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.

I've said it before, every crisis suit I run is BS 4, and it doesn't make them OP.

However have my fellow Tau players seen the Hazard suits load outs from Forge World? three suits that can, depending on load out, put out up to 18 melta shots, or 24 str 4 AP 4 Rending shots, or 6 Str 5 AP 6 large blasts that ignore cover?

If that reflects things to come for Tau, I guess I can live with BS 3 if they'll give us enough ridiculous fire power on a deep striking suit team to utterly annihilate a squadron of Leman Russ tanks... on the front armor.

Kroot Loops wrote:I've said it before, every crisis suit I run is BS 4, and it doesn't make them OP.

However have my fellow Tau players seen the Hazard suits load outs from Forge World? three suits that can, depending on load out, put out up to 18 melta shots, or 24 str 4 AP 4 Rending shots, or 6 Str 5 AP 6 large blasts that ignore cover?

If that reflects things to come for Tau, I guess I can live with BS 3 if they'll give us enough ridiculous fire power on a deep striking suit team to utterly annihilate a squadron of Leman Russ tanks... on the front armor.

I hope this isn't the direction things go for the Tau...

There are only so many ways they can go with Tau. I don't know if you've been following the 5th edition codexs, but we're out gunned, out numbered, and out maneuvered. I don't want to become a horde army, and I don't want assault elements to become a big factor in Tau. That only leaves increasing efficiency of shooting and/or power of weapons. I'd say maneuverability, but with the constraints a limited size playing field, that is a severely handicapped option. How many units can come in from any board edge or any terrain feature now?

Kroot Loops wrote:There are only so many ways they can go with Tau. I don't know if you've been following the 5th edition codexs, but we're out gunned, out numbered, and out maneuvered. I don't want to become a horde army, and I don't want assault elements to become a big factor in Tau. That only leaves increasing efficiency of shooting and/or power of weapons. I'd say maneuverability, but with the constraints a limited size playing field, that is a severely handicapped option. How many units can come in from any board edge or any terrain feature now?

Im down w/ dishing out some high quality shots

The candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long.. (blade runner quote)

shorter life doesnt mean less skilled, just that more information and life is compressed into a shorter period of time.

Well that is certainly a *duh* theory. By this logic humans would be just as skilled as eldar are since human life is "compressed".
Bet people would mind WS5 IG.

Pyriel- wrote:

The candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long.. (blade runner quote)

shorter life doesnt mean less skilled, just that more information and life is compressed into a shorter period of time.

Well that is certainly a *duh* theory. By this logic humans would be just as skilled as eldar are since human life is "compressed".
Bet people would mind WS5 IG.

and the rest goes on to say that due to the shorter sleep cycles of tau that they do infact regain alot of those hours that humans are sleeping/wasting.

ontop of that you have to factor in guard are teens taken from their worlds given a gun and 'trained' to fight.

Tau Fire caste are born, raised, trained to fight their entire lives, it is their purpose for existing.

If someone argues oh well Fire warriors shouldnt be any more skilled than BS 3, fine take Crisis suit pilots, these are the best of the best, extremely experienced (so aged) fire warriors...VETERANS..yet they still have BS 3 with far more experience/technological equipment? Doesnt make much sense.

TopC wrote:

Tau Fire caste are born, raised, trained to fight their entire lives, it is their purpose for existing.

If someone argues oh well Fire warriors shouldnt be any more skilled than BS 3, fine take Crisis suit pilots, these are the best of the best, extremely experienced (so aged) fire warriors...VETERANS..yet they still have BS 3 with far more experience/technological equipment? Doesnt make much sense.

Exactly. In fact 'el's in a FW squad should be BS4 for the same reason and pathfinders too since they're the cream of the crop.

But you're now going to see several posts screaming to high heaven that Tau shouldn't be better than a teenager, taken from his home planet and given a lasgun. In these posts you'll see mention of fluff and tau poor eyesight, short lifespan, etc. I'm just saying because it's all been typed over and over in this thread and others.

agnosto wrote:

TopC wrote:

Tau Fire caste are born, raised, trained to fight their entire lives, it is their purpose for existing.

If someone argues oh well Fire warriors shouldnt be any more skilled than BS 3, fine take Crisis suit pilots, these are the best of the best, extremely experienced (so aged) fire warriors...VETERANS..yet they still have BS 3 with far more experience/technological equipment? Doesnt make much sense.

Exactly. In fact 'el's in a FW squad should be BS4 for the same reason and pathfinders too since they're the cream of the crop.

But you're now going to see several posts screaming to high heaven that Tau shouldn't be better than a teenager, taken from his home planet and given a lasgun. In these posts you'll see mention of fluff and tau poor eyesight, short lifespan, etc. I'm just saying because it's all been typed over and over in this thread and others.

that it has... over and over again..

my argument already refutes the shorter life span as they waste less time sleeping

the eyesight has been refuted because its not that they actually have problems seeing, its the rate their eyes refresh or some such stuff but at long distances makes no difference which has been argued by another person in alot of detail explaining it scientifically, so i dont feel the need to try ... though i will add..what on earth do people think those mechanical things stick out the sides of their heads are? oh my..they improved their eyesight with technology...why on earth would a technological and innovative race so such a thing?

and the rest goes on to say that due to the shorter sleep cycles of tau that they do infact regain alot of those hours that humans are sleeping/wasting.

LOL
Talk about grasping straws. You sound like a hard core Tau fanboy who will excuse just about anything in order to make them better.
Care to show me at least one source that shows the relationship in organisms between sleep cycles and IQ?
As far as I know bears must be the very dumbest creatures in creation, sleeping all winter through and all that. lol

Taking your logic space marines should then be WS6 BS6 since they only sleep 2 hours a day, train every day from morning to "sleep" and live a hundred plus years but I guess that wouldnt sit well with you since it would make them better at shooting then tau.

And how do you explain the poor eye sight of the tau? Glasses?

ontop of that you have to factor in guard are teens taken from their worlds given a gun and 'trained' to fight.

Tau Fire caste are born, raised, trained to fight their entire lives, it is their purpose for existing.

Tell you what, read gaunts ghosts first or GWs own fluff on Cadians and then we can talk about human warriors and their traning vs firewarriors, their short lifespans, lack of experiance vs as varied enemies as their human counterparts...not to mention the superb eye signt the human guard has

f someone argues oh well Fire warriors shouldnt be any more skilled than BS 3, fine take Crisis suit pilots, these are the best of the best, extremely experienced (so aged) fire warriors...VETERANS..yet they still have BS 3 with far more experience/technological equipment? Doesnt make much sense.

This I agree to. Suit pilots, being the very best of the bunch should definately have BS4, if for any otehr reason that the suits optics will surely make up for the pilots poor eye signt.
BUT, and here is the kicker, making them even better will also mean upping their point cost!

Pyriel- wrote:

and the rest goes on to say that due to the shorter sleep cycles of tau that they do infact regain alot of those hours that humans are sleeping/wasting.

LOL
Talk about grasping straws. You sound like a hard core Tau fanboy who will excuse just about anything in order to make them better.
Care to show me at least one source that shows the relationship in organisms between sleep cycles and IQ?
As far as I know bears must be the very dumbest creatures in creation, sleeping all winter through and all that. lol

Taking your logic space marines should then be WS6 BS6 since they only sleep 2 hours a day, train every day from morning to "sleep" and live a hundred plus years but I guess that wouldnt sit well with you since it would make them better at shooting then tau.

And how do you explain the poor eye sight of the tau? Glasses?

ontop of that you have to factor in guard are teens taken from their worlds given a gun and 'trained' to fight.

Tau Fire caste are born, raised, trained to fight their entire lives, it is their purpose for existing.

Tell you what, read gaunts ghosts first or GWs own fluff on Cadians and then we can talk about human warriors and their traning vs firewarriors, their short lifespans, lack of experiance vs as varied enemies as their human counterparts...not to mention the superb eye signt the human guard has

f someone argues oh well Fire warriors shouldnt be any more skilled than BS 3, fine take Crisis suit pilots, these are the best of the best, extremely experienced (so aged) fire warriors...VETERANS..yet they still have BS 3 with far more experience/technological equipment? Doesnt make much sense.

This I agree to. Suit pilots, being the very best of the bunch should definately have BS4, if for any otehr reason that the suits optics will surely make up for the pilots poor eye signt.
BUT, and here is the kicker, making them even better will also mean upping their point cost!

just means you dont have to add 10pts for a targetting array, and since pretty much everones units went down in cost..they should stay bout the same but good call

Tell you what, read gaunts ghosts first or GWs own fluff on Cadians and then we can talk about human warriors and their traning vs firewarriors, their short lifespans, lack of experiance vs as varied enemies as their human counterparts...not to mention the superb eye signt the human guard has

Black Library novels are absolute drivel and in no way should they be considered game 'fluff' since the vast majority are only written from the perspective of the Imperium. Less than 10 Spehce Muhrines in BL novels fought off an entire craft world of Eldar, without a single casualty. According to BL writing, there is absolutely no reason three SM in a leaky rowboat hasn't crushed every non-human race in the galaxy, never mind that all it took to turn the greatest primarch against the Emperor was going, 'Nooooo! You should have the Glory!!!111!!!'

I mean if we're going to use Black Library Novels, what about Firewarrior?

Black Library novels are absolute drivel and in no way should they be considered game 'fluff' since the vast majority are only written from the perspective of the Imperium. Less than 10 Spehce Muhrines in BL novels fought off an entire craft world of Eldar, without a single casualty. According to BL writing,

Show me the canon GW fluff then that tells us imperial guardsmen are sleepy whimps who receive next to no training and cant shoot straight!

Besides GW canon fluff tells an SM chapter almost obliterated a whole craftworld (those usually contain billions of eldar) so what is your point?

just means you dont have to add 10pts for a targetting array, and since pretty much everones units went down in cost..they should stay bout the same but good call

Maybe.
How many points do you suggest firewarriors should be then?
And regarding the WS4 I´m far far from convinced. You need to do better then compare sleep cycles to warrant a WS4, not with S5 long range rifles.

I know tau are underpowered right now (but then again the ninja tau should be scrapped altogether too).

Pyriel- wrote:

Black Library novels are absolute drivel and in no way should they be considered game 'fluff' since the vast majority are only written from the perspective of the Imperium. Less than 10 Spehce Muhrines in BL novels fought off an entire craft world of Eldar, without a single casualty. According to BL writing,

Show me the canon GW fluff then that tells us imperial guardsmen are sleepy whimps who receive next to no training and cant shoot straight!

Besides GW canon fluff tells an SM chapter almost obliterated a whole craftworld (those usually contain billions of eldar) so what is your point?

just means you dont have to add 10pts for a targetting array, and since pretty much everones units went down in cost..they should stay bout the same but good call

Maybe.
How many points do you suggest firewarriors should be then?
And regarding the WS4 I´m far far from convinced. You need to do better then compare sleep cycles to warrant a WS4, not with S5 long range rifles.

I know tau are underpowered right now (but then again the ninja tau should be scrapped altogether too).

How about the BRB? The turn over of new recruits and casualties in the IG runs into the millions daily, the turn over is so high that no one knows what the actual strength of the IG is. Regiments are raised on a planet, given rudimentary training, shipped to the war zone, and thrown into battle.

Even the most professional IG regiment, the Cadians, has a nearly identical birthrate and death rate, which means it's a stagnant population. Have you ever been to a country ravaged recently by war? You'll find an interesting phenomenon, 60% or more of the population will be under the age of 18.

A SM chapter with all it's forces is a far cry from less than 10 space marines with no heavy support.

Besides, at least in 'canon' fluff, Every faction gets their chance to shine. I'm more concerned about the table top. There is no reason the BA should have gotten this super skimmer of death that they are getting, but they are. GW has to make every army viable on the table, they aren't the only game in town anymore where we'll sit for six years hoping we'll be fixed 'next codex'. If they continue ramping the Imperium up and maintaining Xenos in a sub-par existance, I'll migrate with my dollars over to Warmachine/Hordes.

And I'm pretty sure you mean to say BS 4, not WS 4

I'm seeing a lot of mis-information about Guard compared to Tau;

1) Aren't regular Guardsmen the representation for Cadians? So if we're going to use Cadian fluff to compare to Tau fluff, then Cadians are definitely superior in training. Not only are they raised from birth to be extreme warriors, but everything about their entire culture is driven to that end. By the time they are 12 years old, they are already performing live fire exercises against other Cadians! (do Tau ever even do live fire exercises?) I'm going to guess they have their weapons set to "stun," which Las weapons reportedly have. If not, damn, I wouldn't want to mess with those kids....

2) The "Guardsmen" that are quickly recruited and poorly trained (those some people refer to as "having a lasgun thrust into their hands and told 'go!'") are what are called "Conscripts," and are pitiful in a model for model comparison to both Guardsmen and Fire Warriors.

3) If Tau Sergeants (however you call them) are the "betters," then shouldn't Guard Sergeants and Space Marine Sergeants also have +1BS? What about the Veteran Sergeants? Shouldn't they also be +1BS compared to their normal Veteran components? Then wouldn't the commanders be an additional +1BS too? I mean, not only are they veterans, but their also even better than the Sergeants! So that would put a Guard Company Commander at BS6 and Space Marine Captains at BS7! I'm not implying this is good logic, I am showing that just because you're a "veteran" or "Sergeant" doesn't mean your BS should be immediately bumped.

4) According to most IG fluff, the regular (codex) Guardsmen are actually seasoned Veterans, but those of the Veteran squads are the even more seasoned survivors, the nastiest, meanest, and toughest that have survived. Apparently, the milling hordes of millions of IG conscripts are not actually properly represented in game terms, the closest being Conscript Squads, which seem to represent the FNGs, if you ask me.

1) No. Fire Caste is the Warrior Caste of Tau Society, not only is their only purpose in life training for and fighting in War, they've been genetically evolved for this purpose through selective breeding.

But I'm tired of this circular argument. It breaks down to three points of view basically:

1. FW should have BS4, as it fits with the army theme of focused ranged fire
2. BS 4 would be over powered, despite the overall increase in power (at lower prices) in the 5e Codeices
3. Skinnattittar; who somehow believes that the IG is the ultimate fighting force in the galaxy and nothing should be better than them

I'm going to guess they have their weapons set to "stun," which Las weapons reportedly have.

Aren't lasgun always set to stun? Or is it normally set to lightly graze...

FlingitNow wrote:

I'm going to guess they have their weapons set to "stun," which Las weapons reportedly have.

Aren't lasgun always set to stun? Or is it normally set to lightly graze...

Nah, they usually keep them set to "illuminate."

Nah, they usually keep them set to "illuminate."

But at least you get the emperor's finest paper armour!

FlingitNow wrote:

Nah, they usually keep them set to "illuminate."

But at least you get the emperor's finest paper armour!

And only the finest moral support the Imperium can spare!

whats a guardsman cost? like 6pts?

TopC wrote:whats a guardsman cost? like 6pts?

Technically, less than 5pts once you consider the Sergeant. So something like 4.5pts?

As I said before, all fluff arguments in any direction are pointless. The role of the codex is to make the army playable, interesting and balanced.

If that requires pulse rifles with RF15" and all crisis suits getting a free targetting matrix, then you write those rules and concoct a bit of fluff to justify it.

Kilkrazy wrote:As I said before, all fluff arguments in any direction are pointless. The role of the codex is to make the army playable, interesting and balanced.

If that requires pulse rifles with RF15" and all crisis suits getting a free targetting matrix, then you write those rules and concoct a bit of fluff to justify it.

But isn't that kind of like putting the cart before the horse? By that I mean; ass backwards.

That's how you get Ork Custom Force Fields and Teleportas. Fluffwise, they make practically no sense why they would get them and other armies not; not Eldar, not Tau, not Space Marines, not even Inquisitors and Deamon Hunters!

It is not a novel it is a game.

The demands of gameplay take precedence over fluff.

Kilkrazy wrote:It is not a novel it is a game.
The demands of gameplay take precedence over fluff.

Yes, but not the only thing to consider when writing rules. I would even say, playability should be the last thing addressed, but the proving feature.

Why? How? Well, in reality, just about any combat tactic technologically and physically possible has been attempted or considered at one point or another. Just look at the old method marching in tight formation up to another unit, then blasting each other at point blank range; at one point that was considered the most tactically pheasable mode of combat! But it went extinct. Look at Vietnam; with only the most basic of an assault rifle, most basic of ordinance (grenades, rocket launchers, etc...), the Chinese were able to hold back the American military force. Why? Not because they could tactically defeat the Americans on an equal playing field, but because the political environment allowed it to be so. How did the American Revolutionary forces defeat one of the most powerful empires on earth? The environment made such a victory/defeat possible.

Same thing goes for war gaming. An army with fluff that rends it unable to compete with those that exist is an army that is doomed to become extinct. Same goes with their fluff. However, concessions can be made for good fluff. It's a delicate balance to make a good game and GW has done it for over twenty years with reasonable success. No need to make hack-job changes for the sake of making an army playable, especially with one with so many more options than simply boosting their BS for no good reason.

Skinnattittar wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:It is not a novel it is a game.
The demands of gameplay take precedence over fluff.

Yes, but not the only thing to consider when writing rules. I would even say, playability should be the last thing addressed, but the proving feature.

Why? How? Well, in reality, just about any combat tactic technologically and physically possible has been attempted or considered at one point or another. Just look at the old method marching in tight formation up to another unit, then blasting each other at point blank range; at one point that was considered the most tactically pheasable mode of combat! But it went extinct. Look at Vietnam; with only the most basic of an assault rifle, most basic of ordinance (grenades, rocket launchers, etc...), the Chinese were able to hold back the American military force. Why? Not because they could tactically defeat the Americans on an equal playing field, but because the political environment allowed it to be so. How did the American Revolutionary forces defeat one of the most powerful empires on earth? The environment made such a victory/defeat possible.

Same thing goes for war gaming. An army with fluff that rends it unable to compete with those that exist is an army that is doomed to become extinct. Same goes with their fluff. However, concessions can be made for good fluff. It's a delicate balance to make a good game and GW has done it for over twenty years with reasonable success. No need to make hack-job changes for the sake of making an army playable, especially with one with so many more options than simply boosting their BS for no good reason.

Good read, To bad thats YOUR OPINION. Which when it gets down to it... opinions arent what really matters..it will be what the developers see math wise, and on the table, not to mention what looks good in the company wallet

but lets compare maths..

Whats your guardsman cost you?
Firewarriors are 10, bs 3, and ld 7, cant take heavy weapons, cant take CC weapons, there is no ldr fix for stopping them running off table.

please explain all of those Math/Cost wise as to why they should NOT get beefed up.

TopC wrote:Opinions aren't what really matters..it will be what looks good in the company wallet

There, that's how it should have looked.

Skinnattittar wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:It is not a novel it is a game.
The demands of gameplay take precedence over fluff.

Yes, but not the only thing to consider when writing rules. I would even say, playability should be the last thing addressed, but the proving feature.

Why? How? Well, in reality, just about any combat tactic technologically and physically possible has been attempted or considered at one point or another. Just look at the old method marching in tight formation up to another unit, then blasting each other at point blank range; at one point that was considered the most tactically pheasable mode of combat! But it went extinct. Look at Vietnam; with only the most basic of an assault rifle, most basic of ordinance (grenades, rocket launchers, etc...), the Chinese were able to hold back the American military force. Why? Not because they could tactically defeat the Americans on an equal playing field, but because the political environment allowed it to be so. How did the American Revolutionary forces defeat one of the most powerful empires on earth? The environment made such a victory/defeat possible.

Same thing goes for war gaming. An army with fluff that rends it unable to compete with those that exist is an army that is doomed to become extinct. Same goes with their fluff. However, concessions can be made for good fluff. It's a delicate balance to make a good game and GW has done it for over twenty years with reasonable success. No need to make hack-job changes for the sake of making an army playable, especially with one with so many more options than simply boosting their BS for no good reason.

That's one of the most nonsensical things I've ever heard. You do realize that in Imperial Armour 3, the Tau utterly embarrassed the IG at every turn, that they were one shotting their tanks from beyond visual range?

So to match this fluff should we allow Hammerheads to fire on vehicles while in reserve?

WH40k =/= real life. Every soldier in the army does not share a stat line. It doesn't have a giant omnipotent being that can see the battlefield in full moving each soldier. How would the Revolutionary war have played out if Cornwallis could have simply looked down and seen Marion's forces hiding in the swamp terrain and just moved his redcoats straight for them?

What if the VC had been limited to a 6x4 mile wide area they couldn't leave?

Your comparison is, quite frankly, stupid.

@ Froot Loops: And I think you are very narrow minded in your view of how the world works. 40k is a game, of course. You can try to play the game by laying your head on the board where your commander is, and ask other players to tell you what other squads are doing and can see, but you still won't be close to how a "real" battle would unfold.

The way I like to look at the 40k abstraction is that what is being played are the battles where forces are reasonable matches for each other, all else being equal. The vast majority of battles in reality are decided before the first shots have been fired. The ones played in 40k are the ones where things didn't go quite as planned and the enemy is just as much of a match for them.

What do I mean? Well, consider; I am a general and you are a general. I know you have "a" value of units on a hill (where "a" is the combat value, and to defeat it, I must be able to make "b," my combat value, greater). Well, I know it would be silly to send "c" (which will be less than "a") value unit to try and take the hill, so I should probably make sure "b" is at least twice "a." In this event, assuming my information is correct, I will easily defeat you the majority of the time. But maybe you don't have "a" on that hill, maybe you have "d!" And "d" is three times the value as "b!" I get my butt whipped! But maybe you didn't have "a" or "d," be instead had "b," which is the same value as my "b." This is the battle that 40k plays.

I was in the Infantry, I've been to war. Kindly do not try to explain to me how it unfolds.

Your attempts to link real world events to somehow justifying Fluff driven rules utterly failed.

Armies used to march in formation and fire at point blank range because that was the tactic developed when firearm technology coupled with left over martial traditions made it the most viable tactic at the time. As firearms improved and new tactics emerged, things changed. British Supply lines were too long and they couldn't find the American forces and force a favorable confrontation. The political situation in addition to the terrain being unfavorable to armor and again, being unable to find and force the enemy into open confrontation contributed to the 'loss' in Vietnam.

None of which has anything to do with the way a game should be designed.

You come up with a concept:

'These will be 'Space Marines'. They'll be a solid army with no real weaknesses, but they won't excel at anything; they'll also have strong armor and be very durable'

'These will be 'Eldar'. They'll feature highly specialized units that excell at one thing but are weak at another. By combining specialized units a balance force can be assembeled, or they can focus on one aspect or the other. They'll also have the fastest vehicles in the game'

etc etc.

Then you test them so they are balanced against each other.

Then you write fluff to make them interesting. Why are they the way they are? What are some of their great triumphs? Their Great Defeats?