vehicles (and IG ones), and puts a threat to IK and ravenwing, all the while being a bitch to shoot down by anything.
"Farsight bomb " is cheaper, much cheaper, as you don't actually need Farsight. (and 10 points less per suit as you don't have to take bodyguards for huge teams) and can be easily fit into a hunter cadre. This used to be a competitive combo in 6th. Under price reduction and taucurion buffs, it might be 7th competitive.
Fish of Fury is possibly back, between breachers and that combined fire of warriors, fish and fish drones means they are all BS4.
Camping warriors are so much more of a threat with the new drone torrents.
The induction cadre is brutal with T2 deepstriking relentless broadsides (and many other suits)
Stormsurge has insane potential if you can protect it, and between it and stealth cadre, you give Knights a "no good option" scenario for shield placement without even flanking it.
Overall, there are quite a few powerful choices, and until we see them on the field, we can't really say just how good our new codex is.
We are back to top tier, time will tell if top 3, and we have a slight chance to dethrone eldar.
We could dethrone Eldar indeed. Only once Admech came out and there was those insane Aadmech/Skitaarii/Knight armies running around that we finally seen no Tau make the top 5 players in tournaments.
Our dex was up to then placing 4-5 regularly. With all these new buffs I would be extremely surprised to think anyone would not consider us top tier once again.
Personally I think we'll be second best dex around with a chance to be better than Eldar.
I got a feeling we'll see Crisis rain make a comeback. With some Stormsurge/Riptide support. Maybe the Optimized Stealth formation could also see use.
This update has been excellent. I haven't really looked at my Tau in awhile. Now I'm looking to buy stuff again and come up with army lists. I think that Breachers and the Ghostkeel give Tau a little more reason to play aggressively which makes for a more tactically interesting game.
We should all email GW every day to get rid of the Walker Vehicle and make Dreads, Sentinels, etc MCs.
If they say no, email them twice a day.
Way to remove last bits of tactical play in 40k and push it towards Age of Sigmar with guns. If anything, Tau mcs dreadknight and daemon engines should become walkers and get vulnerable sides and rear.
Heh, with that new formation my Leman Russ might as well be Ork Trukks for all the good that heavy armour does them. No formation, hell no army, should have access to something that essentially negates an entire armies play style to this extent.
Pulse Rifles glancing on 5's, penning on 6's? Oh wow, so much for all that heavy armour I just paid for and traded my speed for.
master of ordinance wrote: Heh, with that new formation my Leman Russ might as well be Ork Trukks for all the good that heavy armour does them. No formation, hell no army, should have access to something that essentially negates an entire armies play style to this extent.
Pulse Rifles glancing on 5's, penning on 6's? Oh wow, so much for all that heavy armour I just paid for and traded my speed for.
master of ordinance wrote: Heh, with that new formation my Leman Russ might as well be Ork Trukks for all the good that heavy armour does them. No formation, hell no army, should have access to something that essentially negates an entire armies play style to this extent.
Pulse Rifles glancing on 5's, penning on 6's? Oh wow, so much for all that heavy armour I just paid for and traded my speed for.
Dont forget anyone assaulting you also hits on rear armor too. So yeah, its a bad day for all vehicles everywhere now.
master of ordinance wrote: Heh, with that new formation my Leman Russ might as well be Ork Trukks for all the good that heavy armour does them. No formation, hell no army, should have access to something that essentially negates an entire armies play style to this extent.
Pulse Rifles glancing on 5's, penning on 6's? Oh wow, so much for all that heavy armour I just paid for and traded my speed for.
But Tau walkers aren't vehicles, they're MC's. It's like you want to run the risk of your unit being crippled or one-shotted by enemy anti-tank.
But they are vehicles. They have a crew, chassis, armour, propulsion, magazines, the whole works. They don't have circulation, organs etc.
It's just silly to model them as MC's.
No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
Basically. But hey, rules are for losers, says GW.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dunno, but the Knights are selling pretty well.
Also, as an interesting side-note, I can't recall a single unit in the 40k system that could be categorized as a 'creature' in the strictest sense. The Tyranid MCs are bio-engineered warmachines so are the Ork gargantuan squiggoths. Maybe the Kroot knarlocs?
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
This latest was, for me, the final straw. It indicates that GW are in no way, shape or form interested in actually having a balanced game so... I'm done. Models packed away in boxes, books handed to my FLGS as store-copies. I know enough of the setting to run FFG's RPGs, and that will more than suffice for me.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Backfire wrote: So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Why on earth would they do that? So people can buy second-hand Dreadnoughts instead of fronting up to GW stores like good little peons for new kits? Pssh.
EDIT: You'd better believe I'm bitter and twisted.
Or just go back to 5th edition vehicle rules with some tweaks maybe, instead of dumbing down the game further. Only clear monsters like daemons or large tyranids should be mcs.
nudibranch wrote: People are overreacting. The Hunter Cadre is devastating against death stars and decent against everything else.
No people are obviously not overreacting. Tau was just about the only 6th edition book that did not need an update. Sure, they are currently bottom top-tier/ higher mid-tier and not "OMG-Eldar-OP". However, I currently play 4 armies: Skitarii (played as Dark mechanicum), Chaos space marines, Tyranids and Necrons. Unless I'm playing necrons, I know I'm unpacking most of my models just to put them back where they came from.
Whether I move my bikers (for example) or not, it matters not, they're not going to reach their intended target, and neither is the other 1/2 of my army.
Indeed, Tau would have been able to live well with old codex.
But GW wants to sell shiny new models like the Ghostkeel and the Stormsurge, and of course some nasty formations.
Psienesis wrote: This latest was, for me, the final straw. It indicates that GW are in no way, shape or form interested in actually having a balanced game so... I'm done. Models packed away in boxes, books handed to my FLGS as store-copies. I know enough of the setting to run FFG's RPGs, and that will more than suffice for me.
Rock on. Play Age of Sigmar. Or start an email campaign to get GW to hand the rule writing over to FFG. That would be nice.
Psienesis wrote: This latest was, for me, the final straw. It indicates that GW are in no way, shape or form interested in actually having a balanced game so... I'm done. Models packed away in boxes, books handed to my FLGS as store-copies. I know enough of the setting to run FFG's RPGs, and that will more than suffice for me.
I would gladly take those models off your hands for you
No sense in leaving them in boxes just to sit there and gather dust when someone like me could be enjoying them despite the inherent lack of balance in the game.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Psienesis wrote: This latest was, for me, the final straw. It indicates that GW are in no way, shape or form interested in actually having a balanced game so... I'm done. Models packed away in boxes, books handed to my FLGS as store-copies. I know enough of the setting to run FFG's RPGs, and that will more than suffice for me.
If you want to play a balanced game then the FFG40kRPGs are a strange choice. They are pretty much plagued by the same issues as the 40k tabletop game plus some. And FFG cares about game balance just as much as GW .
It seems to me that 2 Riptides and 1 SS make for a good firebase for Tau. Add a buffmander with 3-4 crisis suits with missile pods and 6-8 marker drones, 3 fw teams with markerlight support and you can pretty much erase whatever the commander looks at, plus SS and/or riptides can target additional marked units elsewhere.
This is my problem, though: 1-3 Pathfinders, Piranhas, Vespid, Drones
Maybe a minimum nr of gun drones, or pathfinders? I hope FW "fixes" this and allows me to use Tetras here
For the auxiliary maybe the retaliation cadre?
Too bad I have 0 Firewarriors and am not really interested in buying any, but now I have to.
Pathfinders are a solid pick, especially now that moving walls are a thing, piranhas are dirt cheap and useful, and drones make an integral part of many people's markerlight base.
Vespid are a joke though, yes.
Hard to tell by mere stats and no tests, but they seem solid enough to be worth giving a try in the hunter cadre.
The possibility to runNgun increases threat range, and the "3 unit combine shots=+1BS" actually means that if a fish has drone, the fish, drone and warriors are technically 3 units by themselves, netting your +1BS.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Because variety man. Lifes not fair. Lol.
We enjoy games because they, unlike life, are fair. Tabletop is a way to step away from the unpleasantness of reality, into something more enjoyable. If games end up the same bitter mess as life, why bother?
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Because variety man. Lifes not fair. Lol.
We enjoy games because they, unlike life, are fair. Tabletop is a way to step away from the unpleasantness of reality, into something more enjoyable. If games end up the same bitter mess as life, why bother?
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Because variety man. Lifes not fair. Lol.
We enjoy games because they, unlike life, are fair. Tabletop is a way to step away from the unpleasantness of reality, into something more enjoyable. If games end up the same bitter mess as life, why bother?
Art imitates life.
And to imitate, one need not replicate.
Edit: What's more, a book of rules is not necessarily art.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Because variety man. Lifes not fair. Lol.
We enjoy games because they, unlike life, are fair. Tabletop is a way to step away from the unpleasantness of reality, into something more enjoyable. If games end up the same bitter mess as life, why bother?
Art imitates life.
And to imitate, one need not replicate.
Edit: What's more, a book of rules is not necessarily art.
You missed the point... Accounting for the lack of balance we can deduce that people continue to bother for the art.. the spectacle if you will.
Backfire wrote: No, but you should designate 'like for like'. At present, what qualifies for a "monster" and which is a "walker" is completely arbitrary and seems to be based mostly on vehicles being so bad in present edition that people wouldn't buy unit like Riptide if it was a Walker.
I dont find it arbitrary. Its intentional. they are jut making the unit NOT suck like Dreadnoughts did for so long. They basically ARE Dreadnoughts but they are just a little tougher to kill, better arc of fire. that's really what they did here. It's not arbitrary at all.
So why they didn't make Dreadnoughts suck less too? Hey, why don't they make ALL vehicles Monstrous creatures since that seems to be almost only way making them viable?
Because variety man. Lifes not fair. Lol.
We enjoy games because they, unlike life, are fair. Tabletop is a way to step away from the unpleasantness of reality, into something more enjoyable. If games end up the same bitter mess as life, why bother?
Then don't? But in the meantime, im not going to get too hung up on it. No point. Theres advantages to dreads over mc's and vice versa. Theyre different and thats that. Dont get wrapped up in what you dont control. Just have fun. Or don't
Then don't? But in the meantime, im not going to get too hung up on it. No point. Theres advantages to dreads over mc's and vice versa. Theyre different and thats that. Dont get wrapped up in what you dont control. Just have fun. Or don't
Yeah, I've heard that argument before. "Vehicles are just as good, they're immune to poison, that is a major advantage over MC's!" But it is really hard to hear those arguments with so many Riptide reactors whizzing around...
Then don't? But in the meantime, im not going to get too hung up on it. No point. Theres advantages to dreads over mc's and vice versa. Theyre different and thats that. Dont get wrapped up in what you dont control. Just have fun. Or don't
Yeah, I've heard that argument before. "Vehicles are just as good, they're immune to poison, that is a major advantage over MC's!" But it is really hard to hear those arguments with so many Riptide reactors whizzing around...
Exactly! To Jancoran, when was the last time you had your MC oneshotted? Or even killed by poison?
I can count numerous times when my Dreadnought, Predator or Vindicator was destroyed Turn 1 before I was able to use it at all.
It's ridiculuos to even try to say that the advantages (huh) even things out.
Must say, I'm disappointed with the Tau rumors. Squadable Riptides and GCs, still easily spammable S7, and Markerlights didn't change. Yes, you're making me want to play again, GW.
Even my Tau friend has stopped playing. And I'm right there with him.
Then don't? But in the meantime, im not going to get too hung up on it. No point. Theres advantages to dreads over mc's and vice versa. Theyre different and thats that. Dont get wrapped up in what you dont control. Just have fun. Or don't
Yeah, I've heard that argument before. "Vehicles are just as good, they're immune to poison, that is a major advantage over MC's!" But it is really hard to hear those arguments with so many Riptide reactors whizzing around...
Exactly! To Jancoran, when was the last time you had your MC oneshotted? Or even killed by poison?
I can count numerous times when my Dreadnought, Predator or Vindicator was destroyed Turn 1 before I was able to use it at all.
It's ridiculuos to even try to say that the advantages (huh) even things out.
The moment he says "Just have fun." it means he's on a completely different mindset and I don't think anything you'll say will have any effect (this is not meant as an insult to Jancoran, merely stating a fact) .
krodarklorr wrote: Must say, I'm disappointed with the Tau rumors. Squadable Riptides and GCs, still easily spammable S7, and Markerlights didn't change. Yes, you're making me want to play again, GW.
Even my Tau friend has stopped playing. And I'm right there with him.
..because your Tau friend MUST SPAM the units, right?
krodarklorr wrote: Must say, I'm disappointed with the Tau rumors. Squadable Riptides and GCs, still easily spammable S7, and Markerlights didn't change. Yes, you're making me want to play again, GW.
Even my Tau friend has stopped playing. And I'm right there with him.
..because your Tau friend MUST SPAM the units, right?
krodarklorr wrote: Must say, I'm disappointed with the Tau rumors. Squadable Riptides and GCs, still easily spammable S7, and Markerlights didn't change. Yes, you're making me want to play again, GW.
Even my Tau friend has stopped playing. And I'm right there with him.
..because your Tau friend MUST SPAM the units, right?
I don't know about you, but I expect a set of rules to be workable without player conspiracy. The fact that a thing is fixable does nothing to the fact that it was initially broken.
krodarklorr wrote: Must say, I'm disappointed with the Tau rumors. Squadable Riptides and GCs, still easily spammable S7, and Markerlights didn't change. Yes, you're making me want to play again, GW.
Even my Tau friend has stopped playing. And I'm right there with him.
..because your Tau friend MUST SPAM the units, right?
I don't know about you, but I expect a set of rules to be workable without player conspiracy. The fact that a thing is fixable does nothing to the fact that it was initially broken.
Fine, you can be a sad donkey about it if you want. In the meanwhile the rest of us can choose to not be donkeys about it. OP wrote of spamming S7, I commented by asking if that's really what his friend must do. Do I want to play with friends and stay friends? Answer is easy: Yes to both. Solution is even more easy: I do not spam the units that can be OP.
Now that said, this game will never be in a position where taking 1000 pts with one faction would be equal to 1000 pts efficiency with another faction. We know the track record of GW since the very beginning of this game, why do you keep expecting otherwise?
The moment he says "Just have fun." it means he's on a completely different mindset and I don't think anything you'll say will have any effect (this is not meant as an insult to Jancoran, merely stating a fact) .
That's the thing, it's almost impossible to have fun with these things. To quote my recent post from parallel thread:
When you shoot a vehicle, number of things can happen: it may lose a weapon or get immobilized. When it is destroyed, it may blow up, or very least leave its burnt-out wreck behind, possibly hindering your other units. These are all believable options based on real life incidents. Similarly, when you shoot an infantry unit, lots of stuff may happen: the unit probably suffers casualties, gradually whittling down its fighting power. You may lose some special weapon or piece of wargear and you now have to do without. The unit might even panic and retreat. Again, all this is intriguing, realistic and provides many tactical dilemmas.
But when you shoot a monstrous creature, what happens? Nothing much. If it fails a save, it suffers a wound. There is no other damage or effect. The monster never panics, it is never stunned and never loses one bit of combat efficiency. It can never blow up, no matter how much flammable fuel or ammunition the 'monster' was carrying according to lore. When it loses its last wound, it is simply removed from play. It doesn't leave a smoking crater, or even a corpse, no matter how gigantic the creature was. It just vanishes without any ado or ceremony. Not only this is very unintuitive and illogical, it is so damn BORING.
It's one thing that units like Riptide are powerful, but they are just no fun to play, with or against. I don't want to spend ages slowly grinding down a nearly indestructable unit. I want to blow stuff up. I want my stuff blow up. It's the difference between your average crappy RTS game, and Total Annihilation.
But I love having a riptide that can assure at least some level of lasting presence. (though had the ghost been released when I have gotten my tide, I'd probably go for the ghost.)
At least you get the comfort of knowing your riptide will stick around for at least a few turns, try having that reassurance when your hard hitters are labeled vehicles or walkers and can explode with one lucky shot.
That's the idea: you should not have such assurances. You should have means to reduce the risk, like more armour or defensive systems for your vehicle or equivalent heavy hitter, but complete safety just leads to boringness.
Natalya wrote: sigh... should I even bother unpacking my models when playing Dark Eldar against these guys? And I thought Necron Wraithwing was bad.
Ask your opponent to not use formations against you. DE are pretty weak, and while the match up still won't be in your favor, at least you can have a good game. Tau aren't eldar or crons.
Yep, I won't deploy formations against anyone not having formation style army yet. its just being polite.
DE and nids don't count, they have formations, but not ones that intertwine like new style
That said, I'll expect said Deldar/nid player not to field his own formations when I am holding back mine.
OFC, there is always the turny where it will be "give no quarters" and I'll deploy anything I have and use every single ditry trick up my sleeve (and as 5th edition tau, I've collected alot. it was needed at the time)
But a casual game is just that-casual. a chance to mess around, try some "sub-optimal" lists, and have fun.
BoomWolf wrote: Yep, I won't deploy formations against anyone not having formation style army yet. its just being polite.
DE and nids don't count, they have formations, but not ones that intertwine like new style
That said, I'll expect said Deldar/nid player not to field his own formations when I am holding back mine.
OFC, there is always the turny where it will be "give no quarters" and I'll deploy anything I have and use every single ditry trick up my sleeve (and as 5th edition tau, I've collected alot. it was needed at the time)
But a casual game is just that-casual. a chance to mess around, try some "sub-optimal" lists, and have fun.
You'll still massacre BA without trying hard, but I appreciate the thought.
BoomWolf wrote: Hard to tell by mere stats and no tests, but they seem solid enough to be worth giving a try in the hunter cadre.
The possibility to runNgun increases threat range, and the "3 unit combine shots=+1BS" actually means that if a fish has drone, the fish, drone and warriors are technically 3 units by themselves, netting your +1BS.
Was under the impression that Drones where part of the unit, since they are upgrades for said unit, and not a separate unit, or you speak of a Drone squadron in the FA section?
.
