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.

They cannot beat anything in CC, and with the delivery systems in the current metagame, they cannot kill quickly enough, and they are not cheap enough..

dbsamurai wrote:Now there's your mistake, because S5 kills light armor. It can glance the hell out of AV11 and shoot LS out of the air...
We do shoot as well as marines, but given that shooting is our biggest strength and the transports can carry 12 troops max I find it's better for RoF and for survivability to stick them in a DF with a full squad rather than min. Especially in the current game where troops are the only way to win 2/3rds of game types. But you're totally right they're waaaaay overcosted in that regard because their light skimmer that shoots about as well as a fast rhino with double storm bolters is more than the cost of a predator with a Heavy2 weapon...that's their main weakness...

I don't bring any light armor, and FW should only get 1.33 glance rapid firing against a Rhino. They will never kill, never stun, it's got fortitude(That's more GK cheapness really), and if they do pop, I can charge them. And why would horde players care very much if they lost a squad of cannon fodder? But yes, DF got cheated, and that is the real reason why FW aren't very good. FW are just really unbalanced.

Fire warriors are not bad. I have played against two different builds of tau, one mechanized and the other one was more of a gunline. The Fire warriors always did what they were supposed to do well. They sat back and shot to devastating effect. Their shooting coupled with plasma weapons available to the battle suits will fry up a marine army (which I played). The main weakness of the fire warriors is their lack off cc, but that is offset by their shooting power. They are over priced when compared to the newer codexes, but they do their purpose and form a solid gunline for the tau.

How can fire warriors shoot to devastating effect? A full squad of 12 will only kill 1.33 MEQ in a round of shooting, or 2 in-cover GEQ. That's not very devastating, and it assumes they get unhorsed first. In the current game, regular weapons don't score a lot of kills, special weapons with wound buffers (the rest of the squad) do. Whether it's low ap guns versus heavy infantry, or template weapons against hordes, the regular guns are just filler to roll some dice and sometimes take away a weak model or two. That's why fire warriors are so awful.

I agree with pretty much everyone lol they are awesome and crappy. I think that all they need to balance is maybe a cheaper transport but more importantly a bs of 4. They are supposed to be highly advanced! So why can't they shoot better? Lol but they are absolutely a finesse army as a whole. Use the marker drones n the like first to get that extra BS point. It's what its there for. If you want an absolutely balanced troop choice than can take as much punishment as it can dish then play marines. However if you want a sly army that WILL dominate the field with fire power then play tau. You just can't use em as marines because they're not.

Also.....you people that play mathhammer are ridiculous! It's a chance game. A squad of FW could very easily put down a squad of just about anything if its in the dice. Even hoarde armies since the pulse weapons have a decent AP. And even marines miss!

now I'm not a big fan of vehicles, never have been n the last time I played as tau the empire codex had just come out, butI don't know how many times I wiped the floor with my cuz's necrons back then because I'd have my kroot run out as cannon fodder n get blown away before they hit combat while my 4 squads of FW, my 2 broadsides and my hammerhead dominated everything but his.damn monolith(for some reason I'd always miss or roll low on the damage charts).

I guess now that I'm done ranting what I'm trying to say is that you can't compare pt for.pt against any other unit in the game except maybe direA lol you have to support them with cannon fodder and suits. Everyone will be too busy shooting at your xv8s and the kroot Runnin down their throat.that you.should be able to set up your fw and then just let.them start killing anything but tanks(you can.glance.them to death.but.unless its your only option then let them shoot at troops where.they will do.the.most damage).

Anyone agree?

Emperor awfulness wrote:How can fire warriors shoot to devastating effect? A full squad of 12 will only kill 1.33 MEQ in a round of shooting, or 2 in-cover GEQ.

Compared to 1 wound with 9 bolters firing. I don't have the tau codex but I assume they cost less than marines so I don't know what your point is.
Oh and bolters can't glance a rhino's front. Tau warriors will average 1 glancing hit 15-30 inches, so there's a good chance of stopping it moving/immobilising it before those close combat specialists get in close.
Don't play tau and I never have but it annoys me when close-combat army players get all "HURRR NO COMBAT ABILITY UR WEAK" right before 10 death company get vaporised by a S10 pie plate.

Emperor awfulness wrote: Whether it's low ap guns versus heavy infantry, or template weapons against hordes

What if you've got lots of numbers and a 4+ save? Like firewarriors?

Mustela wrote:I play Grey Knights, I can have str 5 guns that have an effectively 30" range, with ten shots from the unit

1.) how much does said unit cost?

2.) are they in an army that gets railguns, etc.?

Mustela wrote:I don't bring any light armor, and FW should only get 1.33 glance rapid firing against a Rhino. They will never kill, never stun

They can't stun on a glance? What about immobilizing?

Plus, rhinos are super easy to glance to death, what with only having one weapon.

In any case, the firewarriors are here to threaten, not to beat outright. 6 firewarrior squads can throw down their share of stuns etc. while the rest of the army throws str 10 and deeptrike melta shots at them.

The point is, bolters suck also. But marines get a good gun or two in every squad, and so do their razorbacks. Same goes for IG, eldar, dark eldar, necrons, and orks. Even daemons get a special weapon on their pink horrors. For an exclusive-shooting army, that seems like a weakness. Everyone else can at least justify being mediocre at shooting by having CC backup. Tau don't even have that, AND they get out shot by those mediocre troops.

My Fire Warriors have killed more in combat than with shooting in the 3 years i've played Tau. I'm not sure if it's because of my meta, or because it's crap luck, but I find that without markerlights, they are entirely unimpressive, and to get enough markerlights to do anything, you need to sacrifice those shots that would've gone on helping your broadsides and crisis suits.

Plus, rhinos are super easy to glance to death, what with only having one weapon.

Needing 4s to hit, 6s to glance, hoping your opponent doesn't manage to make the 4+ cover save from smoke launchers (because they will pop smoke, and to remove it we come back to the issue of needing mass markerlights), and then needing 5s or 6s to get a Damaged result, yes, they're super easy if you have enough pulse rifles to do it.

In any case, the firewarriors are here to threaten, not to beat outright. 6 firewarrior squads can throw down their share of stuns etc. while the rest of the army throws str 10 and deeptrike melta shots at them.

6 Fire Warrior squads? 6 squads of 6 is 360pts, you could get two decent crisis suit squads for that. 6 Squads of 8 or 10 are even more, 480pts and 600pts respectively, if you have that many points spare after all this S10 and deepstriking meltas (which I would never do, it's a terrible waste of a crisis suit) then more power to you, but I can't say it'll be very effective, coming from my experience.

Emperor awfulness wrote:How can fire warriors shoot to devastating effect? A full squad of 12 will only kill 1.33 MEQ in a round of shooting, or 2 in-cover GEQ. That's not very devastating, and it assumes they get unhorsed first. In the current game, regular weapons don't score a lot of kills, special weapons with wound buffers (the rest of the squad) do. Whether it's low ap guns versus heavy infantry, or template weapons against hordes, the regular guns are just filler to roll some dice and sometimes take away a weak model or two. That's why fire warriors are so awful.

Your forgetting something: synergy.
Playing Both BA and Tau, I can safely say that if you bring vehicles against tau they will die. They will always die. always. (this assumes a competant player with models btw) why? railguns. going up against AV11 spam, one squad of broadsides and a mess of firewarriors can ensure that the scariest things get popped and the less scary things get shaken half to death. Not to mention that anyone worth their salt takes a squad of stealth suits with markerldrones so they can fire on the move and at least one full team of crisis suits. Deathrain kills av11 like it's a light railgun, Fireknife kills AV11 with it's enormous output of firepower, and TL plasma kills assault squads in JP. In fact, crisis suits cost less than a squad of death company but excel at murdering them. Our guns are spectacular, they're insanely powerful, but at the cost of no cc ability. Still, whether my BA bring vindicators or av11, I can almost always win with tau. the other reason for that, is that fireawarriors have a 4+ save, making them far better than your average mounted guardsmen platoon at holding objectives, and more numerous than space marines so they can hold more objectives and still take all the necessary firepower. We're not perfect, hell we're not even teir one competative, but most of that is due to weaknesses in other units. The firewarriors themselves are the on of the top 5 best units in that codex. Their only real weakness is cost, same with the stealth and crisis suits. They're too old so they cost a bit too much on everything and that's really what keeps them from being top teir, is that we can't quite field enough units, but we can still field enough 4+ and s5 t4 sv3+ units to be mid teir.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Joey wrote:
Compared to 1 wound with 9 bolters firing. I don't have the tau codex but I assume they cost less than marines so I don't know what your point is.
Oh and bolters can't glance a rhino's front. Tau warriors will average 1 glancing hit 15-30 inches, so there's a good chance of stopping it moving/immobilising it before those close combat specialists get in close.
Don't play tau and I never have but it annoys me when close-combat army players get all "HURRR NO COMBAT ABILITY UR WEAK" right before 10 death company get vaporised by a S10 pie plate.

You did prove my point but sadly...we don't have an S10 pie plate...ours is only S7 ap4 we do however have TL rapid fire plasma weapons, and fireknife...that kills death company quite nicely actually

Ailaros wrote:

Emperor awfulness wrote: Whether it's low ap guns versus heavy infantry, or template weapons against hordes

What if you've got lots of numbers and a 4+ save? Like firewarriors?

Mustela wrote:I play Grey Knights, I can have str 5 guns that have an effectively 30" range, with ten shots from the unit

1.) how much does said unit cost?

2.) are they in an army that gets railguns, etc.?

Mustela wrote:I don't bring any light armor, and FW should only get 1.33 glance rapid firing against a Rhino. They will never kill, never stun

They can't stun on a glance? What about immobilizing?

Plus, rhinos are super easy to glance to death, what with only having one weapon.

In any case, the firewarriors are here to threaten, not to beat outright. 6 firewarrior squads can throw down their share of stuns etc. while the rest of the army throws str 10 and deeptrike melta shots at them.

Fire warriors are too expensive and too ineffective to take in large numbers. 10 pts for a model with virtually no options, crappy stats, and a crappy gun with crappy BS means you can't even justify spending for how good they are (unlike other armies). Nobody cares about 4+ armor when cover is everywhere, and better. If you don't have a 3+ you might as well not even have an armor save. Its not like people aren't taking a decent amount of AP 4 these days too, Psycannons, auto cannons, and HBs are rather common to face.

1: 120 pts IIRC. The ammo upgrade is static, so if you take a larger squad the cost per model goes down. Isn't 10 non rapid shots from firewarriors 100 pts? For 20 pts more GKs get better guns, better armor, better rules.
2: no, But railguns are honestly overrated. S10 AP1 whoopee. Not nearly as unique as it used to be. How many shots do you get on how many platforms? GKs can spam S8 and S7 rending cannons all day long, which have better output against most armor and infantry than railguns do. Heck even against AV14 the numbers for the psycannons aren't horrible. Also GKs get access to cheap melta if they really want. Melta > railguns for anti heavy armor. Range is a factor of course... but the optimal range band for the railgun is too long, most of the game isn't going to be played at that range short of spear head annihilation.

Rhinos are NOT super easy to glance to death with S5. rapid fire range, 12 shots, 6 hits, 1 glance... and need a 5-6 to get a meaningful result. So 60 pts of guys in short range have a 1/3 chance of permanently damaging a cheap transport, and if its smoked or in cover? Even if you were to take 120 firewarriors, the numbers just do not work too well. 120 hits in RF mode, 20 glances, 6.6 meaningful results. You need 3 of these results to glance to death a rhino. So 1200 pts of guys to kill 2 cheap tranpsorts? 1 if cover is involved. I know that immobilize feels like you did your job, but most marines are happy to fire out of the top until you shoot them out. Stunned/shake also matters, but GKs just laugh at those... what is tau going to do to stop fortitude?

Firewarriors duty is to fulfill min requirements and unlock devilfish. Hell in some lists they just steal the pathfinders fish after walking on from reserve.

Are you actually saying deepstriking melta suits is good? Good way to throw away your best units with rhino hunting duty.

thecapn226 wrote:No autocannons, no meltaguns, expensive. Oh no, my purifiers are horrible lol.

Yes, but your purifiers have many things that make them good,
and these were only some of the reasons tau fire warriors are not good.

I just want one of these guys that say that fw suck so bad to get stomped by a primarily fw army. Only problem is rather than saying they are a formidable opponent they'll just blame something else and continue saying they suck. And you can't compare tau to gk that's like comparing a BMW to a ferrari. Both are good but very very different.

(i probably could have picked a better analogy but whatevs lol)

I would like to see a heavy Firewarrior army that wouldn't fold over.

Do you have a FW heavy list that would be decent?

I don't actually because I don't play tau anymore since they need an updated dex but I bet it could be done. The tau player would need a lot of skill and twice as much luck.......but still!! I'm just saying that you can't say they are a terrible unit and that's it. Do they belong in a tourney? Prolly not, especially with all the razor/rhino and other vehicle spamming everyone does for the same or less pts than a tau player would need.

The main argument is, do they suck? No!
Do they need a more recent dex to compete? Yes! Lol
Like I said tho, marker lights are there for a reason. Use em n things might turn out better.

Just remember though! I'll never claim to really know what I'm talking about

Wolfnid420 wrote:I don't actually because I don't play tau anymore since they need an updated dex but I bet it could be done. The tau player would need a lot of skill and twice as much luck.......but still!! I'm just saying that you can't say they are a terrible unit and that's it. Do they belong in a tourney? Prolly not, especially with all the razor/rhino and other vehicle spamming everyone does for the same or less pts than a tau player would need.

The main argument is, do they suck? No!
Do they need a more recent dex to compete? Yes! Lol
Like I said tho, marker lights are there for a reason. Use em n things might turn out better.

Just remember though! I'll never claim to really know what I'm talking about

I think tau can compete reasonably well in a tourney environment, but FWs usually aren't going to be the units winning games for them. Its not particularly hard to build towards the strengths of tau. They pretty much only have real 1-2 choices per FOC, and most of them are pretty duh choices for people who can do math and understand the flow of the game. I can see about 3 builds that can compete with a good pilot behind them: Devilfish spam (more viable than you would think, but people are stuck on the 4th ed build and didn't really update), Min FW max suite with piranha and railgun support, and believe it or not seeker missile spam (somewhat experimental, no tourney numbers and limited testing). The two lists above that make heavier use of FWs are much harder to use. The seeker build while powerful gives up railguns. The easiest to use and also probably the most expected is the the min FW max suit build. It plays to the main strength of tau without being as gimmicky as seeker missile spam or FOF.

Tau need a dex mostly to give them more than 3 competitive options. The three builds are actually pretty strong, even against good players, but everybody seen the builds (other than the skyray build) and hold no surprises. The main problem with tau in large events is the difficulty in winning objective missions consistently. FWs are the main weakness of the army (and nobody expects to do their main scoring with kroot) because they aren't resilient or powerful enough to take or hold objectives.

Oh my goodness, this post is filled with so many ridiculous statements I don't even know where to start.

notabot187 wrote:
Fire warriors are too expensive and too ineffective to take in large numbers. 10 pts for a model with virtually no options, crappy stats, and a crappy gun with crappy BS means you can't even justify spending for how good they are (unlike other armies). Nobody cares about 4+ armor when cover is everywhere, and better. If you don't have a 3+ you might as well not even have an armor save. Its not like people aren't taking a decent amount of AP 4 these days too, Psycannons, auto cannons, and HBs are rather common to face.

Crappy gun? It's the second best default infantry weapon in the game. Tell me which army (other than grey knights, who have the best) wouldn't trade their default infantry guns for pulse rifles. If you don't have a 3+ you might as well not even have an armor save? You've gotta be kidding me. I'm not even going to grace that comment with a counter-argument. You and I both know it isn't true. Are people really going to be shooting at fire warriors with auto cannons and psycannons when there are vehicles and battlesuits on the board? Yes, but rarely.

notabot187 wrote:
1: 120 pts IIRC. The ammo upgrade is static, so if you take a larger squad the cost per model goes down. Isn't 10 non rapid shots from firewarriors 100 pts? For 20 pts more GKs get better guns, better armor, better rules.
2: no, But railguns are honestly overrated. S10 AP1 whoopee. Not nearly as unique as it used to be. How many shots do you get on how many platforms? GKs can spam S8 and S7 rending cannons all day long, which have better output against most armor and infantry than railguns do. Heck even against AV14 the numbers for the psycannons aren't horrible. Also GKs get access to cheap melta if they really want. Melta > railguns for anti heavy armor. Range is a factor of course... but the optimal range band for the railgun is too long, most of the game isn't going to be played at that range short of spear head annihilation.

Lol. For 20 points more, GK get better guns, better armor, better rules, and HALF THE BODIES. And S10 AP1? Not nearly as unique as it used to be, sure. But which other armies have S10 AP1 guns with similar range to a railgun that can be fired more than once per game? Who else can get a unit that packs 3 twin linked S10 AP1 guns? Range is ABSOLUTELY a factor and it's ridiculous to say that it isn't a big advantage over melta.

notabot187 wrote:
Rhinos are NOT super easy to glance to death with S5. rapid fire range, 12 shots, 6 hits, 1 glance... and need a 5-6 to get a meaningful result. So 60 pts of guys in short range have a 1/3 chance of permanently damaging a cheap transport, and if its smoked or in cover? Even if you were to take 120 firewarriors, the numbers just do not work too well. 120 hits in RF mode, 20 glances, 6.6 meaningful results. You need 3 of these results to glance to death a rhino. So 1200 pts of guys to kill 2 cheap tranpsorts? 1 if cover is involved. I know that immobilize feels like you did your job, but most marines are happy to fire out of the top until you shoot them out. Stunned/shake also matters, but GKs just laugh at those... what is tau going to do to stop fortitude?

60 points of troops with a 1/3 chance to permanently damage a rhino is BAD?! And why the feth would ANYONE take 120 fire warriors?

notabot187 wrote:
Firewarriors duty is to fulfill min requirements and unlock devilfish. Hell in some lists they just steal the pathfinders fish after walking on from reserve.

Are you actually saying deepstriking melta suits is good? Good way to throw away your best units with rhino hunting duty.

I really hope you either were trolling or are a child.

Mustela wrote:Fire Warriors are one of the most argued about unit in the game. However I can tell you this. If my opponent has a squad of fire warriors, and almost any other unit in the game, I will shoot as the other unit. Their str. 5 guns are offset by two facts 1. Str. 5 doesn't kill vehicles

My Dark Eldar disagree with you, sir.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Grey Templar wrote:if FW dropped a point and regular Battlesuits became BS4 then things would be a whole lot rosier.

That and possably the addition of Drone mounted heavy weapons for the squad. something as simple as a Smart Missile system or Twinlinked Plasma Rifle(even at BS2) would increase their usefulness immensly.

This is a great idea and a wonderful compromise to the special weapons issue. Drones. Why the heck not? Let DRONES be the adaptable portion of FW units. Tau use different drones for different jobs. You pick up different weapons, but the less accurate nature of the drones makes them less reliable.

Also, I was thinking about Drones BS. I'm fine with their BS being low in low numbers, but I like the idea of their BS increasing as their numbers rise. If the unit is networked, the more models there are in the unit, the more input there is for the networked AI, which would make the unit able to make better decisions about it's target, and in turn increase it's accuracy. Much like the changed LD depending on unit size.

In any event, Drones certainly need their cost reduced.

8ppm might be nice.

Nate668 wrote:Oh my goodness, this post is filled with so many ridiculous statements I don't even know where to start.

notabot187 wrote:
Fire warriors are too expensive and too ineffective to take in large numbers. 10 pts for a model with virtually no options, crappy stats, and a crappy gun with crappy BS means you can't even justify spending for how good they are (unlike other armies). Nobody cares about 4+ armor when cover is everywhere, and better. If you don't have a 3+ you might as well not even have an armor save. Its not like people aren't taking a decent amount of AP 4 these days too, Psycannons, auto cannons, and HBs are rather common to face.

Crappy gun? It's the second best default infantry weapon in the game. Tell me which army (other than grey knights, who have the best) wouldn't trade their default infantry guns for pulse rifles. If you don't have a 3+ you might as well not even have an armor save? You've gotta be kidding me. I'm not even going to grace that comment with a counter-argument. You and I both know it isn't true. Are people really going to be shooting at fire warriors with auto cannons and psycannons when there are vehicles and battlesuits on the board? Yes, but rarely.

notabot187 wrote:
1: 120 pts IIRC. The ammo upgrade is static, so if you take a larger squad the cost per model goes down. Isn't 10 non rapid shots from firewarriors 100 pts? For 20 pts more GKs get better guns, better armor, better rules.
2: no, But railguns are honestly overrated. S10 AP1 whoopee. Not nearly as unique as it used to be. How many shots do you get on how many platforms? GKs can spam S8 and S7 rending cannons all day long, which have better output against most armor and infantry than railguns do. Heck even against AV14 the numbers for the psycannons aren't horrible. Also GKs get access to cheap melta if they really want. Melta > railguns for anti heavy armor. Range is a factor of course... but the optimal range band for the railgun is too long, most of the game isn't going to be played at that range short of spear head annihilation.

Lol. For 20 points more, GK get better guns, better armor, better rules, and HALF THE BODIES. And S10 AP1? Not nearly as unique as it used to be, sure. But which other armies have S10 AP1 guns with similar range to a railgun that can be fired more than once per game? Who else can get a unit that packs 3 twin linked S10 AP1 guns? Range is ABSOLUTELY a factor and it's ridiculous to say that it isn't a big advantage over melta.

notabot187 wrote:
Rhinos are NOT super easy to glance to death with S5. rapid fire range, 12 shots, 6 hits, 1 glance... and need a 5-6 to get a meaningful result. So 60 pts of guys in short range have a 1/3 chance of permanently damaging a cheap transport, and if its smoked or in cover? Even if you were to take 120 firewarriors, the numbers just do not work too well. 120 hits in RF mode, 20 glances, 6.6 meaningful results. You need 3 of these results to glance to death a rhino. So 1200 pts of guys to kill 2 cheap tranpsorts? 1 if cover is involved. I know that immobilize feels like you did your job, but most marines are happy to fire out of the top until you shoot them out. Stunned/shake also matters, but GKs just laugh at those... what is tau going to do to stop fortitude?

60 points of troops with a 1/3 chance to permanently damage a rhino is BAD?! And why the feth would ANYONE take 120 fire warriors?

notabot187 wrote:
Firewarriors duty is to fulfill min requirements and unlock devilfish. Hell in some lists they just steal the pathfinders fish after walking on from reserve.

Are you actually saying deepstriking melta suits is good? Good way to throw away your best units with rhino hunting duty.

I really hope you either were trolling or are a child.

DE splinter riffles are better, and they get them on squads for the same price that actually have options. I'm not kidding about how 4+ armor isn't exciting or worth paying for. Welcome to cover hammer. Welcome to the age of hiding in metal boxes. If a FW is out of the transport, probably means there isn't a better target (meaning no devilish, not going to fire S7 at hammerheads).

Half the bodies but much more survivable in most situations. Very few Ap2 weapons, good LD, and ATSKNF means they have more staying power than twice the number of FWs.
Have you even run the numbers on how ineffective railguns are compared to melta? If it isn't a full broadside team, I could care less. You get 3 slots for railguns, meltas can be spread throughout armies that can take it for much cheaper. And like I said, the range advantage for railguns isn't long on a standard gameboard.
The 120 FWs was to illistrate how ineffective FWs are against light armor.
People don't take squads for the default weapon BTW. The default weapon is just gravy for the specials that you want. How many people take naked 5 man GKs squads due to the awsome SB? How many people take kabalites with only splinter riffles? Yeah, only newbs or guys trying to shave points for the transport platform. Tau don't get effective options for their basic squads. Make their utility low, and their killing power too low.
Also not trolling, just not drinking the koolaid from tau tactica. Though trolling tau players is quite fun, I usually reserve that for 4chan.

Pulserifles are just 1 point of str away from actually being as good as the average tau player thinks they are.

DE splinter rifles are most certainly not better. I'd trade my splinter rifles for pulse rifles in a heartbeat. Also, PAGKs have a 3+ save, not a 2+. I'll agree that 4+ isn't exciting, but it's certainly not worthless. Also, it is true that armies with melta can get more of it than tau can get railguns, and that melta within 6" is better at wrecking vehicles, but how many shots within 6" is a decent player going to let you take? Most likely one or less per melta gun per game. Meanwhile, the railguns are going to be in range every turn.

Nate668 wrote:DE splinter rifles are most certainly not better. I'd trade my splinter rifles for pulse rifles in a heartbeat. Also, PAGKs have a 3+ save, not a 2+. I'll agree that 4+ isn't exciting, but it's certainly not worthless. Also, it is true that armies with melta can get more of it than tau can get railguns, and that melta within 6" is better at wrecking vehicles, but how many shots within 6" is a decent player going to let you take? Most likely one or less per melta gun per game. Meanwhile, the railguns are going to be in range every turn.

Yes, you would want the Pulse Rifles.

But only because you are BS4 and can take special weapon options in your squad that prevent it from being one dimensional.

My marines would LOVE pulse rifles too for the same reasons.

Nate668 wrote:DE splinter rifles are most certainly not better. I'd trade my splinter rifles for pulse rifles in a heartbeat.

Any army would trade their basic rapid fire weapon for a pulse rifle, but so many people get sucked in by the "better than a bolter" thing, forgetting that the marine behind the bolter is better in every way, and even battle sisters are better shots than FW, thus making them have the same likelyhood of causing a wound, while being more survivable (due to armor for both and the marines higher toughness), and both armies will eat them in assault. Given the preponderance of vehicles, jump infantry, deepstrike and other methods of avoiding walking, the extra range means so very little, any other army can get itself in the range it needs to be in fast enough to mean you will probably only get 1 salvo off unmolested, and even SoB will charge and eat your fireline. The transports are pretty good, but too expensive, metal boxes are so much cheaper and get the job done (especially BA and GK metal boxes) as well or better, they may not bring as much firepower to bear, but what is inside them does. Don't get me wrong, I like the tau in theory, but the 5th edition rules and metagame that came along with it were not kind to them.

Nate668 wrote:Also, it is true that armies with melta can get more of it than tau can get railguns, and that melta within 6" is better at wrecking vehicles, but how many shots within 6" is a decent player going to let you take?.

To answer your question 1-2. How many do I need, 1-2.

Nate668 wrote:Meanwhile, the railguns are going to be in range every turn.

In range, yes. In LoS, not usually if your opponent is smart, or at the very least they will have a cover save from smoke.

Nate668 wrote:DE splinter rifles are most certainly not better. I'd trade my splinter rifles for pulse rifles in a heartbeat. Also, PAGKs have a 3+ save, not a 2+. I'll agree that 4+ isn't exciting, but it's certainly not worthless. Also, it is true that armies with melta can get more of it than tau can get railguns, and that melta within 6" is better at wrecking vehicles, but how many shots within 6" is a decent player going to let you take? Most likely one or less per melta gun per game. Meanwhile, the railguns are going to be in range every turn.

I would say splinter riffles are better, being able wound anything on a 4 is a great thing to have. Kills big stuff better than FW do, and big stuff is what is likely to not be in metal boxes. And this isn't only because the guy behind the gun is strictly better short of armor (and he can get FNP easily, so is actually more survivable)
Railguns aren't effective due to cost, availability and low RoF. Melta is cheap and plentiful. For the things other armies need to kill at range, there is plenty of S8 Missiles and S8 lances. Not going to really need much more, the bit of AV 13+ you need high strength for handled by melta just fine.

Yes I know PAGKs are 3+ But how many AP3 guns are actively being used? Virtually none other than MLs and the handful of people who play thousand suns. The units that get AP3 aren't particularly very cost effective, and most people would rather have the plasma just in case (plus most AP3 guns are S5 or lower and plasma is S7). AP2 is MUCH more common than AP3.

On the issue of melta shots at optimal range: I put 2 in any squad that has them. Combi and regular... So each squad has 2, so at least 2 shots. This doesn't inlcude such things as MMs which have longer melta range. When I run tacticals I have at least 3 of them with 2 melta shots. I also run MM on other platforms, and sometimes even triple melta bikers. If I ran chaos I would have 6 squads with quad melta. I'm betting that I will get some off. When I still played sisters (before the nerf) I had 16 melta guns in the list, and would fire them at least twice per one that made it (and with rhino/immolators spam, at least half would). Sternguard lists can have 10 meltas shots coming out of deepstrike, and if combat squading at 2 different targets.

I think part of your problem is you haven't played against some of the more min/maxed lists out there. If you had you would understand the limits of what pulse riffles and railguns can achieve (many people rightly call them failguns due to their propensity to fail to do anything)

Railguns would be better if you could take enough of to avoid the small set randomness issue (sometimes you miss or fail to do anything, other times each shot is gold). High payoff, high risk means you are at the mercy of the dice more than the guy who brings enough to offset runs of bad luck. I would love the FW unit if they could take a squad based railgun (and it wouldn't be over the top, DE get lances in their basic squads, and marines get lascannons). It would even justify the unit being static.

Armless, you missed the context of my pulse rifle comment. I wasn't trying to say that fire warriors are the best, just disagreeing with notabot's statement that fire warriors have "crappy guns". Also, vehicles are pretty hard to hide completely. Lets be conservative and say that you get one melta shot within 6" in a game, and I get only two railgun shots. Those two railgun shots have a better chance of wrecking any vehicle than one melta shot. I'm NOT saying that melta sucks, only that railguns are good as well.

Notabot, pulse rifles are clearly better. You obviously don't think things through. Spliter rifles are ONLY better against targets with toughness 6 or higher. My argument is not that fire warriors are better than kabalites, but that kabalites would be better with pulse rifles than splinter rifles.

To the OP,
I do play Tau. I play and win in many tournaments in my area, and I do not suffer from in-playing amongst a few friends. I can tell you that Fire Warriors are a solid unit that I always take. Sure they die from time to time in CC, but it is for the greater good of the army (no pun intended). However; if they are not directly attacked, they lay down torrents of fire that either kill, or intimidate players forcing a tactical shift. One thing about the Tau, is with a few exceptions every unit can be called out on the mat and "suck". Tau are a race that has to work together across many units. I can remember a comical event with my Fire Warriors were they were chased across the board by a squad of Space Marines that wanted them dead. The FWs did not shoot once, but ran about four feet across the board. In the end the SM player said he kept them "shut down" but the reality is that an 8 man squad that cost me 80pts kept a 10 man SM squat that cost 150pts out of the game netting me a 70 advantage. The moral of the story is, it is all how you use them. If you use them like SMs they will die, if you use them in synergy with your other Tau units, they will be effective. Also, I have said this many times...throw mathhammer out the window. Mathhammer is for target practice at the range. It does not work in the field. There are too many factors involved to make it build your army.
Everyone has an opinion based on their experience with Tau and this is simply mine for what it is worth. I hope it helps you a little.

I agree with this last post 100%!! Especially the part about mathhammer! Screw it! It won't hold up in a game lol idk how many times I've seen someone lose because they stick to mathhammer, don't really build their own army and just go with one they find online, and don't have a solid strategy. Mathhammer /= anything other than a waste of time crunching pointless numbers lol at least:.....that's how I feel anyways

Wolfnid420 wrote:I agree with this last post 100%!! Especially the part about mathhammer! Screw it! It won't hold up in a game lol idk how many times I've seen someone lose because they stick to mathhammer, don't really build their own army and just go with one they find online, and don't have a solid strategy. Mathhammer /= anything other than a waste of time crunching pointless numbers lol at least:.....that's how I feel anyways

The people that lose because of Mathhammer didn't use it right. mathhammer is NOT a strategy, its a tool to use in Strategy

Sadly, very few people use it correctly and lose because of that.

Then there are those who do use it correctly, they will force feed you your army before you can even blink.


make fun of Mathhammer at your own peril, and tred lightly in competitive areas.

Nate668 wrote:Notabot, pulse rifles are clearly better. You obviously don't think things through. Spliter rifles are ONLY better against targets with toughness 6 or higher. My argument is not that fire warriors are better than kabalites, but that kabalites would be better with pulse rifles than splinter rifles.

Actually, i'd say they're also better against T5 simply because Kabalite Warriors are BS4, so will generate more hits and therefore more wounds. Against T4 it's going to be more or less equal, and against T3, pulse rifles will win out.

It's ALL in the dice. Mathhammer says nothing other than " in theory my army should do this much damage per turn n should do this here n that there....etc.etc." its ridiculous! It's a game played with dice. Not math. You guarantee nothing by overloading your brain with a bunch of math that is all theory. The only math I really partake in is adding up my points and maybe adding up attacks to see which squad might guarantee myself a couple more or w/e. You can break down everything with math but what's the point it guarantees nothing and your just gonna get frustrated when you don't perform as well as your math makes you think you should. All Im saying is that it might be a tool but one too many people depend on and one ill never use lol idc how many times a squad SHOULD wound something. What I care about is what actually happens in battle