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.

Darrian13 wrote:Illayanden Toledo style= Mike M.?
Mech Tau = Scott Simpson?

toledo style was Pete as he had 70 points and played eldar everybody else from toledo had over 80 or played not eldar.

Actually - Brad played eldar and scored 84 points. Same style as Pete.

i just figured Marc had all 20's so his victims would get zero making 84 not possible. thus Pete Played Marc

stormboy97 wrote:

Greg thats Marc with a C

Got it.

Still recovering from the red-eye and going to work right after it.

skkipper wrote:i just figured Marc had all 20's so his victims would get zero making 84 not possible. thus Pete Played Marc

Yeah - Brad choked that one.

Jayden63 wrote:These reports kinda confirm my suspicion that 5ed did a number on the Tau as well. Granted there were only 5 Tau armies there, but Mech Tau always does pretty well, not this time though. I fear it will only get worse for the greater good as the next few waves of codex come out.

It is worrying, though we should not make too much of a single GT. Next year's UKGT will tell a lot since Mech Tau usually place fairly high in that. (So do DE who seem to have done badly in these latest results.)

I had already stated that Tau were in a world of hurt in 5th. I think a whole new concept and list from what we traditionally see may be in order but it still may not be enough.

Every tournament is followed by proclamations of armies beiong 'too weak'. The sample size is too small while the variance in player ability and configuration of their lists too great to draw solid logical proofs from, in my opinion.

But I know that's not as much fun to debate...

Can we get some thoughts on the new V5 / missions etc here?

jfrazell wrote:Can we get some thoughts on the new V5 / missions etc here?

I'll offer up a little discourse. The big thing that some people may have gotten hit on was victory margins. A guy from my group that I would call a very good player took a nid army. I took an ork army. We both went 4-1, he ended up with 61 battle points and i ended up with 81. Without getting to see the missions before turning in our lists, he was unable to win by large margins.

We had done a lot of prep for 5th ed tourney play, but were both very focused on, well... winning the game. Just winning by the one objective you needed to win by. As it turns out, my 3x30 orks were able to get massacres, his 2x18 without number gaunts weren't. the difference continued to compound itself over 5 games, and there you see the 20 point difference.

I have to say that of course there are some armies that are suffering out there. Specifically imperial guard and dark eldar. Lets just drop them out of the equation and just say that, if you aren't using those books, you can build a tourney army, front load it to get a big margin on early turns, and try for massacres.

As far as the missions go, the book missions do just fine in a tourney environment as long as you aren't obstinately trying to bring your favorite old list from 4th. If you are stubborn, and a reactionary, you're going to have problems with these new missions. They are all in the book... we have all played them a lot. That makes them more accessible and more understandable at a glance. This is good. Less discussion, faster play. Just be prepared in further tournaments to score MORE than the minimum objectives needed to beat your opponent. For objectives it was 2+ more than your opponent, and for kill points i believe it was get double the kill points that your opponent got.

Tribune wrote:Every tournament is followed by proclamations of armies beiong 'too weak'. The sample size is too small while the variance in player ability and configuration of their lists too great to draw solid logical proofs from, in my opinion.

But I know that's not as much fun to debate...

That's true.

However empirical results should be used to validate theoretical propositions. On that basis, you can draw up a list of plusses and minusses that any army got from 5e and theorise that they got stronger or weaker. Then wait for tournament and other game results to prove or disprove the theory.

I think Tau lost more from 5e than they gained, although it wasn't all bad.

Other armies clearly gained from 5e -- Orks being a front runner.

So we wait for more tournament results and see if the pattern is repeated.

Minimum score was 3. So in a complete victory, the winner got 20 and the loser got 3.

I don't necessarily know that Tau are as broken as everyone seems to think that they are. Tau got a shot at Marc on Game 5 - meaning he was the 2nd best battle points up until that point. Hermann only placed 38th because of lower sports/painting scores - if those had been more normal, then he would've placed in the teens.

Just want to say congrats to Ananda Sisk for best appearance and player's choice! I know those were what she was going for, and I'm happy that it paid off for her.

Yes, her army looked great. I voted her as my favorite army.

That said, with the exception of her army, I was a bit surprised that there were very few stunning armies there. Ananda's looked awesome - and there were a few excellent paintjobs there, but nothing else that made you stop in your tracks and go "da-yum". (Fantasy was another matter.) Of course, I can't complain overly... my army was painted to table top standards and no higher - I just had people stopping at my table trying to count Immolators.

Looks like our boy Yakface came in 58th. Good effort Yak!

Whole lotta daemons in the top WHFB slots.

Thanks for the analysis, Shep. Hoping to make the Baltimore GT (assuming work doesn't drop another weekend of hell on my GT plans), and I'll revise my list to shoot for massacres at that one, all-or-nothing. Risky play is more fun anyways. Where did those matches go...

stjohn70 wrote:I don't necessarily know that Tau are as broken as everyone seems to think that they are. Tau got a shot at Marc on Game 5 - meaning he was the 2nd best battle points up until that point. Hermann only placed 38th because of lower sports/painting scores - if those had been more normal, then he would've placed in the teens.

Round 5 = KP's Mission pretty much doomed him from the start. He would have had a Positional Array to hold all the weak crap off the board and try to knock down one of Marc's 7KP and play for some sort of advantage there. It didn't help that his 3rd HH was an Ion Head instead of a Railhead.

Also it was a Dawn of War mission so unless he was running BSF's on his HH's, his first turn of shooting would have been crap.

Darrian13 wrote:Illayanden Toledo style= Mike M.? brad
Mech Tau = Scott Simpson?

some guy named john

not the usual suspects

This is John who played Marc in the 5th round at the Vegas GT. This was the first time I played Tau (I have played almost every other army to date), but it seemed to still be a solid army under 5th addition rules. The one place they really do get hurt is on the kill point missions. This is especially true when you consider that the gun drones that detach from the Devilfish count as a unit for kill point purposes! (In the future I will upgrade them to smart missles to avoid this problem).

My game with Marc was a good one, very tactical, but the kill point rules make for an odd game. Marc killed two of my units, a Firewarrior unit and a Devilfish and I killed one of his, a unit of Boyz. This made the kill point score 2 to 1 and the way the scenario rules were written he got a major victory because he had twice as many kill points as I did. Last year this would have been a straight draw, but this year its a major win. Now, to be fair, if we had played this game last year, both of us would have been a lot more agressive. As it was, we basically sat back and sniped at each other. My point is that the basic rules have not made the Tau weaker, but the scoring system sure has.

stjohn70 wrote:Yes, her army looked great. I voted her as my favorite army.

That said, with the exception of her army, I was a bit surprised that there were very few stunning armies there. Ananda's looked awesome - and there were a few excellent paintjobs there, but nothing else that made you stop in your tracks and go "da-yum". (Fantasy was another matter.) Of course, I can't complain overly... my army was painted to table top standards and no higher - I just had people stopping at my table trying to count Immolators.

St. John: were you the WH player to come in 4th? If not, nice to see WH making the top 5...

John Steele - 5th in Battle Points, 15th Overall. I don't know the other WH guy, but I saw him playing on Table 2 on Game 4 which was a loss, but I assume that he won Game 5 big to take him back up to 4th place.

A playfully sarcastic congratulations to Bruce Silva.

Not for coming in 107th, but for scoring a massive 11 in the painting score.

There should be a prize for that.

Eric

What is the maximum number of painting points you can get and how do you get an 11?

I think Tau can compete, but they do need to change there armies around for 5th edition. There are good things in the codex like disruption pods, and Kroot going to ground in forests, but you need to drop the gun drones and get smart missiles.

Yakface played Tau, and after he gets some sleep he might be able to post his thoughts.

I will post my Batreps against Scott Simpson's Tau, and Shep's Orks shortly.

My Pic (horrid angle... I need a course in table photography, I guess ) of the Best Painted/Player's Choice Awards. Again, grats to Ananda:



What you cannot tell from the pic, is that the green stuff making up the Nurgle symbol is transluscent, and the lighter greens are showing through from the inside.

Again with the bad pics, here's my army - last Immo & IST squad got cut in half... hey, it was a wide setup/



Black Immos all have Celestian Squads
Red Immos have Dominions
Grey are empty HS Immos (except one that carried the IST's)
And 2 red/black rhinos.

For those of you who were there, what did Marc's ork list contain?

30 ard boyz.
ghaz.
mad dok.
3x30 orks w/big shootas.
2xlootas.

That's what I played with my seer council anyway.

Don't know if he played anything else.

Damn that's a lot of immolators

I like lots of tanks and I like that sisters army.