Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

As the title says, witch army is now the weakest since the Necrons are here. this seems like a good question as i want to know which army is weakest in terms of strategy, difficulty defeating them, and how "good" they are in competive play.

i know that exceptions probably be provided, but i mean the weakest army the majority of the time in both competive play and non-competive play

i hope i typed this the right way, and lets atempt to answer this question without a...."Flamewar" locking the thread around the 30th post

one word TAU ok =)

Yep: Tau. An army entirely without close combat options in a game dedicating a third of it's time to close combat.

i dont want to do this, but what about those CC thingys the Tau have....i think they are called "Kroot"

Tau. They just can't cut it anymore

The worst army is the one you enjoy to play the least.

And my Tau do very well thank you, not that I would turn up my nose at a new codex with shiny new units, but I adapt my Tau with each new game.

Its a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

these kind of threads always end badly though.

Soo'Vah'Cha wrote: The worst army is the one you enjoy to play the least.

And my Tau do very well thank you, not that I would turn up my nose at a new codex with shiny new units, but I adapt my Tau with each new game.

Its a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

these kind of threads always end badly though.

This. Tau in the hands of a skilled vetran player is still a pretty solid army.

I'd go for CSM purely because that book now has dubious honour of being the most boring... alongside DA of course.

Sisters. They don't even have a real codex anymore.

DarkHound wrote:Yep: Tau. An army entirely without close combat options in a game dedicating a third of it's time to close combat.

Also an army without any space magic attacks or defence.

hand banana wrote:i dont want to do this, but what about those CC thingys the Tau have....i think they are called "Kroot"

They don't have armour saves, have terrible leadership, I3 and no power weapons. They're more of a meat shield than a real close combat unit.

Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
And my Tau do very well thank you, not that I would turn up my nose at a new codex with shiny new units, but I adapt my Tau with each new game.

Its a poor craftsman that blames his tools.

The Tau codex is outdated and overcosted all round. There's a reason they only have 1 competitive build, and that still crumbles against most 5th edition codices.

Hückleberry wrote:

Soo'Vah'Cha wrote: The worst army is the one you enjoy to play the least.

And my Tau do very well thank you, not that I would turn up my nose at a new codex with shiny new units, but I adapt my Tau with each new game.

This. Tau in the hands of a skilled vetran player is still a pretty solid army.

First we must define what "worst" means. I'd call it the one which has the least chance of winning against any other given army. Tau may be a solid army in the hands of a veteran player, but an Imperial Guard army in the hands of the same player would be unstoppable.

You have to think in terms of modelling and aesthetics too. Does an army with old, outdated looking models lose points? What about an army that has a lot of metal models?

Tau.

There is no worse army. Play the army how it is and work around the problems, a lot of you guys just complain about rules and other useless bull crap that doesent even need to be said. Play the friggen army how it is and get over it.

AND fyi, Tau do very well a lot of the time, the reason why people lose with tau is because their not very good at 40k or just tau...

Simon

Tyranids? Their MC are all one hit kill by all GK's, DE have so many poison weapons and now necrons got some nasty anti Tyranid aswell.

DarkHound wrote:

Hückleberry wrote:

Soo'Vah'Cha wrote: The worst army is the one you enjoy to play the least.

And my Tau do very well thank you, not that I would turn up my nose at a new codex with shiny new units, but I adapt my Tau with each new game.

This. Tau in the hands of a skilled vetran player is still a pretty solid army.

First we must define what "worst" means. I'd call it the one which has the least chance of winning against any other given army. Tau may be a solid army in the hands of a veteran player, but an Imperial Guard army in the hands of the same player would be unstoppable.

I think Tau were solid in 4th edition in the hands of a veteran player.

5th edition changed the balance a lot.

DarkHound wrote: First we must define what "worst" means. I'd call it the one which has the least chance of winning against any other given army.

Lets use this definition of what worst will be, and with that knowledge this thread can contuine saying "Tau" AND have a reason for it perferably

I would go with Sisters, myself. There have been a few Tau players at my FLGS, and they're generally at the top or near the middle of the league at the end. They aren't a bad codex, they just require a little more finesse. Some Tau builds can run circles around other armies, even modern ones.

salix_fatuus wrote:Tyranids? Their MC are all one hit kill by all GK's, DE have so many poison weapons and now necrons got some nasty anti Tyranid aswell.

Ok so Nids have a real weakness to what, 3 armies? How many armies are there in 40k? 14 counting Nids. Wow, yea thats auto lose alright. Nids did suffer a bit to harshly in their re write for some reason, but they are far from suck. Even just adding a bunch of bodies and marching into CC with them blindly can net you some easy victories.

Tau, you actually have to be good with them to pull off wins often. And they have the absolutely, with out a doubt, THE worst unit in the entire game of 40k. So I think its a double whammy

But they can still be pretty devastating, so dont let this thread fool you into an auto win against them. Even a decent shooting phase against a Tau force will hurt

KingCracker wrote:

salix_fatuus wrote:Tyranids? Their MC are all one hit kill by all GK's, DE have so many poison weapons and now necrons got some nasty anti Tyranid aswell.

Ok so Nids have a real weakness to what, 3 armies? How many armies are there in 40k? 14 counting Nids. Wow, yea thats auto lose alright. Nids did suffer a bit to harshly in their re write for some reason, but they are far from suck. Even just adding a bunch of bodies and marching into CC with them blindly can net you some easy victories.

Tau, you actually have to be good with them to pull off wins often. And they have the absolutely, with out a doubt, THE worst unit in the entire game of 40k. So I think its a double whammy

But they can still be pretty devastating, so dont let this thread fool you into an auto win against them. Even a decent shooting phase against a Tau force will hurt

Not saying thats auto lose just 3teams that all have alot of anti nids W (especially against MC) wich nids ofc need vs armor and the like. In a tournament perspective this is a certain draw back.
But yes they dont reaslly suck and they are not the worst army, just cursed with alot of draw backs and as you said "Nids did suffer a bit to harshly in their re write for some reason".

KingCracker wrote: And they have the absolutely, with out a doubt, THE worst unit in the entire game of 40k. So I think its a double whammy

Which would be?

I still despise playing tau so I wouldn't say them, I still haven't played sisters.

The army I smile at seeing across from the table in a tournament is chaos space marines.

I don't think daemons are all that much better either.

Another vote for Tau.

(Yes, it is still possible to win, but given equal skill, the odds are weighted against someone playing Tau more than any other army you could pick).

And part of the problem is not only their outdated costs and such. Part of the problem is that their more or less one build that does still work somewhat can be predicted (and countered) far too easily.

A skilled player can win with any army, even Tau.

But if I had to chose an Army that I disliked in both model range, army list and background its Tau. I don't think Gundam works in 40K, the figures are all hideous (Except Forge World models). I mean look at this:



Space Pope, with his rules that make Tau 'better' in close combat.

blood reaper wrote:A skilled player can win with any army, even Tau.

But if I had to chose an Army that I disliked in both model range, army list and background its Tau. I don't think Gundam works in 40K, the figures are all hideous (Except Forge World models). I mean look at this:



Space Pope, with his rules that make Tau 'better' in close combat.

Hes not spcae pope.
Thats this guy.

I cant wait for shiny new tau.

Kroot are terrible, they are only worth something if you take tons of them, but even then unless assaulted by someone at the same or lower int, they get wrecked.

That said, I've been on a 5 week winning streak with my tau list (seen here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/408114.page )

Tau aren't easy to play, and as said they lack any psychic power stuff, they aren't nearly fast enough, have effectively nothing worth doing in CC, They have the worst special characters in the game (by far), Most of their equipment is overpriced, completely ineffective in this edition, or just horrible to take, and the army relies on heavy laser pointers to be super effective.

ParatrooperSimon wrote:There is no worse army. Play the army how it is and work around the problems, a lot of you guys just complain about rules and other useless bull crap that doesent even need to be said. Play the friggen army how it is and get over it.

AND fyi, Tau do very well a lot of the time, the reason why people lose with tau is because their not very good at 40k or just tau...

Simon

I've been playing Tau since their first Codex, where all you could take was an Ethereal for an HQ (and perhaps the best Ethereal of the all, Aun'shi), and having a codex that still talks about 'Priority Targeting' might need some tweaking, so don't soapbox.

Tau do well in the hands of veteran Tau players, however, it requires far more finesse than Mech Guard or Grey Knights.

Armies are alot faster than they were the previous edition (Outflanking, running, Flat-out transports, and cheaper transports) and with the overcosted points for a majority of Tau units, you must have finesse in order to compensate.

hand banana wrote:witch army

...asked and answered SoB, of course. At least, if you're using that abomination they printed in WD, that is...

As for tau...well, they do have a couple of things going for them in the current metagame...everyone's geared up to face transport spam...and tau don't do that. Not only that, but most anti-transport weapons choices don't have the AP to deal with battlesuits or the volume of fire to deal with kroot. It's a fundamental mismatch between what most all-comers armies bring to the fight and the tau targets that they face. It does go a long way towards minimizing the tau's fundamental disadvantages (lack of a reliable melee unit, lack of a durable scoring unit, lack of speed)