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.

So im playing tau right now, one of the few there is at my FLGS
Im hearing people saying right now how over powered and tough they are, with Riptides and broadsides and ignoring cover.
Im even hearing this from a Necron player who is crying because his army no longer Tables tau 3 turns in and his flyers are useless.
But why do people blame the army? Why do people complain when ever there is a new codex out and it has a few units that are scary(Heldrakes, Riptides and so forth) instead of adapting.

If they don't blame the army, they'd have to blame themselves.

Long and short of it. People don't like to lose.

A new codex comes out and the cries of "cheesiness, beardiness and brokeness" can be heard across the vastness of the gaming realm.

I enjoy losing. It helps me know what does and does not work during game play.

And when gaming against a whiner and it gets to be too much.... I simply crack open a bottle of suds and watch baseball and play with my newborn son. He cries just the same amount but at least he has an excuse.

Drew

People complain about everything, and the blame is always on GW (or what they did with the latest book). They made Tau too good at anti air and it ruins every game ever, even though not every opponent is a Tau player. They made Necron and Guard flyers too powerful and it ruins every game ever, even though not everyone is a Necron or Guard player.

A codex release is a weird time when you both want to be online discussing the cool stuff in the book and don't want to be due to the incessant whining about the sky falling that people who don't play that army will spam in every thread about the new book.

Khorneball wrote:
I enjoy losing. It helps me know what does and does not work during game play.

I second your comments- and I am getting tabled repeatedly by a Tau player these days!

If they don't blame the army, they'd have to blame themselves.

Exactly. Nerds are the kings of shifting the blame away from themselves, and of the knee-jerk reaction. I know, I am a Nerd.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So im playing tau right now, one of the few there is at my FLGS
Im hearing people saying right now how over powered and tough they are, with Riptides and broadsides and ignoring cover.
Im even hearing this from a Necron player who is crying because his army no longer Tables tau 3 turns in and his flyers are useless.
But why do people blame the army? Why do people complain when ever there is a new codex out and it has a few units that are scary(Heldrakes, Riptides and so forth) instead of adapting.

Some of it is whining, some of it can be legitimate complaints.

Some things are overblown and are just people being butthurt they lost. Then there are some things that can't just be "adapted" to, at least without tailoring armies to fight just that, or adjusting one's list so much that it no longer resembles that army one set out to play with, and neither of those options are really good for the hobby. Some armies actually simply do not have to tools to adequately engage certain things until their next update rolls around which is often years away, try playing a general All-Comers Eldar army right now and coming up with a reasonable answer to 3 Heldrakes, not a whole lot of good ones.

The "well just adapt" doesn't always apply as such, or it may mean that one has to play a force that doesn't seem fun/thematic anymore and that sucks the fun out of the game.

 Sgt.Hakan wrote:

Khorneball wrote:
I enjoy losing. It helps me know what does and does not work during game play.

I second your comments- and I am getting tabled repeatedly by a Tau player these days!

How else are you going to learn? Although the amount of times I lost with my old Tau and old DE youd think i would be unstoppable!

I find it funny that a Necron player is sad that he can no longer table you. There are some cases where you really can blame the army because its stupidly overpowered or skewed points wise (looking at you Necrons, GK, and Vendettas) but even then a savvy player should be able to overcome these limitations.

 AegisGrimm wrote:

If they don't blame the army, they'd have to blame themselves.

Exactly. Nerds are the kings of shifting the blame away from themselves, and of the knee-jerk reaction. I know, I am a Nerd.

Knowing is half the battle my friend. We are one big happy fraternity of nerds.

Drew

New armies always get heat because of the possibility of abuse of the obviously powerful units (not saying that's what the OP did). Its the easiest thing to grasp onto, and folks tend to mathhammer these things to death anymore. Even if those Broadsides and Riptides don't really do much in a game but harrass a few units, its the potential they possess that gets the attention which means the firewarriors and crisis suits that did most of the work get generally ignored.

Well, My riptide did destroy a doomsday ark and a triarch stalker first turn. with one overcharged shot. I can understand the frustation, but to blame the army is kinda stupid.

I agree that it depends on the complainer. Probably most of it is that people don't like change or that people don't like losing.

I also agree with vaktathi, though, that just because there are whiners does not imply that game balance is perfect, or that all codices are created equal.

For example, there hasn't been that much complaining about dark angels, and complaints about necron and CSM are pretty much because of a single unit (which, let's be fair, can be adapted to). Meanwhile, I personally think complaints about tau are more justified, due to the fact that the codex itself engenders a boring play style and straight-up ignores an awful lot of rules. The current one has that matt-ward effect, where it kind of makes you wonder if the person writing the codex has actually played a game of 40k...

When somebody whines about me playing overpowered armies, after the raging hate goes away, I usually am able to pick out what was really makeing my army "OP". Poor tactics by my opponent, statistically poor dice for my opponent, or statistically good dice for myself are the usual points of origin. Due to one of these three things my opponent begins to cry "foul" and rather than play on like a man, or bow out like an adult they whine about how "OP' whatever I'm running with is. I went to a tournament with a Tyranid "Nid'zilla" Army. Swarm Lord, 4 Tervigons, 3 Trygons, and 6 Hive Guard. Dropped 70+ gaunts in one game and people wept in rage over the "OP" Tyranids. I lost in the semi finals to....Dark Eldar. Something about the whole army having poisoned weapons making my T6 mean about nothing, and the 3+ armor save only goes so far when they unload a cup of dice in shots. I didn't cry a single tear, shook my oponent's hand and wished him all the best of luck. I knew going into the touney that if I Dark Eldar I would most likely lose, it's just the way the armies are built. I played the same DE army later with my "waterfall" foot IG army and tabled him turn one. Sheer number of autocannon/heavy bolter/missile launcher shots. We laughed for a few and played again and my IG mixed list made for a fun game. There are different levels of competitiveness in lists, some are more for fun, and some are there to take to a tournament. But I have yet to see a codex that, with the right skilled player behind it cannot make the opponent wonder how they are going to pull off a victory, it's the player (and the dice) that make the game, not the codex.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So im playing tau right now, one of the few there is at my FLGS
Im hearing people saying right now how over powered and tough they are, with Riptides and broadsides and ignoring cover.
Im even hearing this from a Necron player who is crying because his army no longer Tables tau 3 turns in and his flyers are useless.
But why do people blame the army? Why do people complain when ever there is a new codex out and it has a few units that are scary(Heldrakes, Riptides and so forth) instead of adapting.

Saying that someone is OP makes you feel good. saying that you suck at playing this game and there for you lost , makes you feel bad. People dont want to feel bad so they call everything OP. I saw guard players claim that SoB are OP , because a very lucky salvo from 3 exorcists blew up 3 LR and some guardsman siting on a landing pad .

Don't be hating on the armies. Be hating on the dice god for messing up your rolls

 Ailaros wrote:


For example, there hasn't been that much complaining about dark angels, and complaints about necron and CSM are pretty much because of a single unit (which, let's be fair, can be adapted to). Meanwhile, I personally think complaints about tau are more justified, due to the fact that the codex itself engenders a boring play style and straight-up ignores an awful lot of rules. The current one has that matt-ward effect, where it kind of makes you wonder if the person writing the codex has actually played a game of 40k...

Hardly. The new tau are a cut above the old one for sure, and they do do a lot of nice things, but they cannot succeed with the gunline setup you frequently comment on as being both "boring to play against and overpowered". An army really geared towards gunline will rapidly sacrifice the ability actually grab any objectives, and gunlines of firewarriors are frankly pathetic against any melee army.

But you play IG, so you can't as easily exploit that glaring weakness.

What you *can* take advantage of is the tactic you continue to excell at, using lots of hellhounds to counter gakloads of gunline firewarriors. Of course the new buff to riptides and crisis suits means that you can't treat the new tau codex the way you used to. Now it plays more like a Space Marine Vanilla army with attached IG allies...you've got fast MEQs in the form of crisis suits, big nasties like Libby Dreads, and pathetically wimpy troop choices in the form of GEQs with clear weakenesses and strengths. You gotta change up your playstyle, because the Tau will continue to outshoot you if you attempt to counter gunlines by fighting fire with fire. I know this because I've been playing Tau pretty constantly since I found out the dex came out. Hell a lot of the old leafblowers and cheese lists from the IG aren't as compromised as people think, airforces with a few models on the table to prevent turn one autoloss is still a list that is hard for a "take all comers" tau list to counter. From a competative tournament standpoint the Tau are hardly any more overpowered than the Necrons or the BA.

Most of the time it's simply whining because opponents can no longer auto-pilot against a new book that was likely very, very weak beforehand. (such as with Tau and soon to come, Eldar).
Sometimes it's whining out of sheer jealousy because opponents don't like that you have some shiny new toys that are on the same power level as theirs and/or they won't be getting any shiny new toys of their own for at least another couple of years.

Oftentimes, a new codex as mentioned above requires opponents to change how they think & play vs the newly released codex. This can mean people have to potentially go out and buy a new toy or two of their own to better adapt, and thus the whining about how GW are evil for forcing people to spend money to stay competitive, etc...
People simply hate change, especially once they're set in their way and have something that works like a well oiled machine.


But, there are a very few cases where it's not whining, but rather very relevant reasons for why a new army army is suddenly OP.

Look at Grey Knights... Army-wide Force weapons, anti-psyker grenades, rad+psycho grenades and psycannons spamed out the ying-yang was all but impossible for Tyranids to beat last edition!
Hell, until the new Daemon book came out, Daemons had only a 50% chance to even put a single model on the table unless the Grey Knight player decided not to be a giant donkeycave!


While most reasonable players will enjoy a good challenge when it comes along, no one ever wants to be in a position where a new codex just basically hard-counters most/all of their own codex.

Too much rock - paper - scissors now. The earlier post on why Nids was auto-lose to DE, who were auto-lose to IG really illustrates the point. I turn up with Nids, get a DE players and with equal skill and equal dice the DE player wins every time. There is no balance there.

There are a lot of match ups where skill/good dice can decide the game, but too many battles where the game is essenitally determined before the first turn starts.

i agree it is rock paper scissors... However, if it is just a new codex beats the snot out of my codex so be it... My issue is with the total meta change where it is " If you spend $200 to buy X Y and Z you will be competitive again otherwise you are SOL. When the meta change was - if you field meltas instead of or missile launchers instead of it was not bad. Now it usually involves buying megatrons or flyers with hefty price tags or worse yet... "Well just buy IG allies and add 2 or 3 vendettas and all problems are solved."

Some people get used to stomping certain armies (i.e. necrons, tau) and don't like it when a rules update changes the status quo.

Some things are a little crazy (overcharged riptides maybe) but I see it as payback for however how many years of players battling through with an outdated, crappy codex. We all get our chance to reap the benefits of being the new hotness when our codex time rolls around.

Hell, after 4-5 years of playing Eldar with this codex, I am looking forward to being the cheesiest army on the block for a while! :-)

 Ailaros wrote:
I agree that it depends on the complainer. Probably most of it is that people don't like change or that people don't like losing.

I also agree with vaktathi, though, that just because there are whiners does not imply that game balance is perfect, or that all codices are created equal.

For example, there hasn't been that much complaining about dark angels, and complaints about necron and CSM are pretty much because of a single unit (which, let's be fair, can be adapted to). Meanwhile, I personally think complaints about tau are more justified, due to the fact that the codex itself engenders a boring play style and straight-up ignores an awful lot of rules. The current one has that matt-ward effect, where it kind of makes you wonder if the person writing the codex has actually played a game of 40k...

My biggest complaint with the DAs is this. Massive blob of guardsmen+Azrael=Hahaha, 4++s FOR EVERYONE! Good luck rooting them out of cover. Add divinitation for extra trolling. Not sure if it works with Chenkov but if it does it'll be bar none the single best way to ensure that nobody can ever, ever take that objective. Not even with Volcano cannon bombardment.

I have to admit I do have some complaints about 6th Edition. But none of those complaints are of armies that are 6th Edition armies...so the 'new Codex causes people to cry' doesn't really apply to me.

Sure, the Chaos Chicken is an amazing unit point for point. But the rest of the armor is underwhelming enough that I still win more games than I lose with my Eldar.

MY problem stems with the power level of armies like Necrons and GK. Those are what suck some of the fun out of the game for playing against...as the swing in power level severely limits my ability to win.

If they are playing to the armies strengths only in what I consider a WAAC or 'spam list' style....I literally have to be TFG and bring EldarCouncilOfDoom to have a chance. The other option is to lose even if the opponent is a far lower level of player in the way of tactics regardless of the dice randomness.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Im even hearing this from a Necron player who is crying because his army no longer Tables tau 3 turns in and his flyers are useless.

Nice! What are you using against his fliers?

Well i will input that sometimes it is the Army but 99% of the time it is the player and they don't want to blame themselves for failing to find a a way around the road blocks - until people find a way to counter ( in this case Tau ) major roadblocks they will complain , a good example is the Vendetta and Hell Chicken people screamed OP when the first Vendetta's rolled around and became damn near indestructable in the air because limited people have Anti - Air ability strong enough to topple them , Tau are one of those factions that do indeed have an abundance of Powerful AA , the Imperial guard being the Second with Hydras costing a dirt cheap 75 Points -- But more on topic as to why people blame the army , -- When ever a very difficult combination comes out people lack either the means or the skills to beat it ( Guard Leafblower , Tau Farsight bomb , Necron flying Bakery to name a few ) but as time goes on people have learned how to find a way to engage effectively ( or better then what they were doing ) and the complaining declines . just a circle really , New thing comes out - its suddenly OP , time goes on it becomes normal then it starts over again

I'm guessing broadsides with skyfire.

And the fact of the matter is, people as a whole like to complain and make excuses. If someone playing a necron army who is used to rofflestomping a tau army suddenly is having a hard time of it, of course he's going to complain. It's too bad he lacks the self awareness and introspection to realize his whinning is baseless and indulgent, but that's how people are.

I think it's ok to blame your own list for losing (for example: taking an ogryn/ratling corps guard army) as long as you don't say how hard you'll beat them next time when you fix your list.
But people really shouldn't blame the other persons army, just make your own list better next time.

I used to get frustrated with my army when it won 9/10 games. Since the new daemon book, I lose maybe 1/3 of the time, and I much prefer it, because every game feels like a challenge, rather than a foregone conclusion that I will win.

Sadly, many players enjoy winning the game, more than playing the game.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
So im playing tau right now, one of the few there is at my FLGS
Im hearing people saying right now how over powered and tough they are, with Riptides and broadsides and ignoring cover.
Im even hearing this from a Necron player who is crying because his army no longer Tables tau 3 turns in and his flyers are useless.
But why do people blame the army? Why do people complain when ever there is a new codex out and it has a few units that are scary(Heldrakes, Riptides and so forth) instead of adapting.

Some of it is whining, some of it can be legitimate complaints.

Some things are overblown and are just people being butthurt they lost. Then there are some things that can't just be "adapted" to, at least without tailoring armies to fight just that, or adjusting one's list so much that it no longer resembles that army one set out to play with, and neither of those options are really good for the hobby. Some armies actually simply do not have to tools to adequately engage certain things until their next update rolls around which is often years away, try playing a general All-Comers Eldar army right now and coming up with a reasonable answer to 3 Heldrakes, not a whole lot of good ones.

The "well just adapt" doesn't always apply as such, or it may mean that one has to play a force that doesn't seem fun/thematic anymore and that sucks the fun out of the game.

Could not have said it better

On a side note, people are complaining about Tau? last time I checked for Dakka on Tau people were crying because their precious broadsides were not Str 10 anymore...

On a side note I can believe that tactics should win games and that a list is part of tactics, but as I see many a time on 40k it is the list that wins the game because of the options that you can do with the list dictate who is going to win from turn 1, that's what put me off 40k, but now as more 6th edition codex's are coming out I do believe that the codex's are becoming more balanced now and that your seeing a mix of units in each individual list, instead of seeing the usual "Netlist X and Y" which seems to bring back more of the skill for me from my Perspective, and as more hardbook codex's are coming out the more balanced the game is becoming IMO which is starting to make me want to pick back up 40k...

people whining about the hardback codex's shouldn't really, yes there are Helldrakes but tbf that's only one unit and there not as bad as people make them out to be* for example I used one in a tourney and I was playing against SoB and my opponent fired all her multimeltas at my Helldrake (within melta range) and she rolled all 6's for a squad of 5... needless to say my Helldrake was reduced to molten slag...

*It should be noted that I do play CSM and Orks (and I love my Helldrake, but not as much as my Forgefiend... it did take a Wraithlord down in one round of shooting ya know ).

Disappointment/anger occurs when events unfold that do not meet expectation. Lots of players have developed the expectation that they should be able to curb stomp tau. Lots of Necron players have developed the expectation they should be able to beat everyone. Lot's of Necron Players have developed the expectation that they have the best book and shouldn't be overmatched by any build out there.

When Events don't meet expectations people then try to rationalize why. Often this takes the form of evaluating their expectations. They can look to themselves as the source of the error of expectation, but this often involves hurting one's ego (i made a mistake, I was wrong ect), another rationalization is to blame others for events that occured that didn't meet their expectations (TAU are over powered because of poor design, Luck screwed me, ect).

Whinning about losing will often happen when people are involved. It'susually the sign of a fragil ego rather than any objective fact or rational thought.

To those of you who are complaining about Necrons.

Am I right in stating that you are complaining because of two builds in particular: Bakery and Wraithwing?

I play Necrons, and only have 2 Flyers, and do not intend on getting more. I also have never fielded Wraiths outside of obscene point games. I also hate the models for them. *ducks under the butthurt*

I rely more on luck and good commanding than WAAC-ish 'TAC' lists. As such, I am frequently completely crushed (as happygolucky will back up, ive lost count of how many times hes tabled me). On the flipside, I have an unfortunate habit of rolling too many 6s (yes you just read that) and in doing so perform a lot better than I should in certain situations. A time comes to mind when I one-shotted (well, one-solvo'd, but that dosent have the same ring to it XD) an Iron Arm'd Flyrant out of the air with an Annibarge, my first shot in that match. (again, happy will verify)

These type of things lend the game the enjoyment for me, and I think its such a shame when too many people just play WAAC.

But I agree, it is more the mindset of the player than the list. For instance, CSM. Happy could go and bring triple turkey, triple Fiend, Lucius Blastmasters everywhere if he was WAAC. He dosent, because he plays for the fun, as do I. His usual list is a Warpsmith, Cultist Blob, 3 nilla squads and then custoimisation. Quite fun to see across the field, as opposed to most of what this thread is complaining about.