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.

Vasarto wrote:The Tau are despreatly in need for an Over Haul. They are niether Competative nor casual. I beat only two people out of my entire time ever playing with them..So my win Ratio is like 2/30

Yeah...they suck hard core. I read the entire book over and over and even With a good army and stratagy. They just suck really badly.

Here are the only good units in the entire Tau book

Wow... I'm not sure how you can possibly claim to have a good army and strategy if you're losing 95% of your games. Tau don't tend to make the greatest all-comers lists, if you don't have the benefit of knowing who your opponent will be, but 95% losses? Surely not.

I would suggest reading tactica, but from the sounds of it Tau gameplay just isn't for you.

ph34r wrote:Worst, as in straight up bad? Codex CSM.
Non-competitive? I'd say witch hunters.

Witch hunters? You've got to be kidding. Them nuns with guns can definitely kick a**!!!

Please stop complaining about CSM, the dex changed the purpose of certain models. That change in purpose defeated several army lists and opened up new ones. QQ and relearn the dex.

/rant

Squa--AAAACCCCKKK!!

......Sivrej was here......

A-P wrote:
4) Tau Empire. 5th is mainly about close combat and that murders Tau.
5) DH & WH. Don`t rate a higher place simply because the rules for allying give some comfort. If playing a "pure" list, place would go up.

First of all, when i play my palls, the cc never make or break a battle. Movement is the keyword here.
And second, like everyone else already have said, the WH is good, and that`s because of the immolator spam

I would have to necrons; you can at least build somewhat of a competitive army out of all the other lists but seriously, necrons are just so difficult to make a competitive army with.


Argue for immortals and whatever else but seriously, the armies are horribly broken towards being near unplayable in any kind of competitive enviroment.


Hell even fun games are terrible.

Necrons are the worst codex, by far. Phase out plus sweeping advance plus the new vehicle damage table means that they are horribly gimped. I don't get why people say chaos is the worst codex, the codex has reasonably priced stuff that is great plus 4 really good troop choices. Most armies have to deal with having 1 crappy troop choice. Maybe people are saying it is bad because of the fluff? Um, go play D&D or something.

Codex: Dark Eldar - all it does is cause strife and infighting among its owners.

Dark Angels is by far the worst. Over-priced units with crappy special characters and more limitations than you can shake a stick at...

In comparison with old codexes, the new CSM codex is such a huge let down. Diversity just went down to zero, it's such a bland army to play now compared to what it used to be.

Tau are still competitive but suffer from some major weaknesses - chiefly that the changes in 5th edition have heavily nerfed armies that rely on pure shooting. They suffer from the perennial problem of having a lot of their weaponry at optimal efficiency at 12", which is precisely the range you don't want to be.

I'd have to overall say necrons though. So bland. So boring.

Necrons definitely.

Not only are they bland and boring but they are boring to play with and against. As a necron opponent the game just becomes race into cc and roll dice until they all phase out. sod all strategy and no fun for either player.

In addition to being dull they also suck, horribly in 5th. Little to no anti-tank now, little to no mobility, little to no cc capability, horrible init, high cost and phase out all combine to make easily the leats competitive army in the game.


DE are very competitive they just need a model refresh and an update so that their rules mesh woth the core rules of 5th better. And more fluff.

WH are still competitive, in fact they got a big boos tin power in 5th ed. Plus they have one of the most varied and colourful lists in the game, if admittedly, most of the circus units are not very good choices.

Pure GK is not competitive at all but then it never was. Like WH they actually got a bit better in 5th mostly because elite cc units are now game winners. And they are still fun and colourful with lots of flavour. GK is never going to be a top tier army as they were conceived more for their allies role, at which they still excel. Who doesnt love fielding an =][= or GK termies?

CSM is highly competitive but boring as hell which is worse because the last codex was very competitve and very interesting.

Tau are pretty poorly balanced due to changes in 5th ed and are overall just overcosted. They need either a serious pts reduction in some core choices (crisis suits, firewarriors, tanks) or a serious improvement in capabilities for them. But they still have quite a lot of flavour and a wide variety of units.

DA are just like the new marine dex but worse on the table and more limited in options. A total failure of a codex and a dud from the very beginning. At least the necron codex was good when it came out.