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.

the weasel king wrote:

Looking at my codex a team of 6-12 fw with a leader with bonding knife is 75-135pts while a team of 10-20 kroot are 70-140pts not counting any hounds or riders. Seems they average out to be about the same maybe a bit more in favor of the fw squad if larger squads need to be taken. Am I off the ball here somewhere thinking that either or will work about the same it just requires playing a bit differently?

FW are 3 pts more expensive than Kroot and 4pts more expensive than Hounds (whom you generally take after you've got 10 Kroot). Assuming you buy the max sized squad of FW (12 models) and using your point values, I can get in 10 Kroot and 10 Hounds so I've nearly doubled the models the FW squad is taking. This gives me greater bubble-wrap coverage and depth [very important]. Whilst generally squads like this are set at 11 or 13 or 17 to make it that much harder to force morale checks on the Kroot, the Kroot are more point efficient in terms of defensive capabilities. Add in they are better at combat (which isn't saying much) and can get a 3+ cover save in the woods and they are an excellent defensive choice with some ability to put out anti-infantry torrent.

With FWs you're sacrificing numbers and point efficiency on the defensive end for offensive firepower (we'll discuss the opporunity cost of this later). You lose the minor advantage of infiltrate which forces your army to deploy in a smaller area within your deployment zone but after you've moved them forward you've gained a lot in terms of anti-infantry. The problem is two-fold. 1st, Tau don't really need help with anti-infantry normally. Whilst the Kroot layer adds some extra punch, the FW's improved shooting isn't worth the lose in defensive presence. 2nd, you're losing more offensive output when you go to ground. When Kroot hit the dirt, the Tau player doesn't care as it is 112 pts designed to protect the rest of your army (yes focusedfire, there are other roles but this is it's primary reason for being taken) whilst 135 pts of FW not shooting seems like a much greater cost of going to ground.

Overall, Kroot are more point efficient and more able to be a defensive layer since they have more bodies, are more effective in assault, can gain cover bonuses from forests, are much more willing to go to ground in terms of lost firepower and can infilitrate. Again, if you don't wish to use Tau, model some counts as, etc., FW can be used in this role but Kroot are simply better at it.

notabot187 wrote:Kroot can have infiltrate. Plus they are usually more of a speed bump than fire warriors. Kroot can at least damage the enemy, fire warriors lose in combat to just about anything.

IMO that seems to me like different but equally viable tactics:

kroot:
1) kroot infiltrate late in game to hold objectives (unreliably due to a potential of coming in on the wrong side)
2) kroot are used as bubble wrap

Fire Warriors:
1) fire warriors mount in devilfishes to stay out of fire and move into objective on turn 5ish
2) fire warriors preform a gun line which could do as much damage or more (while lasting longer) than the kroot

both seem equally good to me for similar points, am I really missing some point as to why the kroot are so much more epic than fire warriors?

Kroot infiltrating allows them to deploy further in front of the Tau army to expand the bubble-wrap layer, not outlfank. Whilst outlfanking gives them some benefit against static gunlines, against most armies this means they are better bubble-wraps as they stop assaults/slow your opponent further out from your lines.

but am I wrong about fire warriors being just as useful just in a different way? I won't take kroot, but I'm not really seeing such a major reason why that's so bad...

the weasel king wrote:but am I wrong about fire warriors being just as useful just in a different way? I won't take kroot, but I'm not really seeing such a major reason why that's so bad...

Its not a matter of its bad, its a matter of your not being able to delay a fast assault or short range oriented army. BA, SW, Vanilla marines, Sisters, mech orks, and nids can all be in your face really quick. With running, mech, or other sneaky tactics you really need to be careful letting your enemy find their optimal zone.

Kirby wrote:
3) Piranha -> Here you're going against blocking... Piranha's primary use is blocking (as said in my post) but of course they can be used for other things. I doubt notabot187 is demanding they only be used as blockers.

The primary use of a fast open topped skimmer with a melta gun is to move right next to a land raider and block it's movement?

Silly me I thought their primary use would be to slag land raiders and other heavy armor with melta guns, with blocking being a back up plan if melta guns fail to penetrate and target priority demands rail guns should be fired at a different target.

the weasel king wrote:First and foremost, no matter how good they are I think the kroot are losers. I know they might be decent or even required now but I don't like the way they look/feel/play. Might be my loss but I'm sure there's another way to win lol.

focusedfire wrote:What level of play are you looking to engage in?" and then quickly followed by a,"What do you have in yout army?"

I guess the answer to that is twofold. First, I like tournament's but never can get to them and hate painting. I tend to mostly play games with my one friend (Blood Angels power gamer). As for what I have, I have a farsight conversion, 7 suits (I tend to proxy 3 as broadsides till I get around to getting some plasticard for a railgun conversion I found), 5 tanks (any type really), full vespid squad, 15 pathfinders with markerlights, 9 pathfinders with rail rifles, 3 sniper teams, 24 fire warriors, and my friend is gona be getting me some piranhas, fire warriors, tanks, and suits.

Next is my play style. The army I have both had the most fun with and the least luck with is my sniper army (18 rail rifles-3 sniper teams and 3 pathfinder teams, hammerheads, broadsides, and suits loaded out with plasma rifles/fusion blaster combo). Other than that I love the feel of shooting an opponent without risking retribution from a retaliation shot. Oh, and I love me some markerlights .

If there's anything else you need to know just ask , and thanks for all the help!

By your reply, It definitely looks like both tactics and list will need to be unorthodox. Now please understand that I will give suggestions and opinions but your final tactics and list decisions are to be yours. I will give some analysis as to why certain units are favored but will try to offer alternatives when I can. Also,I tend to answer point by point, so please bear with me on this:

1)By what you've posted your probably going to end up compromising a bit but not as much as some would try to force upon you. Also your post indicates a semi-comp level of play rather than a WAAC list.

2)As far as what you have for models, it seems that you don't really have the battlesuits for a Farsight list yet but could easily get there with 6 more crisis and 2-3 Broadsides. The problem with Farsight is that you won't be able to run your Rail Rifles in the manner that you want but his army may be the easiest compromise to take you to where you want.
a)By your stated preference about shooting while not getting shot, You could run a more Stealthy scouting themed army. Problem is that you will get shot no matter what and the stealthy units are not as resilient as the Crisis or Broadsides.
b)Just going by the models you mentioned having, Right now your looking at a fully mechanized list that you will need to keep down to 1500pts and below. Maybe 1750. Problem with such lists is the loss of VoF and that they can be uninspiring to play.
c) What you do have would fits a build/tactical philosophy I've been running for the past year that is based upon flexibility. It is my 0 railgun list and it does a number on MEQ. Problem is that it takes a lot of practice to learn to use well and doesn't scale well into games over 1850.
(I am going to address some units and tactics before suggesting fully developed tactic/list combos)


3)Your comment about the Kroot. While disagreeing strongly, I know better than to argue when someone takes a strongly stated stance like you have. I will, however give their strong points and show the alternatives to them and the limitations of doing such.
a)The Kroots main strength is their position in the FOC. Sure they can Infiltrate and are cheap bubble wrap but if they were an elites or fast attack choice no one would use them. Why is this? It is because each of these other sections have units that are better at doing the same jobs but have fewer slots. These slots will almost always have other units that will be considered more important to the army.
b)The examples of units better than the Kroot in specific rolls would be that Gun Drone Squadrons make a better bubble wrap unit but are stuck in Fast attack where you have your Pathfinders and piranhas. In the Elites you have the Stealth teams that are much more durable than the kroot but then your losing Crisis suit slots. So it os a trade off and you will have to decide which compromise your going to make.
c)Then there is the matter of the troops section. With the 5th ed coversave craziness and plentiful AP 4 Autocannons & Heavy Bolters the kroot have almost the same level of duability while fielding about 30% more guns than a Fire Warrior squad of the same cost. Now please note that I said almost as durable also the Fire warriors can benefit from any extra Markerlight hits and hace a rifle that is a point up in strength.
All of this should wiegh upon your decisions. If you are not going to use the kroot but want Stealth, massed anti-infantry fire or just a coversave/meatshield then your are going to compromise in other areas.

4)About Transports, The devilfish is decent but pricy. There is a tactic called leapfrogging where you use One transport to effectively move two infantry units. I believe that the tactic is covered in the secon tactics/sbuild strategies thread. It works by exploiting the Devlfishes side doors and skimmer ability to hop over units.
Here is the example: First you have a devilfish and a unit of FW on each side. You then decide that you want to move to the left. At this point you load the unit on the right and then hop the Devilfish to a point that is about 6" on the other side of the unit to the left. Next turn you disembark the unit to the left side while the unit that started to the left moves 6" and embarks. Repeat as necessary. Doemside to this tactics is that lossing the transport can stranf 2 units. Up side is the you maintain a higher level VoF an rotate the units helping to keep them from getting insta mauled.

5)About Deepstriking Units-You will hear an almost universal don't do it. This is mainly due to fear of the Allied mystics in an IG army and an over attachment to preserving the battle suits. People will call them suicide units but oddly enough the few of us that practice te Mont'ka have gotten good at keeping these units alive. My quote"suicide" fusion crisis suit units currently have a 60% survival rate. That better than some people broadsides. You will have people also tell you that the Ctisis suits "are the VoF" in a Tau army, but the truth is that you can juggle the list to get the shots needed if you want to deep strike while maintaining a respectable VoF.

6)About Ion Cannons- These are insanely cheap and good weapons, but require a complete departure from standard build philosophies if you plan on running more than one of them. You end up with roll reversals between the crisis suits with the MP and the Hammerheads. In a 0 raigun list the anti-tank is left to the Piranhas and fusion equipped crisis suits. Anti-hoard goes to the flamer equipped crisis suits and the anti-light vehicle/Anti-meq/anti-mc goes to the Ion heads and rail rifles. Down side to this list is that you have to know how to manruver your army 3rd-4th ed old school style. This build requires practice, pathfinders, and a posi-relay to have the needed flexibilty in deployment/use of reserves.

7)Commanders- These guys are your crack shots and (IMO) equipping them with the AFP is a bit of a waste. Make sure to make use of that higher BS from the very start of the game. Give him the longest ranged weapons nut don't over kit him with wargear. You have to many thing that can take him out on in a single shot(Like Doom of Malntai or Jaws of the World Wolf) Prevailing thought says to only take Shas'els because A Shas'el with Targeting array is 15 points cheaper than a Shas'o. It is up to you whether you feel an extra wound,+1 leadership and an extra open hardpoint are worth those points.


8)Crisis suits- There is a constant debate as to what to equip them with. One standard build will use lots of Missile Pods. Why? Because they rock. They are the only crisis suit weapon with a range over 30" and they are S7 Assault 2. Problem is that the Crisis suits are your only reasonably priced source for plasma and fusion/melta. This is why you need to decide what tactics you are going to use before writing a list. You battle plan will determine whay weapons and how many the crisis suits will take. All I can say is once you decide, Try to keep them as cheap as possible(Basically don't go nuts with the sheild drones.)(Also remember that Crisis teams of 2 without drones will never fall below 50%, so no need to bond them when set up like that.



Well, it is getting late. I'll let you think on this and we will discuss more later. Also feel free to PM me with Questions. I figure that you'll have some about various pieces of now obsolete wargear unless somebody has helped to bring you up to 5th ed.

Later, I hope this helps some

There's some great advice and ideas in here so far, lets have more of that and less accusations and bitching at each other please. Ta.

kirby wrote:
The main difference seems to be two-fold:
1) if Tau are a mono-build or not
2) who's making the assumption

1)They are not

2)You did which was proven by the OP's reply to my questions. He is looking for a Srmi-comp list and has pretty clearly stateted such but none of you are listening. He wants to play to his perconal style, not to yours. It is this non-listening attitude that chases people away from both the game and Dakka.

kirby wrote:
I'll look at one below were I reply to your understanding of Tau units but let's look at the 2nd point. You make a lot of allusions to what the OP wants or has, etc. If the OP wants a specific goal or playstyle he should mention it early. Since he said he was after competitive tactics, well you need a competitive list to enact competitive tactics. It doesn't matter how good bubble-wrapping or flanking or blocking or castling or tank shocking or whatever is if you take bouncy balls to a gun fight. Whilst you can do well with a sub-par or medicore list with competitive tactics, by asking for competitive tactics we are going to assume the OP wants a competitive list to go with the tactics. If we are completely off the mark he can correct us. Haven't seen him do that other than say he doesn't want to use Kroot because of their fluff. So...enough of the external attribution.

1)The "Your understanding" line comes across as condescending which is in direct contradiction with your purported goal of this post not having personal digs. Congratulations. You couldn't make it more than 2 sentences. Way to go Timmy.

2)It seems that I was correct about what the OP wanted. You have steadily operated off of the assumption that he is looking to play your list and tactic as opposed to something that fits his style. I've been on this forum long enough to not operate under assumptions as to what the person wants. I was correct in my statement that the first thing anybody here should have said wae to ask for more details. It does no good telling someone to use a bunch of models they don't have.

3) The OP has stated his goals and preffered playstyle but both you and notabot have refused to listen. It is a good thing that the weasel king likes debate. Could just as easily been a 16 year old kid that you just remided that he stopped playing because of such behaviors by others. You have taken the term competitive tactics without looking at which ones he is looking for. You come across as if he must be converted to your way of thinking as opposed to just giving a few suggestions and letting him find his own way.

4)I invite you to reread what you posted in this first real paragraph. It reads as a logic chain based solely upon assumption. You effectively say, "He said competitive tactics so I am going to assume that he either has the army I'm telling him to run or he must go out and buy the armyI'm telling him to run."

5)Also, reread where he says that he doesn't go to tourny's but mainly play one individual and then says that he ejoys playing his unconventional list the most even though he doesn't win with it. That is about as clear of an indication that he is looking for semi-comp as you can get. You gotta listen to what people actually say rather than what you assumed they said. Seriously, you are effectively saying that what he has described as his prefference doesn't matter, until he tells you specifically you won't stop. This is a people skills issue that could be a problem if you don't learn to listen to what others are saying

kirby wrote:In your replies to notabot187 you've attempted to reply on how units should be used, so let's look at those and look at why Tau are effectively a mono-build.

Again, Tau are not a mono-build other than when you design your army for the tactics you want. Then that can be your personal mono-build. You can claim other wise but to many Tau armies winning with builds that are not your much vaunted my way or the highway mono-build.

kirby wrote:1) Kroot -> they can be offensive but their primary role is defensive (said in my post).

Correction, I never said their primary roll was defensive. That was an assunption on your part. Agreeing that they can be used as such and often are does not equate to my agreeing to such as their primary use.

kirby wrote:2) Devilfish -> Having an army rely on, not be supported by, but rely on markerlights is never a good idea. Your opponent shuts down your markerlight units and your Seeker missiles become useless. To get multiple markerlight units you are also sacrificing Crisis suits (for Stealth teams), Piranhas (for pathfinders, who rock though so it's okay) and Broadsides/Hammerheads (for Skyrays). That seems to be a good list of the best units out there unless you start tacking on marker drones to crisis teams (making them even bigger targets), etc.

There are units that you have ommited, but Ill let it slide as to that you are probably only playing 1750+ point games. I could be wrong but to me you come across as someone who mainly
plays at the Higher point levels.
In lower point games of a 1000 points or less the brodsides, pathfinders and even piranhas can become to costly. Funnily enough several if the "sub-par" units become very useful due to the dynamics of these smaller games.

kirby wrote:3) Piranha -> Here you're going against blocking... Piranha's primary use is blocking (as said in my post) but of course they can be used for other things. I doubt notabot187 is demanding they only be used as blockers.

Pirahna's primary use is to shoot the enemy, then to bring a free unit of gundrones on the field and then only if I feel the need, they can be screeners. Tau already have an expensive fast attack that doesn't do any damage in and of its self, they don't need you adding another.

kirby wrote:4) Markerlights -> notabot187 is correct in pointing out don't take more than you need. I too often see lists @ 1500 with 2 PF squads...they run out of guns to ML quickly which appears to be his main point there.

notabots statement was only correct if you buy into there is only build to run.(I just had a funny image of the typical list player going all LotR's. You know, "One build to unite them , one build to bind them....." not making fun of you it was just a funny thought.)(and yeah, I know the LotR quote isn't exact, was just conveyong a funny mental image.)

Back to the point. You can run a top winning Tau list with 0 marker lights if you want. This fact defies the mono-build theory.

kirby wrote:5) FW -> can't say I've ever praised DA jumping out of their transport. Jumping out of your transport is generally a bad idea unless you're a combat unit (i.e. TH/SS termies), are forced to due to wreckage, last ditch shooting efforts, etc. FWs do nothing the rest of the Tau army can't do (S5 spam), are rather expensive for what they do and die rather easily. I also like how you say DFish have problems yet you promoted a DFish army before.

Funny, Against hordes it is quite effective.
About the D-fish, again their use is dependent upon the tactics one wishes to employ. If you want to run an alpha strike seeker swarm they fit in without sacrificing a HS slot to the SkyRay. They in and of themselves are limited to S5 weapons. Again, the use is situational and variable. This runs counter to the mono-build theory your pushing.

kirby wrote:6) Crisis suits -> Playstyle: competitive. Effective suit build: PR/MP/MT. 6-12 S6+ shots for <200pts.

2 Crisis suits with TL FB and Flamer=98 points of insta dead Land Raider, Leman Russ, ect.. Again, depends on your tactics. In lower point games I will run battlesuit monat's Vespids and Gundrones to swarm the board. Point is, different tactics for different situations. I knpw the OP is playing near the 2000 point limit but have noticed that nobody had mentioned at the time I began this reply that he could ask his gaming buddy to scale his army down to meet where the Tau scale better.

kirby wrote:7) Farsight -> not competitive in any sense of the word; you have minimal redundency (yet you said it was good before, too) due to an egg basket unit which is terrible in combat.

Yet Farsight works for some.

kirby wrote:8) Ninja Tau -> correct in pointing out you shouldn't always Ninja...but Ninjaing is pointless. Why would I make my shooty army, shoot less? I can control the 'tempo of the game' with my defensive units anyway.

The difference between us that is becoming very clear is that you are an attrition warfare proponent that does not believe or make use of tactical reserves where I am a Maneuver Warfare proponent that strongly believes in the concept of tactical reserves.

kirby wrote:9) Hybrid Tau -> tick.

Now while I have pushed the Hybrid concept for a long, long, long time. I admit that it is not the only build or strategy. I remember when everyone kept tryong to apply the SM Spamming tactics and then complaining that the Tau sicked when such simplistic pproaches didn't work.

Question, How long has the term Hybrid been used to describe a 40K army of mixed elements. Especially when applied to the Tau? Who is known for first applying the term?

kirby wrote:When you start deviating outside of PR/MP Crisis, min-FW in Fish, Kroot layers, Piranhas, PF, Broadsides & Hammerheads you lose efficiency. Whether it's firepower or defensive abilities Tau really can't operate well outside of this build because of their poor unit choices elsewhere (i.e. Ethereal, SCs, Skyray, Stealths, FW, Krootox, etc.).

Funny, I've made the ethereals work before, rather well, too. As for the krootox? Did you know that a squad of 10 froot and 2 krootox will fit inside of a transport?


Later

Jayden63 wrote:Tau never do well in tournaments anymore. Also one unit of firewarriors and 40 kroot can be 5 scoring troop choices, so its not hard to get the initial numbers. Its just requires some luck to keep them on the table by the end of the game.

I wouldn't say they never do well in tournaments. It really depends on the list and the competency of the general. For example here are some battle reports with Tau:

Round 1, 2 & 3 - 'Ard Boyz

Round 1 - 'Ard Boyz Semi
Round 2 - 'Ard Boyz Semi
Round 3 - 'Ard Boyz Semi

Tau vs Chaos Space Marines

Practise game for 'Ard Boyz PART 1
Practise game for 'Ard Boyz PART 2

Round 1 - 'Ard Boyz Semi was a bye
Round 2 - 'Ard Boyz Semi
Round 3 - 'Ard Boyz Semi

Round 1 - 'Ard Boyz Semi
AbusePuppy hasn't published Rounds 2 and 3 yet. Keep an eye here if your interested in his games. Alternatively he may post them up in Warseer.

Now in those battle reports where the Tau won... was it the list or the general

I personally have difficulty with the idea that ethereals, krootox, and ion cannons really being worth it.

Ethereals, you get a reroll of morale tests, which sound good for an army that has pretty bad leadership. Except the part where he dies, since your opponent forces a test on all your units at the same time. Yeah, that is potentially a very bad thing.

Krootox: you lose infiltrate (which isn't always huge deal, but takes away one of the better tactical option they have) for a rapid fire version of an autocannon. That actually would almost be good idea, but the loss of infiltrate, and the lack of durability of offensively used kroot is a bit of a problem.

Ion cannons: S7 ap3, 60" range, heavy 3. 3 shots is nice, AP 3 is nice, S7, well, thats a problem. For meq busting, you don't need higher than S6, so plasma is better with its AP2. S7 isn't going to hurt the heavier armors (can't touch AV 14, and 12 and 13 is VERY tough for it). With amount of cover available, even with its reasonable volume of fire, you will be lucky to kill more than a single marine a turn with this. Add in marker light support, and you probably will kill 2 or 3... Not exactly the greatest firepower for its points.

As for the whole melta weapon issue. I've played with many a melta gun with many different armies. I know this one thing in particular more than any other: Meltas don't always kill what they are shooting at, in fact it takes usually 2-3 hits to take down anything with AV 12+. Tau have their little AV 10 skimmers that can take them, in fact a whole squad of them. Still won't kill that land raider with its deadly cargo every time (if you take a typical 2 in a squadron, the odds aren't even good that you stop it) Since the "primary" plan of killing their target isn't going to work more than 50 percent of the time, lets look at blocking movement: Park around the front arc, so they have to move around it. They have to get a destroyed or better result, for the entire squadron. Even then, it leaves difficult (and dangerous terrain for vehicles) behind. If they try to ram it, the odds of getting the desired result isn't very good. So I guess what I have to say is this: their primary use is delaying the enemies arrival into their optimal range, whether this is achieved through destruction of transports (ideal, but not always attainable right away) or by blocking is besides the point. Attempts to use them more conservatively might pay off, and even might be the correct tactical choice. But against most 5th ed lists and in most 5th ed missions, the movement control ability of the unit is going to be the most important.

Crisis suites deepstriking into range of armor with fusion blasters, puts them in RF range of the enemies firepower, not to mention the assault range of their units. Suites don't fair well in combat, and can be taken out easily when they are in such short quarters. The odds of them accomplishing their mission if they deep strike isn't the greatest, and if they cross the board, it means they can be picked off before getting in range. I'm sure I'll hear stories about how the suites survive even in the middle of the enemy, but unless its last turn nobody is going to just let a crisis suite team have its way in their own back field or main line.

Crisis suites deepstriking into range of armor with fusion blasters, puts them in RF range of the enemies firepower, not to mention the assault range of their units. Suites don't fair well in combat, and can be taken out easily when they are in such short quarters. The odds of them accomplishing their mission if they deep strike isn't the greatest, and if they cross the board, it means they can be picked off before getting in range. I'm sure I'll hear stories about how the suites survive even in the middle of the enemy, but unless its last turn nobody is going to just let a crisis suite team have its way in their own back field or main line.

IMHO, damaging the vehicle the suit is shooting at is a bonus when you are deepstriking in objective missions.

Lets say that this is a monat suit with TL fusion blasters and 2 drones (doesn't matter what kind) Now lets say that he breaks open that landraider full of termies(which, assuming he is within 6 inches, he is bound to at least damage it). BANG, he just instantly made up his points and more. AND...on the opponents turn he has to waste shooting to try to destroy it. This (if you have drones) would take 4 unsaved, 3+ wounds. That means that he has to make an effort in killing the suit.

And now lets talk about assulting the poor suit. Honestly, what bonehead of a player is going to waste a whole turn assualting one suit and his drones while your whole firebase is on the other side of the board?

It's a win-win, pop something big and provide a distraction, or don't pop it and provide a distraction. Either way, at least one unit is not going to be moving towards your SCORING units that will eventually win you the game.

mythological wrote:

Crisis suites deepstriking into range of armor with fusion blasters, puts them in RF range of the enemies firepower, not to mention the assault range of their units. Suites don't fair well in combat, and can be taken out easily when they are in such short quarters. The odds of them accomplishing their mission if they deep strike isn't the greatest, and if they cross the board, it means they can be picked off before getting in range. I'm sure I'll hear stories about how the suites survive even in the middle of the enemy, but unless its last turn nobody is going to just let a crisis suite team have its way in their own back field or main line.

IMHO, damaging the vehicle the suit is shooting at is a bonus when you are deepstriking in objective missions.

Lets say that this is a monat suit with TL fusion blasters and 2 drones (doesn't matter what kind) Now lets say that he breaks open that landraider full of termies(which, assuming he is within 6 inches, he is bound to at least damage it). BANG, he just instantly made up his points and more. AND...on the opponents turn he has to waste shooting to try to destroy it. This (if you have drones) would take 4 unsaved, 3+ wounds. That means that he has to make an effort in killing the suit.

And now lets talk about assulting the poor suit. Honestly, what bonehead of a player is going to waste a whole turn assualting one suit and his drones while your whole firebase is on the other side of the board?

It's a win-win, pop something big and provide a distraction, or don't pop it and provide a distraction. Either way, at least one unit is not going to be moving towards your SCORING units that will eventually win you the game.

Trying to Deep Strike in short Melta range of something, when you roll 2d6" Scatter. Yeah, 'good' plan there sparky.

How about, instead, use reliable things. Especially since not every army uses a Land Raider - and rarely all out on a flank by themselves. Oh, and the fact that they can just circumvent your suits or use another unit to kill them, or 'GASP' since you are in Reserve, they will already be half-way to you, or further, so they are on an Objective already.

PROTIP: Armies that get reliable S10 ranged weapons don't need to rely on melta weaponry so much.

LOLAdvice makes me LOL.

Eh, If you have the extra elite slots available, a suicide suite could be useful, but honestly I don't often see FOC spaces for it expect at low points where you can't afford full squads. In this way it acts like a drop pod dred, except with a toughness and armor save instead of an armor value. Personally I don't think it sounds like a good idea, and haven't seen it work well at all. I would rather have a unit that is going to predictably do its job than one that is subject to so many variables (reserves and deepstriking), and even when works doesn't even have even chances of taking out its main target (roll to hit, roll to pen, roll to immobilize or destroy is less than one could hope) Not to mention that unlike drop pods, you don't any turn 1, you get them turn 2 or later, which means that LR is most of the way to your fire base, and the value of killing it is greatly diminished once its payload is away.

Trying to Deep Strike in short Melta range of something, when you roll 2d6" Scatter. Yeah, 'good' plan there sparky.

How about, instead, use reliable things. Especially since not every army uses a Land Raider - and rarely all out on a flank by themselves. Oh, and the fact that they can just circumvent your suits or use another unit to kill them, or 'GASP' since you are in Reserve, they will already be half-way to you, or further, so they are on an Objective already.

PROTIP: Armies that get reliable S10 ranged weapons don't need to rely on melta weaponry so much.

LOLAdvice makes me LOL.

Notice I never said that I use it, but if you have the slot and need a good points filler than it can be used. Oh and yes, your right, the landraider/ anything but a trukk would be in my face after turn 1 after moving 12 inches, tops!

And using another unit to kill them is a bonus, because something IS shooting at them, meaning that they are not shooting at something more important. This more important thing could be those handy S10 ranged weapons?...hmmm?

alright, taking some of what I've read so far I have built a 1500pt list located here: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/304138.page#1726394.

As to the why of everything I did:

Hq squad: Expensive as heck, yes I know. But I tend to have great results with this squad. The key to them is put em on the front line and watch as they take up shots for 3-4 turns from every major gun in my opponents army and an assault round (at which time I loose 1 guy to failsafe detonator his sorry but ) or they run free to eliminate well over their points. I also took the "suicide suit" idea with the positional relay to bring in a "suicide suit" turn 2 with rerolling scatter from those lovely devilfishes as well as to bring in my few fire warriors on turns 3 and 4 respectively and into the waiting devilfishes to zoom towards the most sutable objective.

Elite: I kinda already explained the "suicide suit" above, would have maybe taken more, but so far only have so many suites to take and so many points to play with

Fast Attack: There pathfinders, need I say more? I plan on using them for a) marker lighting goodness as well as b)my friend takes the effect they play on my army way more seriously than he should and as such goes out of his way to eliminate the "threat". So I loose by turn 3 or 4 most of my pathfinders, but everything else is still there shooting him with fairly decent accuracy without the markerlights. So I guess there also Kinda bait. As for the devilfish I already explained what they do in the hq section.

Heavy Support: Well my broadsides are just that, Heavy support, anti-tank, whatever you want to call it. Although they do rip through that one deep striking assault squad that my opponent sends after em due to 2+saves, drones, and those lovely t.l. plasma rifles. The snipers do what they do best, snipe. I tend to use them in conjunction with my pathfinders to take out troops sitting on objectives while hitting on 2s or 3s and removing their cover saves. I find it quite effective most of the time.

Troops: Talked about what they do in the hq section.




Am I kinda getting the gist of what you guys are all suggesting?

notabot187 wrote:I personally have difficulty with the idea that ethereals, krootox, and ion cannons really being worth it.

Ethereals, you get a reroll of morale tests, which sound good for an army that has pretty bad leadership. Except the part where he dies, since your opponent forces a test on all your units at the same time. Yeah, that is potentially a very bad thing.

Krootox: you lose infiltrate (which isn't always huge deal, but takes away one of the better tactical option they have) for a rapid fire version of an autocannon. That actually would almost be good idea, but the loss of infiltrate, and the lack of durability of offensively used kroot is a bit of a problem.

Ion cannons: S7 ap3, 60" range, heavy 3. 3 shots is nice, AP 3 is nice, S7, well, thats a problem. For meq busting, you don't need higher than S6, so plasma is better with its AP2. S7 isn't going to hurt the heavier armors (can't touch AV 14, and 12 and 13 is VERY tough for it). With amount of cover available, even with its reasonable volume of fire, you will be lucky to kill more than a single marine a turn with this. Add in marker light support, and you probably will kill 2 or 3... Not exactly the greatest firepower for its points.

As for the whole melta weapon issue. I've played with many a melta gun with many different armies. I know this one thing in particular more than any other: Meltas don't always kill what they are shooting at, in fact it takes usually 2-3 hits to take down anything with AV 12+. Tau have their little AV 10 skimmers that can take them, in fact a whole squad of them. Still won't kill that land raider with its deadly cargo every time (if you take a typical 2 in a squadron, the odds aren't even good that you stop it) Since the "primary" plan of killing their target isn't going to work more than 50 percent of the time, lets look at blocking movement: Park around the front arc, so they have to move around it. They have to get a destroyed or better result, for the entire squadron. Even then, it leaves difficult (and dangerous terrain for vehicles) behind. If they try to ram it, the odds of getting the desired result isn't very good. So I guess what I have to say is this: their primary use is delaying the enemies arrival into their optimal range, whether this is achieved through destruction of transports (ideal, but not always attainable right away) or by blocking is besides the point. Attempts to use them more conservatively might pay off, and even might be the correct tactical choice. But against most 5th ed lists and in most 5th ed missions, the movement control ability of the unit is going to be the most important.

Crisis suites deepstriking into range of armor with fusion blasters, puts them in RF range of the enemies firepower, not to mention the assault range of their units. Suites don't fair well in combat, and can be taken out easily when they are in such short quarters. The odds of them accomplishing their mission if they deep strike isn't the greatest, and if they cross the board, it means they can be picked off before getting in range. I'm sure I'll hear stories about how the suites survive even in the middle of the enemy, but unless its last turn nobody is going to just let a crisis suite team have its way in their own back field or main line.

I understand your difficulty in accepting these often maligned units as viable. The peer pressure in the forums is overwhelmingly against change or deviation from the "Norm". I just happen to be the sort of individual that immediately asks why when someone says a unit or weapon is either mandatory or useless.

If they say the unit is mandatory I want to find out why it is so important that I have to limit myself and my tactical options.
When the consensus is that the unit is useless, along with the questions about self-imposed limitaion of options I consider it a sort of challenge to find tactically viable options for the units use. So far there is only one Tau unit that I have not been able to find a viable in game use for and that is the paperweight known as Aun'va.

Now I openly admit that some units are more efficient than others, but the only Tau units that really stand out in their inefficiency are the Tau Special Characters. Of the Tau SC's only Farsight brings something that could be worth his points in that he allows for more Crisis suits through his altered retinue and the free bonding knives. Downside of limited choices in other areas can be mitigated by Cross unit redundancy.(Concept that you don't have to use 2-3 of same unit for a particular role but instead can use differing units.)

As to the uses I and others have found for these units:

1) This use for the Ethereal came about when I had a Broadside unit walk 12" off of the table from losing a drone and later the same day someone commented upon etherials being useless. I thought about it and figured a way where the Ethereal can be used in a hybrid army to keep your anchor units in place. You set up a classic Broadside Castle with the 3 Broadsides loaded with 3-4 Shield drones and only 2 gundrones max. Then you join an ethereal that has two gundrones. With a proper set of screens this unit will suffer only shooting attacks and remain rock solid for pretty much a guaranteed 3 turns. The rest of the army is mechanised or reserved for the just in case some freak acciden happens.
I am currently reviewing this tactic because of the Tyranids DoM and Mawlock abilities. Before the new 'Nids this was an effective way to keep your broadsides from walking of the table from shooting wounds.

2)Now about the Krootox, I did not figure this one out but recognised its usefulness when someone else did. Currently the krootox only takes up one space in a transport. A min squad of kroot with two Krootox adds an interesting dynamic to a FoF attack. It is a little expensive but two D-Fish loaded with such units unloads with 8 S7 AP 4 Shots and 40 S 4 AP 6 shots. This could be very useful if your the type that liked the old FoF tactic and wants a little extra punch when clearing an objective.
Downside is that the kroot have to load up first turn and the unit costs about 20 points more than the classic FoF in order to bring that extra S 7 punch

3)The Ion Cannon list came about from someone declaring that the Railgun was a mandatory part of any Tau army. I had been playing a series of medium to lower point games(1750 to 1000pts) where the Railguns while useful were soaking up an innordinate amount of points and thus reducing overall volume of effective fire. I realized that by using cross unit redundancies for my AV 13-14 tank killers that I could free up points better spent elsewhere. I originally tested the concept in an extreme 0 railgun format that worked amazingly well. I brought the ideas here to Dakka so the regulars could thrash the list and ended up with many who liked the concept but felt it was to extreme. When switched to a single unit of broadsides with two Ionheads, a 1-2 fusion teams and a squadron of tank hunting Piranha the concept became accepted for games 1750 and lower.

BTW, your math on the Ion cannon isnt fully taking into account their range advantage and AP. The Ion cannon shine in the MC and Speeder squadron killing. The insta killing marines is just a nice side benefit. I also find that the higher weapon mount allows for better Los and less Cover saves for my opponents. Now, there are disadvantages to this list, but every list has them. My point is that your tactics will influence your list and that there is more than just one viable build for the tau.

4) I understand your point about the meltas not always killing what they shoot at, but the same applies to any weapon. The use of deep strikers will seem exceedingly risky, but with practice, a beacon fish and controlled timing you can make it a very reliable tactic. The concept is more about going after a backfield unit on turn 3-4. These are the turns where your opponent is pushing towards his objectives and if I can force him to back up to deal with one of my deep strikers then it has already taken a unit out of the game. If they take out a Leman Russ then they just earned double their points back.

If it is an assault oriented army like SM's then the deep striking units will earned 2&1/2 times their points back wen they take out the Land Raider and even if they dont destroy it they will still be forcing an unpleasant choice on my opponent. Yes, I know that the LR is an assault vehicle, but after the assault they run around the field wrecking your face and end up on an objective at the end game. If my first line of defense fails to take out the LR then I want my reserves to be able wreck it when they come in.

Again, I must stress that there is almost always an isolated unit that the deepstrikers can take out or pull off of an objective. The Point of a deepstrike team isn't to just thoughtlessly drop them in to kill the biggest target. You should be looking for positioning that gives the the chance to be a threat while equally giving them the best chance to survive and become a harassing threat. Use your deepstrikers to disrupt your enemies plans.

I understand that not everyone is comfortable using deep strike. That is why I don't claim doing such to be the only way to use the crisis suits, it is an just an option like any other tactic.


Later

Peer pressure on the forums? Nah, I just see a group of stinkers. Had them used against me, proxyed them, and took a good look at possible configurations. While sometimes they do acceptably well, when compared to the other options given up for them, they don't really get the job done. I would have no problem playing them in a fluff or story driven game, but in anything resembling competition (including friendly practice games among friends) I don't see their relative worth.

I have no problem using deep strike actually. I use it pretty frequently, with my marines (dropping in termies, dreds and occasionally stern guard). The difference though is the cost for tau, who lean heavy on the elite slot, compared to marines, who have goodies all over the book. Deep striking speeders works in marines, and can work with tau (though multi melta vs melta makes the tau version riskier due to shorter range)

notabot187 wrote:Peer pressure on the forums? Nah, I just see a group of stinkers. Had them used against me, proxyed them, and took a good look at possible configurations. While sometimes they do acceptably well, when compared to the other options given up for them, they don't really get the job done. I would have no problem playing them in a fluff or story driven game, but in anything resembling competition (including friendly practice games among friends) I don't see their relative worth.

I have no problem using deep strike actually. I use it pretty frequently, with my marines (dropping in termies, dreds and occasionally stern guard). The difference though is the cost for tau, who lean heavy on the elite slot, compared to marines, who have goodies all over the book. Deep striking speeders works in marines, and can work with tau (though multi melta vs melta makes the tau version riskier due to shorter range)

1)Thats cool, its your choice. I'm just arguing the point that there are other people that make different configuations work because they focus on a different set of tactics. Some will find these units that you feel are stinkers useful for a given tactic and will employ them effectively. You might not feel having kroot in a devilfish is valid, but there are others who will. Before the nids new codex the etheral tied in with a Broadside unit worked wonders for making the entire castle more resilient to ranged fire. Things change and you have to adapt, having a larger list of tactics and options never hurts. Its like those who disdain the concept of Ninja Tau blindly carrying their attitude over to the posi-relay and call it useless. This is sad because it is quite useful and I can't think of a list where the flexibility it offers wouldn't be useful. I'm not saying you must always take it, just that no one has ever lost a game because they included one in their army.

2) Thank you for agreeing that tactical reserves and deepstriking can be useful. And yes, The multi-melta tech gap is annoying from both from a fluff and game play perspective, but I do likes my challenges.



About your earlier posted position of line blocking being the piranhas primary purpose:

Where you see Piranhas as line blockers first, others see them as one of the most reliable forms of ant-tank the Tau have. Each veiw point has its merits, but to advocate one use to the exclusion of the other and advising new players as to such is to teach a flawed concept.
While line blocking may be useful it is not as useful as taking the opportunity to remove a russ squadron when the opportunity presents itself. The choice between firing and blocking will come up and if you aren't teaching new players all of the options then you are doing them a grave disservice. IMO, most of the time firing will be more important than blocking, but I do accept that there will be times that foregoing the easy shot to block can win you the game. The point is to teach the option.

Catch ya later

@focusedfire; looking at our initial posts you'll find the first "personal dig" comes from you (if you really find me saying the OP was looking for competitive tactics a personal dig, well can't help you) so stop with the high and mighty road.

I'm sorry but what meta-game? Do Americans play under the 5th edition rules? Yes. Individual codecies change how other armies operate minimally and generally only when they are versusing them. I.e. don't castle versus Manticores and Blood Lance. This doesn't mean you drop mech altogether and go for foot, it just means you need to make sure your army is capable of a non-castle deployment against these type of lists. Or the gradual inclusion of anti-psy, etc. Unless massive game changing rules are brought in via codecies or erratas, how should armies change significantly to 'adapt' to the same rule set? Eldar, Tau, Chaos, Orks, Daemons, WH, DE, etc. are all limited in their unit choices leading to 1 or 2 overarching builds leading to little variablity in competitiveness across lists within those armies (i.e. hard to make Chaos/Orks/Daemons/DH lists on par with Tau/Eldar/SM/IG/Tyranid lists).

In his original post the OP asked for competitive, he's changed it since then that's fine but let's still discuss Tau in 5th since that's the title of the post and weasel can still learn something from this all. Stop externally attributing, over-dramaticising (if people leave the game because of forums...they need to not go on forums, wow.) and attempting pseudo-psychology.

Onto the actual unit analysis again.

1) Kroot -> I know you didn't say their primary role is defensive. I'm saying I did. Stop touting on others reading comprehension please. When they so effectively stop and slow your opponents assaults/infantry in midfield and suffer from poor I and no assault grenades, their offensive use is limited.

2) Devilfish -> 1500+ but you're correct in my preference for appropriate sized battles of 1750+. GW is designing their game for this currently and some of the older codecies (i.e. DE) scale terribly but all of the new armies do not and have very limited builds @ 1500 (i.e. Tyranids, SM, etc.). 1000 pts isn't 40k due to lack of balance. You can't create an army that can deal with a pure mech, pure foot and hybrid list @ 1000pts reliably. And @ that points Tau just go "lol here's 10 Crisis suits." A classic example of lack of balance at lower points as they have the anti-infantry and mid-range mech firepower of a 2k list. I like how you didn't actual rebut against Devilfish.

3) Piranha -> Piranhas (like MM/HF speeders) don't have long-ranged weaponry so moving them initially to block movement is better than delaying them for short-ranged melta shots later. As Elessar said (maybe he's me, too!), Tau don't really need anti-tank help. WHilst a meltagun @ 2d6" is often better than a railgun, Tau could use more help ni delaying your opponent's army and are thus more important as blockers in the Tau army (back to the MM/HF example, the SM player can hold them back or reserve them because they aren't as important for blocking unless versusing an army like double raiders). When you can block and fire the fusion blaster at once, you get the best of both worlds but remember blocking is as close to a certainty of delaying your opponent as possible.

4) Markerlights -> yes you can, generally at 2250+ where you can get even more guns + targeting arrays whilst not impacting upon your ability to damage your opponent. That list still runs off of the model of Crisis suits/min-FW in Fish/Kroot shields/Piranhas/Broadsides/Railheads.

5) FW -> Ya DA bladestorming or FW w/markerlights can prob drop a squad. Shame you've open yourself to reprisal from the rest of the horde when you could stay cooped up in your transport and block/tankshock/moveaway/etc. Jumping out of your transport limits your flexibility which you try to advocate (specifically in army list building which you think comes from different unit types). Seeker missiles on DFish/Piranhas are always going to be hit & miss due to their complete reliance on another unit. And I'm still sacrificing Piranhas or Crisis suits (or again making them an even bigger target with Marker Drones) to get those army wide Markerlights. When Tau can field a couple markerlights here, and a couple markerlights there, Seekers will become more useful but because they are concentrated in PF squads or otherwise have huge opportunity costs (SkyRays, Stealths), it's not efficient to run this type of list.

6) Crisis Suits -> Close range crisis suits = dead. Back to Elessar's point where Tau have S10 AP1 railguns. And if you need those melta weapons in your opponent's face, after T1/2, your Piranhas can block and shoot. Luckily that's already built into the list, phew. I know you didn't mention TL-MP but I will as they are the 'closest competition' to the PR/MP suits. PR/MP suits allow you to shoot tanks and infantry effectivelt. TL-MP improve your anti-vehicle somewhat but aren't great at anti-infantry and take less benefit from markerlights. Thanks to Tau already rocking with anti-tank through railguns I'm going to bang out 6-12 S6+ shots instead of 6 S7 shots because my damage potential is infinitely higher for a small to moderate increase in points depending if you're running flamer or TA as your 3rd slot.

7) Farsight -> in non-competitive. I like how you avoid the actual analysis.

8) Ninja Tau -> or that I play to the best of my ability and the book I use at the time.

9) Hybrid Tau -> Still tooting your own horn? Pretty sure the word Hybrid has been around for a long time but if you want to claim credit for it, by all means. Much like the BoLS crew giving Darkwynn credit for Mech IG, it's simply .

In regards to the mono-build. WHen you want to play competitively which is where I am always coming from unless otherwise stated, they are stuck with their mono-build. This does not mean that every list must be the same like you think but they follow the same framework which has been outlined above. In regards to what the OP asked for since he now wants semi-competitive, having an actual grasp of competitive is good because it furthers his (and others) understanding of the game and therefore gives him an idea on how to make a 'semi-comeptitive' list. If you want to branch outside of the competitive bubble, sure things like Ethereals and Ionheads can fit into your army because you're not going for efficiency but it doesn't make them good (my ethereal died? So my shooting army which keeps everything at arms length with defenses now has to rage forward? I'll take one!).

Hey, 'subtle' attacks. Yay!

Listen up, ballbag, just because relying on the opponent being stupid enough to leave a viable target exposed (because, what? You lie/omit the reality about having Fusion Guns in Reserve, Deep Striking in? LOLXXORZ!) works for you, doesn't mean it's a good tactic.

Just because some things are very good at Deep Striking, and Deep Striking Melta, doesn't mean that Crisis teams aren't paying a stupidly high opportunity cost.

Also, wake up please, this is 2010. Getting your points back is one of the least efficient ways to measure the effectiveness of units in 40k - this is neither WFB, nor 3rd Edition 40k. If you MUST consider it in almost baseless, arbitrary ways, how about Kill Points. One for one. Oooh, sign me up.

Hey, 'subtle' attacks. Yay!

Listen up, ballbag, just because relying on the opponent being stupid enough to leave a viable target exposed (because, what? You lie/omit the reality about having Fusion Guns in Reserve, Deep Striking in? LOLXXORZ!) works for you, doesn't mean it's a good tactic.

Just because some things are very good at Deep Striking, and Deep Striking Melta, doesn't mean that Crisis teams aren't paying a stupidly high opportunity cost.

Also, wake up please, this is 2010. Getting your points back is one of the least efficient ways to measure the effectiveness of units in 40k - this is neither WFB, nor 3rd Edition 40k. If you MUST consider it in almost baseless, arbitrary ways, how about Kill Points. One for one. Oooh, sign me up.

I'll bite, I say that I have a monat suit coming in from reserve, what is the opponent going to do, make an fortress around my primary target, maybe a three layered defense shield around it? hmmm, that's weird, I don't remember many opponents going that far out of the way to stop one (completly ineffienct, as you call it, suit from getting a melta in the back) According to you, they should have nothing to worry about.

And making their points back is getting that kill point back. Say the monat pops a rhino with beserkers in it. 1 KP for me, now those beserkers have to RUN UP through all of my shots, chances of them succeeding are very low and will most likely give me another KP. So the 1 KP suit has successfully given me 2 KPs, I think that is worth it, no?

Stupidly high opportunity cost ehh, lets look at that for a second:

1 monat suit (TL fusion blaster, targetting array) 53 points

add 2 gun drones if you want, 73 points. If you need some surprise in your army and have a pathfinder fish, this becomes a good tactic for the army. This is not to say that this should be your only tactic, but when the rest of your army is plugging away on your side of the board, it is nice to cause some confusion that will keep the enemy from getting to your fragile units.

mythological wrote:

Hey, 'subtle' attacks. Yay!

Listen up, ballbag, just because relying on the opponent being stupid enough to leave a viable target exposed (because, what? You lie/omit the reality about having Fusion Guns in Reserve, Deep Striking in? LOLXXORZ!) works for you, doesn't mean it's a good tactic.

Just because some things are very good at Deep Striking, and Deep Striking Melta, doesn't mean that Crisis teams aren't paying a stupidly high opportunity cost.

Also, wake up please, this is 2010. Getting your points back is one of the least efficient ways to measure the effectiveness of units in 40k - this is neither WFB, nor 3rd Edition 40k. If you MUST consider it in almost baseless, arbitrary ways, how about Kill Points. One for one. Oooh, sign me up.

I'll bite, I say that I have a monat suit coming in from reserve, what is the opponent going to do, make an fortress around my primary target, maybe a three layered defense shield around it? hmmm, that's weird, I don't remember many opponents going that far out of the way to stop one (completly ineffienct, as you call it, suit from getting a melta in the back) According to you, they should have nothing to worry about.

And making their points back is getting that kill point back. Say the monat pops a rhino with beserkers in it. 1 KP for me, now those beserkers have to RUN UP through all of my shots, chances of them succeeding are very low and will most likely give me another KP. So the 1 KP suit has successfully given me 2 KPs, I think that is worth it, no?

Stupidly high opportunity cost ehh, lets look at that for a second:

1 monat suit (TL fusion blaster, targetting array) 53 points

add 2 gun drones if you want, 73 points. If you need some surprise in your army and have a pathfinder fish, this becomes a good tactic for the army. This is not to say that this should be your only tactic, but when the rest of your army is plugging away on your side of the board, it is nice to cause some confusion that will keep the enemy from getting to your fragile units.

It means you don't have 3 suit squads firing every turn, instead you have 2 and one that show up and potentially damages a rhino. Melta shots form derpstrike isn't a gimme. Put your guy close enough, you can scatter onto them, or even scatter too far away. Position him safely, you are more likely to not have 2d6 armor pen. S8 with BS 4 (TL in this case) against even AV 10 won't always take out that transport. If you get in 2d6 pen range, its still even chances you destroy it (though better than even it at least immobilize it). If you aren't in melta range, you have a 50/50 for a pen, which has a 50/50 for a destroyed. I just don't like those odds for an effectively suicide squad. Not to mention if they are smoked that turn, then it is really getting into the low chances of doing what you want.

Kirby wrote: @focusedfire; looking at our initial posts you'll find the first "personal dig" comes from you (if you really find me saying the OP was looking for competitive tactics a personal dig, well can't help you) so stop with the high and mighty road.

Actually you started it with a condescending tone and advice to read what equated to a remedial education blog for Tau players. The when commented upon you attacked through your blog rather than mount a defense for the opinions you claim you've been espousing as fact. I think its funny really. The fact that your taking the time to trash talk me on your blog and constant posting of inadequate counters to my arguments means that I'm in your head. Go on admit it, you can't stop thinking of me, can you.

Go ahead, go complain about me on your blog. I understand that you find me fascinating.

Kirby wrote:I'm sorry but what meta-game? Do Americans play under the 5th edition rules? Yes. Individual codecies change how other armies operate minimally and generally only when they are versusing them. I.e. don't castle versus Manticores and Blood Lance. This doesn't mean you drop mech altogether and go for foot, it just means you need to make sure your army is capable of a non-castle deployment against these type of lists. Or the gradual inclusion of anti-psy, etc. Unless massive game changing rules are brought in via codecies or erratas, how should armies change significantly to 'adapt' to the same rule set? Eldar, Tau, Chaos, Orks, Daemons, WH, DE, etc. are all limited in their unit choices leading to 1 or 2 overarching builds leading to little variablity in competitiveness across lists within those armies (i.e. hard to make Chaos/Orks/Daemons/DH lists on par with Tau/Eldar/SM/IG/Tyranid lists).

If these attemted jabs are the extent of you Aussies command of the English language, I can see why the Brits kicked you guys out.

Sometimes certain new units will force new tactics and even new builds on another armies part. Right now the Mawlock looks to be a very big issue for the broadside castle. Rather than sitting around and claiming that there is only one tactic, I prefer to have counters ready. Often these counters will force changes in the army composition.

To me, Your inability here to see that each new Codex can drastically alter the game for specific armies, especially after the players have had time to assimilate the new rules, makes you come across as a noob.

Kirby wrote:In his original post the OP asked for competitive, he's changed it since then that's fine but let's still discuss Tau in 5th since that's the title of the post and weasel can still learn something from this all. Stop externally attributing, over-dramaticising (if people leave the game because of forums...they need to not go on forums, wow.) and attempting pseudo-psychology.

You need to learn use the letters IMO when stating something you think to be true. This, alone, will fix a lot of our disagreements. Here let me correct your above sentence:
In his original post the OP asked for competitive, he's changed it since then that's fine but let's still discuss Tau in 5th since that's the title of the post and (IMO) weasel can still learn something from this all.

IMO,Your last sentence in the above makes you sound like TFG. That sentence alone indicates a completely self-centered dis-associative attitude towards your fellow gamers. It indicates someone that feels the game is all about them and their desires.

As far as the psycho-analysis is concerened, just be happy that I'm not charging you $275 an hour.

Kirby wrote:1) Kroot -> I know you didn't say their primary role is defensive. I'm saying I did. Stop touting on others reading comprehension please. When they so effectively stop and slow your opponents assaults/infantry in midfield and suffer from poor I and no assault grenades, their offensive use is limited.

Go back and read the entire thread. You first replied that kroot were solely defensive. Then you replied to my post to notabot about excluding the offensive capabilities for the kroot with the line, "1) Kroot -> they can be offensive but their primary role is defensive (said in my post).". First by the words you were using it could be implied that I was saying that their primary role was defensive. Second, when you go back to your preceeding post you never claimed any offensive capabilities so the "said in your post" was both inaccurate and misleading.

Kirby wrote:2) Devilfish -> 1500+ but you're correct in my preference for appropriate sized battles of 1750+. GW is designing their game for this currently and some of the older codecies (i.e. DE) scale terribly but all of the new armies do not and have very limited builds @ 1500 (i.e. Tyranids, SM, etc.). 1000 pts isn't 40k due to lack of balance. You can't create an army that can deal with a pure mech, pure foot and hybrid list @ 1000pts reliably. And @ that points Tau just go "lol here's 10 Crisis suits." A classic example of lack of balance at lower points as they have the anti-infantry and mid-range mech firepower of a 2k list. I like how you didn't actual rebut against Devilfish.

Again you need to learn to use the letters, IMO. Also you again make yourself sound like a noob in that the game was originally designed as a squad battle game. IMO, If any thing the 1750+ games are innapropriate for a system that has out grown the mechanics it operates on. For anything over 1000 - 1250 pts GW needs to recalculate the represented distances and move towards a d10 system. But that is a topic for another threads. I will end my side of the scale arguement by pointing out that I feel your comment about "1000 pts isn't 40K" may, to many, completely wreck any credibility you might have.
Now. if you had said (IMO,1000 pts isn't 40K) then you wouldn't be damaging your credibility by trying to push opinion off as fact.

As to not replying about the Devilfish....Did you even read what you wrote? Here is the quote:
[color=orangekirby wrote:
2) Devilfish -> Having an army rely on, not be supported by, but rely on markerlights is never a good idea. Your opponent shuts down your markerlight units and your Seeker missiles become useless. To get multiple markerlight units you are also sacrificing Crisis suits (for Stealth teams), Piranhas (for pathfinders, who rock though so it's okay) and Broadsides/Hammerheads (for Skyrays). That seems to be a good list of the best units out there unless you start tacking on marker drones to crisis teams (making them even bigger targets), etc.[/color]

Even if I apply the Devilfish as a "greater than" it makes no sense, so I replied to the overall grouping of units in that you were ommiting units that become more effective at the lower point levels. If you want to actually make a comment about the Devilfish, I will be happy to reply to any parts that I disagree with.

Kirby wrote:3) Piranha -> Piranhas (like MM/HF speeders) don't have long-ranged weaponry so moving them initially to block movement is better than delaying them for short-ranged melta shots later. As Elessar said (maybe he's me, too!), Tau don't really need anti-tank help. WHilst a meltagun @ 2d6" is often better than a railgun, Tau could use more help ni delaying your opponent's army and are thus more important as blockers in the Tau army (back to the MM/HF example, the SM player can hold them back or reserve them because they aren't as important for blocking unless versusing an army like double raiders). When you can block and fire the fusion blaster at once, you get the best of both worlds but remember blocking is as close to a certainty of delaying your opponent as possible.

Or you could make use of tactical reserves and leave him with little to nothing to attack, you can punch a hole in his lines and use mobility, you can use your mobility to turn the game onto the tables long edges and you can even play the player and throw him off of his game. This is another case of where applying the IMO qualifier would fix things.

You see, it is not as cut and dried as you claim it is. IMO, Claiming that there are only one set of available tactics and that the Piranha are more important as line blockers than offensive units is about as preposterous as claiming all builds using Kroot, Pathfinders, Crisis Suits, Broadsides and/or Hammer Heads are the same. There is a difference in having similarities because they are the same army and identicle cookie cutter lists that all use the exact same wargear loadouts and unit composition. The first is just a Tau army, the second is a monobuild.

Oh yeah, Ellesar and I have disagreed on the subject of deepstrikers before. We both agree to disagree.

Kirby wrote:4) Markerlights -> yes you can, generally at 2250+ where you can get even more guns + targeting arrays whilst not impacting upon your ability to damage your opponent. That list still runs off of the model of Crisis suits/min-FW in Fish/Kroot shields/Piranhas/Broadsides/Railheads.

I've seen the army also works well at 1500 pts and below without the markerlights. You also Fail again in that you make an opinionated claim without applying the IMO or IMHO tag to it.

I can see where you think it is a monobuild army when your fielding the entire FoC to reach the 2000+ point levels. Stretching the army to fit into the higher point games where it doesn't really scale well will limit you. IMO, That problem lies in your choice to engage in these games. At normal 1500-1850 point tourny levels the tau fit better. @2000 pts + Your taking units that limit your tactics just to get to the upper points levels. Funny thing is that, even at these higher levels, there are still alternative builds at those higher point levels. Not as many but there are still a few.

As to the last bit of your statement about the model the army runs on, I refer you to my reply immediately above where I said:
"IMO.........is about as preposterous as claiming all builds using Kroot, Pathfinders, Crisis Suits, Broadsides and/or Hammer Heads are the same. There is a difference in having similarities because they are the same army and identicle cookie cutter lists that all use the exact same wargear loadouts and unit composition. The first is just a Tau army, the second is a monobuild."

Kirby wrote:5) FW -> Ya DA bladestorming or FW w/markerlights can prob drop a squad. Shame you've open yourself to reprisal from the rest of the horde when you could stay cooped up in your transport and block/tankshock/moveaway/etc. Jumping out of your transport limits your flexibility which you try to advocate (specifically in army list building which you think comes from different unit types). Seeker missiles on DFish/Piranhas are always going to be hit & miss due to their complete reliance on another unit. And I'm still sacrificing Piranhas or Crisis suits (or again making them an even bigger target with Marker Drones) to get those army wide Markerlights. When Tau can field a couple markerlights here, and a couple markerlights there, Seekers will become more useful but because they are concentrated in PF squads or otherwise have huge opportunity costs (SkyRays, Stealths), it's not efficient to run this type of list.

Yeah, Lets go ahead and let the melta vets camped on the objective use their death or glory to keep us from winning the game because we were to scared to disembark our anti-geq unit and eradicate them. Go ahead, hide in your transports and give the game to your opponent.

BTW,Part of the flexibilty I mentioned is using your units offensively when needed. Broaden your tactical view and you will find other ways to run a list.

Kirby wrote:6) Crisis Suits -> Close range crisis suits = dead. Back to Elessar's point where Tau have S10 AP1 railguns. And if you need those melta weapons in your opponent's face, after T1/2, your Piranhas can block and shoot. Luckily that's already built into the list, phew. I know you didn't mention TL-MP but I will as they are the 'closest competition' to the PR/MP suits. PR/MP suits allow you to shoot tanks and infantry effectivelt. TL-MP improve your anti-vehicle somewhat but aren't great at anti-infantry and take less benefit from markerlights. Thanks to Tau already rocking with anti-tank through railguns I'm going to bang out 6-12 S6+ shots instead of 6 S7 shots because my damage potential is infinitely higher for a small to moderate increase in points depending if you're running flamer or TA as your 3rd slot.

Sigh*(Insert corrective comment about opinionated statements needing to be preceeded with IMO.)

You can claim all you want, I run a 1750 list with three squads of 2XV8 Crisis with TL FB+FL. Haven't had any problems with it because I figured out the trick of disruptive deepstriking back in 4th ed.
(Insert obligatory reply about the quality of my opponents)
Uh yeah, The people I play average over 10 years 40K experience with some being competitive players who have settled down to raise families. Even did an annihalation test game where we let the BT's have New PotMS BS 4 on all of his vehicles(A list spamming multimelta speeders and razorbacks) and pulled a draw.

Just because you can't see the validity in something doesn't mean that it lacks validity. It just means that you don't see it as feasible.

We both have opinions, the difference is that I openly admit when I am doing so and am not saying build/play this way or lose. I approach this from the standpoint of offer opinions/advice nut let people find what works for them.

Kirby wrote:7) Farsight -> in non-competitive. I like how you avoid the actual analysis.

Funny, what you posted wasn't analysis, imo. But seeing as you asked so nicely.
If you had been reading the thread you would have seen where I mentioned the concept of cross unit redundancies. It doesn't take 3 of the same unit to fill a given role, just three units thacan fill that roll. By using this method you can go a long way of making up for the Farsight list limitations.

Kirby wrote:8) Ninja Tau -> or that I play to the best of my ability and the book I use at the time.

Thus implying that players using a piece of wargear in the book and the Tactics it allows are not using the book or playing to the best of their ability. Seriously, get over yourself, people play differently if that is hard for you to understand then (imo) you are going to have a hard time gaming with others.

We have already agreed that we disagree on this point. Let us leave it there.

Kirby wrote:9) Hybrid Tau -> Still tooting your own horn? Pretty sure the word Hybrid has been around for a long time but if you want to claim credit for it, by all means. Much like the BoLS crew giving Darkwynn credit for Mech IG, it's simply .

Did I say it was me. I asked you a question that would lead you to research the developement of the basic framework for the list your touting and when and how the hybrid term became popularized.

What I was saying is that you are arguing with the guy that has fought to make the Tau an accepted and viable army on this forum.
Not an easy thing to do when a certain very controversial figure had half of the forum hating the Tau simply due to association with his name. It was tough. People constantly confused us because we both played Tau and have a thing for Star Blazers based Avatars.

kirby wrote:
In regards to the mono-build. WHen you want to play competitively which is where I am always coming from unless otherwise stated, they are stuck with their mono-build. This does not mean that every list must be the same like you think but they follow the same framework which has been outlined above. In regards to what the OP asked for since he now wants semi-competitive, having an actual grasp of competitive is good because it furthers his (and others) understanding of the game and therefore gives him an idea on how to make a 'semi-comeptitive' list. If you want to branch outside of the competitive bubble, sure things like Ethereals and Ionheads can fit into your army because you're not going for efficiency but it doesn't make them good (my ethereal died? So my shooting army which keeps everything at arms length with defenses now has to rage forward? I'll take one!).

The part that I bolded, I Just wanted you to know that they get the Preffered Enemy USR rather than the Rage USR. While Preffered Enemy doesn't help it also doesn't hurt the Tau Either. Now the Price of failure rule can hurt but if you mech-up and plan accordingly it doesn't do much to your forces.


As far as everything else you said in this last paragraph, I feel it all of this needs a big IMO(Or some other qualifier in front of it.

As far as any question about competency goes, I feel it falls to my side. This is due to my having a more comprehensive grasp of the Tau Armies abilities and broader use of a greater variety of tactics.

focusedfire wrote: As far as any question about competency goes, I feel it falls to my side. This is due to my having a more comprehensive grasp of the Tau Armies abilities and broader use of a greater variety of tactics.

Sorry, I was going to ignore this post until I got to this part.

Talk about arrogant. This entire post, and nearly everything you have said this entire thread has been insulting in tone, and often not even indirectly. For somebody who tries OH so hard to enforce proper forum etiquette, you certainly come across like an

Sure, the other guys here haven't exactly stopped this train wreck of a thread from going up in flames... But most of the worst of it was in response to YOUR tone and rather insulting way of bringing your point across.

Personally I think the whole stelek thing that you mentioned is rather silly, trying to play the martyr dieing for the sins of another, spreading your message of the greater good. Give me a break.

^ Agree with notabot187. If you think my original message was condescending, that's fine; it wasn't but I know you like externally attributing. I also have never talked about this thread or Dakka on my blog, that's Dethtron's. Notice how I put down one link to my blog and others referenced other pages and other blogs.

re: Ethereal's death; correct, woops. No idea why I thought rage >.<. Still doesn't overcome the fact you're forcing your whole army to take Ld tests on crappy Tau Ld when a single model dies and you can't get double re-rolls thanks to COmmanders being a requirement. I'd love to mech up my suits btw.

I reference you to my previous posts and the one link I laid down to reply to your points as you're just repeating yourself, externally attributing on me and basically having a whine. You're trying to propose bad units as a codex being 'flexible.' There is no need for an opinion about that, Warhammer 40k has a lot of grey but there is a fair amount of black & white about it, too. I.e. Crisis > Stealths. TH/SS > VV (Vanilla). etc.

Yep, I don't agree with most of Focused Fire's theories, but eh, if he wants to play Ion Cannon Hammerheads and sacrifice fusion suit ninja tau, let him. You want to feed one unit a turn to my entire army four four rounds? By all means.

Besides, when my rail guns have cratered three Monoliths in turn 1 while he's still realizing he has nothing in his entire army that can deal with them, the party is just getting started.

As for the Tau Semi final wins, it wasn't the list or the generals, it was extremely favorable match ups. Chaos Daemons and Necrons against Tau? Please. And an Ork list without Buzzsaws on it's deff koptas that didn't manage to kill a single AV 10 open topped vehicle for four turns? Yeah. When they play Blood Angels, Space Wolves, or IG and win, then I'll be impressed.

In the issue of Broadsides versus Hammerheads, Hammerheads are more flexible being able to switch between solid shot and submunition rounds, while Broadsides are better at killing vehicles. If the Hammerhead gets a weapon destroyed result, it becomes a pathetic Str 5 AP 5 platform, but if Broadsides get assaulted the squad is pretty much done shooting for the rest of the game.

2 hammerheads and a team of broadsides with a HW target lock on the team leader can shoot at four targets a turn, 2 teams with HW target locks on team leaders and a hammerhead can shoot at five targets a turn

Submunition blast is greater than an Ion Cannon against anything except single targets (Monstrous Creatures and the like), and 3+ saves in the open (Submunition blast is still equal here if you manage to catch six under the large blast.)

Personally watching the thread for awhile now, as well as been just a lurker here for awhile, a LONG while.

Everything is indeed opinion in the end, but I do hope for some realization things can be learned from both sides.

Focusfired -

1) I have played Tau for a bit, not long, but I have watched others play using said tactics you do and compared to how I do using the others tactics in this thread...I do better. Is it because I'm the better general using those tactics or is it because I'm getting lucky? (Or otherwise?)

2) Many MANY Tau Empire players ignore the uses of Kroot, but like many others in this thread, I inquire as to what exactly the Fire Warriors do superior to Kroot for what the army needs? I know you didn't say Kroot are useless, I just find your argument that "Fire Warriors still have their uses over Kroot" kinda ill-founded. I feel Tau Troop slots are slacking, in all honestly. Like Eldar, I love their models, though their flexibility in roles is not what I would like in 5th Edition. (Where their roles are valued and supporting the rest of the list, Kroot come very close to this in the Tau Empire, but not quite as sometimes their poor morale bites me back.

3) Piranhas I feel are like a passive aggressive threat if not used in the way Kirby's saying. Reserving them and keeping them off table to "Surprise" isn't exactly valued as you're letting the enemy gain ground. Keep them on the table, have faith in your AV 11 (And 4+ Cover if you gave 1 a Disruption Pod.) and that if the enemy shoots your Piranhas, that's much better off than them shooting your Crisis Suits.

4) While I have personally never faced a TL FB kinda suit DSing, again I think it's a bad use of a Elites slot much like C:SM Termicide. It comes down, hopes to kill a tank or something big, then dies from the opponent's reaction. Same deal for FWs getting out of their hiding holes. Str 5 is cool...but not that cool.

Anyways, I can't help but feel your smug attitude either, so I'm with notabot on this.

So one of the requisites, imo, to being a 'good' codex is having some way of dealing with any list. To me, this is where the Tau fail, because it seems that there reaches a saturation point of fast target priority that becomes irrecoverable.

For instance, this sort of list:


2500 Pts - Blood Angels Roster

HQ:
Librarian (Epistolary; Jump Pack; Force Weapon; Infernus Pistol; Shield of Sanguinius; The Sanguine Sword)
Reclusiarch (Jump Pack, Infernus Pistol, Melta Bombs)

Elites:
3x Sanguinary Priests (Jump Pack; Lightning Claws; Melta Bombs)
2x Chaplain (Jump Pack)

Troops:
3x 10 Assault Squad (Infernus Pistol; Hand Flamer; Power Fist)

Fast Attack:
3x Baal Preds (Assault Cannon; Heavy Flamer)

Heavy:
2x Vindicator (Siege Shield)
1x Dreadnaught (MM; HF); Drop Pod

How do you try to deal with this list? 3 squads of 12-13 3+/FNP fearless models that can jump right over your Piranha wall, with out flanking Baal Preds to bypass the wall, and a dreadnought that drops into the backfield to fry off a good portion of your kroot wrap, and you're looking at probably one turn of shooting from most deployments before they start hitting CC. I haven't been able to find a good answer yet, I can cause some serious damage to the list, but I can never crack it before my army starts to get rolled up, just can't squeeze enough Plasma into the list.

Personally with what Kirby described -

You are firing at Kroot with ASM you are forced to assault Kroot with proper layering. Proper Kroot wall again, makes it so it's only really deadly to Kroot or 1 vehicle...big deal..1kp to 1kp trade off again...

Vehicles aren't much of a problem, get rid oft the Vindicators and just accept Cover Saves vs. Baals.

Jump Pack Squads are weakened and focussed fire down by Crisis with MP/PRs. Drone/Kroot Bubblewrap even fired at with 3+ Cover Saves are pretty hard to dislodge from this role.

Piranhas block where you land, not where you jump over. Pretty predictable where you want to land, no?

Course just theorying, have to factor terrain in, target priorities (In this case - The closest threat.) and such, what do I know.

Baal Preds flanking don't really bypass the wall, it gets them farther from the enemy sometimes. Better to Scout and hide behind a building in Cover and wait till the Tau formation breaks, I think.