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.

Almarine, your are voicing an opinion that is somewhat uneducated, admitting that you have never played them

Have you played anything other than MEQ?

It is practically a different game.

I used to just move forward and hope for the best, back when i was a pup. Normally got slaughtered. Developed some tactics, and all of a sudden i am competitive. Who'd a' thunk it?

ObiFett wrote:Except that every game you play as Tau, all the enemy has to do is get two or three models into CC with ANY of your units and they will wipe your unit out. While you need two or three units to kill an enemy unit. That is why a single mistake can result in being tabled. But done right, and Tau can hold their own pretty well. That is why they are much less forgiving than most armies. Tau only play 2/3 of the phases, while your opponent plays all 3. And Tau aren't even the best at the 2/3 of the phases they do play.

Yes and I agree, tau are pretty meh.

somerandomdude wrote:Dark Eldar are well reported as one of the trickier to use codices and IMHO this is justifiably so. Their biggest weakness is, of course, their vulnerability and even if you're not playing them like Imperial Guard they can still be ripped to shreds. Dark Eldar are an army that can seriously suffer from not having the 1st turn and are very vulnerable to shooty armies which appear to be predominant in 5th edition.

Sure, if by suffer you mean not getting to pounce on anything anywhere on the table with the exact measure of power you estimate is required by turn 2 (at latest). That has to absolutely suck, how do they even go on living.

somerandomdude wrote:Furthermore, the Dark Eldar's main source of anti-tank, the Dark Lance, is still seen by many Dark Eldar players as actually being a sub-par anti-tank weapon. Whilst yes, they have the tools, range of units and speed, IMHO it requires a competent player to use these aspects efficiently and competitively. Much like their Eldar counterparts, the Dark Eldar rely on speed, coordination and combination and i believe it requires a competent player to use these aspects effectively.

Saying dark lances are sub par sort of implies most other armies have something better. I guess you mean lascannons. I prefer lascannons like anyone else but they're also generally more expensive than lances or they're fired by guardsmen at bs3. LC razorbacks I'd say definitely pay for the premium. Aside from vendettas, that's the main place to get them.

somerandomdude wrote:Almarine, this is actually exactly why Space Marine armies are thought of as "easier" than others mentioned in this thread.

Dice:
Your statline is WS/BS4, S/T4, 3+, LD9+. If you make a miscalculation, your statline has a better chance of saving you. If you come up against a bad match-up, your statline has a better chance of saving you.

This is a very sweeping statement, I don't really know what you even mean. I guess the traditional response would be that marines are few and expensive. In the case of some other armies, numbers can have a better chance of saving you. Or holofields

somerandomdude wrote:Range:
There's very little range estimation needed in today's game. Even if there was, Space Marine armies have a generous amount of mid-range firepower that they can take advantage of given the nature of today's games (4x6 tables, extra movement, etc.)

When I say range estimates I'm thinking more about movement, calculating the odds of failing a charge in difficult terrain, plotting how far your transports can go in the next three turns, estimating the range between two enemy units to see if one can support the other if engaged and so forth. Maybe space marines do have an abundance of mid-range firepower. You mean stuff like bolter variations and multi-meltas?

somerandomdude wrote:
Thinking Ahead:
As I stated before, you can fail to forsee something as a Space Marine and still have a chance. With DE, Eldar, and Tau, which table edge/quarter you choose is a game-changing decision.

This is the main thing I'm wondering if people don't have wrong. Excluding tau. With DE, all you really have to do is take the edge you don't want your opponent to have. Probably just the one with most or least cover. You're not going to be spending a whole lot of time in it anyway. Tau and foot eldar will have as much difficulty as any other (foot) army of course, since they can't fly.

What I'm saying is, the greater your mobility the more forgiving your movement and deployment will be. Deploying space marines can be harder than many seem to think. Oftentimes you need to calculate how far they can actually make it if driving in a straight line and place them accordingly, be it in an exposed position or not. Marines may be resilient but rhinos sure aren't. Thankfully they have smoke...

Edit:

somerandomdude wrote:
Almarine, your are voicing an opinion that is somewhat uneducated, admitting that you have never played them

Have you played anything other than MEQ?

It is practically a different game.

I used to just move forward and hope for the best, back when i was a pup. Normally got slaughtered. Developed some tactics, and all of a sudden i am competitive. Who'd a' thunk it?

Yeah you could say that I am, but it's more like I'm asking a question really. Obviously I can't know if I would feel the same way if I played these armies and I'm the first to admit that. But I am interested in why people hammer on about how (for instance) DE are hard to use. So far I'm not convinced by the answers.

And yes, I mainly play guardsmen. I will elaborate further on this when I get back.

This post can safely be deleted.

Wow, I said a lot more than I thought!

Dark Lances are viewed as subpar by DE players because:

Missile Launchers are also S8, and AP 2 doesn't help against vehicles.
Missile Launchers have a greater range, which is huge in Spearhead and in the first turn of any game.
Dark Lances on infantry are more than twice as expensive as Missile Launchers in Heavy Support slots, and Missile Launchers are free in troops.
Most of a DE players Dark Lances (not Blasters) are going to be on AV 10 open-topped vehicles.*
You spend all of those points on the Lance rule, which helps against AV13/14 (which means, not a lot).
Those armies that have Missile Launchers can get plenty of melta to give them close range anti-tank as well.

*This is one of the main reasons DE are difficult for people to run successfully (without a whole lot of practice). Your greatest weapon needs LoS to hit anything, but you need to block LoS to survive.

DE have AV 10 opentopped vehicles. With T3 5+ units inside. They're fairly easy to wreck, and explosions lead to even more deaths. At twice the cost of a Rhino. How often do you worry about your Rhinos killing half their squad in an explosion?

You also made a mention of numbers that other armies have over Space Marines. Dark Eldar do not have a strong number advantage, and neither do most Tau and Eldar lists I've seen. Sure, there is a number discrepancy, but it is nothing like Space Marine and IG.

First: Crons - out of date
Second: Daemons - Random, very little synergy in the army, HQ's and heavy options are EXPENSIVE pointswise
Third: DE - require lots of strategy to play effectively, can't be thrown at an opponent and expected to win

It all depends on what you mean by difficult. I think that there are a lot of armies that are hard to play, but in different ways.


1) Dark Eldar.
Easy Because:
You are very fast
You have strong shooting and assault elements
Good options in every FOC
Power from Pain increases durability/damage in the late game

Hard because:
Lack Durability
Units only do one thing well

Summary: I would say that the DE are Easy to win with, but also easy to lose with. If you play right, your opponent will not know what hit them. If you make a couple mistakes, especially with movement, then your lack of durability will ruin you.

2) Necrons
Easy because:
Some of the most durable units in the game.
Vehicles that are impossible for some armies/lists to kill
Good options for shooting and assault

Hard because:
Generally high prices
Bad units in the Elite/Troop FOC
Lack of High Damage units.
No transports
Single Purpose Units
Phase out

Summary: These guys are the opposite of the DE. They have a lot of units that are very hard to get rid of, especially when used together. The problem is that your troops are subpar in the shooting phase, bad in combat, and very expensive. Combine all this with the Phase out Rule, and your durability does not really mean much when you lack the tools to deal a lot of damage. Hard to win with, Easy to lose big (phase out).


Space Wolves:
Easy Because:
Shooting and Assault Elements
Good units in Every FOC
Multi-purpose units.
Generally low prices compared to similar armies
Extra FOC slots. (4 HQs)
Good Force Multipliers

Hard Because:
It is easy to over equip some units (wolf guard, and long fangs)
Some poor unit choices.
Can have low LD

Summary: With a well written list, these guys are very hard to beat. Grey Hunters shoot as well or better than other marines, but they also are very stong in combat, especially with the wolf standard. Even if you make a mistake like getting out of a transport to rapid fire something, your power in the assault phase, counter attack, and armor save means that you will probably not pay a big price for your mistake. It could not be a mistake at all. It is however, very easy to write a bad list. You can be tempted to add to much wargear to some units, and other units are simply not well balanced, like Blood Claws compared to Grey Hunters. Easy to win with, and hard to lose.



Depending on what you as a player have the most trouble with, different armies can be harder or easier for you. If you are a master of the assault Phase, then playing Tau will be hard for you as you can not put that knowledge to use. If you are really good with movement and judging ranges, then DE will be easier for you than for other players.

You ever hear the anecdote about how a smaller quick guy can beat a bigger slower guy with room to manuver, but put them in an elevator and the smaller guy is toast?

Well, the 4x6 board is the elevator for Tau.

somerandomdude wrote:

Backfire wrote:All that sounds very good compared to Devilfish: 80pts base w/ weak weapons and two kill points, 120 points fully kitted, limited weapons upgrades...

Might want to check this out (updated March 10th):

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1760102a_Tau_Empire_Version_1_1.pdf

Q: What happens to the gun drones on a vehicle if the
vehicle is destroyed? (p30)
A: The gun drones will be destroyed along with the
vehicle. Note that they do not give away an additional kill
point as they have not been detached from the vehicle.

Cool, I have missed the new FAQ altogether. That makes DroneFish and lone Piranhas slightly more viable, as in KP games you can elect not to disembark them at all.

Nice to finally have a clear ruling for Seeker missiles. They sucked enough already.

Curious how they have fixed some of the Piranha disputes. Now certain upgrades can only be taken for the whole squadron.

It still doesn't explain what happens when you assault a squadron of 5 Piranhas which have Flechettes

I would say necrons, tau, dark eldar and tyranids.

Necrons and Tau moastly because they have old codexes. I have no experience with it.

Dark eldar is very difrent then any other army out there, but there style of play is something that comes very naturally to my mind so I don't think they are so dificult, but yes it is hard.

Tyranids on the other hand: Tyranids are hard, at least for me. I have only lost with them. I cannot wrapp my mind around how they work, but I love putting together the models so I play with them often. But I lose every time. I think I will have better chanches next time (I have read a lott of hulksmashes articels since last time.)

The problem is: My oponent is always SM gunnline or IG gunnline. Everytime. There is nothing I can do against it.

Wham-bam-thank-you-ma'm.

Of course other people who understands the tyranid mecanics might have an easy time against gunlines. How ever every army that has a hard counter will always have an uphill battle against them.

Niiai wrote:
The problem is: My oponent is always SM gunnline or IG gunnline. Everytime. There is nothing I can do against it.

The solution is outflanking genestealers, and to have your Hive Tyrant let a Warrior squad outflank.

At least, that's what I'd do.

I think you win or lose most matches with Tyranids when you write your list and find out who your opponent is. I've found that it is very hard (not impossible, just hard) to make a decent "all comers" list that isn't going to struggle and scrape against getting tabled by at least 1/3 of all armies.

Tyranids are certainly a "win big or lose big" army in my mind.

I played Eldar and SM for years and years, and I can certainly verify that if you try to play Eldar in a straightforward style like a MEQ army, you are going to lose. The only way I could be competitive was keeping a game plan in mind that included things like sacrificial units, using speed to drop harassers behind enemy lines, hit and runs, backpedaling juicy units to try and lure aggressive players into ambushes, and so on. I could win often enough, but I had to work a LOT harder at it. When I came back to 40K earlier this year, I specifically decided to stick with SM and sell off the Eldar because I didn't want to work so hard for a while.

Tau generally lose regardless but de are pretty easy to play they've got a good dex obi fett their quite easy to play.

daedalus wrote:

Niiai wrote:
The problem is: My oponent is always SM gunnline or IG gunnline. Everytime. There is nothing I can do against it.

The solution is outflanking genestealers, and to have your Hive Tyrant let a Warrior squad outflank.

At least, that's what I'd do.

while this is of topic I ahve tryed that a lott of times and it is usaly bad in my opinion. I at least do not have the models for it. The problem being that genestealers attack the transports (cool enough) and then they get shot up.

Vs guards there are a lott of chimeraes with flamers and multilaser. If you charge one chimerae you end up in a big bunch and then he flames you with his hellhounds.

Vs Marines the same is moastly trye only he used dreadnoughts/landspeeders to lay down the pie plates.

somerandomdude wrote:Wow, I said a lot more than I thought!

Dark Lances are viewed as subpar by DE players because:

Missile Launchers are also S8, and AP 2 doesn't help against vehicles.
Missile Launchers have a greater range, which is huge in Spearhead and in the first turn of any game.
Dark Lances on infantry are more than twice as expensive as Missile Launchers in Heavy Support slots, and Missile Launchers are free in troops.
Most of a DE players Dark Lances (not Blasters) are going to be on AV 10 open-topped vehicles.*
You spend all of those points on the Lance rule, which helps against AV13/14 (which means, not a lot).
Those armies that have Missile Launchers can get plenty of melta to give them close range anti-tank as well.

*This is one of the main reasons DE are difficult for people to run successfully (without a whole lot of practice). Your greatest weapon needs LoS to hit anything, but you need to block LoS to survive.

I'll give you the range thing, that is pretty significant, but I'm not sold on the rest. AP2 doesn't help with vehicles but it surely doesn't make a dark lance worse than a missile launcher. Dark lances and missile launchers both seem pretty inconsequential on troops, I've rarely had my combatsquad with ML be of much use, while ravagers are anything but expensive.

You may call ravagers fragile, because they have to be in LOS to shoot, but so does almost everything. Obviously some vehicles can handle it better than others, but DE skimmers are certainly not without defensive capability. As for the lance rule, it may not reliably pop land raiders (who said dark lances are DE's greatest weapon?), but they can totally suppress them.

Finally, melta is available to DE as well. It's not as easy to fit as for IG, but that can be said of anything.

somerandomdude wrote:DE have AV 10 opentopped vehicles. With T3 5+ units inside. They're fairly easy to wreck, and explosions lead to even more deaths. At twice the cost of a Rhino. How often do you worry about your Rhinos killing half their squad in an explosion?

Haha, I remember when I thought every passenger took an automatic saveable wound from exploding transports. Dreadful times. Anyway, AV doesn't matter if you can't draw LOS. If there is a piece of LOS blocking terrain anywhere on the board, I would estimate a DE vehicle to be able to reach it within one movement phase approximately 100% of the time. For when there isn't or when they don't, there is cover. While rhinos have smoke, I don't find it quite comparable. A raider moving fast is going to hurt something unless you down it immediately. A rhino popping smoke is probably in a sort of advantageous position on t1-2 and mainly aims to keep alive for another turn, on which it's still going to be trudging in the midfield. Around the same time, the contents of a raider will probably have reached their target.

somerandomdude wrote:You also made a mention of numbers that other armies have over Space Marines. Dark Eldar do not have a strong number advantage, and neither do most Tau and Eldar lists I've seen. Sure, there is a number discrepancy, but it is nothing like Space Marine and IG.

Can't argue much with this. Do you consider IG difficult to use?

Uh, just look at top tourney rankings. Wonder why you see the same stuff all the time?

DE are a scalpel in skilled hands.. now give those skilled hands BA...
If the same precise no nonsense player can win with a "harder" army, imagine what they can do
with space wolves...or other <insert other commonly accepted newb army here>

Personally, I think it all comes down to a person's default playstyle. Everybody knows exactly what it takes
to win with every army... so why isn't everybody awsome with everything? Because people revert
back to how they like to play. That's not to say people can't play other armies, but I think everybody
falls into one as their standby. Ork players are generally ork players, etc etc.

The best players play the army they are playing, they have the willpower and reserve to
play what they are given/chosen the way it's ment to be played.

Then again, in the end.. if the dice hate you.. the dice hate you.